Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
Were the Fimir always a matriarchal society?

yes.


http://warhammerworld.games-workshop.com/2016/08/17/what-happened-at-the-warhammer-age-of-sigmar-open-day/

little vid and some more open day pics.

edit: Deleted don't want to cause flame wars or arguments in the news topic. :X

Out of all the things Feit has ever posted, I believe this the least. Not because I don't believe AOS is improving, but because there's no way in hell they'd get access to such secret information, and so specific in terms.

It just looks like they were thinking "hmmm, 20% doesn't sound exciting enough, but 50% is obviously too high...so let's split down the middle."

 Accolade wrote:
Out of all the things Feit has ever posted, I believe this the least. Not because I don't believe AOS is improving, but because there's no way in hell they'd get access to such secret information, and so specific in terms.

It just looks like they were thinking "hmmm, 20% doesn't sound exciting enough, but 50% is obviously too high...so let's split down the middle."

As I said some of the information is incorrect if it came from Lady Atia I would be more inclined to believe it. Since they got the figures for WHFB wrong. I think I may delete my post don't want to start a flame war.

Well sure, but if it was from Atia it would believable!

EDIT: no worries about it, I'm just kidding around. Really, I think people react poorly to stuff from Feit mostly because it's such utter click bait.

That being said, hope AOS is making it in the positive direction.

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
Were the Fimir always a matriarchal society?

That's a new bit for me.

Fimir were my favorite monster from Heroquest. Wouldn't mind seeing them modified a bit to make a glorious return.

I recallthat being said before. The catch being that all their Females are sterile, and so need to..... um..... "mate" with females of other races to reproduce.

Considering the new AoS fluff avoiding mentions of the previous methods of beast men reproduction, and implying a retcon to how new beastmen are made (Combination of people mutating into them and that their are female beastmen for them to mate with). I would not be surprise if this was a change we will also see in the fimir.

Well it seems Grombrindal fan's should be happy about something.




https://war-of-sigmar.herokuapp.com/bloggings/1052

Yeah according to Atia Grombrindal is coming to AOS.

Enough with this guy already. I get he is the Magazines Mascot, but he is a generic dwarf. Top it off, all the ltd miniatures of him are not great by contrast to other models of the same time period. If he is a 'free' model that comes with my subscription I would rather toss him in the fire place than sell it. Lets get some more interesting things for them to shine the light on instead of a tired concept.

Pariah-Miniatures wrote:
Enough with this guy already. I get he is the Magazines Mascot, but he is a generic dwarf. Top it off, all the ltd miniatures of him are not great by contrast to other models of the same time period. If he is a 'free' model that comes with my subscription I would rather toss him in the fire place than sell it. Lets get some more interesting things for them to shine the light on instead of a tired concept.

What are you talking about? These are all great minis, full of character.

via the FB page :

Nagash in it for the long game son. Buckle up.

I's love to see those numbers adjusted based on the number of participants for each faction.....

 reds8n wrote:
via the FB page :

Not the least bit surprising. AoS brought along a lot of Space Marine converts to the Sigmarines, exactly as intended. Not to mention just about every elf army - among the most popular prior to Fantasy's demise - are Order.

Chaos being second also looks about right, what with Warriors of Chaos arguably being the most popular Fantasy army, but given that Fantasy was overall a much more 'balanced' game in terms of what armies were played, not enough to overwhelm Order/Sigmarines.

Greenkins weren't popular enough to hold a faction by themselves, nor were Vampire Co- uhh, Death, especially since GW chased off their Tomb King players.

It would be kinda neat if the White Dwarf could lead my small Dwarf army. I am actually in the market for a good dwarf hero as my army is based on BFSP and the included hero doesn't cut it.

Looks like GW didn't learn from the 40k campaigns.. You need to adjust the wins based on # of games played with a specific faction., so you don't just get the most played faction steamrolling over others.

