Switch Theme:

What can 40k learn from AoS?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







Lord Kragan wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Look at AOS....Don't do a damn thing it does.


Yes, screw costing formations! Pricing rules breaks the balance. Oh and don't get me started on getting units' rules for free. The gall!


And don't touch the wound counts. Or give everyone psychic hoods. Or scythe out every single Allied-related headache at a stroke by giving everyone a typeline and defining what types rules apply to. None of that would be positive at all.

AoS may be terrible, but it's terrible the same way most of GW's trip-ups are, where they had a pile of cool ideas and then utterly failed at testing them or ensuring they worked in the real world. You can usually see bits and peices of the cool ideas if you look for them.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets





Indianapolis, IN

Simple, DO NOT DO TO 40K WHAT THEY DID TO AOS!

comparing core rules, 40k is actually a pretty solid game. Certain rules need some tweaking, mainly the USR's. Outside of that there really is nothing wrong with the game. Issues come up when you start looking at all the different codecs. Not all the codecs are the same "power level." Personally, the most balanced games I have played have been at the 2500pt level. Looking at some of the new formations and Army lists, just furthers that belief.

Armies:
The Iron Waagh: 10,000+ 8th Edition Tournament Record: 4-7-1
Salamanders: 5,000 8th Edition Tournament Record: 4-2
Ultramarines: 4,000
Armored Battle Company (DKoK): 4000
Elysians: 500
Khorne Daemons: 2500
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





For me, 40k should learn from AoS is what direction the rules should NOT go. Yes I understand that many players think the game is too complex, but many players also enjoy complexity, and some of us think the game could use more complexity to make it more realistic. There are already games out there that are more simplistic than 40k, and if this game is too hard, then go play them. But please stop trying to drag this game down too.

Far too many times, I've watched as a game I loved to play got dragged down to a simpler level to match other games. When this happens, it's always a death nail for the game that changed. Sure people will come to the game to try the new rules, but inevitably they will go back to the old game they were playing, as 40K just won't be as cool, and they don't want to start completley over. Meantime those of us who enjoyed complex games are left with fewer and fewer options.

Yes there are some rules that need to be changed, but that does not mean they need to be simplified. Yes there are balance issues, but that's not a problem with the core rules, that's a problem with codex's coming up and mucking things up by giving one army a way to circumvent the rules that other armies can't. Balance issues are going to always be there as some armies will get more attention than others, thus newer and more useful abilities. Balance issues will always be there, so long as GW does not decide unit point costs based on a set point chart instead of their current method of play testing a new unit and giving it a arbitrary point value.

In the end, the biggest problem many people have with the AoS change, is the fact that it completley invalidated all the current rulebooks. Both 40k and Fantasy went through many editions of new and changed rules without invalidating the existing codexs and Army Books. Yes I know it happened in the 2nd - 3rd edition change, I also remember none of the people I knew liking it, because so many armies were forced to be bland generic garbage until they lucked out and got a new army book, but even then they had a hard time finding someone to play them, because the other guy's Codex wasn't out yet.

The resistace to a new AoS type ruleset for 40k is a multi front issue and based on past examples of this happening, would most likely do far more harm than good for the game overall.
   
Made in gb
Angered Reaver Arena Champion




Connah's Quay, North Wales

There are two types of complexity. Complexity that adds to the game and complexity that bloats it. 40K has a lot of the latter in recent releases.
-Wolfen give a random buff to the entire army just by being included,
-you need note book to keep track of a Greater Daemons wargear,
-the Warp Storm table, all these new SM exclusive disciplines and their antagonistic Chaos ones,
-a near unlimited amount of formations each with their own specific rules,
-overlapped special rules

40K is complex, but in all the wrong ways. If 40K wanted to be nuanced it would have ballistic modifiers instead of cover saves, it would have more limited movement options (some armies can be anywhere and everywhere whenever they want, leading to almost no tactical choices) and a psychic phase that amounts to more than ''throw all dice to stop that one power''. But it doesn't, instead it has random tables and 2+ cover saves that doesn't stack with armour and basically no moral penalties for 80% of the entire roster despite being a large chunk of the rules. Bloated.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/16 16:26:26


 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Just an interesting note, in this month's WD batrep they have to use a fething cheat sheet pinned to the wall that was filled with crib notes for random abilities and effects the armies have so they did not forget.

