1 hour ago, Parakitor said:

What hasn't been said is a Corellian Conflict style campaign box. This would be tailored to the players who want more of the story in their games. The campaign on BattleLore: Command was a lot of fun to explore, so I would hope for something like that. I feel like that's going to be a while because a) we need the armies all caught up to about the same level, and b) I think you'll need a lot more units than I, or many other new players, currently own. But that's definitely something I want to pick up.

They would need to do a much better job on that however (CC vanilla is pretty bland)

CC Vanilla also tends to snowball. Which is a problem of any "beat the opponent for more resources!" type of gameplay. Gain resources if you win, lose resources if you lose (because you have to repair your ships now or risk losing them for good)

RWM already feels like WC3 in miniature form, perhaps a campaign could be more like an RTS in turn-based gameplay mode. Actual buildings and mines are just annotated on the map but resources are earned between battles, and are only affected by the battles if you steal a resource node or something.

I’m not certain I can agree with the idea that the game can only support 4 factions.

I think I’d be more comfortable with 6 factions. I think another “good faction” and another Bad faction. I’d love to see Dwarves and Orks for those I think.

FFG has been promising us a "Core Set Campaign" since the launch kit dropped...

10 minutes ago, Hawktel said:

I’m not certain I can agree with the idea that the game can only support 4 factions.

I think I’d be more comfortable with 6 factions. I think another “good faction” and another Bad faction. I’d love to see Dwarves and Orks for those I think.

It's not a matter of "can it?".

It's a matter of "Should it?"

I believe the answer is a pretty firm "No" for a good, long time.

Give me four balanced factions, then go nuts once they've nailed that down.

1 hour ago, Tvayumat said:

Playtesting that much content and maintaining anything like balance is a full time job. Adding a fifth faction well after the fact isn't realistic or sensible.

Things can look different but still be the same faction mechanically.

for example if we want heavy troops for the humans maybe they ally with dwarves. Human+dwarves then become a single faction.

games like war machine forever add more slightly different same looking models and it's super boring to collect and paint that. For example cygnar storm blades Look almost the same as storm glaves. Boring! Same thing with empire faction in x-wing. I'm so sick of tie variants!

Games like malifaux already do multiple aesthetics with a single mechanical faction and people love it. You never have a problem with trying to introduce a new faction to an established game where you need to create a whole bunch of new options all at once so they can some form of parity to the original factions.

so for each faction I would like to see about

2-3 troop

2-3 cav

2-3 siege

2-3 heros

Then be done with it and move onto the next faction in the alliance.

Right now the biggest roadblock this game has is attracting players and making the choices feel unique and desirable. Undead and humans are classic but played out for lots of folks.

You can add new races at any point, the later you wait the more issues it may cause.
*glances at scum for xwing*

it also causes potential imbalance with releases. The new race will need to play catchup, which can easily let some bad balances run wild due to less playtime after release before a new unit comes out.
Other imbalance would be releases. GW may not be a very good role model for this example but they technically have well over a dozen (closer to 2 dozen) factions in 40k, and many of them have been largely ignored/abandoned. If say RWM gets up to 8 factions in the distant future, one or two of them might end up getting the shaft just because resources are spread too thin to properly balance/play out the game.

Four races is fine as is. I actually wouldnt want a new race for awhile, but like i said if Orcs pop up i'll be happy lol.

GW games also have what can most charitably be described as only a passing familiarity with the concept of balance, so we probably shouldn't use them as an example of future possibilities.

Do four factions. Do them right. Don't overbloat the game.

EDIT: For the record, I'm agreeing with @Vineheart01 , even though I realize it kind of sounds like I'm not.

After reading a bit of the lore guide I think we will see a very diverse series of forces.

The dequan lords have 12 unique baronies, expat elves, drawrven buddies and 8 free cities. Lots of ways to explore new looks while maintaining a single "faction".

Also telling my wife I'm 'only' collecting 4 armies is much easier to swing than 5 or 6 or 10 . That goes even if the price of the game was the same either way haha.

For the record, I'm against cross-faction units. I'd like each faction to maintain as much identity as possible. For example, releasing Daqan dwarves early and later putting them in their own faction is disagreeable to me. Anything that blurs the line between how factions play is a negative in my book. Neutral upgrades are about as much as I want to tolerate. (And yes, that means I'm against Ankaur Maro's & Kari Wraithstalker's abilities.

Part of the appeal to me is the endless possibilities. Why stop at 4 factions when the sky is the limit. I agree it may be a year before they introduce more but if the hold it at 4 forever I would be very disappointed. I totally expect that end of next year we'd hear plans for more !

