"A requiem for WAB........" Topic

So where did it all start to go wrong?

Was it the management changes in WH?
Was it the stopping of events in Warhammer World?
Was it the issue of WAB 2.0?
Was it the errata for WAB 2.0?
Was it Allen Curtis's decision to drop WAB?

As good historians can we say what was the critical turning point?

As the words to ABBA's SOS tune go…..

It used to be so wonderful, it used to be so good…..

I left the fold after repeated games vs unpainted armies.
I'll also add, the errata issue with the new 2.0 left me happy I hadn't returned to the fold.

I still play the older rules and never bought the second edition. I also think it a bit premature to announce a requiem. There are plenty of WAB players out there. The big issue is the fact that original rule books will begin to become scarce unless a legal pdf becomes available. Without new printings that are easy to come by the pool of players will begin to dwindle. And it does not appear that Warhammer Historicals are interested in making getting the second edition rule book easy. Too bad really as it is a great game.

Clash of Empires looks very much like WAB 3.0 to me – very similar mechanisms. So I'd think anyone who likes WAB will move to CoE if they want to carry on with that style of game (individual basing, roll to hit, roll to wound, roll to save).

I'm not so sure. Just been re-reading WAB 2.0 and it's actually really good. I have been playing WAB for years, have had lots of fun, and love the rules and the supplements, so I don't think I'll give it all up quickly.

Yes, agree with all the frustration with the new mgmt, and nonsense like KN etc, and I am curious enough to also pick up the new 'successor' games. But I think writing off WAB already is premature. It'll just take a couple of choice supplements and WAB will be back in the saddle again.

whitemanticore is square in the black.

The death of WAB is a bit premature, to say the least. I like it very much, and also never saw the need to buy the V2.0 edition. There are MANY players out therte, and I don't see it dying off, even with the new rules sets coming out.

Also, don't ever confuse the sales of a particular set or sets with actual popularity. I know several gamers, myself included, who buy rules sets for period we like in order to see other's thoughts on how games should play. Each brings something to the table, and I've often stolen this or that concept from one set to apply to another to tweak things.

I play WAB. I also play Impetus. What's nice is that my WAB minis can fit onto movement stands to play Impetus. They can also be used to play HC, CoE and any other set that comes along.

Once I get flush again, and my painting caught up, I'll be buying the three new rules sets to add to my collection. I'll still be using WAB and Impetus, but for different reasons.

Bit of a rant, I know, but WAB is far from dead, and there is certainly no reason to NOT use earlier editions.

respects,

Just about every member at our club likes WAB 2.0, it eliminated many of the rediculoua quirks of the earlier edition. Units are thinner and longer and skirmishers can no longer reform into close order in the middle of a battle.

I think a better term might be when did it start to lose it's traction with the target market. "Jump the shark" is (or was) a good way of saying it.

I'm not sure there was one defining moment though. It seems it was a gradual erosion. From the lack of resources devoted to producing new supplements to removing Rob Broom from heading it up, to switching it over to FW,to finally a flawed release of 2.0 (the final proofread version was not what was published). All of those things contributed. Also contributing all along the way is the huge wave of negativity from the vocal player base.

It's not dead yet and could probably still recover but it needs support that I doubt will ever come from FW. I suspect it's going to be one of those things that GW/FW milks for as much money as they can as it dies a slow death due to competition from better supported systems.

For the Adepticon tournaments, players switched to WAB2 without comment. Suggestions of using CoE or HC for tournaments and/or event games have been getting a steady stream of push back. Despite the lack of product from the home company, it appears that WAB2 is here to stay for at least another year.

I wrote an article on the subject of "when WAB jumped the shark" to submit to "Slingshot" a couple of years ago, but never sent it in. Wonder where the file is…

One could make the case that the Spirit of WAB (an aethereal being, garbed in diaphanous tissue) died when Jarvis Jackson, Rich Priestly, and the Peary twins abandoned it as a "labor of love", so that was expected to become and stay commercially viable.

It attempted to fulfill the desires of two diametrically opposed groups of customers, and so could never make everyone happy.

Allen

errata for above

"Jervis Johnson"
"Rick Priestley"
"Perry Twins"
"Hail Ceezer"

Yes, some may be suffering from an irony deficiency. As I mentioned to someone offline, over the past few months, there have been more misspellings of "Priestly" on TMP and elsewhere than there have been correct mentions of "Priestley".

I didn't mention "Hail Cesare" because from the official Warloard pronouncements, I can't tell if it's supposed to be "Hail Ceaser", "Hale Sieze Her", or what.

Allen

An I thought I was a master of sarcasm, how truly ignorant I'am!