If this is not indicative of an overly bloated system full of unnecessary rules I don't know what is.
   
Made in es
Brutal Black Orc




Barcelona, Spain

Ruin wrote:
Just an interesting note, in this month's WD batrep they have to use a fething cheat sheet pinned to the wall that was filled with crib notes for random abilities and effects the armies have so they did not forget.

If this is not indicative of an overly bloated system full of unnecessary rules I don't know what is.


Bad memory. Simple as that. I too have a cheatsheet for ANY wargame I have. It makes things faster.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/16 16:44:36


 
   
Made in us
Giggling Nurgling





I think there are tons of things to learn from AOS and 7th that GW should use when doing a "new edition".

Firstly they should have learned that despite what rules system they come up with we as a community will tweak it to make a game we enjoy playing. That is the reason why ITC, South coast and custom tourny rules are pretty much standard.

Simplification is definitely a goal to keep in mind, but it is not the cure all answer. AOS was very simplified and depending on what forces you take it make game predictable (Forces meet at the center of the board.. roll dice, kill kill kill over and over whoever has abilities that cause more mortal wounds wins.). It does however have some benefits. Doing away with tables is awesome, sliding abilities for monstrous creatures actually make it not game breaking to have a gigantic beasts in small battles. Special rules are what take this game from boring into something special, narrative play is where this thing shines.

To ignore the good and bad things about AOS and 7th would be folly. We can't just say... "don't do that" Seriously how many have even played 5+ games of AOS? There's a ton of things I hope they do that make the game refreshing and more balanced.
   
Made in es
Brutal Black Orc




Barcelona, Spain

Though the kill kill kill part doesn't hold true at all in matched play. Sometimes (read: if yo don't do anything else) doing overwhelming killing force may cost you the game there, because you didn't go and play for the mission.
   
Made in ca
Grumpy Longbeard





Canada

 Strg Alt wrote:
The AOS rule pamphlet is an insult to wargaming. If this kind of ruleset will be implemented in 40K, it will alienate a lot of veteran players. But maybe this is what GW really wants. These old guys just don´t buy enough stuff anyway and instead glorify the golden days of the past. Thats bad for business, so just get rid of them.


Holy Tzeentch I'm sick of this. Did you actually give it a go? Just because it isn't what you specifically enjoy does not mean it's bad. Many people enjoy AoS.
Also OP asked us not to game bash really nicley.

As to what 40k can learn:
WARSCROLLS!
The hero phase and his magic is done.
One warscroll per unit. Complex units slow the game down and death stars are not fun to play against.
Decreasing effectiveness for big models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also rend and variable damage on weapon profiles.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/16 19:00:16


Nightstalkers Dwarfs
GASLANDS!
Holy Roman Empire  
   
Made in us
Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





OgreChubbs wrote:
Aos brought nothing good for long term growth, just dumbed it down to a halo game. Minimal thought do what you want and pew pew til your done.


Have you actually played a Halo game at all?

Though considering that Halo was a multi-million dollar seller which still is making games to this day, that would be pretty good for it's growth eh?
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




I keep seeing a few people are saying 40K is too complex and others are saying 40K is not complex. After reading the 40K is not complex, they could be correct. Maybe instead of saying 40K is too complex maybe we should say 40K is too convoluted.

Let 40K keep the complexity it has, but don't make 40K convoluted. Age of Sigmar now has lots of complexity, but it's not convoluted.

So now I will say 8th edition of 40K should have no convolution at all. Make it clear, concise and well written.