Crossfaction units, as in a standard unit that can be freely taken by any, i agree would be weird.
Crossfaction figure upgrades would be neat. Mercenaries and/or summoned creatures

6 hours ago, Willange said:

Shadow Dragon would be awesome, but I'm thinking Roc Warriors are more likely since they were in the Runewars boardgame as well as Battlelore and Runeage. Maybe one day!

I'm sure we'll see Roc Warriors before a Daqan dragon for the same reasons you mention ... however I'm pretty sure they'd be single base figures. I was mentioning the dragons in the context of 1 x 2 or 2 x 2 base units that @Budgernaut had mentioned.

I think Roc Warriors, Ironbound and (maybe) Siege Golems would be the most likely new Daqan units to look forward to in the near future...

>> Double Post <<

Privateer Press just announced a faction a year and that worried me a lot...thinking about this game getting a few factions a year will eventually mean that releases for existing factions will go years between each release...unless FFG decides to really up their release waves to 4-8 things per month... I get the desire for lots of options, kinda, but if you keep going to the argument of "WHF has soo many factions..." @Vineheart01 put it best yes GW has made a lot of factions but only 2-3 are viable at any given time...So I really don't want to see that happen here...

There is a big difference between GW and FFG. As a former GW product fan I can tell you GW never focused on 2-3 factions as you put it ! My friends and I own all the factions for fantasy and 40k and all the army books and codex so never GW only focused on 2-3 faction per year.

There are many people who are fans of Terrinoth and play Runebound and fans of orcs and the Dwarves. my gaming group granted all old timers but strong 36 people are all holding up on purchasing this miniature game until they publish Orcs & Dwarves. We have no desire to play as Daqan or Undead or...

for now we will just play Runebound and use our favourite orc & dwarves heroes and look at this game and wait with great interest.

if FFG wants to increase their revenue for this game they need to scratch the back of all interested fans for the six factions which came out in Rune Age.

if FFG keep going back and produce more units/Heroes for the original 4 factions in that case they are missing out on the big picture.

46 minutes ago, frida1944 said:

There is a big difference between GW and FFG. As a former GW product fan I can tell you GW never focused on 2-3 factions as you put it ! My friends and I own all the factions for fantasy and 40k and all the army books and codex so never GW only focused on 2-3 faction per year.

There are many people who are fans of Terrinoth and play Runebound and fans of orcs and the Dwarves. my gaming group granted all old timers but strong 36 people are all holding up on purchasing this miniature game until they publish Orcs & Dwarves. We have no desire to play as Daqan or Undead or...

for now we will just play Runebound and use our favourite orc & dwarves heroes and look at this game and wait with great interest.

if FFG wants to increase their revenue for this game they need to scratch the back of all interested fans for the six factions which came out in Rune Age.

if FFG keep going back and produce more units/Heroes for the original 4 factions in that case they are missing out on the big picture.

never said they focused on them only said that there are only a few viable factions, meaning that competitively very few factions were worth playing, at any time. there were entire factions in WHF that didn't get codexs in the last edition of their rules, in 40k they get the same thing there are entire armies that don't get updates for years, while they churn out new models and make them ridiculously over powered in the meta so that everything else just stagnates... And honestly if your whole group is holding off on a game in the hopes that factions that have not even been hinted at are going to be published then I really don't think anything I say will have any sway...But hey, read into whatever you want... But regardless every argument of "Oh FFG should crank out as much as they can cause all they want is money..." is getting old, they are putting the game first, but people are mad about that, on the flip side if they put out 14 factions all at once and then had such a slow crawl of expanding them and no time to properly play test and balance everyone would again complain that they were then only concerned with profit and not the game.

What does everyone want? A game system that is fun and well thought out, quick to play and has a lot of potential tactical depth? or just a bunch of different chunks of plastic to push across a table?

I think a lot of folks think playtesting and balancing is easy. It is a lot of work and a bit of witchcraft. Balancing a new unit and 2 factions and some cards takes a lot of time an effort. Four? A good 8x as long. Get into 6+ and you are like GW, a toy company with a game tacked on. 6 would be an absurd amount of dev time. Interaction would spiral out of control. It might be feasible at launch, but the further a game expands, the more time you need as well.

I think FFG is doing it right. This is their 1st crack at a game like this. So it makes sense to start slowly with a small number of factions. If the game does well then start to slowly add new factions.

