I won't actually see the difference if they would stop with SBG. All boxes of warriors or blisters would be needed for WoTR anyway, so there won't be a big change.

_________________
Isengard - 1500+
Gondor - 1000+
Imperial Guard - 1000+
Blood Angels - 850+

I don't see the favoritism...For all of the new WotR miniatures, they have published SBG profiles for them. And sure the December WD had a WotR battle report, but it was preceded by a SBG re-cap, and was the culmination of a campaign that included both SBG and WotR. Where exactly is this favoritism? Or is it just that WotR got a lot of press right after it's release (much the same as Apocalypse, Planetstrike, etc.)

_________________
Respectfully,
Jonathan

Do what is right, love mercy, and walk humbly

Battle Companies

There was a thread over at the old Last Alliance where someone had a chance to talk with Mat Ward at one of the GW events in the UK. He had stated that there would be no more supplements published for SBG and that the new models would be released primarily to support WotR but would follow-on with rules in White Dwarf for SBG.

The abandonment of the models planned in LOME, the lack of new sourcebooks being planned for SBG and the "relegation" of SBG to the pages of White Dwarf only are what make people feel like WotR is being favored over SBG.

Add on top of that that the LOTR portion of the website was completely redesigned around the WotR army alliances.

Lastly (and this just affects the North American players) but the GW sponsored events for SBG have basically disappeared. They are launching the 'ard Boyz tournaments for all three systems - all three that is if you count WotR as the core system. Same thing for the Tournament Circuit - while they are allowing some SBG events to be "qualifiers" for their circuit ending Grand Tournaments, the website only talks of a War of the Ring Grand Tournament to end the circuit season.

So those are a few of the reasons why many players have that WotR is getting shown favoritism.... but I'm not bitter.

_________________
There and Blog Again ...

Yeah and the fact that although the new profiles are published in WD, there hasn't been any SBG-specific articles for a while since WOTR began, though the JAN WD has a purely SBG tactics article, so it doesn't look like GW has completely given up on SBG:
http://www.one-ring.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=16778

_________________
TO9G - 2010 Isengard

From what I understand, isnt there two rumored SBG books in the pipeline? If it does turn out to be true, then I would think mat Ward may have been mistaken as far as how he expected WotR to overtake SBG completely (though it is understanbale how it seems that way)

I am not sure either about the abandonment of the models for LOME, especially since those very same models (with the exception of Helm Hammerhand) are also in the WotR book (were wolves, Beorn, etc).

I mean, it is possible that they are gearing more towards WotR and all evidence seems to point in that direction, but I do not think that SBG is as forgotten as many people like to lament.

Hell, I am playing SBG now that WotR was released, and made me realize that the SBG rules are nowhere near as bad as they were when first released in the FotR box. SBG is only growing because of WotR from where I stand (and from what I see locally).