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in es
Brutal Black Orc




Barcelona, Spain

Davor wrote:
I keep seeing a few people are saying 40K is too complex and others are saying 40K is not complex. After reading the 40K is not complex, they could be correct. Maybe instead of saying 40K is too complex maybe we should say 40K is too convoluted.

Let 40K keep the complexity it has, but don't make 40K convoluted. Age of Sigmar now has lots of complexity, but it's not convoluted.

So now I will say 8th edition of 40K should have no convolution at all. Make it clear, concise and well written.


I wish I could exalt you more times.
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






Davor wrote:
I keep seeing a few people are saying 40K is too complex and others are saying 40K is not complex. After reading the 40K is not complex, they could be correct. Maybe instead of saying 40K is too complex maybe we should say 40K is too convoluted.

Let 40K keep the complexity it has, but don't make 40K convoluted. Age of Sigmar now has lots of complexity, but it's not convoluted.

So now I will say 8th edition of 40K should have no convolution at all. Make it clear, concise and well written.

I hadn't thought about this distinction. Kudos to you, sir/madam.

40k drinking game: take a shot everytime a book references Skitarii using transports.
 
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Davor wrote:
I keep seeing a few people are saying 40K is too complex and others are saying 40K is not complex. After reading the 40K is not complex, they could be correct. Maybe instead of saying 40K is too complex maybe we should say 40K is too convoluted.

Let 40K keep the complexity it has, but don't make 40K convoluted. Age of Sigmar now has lots of complexity, but it's not convoluted.

So now I will say 8th edition of 40K should have no convolution at all. Make it clear, concise and well written.


I'd pretty much agree with that too.

AoS doesn't have a great many rules, especially compared to 40k, but the way it all interacts makes the game far more challenging than first looks might suggest.

   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Mr Morden wrote:
Please tell me why reducing the psychic phase to a single die roll is good for the game? Where is the skill? Where is the choice? Where is the dice management?


40K psychic phase

the bordeom of a unbalanced phase where quite often one player can do sweet FA, just watch the other messing about with his dice managment

The unbalnced nature and tiresome nature of a phase when some abilities are just BS

Lots of skil in selecting an army with bucket loads of dice and then guess what dominating - wow such "Skill".

Why did we have to have the magic phase dumped into 40k - Please tell me why the previous system was not ok - cheese powers notwithstadning as there are a whole load of new ones.

Why is random psychic powers such an awesome partfo the game

AOS Magic - you have these spells, you roll adice to make them work - with or without synergy bonuese, your oppoent mayor may not stop them.

Simpe and effective



Yea, the 40K psychic systems bad. Thats what I've been saying. It was a poor port over from Fantasy 7th edition. But not an exact port either, a bad one.

Random powers more or less was an attempt at balancing the powers out so that you wouldn't automatically take the best powers in the lore. I'm not necessarily for or against choosing powers, but the lore needs to have every power be equally useful to the player. Otherwise again, you'll just have people taking the same powers all the time.

Simple? yes. I would say tremendously boring.

My suggestion would be to port over an adjusted version of the 8th edition fantasy magic phase instead. Now before everyone looses their minds I'll explain.

The 3 main problems 8th edition magic phase:
1) 6th spell was incredibly powerful and could easily tip the game in your favour.
2) It didn't scale well at larger games.
3) Magic Resistance didn't work as intended.

The first problem solves it's self because we aren't using the same lores as Fantasy. 40K has it's own disciplines and they need to make sure the Psychic powers aren't game winningly powerful. I'm looking at you Invisibility.

Simply Adding an additional D6 for every 1000 points above a 3000 point game could solve this issue, but I'm open to suggestions.

Magic resistance isn't really a thing in 40K, unless you take into consideration Adamantium will. But I'll address this later.