I recently won a copy of 2.0 off of ebay a few weeks ago – great price – no one else bid on it! I've read through most of it, and possibly due to reading all the "fan" mail the year preceeding, and also reading all of the published errata beforehand, it actually suits me fine. No offense to the WAB-haters/quiters – you all have your justifiable reasons. But to address the OP – the requiem is not universally applicable. My local gaming buddies have no problem gaming WAB for now, and in the future. Dean

I didn't mention "Hail Cesare" because from the official Warloard pronouncements, I can't tell if it's supposed to be "Hail Ceaser", "Hale Sieze Her", or what.

At some point, I was hoping that they intended to make a game called "Haile Selassie" about the Italian invasion of Ethiopia in the 1930's.

As for WAB, I would think that the biggest nail so far has been getting rid of the sales through the retailers – meaning that the game suffers from a rather limited visibility and availability at the moment.

While I don't think removing the retailers from the pipeline helped with anything other than increasing their profits, I hardly see that as the biggest nail.

There are a number of popular rules that have a very small retail presence other than from the main supplier. There are also a huge number of people (at least in the US) who have no access to a store that would carry WAB products if they were available.

I think if FW marketed the system better and provided support (or at least communicated better) it would only be a small issue that you could only get the rules from a single source.

I hadn't noticed that anything HAD gone wrong with WAB.

We are playing WAB 2.0 at our club and enjoying it..

Mike

Well if you had been reading all the wailing WAB doomsaying Mike you shouldn't be…..

I was finally preparing to get involved in the WAB community after a good decade of the 15mm DB_ world.

Then I heard 2.0 was coming. Then I couldn't buy it at my gamestore. Then I saw the waves of errata. I said "self, just another pile of: <WARNING RANT ABOUT THE EVIL EMPIRE COMING> <ABORT> <ABORT> <ABORT>

and so, I mounted 28mm for Impetus, picked up Hail Caeser, and am fully contemplating acquiring COE.

as has been noted already if new Rulebooks are not being printed it is onlt a matter of time as peeps will not know it exists, like me before i read about here on TMP, logical really. WAB will be here as long as the people who own the rulebooks now play it.

WAB will be here as long as the people who own the rulebooks now play it.

Truth.

However, I still see WAB as the favourite rules system for articles in Wargames Illustrated. At some point WAB will lose it's premier status in the gaming mags and the decline will accelerate! In two years I bet we'll hear very little about WAB.

My local gaming buddies have no problem gaming WAB for now, and in the future. Dean

Sure, Dean. Until one of your friends wants to play a proper Theban list, or a proper Samurai and Korean list, or a proper Crusader list, or an Aztec list, or a Ptolemaic Successor list, etc., etc.

The viability of a game goes beyond the ability of tracking down a copy of the rules.

@wodensraven

it's like something from Mad Max – as long as the ancient scrolls survive we will maintain the old knowledge…….

It's really the lack of supplements that will be a problem. I don't know if those will ever be reprinted. Without them, the rules have much less value.

I thought I saw a rumor that there might be a supplement released that had a lot of smaller army lists like the AoA supplement from the early days of WAB. Maybe that would be enough to keep it alive but it's a far cry from the golden days of WAB.

@Cinc

That rumour has been around a long time. The people supporting that on the WAB Forum have moved onto CoE so the potential authors will probably do lists for CoE.

Incidentally another milestone is the change of name of the forum from WAB Forum to Wargaming Ancient Battles Forum!

I will probably be playing WAB 2 for some time.

Incidentally another milestone is the change of name of the forum from WAB Forum to Wargaming Ancient Battles Forum!

Slight clarification: it used to be the Warhammer Ancient Battles Forum. It has been renamed the Wargaming Ancient Battles Forum, as it now also includes dedicated boards for Hail Caesar, Clash of Empires, and War & Conquest.

Cheers,
Scott

Scott,

Yes I was using WAB as a recognised acronym for Warhammer Ancient Battles. Note to be a bit pedantic it was actually called the WAB Forum.

The rot set in when posters misused the board to promote the other rulesets. Of course the so called Moderators did nothing to stop this. They then made a virtue of an evil by changing the title!

That rumour has been around a long time. The people supporting that on the WAB Forum have moved onto CoE so the potential authors will probably do lists for CoE.

Ah…no.

The AoA supplement has been finished for a while. The author is Martin Gibbons. Whether FW publishes it is another thing. Also, as Lot of Gaul correctly states, CoE is only one of the rulesets being catered to by WABForum.

They then made a virtue of an evil by changing the title!

Good grief!

well I wouldn't hold out much hope….

I wasn't blaming the guys for doing that – out of kindness I suppose. It was just indicative of the move away from WAB was my point. It has to be said that the WAB Forum previously never had separate boards or discussions on FoG, Impotence, Warlord, DBM, DBA, DBR, DBMM – presumably because they were a separate tribe.

Still it's all water under the bridge now…..

It has to be said that the WAB Forum previously never had separate boards or discussions on FoG, Impotence, Warlord, DBM, DBA, DBR, DBMM……….