The thing is, I don't think they expected the 'wyld' success of the Sylvaneth, and Order claiming dominance here helps the narrative (granted it would have been nice to have at least one city tip to another faction, but if you had to pick one to claim all three...).

 Kirasu wrote:
Looks like GW didn't learn from the 40k campaigns.. You need to adjust the wins based on # of games played with a specific faction. so you don't just get the most played faction steamrolling over others.

No. They don't.

The only thing that does is devalue actual wins from factions with large player bases, and overvalue wins from factions with smaller player bases. Why should I have to play 4 times as many games, AND WIN THEM, as another player solely based on what factions we play, in an open campaign? Sorry your faction didn't win/the campaign didn't end the way you wanted, but don't be a sore loser about it.

This campaign also took into account painting units; death should have had arguably the easiest time with that considering how stupidly fast and simple it is to paint undead.

The infographic above also does not report actual wins/painted units/games played, only locations won by each faction. While we can infer that more people play order armies, we cannot infer how many people either a.) Didn't participate, and b.) Played multiple armies.
The campaign was however an exceedingly clever poll-in-disguise. Gamesworkshop got lots of data about Age of Sigmar players from this experience. You can be sure they will put that into good use.

You could also dedicate your win to any alliance regardless of what you actually played. Though I doubt many people really did that, but it was an option present.

Neronoxx wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
Looks like GW didn't learn from the 40k campaigns.. You need to adjust the wins based on # of games played with a specific faction. so you don't just get the most played faction steamrolling over others.

No. They don't.

The only thing that does is devalue actual wins from factions with large player bases, and overvalue wins from factions with smaller player bases. Why should I have to play 4 times as many games, AND WIN THEM, as another player solely based on what factions we play, in an open campaign? Sorry your faction didn't win/the campaign didn't end the way you wanted, but don't be a sore loser about it.

This campaign also took into account painting units; death should have had arguably the easiest time with that considering how stupidly fast and simple it is to paint undead.

The infographic above also does not report actual wins/painted units/games played, only locations won by each faction. While we can infer that more people play order armies, we cannot infer how many people either a.) Didn't participate, and b.) Played multiple armies.
The campaign was however an exceedingly clever poll-in-disguise. Gamesworkshop got lots of data about Age of Sigmar players from this experience. You can be sure they will put that into good use.

I hope you are aware that Death's core infantry has not been repackaged yet? They are still on square bases and Death players have to wait like a week to get in bases for skeletons and zombies. Let's not also forget from a gaming aspect the general's handbook has "muddled" Death quite a bit considering their magic got indirectly nerfed. Honestly I feel that Death and destruction need "a bit" more love.

I assume more people will pick up Death when we get a proper battle tome with our spell lores. We really need our magic. I assume that's why they GW have not really updated Death yet.

You are aware that bases don't actually matter in Age of Sigmar right?

And death magic is fine. The only people who were actually hit by that 'nerf' were people intending to summon more models than they owned (exaggeration, I know, but not necessarily untrue.)

Death has plenty of nasty stuff, but I insist the actual attribute of the factions less than stellar showing would amount to all the lost and wayward Tomb Kings players. Makes way more sense if you think about it. They were what, 1/2 of the faction unofficially?

Neronoxx wrote:
You are aware that bases don't actually matter in Age of Sigmar right?

And death magic is fine. The only people who were actually hit by that 'nerf' were people intending to summon more models than they owned (exaggeration, I know, but not necessarily untrue.)

Death has plenty of nasty stuff, but I insist the actual attribute of the factions less than stellar showing would amount to all the lost and wayward Tomb Kings players. Makes way more sense if you think about it. They were what, 1/2 of the faction unofficially?

Bases don't matter but I am sure many people want to make sure the presentation in their army is consistent since some death models have been converted to circle bases as been said on facebook. I am sure I am not alone in this. I disagree with you on the magic aspect but I don't want this to go off topic.

Neronoxx wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
Looks like GW didn't learn from the 40k campaigns.. You need to adjust the wins based on # of games played with a specific faction. so you don't just get the most played faction steamrolling over others.