So in the Psychic phase you would roll 2d6 and the player who's turn it is gains that many dice to cast psychic powers on to a maximum of 12 dice. The opponent gets the best of the 2 rolls. You need to choose how many dice you want to cast a psychic power on to a maximum of 6 dice. Casting levels of Psychic powers are increased to 6+ for basic spells and lets say 18 or 22+ for really high ones. You roll the dice add them up and then add your psychic mastery level. If it equals or beats the casting level of the psychic power then it goes off. If not, then it doesn't. The opponent can then attempt to stop the casting with their own dice using the same method adding in psychic mastery levels or adamantium will if applicable. If you roll double 1's then you suffer perils of the warp.

The benefit of this system are that you have a maximum number of warp charges to cast with. This eliminates armies that have 24+ dice so you don't just sit there for half an hour while your opponent rolls every power they have. It also forces the player to decide which spells to cast because they have a finite amount of dice to cast with. You can't just spam constantly. It also adds a level of complexity to the game by promoting spell and dice management while eliminating spamming of spells and spamming of units that generate power dice.

Many armies in 40K also have no access to psychic powers. This benefits them because it shrinks the casting pool down, and buffs the dispel pool up on average. Making it so armies without psykers have more of a chance to stop game winning spells without relying completely on rolling a bunch of 6's.

Let's turn the tables for a second:

Please tell me how would the game improve with spending half an hour per game just deciding where I'll make a few rolls? Where's the skill when you are just going to choose the optimal spell for the situation and the skill will be that of your rolls? FU-CK dice management, this games are bloated enough as they are-

Please tell me why I should not want a cocky player be punished by thinking he'll have two turns and ends up by not having them and have his whole army in the open? Double turns aren't a sure-fire thing and they are actually a chastising mechanic too.

Please tell me why it is truly immersion breaking? Please tell how having unkillable units with a boatload of buffs is beneficial for the game?



Don't you just come automatically with spells in AoS? How is that not choosing the right spells for your army? Additionally, why would I not cast a spell that was beneficial to me at the time? Isn't that how you play a game, by doing something that is beneficial to you? Not to mention that you already roll psychic powers randomly which doesn't necessarily mean you'll get a spell that you want.

Adding a level of tactical and strategic decision making to game isn't the same as rules bloat. Just so you know.

Oh I see, so you don't actually want any tactical thought in your game because you want to "punish" people who like to play a more serious style wargame. This is somehow more important to you than seeing two turns of 7 riptides shooting at the opponent, or 6 units of fully equipped scatterbikes rip into a enemy's line from 36" away.

I think this sentence more than anything is telling of your mindset. You aren't actually interested in having a strong tactical game at all, you just like seeing people who enjoy a strong wargames fall flat due to bad rules and unnecessary layers of randomness.

And lastly an answer: You just don't get it. I could thoroughly explain it to you but you just won't get it, as sold on the pre-conceived concept as you're.


I think I do get it. You can't thoroughly explain anything because there's nothing there to explain.

I think you've just invalidated your opinion.

Square Bases for Life!
AoS is pure garbage
Kill Primaris, Kill the Primarchs. They don't belong in 40K
40K is fantasy in space, not sci-fi 
   
Made in es
Brutal Black Orc




Barcelona, Spain

No, it's just saying that speaking to you will be like speaking to a brick wall. I do prefer to not wast my time when I could do other things.
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

I actually like the current implementation of the psychic phase.

While the selection method of powers is questionable, I would say it's analogous to drawing cards from a deck, which I'm fine with.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka




 Marmatag wrote:
I actually like the current implementation of the psychic phase.

While the selection method of powers is questionable, I would say it's analogous to drawing cards from a deck, which I'm fine with.


Thing is, when some people will have the Ace, King, Queen and Jack taken out of the deck it's not really fair then is it? It's only fine drawing cards from a deck when everyone has an equal chance at those 52 cards. When say 2/3 or 3/4 of the deck is taken away from you, but the other person gets a full deck something is terribly long

Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.

Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?

Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".  
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut






Mhaa ha ha ha. The Panzies just got Aealfed AoS style.