Another thing to consider in the possibility of adding more factions is that most people are probably buying an average of 2 factions. Some people will do 1, some will do 4, and some others would be willing to buy any number. If you release another faction, you only make money on the people that actually buy it (duh). Not everyone is willing to buy all factions meaning that if you have a player who only wants undead, then a new faction is wasted on him. Whereas if you just release expansions to current factions that already sell, then you have a pretty good idea that people will buy those. The main way that releasing new factions nets you more cash than if you just did an equivalent value of expansions to old factions is if the factions actually draw new people to the game, but then that has to net you more than the expansions would have. There may be a few people who will only buy the game if orcs/dwarves/dragons are out, but I would guess that's a small number per army.

The only other way new armies could help more than expansions to old ones is if people don't really want to expand their current armies further and would rather buy new factions. Maybe they come out with Ironbound for Daqan and half the Daqan players just say 'meh' and stick with their spearmen. Maybe they make a Barrow Wyrm for Waiqar and all the player go, 'ew, no way'. Then maybe a new faction would have made more money. Seems unlikely for the near future though. I for one am more than excited to finally have crossbows and death knights, so maybe I just come to this conclusion due to my own preferences.

All this is just to add another point onto the more important (imo) balance points that others have mentioned. The game will only remain a game if it sells well and is relatively well balanced. If people just want minis, then Runewars is already doomed to fail as there are plenty of neat minis in the world already. Balanced gameplay with good OP support from FFG is what will make this game competitive.

3 minutes ago, Willange said:

Another thing to consider in the possibility of adding more factions is that most people are probably buying an average of 2 factions. Some people will do 1, some will do 4, and some others would be willing to buy any number. If you release another faction, you only make money on the people that actually buy it (duh). Not everyone is willing to buy all factions meaning that if you have a player who only wants undead, then a new faction is wasted on him. Whereas if you just release expansions to current factions that already sell, then you have a pretty good idea that people will buy those. The main way that releasing new factions nets you more cash than if you just did an equivalent value of expansions to old factions is if the factions actually draw new people to the game, but then that has to net you more than the expansions would have. There may be a few people who will only buy the game if orcs/dwarves/dragons are out, but I would guess that's a small number per army.

The only other way new armies could help more than expansions to old ones is if people don't really want to expand their current armies further and would rather buy new factions. Maybe they come out with Ironbound for Daqan and half the Daqan players just say 'meh' and stick with their spearmen. Maybe they make a Barrow Wyrm for Waiqar and all the player go, 'ew, no way'. Then maybe a new faction would have made more money. Seems unlikely for the near future though. I for one am more than excited to finally have crossbows and death knights, so maybe I just come to this conclusion due to my own preferences.

All this is just to add another point onto the more important (imo) balance points that others have mentioned. The game will only remain a game if it sells well and is relatively well balanced. If people just want minis, then Runewars is already doomed to fail as there are plenty of neat minis in the world already. Balanced gameplay with good OP support from FFG is what will make this game competitive.

I'm much more interested in seeing new methods of playing the existing armies...there are lots of different types of undead, and not all of them would work the same...I want to see that kinda of thing!

I want 4 fleshed out factions. As much as I want some awesome Dwarf or Orc army, I want a balanced game before that.

I also feel like I'm in the minority when I say that I despise the idea of cross faction units and neutral units/figures. The point of factions are to create distinct and diverse armies. Blurring the lines defeats that entire point. And yes, I hate Kari and Ankaur's army building rules and have to live with them.

Just now, Church14 said:

I want 4 fleshed out factions. As much as I want some awesome Dwarf or Orc army, I want a balanced game before that.

I also feel like I'm in the minority when I say that I despise the idea of cross faction units and neutral units/figures. The point of factions are to create distinct and diverse armies. Blurring the lines defeats that entire point. And yes, I hate Kari and Ankaur's army building rules and have to live with them.

I don't mind the idea of cross faction play as long as it makes sense...Kari has elf allies, ok that works. Maro has corrupted...well everything, sure I guess I can get on board with that...But in this world seeing some mercs that are just like yup we sell our swords to everyone! undead? no problem, drinking demon blood? we cool with you!...It was why I like how mercs work in WMH, when they came out they all have specific factions they work for, no one really worked for cryx at first...but I don't know. I would throw cross faction play out a window if it unbalances the game to the point where the game play was affected...

Personally, I'd like a proper lore book next. I love Star Wars Armada and Arkham Horror, but you kinda know what's going on when you get into those games. Even having played some Descent, I know nothing of the lore for Terrinoth. I'd like a product that will help me get attached to my models so I'd have more of an emotional investment in the game rather than just some average models and a good ruleset. A good lore book would easily help me go all in. Then follow that up with Dwarfs and Orcs.