No. They don't.

The only thing that does is devalue actual wins from factions with large player bases, and overvalue wins from factions with smaller player bases. Why should I have to play 4 times as many games, AND WIN THEM, as another player solely based on what factions we play, in an open campaign? Sorry your faction didn't win/the campaign didn't end the way you wanted, but don't be a sore loser about it.

This campaign also took into account painting units; death should have had arguably the easiest time with that considering how stupidly fast and simple it is to paint undead.

The infographic above also does not report actual wins/painted units/games played, only locations won by each faction. While we can infer that more people play order armies, we cannot infer how many people either a.) Didn't participate, and b.) Played multiple armies.
The campaign was however an exceedingly clever poll-in-disguise. Gamesworkshop got lots of data about Age of Sigmar players from this experience. You can be sure they will put that into good use.

If it's a devalued series of Order victories as opposed to "Order/Sigmarines will always win every campaign forever because they're the most played" then I'll take it. Otherwise, every campaign will just become a glorified popularity contest for the most played faction, which will always be Space Marines/Stormcast Eternals.

I mean look back at Medusa V. That went something like, Space Marines >>> Non-Space Marine Imperials >>>>>>; Eldar > Everybody else. What do you know, that was exactly the order of popularity of the factions at the same. The Disorder forces actually pulling their finger out and coordinating actual victories in the Eye of Terror took GW by surprise to the point they basically retconned the whole thing, and that was largely driven by the 3.5 CSM 'dex being so popular due to its overpowered nature, and the Space Marines still pulled ahead.

I play an Order army and I'M bitter about the results, because myself and I think most people knew that this is exactly what would happen. I'd rather have to play and win four games and actually feel like the victory for the faction was hard fought globally than know it's a guaranteed win from the start because I'm the side with the Not-Space Marine majority.

 Arbitrator wrote:
Otherwise, every campaign will just become a glorified popularity contest for the most played faction, which will always be Space Marines/Stormcast Eternals.

And that's perfectly fine if the premise of the campaign is a simple square off. You really don't want people that make up the majority of your customers feel cheated out of their wins, superficial as they are.

What GW could do is to give every faction an objective that they can work towards based purely on their own performance. Say, if Chaos wins 50% of their games during the campaign, they gain control of a location that isn't the main point of contention or summon a powerful demon.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
Otherwise, every campaign will just become a glorified popularity contest for the most played faction, which will always be Space Marines/Stormcast Eternals.

And that's perfectly fine if the premise of the campaign is a simple square off. You really don't want people that make up the majority of your customers feel cheated out of their wins, superficial as they are.

Yeah, because what the hobby needs is even more Space Marine bias and even less non-Imperial players.

Edit: And before somebody jumps on me with "b-b-but this is a AoS thread!", my point here still stands for Stormcasts, it's just the two are so interchangeable at this point I refer to one the same as the other.

I know that a big chunk of the fandom would just prefer if those annoying non-loyalist Space Marine 'whiners' would go away so they can play Horus Heresy 40k and Age of Stormcasts, but it would actually be refreshing to see the fiction not tell us one thing, but then show us the other. I've said this another thread very recently, but for 'grimdark' settings it always feels really weird that both in the Age of Sigmar and 40k, Chaos is apparently this all-malevolent force that is one arm stretch away from devouring the galaxy, but every other piece of fiction, campaign and even models just describes how those amazing superhuman badarses (whether Marine or Stormcast) swoop in and crush the enemy.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
What GW could do, is to give every faction an objective that they can work to based purely on their own performance. Say, if Chaos wins 50% of their games during the campaign, they gain control of a location that isn't the main point of contention or summon a powerful demon.

Not a terrible idea, I must admit. The problem is that the 'main point of contention' is still always going to fall into the loyalist superhumans no matter what, which turns the whole thing into glorified window dressing instead of "YOU CAN TOTALLY CHANGE THE FICTION GUYS!".

As has been said by others, I'd be very interested in seeing the break down of victories with the numbers of players per faction.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
Otherwise, every campaign will just become a glorified popularity contest for the most played faction, which will always be Space Marines/Stormcast Eternals.

And that's perfectly fine if the premise of the campaign is a simple square off. You really don't want people that make up the majority of your customers feel cheated out of their wins, superficial as they are.

What GW could do is to give every faction an objective that they can work towards based purely on their own performance. Say, if Chaos wins 50% of their games during the campaign, they gain control of a location that isn't the main point of contention or summon a powerful demon.

So, ask them. You might find GW surprisingly open these days.

 reds8n wrote:
via the FB page :

Wow.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
Otherwise, every campaign will just become a glorified popularity contest for the most played faction, which will always be Space Marines/Stormcast Eternals.

And that's perfectly fine if the premise of the campaign is a simple square off. You really don't want people that make up the majority of your customers feel cheated out of their wins, superficial as they are.

What GW could do is to give every faction an objective that they can work towards based purely on their own performance. Say, if Chaos wins 50% of their games during the campaign, they gain control of a location that isn't the main point of contention or summon a powerful demon.

You know it would not surprise me if GW does something like this when they write up the fluff for the season of war. They pretty much state that after the war chaos has pretty much heavily corrupted the surronding lands and nagash's forces caused piles of dead and destruction wrecked a lot of stuff. Yeah the cities are safe but at what cost? The greywater they pretty much destroyed majority of the surrounding land to stave off the invaders, to the everqueen's horror.

Neronoxx wrote:
The only thing that does is devalue actual wins from factions with large player bases, and overvalue wins from factions with smaller player bases. Why should I have to play 4 times as many games, AND WIN THEM, as another player solely based on what factions we play, in an open campaign? Sorry your faction didn't win/the campaign didn't end the way you wanted, but don't be a sore loser about it.

Then you are deciding results in advance basically.

This campaign also took into account painting units; death should have had arguably the easiest time with that considering how stupidly fast and simple it is to paint undead.

Assuming you go for easy route. Good looking bone is actually hard to paint(what it being similar to white in shade and white being nuts to paint)

And of course there's this great equalizer "money". Doesn't really matter what faction I would be painting. Same amount of units would be result anyway. Not everybody can afford to buy more than they can paint. 4 weeks? That's 75£ or so worth of models at most. Easy to paint isn't much help there...

Campaign aside, but somewhat connected: I wonder about the future of AoS. With Sylvaneth amd Ironjawz being at least some level of success compared to the previous releases it won't get nuked for a return to the Warhammer world (hmpf).

What is the plan here? The many mini factios can be realeased and generate sales for Battletomes and minis, both repacks and kits. We know that sales for new kits are heavily frontloaded while blood can be squeezed from the old kits stone in such a release. Good. But a huge problem with the sell on release has always been that you have to pump out new stuff while the rest of the line is mostly wasted shelf space. If Fantasy suffered from people not buying Brets and back in the day Woodies because of neglect and no upcoming releases planned, how will dozens of mini factions fare once released? It seems people mostly reject the idea of quasi-Unbound Alliances and won't buy new dwarves for their Empire knights army as well as a few more HElf dragon riders for a broken combo, err, for fun no matter what store clerks have to sell this week. I bet new Fyreslayer releases are a looong way off, though. Swifthawk agents? Lol.

So how will it go? Maybe they will finally release add-ons for different mini factions once they're all released that change the way old units synergize with the new model or each other like dozens of competitors do rather succesfully each month. They can do that now with rules in the boxes. Put factions back in people's mind with different SC boxes? Or will they convince themselves that new formations will keep factions fresh? Will everything go to pasture as Direct Only after a year or so?

The Flesh Eater Courts and Beastclaw releases seemed to be a really well received way of making old models very desirable in the new game.

Releasing new characters and elite units that buff old kits for each faction would be a very good call.