Inactive, user. New profile might pop up in a while 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought





Eye of Terror

To address the OPs question, 40k can learn NOTHING from AOS.

Players like me win games based our our superior understanding of the rules and ability to articulate interpretations others feel too intimidated to challenge. We wear opponents out based on our ability to endure 6 to 8 hour gaming sessions using an 800 point army, instead of relying on the random fortune of dice and imbalanced rulesets.

Simplifying the rules would spoil my enjoyment of the game, which is the player-to-player interaction over speculative claims about mechanics. I would hate a situation where, instead of making up rules in a serious voice and having people just accept what I say, a short sheet could be referenced that easily and efficiently clears up the matter. Might as well just play cribbage if we all know enough to agree on things without needing to read 10 pages from 5 books.

AOSifying the rules could also reduce the time of games, which would be irritating. I like it when my opponents bow out before turn 4 because sunrise has come and they need to get to work. 40k players should be mental marathon runners and arguing over rules is just as important as any other meta in the game, such as list selection, dice rolling, moving, shooting or assaulting. It takes time to have a good argument, and cutting into that leaves a lot of players wondering what to do with their lives when they are not at the table.

The one thing I think 40k could take from AOS is a renaming of all the factions. Some extra vowels and a misplaced consonant would be very helpful in making the various races sound all grimdark and futuristic. I am betting GW could increase sales in Germany just by introducing some umlauts.

Oh, and if they could also switch the fluff so that the entire universe has ended and the Emperor is leading armies as part of some kind of Ragnarok existence completely disconnected from reality as we know it, I would be all for that. If they can use this as an excuse to phase out all old models and sell me a bunch of monopose models with exaggerated proportions, that would be grand.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/18 02:54:05


   
Made in us
Beautiful and Deadly Keeper of Secrets





I can't tell which way that Sarcasm is for considering some of those are actual arguments I've heard.
   
Made in es
Brutal Black Orc




Barcelona, Spain

 techsoldaten wrote:
To address the OPs question, 40k can learn NOTHING from AOS.

Players like me win games based our our superior understanding of the rules and ability to articulate interpretations others feel too intimidated to challenge. We wear opponents out based on our ability to endure 6 to 8 hour gaming sessions using an 800 point army, instead of relying on the random fortune of dice and imbalanced rulesets.

Simplifying the rules would spoil my enjoyment of the game, which is the player-to-player interaction over speculative claims about mechanics. I would hate a situation where, instead of making up rules in a serious voice and having people just accept what I say, a short sheet could be referenced that easily and efficiently clears up the matter. Might as well just play cribbage if we all know enough to agree on things without needing to read 10 pages from 5 books.

AOSifying the rules could also reduce the time of games, which would be irritating. I like it when my opponents bow out before turn 4 because sunrise has come and they need to get to work. 40k players should be mental marathon runners and arguing over rules is just as important as any other meta in the game, such as list selection, dice rolling, moving, shooting or assaulting. It takes time to have a good argument, and cutting into that leaves a lot of players wondering what to do with their lives when they are not at the table.

The one thing I think 40k could take from AOS is a renaming of all the factions. Some extra vowels and a misplaced consonant would be very helpful in making the various races sound all grimdark and futuristic. I am betting GW could increase sales in Germany just by introducing some umlauts.

Oh, and if they could also switch the fluff so that the entire universe has ended and the Emperor is leading armies as part of some kind of Ragnarok existence completely disconnected from reality as we know it, I would be all for that. If they can use this as an excuse to phase out all old models and sell me a bunch of monopose models with exaggerated proportions, that would be grand.


Regarding your last statement. a) It's called 30k's great crusade. b) Isn't Fantasy completely disconnected from reality as we know it? You know, last time I checked in the news, there wasn't a giant bumhole torn into the fabric of reality that leads into hell on each pole of the world. It also does have other bizarre things such as a moon made entirely out of drugs and a weird ass vortex of magic in the middle of an island. c) I think it's better proportioned that the no-knees dwarves, plus there's plenty of models, such as gore-gruntas, varanguard, and the kurnoth hunters, that aren't monopose. Something that the old fantasy ailed even more from, considereing that most of your army would be dudes holding a spear and whield in an awkward position.

