Ishkur Cinderhat:
Frankly, I don’t see the CD in HoC at all. Neither as a special unit nor as a trial for a big re-launch of the Chaos Dwarfs. So I deeply mistrust those rumours.
1st, the Chaos Dwarfs don’t fit into that list fluff-wise or geographically. HoC is all about wild norsemen and mutated Kurgan. Putting Chaos Dwarfs into that list would be like having an Arabian unit in the Bretonian Army. :o
2nd, IMO it would be worthless as a sales trial. Very very probably the CD would not be a standard unit, but instead a rare or elite choice. How many of these would anyone buy for his army? One, maybe two. That would not tell GW anything about the sales performance of a full-blown army, so why bother.
metro_gnome:
you’re right about a sales trial… baloney and admitted speculation…
but mortal worshipers of chaos gods together on the same field of battle despite difference in height?
its completely congruent with 6th and 7th ed fluff…
Ishkur Cinderhat:
Yes and it worked fine in Archaon’s Horde with the Hellcannon in it, but I always thought of this as a rather special army and not the typical generic Chaos horde. What troubles me is that Chaos Dwarfs live far away from where the marauders live, so they really should not be a regular unit in the army.
Then again, including them in the list would probably mean that we have expanded our territory, which isn’t a bad thing either fluff-wise. 
Willmark:
the absurdity demanding both on the same sprue defies logical response...
metro_gnome
What defies logical sense is arguing something I haven�?Tt. Your Strawman argumentation really hasn�?Tt changed the face of the debate here or any of the other times you�?Tve done it. I�?Tm not asking for multi-part whatever. It would be great if GW made CD models, I wouldn�?Tt have had to go through (still am going through) making the models I am. GW didn�?Tt�?� so in order to make CD models I have to purchase parts from all three ranges to do so�?�. Simple as that, I�?Tm sure that anyone else who is constructing their army in the same style has the same exact problem.
Personally I could care less where someone gets their models from, GW sure does. There is a market that wants CD related models and all that currently entails: whether its hobgoblins, CDs or the tooth fairy dressed up as a Bull centaur model. GW is neglecting that market. Those that are feeling that neglect are looking for or have already found alternatives to GW�?Ts neglect. I�?Tm supposed to feel sorry for GW neglecting me as customer? I�?Tm not buying that bridge.
Option 6 if happening/when happening is no one�?Ts fault other then GWs�?�
you hear my point but you dont "get it"...
metro_gnome
I hear you just fine, I just don�?Tt agree with all of it. There is a difference between disagreement and �?onot getting it�?� and the irony that statement entails.
Here�?Ts what GW doesn�?Tt get: There is going to be NO MARKET if GW doesn�?Tt produce what the customer wants. I can�?Tt speak for the 12-year customer which is all that matters apparently. Neither can you. GW can target CDs in whatever form they want. If they target to what the majority of the customer base might want (again that pesky Market Research thing coming into play) they would have a much greater chance of success. Maybe something that appeals to the adult gamer (while not as numerous, but probably has more money to spend) as well as to the child gamer. Everyone wins, hooray for happiness.
I can however speak to the �?o35 year old kid�?� that has MORE money to spend then when I was 12�?� Tying into that is my desire hope/wish for a competing company to actually FORCE GW to take their head out of their collective nether regions. Monopolies are seldom a good thing (Hence my reference to Quark�?Ts former position). I�?Td be nice if a company came in, LISTENED to what customers want and delivered it, because for me GW is not doing that. Oh I remember my cash that I can spend isn�?Tt important or GW doesn�?Tt want it because I�?Tm not 12.
I have two kids that are likely to want to play Warhammer, two of the target audience that GW wants. Who do you think is going to have the biggest influence into what/ if they will buy? Who will being paying for their toys (along with my own)? As time goes by there is more parents that have played the game then say 15 years ago. Is the sole arbiter? No, but a useful point to consider. So if they have had a bad experience with GW are the going to be wary of them? Let alone someone like me who has never really left the hobby and has watched GW lurch from one blunder to the next. You seem to think that once a gamer reaches a certain age the no longer matter. I�?Tll agree that children are probably more numerous in the hobby, but not they only ones.