It has to be said that they still don't.

presumably these are considered the most WABlike and so appeal to the same audience

its interesting to note that a lot of new Ancient wargamers like me have never heard of WAB unless seen here or know someone who plays it..says it all about its future tbh.

well its the same with most miniatures rules today – they need the oxygen of support to flourish and thrive. Themed tourneys, active fan participation and a nice steady stream of exciting publications all help build the WAB fan base.

When they all dried up that's when people felt the hurt….

they need the oxygen of support to flourish and thrive.

Why do so many people think this is necessary? For example, a set of rules I use for Seven Years War was first published in Wargamer's Newsletter in 1968!! I'm probably one of the only people still playing these rules but they work for me. What need of "support"?

Margard, that's fine if you can find opponents easily enough or if you're happy to play against yourself.

Support is far more of an issue for new players just starting an historical army and wanting to find someone to play against.

If you have a regular opponent or opponents then it really doesn't matter.

Support is far more of an issue for new players just starting an historical army and wanting to find someone to play against.

Er… no. If you are looking for an opponent, it's not "support" you need but simply a way of saying "Hey, who plays xxx around here"?

Then again, the best way of finding opponents is to "grow your own" – get your friends interested and invite them to try a game …

I think that the shrewd renaming of the WAB forum shows that quite a few people consider the writing to be on the wall for WAB as a major ancients player.

Jaz
6sided.net – Start A Wargaming Blog

When they started releasing siege, pirate and other rules systems before publishing army lists for the ancients system that were print ready.

DM

interesting view Don – the siege rules by Guy Bowers were supposed to support WAB?

John,

In my opinion the siege rules didn't support the core game as well as other supplements. However, on a more positive note the siege rules were probably the least damaging of all the publishing/release mistakes when it came to supporting WAB. It actually did fit into the WAB vertical market space.

While breadth of product offerings is important, depth should have carried more weight as they would have been supporting a proven and successful system with a vast support network of players and figure designers/manufacturers.

I'm also not saying that any of the non-WAB products were inferior in any way. The timing of releases could have been better. To net it out, Warhammer Historical ignored their CSFs and core competencies.

DM

Don you are not alone in this view, my mate George is always banging on about how the WAB supplements should have been finished before they diversified into cowboys, Nappie navals, pirates etc.

Of course no right or wrong answer, it's like Avalon Hill having to do all the Squad Leader gamettes before they did other boardgames.

Personally I welcomed the diversity and range of the other WH products even though I didn't play all. Others did and there were many who got interested in historical gaming which WAB may not have done so all to the good!

I think it was a brave and bold move to try something different like Siege and Conquest and arguably the raid bits supported all the supplements where players had used up all the period specific scenarios.

The big what if of gaming history is what the WAB corpus would have grown to if given true freedom. Remember the promise of the Seljuk lists promised in BTGG for the Crusader supplement?

Unfortunately all conjecture at this point.

I don't know what all the fuss is about, I still play WAB and will be still playing WAB for a loooooong time as all the armies I want to build are in the current supplements, and even if they aren't I will make up my own list and as long as my opposing player accepts the changes we are both happy to game together(and really thats how the supplements started).

Granted the changes of leadership by GW has made things a little confused a left a few people upset, I am hoping that the days of the enthusiast will return. I know of three supplements that are print ready and when the world wakes up from its depression and gets back to business and money can be made again without much risk I think we will see more supplements.

Wab is still strong at our club and a few of us are basically too lazy to move onto the flashy new rules that are overhyped, flashy with lazy rule writing(IMHO). I bought WAB 2, not happy with some changes, happy with others, but it is a game after all…… don't forget that!

I guess the real test will be in two years, we will then see who is still standing then, although I will probaly still be playing WAB

my Aussie two cents worth(now worth $2.14 USD )
cheers
matt

Cheers to you Matt!

I too am perfectly happy with the system, although I only use V1.5. Apparently there are a lot of folks who got into gaming later in life who never had to do any research, think for themselves, or design their own lists, scenarios, etc.

I, too, simply don't understand the fuss.

I really enjoyed the Siege and Conquest rules, does that make me a bad person? :)

TKindred and Matt,

Apparently there are a lot of folks who got into gaming later in life who never had to do any research, think for themselves, or design their own lists, scenarios

With all due respect, that is not the problem. Coming up with good lists, that have some semblance to historical accuracy, are balanced, display an understanding of the games meta-rules, and provide a good game for both players is not that easy to achieve. If it were, we would see great lists everywhere. We don't. At the WABForum we have some good lists, some mediocre lists, and a lot of bad ones.

At least with the published supplements, we have authors who agonized over their lists, did their homework, and spent some time play testing them, before committing anything to paper.

Or, you can have a game against my WS5, BS6, Ld11 Mound Builder Berserker Temple Guard army. What do you think will give you the best game?

By the way, I played my first Clash of Empires game, last weekend. It was a very good experience, and I could swear that I heard the WAB Requiem playing in the background.

LOL Bowman and is that the sound of massed fire?

Beginning to think CoE is what WAB 2.0 should have been……