I know it's sarcasm but that last line had me puzzled a bit.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/18 08:33:01


 
   
Made in gb
Major




London

 oldzoggy wrote:
Mhaa ha ha ha. The Panzies just got Aealfed AoS style.


you say "panzies" but they are stronger than most other armies. So I know whos really laughing.
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Some of these arguments are really confusing, to the point I'm not sure who is in favour of what?

Hey, I know. Let's get back On Topic, yeah? Discussing specific things from AoS, rather than whether or not you like AoS as a system, hmm?

   
Made in br
Fireknife Shas'el




Lisbon, Portugal

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
 oldzoggy wrote:
Mhaa ha ha ha. The Panzies just got Aealfed AoS style.


you say "panzies" but they are stronger than most other armies. So I know whos really laughing.


He mispelled it. Eldar nowadays are akin to Panzers

AI & BFG: / BMG: Mr. Freeze, Deathstroke / Battletech: SR, OWA / HGB: Caprice / Malifaux: Arcanists, Guild, Outcasts / MCP: Mutants / SAGA: Ordensstaat / SW Legion & X-Wing: CIS / WWX: Union

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"FW is unbalanced and going to ruin tournaments."
"Name one where it did that."
"IT JUST DOES OKAY!"

 Shadenuat wrote:
Voted Astra Militarum for a chance for them to get nerfed instead of my own army.
 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought





Eye of Terror

Lord Kragan wrote:
 techsoldaten wrote:
To address the OPs question, 40k can learn NOTHING from AOS.

Players like me win games based our our superior understanding of the rules and ability to articulate interpretations others feel too intimidated to challenge. We wear opponents out based on our ability to endure 6 to 8 hour gaming sessions using an 800 point army, instead of relying on the random fortune of dice and imbalanced rulesets.

Simplifying the rules would spoil my enjoyment of the game, which is the player-to-player interaction over speculative claims about mechanics. I would hate a situation where, instead of making up rules in a serious voice and having people just accept what I say, a short sheet could be referenced that easily and efficiently clears up the matter. Might as well just play cribbage if we all know enough to agree on things without needing to read 10 pages from 5 books.

AOSifying the rules could also reduce the time of games, which would be irritating. I like it when my opponents bow out before turn 4 because sunrise has come and they need to get to work. 40k players should be mental marathon runners and arguing over rules is just as important as any other meta in the game, such as list selection, dice rolling, moving, shooting or assaulting. It takes time to have a good argument, and cutting into that leaves a lot of players wondering what to do with their lives when they are not at the table.

The one thing I think 40k could take from AOS is a renaming of all the factions. Some extra vowels and a misplaced consonant would be very helpful in making the various races sound all grimdark and futuristic. I am betting GW could increase sales in Germany just by introducing some umlauts.

Oh, and if they could also switch the fluff so that the entire universe has ended and the Emperor is leading armies as part of some kind of Ragnarok existence completely disconnected from reality as we know it, I would be all for that. If they can use this as an excuse to phase out all old models and sell me a bunch of monopose models with exaggerated proportions, that would be grand.


Regarding your last statement. a) It's called 30k's great crusade. b) Isn't Fantasy completely disconnected from reality as we know it? You know, last time I checked in the news, there wasn't a giant bumhole torn into the fabric of reality that leads into hell on each pole of the world. It also does have other bizarre things such as a moon made entirely out of drugs and a weird ass vortex of magic in the middle of an island. c) I think it's better proportioned that the no-knees dwarves, plus there's plenty of models, such as gore-gruntas, varanguard, and the kurnoth hunters, that aren't monopose. Something that the old fantasy ailed even more from, considereing that most of your army would be dudes holding a spear and whield in an awkward position.