GW is tackling this with no thought as to how it will play out (and they do this with everything). GW acts without considering the implications and no one will dissuade them. I�?Tve yet to see any sign they engage in any research. Apparently the kid market you are so quick to tout is all that matters? Great. You�?Tve seen just what marketing and demographic analysis GW has done? Cool. Then please send me the link, because until you have some cold hard facts then the assertions are just that. �?oIn
metro_gnome:
option 6 happens when GW releases rules with no models… which is what you endorse…
so if they were to take your advice it would be your fault… and theirs for taking half baked advice…
to satisfy you and me and our dusty old armies…
GW doesn’t do this… and its told us why…
"as a toy company it would be foolish for us to release rules with no toys"
and it would be… if we agree that rules are a loss leader (cue flip flop)…
in no way does releasing rules without releasing what they actually sell (toys)… result in a profit…
and in the very worst instance it increases sales to the competition…
your contention is that this is somehow a bad business practice… or it was several pages ago…
tho you have failed to show how producing rules without models makes them any money…
but now I am becoming aware that your position is not about business practice at all…
its a biased rant about not getting what you want…
well thats all very interesting but it has nothing to do with GW bein a good business…
or “listening to their customers”…
a quick glance at the percentage of armies can tell that most of their customers…
the ones they listen to… don’t give a rats ass about chaos dwarfs…
and tomorrow you will complain that there are too many space marines in WD…
how dare they listen to their customers like that…
GW is not a bad company… they just don’t do what you want them to do…
I for one am glad… as I wouldn’t expect them to last long under your leadership…
maybe your dog tho… sounds like hes got his ear to ground as far as marketing is concerned…
Xander:
GW doesn’t even release rules updates to current armies in any sort of structured way. After 7th was released, you could have expected a small FAQ for armies like Beasts of Chaos which has rules revolving around ranking their troops in 4s. But it never happened, GW is very bizarre that way.
But I digress, this topic deals with the rumour at hand. If you want to continue this discussion, please take it to PMs. 
metro_gnome:
well i called catpipe out on his tom foolery on warseer… he hasn’t responded yet…
I’m hoping the SMs in fantasy is the only april foolishness…
Willmark:
I agree well agree to disagree and leave it at that.
Back on topic: Mixing 40k and WFB whats wrong with that! 
dedwrekka:
Yes and it worked fine in Archaon's Horde with the Hellcannon in it, but I always thought of this as a rather special army and not the typical generic Chaos horde. What troubles me is that Chaos Dwarfs live far away from where the marauders live, so they really should not be a regular unit in the army.
Then again, including them in the list would probably mean that we have expanded our territory, which isn't a bad thing either fluff-wise. :D
Ishkur Cinderhat
Well, from all accounts they aren't a "regular unit", which is why they would be special or rare, as rumored so far. :)
Besides, you think we'd send our precious artillery out there sans guards?
metro_gnome:
a special unit with a ranged option… its all we need…
tho the fingers are crossed for that hero i talked about earlier…
in any event why would archaons horde be a different kind of army?
its pretty much what the hordes of chaos should be… with more chaos dwarfs of course…
i thought a single book for both systems for daemons would have been a good idea…
but 4 space marines vs a skaven horde (and winning) sounds like the opposite of fun…
Willmark:
Against the Skaven it could be poetic justice!
But I hear you. I for one dont really want to mix my genres like that.
dedwrekka:
Pretty sure the majority or all of that podcast was an april fool’s joke, as several of the things mentioned in it are fairly easy to discredit.
cornixt:
Latest podhammer has revealed that ALL of their rumours from the last podcast were part of their April Fools joke. Quite cleverly done, putting the very obviously fake at the end (the 40k/fantasy crossover) and having the others as being pretty plausible. If they hadn’t had the 40k one or they’d put it at the beginning then I would have been much more suspicious and the whole thing would have been a damp squib of an April Fool (I’ve got some great ones that I keep forgetting to release on April 1st). The old “tell enough lies and people will start to believe some of them”. I even got an honorable mention for starting the thread, although I’m sure that someone else would have done if I hadn’t.
The Chaos Dwarf unit in Chaos issue comes up about once per year anyway, and the reaction is always slightly different. I’ve been planning to use my CD army as a counts-as Chaos army recently so it was pretty straight forward to consider. Given the current lack of Mortal units and severe restrictions on taking Beasts/Daemons, or even not being able to at all (unless they actually duplicate some units over the different armies such as Dragon ogres and Trolls like in Ravening Hordes?), it could still happen quite feasibly in the new Mortal army.
Xander:
Ah well.
I am disapointed that their RSS feed for their podcast said this posted on March 31st. It’s one thing to have a joke on April 1st, but to have one on March 31st makes no sense. 
Willmark:
Puts us back to speculation mode. Roll on June WD.
Obsidian:
I've been planning to use my CD army as a counts-as Chaos army recently
cornixt
I've been wondering the same thing but with Empire rules.
This might not be the right topic for that though so once I've made a list of why, I'll create another topic elsewhere.
Reason I replied though is that I wonder how you thought about using Chaos Dwarfs with regular Chaos rules.
cornixt:
I wrote a thread on it a few months ago. Not got all the base-size adapters finished yet so I haven’t tried it out.
Podhammer:
Ah well.
I am disapointed that their RSS feed for their podcast said this posted on March 31st. It's one thing to have a joke on April 1st, but to have one on March 31st makes no sense. :P
Xander
It wasn't March 31st in Australia when I posted up the show :hat off
AGPO:
Now back to my point of a "trial run", if that is GWs plan then it would make sense. Go from May to Nov with a temporary list and see how CDs sell. One has to wonder if GW isnt sold on the idea of CDs, (makes sense), but aren't writing them off entirely... By Gav's own account there are members of the design team that want to do them do who knows.
Bottom line if this is true I suspect GW has ulterior motives know that there are going to be many CD fans that want there own book. I would imagine gauging that interest is something that GW would like to know. But then again we are talking about GW who knows as much about Marketing as my dog... And he's 'pretty smart. GW? Not so much.
Willmark
Don't froget the Gnoblar list. It may not be an official trial but if enough people say "hey, those little evil dwarfs are cool, wonder if there was ever an army for them? They come here, or to HoH or Kris Aubin or wherever, see the cool conversions and think, "what a great idea." Pretty soon more and more people are asking "will there ever be a full chaos dwarf army list again, even something in WD?" Far more than if it was just old time converters and veterans like us. It's a White Dwarf article tops, GW gets someone working on the magazine to knock up some conversions and rules, whacks Kris Aubin's stuff in to look cool and shazam, we have an update. Not an army book, but some new rules at any rate.
Selling conversion kists is simlpy a case of selling a mail order bundle. It takes a picture of said conversions, plus a discription saying "to make these, buy these parts." and a link to a bundle selling them all. It's like the old conversion corner on the UK site and it sells more models without having to do anything more than a bit of coding and packing a few boxes together.
Willmark:
That’s what I’ve said for quite some time, but is apparently “impossible” for GW to do according to some because (apparently) it would be the end of GW as we know it.
Lets see create rules check, add parts from models in the already exiting ranges check. Money for GW rather the eBay check, thus supported army, check, happiness for everyone old payers and new.
That being said GW appears to only want to do Chaos dwarfs if they can support it with a range of models that they redesign, GW has said as much. which is our main point of contention with GW when you think about it. To which I say they models are already there, you simply go across various products line in much the same manner as you have outlined and I have suggested previously. Realistically there is no unit in the current list that can’t be made by converting some other model. Its basically what we a good chunk of us do now. That or eBay, which may be part of GW’s problem.
Its ironic, our only “armybook” was just a collection of WD articles to begin with. And now the very thought of placing a temporary list in WD is terrifying to them. I can’t really think of a downside to a “get you by list” in WD until they get around to us. Other then they don’t want to right now, because they don’t have models to supply for it, which leads to your comments above about a “bits pack” (of which I agree). Classic chicken and the egg situation.
Looking long and hard at GW it appears that now that they are run by “adult management” rather then gamers who became businessmen; they are trying to get much more disciplined in their release schedule, and much more organized, great, we all applaud that. But get you by measures as long as they have an end in sight aren’t the end of the world. Businesses do it all the time, hell GW has done it.
Anyways roll on June WD as that will tell us the state of the HoC list, thus shedding light on GW’s intentions at least as far as HoC is concerned. I for one don’t expect to see anything in it CD related.