@Lord Kragan yes, that was my point. I do not enjoy feeling like I identify with the subject of a game in any way and truly wish 40k were more abstract - like Go or Chess. Blowing up the Universe AOS-style might be a good way to make things seem even less familiar. The AOS setting opens the door to the imagination and encourages people to ask questions, like wondering why a world's worth of dead people are going around smacking each other with sticks in the afterlife. That kind of setting would go over well with 40k players and probably bring a lot of new people into the game.

With regards to your point about space bumholes and whatnot, true story: I belong to a skeptics society, we had a speaker out a couple years ago who is an astrophysicist. He gave a presentation about the math used to measure the total size and weight of the cosmos. He did describe several celestial bodies / phenomenon as orifices in reality - so it's not that far fetched!

I agree with your point that dwarves are perfectly proportioned and was unaware that there were so many options in the AOS range for dynamically posing models. I was just hoping GW could invalidate the current range and come up with something new for us to purchase. So many 40k players I know can't stand their collections and would really like to see a complete overhaul plus rules preventing them from using the old ones. It would also be great if every model were bulked out to heroic proportions, I like the aesthetic of of Ahmed-Hamouda-style Astartes and think everyone else would too.





This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/18 14:04:18


   
Made in us
Guardsman with Flashlight





 Pr3Mu5 wrote:
The Floating Initiative format would ruin 40k in my opinion.
Can you imagine 2 back to back turns of Tau shooting?
Or even anyone good/average in the shooting phase vs chaos demons or orks?
Solution: Nerf Tau and other extremely shooty armies that need it.

Honestly, I wish GW would release equivalents of FAQ's that nerfed/buffed armies that really need it for being consistently broken/weak. (Tau/Eldar/Orks)
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Another reminder.

Topic isn't 'do you like AoS'. Topic is 'is there anything in AoS you think could be adapted for 40k'.

If your answer is no, that's cool. No need to explain or justify. Explanation is however needed when wanting to add something, yeah?

So....


   
Made in us
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade





cedar rapids, iowa

There are a bunch of people that do not play AoS commenting in a AoS to 40k thread, fun times.

IMO what should be used for 40k:
Assault rules are much faster/easier/fun in AoS then 40k.
Movement stats for each unit instead of unit type movement.
Rending instead of AP, much better.
Pretty much removing invulns and a wound bump everywhere.
Datasheets that tell you how the unit plays instead of TABLES EVERYWHERE.
Drastic reduction in universal special rules, datasheet tells you what the unit does.
More missions that actually are fun/balanced.

What should not be brought over:
Initiative as it stands is not done well in AoS. (This could easily be adjusted/fixed.)
Shooting in CC with EVERY weapon is really dumb, some weapons are ok (pistols for example.) Many people abuse this thinking they can just shoot at everything despite not having LoS out of the combat.

 
   
Made in us
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets






My biggest items I'd transfer over:

-Stat/attack reduction of MCs as they take wounds. Yeah, I play big Daemons, but this would definitely take Riptides/Wraithknights down a notch, and make them a bit closer to what vehicles are now.
-Being able to roll Charge distance before declaring a target. Yeah, it's still a random Charge distance, but it's something
-Streamlined rules, bumps in wounds, simpler saves, Rending rules

What I don't want brought over:
-Random Initiative. I've seen several games where an army gets back to back turns and just stomps all over the enemy
-Shooting into CC. Tau/Eldar would just slaughter people with this.

~1.5k
Successful Trades: Ashrog (1), Iron35 (1), Rathryan (3), Leth (1), Eshm (1), Zeke48 (1), Gorkamorka12345 (1),
Melevolence (2), Ascalam (1), Swanny318, (1) ScootyPuffJunior, (1) LValx (1), Jim Solo (1), xSoulgrinderx (1), Reese (1), Pretre (1) 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: