Wow, mikhaila thanks for sharing. Sounds like Warhammer is truely dead as a game now, and will exist solely as a mechanism for selling minis. Also means no tournament is going to run sigmar - 8th edition will probably become immortal - might even get a community update to fix some of the less balanced parts of the game.
I was excited about this release, but if what you say is true then I can't imagine any serious wargamer being interested in this - even when I was a 12 year old kid first getting into warhammer I was into the army books and the points system and everything. Just don't get this move by GW.
Sorry to hear about that. It sucks from the perspective of a player but I'm sure it is even worse when it isn't just a hobby but rather a not insignificant part of what puts food on the table. If 40k cranked the stupid up to 11 with 6e and broke the knob with 7e, I shudder to think what a completely point free scifi game it may become in a few years.
Bull0 wrote: Very bizarre indeed. Thanks for sharing. Balancing by model count obviously won't work unless they're going to homogenize the model range a *lot*. Be interesting to see what comes out of the rules release at the weekend but if this is true, I'm highly skeptical there'll be a decent game at the end of it.
I am quite skeptical too.. but on the other hand... Heroes of Might and Magic use to work on that system and it is a legacy for me.
Sorry to hear about that. It sucks from the perspective of a player but I'm sure it is even worse when it isn't just a hobby but rather a not insignificant part of what puts food on the table. If 40k cranked the stupid up to 11 with 6e and broke the knob with 7e, I shudder to think what a completely point free scifi game it may become in a few years.
And what's worse is that GW will dump a load of this completely crap product on stores, clogging up their shelf space and stockrooms with a product that nobody wants and won't sell.
Pepticsalve wrote: Wow, mikhaila thanks for sharing. Sounds like Warhammer is truely dead as a game now, and will exist solely as a mechanism for selling minis. Also means no tournament is going to run sigmar - 8th edition will probably become immortal - might even get a community update to fix some of the less balanced parts of the game.
I was excited about this release, but if what you say is true then I can't imagine any serious wargamer being interested in this - even when I was a 12 year old kid first getting into warhammer I was into the army books and the points system and everything. Just don't get this move by GW.
NewTruthNeomaxim wrote: Incidentally, is anyone familiar with the fun, but now dead game "Arcane Legions"? I ask because it was actually a very solid, mass-battles game, with some interesting mechanics... and its core rules were a six page document.
I just thought it felt like a relevant example of rules requiring less verbosity than we expect out of modern games, especially when special abilities can be spelled out in greater detail on supplemental materials like unit-cards.
I for one, am hyped by the sound of a lot of this... especially the "risk free" part where I can be playing, and thus really evaluating the rules within ten minutes of downloading them (the week after GW's destroyed servers come back online).
That game looked ass on the table (green army man level sculpts in 20mm on huge movement trays you couldn't flock because they had stats printed on them) but the system was brilliant.
I thought GW was trying to get away from the idea of codexes/army books containing special rules and the BRB containing all the USRs. Now we're sorta back to the BRB (all of 4 pages of it) being the stripped-down core and the Warscrolls describing the special rules and wargear again. Why is this better? Framing it in a 40K perspective, does everyone remember how may different types of storm shields or psychic hoods there were between multiple books? Everytime they reprinted the rule, they worded it slightly differently or they completely changed how it worked.
GW stopped doing online FAQs. What makes anyone believe they intend on keeping these free warscrolls updated and working well within the framework of newer units being added year after year? This whole thing reeks of GW just throwing its hands up and saying to the gamer "y'all figure it out for yourselves, writing rules is hard, we'll be over here in the corner making miniatures."
I've got a real bad feeling about AoS, and I really hope I'm wrong.
OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
SNIPPAGE
I've actually been in tears today over what they did to WFB. I have no idea how I will sell this game in my shop other than an expensive boardgame.
So Mike, did you learnt this AFTER you committed to a stock order?
I will bet my car, both my arms and legs, the soul of my first-born, that AoS isn't as well designed as that game.
Thank you for the tip! But I only play GW games :-)
Thinking of picking up Neferata Mortarch of Blood as it's such an incredible model.
(This is the last time I will keep banging the drum, honest!)
What if I told you the game was designed/written by Alessio Cavatore? I'm guessing from your sig you have followed GW games for a while, so you shouldn't need an introduction about who he is.
The game plays like a mix of a smaller, skirmish scale of LoTR (which Alessio also designed) mixed with some Bolt Action (a game which was part-designed by Rick Priestly - the guy who designed 40k of course!)
So, you have to think, do you relate to the living, breathing human being behind the creation of something? Or the badge on the box? Cause I can guarantee you there is more of the 'soul' of GW in Terminator than there is in this AoS game that is coming over the horizon. It's the kind of game GW themselves probably would have made in the 90's if they had had the lisense.
OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
I'm having trouble with the idea of two 12 year olds opening up figure cases and playing a game....let alone running a league, or a tournament.
I argued and asked for any reason they didn't have a points system. They just kept telling me it doesn't have one, doesn't need one, the game has things that give the player with least models an advantage, or why one dragon gets killed by a unit. It was like talking with people that don't play the game. Have never played the game. Only played the scenarios in AoS.
With the vast difference in profile between models in Warhammer, it's absurd to think you can balance by model count.
And you can't balance by Warscroll, this is just multiple models which can have hugely different numbers and stats.
And you can't balance by wounds. Chaos Warrior = 1 goblin? Nagash = 10 goblins?
In fact, Nagash or a large dragon or blood thirster is aways optimal. Warscrolls =1, Model count =1, Wounds < 10.
Because of the huge difference in power of the playing pieces, nothing makes sense unless you balance by a number that reflects the value of the individual piece in the game.
AoS is essentially Unbound armies where you bring what you want. You aren't even restricted by faction, you just might have models that don't gain a bonus others might from an icon or leader.
I've actually been in tears today over what they did to WFB. I have no idea how I will sell this game in my shop other than an expensive boardgame.
Ayup, aaaaand we're done.
Seriously GW, seriously. Seriously.
Seriously.
It's like they're cursed to always almost do things right. They finally resolve to reinvigorate Warhammer...but they do it by killing off the game and the fiction. They design(perhaps that's too strong a word for...whatever this drek is) the replacement to bring down the entry point to a more affordable level and they put the rules out for free...but they also completely throw out any pretense that they're selling a game rather than rules for showing other people the contents of your display case in a public setting.
At this point I think the only entertainment value left in the once-beloved Warhammer Fantasy is going to be watching the usual suspects polish up that armour and try to defend this utter, utter pish.
If take what you want turns out to be true, this game is an insult to Warhammer brand.
The players they want to attract are not historical wargamers and not seasoned enough to leave balancing in their hands. No balance at all makes the game "roll dice to see something awesome" kiddie affair where tactics will decide 1 in 50 games or sth. Btw unless a dragon and goblin unit are the same in damage output and resiliency, even a hardcore wargamer will have a hard time balancing such a game and it will go to crap anyway when attempting to play a stranger. Really this seems to be much worse than anticipated.
What a rollercoaster this has been. I was actually quite excited by what we were hearing from Mikhaila. But no points and unbound being the core list building system sounds absurd.
Well, just talk to a guy working in my LGS, and he told me that he indeed receive info saying that they will be no point cost, and no ways to balance opposing armies.
This system is already dead. What a bunch of idiots, Wasn't it already stated that the lack of succes of INQ was in large part due to the absence of point cost? Mindboggling
My only ray of hope here is that the balancing stuff - proper army lists with points costs - might just be coming later? Didn't some of the rumours originally say there'd be no rules for existing models, just the "skirmish" game - and then we did 180 on that because we've now heard there *will* be rules - but in fact maybe those "rules" are just statlines and the armies will get some proper army books / rules later?
Pacific wrote: I have to say that sounds absolutely horrendous. You couldn't make this gak up, it's like the ship is being purposefully steered into the iceberg.
I will bet my car, both my arms and legs, the soul of my first-born, that AoS isn't as well designed as that game.
Thank you for the tip! But I only play GW games :-)
Thinking of picking up Neferata Mortarch of Blood as it's such an incredible model.
(This is the last time I will keep banging the drum, honest!)
What if I told you the game was designed/written by Alessio Cavatore? I'm guessing from your sig you have followed GW games for a while, so you shouldn't need an introduction about who he is.
The game plays like a mix of a smaller, skirmish scale of LoTR (which Alessio also designed) mixed with some Bolt Action (a game which was part-designed by Rick Priestly - the guy who designed 40k of course!)
So, you have to think, do you relate to the living, breathing human being behind the creation of something? Or the badge on the box? Cause I can guarantee you there is more of the 'soul' of GW in Terminator than there is in this AoS game that is coming over the horizon. It's the kind of game GW themselves probably would have made in the 90's if they had had the lisense.
*Puts drum away* OK that's it now!
Alessio was also responsible for the godawful Skaven and Vampire Counts books; so stop pretending that his involvement is some kind of a "selling point" or that means there will be no issues.
The thing I can't get my head around is why this new game has utterly replaced warhammer 8th edition when clearly they are so different? Why games workshop felt the need to totally destroy over 20 years of gaming community seems crazy, especially if both games can use the game models. Why not keep support for 8th edition and run sigmar alongside as a 'lite' wargame.
I've been through the emotions like many people on this thread - this is part of our childhoods and its been wiped away clean. But 8th edition will carry on - and I'm going to save the money I would have spent on sigmar and buy start putting an 8th edition army together instead - I imagine a lot of people will carry on with 8th edition now we know what sigmar is all about. It could have been awesome - but from what we have heard over the last few hours it sounds like a total joke. I keep checking the calendar to see if its the 1st of April.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
I'm having trouble with the idea of two 12 year olds opening up figure cases and playing a game....let alone running a league, or a tournament.
---cut---
Damn. I did not have much, if any,hope for AoS but I didn't expect it to be that bad.
Long term I suppose it might be better that AoS tank spectacularly rather than dies a slow death, so that players can move on to other systems quicker and hopefully be less shattered between GW systems ad others. It's problematic for the stores depending on revenue from selling GW products to have to find alternative incomes on short notice of course.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
I'm having trouble with the idea of two 12 year olds opening up figure cases and playing a game....let alone running a league, or a tournament. ---cut---
Damn. I did not have much, if any,hope for AoS but I didn't expect it to be that bad.
Long term I suppose it might be better that AoS tank spectacularly rather than dies a slow death, so that players can move on to other systems quicker and hopefully be less shattered between GW systems ad others. It's problematic for the stores depending on revenue from selling GW products to have to find alternative incomes on short notice of course.
Many fantasy systems out there will be compatible with GW miniatures. So hopefully the stores can just continue ordering the minis and promote those games instead without having to also order GWs latest garbage game.
And we thought Dreadfleet was bad...
Only thing I can really think of to do in order to let GW know how badly they've messed this up is to have an organised mailing campaign against them. Organise players to write down their issues and complaints in a physical letter and send it, with recorded postage so someone at GW has to come and sign for that letter, to their HQ.
Design a game that allows someone to take what they want, right off the shelf, and plop it onto the table.
Make the entry point absolutely as LOW as possible from a planning stage and make it all about selling the shiny models.
If the Games Dev team WANTED to do this, I would be surprised (although not out of the question).
Has anyone heard if Jeremy Vetock is still involved with the UK studio? If he had a hand in this, I would be a little more optimistic. Otherwise, 7th edition is where I hang my hat for the rest of my Warhammer life.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
I'm having trouble with the idea of two 12 year olds opening up figure cases and playing a game....let alone running a league, or a tournament.
---cut---
Damn. I did not have much, if any,hope for AoS but I didn't expect it to be that bad.
Long term I suppose it might be better that AoS tank spectacularly rather than dies a slow death, so that players can move on to other systems quicker and hopefully be less shattered between GW systems ad others. It's problematic for the stores depending on revenue from selling GW products to have to find alternative incomes on short notice of course.
The only problem is if AoS tanks spectacularly, GW are likely to simply kill Fantasy for good, including the model range. Fine if you've already got everything you want or want nothing, but for folk with 8th Ed armies to complete, Mordheim warbands to build, or who use Fantasy kits as a source of bitz for 40K/INQ28 conversions it would be craptacular.
On the other hand, if AoS does even moderately well, GW might decide to inflict this atrocity on 40K as well, so really there are no good outcomes I can see at this stage.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
I'm having trouble with the idea of two 12 year olds opening up figure cases and playing a game....let alone running a league, or a tournament.
---cut---
Damn. I did not have much, if any,hope for AoS but I didn't expect it to be that bad.
Long term I suppose it might be better that AoS tank spectacularly rather than dies a slow death, so that players can move on to other systems quicker and hopefully be less shattered between GW systems ad others. It's problematic for the stores depending on revenue from selling GW products to have to find alternative incomes on short notice of course.
Many fantasy systems out there will be compatible with GW miniatures. So hopefully the stores can just continue ordering the minis and promote those games instead without having to also order GWs latest garbage game.
I guess. At least as long as GW keeps producing the older minis.
pretre wrote: A lot of rumor mongers are going to take a big hit on this. Wow.
I'll help you out with what I posted before:
All current models stay valid: looks like a truth right now
Round bases were for display purposes, and we don't have to rebase: semi true, but probably leaning more towards false: seeing how round bases ARE now the norm, but we don't have to actually rebase. You can call that one however you'd like.
This Age of Sigmar box release is a board game, not the actual full game release: sounds like a false in my book.
So I'm fine with having a 1/1/1 across the board. I think I had one more thing but forgot what it was.
LInk to the original or is it in the tracker already?
streetsamurai wrote: Wasn't it already stated that the lack of succes of INQ was in large part due to the absence of point cost? Mindboggling
Not that I ever heard. The lack of success for Inquisitor was more down to the peculiar choice of scale combined with a small available model range, and the lack of actual gaming material for what was essentially an RPG.
Anyone think maybe Kirby is buying stock in Mantic currently? It's like he's forcing everyone to either play a crap system (like those who are so l33t they'll only play GW games) or switch to something that allows for all old GW models/armies to be used.
If Ronnie lets Kirby make any decisions though, I'm sending over an army of poo flinging monkeys to absolutely ruin his carpets.
@pretre: I emailed it to you and added it to the thread a couple days later, as I specified I would. You also copy pasted the second batch of rumors directly into the thread. I'm in the middle of a house move though, laptops still packed, and it would take forever and a day to locate and copy/paste on the phone, at the moment. But I'll copy paste it when I can.
The only consolation I have in all this is that at least Warhammer: Total War will keep the Warhammer World alive, even as GW does its very best to tear it completely down.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
I argued and asked for any reason they didn't have a points system...
To start with, sorry if you're having a bad time dude.
But I'm really, really, really skeptical of this.
Having a miniature wargame without point values would be like inventing a card game that doesn't use cards, or a board game where you don't have a board. That is to say, points values is sort of the defining feature of miniature wargaming.
Maybe there's some sort of clever bit that GW has come up with that lets players determine equal-sized armies without using "points"? Or maybe you misinterpreted what the guy was saying?
I remember when the Nigmo rumor was all the rage and I said "Huh, that doesn't make sense. I bet this is just internet lunacy", and I was basically proven right.
If the entirety of Fantasy sold as well as Tactical Marines, GW might care enough to support detailed rules for them.
That, and we could staring at a hardcover $85 Warhammer Fantasy Age Of Sigmar Advanced edition a few months from now, with $58 harcover faction books, with more complicated rules and point costs.
I don't really buy the lack of point costs being a permanent thing. Literally every other tabletop miniatures battle game I can think of has some sort of army building mechanic.
I guess they could partly balance it around the number of models you're allowed to take per slot... so if you're running chaos warriors the war scroll for that is 3-5 models, while the scroll for clanrats is say, 5-10...
that wouldn't help you with the big disparities between say, an empire hero and Nagash, unless that kind of thing goes into a "lord of war" or "large games only" type slot...
think that would generally require more finesse than GW have in them to be done well, though
zedmeister wrote: One thing occurs to me with the whole warscrolls concept (and it's probably already been mentioned) is that this does open a much broader scope for limited edition unit releases.
"Skaven Assassins release - 10 per box - limited to 700 worldwide. Ensure that you place your orders for Skaven Assassins - Limited Edition Unit Box as soon as possible to avoid disappointment!"
This, i remember a rumor to this effect awhile back and i could really see GW wetting themselves with joy at the mere thought of getting into this sorta of model. no excess stock, they fire off a run, charge a mucho premium price and then maybe in a year or something they squirt out another batch.
It's not like GW hasn't seen success with Limited Edition rulebooks and FW scenery.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
I argued and asked for any reason they didn't have a points system...
To start with, sorry if you're having a bad time dude.
But I'm really, really, really skeptical of this.
Having a miniature wargame without point values would be like inventing a card game that doesn't use cards, or a board game where you don't have a board. That is to say, points values is sort of the defining feature of miniature wargaming.
Maybe there's some sort of clever bit that GW has come up with that lets players determine equal-sized armies without using "points"? Or maybe you misinterpreted what the guy was saying?
I remember when the Nigmo rumor was all the rage and I said "Huh, that doesn't make sense. I bet this is just internet lunacy", and I was basically proven right.
So despite two different retailers being told the exact same thing and seeing it inferred in GWs own magazine it is all misinterpretation?
I'm sure Mikhaila was very careful to make sure he wasn't misinterpreting the rep, considering he called for the express purpose of clarifying that very point (the lack of any balancing system).
With print runs of a five hundred or a thousand copies or whatnot, it's pretty hard not to sell out nigh-instantly with even a relatively small consumer base.
adamsouza wrote: I don't really buy the lack of point costs being a permanent thing. Literally every other tabletop miniatures battle game I can think of has some sort of army building mechanic.
And therein lies the problem. I don't think GW's management are seeing this as a 'tabletop miniatures battle game'.
They're seeing it as a set of rules provided so that you can play games with your toy soldiers. They're not quite sure why you would want to do that, though...
I am incredibly skeptical about this. Are you certain they were not just talking about the new boxed set? GW have made some strange moves lately, but this sounds absurd even for them.
nudibranch wrote: I am incredibly skeptical about this. Are you certain they were not just talking about the new boxed set? GW have made some strange moves lately, but this sounds absurd even for them.
The new boxed set is it. There's no big rulebook coming.
Well, unless it tanks and then I'd say there's a 50/50 chance of us either getting a different ruleset or them dropping the game entirely.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
I argued and asked for any reason they didn't have a points system...
To start with, sorry if you're having a bad time dude.
But I'm really, really, really skeptical of this.
Having a miniature wargame without point values would be like inventing a card game that doesn't use cards, or a board game where you don't have a board. That is to say, points values is sort of the defining feature of miniature wargaming.
Maybe there's some sort of clever bit that GW has come up with that lets players determine equal-sized armies without using "points"? Or maybe you misinterpreted what the guy was saying?
I remember when the Nigmo rumor was all the rage and I said "Huh, that doesn't make sense. I bet this is just internet lunacy", and I was basically proven right.
Heaps of games don't use point's costs. It depends on the game style. Some have Scenarios to play out. I doubt many of the people reenacting the battle of Waterloo anniversary this year used points values for the battle because the armies are already laid out. Same with many of the historical games.
HOWEVER in a sci fi or fantasy game without much history behind it definitely needs points to play properly. This game will probably suck. Unless of course no points is not true but I suspect they are.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
Just spent an hour and a half on the phone with GW, them trying in vain to make me understand how I can play the game, let alone how i could make someone want to buy it.
It has no points, no system to balance armies, nothing whatsoever tells the two players what they can put on the table.
Just play with what you want to play with.
I'm having trouble with the idea of two 12 year olds opening up figure cases and playing a game....let alone running a league, or a tournament.
I argued and asked for any reason they didn't have a points system. They just kept telling me it doesn't have one, doesn't need one, the game has things that give the player with least models an advantage, or why one dragon gets killed by a unit. It was like talking with people that don't play the game. Have never played the game. Only played the scenarios in AoS.
With the vast difference in profile between models in Warhammer, it's absurd to think you can balance by model count.
And you can't balance by Warscroll, this is just multiple models which can have hugely different numbers and stats.
And you can't balance by wounds. Chaos Warrior = 1 goblin? Nagash = 10 goblins?
In fact, Nagash or a large dragon or blood thirster is aways optimal. Warscrolls =1, Model count =1, Wounds < 10.
Because of the huge difference in power of the playing pieces, nothing makes sense unless you balance by a number that reflects the value of the individual piece in the game.
AoS is essentially Unbound armies where you bring what you want. You aren't even restricted by faction, you just might have models that don't gain a bonus others might from an icon or leader.
I've actually been in tears today over what they did to WFB. I have no idea how I will sell this game in my shop other than an expensive boardgame.
I know you have a soft spot for things like Orcs & Goblins, and it does seem that they're not going to be able to be balanced... even if 30 goblins counts as a "unit", or let's say skaven slaves... in the past that would be something like 5% of the cost of a kitted out lord on dragon, instead of equal to it. There's just no way seemingly to balance those things out unless literally hundreds of models were equal to one. Since that's not feasible, why would people not just take the super models?
Looks grim... for traditional fantasy lovers at least.
I'm sorry, but retailers being told that "there is no other product coming" is not conclusive in the slightest. They've been told about AoS TODAY, five days before release. As far as GW is concerned, there is nothing coming except the product they want to sell now. It's been this way for ages.
Seems to be more leaks supporting NO points., Getting some reports about a bonus characteristic based on number of models, not limited by points, but by model count, and we already see one of those screen shots shows victory conditions that allows game ending scenarios based on % of your opponents army removed. Its looking like thats the mechanic. If anyone gets concrete info on this, I'm sure it'll be posted asap to confirm or refute.
I'm sorry, but retailers being told that "there is no other product coming" is not conclusive in the slightest. They've been told about AoS TODAY, five days before release. As far as GW is concerned, there is nothing coming except the product they want to sell now. It's been this way for ages.
Exactly. It is incredibly rare for FLGS staff to know anything about a product before the preorder appears. They know as much as us.
I'm sorry, but retailers being told that "there is no other product coming" is not conclusive in the slightest. They've been told about AoS TODAY, five days before release. As far as GW is concerned, there is nothing coming except the product they want to sell now. It's been this way for ages.
Indeed. GW mooks have strict orders to play dumb about next morning's preorders on Friday evening. A firm "There's no big rulebook coming." from GW means "There's no big rulebook coming this week."
I'm sorry, but retailers being told that "there is no other product coming" is not conclusive in the slightest. They've been told about AoS TODAY, five days before release. As far as GW is concerned, there is nothing coming except the product they want to sell now. It's been this way for ages.
Do you think they'd be releasing rules for free if they were going to sell them later on?
Vaktathi wrote: With print runs of a five hundred or a thousand copies or whatnot, it's pretty hard not to sell out nigh-instantly with even a relatively small consumer base.
It's not just that they sell out, they are profitable. GW doens't even have to keep stock that didn't move in storage, which is a win for distributors/retailers.
If it's just that they're not giving mikhaila the full scoop, then that is beyond callous, leaving store owner's livelihoods up in the air because GW thinks they're Apple.
However, if there really is no balancing, and the game has become a roughshod version of "put your toys down and yell PEW PEW" then it has effectively killed the game. It's akin to watching reading a George RR Martin Got book- you sit there praying that some awful thing won't happen, and then it does...and even worse than you could have possibly imagined...
I'm sorry, but retailers being told that "there is no other product coming" is not conclusive in the slightest. They've been told about AoS TODAY, five days before release. As far as GW is concerned, there is nothing coming except the product they want to sell now. It's been this way for ages.
Doesnt surprise me considering anything further would be leaked in under 5 minutes since most people disregard NDA's.
Also does everyone who takes these photographs not know how to take a clear photograph from head on, it isnt rocket science. This seems to have been the case as far as I can remember.
Do you think they'd be releasing rules for free if they were going to sell them later on?
Yes. They are only giving us a 4 page PDF of rules, and army stats for existing models to get you interested enough in playing, so that when the Hardcover Rulebook comes along your already invested enough in the game to want to buy the rulebook..
It worked well for Manitc's KoW. The whole game is available for free in PDF form, but most players gladly buy the rulebook after they have a few games under their belt.
INFINITY did this as well to.
Accolade wrote: If it's just that they're not giving mikhaila the full scoop, then that is so beyond callous, leaving store owner's livelihoods up in the air because GW thinks they're Apple.
If there really is no balancing, and the game has become a roughshod version of "put your toys down and yell PEW PEW" then that's akin to watching reading a George RR Martin Got book- you sit there praying that some awful thing won't happen, and then it does...and even worse than you could have possibly imagined...
Difference is that the characters in GoT often die as a result of their own, often stupid, actions. Warhammer Fantasy dies because of the stupid actions of the person who killed it.
A Town Called Malus wrote: [ Do you think they'd be releasing rules for free if they were going to sell them later on?
Yes. They are only giving us a 4 page PDF of rules, and army stats for existing models to get you interested enough in playing, so that when the Hardcover Rulebook comes along your laready invested enough in the game to want to buy the rulebook..
Except that's not going to happen if you give people a complete piece of crap that doesn't even deserve to be called a game.
The people who enjoy playing it won't buy the rules as they already got it for free. The people who don't enjoy it won't come back as you've already shown them you don't know how to make a good game in the first place.
This "big rulebook" is going to be the new version of the Squats.
All current Armies will be available including Lizardmen.
Rules will be available as a FREE PDF download
Armies from box set are considered to be 2 new armies, not a part of an existing one.
Smaller units can still fight bigger and use some kind of sudden death scenario
Box has a 96 page book with background material. The rules are only 4 pages !! Game is quick to get into but with War Scrolls and the rules it has a lot of potential.
Also do people really think that theyre reaaaaally going to give up the opportunity to sell a rulebook at 70$+? As well as selling out the inevitable collectors edition?
Shigematsu wrote: Also does everyone who takes these photographs not know how to take a clear photograph from head on, it isnt rocket science. This seems to have been the case as far as I can remember.
Because these are intentionally released by GW, intended to whet our appetite, not spoil the whole thing. You want the whole thing? 4chan had the SM codex before preorders even went up. All the rules pages, complete, clear and the right side up. That was an actual leak.
Shigematsu wrote: Also do people really think that theyre reaaaaally going to give up the opportunity to sell a rulebook at 70$+? As well as selling out the inevitable collectors edition?
nudibranch wrote: I am incredibly skeptical about this. Are you certain they were not just talking about the new boxed set? GW have made some strange moves lately, but this sounds absurd even for them.
It is hard to believe and I for example am waiting for confirmation. The idea is so brain dead pointless that maybe even the kiddiest kids wouldn't fall for it, can GW really be that dumb? I ask this question a lot lately. On the other hand it comes from a few sources and is possible which in turn is kind of scary heh.
And you can't balance by wounds. Chaos Warrior = 1 goblin? Nagash = 10 goblins?
In fact, Nagash or a large dragon or blood thirster is aways optimal. Warscrolls =1, Model count =1, Wounds < 10.
I don't doubt what they're telling you, but I don't think that's the full story either. Or else their own starter set is imbalanced (I know I know, it always is... but not in favor of the bad guys!). Their number of models per side aren't equal in the starter set, but the number of different units appear to be.
Going by the starter, I think the following are each one Warscroll:
5 hammer and shield sigmarines
5 hammer and shield sigmarines
3 greathammer sigmarines
3 angels
1 Hero on reptilecat
1 BsB
So 6 assumed Warscrolls, but 18 dudes.
Chaos has
10 Marauders
10 Marauders
5 Warriors/Chosen
1 Beast and handler
1 Hero with Hound
1 Bs/icon bearer
6 assumed Warscrolls, but 29 dudes.
So, I don't think 10 night goblins will equal 10 chaos warriors. The warscrolls likely have a number of models. What if 5 warriors = 10 Marauders = 20 night goblins? Start making more sense?
Look, I have no idea if I'm right. But I think this is way more likely than what you seem to be suggesting.
pretre wrote: Also, I imagine if there are really no points, some group will come along to assign points to each scroll. Think of the balance! We could actually have balanced armies if GW isn't assigning the points.
Well, there's always that.... seriously. It may be fore the best.
I and other retailers are spending a lot of time on the phone with GW today.
First getting the basic info on the game, how it plays, etc. Then being told the incentives GW is giving us to carry the game, and take a big load of them. I ordered the 80 copies they wanted to me to get, so did a nearby store. That's 10,000.00 of product, 5500.00 our cost, non - returnable. A large commitment to the game.
Then we hear about no points values. We realize we don't know how to run tournaments, or leagues, or even tell two 12 year olds how to start a game.
"Just put out what models you want to play with"
And we've all argued with sales reps and people in management, and the message is all the same: No points, this is the rules, this is it, nothing else.
Maybe they are lying about something else on the way? I can't hold out hope for that. Not on 5500.00 and all the time and effort to commit to painting demo armies, training staff, and organizing events. At the expense of doing the same for other games. So many of us will drastically cut orders down to pre-paid pre orders and a copy for the shelf. If they do have more coming, well, i'll wait until i see it.
I don't doubt what they're telling you, but I don't think that's the full story either. Or else their own starter set is imbalanced (I know I know, it always is... but not in favor of the bad guys!). Their number of models per side aren't equal in the starter set, but the number of different units appear to be.
Going by the starter, I think the following are each one Warscroll: 5 hammer and shield sigmarines 5 hammer and shield sigmarines 3 greathammer sigmarines 3 angels 1 Hero on reptilecat 1 BsB
So 6 assumed Warscrolls, but 18 dudes.
Chaos has 10 Marauders 10 Marauders 5 Warriors/Chosen 1 Beast and handler 1 Hero with Hound 1 Bs/icon bearer
6 assumed Warscrolls, but 29 dudes.
So, I don't think 10 night goblins will equal 10 chaos warriors. The warscrolls likely have a number of models. What if 5 warriors = 10 Marauders = 20 night goblins? Start making more sense?
Look, I have no idea if I'm right. But I think this is way more likely than what you seem to be suggesting.
Except the game rewards you for low model count, not scroll count. The good side has less ~1/3 less models than the evil side and so benefits from the sudden death victory rules. So all the good player has to do is complete one of those conditions, which they get to pick, and they win.
GW Rep: How many boxes can I put you down for?
FLGS: None. These rules suck and I have no idea how I can sell this clusterfeth to people.
GW Rep: Cmon, points costs aren't needed, this is a great game.
FLGS: At least tell me that this is just an intro set and a full rulebook is coming later that way I can at least sell the models.
GW Rep: Nope, this is it; so how many boxes?
FLGS: .....................
Yeah, totally good way to sell a product to a skepical buyer. Mik owns 2 good sized shops, I believe, and turns over a great deal of merch for GW I'm sure. It makes complete sense to jeopardize that by feeding him false information about the existence of some larger rulebook coming in the next month or so.
Kirby himself could step in front of a camera and literally say, "this is it." and some people would still make excuses.
The owner of my LGS is also cutting back drastically on his order, unless he get info that satisfy him. Hopefully, this will become a trend and force GW to be, at a minimum, more open with their release schedule, or completely rewrite the rules of the game to at least include a way to balance armies.
streetsamurai wrote: The owner of my LGS is also cutting back on his order, unless they get info that satisfy him. Hopefully, this will become a trend and force GW to be, at a minimum, more open with their release schedule, or completely rewrite the rules of the game to at least include a way to balance armies.
Yeah, I think this would be a smart move on LGS's part. But looking at the way GW has handle being forced in the past...I wouldn't really be surprised if they just started burning stock out of spite.
agnosto wrote: Mik owns 2 good sized shops, I believe, and turns over a great deal of merch for GW I'm sure. It makes complete sense to jeopardize that by feeding him false information about the existence of some larger rulebook coming in the next month or so.
Kirby himself could step in front of a camera and literally say, "this is it." and some people would still make excuses.
No one is making excuses (excuses for whom anyway?). Merely pointing out GW reps are not a good source of information even on the product releasing this week, much less anything down the line.
Merely pointing out GW reps are not a good source of information even on the product releasing this week, much less anything down the line.
Quoted because it's worth repeating. GW is hiring sales reps based on sales experience, not love of the game. They can't leak any useful information to you because they don't understand any of it.
The internet knows.
Then we know.
Then the LGS owners know because we ask them for it.
Then the Sales Reps know becuase the LGS owners ask them for it.
I'm not doubting you because I simply don't know but that's a terrible way to run a retail business. If you've ever been in sales or marketing, you know that you don't damage lucrative sales relationships by lying. If you don't know, fine, but you never lie to a paying customer and expect them to carry your merchandise...no no no.
The answer should be, "sorry but I don't know." instead of "this is it.". Unless of course, that's the case.
You're already hearing the result; 80 boxes cut back to preorders and a shelf copy. Imagine that across the country and then worldwide, stupid move.
I had been skeptical of the release. Realizing I am a beardy old guy... I want mass armies with a theme and some strategic game play.
So I just bagged the 7th edition rulebook I never bought, and I will play that way...
If, by some miracle, there is some decent balance and thoughtful gameplay possible, I can be convinced to play AoS, but not based on what Mikhaila is saying.
I have first hand knowledge of the man and his business (not recently mind you, but he created the GW market for a large part of the Philly area), and if he is truly upset and nervous, than I am as well.
A Town Called Malus wrote: The only consolation I have in all this is that at least Warhammer: Total War will keep the Warhammer World alive, even as GW does its very best to tear it completely down.
I really think GW may have cocked up... judging by various reactions to the closed door E3 demo... that game is going to sell like nobodies business. All the potential new customers being sold a gaming universe that doesn't exist anymore. The mind boggles
Quite frankly, I like the idea of no points, and forces built around showcase models rather than vast piles of identical models. The idea of buying, building and painting wound counters en masse is just ridiculous. But a Dragon? or a pair of Giants? Awesome!
Tank_Dweller wrote: I really think GW may have cocked up... judging by various reactions to the closed door E3 demo... that game is going to sell like nobodies business. All the potential new customers being sold a gaming universe that doesn't exist anymore. The mind boggles
"GW may have cocked up" might be the understatement of the year, here at Dakka.
To stay on topic. What I find hard to process in the recent batch of rumours is that we've heard no news of the design studio being decimated. Pretty sure they actually hired people recently. Given that the vast majority of actual game design is the tedious process of balancing costs and effects, and assuming the new game really has no costs, then the amount of work required to push it out is massively reduced. A single person could write those rules and prepare all the stat cards. It's more of an accountant's job than anything else.
Dunno, maybe they're all doing 40k content by now and this was meant to be a lunch break project, but it still feels weird that GW would essentially wind down all WFB development down to a sliver of what is used to be and not cut costs in the process.
agnosto wrote: I'm not doubting you because I simply don't know but that's a terrible way to run a retail business. If you've ever been in sales or marketing, you know that you don't damage lucrative sales relationships by lying. If you don't know, fine, but you never lie to a paying customer and expect them to carry your merchandise...no no no..
The thing is, we've seen in the past that GW have no issue with doing just that. The 'No, no, it's definitely not Space Hulk' lead-up to the Space Hulk release being the first example that springs to mind.
So it's not entirely out of the question. But given the way this game is shaping up, I would be surprised if a 'rulebook' release later on was anything more than a compilation of the starter set rules and the Warscrolls released up to that point.
mikhaila wrote: I and other retailers are spending a lot of time on the phone with GW today.
First getting the basic info on the game, how it plays, etc. Then being told the incentives GW is giving us to carry the game, and take a big load of them. I ordered the 80 copies they wanted to me to get, so did a nearby store. That's 10,000.00 of product, 5500.00 our cost, non - returnable. A large commitment to the game.
Spoiler:
Then we hear about no points values. We realize we don't know how to run tournaments, or leagues, or even tell two 12 year olds how to start a game.
"Just put out what models you want to play with"
And we've all argued with sales reps and people in management, and the message is all the same: No points, this is the rules, this is it, nothing else.
Maybe they are lying about something else on the way? I can't hold out hope for that. Not on 5500.00 and all the time and effort to commit to painting demo armies, training staff, and organizing events. At the expense of doing the same for other games. So many of us will drastically cut orders down to pre-paid pre orders and a copy for the shelf. If they do have more coming, well, i'll wait until i see it.
Mikhaila Mikhaila You are doing it wrong you just have to forge a narrative
So what i read of the last few pages is that it is trying to be the age of X-wing but without point values, And don't worry the GW customers will buy what we make Kirby said so it will be as successful as Dreadfleet!
I am as confused as ever.. just want some real news to tell my FLGS whether or not I want the game.. As for the cards.. it would not surprise me that they would pull something from the classic epic rules were you had a ton of game cards.. A command card.. then it would allow you to buy other cards like support or others.. Kind of how warmachine works.. I guess you either lead or follow..
agnosto wrote: I'm not doubting you because I simply don't know but that's a terrible way to run a retail business. If you've ever been in sales or marketing, you know that you don't damage lucrative sales relationships by lying. If you don't know, fine, but you never lie to a paying customer and expect them to carry your merchandise...no no no..
The thing is, we've seen in the past that GW have no issue with doing just that. The 'No, no, it's definitely not Space Hulk' lead-up to the Space Hulk release being the first example that springs to mind.
So it's not entirely out of the question. But given the way this game is shaping up, I would be surprised if a 'rulebook' release later on was anything more than a compilation of the starter set rules and the Warscrolls released up to that point.
D
Yes GW damage sales relationships on regular basis. There may still some balance mechanism in all this that you can use or ignore or the sales reps are too slowed to understand the question and think they're being asked about factions or sth. Not counting on it though heh.
I and other retailers are spending a lot of time on the phone with GW today.
First getting the basic info on the game, how it plays, etc. Then being told the incentives GW is giving us to carry the game, and take a big load of them. I ordered the 80 copies they wanted to me to get, so did a nearby store. That's 10,000.00 of product, 5500.00 our cost, non - returnable. A large commitment to the game.
[spoiler]Then we hear about no points values. We realize we don't know how to run tournaments, or leagues, or even tell two 12 year olds how to start a game.
"Just put out what models you want to play with"
And we've all argued with sales reps and people in management, and the message is all the same: No points, this is the rules, this is it, nothing else.
Maybe they are lying about something else on the way? I can't hold out hope for that. Not on 5500.00 and all the time and effort to commit to painting demo armies, training staff, and organizing events. At the expense of doing the same for other games. So many of us will drastically cut orders down to pre-paid pre orders and a copy for the shelf. If they do have more coming, well, i'll wait until i see it.
Mikhaila Mikhaila You are doing it wrong you just have to forge a narrative
So what i read of the last few pages is that it is trying to be the age of X-wing but without point values, And don't worry the GW customers will buy what we make Kirby said so it will be as successful as Dreadfleet!
Actually, as point of order "they'll buy what we make, we don't make what they'll buy" was a phrase I created to sum up GW's essential attitude.
nudibranch wrote: At least it really is a 'bear and pretzels' game now, I guess?
For the record, my most enjoyable games of 8E have involved booze, and only occasionally to sooth the butthurt - though not any caused by the ruleset, just the armybooks
MOAR WITNESSING
Ok so I just spoke with our GW guy for about a half an hour about Age of Sigmar. Here are the details:
+All the rules are free, core, unit specific, everything- The core rules are very simple but the complexity comes with each unit getting its own individual "Warscroll." The warscrolls will detail what each unit can do, its stats, etc. All the warscrolls and the core rules will be made available for free download starting on July 4th.
+The game can be played with all existing models in the warhammer fantasy range. There is no strict force organization chart. You could make an unbound army but there are benefits for taking units of the same faction. There is increased synergy and interplay between units of the same faction (Chaos, Elves, etc).
+ There is a lot more synergy in general in the game. The Khorne banner guy you see in the pictures has the ability to plant his banner in the ground and create a warp rift where every Khorne unit within 12 inches of the banner gets all sorts of nasty benefits.
+The starter box is 100 bucks after discount at TJs. It comes with 47 new models, 96 page Age of Sigmar Book, dice, measuring sticks etc. It comes with two armies Warriors of Khorne and a new army (Stormcast Eternals). He said the pictures floating around don't really do them justice and that they were the best quality plasics he has ever seen (he got the chance to construct, paint, and play with them last week). That sounds like a sweet week at work! smile emoticon
+The Stormcast Eternals are warriors of the warhammer world that Sigmar saved before the destruction of the mortal realm. They are then reincarnated as demigods keeping some of their previous personality. Every time they die, he resurrects them and they lose a bit of their individuality of their first life. This will explain how we will see heroes and villains that were important figures in the Warhammer World before hand. Apparently the guy riding the drake is one of the previous characters but his identify isn't revealed yet.
+There will be a bunch of new armies coming from the 9 realms of the game world. Some of the realms are familiar (Death, Beasts, Chaos, Heavens, etc). Each realm will have familiar armies coming from it, as well as new ones (like the Stormcast Eternals). I am guessing my beloved Greenskins are in the Beasts realm!
+The white dwarf next week comes with a new Stormcast Eternal Mini.
+The game while having skirmish elements is not just a skirmish game. Large scale battles are completely doable and actually will have a lot more interplay and intricacies due to the layers of synergy with the individual warscrolls for all the units.
+Bases don't matter. Measuring is done model to model (center mass I imagine). Bases are purely for aesthetics.
+He made a comparison to X-Wing where the core rules are simple and fun but the unit specific rules are where the game really comes to life.
+Premeasuring is still alive and well.
+There are fluffy faction specific rules that make armies play how you would imagine. He used an example of how Khorne units have the ability to take a death blow. When a khorne model dies they can get a last gasp strike as they fall.
+He said the game plays faster than WHFB, is simple at its core, but complex once you start throwing in all the unit specific rules. He said it would be much easier for new players to get into the hobby and the themed armies have really cool things up their sleeves.
All in all I am really excited. Putting all the rules out there for free, making any regiment box in effect a starter box, and keeping large scale battles relevant are smart moves. I cannot wait. More details to follow! Everyone will be able to start playing AoS on the fourth of july without spending a penny.
Well there is a ton of crazy things going on in this thread....some are excited, some are mad, some are sad some just don't know what to think. Right now I'm unsure.
The things I see so far that I like:
- free rules and warscrolls - everyone has been complaining about cost and this helps alot GW finally listened
- starter set that can play right out of the box - this is good for new players and might end up being a better thing for new players if this is the new army size (20-40 models)
- all existing models will still be available - so we can all collect and use them still
Things I'm worried about
- not being able to buy 8th edition army books anymore
- not sure where the future of the game is going - I love 8th edition and I will stick with it forever if I can but I just hope they don't crush the products lines
- points values and balance - so far we don't know too much but it doesn't seem to be very good and I'm scared about this
I wanted to buy the starter before any leaks but now I don't know if I will or not. I think I'm going to wait and download the free rules this Saturday then decide myself. If its not what I want I will be ordering all the 8th edition army books off eBay or retailers who still have it so I can have all the armies if I so wish before it is difficult to get the books
mikhaila wrote: I and other retailers are spending a lot of time on the phone with GW today.
First getting the basic info on the game, how it plays, etc. Then being told the incentives GW is giving us to carry the game, and take a big load of them. I ordered the 80 copies they wanted to me to get, so did a nearby store. That's 10,000.00 of product, 5500.00 our cost, non - returnable. A large commitment to the game.
Then we hear about no points values. We realize we don't know how to run tournaments, or leagues, or even tell two 12 year olds how to start a game.
"Just put out what models you want to play with"
And we've all argued with sales reps and people in management, and the message is all the same: No points, this is the rules, this is it, nothing else.
Maybe they are lying about something else on the way? I can't hold out hope for that. Not on 5500.00 and all the time and effort to commit to painting demo armies, training staff, and organizing events. At the expense of doing the same for other games. So many of us will drastically cut orders down to pre-paid pre orders and a copy for the shelf. If they do have more coming, well, i'll wait until i see it.
Sorry to hear that, and for the stress it must be causing. If ever i was a gw 'hater', it's for the dick moves they pull on their independent retailers and fans. Hoping you get it sorted, good luck.
chiefbigredman wrote: If its not what I want I will be ordering all the 8th edition army books off eBay or retailers who still have it so I can have all the armies if I so wish before it is difficult to get the books
Just tossing this out there: all of the books are available for download in the wilds of the Internet, in various levels of quality. Or so I've heard tell. Though I can appreciate you wanting the physical books out of personal use preference, a sense of completeness, an aching nostalgia, or so on.
How would a game without points values (or any sort of balance-based limitation) work?
If you can literally bring whatever you want, why not just bring so much stuff that you overwhelm your opponent's army? If there are arbirary limitations (10 Warscrolls), what's to stop you from taking 10 of the best unit of the game?
I have a Tomb King force that I never got to actually play Fantasy with, but with the game sixes possibly being smaller that would make the size army I have perfect for this game.
Im really not sure what to make of this, Most of it was sounding good to me upp until the part about no points, just makes no sense in my head even though i only play games against my brother mainly once in a blue moon id have no idea how we could make a game fair even though we like more fun games.
H.B.M.C. wrote: How would a game without points values (or any sort of balance-based limitation) work?
If you can literally bring whatever you want, why not just bring so much stuff that you overwhelm your opponent's army? If there are arbirary limitations (10 Warscrolls), what's to stop you from taking 10 of the best unit of the game?
This does not work.
I don't think the forces will have no structure whatsoever.
Units will be classified according to battlefield role, but the size of those units will be fixed to their specific Warscroll.
'Exalted Hero of Chaos Warscroll'
- 1 Chaos Hero Guy
- Hero Warscroll
'He-Man on Lizard Thingo Warscroll'
- 1 He-Man riding a cool drake thing
- Hero Warscroll
'Chosen of Khorne Warscroll
- 5 Chosen of Khorne
- Special Warscroll
And so on and so forth.
So instead of saying to a person "Hey, do you want a 2000pt Fantasy game?" You'll say "Hey, do you want an Age of Sigmar game? 1 Hero, 2 Core, 1 Special?
Essentially the unit-size balance will be written into the scroll, 5 chaos warriors are roughly the equivalent of 20 goblins, after all.
In fact, there'll probably be a semi-standard 'Fantasy Force Organisation Chart', consisting of 1 hero, 1-3 Core, 1 special, and 1 rare, or something along those lines.
H.B.M.C. wrote: How would a game without points values (or any sort of balance-based limitation) work?
If you can literally bring whatever you want, why not just bring so much stuff that you overwhelm your opponent's army? If there are arbirary limitations (10 Warscrolls), what's to stop you from taking 10 of the best unit of the game?
This does not work.
That's not typically how they work. Normally, the scenario dictates what you can bring and typically systems like this don't really have wargear or individualized equipment. So all of those game-breaking combos would probably be generalized down into something that analogs across different armies. They may opt to have a chart that you can pick weapons from to get a specific type of loadout (like your lord is allowed to pick if he's ranged, great weapon, etc).. I dunno. there are ways to do that but who knows what direction they went.
While WFB badly needed a reboot, I can't believe this is the path they chose. I like the free rules idea. I like that the old stuff is still viable. But no point costs? How the hell does that work? And people bitch about unbound armies in 40K....
But with a "bring and battle" game, you need structure. This game doesn't appear to have any, and things without structure are very difficult to control/hold onto.
I mean look at the way this is worded:
"Armies can be as big as you like, you can use as many models from your collection as you wish."
That is slowed!
(feth you, word filter)
And there's a random terrain chart!!!???!!! I'm not friends with this game any more...
chiefbigredman wrote: If its not what I want I will be ordering all the 8th edition army books off eBay or retailers who still have it so I can have all the armies if I so wish before it is difficult to get the books
Just tossing this out there: all of the books are available for download in the wilds of the Internet, in various levels of quality. Or so I've heard tell. Though I can appreciate you wanting the physical books out of personal use preference, a sense of completeness, an aching nostalgia, or so on.
- Salvage
I know I could PDF them but I like the physical books, its not the same reading it on my phone or computer. It is easier for me and much nicer to have the actual copy
H.B.M.C. wrote: But with a "bring and battle" game, you need structure. This game doesn't appear to have any, and things without structure are very difficult to control/hold onto.
I mean look at the way this is worded:
"Armies can be as big as you like, you can use as many models from your collection as you wish."
That is slowed!
(feth you, word filter)
And there's a random terrain chart!!!???!!! I'm not friends with this game any more...
That statement about armies being as big as you like is likely targeted at those concerned that they could no longer conduct mass-battles with the rules, it's to say that they can still use their large collections in the new game. It's not trying to say that every game will have absolutely no limits on how many models it includes.
The random terrain chart, just like the one in 8th, is likely optional. And even if it isn't (that is, they don't offer an alternative way of setting up the board), why not just set up the board in a mutually-agreeable fashion? The way my group has been doing for the past...forever?
The last 48 hours have really put the last nails in the WFB coffin.
And it's basically killed the option of selling off old models, as the only buyers now will be people still clutching on to 7th or 8th edition locally.
So instead of saying to a person "Hey, do you want a 2000pt Fantasy game?" You'll say "Hey, do you want an Age of Sigmar game? 1 Hero, 2 Core, 1 Special?
Essentially the unit-size balance will be written into the scroll, 5 chaos warriors are roughly the equivalent of 20 goblins, after all.
In fact, there'll probably be a semi-standard 'Fantasy Force Organisation Chart', consisting of 1 hero, 1-3 Core, 1 special, and 1 rare, or something along those lines.
This seems reasonable. I'd look forward to playing like that.
mikhaila wrote: OK,....this sucks so hard....I'm having trouble typing, hands shaking....
I argued and asked for any reason they didn't have a points system...
To start with, sorry if you're having a bad time dude.
But I'm really, really, really skeptical of this.
Having a miniature wargame without point values would be like inventing a card game that doesn't use cards, or a board game where you don't have a board. That is to say, points values is sort of the defining feature of miniature wargaming.
Maybe there's some sort of clever bit that GW has come up with that lets players determine equal-sized armies without using "points"? Or maybe you misinterpreted what the guy was saying?
I remember when the Nigmo rumor was all the rage and I said "Huh, that doesn't make sense. I bet this is just internet lunacy", and I was basically proven right.
There are miniature games that don't have a points system. Tomorrow's War and Force on Force are two off the top of my head. They are fun to play. I think the problem is that anything GW makes. people want to use it for tournament play. I don't have an issue with that, but GW has been actively moving away from organized play for years. Maybe this is their solution?
Someone posted up a picture of a spray can and 3 lots of paint and people sort of skipped over that but seems like that is actually the case.
Here is the leaked prices and stuff for this week (US and Canadaian prices)
I don;t understand the craziness. Balancing types of Warscrolls against each other is the same as using points, really. A 5-man unit of 10pt models is supposed to be balanced against a 2-man unit of 25pt models. That's the entire freaking basis of a points-based system!
50pts is 50pts.
The problem is that to have everything equal out warscroll vs. warscroll, you have to remove all customization and only take what is doled out by GW as a choice. You want a Chaos Lord? It has to be one of the choices that come with different stock gear/abilities, rather than being kitted out by the player. Which is boring.
It'd be exactly like in X-wing, fielding a basic Y-Wing against a Interceptor of the same points, or making 100pt lists of ships only with no upgrades. It's perfectly possible and technically balanced, but the upgrade cards are where the player choice really comes into play.
agnosto wrote:I'll still buy the sigmar guys as a 40K project.
That will give the wrong signal to GW, see it sells this is the way to go!
chiefbigredman wrote:Someone posted up a picture of a spray can and 3 lots of paint and people sort of skipped over that but seems like that is actually the case.
Here is the leaked prices and stuff for this week (US and Canadaian prices)
Spoiler:
Are the last columns the prices in Pounds and Dollars?
Dr. Delorean wrote: So instead of saying to a person "Hey, do you want a 2000pt Fantasy game?" You'll say "Hey, do you want an Age of Sigmar game? 1 Hero, 2 Core, 1 Special?
Where are you getting these specific types (core, hero, special, etc.). What part of the leaked rules are they from, 'cause I've not really read them through completely.
Well, one would assume that would be what you would have to do to have balanced battlescrolls if points are not involved- to restrict entire armies of 5 bloodthirsters. Just have army slots like 40K and Warhammer has had for years. Techincally there are points involved, just only GW would know the formula.
Though that is giving even basic credit to GW's games development, which is dubious at best.
I can't see any other way to balance things without points if you are not going the scenario route like Tomorrow's War.
agnosto wrote: He's making wild assumptions based on nothing but blind optimism.
'Assumption' implies that I believe these things to be true, when what I'm actually doing is positing a scenario that may come to be, whether it is likely or not.
But you don't really care about that, do you? You just want to be salty on the internet.
It'd sure be a thing to see if there isn't, I can't think of a tabletop game like 40K/Warhammer (not counting games designed like Tomorrow's War) that doesn't have slots, or detachments, etc. Even with points involved too. Dropzone Commander, Epic, whatever.
It may end up being the mother of all GW hand-waving.
agnosto wrote: He's making wild assumptions based on nothing but blind optimism.
'Assumption' implies that I believe these things to be true, when what I'm actually doing is positing a scenario that may come to be, whether it is likely or not.
But you don't really care about that, do you? You just want to be salty on the internet.
I could care less obviously. If I did, I would have put more effort into reading your mind as to whether you actually believed what you wrote (assumed) or was just making things up to spark conversation. I obviously credited you with more belief than you actually possessed based upon the effort you put into your post. Apologies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AegisGrimm wrote: It'd sure be a thing to see if there isn't, I can't think of a tabletop game like 40K/Warhammer (not counting games designed like Tomorrow's War) that doesn't have slots, or detachments, etc. Even with points involved too. Dropzone Commander, Epic, whatever.
It may end up being the mother of all GW hand-waving.
Or they're completely reworking unit characteristics so that a unit of spearmen has a shot against a single bloodthirster. (Spears of stabbiness have a +1 to wound vs monsters).... Nah.
agnosto wrote: He's making wild assumptions based on nothing but blind optimism.
'Assumption' implies that I believe these things to be true, when what I'm actually doing is positing a scenario that may come to be, whether it is likely or not.
But you don't really care about that, do you? You just want to be salty on the internet.
I could care less obviously. If I did, I would have put more effort into reading your mind as to whether you actually believed what you wrote (assumed) or was just making things up to spark conversation. I obviously credited you with more belief than you actually possessed based upon the effort you put into your post. Apologies.
agnosto wrote: And not supported by what we've seen of all 4 pages of the rules...
Oh! We have every single rules page COMPLETELY spoiled so far? Awesome! Toss a link so we can check it out!
Remedial reader? "What we've seen"..... Try again captain sarcasm.
I read what you said and understood it completely. What flew over your head (apparently) was my point that we haven't seen everything, therefore we don't know what the build restrictions will or won't be. Any speculation at this point is just as viable.
agnosto wrote: And not supported by what we've seen of all 4 pages of the rules...
Oh! We have every single rules page COMPLETELY spoiled so far? Awesome! Toss a link so we can check it out!
Remedial reader? "What we've seen"..... Try again captain sarcasm.
I read what you said and understood it completely. What flew over your head (apparently) was my point that we haven't seen everything, therefore we don't know what the build restrictions will or won't be. Any speculation at this point is just as viable.
But thanks for playing!
And I clearly had already admitted as much so I suppose you were just trolling since you completely understood the entire sentence that I wrote. Yay!
It's all blind conjecture at this point, which is my favourite kind of conjecture.
Their intention clearly is to make a game you can play, otherwise why write rules at all? Why not just say "Hey, here are the models we make, go play with them however you like!",
Having no limit to unit sizes and thus allowing the equating of a single goblin with a bloodthirster works directly against that intention.
What I'm essentially saying is that -some- structure is necessary, whatever it turns out to be, and I think even GW would realize that.
Inb4 people saying 'lolGW probably wouldn't realize that they're idiots etc'
That's always a possibility, but I prefer to remain optimistic, and risk being bitterly disappointed.
agnosto wrote: And not supported by what we've seen of all 4 pages of the rules...
Oh! We have every single rules page COMPLETELY spoiled so far? Awesome! Toss a link so we can check it out!
Remedial reader? "What we've seen"..... Try again captain sarcasm.
I read what you said and understood it completely. What flew over your head (apparently) was my point that we haven't seen everything, therefore we don't know what the build restrictions will or won't be. Any speculation at this point is just as viable.
But thanks for playing!
And I clearly had already admitted as much so I suppose you were just trolling since you completely understood the entire sentence that I wrote. Yay!
You structured that sentence in an imperfect and misleading way, knowingly or not.
The inclusion of the word "all" is gratuitous, because we don't know all of anything yet. It invites misreadings of your meaning.
"And not supported by what we've seen of the 4 pages of rules" would have been a better way to say your piece without begging to be criticized.
Their intention clearly is to make a game you can play, otherwise why write rules at all? Why not just say "Hey, here are the models we make, go play with them however you like!"
Well that does seem to be GWs mentality towards the game these days....
On the posed scenario of "could 10 spearmen take a bloodthirster"...
one odd mechanic is that you have rolls to hit and would, not just stats. An example i was given was Chaos warriors hit on 3+, wound on 4+. All the time, against everyone, unless the model has a specific rule like "tough: models have a -1 to would this model ".
So maybe spearmen hit on 4+, wound on 5+, all the time? Better than normal odds of killing a bloodthirster than they used to have. .
One other mechanic was break tests (with some fancy name). You add up the number of wounds done, subtract your bravery, and then lose that many more wounds.
mikhaila wrote: Then we hear about no points values. We realize we don't know how to run tournaments, or leagues, or even tell two 12 year olds how to start a game.
"Just put out what models you want to play with"
Dr. Delorean wrote: What I'm essentially saying is that -some- structure is necessary, whatever it turns out to be, and I think even GW would realize that.
I dunno, maybe that's why the rules are allegedly free, because even GW couldn't find it in themselves to charge $85 for a book that might as well literally tell you to make the gak up as you go along.
Maybe some games can pull off not having points costs, but I have no confidence whatsoever in GW to pull it off and release a game that's at all playable. Maybe if they outsourced the rules, but their own design team? No. We'll see on Saturday, I guess, but right now it doesn't look very good in my opinion.
God, 8th Fantasy was $75. The past two versions of 40k were $85. They're all garbage. What the hell monster could they have produced that even GW has to say "Nah man, we can't sell that to people."? It's almost scary to think about. I'm imagining a game with the same tactical depth as fething Snakes and Ladders if that's the case.
Nocturnus wrote: There are miniature games that don't have a points system. Tomorrow's War and Force on Force are two off the top of my head. They are fun to play. I think the problem is that anything GW makes. people want to use it for tournament play. I don't have an issue with that, but GW has been actively moving away from organized play for years. Maybe this is their solution?
Such games are completely unable to handle pick-up games, though. They're fine if you want to design scenarios for literally every single meet-up. But they don't work when two random people who just happen to both have armies show up at the game store at the same time.
Units will be classified according to battlefield role, but the size of those units will be fixed to their specific Warscroll. .
The word from earlier in the thread was that the minimum unit size is set by what comes in the box, but that there is no maximum unit size.
Wonder how that is going to work then. 10 spearmen per scroll so a 30-man unit would be 3 scrolls?
/blind conjecture
Edit:
At first blush that doesn't sound terrible. Replace points with the number of scrolls so you could have a 10 scroll battle for example.
It just sounds like points by another name "rounded off". I mean, every unit is 1 point. So side A takes 10 bloodthirsters, side B takes 100 spearmen. But you need to take distinct units, so you can take the 10 spearmen, or 20 spearmen, but not 12 spearmen.
This also indicates to that AoS is much less configuration-centric. Obviously, listbuilding is still important in terms of what units you take, because of synergies, spells, force multipliers and all that (take 10 units of healers, and you might have a legit army, you can't kill anything). But you won't be configuring your units with weapon A/B/C, or relic A/B/C. Or if you do, they'll all be the same cost, so presumably similar effectiveness.
And there will be a rank-up system. And probably one army = one faction.
We know that it will be a very different game than WHFB. Will it be fun? I have no idea I've barely read the leaked rules (though I will read it on the WD when I pick it up tomorrow or the next day), and those don't even tell us what a unit looks like.
I mean, this is really no different than, "Codex: Space Marines SUCKS!!! It's just a reprint. Devastators are the same! Assault Marines are the same! It's a cash grab!!!" But then, nobody who actually bought the codex thought so, because the devil's in the details, and actually, it wasn't even close to being a reprint. Just the few leaks were totally inconsequential, so there were folks who jumped all over the conclusion that it MUST suck.
By the way, just so you don't read it the wrong way, agnosto, it's in no way directed at you. I'm just speaking generally; I agree with you, and wonder the same thing as you. I'm cautiously hopeful that it will be a relatively simple, easy to play, and enjoyable game.
Dr. Delorean wrote: What I'm essentially saying is that -some- structure is necessary, whatever it turns out to be, and I think even GW would realize that.
I dunno, maybe that's why the rules are allegedly free, because even GW couldn't find it in themselves to charge $85 for a book that might as well literally tell you to make the gak up as you go along.
Maybe some games can pull off not having points costs, but I have no confidence whatsoever in GW to pull it off and release a game that's at all playable. Maybe if they outsourced the rules, but their own design team? No. We'll see on Saturday, I guess, but right now it doesn't look very good in my opinion.
God, 8th Fantasy was $75. The past two versions of 40k were $85. They're all garbage. What the hell monster could they have produced that even GW has to say "Nah man, we can't sell that to people."? It's almost scary to think about. I'm imagining a game with the same tactical depth as fething Snakes and Ladders if that's the case.
Its going to be 4 pages of hard-core full-throttle hold-on-to-your-seats awesome. You can't put a price on that, the awesome would just burn it away!
Dr. Delorean wrote: It's all blind conjecture at this point, which is my favourite kind of conjecture.
Their intention clearly is to make a game you can play, otherwise why write rules at all? Why not just say "Hey, here are the models we make, go play with them however you like!",
Having no limit to unit sizes and thus allowing the equating of a single goblin with a bloodthirster works directly against that intention.
What I'm essentially saying is that -some- structure is necessary, whatever it turns out to be, and I think even GW would realize that.
Inb4 people saying 'lolGW probably wouldn't realize that they're idiots etc'
That's always a possibility, but I prefer to remain optimistic, and risk being bitterly disappointed.
Well, yeah
I can't imagine that the rules say "take a number of models in this unit". Because then like, I will field 5000 goblins to fight your bloodthirster, bwahnahahaha, thankyouverymuch
(whips out airbrush and green primer...)
There must be some structure; I think it's just dumbed down, as I mentioned, to make it so that basically 1 unit = 1 point. There must be some what of constraining the unit; otherwise, people will field as many as they have models for.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Torga_DW wrote: Its going to be 4 pages of hard-core full-throttle hold-on-to-your-seats awesome. You can't put a price on that, the awesome would just burn it away!
I think it'll be 4 pages of core "rules" and then 96 pages of lists, since there are entries for every single current WHFB -- which is numbers in the hundreds, right? It's just rules by another name.
Torga_DW wrote: Its going to be 4 pages of hard-core full-throttle hold-on-to-your-seats awesome. You can't put a price on that, the awesome would just burn it away!
I think it'll be 4 pages of core "rules" and then 96 pages of lists, since there are entries for every single current WHFB -- which is numbers in the hundreds, right? It's just rules by another name.
No point values? Unlimited unit sizes? Warscrolls as a limiting factor (which is no limiting factor when you have unlimited unit sizes). Unsure why others think GW will create "good rules" to go along with these terrible ideas.. What kind of evidence do we have that proves they can accomplish such a task? None.
I guess my WFB stuff will go in a box never to be seen again.. or perhaps an alternate reality bubble.
rybackstun wrote: I love how the idea of "Wait and See" is nearly impossible for some people to comprehend.
Well you know what, let's just lock the fething thread then until Saturday. No one's allowed to discuss what we know anymore until we have the full story!
Seriously, the lengths some people will go to in order to silence dissent. I sometimes wonder if people aren't getting paid by GW themselves to come here and talk everyone down.
What I've seen is... well, maybe not promising, but interesting at least. The new hit, wound type rolls are the sort of thing I approve of. Use whatever you want is something I approve of.
Dunno how it will be balanced without points but thats not an automatic dealbreaker either - as is, when I play my opponents I care less about points and more about "are you fine if I use this? I would prefer you toned down that" etc etc. Superheavies in 40k do that to you - its way less about points and more about "if your opponent can handle it". So likewise, if I take a Bloodthirster, and its too much for my opponents army, they can just take more next time until we balance ourselves out in some sorta equilibrium
Will really wreck pick up games though I gotta say
Nocturnus wrote: There are miniature games that don't have a points system. Tomorrow's War and Force on Force are two off the top of my head. They are fun to play. I think the problem is that anything GW makes. people want to use it for tournament play. I don't have an issue with that, but GW has been actively moving away from organized play for years. Maybe this is their solution?
Such games are completely unable to handle pick-up games, though. They're fine if you want to design scenarios for literally every single meet-up. But they don't work when two random people who just happen to both have armies show up at the game store at the same time.
Actually, it really only requires having two sensible individuals that want to have a game, not WAAC. Regardless, I don't know what GW is thinking at this point.
I think it stands to reason that 'stats' are going to narrow and be much closer to one another now. I.e. in the oft-used example previously, I would wager that a Bloodthirster's stats are going to be -much- closer to a Spearman's stats than they were in previous editions.
That way, if you DO take a BT, and I take my 10 speardudes, I actually have a shot at killing him - whereas before, I might not have even been able to harm him.
And putting caps on the number of 'warscrolls' you can use... that could very well be the 'balancing factor', but I still find it hard to believe that will provide much of a balance. I dunno. If they really super-simplified it to where stats/abilities were all within the same ballpark as one another, I guess it could work...
But the whole 'take anything you want' really annoys me. I have -zero- interest in seeing someone's Chaos warband mixing with some high elves and undead. If you're going to allow that - why bother with 'factions' at all? Oh, I know - 'there will be bonuses for keeping your list pure to one faction'.... well, I'm eager to see what those are, too.
rybackstun wrote: I love how the idea of "Wait and See" is nearly impossible for some people to comprehend.
Well you know what, let's just lock the fething thread then until Saturday. No one's allowed to discuss what we know anymore until we have the full story!
Seriously, the lengths some people will go to in order to silence dissent. I sometimes wonder if people aren't getting paid by GW themselves to come here and talk everyone down.
Statement of observation = silencing dissent.
That's a leap in logic that even I can't follow, so I'm impressed.
There's a running club near me which started charging junior members an annual fee. Everyone was in uproar and claimed it would kill off junior attendance. Instead, the opposite happened and attendance went through the roof i.e. I'm paying for this now little Timmy, so you're damn well going to go to run club and not lie in bed.
You buy something like a rulebook / armybook etc, you're more likely to want to do something with it. because you don't want the money to have been wasted.
I think people will enjoy flicking through the free stuff on Saturday, but most will have got bored within a month or so.
This sure is a rollercoaster... I have such a hard time believing there is NO balancing mechanic. I mean, they have created rules for EVERY MODEL they make, apparently. That is a huge task! Think of the man hours that had to go into that. Why would they go through all that effort if they didn't care about the rules? Why would they create what looks like a simple, but quite fun, ruleset, only to screw it all up like that? It defies belief. There has to be SOMETHING, even if it's coming later. Still, even if that's the case, it's such a huge dick move against retailers that I can't believe it. Obviously they want retailers to carry it, and a lot of it, otherwise they wouldn't give them good incentives to do so. How could they not realize that this one bit of info would make retailers cut down their orders to nearly nothing? Yeah, I have no idea what's going on.
Nocturnus wrote: There are miniature games that don't have a points system. Tomorrow's War and Force on Force are two off the top of my head. They are fun to play. I think the problem is that anything GW makes. people want to use it for tournament play. I don't have an issue with that, but GW has been actively moving away from organized play for years. Maybe this is their solution?
Such games are completely unable to handle pick-up games, though. They're fine if you want to design scenarios for literally every single meet-up. But they don't work when two random people who just happen to both have armies show up at the game store at the same time.
Actually, it really only requires having two sensible individuals that want to have a game, not WAAC. Regardless, I don't know what GW is thinking at this point.
The word I think you are realy looking for is understanding, two individuals that understand the systems Rules, Flaws and what they both want to achieve with a game.
Sensible is highly contextual in a wargame, Two people can both say. 10 scrolls 2000 points, or even 1hero 2 core, 2 special. And still turn up to the game looking for completely difernt things.
GW still needs to make sure that the rules and guide they provide, do provide structure.
Even if two sensible, non-WAAC, fluffy players show up and are willing to compromise to get a balanced game... How would they know how to do it? It's essentially asking the players to design the game and assign points costs, a job that would take months, right there and then.
It all sounds pretty horrible at the moment. My original stance was "I don't think GW will be able to write a decent game to replace WHFB". I still think that is the case.
But if the WD has a free model on it, I'll go pick one up and have a read of the new rules.
Mymearan wrote: This sure is a rollercoaster... I have such a hard time believing there is NO balancing mechanic. I mean, they have created rules for EVERY MODEL they make, apparently. That is a huge task! Think of the man hours that had to go into that. Why would they go through all that effort if they didn't care about the rules? Why would they create what looks like a simple, but quite fun, ruleset, only to screw it all up like that? It defies belief. There has to be SOMETHING, even if it's coming later. Still, even if that's the case, it's such a huge dick move against retailers that I can't believe it. Obviously they want retailers to carry it, and a lot of it, otherwise they wouldn't give them good incentives to do so. How could they not realize that this one bit of info would make retailers cut down their orders to nearly nothing? Yeah, I have no idea what's going on.
It's only a huge task if they did it right and attempted to balance it.
It would take around a day for someone to half-ass assign stats and some generic +/- modifiers as "Special Rules" to all the units in Warhammer.
It is somewhat funny people still think GW will produce something later to introduce (a semblance of) balance.
GW couldn't give a rat's bottom about balance with 40K, where they still have point values - for heritage reasons I suppose - but frequently mock them with silly formations, D-Weapons at no extra costs and widely disparaging levels of power for different units and armies of the same points value, free transports/equipment from some armies and not others, etc.., etc...
Now that they've taken the next "logical" step and removed the points, which aren't doing nothing in 40K anymore either, they'd start creating a new system for balance, something they explicitly took a stance again in 40K with "forge the narrative"? I don't think so.
If anything, expect further (albeit slowly trickled-in) stuff for no points in 40K too. Because.
To be honest, if AOS kills the fantasy competitive scene, I say good riddance. Here, it is filled with immature adults, WAAC players, drama queens and generally unpleasant people.
Still, I believe the starter has no point system because the armies are prebuilt. Anyway, this week end we'll see the rules.
Want to use alternate models? Well, they don't come with a war scroll so how are you going to use them?
By downloading the appropriate warscroll from the GW webzone. This is no different than previous Warhams.
Losing battles? Buy more models to give yourself the strategic edge!
Just like any other non-historical wargame.
Want to win a tournament? Turn up with 1000 models, 2000 models!!
Games will still require each player to use the same number of warscrolls.
If there's no factions I guess the Stormcast allied with Goretide is going to be the new ready salted flavor of army.
I doubt flavor is a word will come much into play with AoS. I doubt there will be any tournaments, either. This is the least tournament-worthy wargame I've ever seen.
Well, time to make all my models with square bases. Backwards compatible with 8th.
That's the idea. Now to find a cheap source of square bases...
Conjecture on my part. If there is 0 (ZERO) restrictions to how an army is built, then AoS is simply not a game.
Equal number of warscrolls per player is the simplest solution there is, it doesn't get any more basic.
There can be no scenarios in the fluff book, because that would only cover the contents of the starter set. It would make it impossible to play the game with any other combinations of units, past or future.
-DE- wrote: Conjecture on my part. If there is 0 (ZERO) restrictions to how an army is built, then AoS is simply not a game.
Equal number of warscrolls per player is the simplest solution there is, it doesn't get any more basic.
There can be no scenarios in the fluff book, because that would only cover the contents of the starter set. It would make it impossible to play the game with any other combinations of units, past or future.
Conjecture is still conjecture. Can't blame Bottle for working with what is actually known, and refuting his points on the basis of personal conjecture should at least make that clear.
So there is a unit type. And it'll be on the War Scroll. Which suggests the scenarios in the bigger book state what you can take.
Element Games has always divided armies by type like that, with sections for Lords/Heroes, Core, Special, and Rare. That's not new.
People are saying maybe the game will be balanced by how many models are on each scroll, like 3 chaos warriors = 10 goblins or whatever, but surely that only works for units? Because a Skaven Cheiftain would be one scroll, and a high elf Lord on dragon would be one scroll (maybe two? One for the Lord and one for the dragon) but there's no way 1-2 Cheiftains would be equal to a dragon elf Lord...
rybackstun wrote: I love how the idea of "Wait and See" is nearly impossible for some people to comprehend.
Wait and see is boring though and there's quite a chance this thread is more fun than Age of Tabling will ever be.
It's on GWbtw and the way of creating exciment they choose. We could have had that information long before they canceled army books etc, "hey we're doing a narrative ruleset for multiples collectors, buy what you need while we still produce and go to hell"/ "hey don't wory it will be a simpleton but balanced as your 6 small models will be equal to 3 fat models, 2 ripped models or one big model/wizard it's great who needs a codex" or sth
RoninXiC wrote: Because a Bloodthirster scroll is as balanced as a 20 man Nightgoblin unit.. that seems plausible.
But it could be as all unit rules are being re-written.
For example:
Ten average lads hit on 4+ and wound on 4+. 1 wound each. Bravery 7. Save 6+.
1 big Daemon bugger. 5 attacks. 3+ to hit. 3+ to wound. 5 wounds. Auto Mortal Wounds. Save 4+.
So normal guys hit first. 50% hit. 50% wound. That's 2-3 wounds before a save.
Daemon causes 2-3 wounds back.
Both take bravery checks. Daemon loses a wound and unit 3 more.
Unit has lost 5-6 models. Daemon has lost 3 wounds.
The straight 'to wound roll' means there is no longer toughness. So a blob of previously weak models could take on anything through sheer volume. Especially as there is no winner in combat - both sides take a daemonic instability/moral check.
This is all conjecture, though. The Bloodthirster might be 2+ across the board with twelveteen wounds.
Edit: Also, units don't flee. Retreating is a decision and stops that unit from doing anything else that turn (so can't retreat and re-charge or shoot). So you can tarpit....probably.
Games will still require each player to use the same number of warscrolls.
Not in the leaked rules we've seen. Where's that info from?
RoninXiC wrote:@DE
What makes you think there are ANY kind of restrictions to the amount of Scrolls a player can use? You have 0 evidence for this.
All we know is the one rule that says: Play whatever you want.
They'll be on the same line of thinking as me - there's a number of scenarios in the big book. We expect that will state War Scrolls to be taken.
We'll see when the big book leaks.
What big book?
He's about the 96 pages book in the starter. It can, imo contain some specific scenario for "competitive" play with a method to balance forces. Hope is a fool's mother they say here though.
ImAGeek wrote: But surely those scenarios will only be for the starter, so it won't have any bearing on the greater game as a whole anyway..?
Could be either. There's no other book(s) coming. So perhaps having the only written scenarios there is another incentive for the starter set if you aren't keen on the models. Or maybe not.
I'm going to go against the grain and say I'm cautiously optimistic about this release. Not to mention a free mini with White Dwarf is just enough to buy my loyalty
rybackstun wrote: I love how the idea of "Wait and See" is nearly impossible for some people to comprehend.
Well you know what, let's just lock the fething thread then until Saturday. No one's allowed to discuss what we know anymore until we have the full story!
Seriously, the lengths some people will go to in order to silence dissent. I sometimes wonder if people aren't getting paid by GW themselves to come here and talk everyone down.
Statement of observation = silencing dissent.
That's a leap in logic that even I can't follow, so I'm impressed.
Here's a direct quote from one of my last posts:
Sidstyler wrote: We'll see on Saturday, I guess, but right now it doesn't look very good in my opinion.
So clearly I'm already aware that we don't really have the full picture yet, and I'm basing my opinion on what we know. If we're not allowed to talk about the information as it stands right now (unless you have a positive opinion, apparently, it's only the negative people that aren't "allowed"), then what is the purpose of the thread at this point? You're trying to shut people up, that's what it looks like to me.
I'm allowed to have a negative opinion based on what little info GW will let me have if I don't like what I'm seeing, and I can still change my mind later if it turns out GW actually knew what the feth it was doing and came up with a real winner of a ruleset. I'll eat my words if AoS ends up becoming one of the best miniature wargames ever written, solves all of WHF's previous problems and ends up becoming a huge success. But until then, it's not against the Dakka rules to talk about the rumors we have about AoS in the meantime, nor is it against the rules to have a negative opinion. And I don't care if you're tired of seeing the same negative opinion over and over, for one thing that says more about the quality of this new product or how GW is handling the release than it does the people posting here, and two, it's very easy to just avoid the thread if you find it so displeasing.
Flashman wrote: If GW just want to sell minis, they should give FFG (or somesuch) a licence to produce a balanced ruleset.
FFG love writing rules and doing box sets with cool cards and tokens.
Yes outsourcing just rules to FFG would be great. I don't think it would be that balanced but it would probably be very tactical, which is the most important thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ImAGeek wrote: But surely those scenarios will only be for the starter, so it won't have any bearing on the greater game as a whole anyway..?
It can be a "pitched battle" scenario that is not about particular forces but a set of guidelines for a balanced battle. Or sth.
What if they are going for a system similar to Open Combat?
This way you would have your own stats for all your models, bases wouldn't matter, indivivual stats for all minis on the table (or "scrolls") etc. And they could focus on producing models
I know it's not very GWish but...
RoninXiC wrote:This is just not Warhammer Fantasy. They destroyed a game most of us loved for 20+ years.
This is 40k. Nothing of this is Fantasy anymore. No blocks of infantry, no rank'n'files, no nothing.
Well yeah the fact Warhammer Fantasy as we know it is gone is sadly apparent at this stage; Fluff and game dynamics are now gone so it's Warhammer in all but name.
Thing about saying it is 40K is that at least 40K has the very deep background fluff to draw people in. I can't see what the new AoS has in terms of narrative to appeal to new gamers and if the rules are woeful then it can't appeal to many existing WHFB players. It's the new model range that is all that is appealing to people at present; I'll probably pick up the new White Dwarf for the free Sigmarine and to have a proper look at the rules and hold out to see if they bring out any interesting new Dwarf or Undead models!
Flashman wrote:If GW just want to sell minis, they should give FFG (or somesuch) a licence to produce a balanced ruleset.
FFG love writing rules and doing box sets with cool cards and tokens.
I had thought that myself. What seems evident is that the same drive is not going into the hobby/game side as the model side of things. Would be nice to let somebody else do the rules and let them concentrate on what they do best
I'm convinced now that there has *got* to be *some* sort of balancing at some point in this game... Its been said already, I know, but if the warscrolls were divided into HQ, Core, Special, Rare and each warscroll had a fixed unit size and equipment load-out (so they were actually balanced against each other) then it would work, and frankly be quite a nifty way of building an army. You could play a game where each side gets 1 HQ scroll, 3 Core scrolls, 2 Specials and 1 Rare, or something like that... The points would still be there, but hidden away. Sure, it would take away a great deal of the flexability of list building - which is something I personally enjoy. Putting together an army in a fixed number of points and then seeing how it does on the table is a fun part of fantasy...
If on the otherhand it really is as crazy as "bring whatever you want, throw some dice around and generally shout PEWPEWPEW until your opponent starts crying" then I'm out...
There simply has got to be more to come... Right?...
Pepticsalve wrote: If on the otherhand it really is as crazy as "bring whatever you want, throw some dice around and generally shout PEWPEWPEW until your opponent starts crying" then I'm out...
Isn't that what people do any way once they've min/maxed their cheese and turned supposedly restricted list choices into a full on Fondue of Death?
Flashman wrote:If GW just want to sell minis, they should give FFG (or somesuch) a licence to produce a balanced ruleset.
That's one of the most sensible things I've heard in this entire thread - GW could focus entirely on creating amazing miniatures and license out the actual game systems to a company that gives a damn! I recently played Descent 2nd edition from FFG and it was fantastic - very balanced and enjoyable rule-set.....
Flashman wrote: If GW just want to sell minis, they should give FFG (or somesuch) a licence to produce a balanced ruleset.
FFG love writing rules and doing box sets with cool cards and tokens.
Yes outsourcing just rules to FFG would be great. I don't think it would be that balanced but it would probably be very tactical, which is the most important thing.
It would be great for us, but GW seems to think it needs overpowered rules to force sales of certain models, apparently. That and they wouldn't get all that sweet, guaranteed short-term cash flow from selling massively overpriced limited editions anymore.
SJM wrote: I don't understand the obsession with "the fantasy we know it is dead!!" line, you do realise you can play any edition you like, right?
If you don't like the system, play the system you do like?
You're the first person to say that! Really!
Whenever folks say a game is dead, what they mean is that it's not officially supported. Which generally has a negative impact on the ability to get games going.
SJM wrote: I don't understand the obsession with "the fantasy we know it is dead!!" line, you do realise you can play any edition you like, right?
If you don't like the system, play the system you do like?
You're the first person to say that! Really!
Whenever folks say a game is dead, what they mean is that it's not officially supported. Which generally has a negative impact on the ability to get games going.
True. That said, the change is radical enough that there might be a genuine D&D 4th/Pathfinder-style split, which you wouldn't have seen with more gradual (relatively) transitions such as 6th to 7th or 7th to 8th.
I see very few people who currently actively and regularly play Warhammer Fantasy 8th switching to AoS. Admittedly, said scene is tiny to begin with (as opposed to the "played Fantasy many years ago and dream nostalgic-about it"-crowd).
SJM wrote: I don't understand the obsession with "the fantasy we know it is dead!!" line, you do realise you can play any edition you like, right?
If you don't like the system, play the system you do like?
Not an obsession, just an unfortunate reality. Yes we can play any edition but in reality once GW changes the game completely the real effects to the existing game only become noticeable 2-3 years down the line when the existing model range has completely changed. Age of Sigmar is a totally different game to Warhammer Fantasy Battles so it's not really a case of saying they are different editions of the same game. Yes, other GW games down through the years still have cult followings but they are now unsupported and marginilised.
SJM wrote: I don't understand the obsession with "the fantasy we know it is dead!!" line, you do realise you can play any edition you like, right?
If you don't like the system, play the system you do like?
The problem is that Warhammer, for many people, is not DnD. With games like DnD, you plan beforehand, you decide what edition and what modules you are running and everyone agrees and everyone is happy. This works for games like DnD because it is primarily and story-telling game, which WHFB generally isn't (GW can say 'forge thee narrative!' as many times as they like.) WHFB and WH40K are played by most as competitive, player-versus-player games with tournaments and such, where rule structure and standardised rules are important. Most games are played as pickup games between people who have not planned their game out prior to meeting each other and may not of even known each other beforehand, which of course requires both players to use and understand the same ruleset, which is the main reason the majority of players play the most recent edition of both WHFB and WH40K, despite having preferred a previous edition. At least now it might be possible to say "AoS or 8th?" before a game. I can definitely foresee a split in systems happening.
Want to use alternate models? Well, they don't come with a war scroll so how are you going to use them?
By downloading the appropriate warscroll from the GW webzone. This is no different than previous Warhams.
Sure for the existing models. Don't expect new models to have the rules for free. They'll be on the warscrolls inside the box, which will likely be limited edition too.
nudibranch wrote: WHFB and WH40K are played by most as competitive, player-versus-player games with tournaments and such, where rule structure and standardised rules are important. Most games are played as pickup games between people who have not planned their game out prior to meeting each other and may not of even known each other beforehand...
I should clarify that by 'competitive', I do not mean WAAC but rather that the system of the game has two or more players compete against each other to achieve some form of victory. And that, at least in my area and from what others have told me, most games are pick-up games.
Flashman wrote: I'm not even sure free rules is a fantastic idea..
Except this is exactly what many people have been suggesting that GW do on countless threads - usually in comparison to their many competitors who do exactly this?
Free rules and "army lists" is pretty huge - if they game is nice, simple and above all playable then again - huge step forward IMO. Then rather than spending time on the rules we can look at what tactics are required to win. Army building could be quick and easy with select these cards - so Malifaux / X Wing / WMH / Heroscape style - may even have upgrade cards similar to the fist two games?
If this is as clever as HeroScape was at this then it could be great - isn't the combat mechanic also similar to Kings of War? Not that familiar with it but that seemed to have set "to-hit" modified by special rules?
I am very excited about this release. It checks a lot of boxes on my wish list. Low model count, low entry price, more narrative games, mixing of factions, simple rules. This sounds like a win. And strangely enough I like the Sigmarines. I understand a lot of the frustration here though. As a RPG/Wargames player of 25 years I have played and purchased many rule sets, and points cost is a relatively new innovation considering the history of Wargames. Fubar is my current go-to rule set for just about any genre. It runs 2 to 4 pages and is FUN with no points buy. Tournament WAAC style games have never been fun for me and frankly in the large metro area I live in it is not even present. WHFB is rarely seen in these parts. 40 K is easier to find opponents for, yet is rarer than many other games. I love collecting GW minis but find it difficult to find people to play with. My wife and sons all paint/model and game to some extent. I have a number of friends who also play games like FFG etc. but blanch at the idea of learning WH rules or purchasing vast armies and army books or codices. It is very easy to buy a box for one of the kids of a unit they think looks cool, slap some paint on it and get to playing immediately. This cuts into their sports and video game time much less than the previous versions. So AOS sounds just about perfect to me. I own a literal room full (and garage) of games and to be honest I have had more fun with RPGs and Wargames that were rules lite. I find more opportunity for creativity and strategic surprises than in "balanced" rules. You haven't lived until you have Daleks versus Space Marines battles
RoninXiC wrote: Because a Bloodthirster scroll is as balanced as a 20 man Nightgoblin unit.. that seems plausible.
But it could be as all unit rules are being re-written.
For example:
Ten average lads hit on 4+ and wound on 4+. 1 wound each. Bravery 7. Save 6+.
1 big Daemon bugger. 5 attacks. 3+ to hit. 3+ to wound. 5 wounds. Auto Mortal Wounds. Save 4+.
So normal guys hit first. 50% hit. 50% wound. That's 2-3 wounds before a save.
Daemon causes 2-3 wounds back.
Both take bravery checks. Daemon loses a wound and unit 3 more.
Unit has lost 5-6 models. Daemon has lost 3 wounds.
The straight 'to wound roll' means there is no longer toughness. So a blob of previously weak models could take on anything through sheer volume. Especially as there is no winner in combat - both sides take a daemonic instability/moral check.
This is all conjecture, though. The Bloodthirster might be 2+ across the board with twelveteen wounds.
Edit: Also, units don't flee. Retreating is a decision and stops that unit from doing anything else that turn (so can't retreat and re-charge or shoot). So you can tarpit....probably.
The one in the starter set. Fluff, painting and scenarios. I am quite confident that's the case.
Thank you Shane. This is exactly what I was going to say,but you did that job for me. If you have fixed numbers for to hit, to wound and so on it is so much easier to balance things ou against each other. No more invincible deamons, no more puny spearmen. There is still more behind this, as a thirster wont loose attacks till he lost his last wound and whatnot. Concerning the ' we cant take options anymore' maybe there will be more than one scroll where it would be appropriate? Easiest example statetroops. Sword/shield gets a better save, Spear has a longer reach and halbs better to wound.
Yeah this is all speculation and wishfull thinking, but I was really looking foreward to use my fantasystuff again and maybe even get some friends into the game if the modelcount will sink as drastic as the rumours suggest.
+The Stormcast Eternals are warriors of the warhammer world that Sigmar saved before the destruction of the mortal realm. They are then reincarnated as demigods keeping some of their previous personality. Every time they die, he resurrects them and they lose a bit of their individuality of their first life. This will explain how we will see heroes and villains that were important figures in the Warhammer World before hand. Apparently the guy riding the drake is one of the previous characters but his identify isn't revealed yet.
There is a place for destruction of self in your fiction, but I don't feel this is it.
Dr. Delorean wrote: Their intention clearly is to make a game you can play, otherwise why write rules at all?
Like Wile E. Coyote painting a tunnel on the side of a mesa, the plan could be to have something that resembles having a playable game just long enough to secure the sale.
Eumerin wrote: Such games are completely unable to handle pick-up games, though. They're fine if you want to design scenarios for literally every single meet-up. But they don't work when two random people who just happen to both have armies show up at the game store at the same time.
Actually, it really only requires having two sensible individuals that want to have a game, not WAAC. Regardless, I don't know what GW is thinking at this point.
It requires not only that the two individuals want to have a balanced game, but also the necessary time, skill and understanding of another person's brainchild they need to make it balanced. But having that necessary skill and understanding of the systems of the game is the game designer's job - you pay them to produce a playable game so that you don't need to know how to do it yourself.
streetsamurai wrote: Wasn't it already stated that the lack of succes of INQ was in large part due to the absence of point cost? Mindboggling
Not that I ever heard. The lack of success for Inquisitor was more down to the peculiar choice of scale combined with a small available model range, and the lack of actual gaming material for what was essentially an RPG.
Basically it was a pet project that got some support but not enough. When everything got shifted to specialist it had to share a budget with 3 other systems, as well as support team. This eventually got wound down it stalled.
The scale was fairly good. But Iq28 is very popular, so much that it's appeared in WD so it has nothing to do with popularity.
It requires not only that the two individuals want to have a balanced game, but also the necessary time, skill and understanding of another person's brainchild they need to make it balanced. But having that necessary skill and understanding of the systems of the game is the game designer's job - you pay them to produce a playable game so that you don't need to know how to do it yourself.
I'd agree.
The person pitching 10 Bloodthirsters against 10 Goblin Spearman is the easy one to spot and not really the problem IMO.
But what if I do want a balanced game of ... say ... Elves vs. Dwarfs (or whatever they are called now). Is 20 Phoenix Guard against 20 Ironbreakers a good match? Or should the Dwarf-player get 25 Ironbreakers?
What if I play a bunch of games of Elves vs. Dwarf with armies that used to be formally equal points values (in 8th, 7th, or whenever) and Elves win three times in a row? Was the Elf-player the better/luckier player, or should armies be adjusted according to the principle of "sensible individuals"?
It requires not only that the two individuals want to have a balanced game, but also the necessary time, skill and understanding of another person's brainchild they need to make it balanced. But having that necessary skill and understanding of the systems of the game is the game designer's job - you pay them to produce a playable game so that you don't need to know how to do it yourself.
I'd agree.
The person pitching 10 Bloodthirsters against 10 Goblin Spearman is the easy one to spot and not really the problem IMO.
But what if I do want a balanced game of ... say ... Elves vs. Dwarfs (or whatever they are called now). Is 20 Phoenix Guard against 20 Ironbreakers a good match? Or should the Dwarf-player get 25 Ironbreakers?
What if I play a bunch of games of Elves vs. Dwarf with armies that used to be formally equal points values (in 8th, 7th, or whenever) and Elves win three times in a row? Was the Elf-player the better/luckier player, or should armies be adjusted according to the principle of "sensible individuals"?
Maybe all the units will be pretty much the same. Are they really creating individual unit cards for every single unit type they currently sell on the store? Perhaps most of the units are similar and then the difference comes from your Hero (who is unique). We'll find out on Saturday.
Doomsdave wrote: I am very excited about this release. It checks a lot of boxes on my wish list. Low model count, low entry price, more narrative games, mixing of factions, simple rules. This sounds like a win. And strangely enough I like the Sigmarines. I understand a lot of the frustration here though. As a RPG/Wargames player of 25 years I have played and purchased many rule sets, and points cost is a relatively new innovation considering the history of Wargames. Fubar is my current go-to rule set for just about any genre. It runs 2 to 4 pages and is FUN with no points buy. Tournament WAAC style games have never been fun for me and frankly in the large metro area I live in it is not even present. WHFB is rarely seen in these parts. 40 K is easier to find opponents for, yet is rarer than many other games. I love collecting GW minis but find it difficult to find people to play with. My wife and sons all paint/model and game to some extent. I have a number of friends who also play games like FFG etc. but blanch at the idea of learning WH rules or purchasing vast armies and army books or codices. It is very easy to buy a box for one of the kids of a unit they think looks cool, slap some paint on it and get to playing immediately. This cuts into their sports and video game time much less than the previous versions. So AOS sounds just about perfect to me. I own a literal room full (and garage) of games and to be honest I have had more fun with RPGs and Wargames that were rules lite. I find more opportunity for creativity and strategic surprises than in "balanced" rules. You haven't lived until you have Daleks versus Space Marines battles
Warmachine isn't as complicated as people make it out to be, and the base rules could likly be put on 4 sheets like this is going to be, if GW just shifts special rules to the warscrolls it will likly be very similar in complexity when all said and done.
This game actuly looks to need about the same size army's as a warmachine start up and most players to get starting in warmachine could do it with the free materials in a 55$ box.
We still don't know if GW is realy being entirely honest when they say can take any box or two of the shelf and play a game effectively.
So I am not realy that hopfull for that.
But I think one of the reasons points are used is that it's a realy light and simple way to give out a power lvl for something you buy, it means you can offer a greator variety.
When it's down to it, creativity is encouraged by difernt rules sets in difernt way, and difernt people like difernt things, but as to the naritive distinction.
Age of sigmar is offering nothing more naritive wise than warmachine, infinity or fantasy before it.
To restate my thoughts, a lot of rule sets can be put down in a very short page count. But offer more as special rules and changes, if every unit has a full page of rules to read. Then it's realy just trading one form of rules for another and gaining little.
Naritive is as much about the world as the rules, we play more naritive games in warmachine then we ever did in 40k since the tight rule set allows myself and my play partners greator freedom in the design off alternative missions and rules.
Be excited for the release it's an possibly very exciting time. But I think we need GW now more than ever to talk about what's coming.
streetsamurai wrote: Wasn't it already stated that the lack of succes of INQ was in large part due to the absence of point cost? Mindboggling
Not that I ever heard. The lack of success for Inquisitor was more down to the peculiar choice of scale combined with a small available model range, and the lack of actual gaming material for what was essentially an RPG.
Basically it was a pet project that got some support but not enough. When everything got shifted to specialist it had to share a budget with 3 other systems, as well as support team. This eventually got wound down it stalled.
The scale was fairly good. But Iq28 is very popular, so much that it's appeared in WD so it has nothing to do with popularity.
Inq28 appears in WD because John Blanche loves it, unless you mean something else.
Mymearan wrote: Even if two sensible, non-WAAC, fluffy players show up and are willing to compromise to get a balanced game... How would they know how to do it? It's essentially asking the players to design the game and assign points costs, a job that would take months, right there and then.
Considering the terrible state that GW rules writing is in, is it that far fetched that they leave it up to the players to figure out this mess?
Is there no sort of website countdown/build-up thing going on this week?
Yesterday featured jetbikes, today is a HH novel. Surely some sort of teaser or mini preview would get the juices going for what is such a big revamp? Kinda weird and frustrating.
RoninXiC wrote:You claimed the New rules to be more narrative. I dont understand how.
Spoiler:
Apple fox wrote:
Doomsdave wrote: I am very excited about this release. It checks a lot of boxes on my wish list. Low model count, low entry price, more narrative games, mixing of factions, simple rules. This sounds like a win. And strangely enough I like the Sigmarines. I understand a lot of the frustration here though. As a RPG/Wargames player of 25 years I have played and purchased many rule sets, and points cost is a relatively new innovation considering the history of Wargames. Fubar is my current go-to rule set for just about any genre. It runs 2 to 4 pages and is FUN with no points buy. Tournament WAAC style games have never been fun for me and frankly in the large metro area I live in it is not even present. WHFB is rarely seen in these parts. 40 K is easier to find opponents for, yet is rarer than many other games. I love collecting GW minis but find it difficult to find people to play with. My wife and sons all paint/model and game to some extent. I have a number of friends who also play games like FFG etc. but blanch at the idea of learning WH rules or purchasing vast armies and army books or codices. It is very easy to buy a box for one of the kids of a unit they think looks cool, slap some paint on it and get to playing immediately. This cuts into their sports and video game time much less than the previous versions. So AOS sounds just about perfect to me. I own a literal room full (and garage) of games and to be honest I have had more fun with RPGs and Wargames that were rules lite. I find more opportunity for creativity and strategic surprises than in "balanced" rules. You haven't lived until you have Daleks versus Space Marines battles
Warmachine isn't as complicated as people make it out to be, and the base rules could likly be put on 4 sheets like this is going to be, if GW just shifts special rules to the warscrolls it will likly be very similar in complexity when all said and done.
This game actuly looks to need about the same size army's as a warmachine start up and most players to get starting in warmachine could do it with the free materials in a 55$ box.
We still don't know if GW is realy being entirely honest when they say can take any box or two of the shelf and play a game effectively.
So I am not realy that hopfull for that.
But I think one of the reasons points are used is that it's a realy light and simple way to give out a power lvl for something you buy, it means you can offer a greator variety.
When it's down to it, creativity is encouraged by difernt rules sets in difernt way, and difernt people like difernt things, but as to the naritive distinction.
Age of sigmar is offering nothing more naritive wise than warmachine, infinity or fantasy before it.
To restate my thoughts, a lot of rule sets can be put down in a very short page count. But offer more as special rules and changes, if every unit has a full page of rules to read. Then it's realy just trading one form of rules for another and gaining little.
Naritive is as much about the world as the rules, we play more naritive games in warmachine then we ever did in 40k since the tight rule set allows myself and my play partners greator freedom in the design off alternative missions and rules.
Be excited for the release it's an possibly very exciting time. But I think we need GW now more than ever to talk about what's coming.
If some of the conjecture in this thread is true, then I like the idea of small grunt units having a chance against a big boss or monster. To me that hews closer to classical fantasy/SF than perfectly balanced armies. I like it when a lone survivor of a doomed unit finds the one weak spot in the scaly armor of an otherwise invulnerable beast. The moisture farmer from a desert planet saves the galaxy etc. To me that is much more narrative. All subjective of course.
In addition, The star gate thingies open up all kind of possibilities for personal narrative for my forces (particularly if the unbounded speculation proves true): "Hey buddy what's the story with that Empire/Skaven warband you are playing?" "Well after the Old World exploded the ancestors of these two groups found themselves on a distant planet/dimension where they had to band together to survive the predation of indigenous methane sky-pirates. After 5000 years in this time-dilated reality they have become allies and recently rediscovered a star gate to a place & time where I can fight your Sigmarines." To me that sounds fun. I can create narrative within the fluff's framework narrative. If the bonuses go to themed armies than my opponent has an advantage over my gonzo team, and I'm OK with that too. If the mechanics are card-driven then I can show up with the units and their corresponding cards and have fun. (Again, provided some of the speculation is true)
I realize a lot of people prefer points-buy. And a pre-defined very structured fluff. That's cool. Live & be well. I'm not saying my way is better but my gaming group & family play this way & we love it.
A wee message to the casual and/or narrative players who claim that this new system benefits casual/narrative play and that that is the 'true' way to play whfb/wh40k: Game balance does not hurt you. Infact it would most likely improve the game for you as you'd actually have a fair chance at winning the battle, and (unless you're play the Thyrrus), then don't you want that? And even in situations when you don't, like representing hopeless last stands and such, you can do that, just agree with your opponent that you can field less models in your army to represent that. If you want to field 8 bloodthirsters and unit of ironguts and your opponent agrees, that is fine too. This can all be done without gimping the entire system for everyone else. It's much easier to mod a game to be less competitive than it is to make it more.
They could have ended the End Times with a giant explosion still, just not shatter the world. A massive magical explosion of nuclear proportions in the centre of the Empire. We get all the new look scenery to represent the fallout zone. Sigmar still has his chosen, and the races all pile into the power vacuum the explosion leaves behind.
With pocket dimensions nothing is of consequence. It gets even worse with the idea of "summoning" long dead heroes for the battle too..
I'll play AoS (I have to, my local is a GW). But the stories behind my armies will stay in the Old World me thinks
SJM wrote: I don't understand the obsession with "the fantasy we know it is dead!!" line, you do realise you can play any edition you like, right?
If you don't like the system, play the system you do like?
I am fascinated by this, you're truly opening my eyes here.
I love my BFG and have decided to run a campaign, so I'll just pop down to the local gaming shop and gather together all the other bfg... oh, there aren't any? That was a legitimate surprise, really...
Ah well, time to play 40k 5th ed, my orks weren't a show of gak in that edition, oh, everyone else is playing some boggled hybrid of 6th and 7th? But guys, my army is great in 5th and it's a far more streamlined game... guys?
SJM wrote: I don't understand the obsession with "the fantasy we know it is dead!!" line, you do realise you can play any edition you like, right?
If you don't like the system, play the system you do like?
I am fascinated by this, you're truly opening my eyes here.
I love my BFG and have decided to run a campaign, so I'll just pop down to the local gaming shop and gather together all the other bfg... oh, there aren't any? That was a legitimate surprise, really...
Ah well, time to play 40k 5th ed, my orks weren't a show of gak in that edition, oh, everyone else is playing some boggled hybrid of 6th and 7th? But guys, my army is great in 5th and it's a far more streamlined game... guys?
migooo wrote: Look oldhammer groups exist. As do second ed 40k groups
I'm looking at oldhammer but I only play 40k second. Just play what makes you happy and ignore something that doesn't.
Groups can be hard to find but they are about.
I play 2nd 40K too, but that is a group who have been playing games together since 1992, for a lot of people, pick up gaming at their local GW (in the UK) or local FLGS (everywhere else) is how it works. Indeed, the ubiquity of GW games is precisely why they have dominated the market so long, there are always players wherever you go, therefore its the one you buy into. Only Warmahordes has really made significant inroads into that, but now GW are creating a game that makes (assuming the no method of balance is real) pick up games very very difficult, and pretty much an exercise in who has the biggest wallet.
That is what I would call commercial suicide. I know they believe most people buying their stuff are not gamers, but I have a feeling they are about to find out otherwise.
nudibranch wrote: A wee message to the casual and/or narrative players who claim that this new system benefits casual/narrative play and that that is the 'true' way to play whfb/wh40k: Game balance does not hurt you..... This can all be done without gimping the entire system for everyone else. It's much easier to mod a game to be less competitive than it is to make it more.
I get that. I think I even alluded to it. I wish you could have the WHFB you want. I really do, cause I was fine without it. I was just answering a question after saying I liked this incarnation of the game. I never played any edition of WHFB or 40K as written. This may be the first time I will and that's novel for me. I'm sorry if it messed you up, because I would rather have more people playing more games than people mad at any games. And I have never advocated that I have the "true" way to play anything I don;t even like the concept.
If there's no points or balancing AT ALL I imagine pick up games will have players saying things like "Well... This was about 1'500 points in 8th. How much was your force?" Which is a crummy solution.
Anothing thing is that a number of people, myself included, prefer pickup games as it means I'm not constantly facing the same players and armies and adds a level of exitement that is lost when you fight the same few armies over and over again.
Bottle wrote: If there's no points or balancing AT ALL I imagine pick up games will have players saying things like "Well... This was about 1'500 points in 8th. How much was your force?" Which is a crummy solution.
And a solution which immediately fails with all the new stuff, starting with Sigmarines and all future releases of (presumably mostly) cool miniatures you might want to use.
nudibranch wrote: A wee message to the casual and/or narrative players who claim that this new system benefits casual/narrative play and that that is the 'true' way to play whfb/wh40k: Game balance does not hurt you..... This can all be done without gimping the entire system for everyone else. It's much easier to mod a game to be less competitive than it is to make it more.
I get that. I think I even alluded to it. I wish you could have the WHFB you want. I really do, cause I was fine without it. I was just answering a question after saying I liked this incarnation of the game. I never played any edition of WHFB or 40K as written. This may be the first time I will and that's novel for me. I'm sorry if it messed you up, because I would rather have more people playing more games than people mad at any games. And I have never advocated that I have the "true" way to play anything I don;t even like the concept.
Eh, don't worry about, it was'nt aimed at you And I don't mean it as an attack against casual play, just that solid rules don't mean the game can't be played casually.
nudibranch wrote: A wee message to the casual and/or narrative players who claim that this new system benefits casual/narrative play and that that is the 'true' way to play whfb/wh40k: Game balance does not hurt you..... This can all be done without gimping the entire system for everyone else. It's much easier to mod a game to be less competitive than it is to make it more.
I get that. I think I even alluded to it. I wish you could have the WHFB you want. I really do, cause I was fine without it. I was just answering a question after saying I liked this incarnation of the game. I never played any edition of WHFB or 40K as written. This may be the first time I will and that's novel for me. I'm sorry if it messed you up, because I would rather have more people playing more games than people mad at any games. And I have never advocated that I have the "true" way to play anything I don;t even like the concept.
Eh, don't worry about, it was'nt aimed at you And I don't mean it as an attack against casual play, just thatvsolid rules don't meant the game can't be played casually.
Like you said, casual/fluffy players should be the ones that want balanced rules more, if anything. Competitive players will just play whatever is competitive but of the rules were balanced fluffy players would benifit more because they could then easily play whatever themed army they want and still have a chance. Poorly written unbalanced rules hurt everyone, including 'casual fluffy' players, them more than the competitive players probably. Everyone wins with solid, balanced rules.
Good god. You went and blew it up, you maniacs! Damn you! Damn you all to hell!
Ahem. I've been away from the hobby for a while. Regardless, this is horrendously disappointing. Warhammer Fantasy was doing poorly, we all knew it, but this? This is madness.
Bah, I'm in camp wait-and-see now. We're fixating on a couple of negative soundbites that aren't even 100% confirmed - no points costs etc - without knowing how the rest of the rules work, so we don't even know how much of an issue those unconfirmed changes will pose.
nudibranch wrote: A wee message to the casual and/or narrative players who claim that this new system benefits casual/narrative play and that that is the 'true' way to play whfb/wh40k: Game balance does not hurt you..... This can all be done without gimping the entire system for everyone else. It's much easier to mod a game to be less competitive than it is to make it more.
I get that. I think I even alluded to it. I wish you could have the WHFB you want. I really do, cause I was fine without it. I was just answering a question after saying I liked this incarnation of the game. I never played any edition of WHFB or 40K as written. This may be the first time I will and that's novel for me. I'm sorry if it messed you up, because I would rather have more people playing more games than people mad at any games. And I have never advocated that I have the "true" way to play anything I don;t even like the concept.
Eh, don't worry about, it was'nt aimed at you And I don't mean it as an attack against casual play, just thatvsolid rules don't meant the game can't be played casually.
Like you said, casual/fluffy players should be the ones that want balanced rules more, if anything. Competitive players will just play whatever is competitive but of the rules were balanced fluffy players would benifit more because they could then easily play whatever themed army they want and still have a chance. Poorly written unbalanced rules hurt everyone, including 'casual fluffy' players, them more than the competitive players probably. Everyone wins with solid, balanced rules.
A valid point which I understand. I would never buy and read the gigantic religious text that was the BRB just so I could play casually. You are both genteel posters & I appreciate your views.
I try to avoid criticising people on this forum, but holy horse gak, some replies really do take the biscuit.
Some people are convinced that in a few months time, GW will ride to the rescue with a 300 page, hardback rulebook, that will be 100% balanced.
Never going to happen.
Evidence?
1) They've been working on this for months, and this is what we're getting. If they had a big rulebook, they would be releasing it, like they did in other versions. Right Now. This July.
2) Mikhalia, never a man for spouting bull, has been told that players can use whatever models they want.
3) It's a 4 page rulebook, but already, from what we've heard, GW are talking about complexities, and adopting the roll a D6 for it, approach
Based on that evidence, and using Occam's razor as a guide, you can reasonably conclude that this is shaping up to be a steaming pile of horse gak
40k sells more than fantasy, and yet, GW had no qualms about unbound in 40k. Why should fantasy, a less popular game, be any different?
Last night, I was asking people to stay calm. Well, last night I had a few drinks in me
I'm lucky, I'm insulated, having sold off my fantasy stuff a while back. I have a clean slate for this version, but I'm grabbing a parachute and bailing out.
As always, the people who love fantasy, and have spent hundred of hours, and thousands of pounds/dollars on their armies, have my sympathies...for what it worth.
migooo wrote: Look oldhammer groups exist. As do second ed 40k groups
I'm looking at oldhammer but I only play 40k second. Just play what makes you happy and ignore something that doesn't.
Groups can be hard to find but they are about.
Other games exist too. As do groups that play them.
They can be found at non-GWFLGS's. This requires less effort than trying to track down an obscure group of garage-gamers that probably will be on the other side of the state.
Agamemnon2 wrote: Good god. You went and blew it up, you maniacs! Damn you! Damn you all to hell!
Ahem. I've been away from the hobby for a while. Regardless, this is horrendously disappointing. Warhammer Fantasy was doing poorly, we all knew it, but this? This is madness.
Somewhere, in GWHQ, this version makes perfect sense. It's us who are 'mad' for not getting their vision.
migooo wrote: Look oldhammer groups exist. As do second ed 40k groups
I'm looking at oldhammer but I only play 40k second. Just play what makes you happy and ignore something that doesn't.
Groups can be hard to find but they are about.
Which is exactly the point, if he wanted to play 5th edition 40k he'd either have to have a group nearby that's willing to play it, or try to start one himself. If no one in the area wants to play 5th at all then you're fethed. You even said yourself that you only play 2nd.
"Oldhammer is a thing!" doesn't mean gak if it isn't actually a thing where you live, or if they're all playing the "wrong" edition.
Bull0 wrote: Bah, I'm in camp wait-and-see now. We're fixating on a couple of negative soundbites that aren't even 100% confirmed - no points costs etc - without knowing how the rest of the rules work, so we don't even know how much of an issue those unconfirmed changes will pose.
This is why GW needs to talk, people not in the HHHobby exclusively will be looking at other stuff right now and even have pre orders down.
I have preorders down for pp stuff coming in July and September, I just order some new RPG books. Probably going to put some extra money on some kickstarter and just order 2 new game mats.
All up, GW negatives have made me less likly to wait and save any money for them as an alternative, making my likly hood at preordering less.
This is info we should have all had 2 months ago, where is GW marketing. Most kickstarter projects seem to have better marketing.
Hard to generate hype for a product when people are preordering, playing and talking about info we do know.
I even know the stats and how they will play for my PP preorders not out for 3 months, perfectly capable of testing and discussing all the positives they will bring.
Based on that evidence, and using Occam's razor as a guide, you can reasonably conclude that this is shaping up to be a steaming pile of horse gak
Not quite yet. It very well could be... be we really need to see some Warscrolls first.
It sounds like GW is trying to emulate Wrath of Kings, I have no idea if they can pull it off. Unlike some people in this thread, I genuinely hope they do.
Based on that evidence, and using Occam's razor as a guide, you can reasonably conclude that this is shaping up to be a steaming pile of horse gak
Not quite yet. It very well could be... be we really need to see some Warscrolls first.
It sounds like GW is trying to emulate Wrath of Kings, I have no idea if they can pull it off. Unlike some people in this thread, I genuinely hope they do.
I'm firmly in the "wait and see" camp.
A lot of GW defenders criticise their fellow gamers for the flak they give GW, but it's because they LOVE the games so much, that these people react in such an angry manner. People genuinely want the AOS to be a cracking game, only a tiny minority want it to crash and burn.
Sadly, the evidence points to this going downhill, and that's why people engage in nerd rage.
migooo wrote: Look oldhammer groups exist. As do second ed 40k groups
I'm looking at oldhammer but I only play 40k second. Just play what makes you happy and ignore something that doesn't.
Groups can be hard to find but they are about.
Which is exactly the point, if he wanted to play 5th edition 40k he'd either have to have a group nearby that's willing to play it, or try to start one himself. If no one in the area wants to play 5th at all then you're fethed. You even said yourself that you only play 2nd.
"Oldhammer is a thing!" doesn't mean gak if it isn't actually a thing where you live, or if they're all playing the "wrong" edition.
True but it's also kinda blinkered . Fine I'm willing to accept if there's not a group in your vicinity or are reliant on GW shops to play you are going to have a bit of a bad time. But I live in a fairly secluded part of England that has stupid transportation links and I don't drive and its still manageable. Fine I only play every other week or so but that's preferable to not.
migooo wrote: True but it's also kinda blinkered . Fine I'm willing to accept if there's not a group in your vicinity or are reliant on GW shops to play you are going to have a bit of a bad time. But I live in a fairly secluded part of England that has stupid transportation links and I don't drive and its still manageable. Fine I only play every other week or so but that's preferable to not.
I also live in a remote area, in one of the U.S.'s smaller states (Maryland). It's a 45 min to my nearest GW, an hour to my nearest non-GW, driving. Public transportation is really not a thing in a lot of the U.S., and plenty of people live in rural or suburban areas that basically require a car to get around.
I'm fortunate, I have a regular gaming group of friends. But we all started with 8th, and most of my friends lost all interest in GW products after the crap they've been pulling lately. Looking at AoS so far, I'm finding it harder and harder to disagree with them.
If stores want to run tournaments (or simplify pickup games) all they need to do is set some limits for the games played in their store
eg 10 warscrolls worth (perhaps broken down by type if the warscrolls come like that)
after a few weeks everybody who frequents the store will know how much stuff they can bring
(just like not you could, in theory, rock up with 20,000 points of minis but you'd be very unlikely to get a game, or finish it before the store owner threw you out)
this is, of course, dependant on the warscrolls themselves coming with some sort of reasonable balance
(and even if they don't we've plenty of experience with people being obsessed with cherry picking the 'best' units with the 'best' options for their points based games)
this is certainly not going to be the WFB we remember (and the flyer rams that home), but it may (or may not) be a decent if simpler game. We need to see the war scrolls to find out and since they are going to be free (for now) the only ones really suffering are store owners who are being asked to buy sight unseen
and even they are being offered sweetners to do so, gamble it's a hit and get extra stuff etc,
don't gamble and pay more later,
uncomfortable but then that's business (would a smaller company launching something they'd had more access to beforehand give as much free stuff? I suspect not)
A lot of GW defenders criticise their fellow gamers for the flak they give GW, but it's because they LOVE the games so much, that these people react in such an angry manner. People genuinely want the AOS to be a cracking game, only a tiny minority want it to crash and burn.
Sadly, the evidence points to this going downhill, and that's why people engage in nerd rage.
Makes sense.
I'm just trying to calm people down. We don't have full access to rules and I feel like some rumors (mainly the ones from the warhammer forum) jumped to incorrect conclusions, which caused some panic.
I understand why these leaked rules have people worried, I just feel like we're still missing some very important info.
Do we really have three more days of wahhhhh to endure before the Age of Sigwahhhh hits? Cos there's a lot of wahhhh going on based on very little info.
Smug posters like you are just as bad as any hyperbolic "hater", JohnnyHell. We're making judgements based on the information we have. If you are happy to wait til later to see the full rules, go do that.
What is amusing to me is seeing the acceptance of KOW style rules by many who had decried KOW as "too simple" and lacking in depth. I guess it's different if it comes from GW rather than Mantic, right?
JohnnyHell wrote: Do we really have three more days of wahhhhh to endure before the Age of Sigwahhhh hits? Cos there's a lot of wahhhh going on based on very little info.
From the sounds of it, doesn't look like there will be much more info on Saturday
Da Boss wrote: Smug posters like you are just as bad as any hyperbolic "hater", JohnnyHell. We're making judgements based on the information we have. If you are happy to wait til later to see the full rules, go do that.
What is amusing to me is seeing the acceptance of KOW style rules by many who had decried KOW as "too simple" and lacking in depth. I guess it's different if it comes from GW rather than Mantic, right?
I thought people were saying the rules were similar to Wrath of Kings, not Kings of War (those two names do really blend together)?
They sound pretty similar to KOW to me too - having the stat you roll to succeed be determined by the model itself with modifiers applied by unit special rules is the core of KOW, and the break mechanic is broadly similar.
Da Boss wrote: Smug posters like you are just as bad as any hyperbolic "hater", JohnnyHell. We're making judgements based on the information we have. If you are happy to wait til later to see the full rules, go do that.
What is amusing to me is seeing the acceptance of KOW style rules by many who had decried KOW as "too simple" and lacking in depth. I guess it's different if it comes from GW rather than Mantic, right?
Dude, I meant wahhhh on all sides. Wahhhhhh just denotes noise and complaints and excitementt. It's all gone circular and it's tedious after page 138. Haha. But label me how you like, it's no biggie! Sun is shining, life is good, and I've plenty of plastic dollies to put together before going anywhere near this yet! #oopsquitesmug
Automatically Appended Next Post: Flashman wins the internetz, hahaha.
It is pretty smug to stand above everyone and piss over them all as crybabies when some people on here make their livelihoods from selling these games and so for them this is a very serious matter.
Da Boss wrote: It is pretty smug to stand above everyone and piss over them all as crybabies when some people on here make their livelihoods from selling these games and so for them this is a very serious matter.
Yeah, reading through mikhaila's posts is surprisingly gut-wrenching, even when we're talking about plastic figures.
Da Boss wrote: It is pretty smug to stand above everyone and piss over them all as crybabies when some people on here make their livelihoods from selling these games and so for them this is a very serious matter.
Well, at least GW isn't bypassing retailers on new releases/product launches with Kickstarter yet. So on that end, I think we're in relatively safe waters compared to .. dunno ... Zombicide or Mantic Games or Kingdom Death, etc...
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: If stores want to run tournaments (or simplify pickup games) all they need to do is set some limits for the games played in their store
eg 10 warscrolls worth (perhaps broken down by type if the warscrolls come like that)
They can... but they should then expect the typical whining you invariably get both in person and online about how "unfair" it is that the store/organization/tourny isn't "playing by the rules" and just making "house rules" when they're just trying to restore the balance that GW has abdicated their responsibility for managing. It'll be the fantasy equivalent of the "fluff bunnies" that just want to play their multisource Dark Eldar Inquisition Space Marine Knight Eldar net list and are told they can't. Just insert tired copy/paste horrors of comp thread and 3rd party restrictions on their game. How dare someone put back the sanity and limits that GW removed!?!
Da Boss wrote: It is pretty smug to stand above everyone and piss over them all as crybabies when some people on here make their livelihoods from selling these games and so for them this is a very serious matter.
Well, at least GW isn't bypassing retailers on new releases/product launches with Kickstarter yet. So on that end, I think we're in relatively safe waters compared to .. dunno ... Zombicide or Mantic Games or Kingdom Death, etc...
"At least"? GW is the biggest dog in the pound... if they need to "kickstart" something, the whole industry is in trouble. Luckily, GW would likely never use KS because backers expect discounts there in return for placing in effect a long term preorder. GW doesn't do discounts and would rather trash stock than sell it at 40-50% off of what their own stores offer.
"At least"? GW is the biggest dog in the pound... if they need to "kickstart" something, the whole industry is in trouble. Luckily, GW would likely never use KS because backers expect discounts there in return for placing in effect a long term preorder. GW doesn't do discounts and would rather trash stock than sell it at 40-50% off of what their own stores offer.
Doesn't help the FLGS-owners making "a living" with this.
Mikhaila & co. at least have the option of taking orders for new GW stuff the week it is announced and hype is high (if there is hype... Age of Sigmar might be a dud, but the next Space Marine Codex will be coming at some point).
Could she now take orders for Zombicide Black Plague, now that everyone's hyped for it? No.
Da Boss wrote: It is pretty smug to stand above everyone and piss over them all as crybabies when some people on here make their livelihoods from selling these games and so for them this is a very serious matter.
Ok so I just spoke with our GW guy for about a half an hour about Age of Sigmar. Here are the details:
[snip spoonfed corporate buzz]
+He said the game plays faster than WHFB, is simple at its core, but complex once you start throwing in all the unit specific rules. He said it would be much easier for new players to get into the hobby and the themed armies have really cool things up their sleeves.
All in all I am really excited. Putting all the rules out there for free, making any regiment box in effect a starter box, and keeping large scale battles relevant are smart moves. I cannot wait. More details to follow! Everyone will be able to start playing AoS on the fourth of july without spending a penny.
So the GW guy said it's the bestest game ever made ever
I'M SOLD!
rhavien wrote:Concerning the ' we cant take options anymore' maybe there will be more than one scroll where it would be appropriate? Easiest example statetroops. Sword/shield gets a better save, Spear has a longer reach and halbs better to wound.
I've been concerned about the possibility of options vanishing too, but I think we ought to admit that very few units appear in the 8E meta in more than one configuration. The change from 7E to 8E shook things up (saurus dropped their spears and picked up hand weapons, for example) because of core rules changes, but apart from weird hobbyists Doing Stuff Because Cool, players pretty much just take what's Obviously Good. It's the hypothetical drop of the wonderful common item lists of 8E that will hurt variety the most ... but a) who knows about character upgrades, and b) people tended to take the same stuff anyway
Apple fox wrote:We still don't know if GW is realy being entirely honest when they say can take any box or two of the shelf and play a game effectively.
Fun Project: challenge some friends / your club to grab a GeeDub box off the shelf, build it, paint it, play it, report back.
MeanGreenStompa wrote:I love my BFG and have decided to run a campaign, so I'll just pop down to the local gaming shop and gather together all the other bfg... oh, there aren't any? That was a legitimate surprise, really...
Just my two pennies but I'm kind of interested in seeing what its all about, which is a big thing really since I haven't touched GW stuff since 3rd edition 40k came out.
It strikes me that being able to take bits from different armies is very much like 3rd ed Warhams, which is what I started on, and if thats the case I'm a little excited for it.
A 4 page rulebook does seem...odd, but they've made so many errors over the years with pricing and rules-bloat that I can almost see why they've gone down this route.
Of course people are worried/annoyed, theres a lot of love, effort and cash invested in these games. As someone who could possibly get back into Warhams with this new ruleset I can be objective and sympathise with those who cannot. If they are rubbish, then I can move on, invested people cannot.
Im defiantly seeing pieces of KOW, LOTR, and 40k in this. Not much whfb. So this game in no way can replace whfb but it might be a feasible fantasy skirmish game that ill have people to game with. This has the makings of an enormous flop or, like lotr, a misunderstood excellent, tight, and tactical ruleset
namiel wrote: Im defiantly seeing pieces of KOW, LOTR, and 40k in this. Not much whfb. So this game in no way can replace whfb but it might be a feasible fantasy skirmish game that ill have people to game with. This has the makings of an enormous flop or, like lotr, a misunderstood excellent, tight, and tactical ruleset
Best case scenario, it's a good game that they killed WHFB to make (which to me, a fan of regimental games, is still "meh" at best). Worst case scenario they killed WHFB to make a mediocre skirmish game in a market where I can't throw a cat without hitting another skirmish game.
Though they do say it can be played with lots of models.... but it it's another game like 40k where you have 100's of individual models and a movement phase takes you an eternity then I'm not interested. I've never been a huge fan of that aspect of the 40k rules system.
JohnnyHell wrote: Do we really have three more days of wahhhhh to endure before the Age of Sigwahhhh hits? Cos there's a lot of wahhhh going on based on very little info.
Complaining about complaining and simultaneously posting 3 off topic posts? Well played
Boss Salvage wrote: I've been concerned about the possibility of options vanishing too, but I think we ought to admit that very few units appear in the 8E meta in more than one configuration. The change from 7E to 8E shook things up (saurus dropped their spears and picked up hand weapons, for example) because of core rules changes, but apart from weird hobbyists Doing Stuff Because Cool, players pretty much just take what's Obviously Good. It's the hypothetical drop of the wonderful common item lists of 8E that will hurt variety the most ... but a) who knows about character upgrades, and b) people tended to take the same stuff anyway - Salvage
I think it's pretty much guaranteed options will vanish. There are simply too many variables in the old lists to account for on a simple no-points war-scroll. At the very least, they'll tone down the variability. No more "swords base, want spears? halberds? second sword? shield?". I could see it boiling down to possibly a few configurations: "1H only", "1H + shield", "2 hander".
Do I think there will still be a difference between Night Runners and Gutter Runners? Most likely not. Difference between Stormvermin and Clan Rats? 1 probably has smaller numbers, gets a better save and "2H" instead of "1H + shield".
I don't know, we'll see. I find the whole "no bases, measure from the model" to be the most abuse-prone thing in the whole list. I mean, look at this model:
Just turning the model will make at least an inch of difference in reach/movement/whatever.
I don't know, we'll see. I find the whole "no bases, measure from the model" to be the most abuse-prone thing in the whole list. I mean, look at this model:
Just turning the model will make at least an inch of difference in reach/movement/whatever.
Not when I'm mounting my flying Skycutter on a double-height flying stance. Turn whichever way you like. No way you'll get into 3" melee-range of my model-not-counting-the-base, while I pepper you with arrows
Ya know, this game just isn't made for being to precise about it all, I would think.
streamdragon wrote: I don't know, we'll see. I find the whole "no bases, measure from the model" to be the most abuse-prone thing in the whole list.
Seriously. If I play this thing much, I may insist upon measuring by center mass. Even if that's up to some interpretation, it'll provide a far more consistent experience and allow for modeling variety.
As somebody who is also a GW retailer (and has been since the turn of the century) I can say that I feel like there's very little risk for us here.
We would never order 80 of anything let alone a GW product because we don't do that kind of business but even if we did I can't see needing 80 copies in the first week - which is what you're saying when you preorder that many. Because... you can just order again if you start running short.
So, I've always felt that regardless of what form AoS was going to take we'd order light, see how things go, and adjust course as everybody gets a chance to see how it's shaking out. People hate it? We didn't go all in so no big deal. It takes off? We order more. Easy peasy.
The thing is, on the surface this is EXACTLY what I think that they should be doing with Warhammer - assuming that it is a well designed game, of course. Miniature battle games are, on the whole, a lot to get a new player to swallow. So the idea of making the game something that you can start small in and then scale up is, in my mind, the best possible option.
I am concerned about the rules that we've seen so far. Not overly so. We haven't seen them all and I think that the war scrolls are really going to be the things that make or break the game.
For my customers, the way that they are bringing this out is great. All of the Warhammer players can just download the stuff they need to try the game, grab their minis and go. They can immediately tell if it's a game that they are going to want to keep playing.
For us, that immediacy for the customers means that we'll be able to tell very quickly whether or not to support it going forward.
I've personally been involved in the hobby for more than 30 years but I've long since moved on from GW where I would be emotionally moved by whatever they decide to do. At this point it's all business. I want them to make a game that I want to play and this seems to have the possibility to be that game but I'm not holding my breath.
This might seem like an odd question, but does anyone know the nature of the sales reps that deal with independent stockists?
More specifically, are they an internal group within GW, or are they a 3rd party company that GW hires to call independents and promote their games/get the independents to stock them?
Because here's the thing - GW doesn't tell anyone anything unless that person needs to know -immediately-. They didn't even tell the managers of their own stores until yesterday. That's how they keep such a tight lid on leaks, for the most part.
We don't need to doubt mikhaila or even the sales reps and managers he spoke to, I'm sure he is being truthful and is entirely legitimate.
What we can doubt is how much those sales reps and managers knew, especially if they're a 3rd party business that GW contracts to promote products. GW has a history of screwing independents over, why tell the sales reps anything GW thinks they don't need to know to generally describe a game?
I'm not saying that the core rules contain some structural system that we haven't seen, but that some other aspect of the game that we have yet to be exposed to contains said system.
That way, mikhaila didn't lie (why would he anyway), the sales reps and managers didn't lie (they just didn't know enough), and GW continues with their general modus operandi of telling independents zero info.
namiel wrote: Im defiantly seeing pieces of KOW, LOTR, and 40k in this. Not much whfb. So this game in no way can replace whfb but it might be a feasible fantasy skirmish game that ill have people to game with. This has the makings of an enormous flop or, like lotr, a misunderstood excellent, tight, and tactical ruleset
Best case scenario, it's a good game that they killed WHFB to make (which to me, a fan of regimental games, is still "meh" at best). Worst case scenario they killed WHFB to make a mediocre skirmish game in a market where I can't throw a cat without hitting another skirmish game.
Though they do say it can be played with lots of models.... but it it's another game like 40k where you have 100's of individual models and a movement phase takes you an eternity then I'm not interested. I've never been a huge fan of that aspect of the 40k rules system.
Im waiting to see 100% of the rules. I do love the idea of having anything you want pretty much on the table. I honestly would prefer a force org much like LOTR where its a hero followed by warriors of HIS/HER army not just any army. Lots of different combinations to create that one whole moving piece that is an army. In lotr mixing my elves, with ents and hobbits or my urkhai mixed with dead marsh specters, etc. This could be great for the game in a way that no one list really rules the roost but knowing gw balance is not their forte
Dr. Delorean wrote: This might seem like an odd question, but does anyone know the nature of the sales reps that deal with independent stockists?
More specifically, are they an internal group within GW, or are they a 3rd party company that GW hires to call independents and promote their games/get the independents to stock them?
Because here's the thing - GW doesn't tell anyone anything unless that person needs to know -immediately-. They didn't even tell the managers of their own stores until yesterday. That's how they keep such a tight lid on leaks, for the most part.
We don't need to doubt mikhaila or even the sales reps and managers he spoke to, I'm sure he is being truthful and is entirely legitimate.
What we can doubt is how much those sales reps and managers knew, especially if they're a 3rd party business that GW contracts to promote products. GW has a history of screwing independents over, why tell the sales reps anything GW thinks they don't need to know to generally describe a game?
I'm not saying that the core rules contain some structural system that we haven't seen, but that some other aspect of the game that we have yet to be exposed to contains said system.
That way, mikhaila didn't lie (why would he anyway), the sales reps and managers didn't lie (they just didn't know enough), and GW continues with their general modus operandi of telling independents zero info.
So why have those same GW reps suddenly changed from responding to direct questions from retailers with "I don't know anything about that" or "we're not allowed to discuss that yet" to saying "Yes. Yes, absolutely, that thing you asked about is happening, 100%, care to order 500?" - if the goal is to mislead retailers without outright lying, all GW had to do was stick to the MO they've been using for years now. And if a third party company did act as you describe, they'd be utter morons, because they're taking on the legal liability for the lies for no good reason.
Dr. Delorean wrote: This might seem like an odd question, but does anyone know the nature of the sales reps that deal with independent stockists?
More specifically, are they an internal group within GW, or are they a 3rd party company that GW hires to call independents and promote their games/get the independents to stock them?
Because here's the thing - GW doesn't tell anyone anything unless that person needs to know -immediately-. They didn't even tell the managers of their own stores until yesterday. That's how they keep such a tight lid on leaks, for the most part.
We don't need to doubt mikhaila or even the sales reps and managers he spoke to, I'm sure he is being truthful and is entirely legitimate.
What we can doubt is how much those sales reps and managers knew, especially if they're a 3rd party business that GW contracts to promote products. GW has a history of screwing independents over, why tell the sales reps anything GW thinks they don't need to know to generally describe a game?
I'm not saying that the core rules contain some structural system that we haven't seen, but that some other aspect of the game that we have yet to be exposed to contains said system.
That way, mikhaila didn't lie (why would he anyway), the sales reps and managers didn't lie (they just didn't know enough), and GW continues with their general modus operandi of telling independents zero info.
So why have those same GW reps suddenly changed from responding to direct questions from retailers with "I don't know anything about that" or "we're not allowed to discuss that yet" to saying "Yes. Yes, absolutely, that thing you asked about is happening, 100%, care to order 500?" - if the goal is to mislead retailers without outright lying, all GW had to do was stick to the MO they've been using for years now. And if a third party company did act as you describe, they'd be utter morons, because they're taking on the legal liability for the lies for no good reason.
The sales reps who deal with 3rd party shops are GW employees(one of the guys who worked at the Chicago bunker moved to Memphis and started doing that is how I know). GW lets their people know of the big releases but are very sure to get those non disclosure clauses signed. The top dictates the release of information by the lower level employees. As you can see those were pre prepared blurbs
timetowaste85 wrote: @pretre: I emailed it to you and added it to the thread a couple days later, as I specified I would. You also copy pasted the second batch of rumors directly into the thread. I'm in the middle of a house move though, laptops still packed, and it would take forever and a day to locate and copy/paste on the phone, at the moment. But I'll copy paste it when I can.
Yeah, iirc, you only e-mailed me before it came true. I'll check again but don't see a specific post of yours.
So does the book from which these pictures were taken also include pictures of models and/or artwork? Personally I'm not really interested in the game, more in the figures, background and artwork.
timetowaste, it seems like your source was a little off about this... emphasis mine:
timetowaste85 wrote: I'm chiming in that Age of Sigmar's is actually a board game. Told it's something like space hulk. The source that told me 7/11 was release day also told me this. So I'll run with it.
timetowaste85 wrote: My source said 9th at the same time. But AoS is a board game. So I've been told.
TimW wrote: Has anyone considered that Warhammer: Age of Sigmar is a different game from Warhammer Fantasy Battle and that we may still see a new edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle come out, alongside the new skirmish sized game?
Plus Age of Signar could actually be something akin to Space Hulk. A stand alone game, all inclusive. I'm just guessing here...
That's actually what my source told me: a game similar to Space Hulk or the assassin one that just came out. Bunch of models for a stand alone game that CAN port directly into the mass battle thing when it hits.
I guess it's a bit open to interpretation, though - maybe this sort of is like Space Hulk in a sense? Rules are in the box, all you need to play... but there is definitely no board like Space Hulk or the Assassins game. So yeah, hard to judge.
Dr. Delorean wrote: This might seem like an odd question, but does anyone know the nature of the sales reps that deal with independent stockists?
More specifically, are they an internal group within GW, or are they a 3rd party company that GW hires to call independents and promote their games/get the independents to stock them?
They are hired GW employees. I actually interviewed for the job once.
So why have those same GW reps suddenly changed from responding to direct questions from retailers with "I don't know anything about that" or "we're not allowed to discuss that yet" to saying "Yes. Yes, absolutely, that thing you asked about is happening, 100%, care to order 500?" - if the goal is to mislead retailers without outright lying, all GW had to do was stick to the MO they've been using for years now. And if a third party company did act as you describe, they'd be utter morons, because they're taking on the legal liability for the lies for no good reason.
Because previously they didn't know or couldn't say and now they do or can.
Talking to GW reps can be super frustrating and they understand that. I will sometimes get information that's "secret" but only after everybody on the forums already knows it. Frankly, most of the time they are in the dark as much as anybody.
RiTides wrote: timetowaste, it seems like your source was a little off about this... emphasis mine:
timetowaste85 wrote: I'm chiming in that Age of Sigmar's is actually a board game. Told it's something like space hulk. The source that told me 7/11 was release day also told me this. So I'll run with it.
timetowaste85 wrote: My source said 9th at the same time. But AoS is a board game. So I've been told.
TimW wrote: Has anyone considered that Warhammer: Age of Sigmar is a different game from Warhammer Fantasy Battle and that we may still see a new edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle come out, alongside the new skirmish sized game?
Plus Age of Signar could actually be something akin to Space Hulk. A stand alone game, all inclusive. I'm just guessing here...
That's actually what my source told me: a game similar to Space Hulk or the assassin one that just came out. Bunch of models for a stand alone game that CAN port directly into the mass battle thing when it hits.
I guess it's a bit open to interpretation, though - maybe this sort of is like Space Hulk in a sense? Rules are in the box, all you need to play... but there is definitely no board like Space Hulk or the Assassins game. So yeah, hard to judge.
And I tracked both of them already. timetowaste85 is at two false.
You know, AoS as we know it now, does sound like a rather good introductory product. It lets prospective customers buy cool toys and not worry about points and FOC. That's something that cannot be overstated.
If it's supplemented with an actual game system later on that helps retain those customers, it might actually be the best thing GW has done it a long time, as far as the company well being is concerned.
namiel wrote: Im defiantly seeing pieces of KOW, LOTR, and 40k in this. Not much whfb. So this game in no way can replace whfb but it might be a feasible fantasy skirmish game that ill have people to game with. This has the makings of an enormous flop or, like lotr, a misunderstood excellent, tight, and tactical ruleset
I don't see any Kings of War in this. Kings of War is a huge mass battles game with tight movement rules where defense in depth matters. If anything, Kings of War is Warhammer 9th edition, considering the pedigree and rules design principles (KoW is WHFB, but zoomed out a level)
I also am not seeing much LotR in this, either. LotR's core system relied upon highly customizable warbands with captains in the lead. AoS's warscrolls seem to be uncustomizable unit boxes.
I'm optimistic, after going through all 5 stages of grief I'm now in acceptance. Gonna get the big box set and see how it is. Honestly, due to my schudule and lack of free time, I doubt I'll even get to play it much, but since my old armies are supposedly still valid then that makes it worthwhile.
I'm also glad to see the switch to more of a skirmishy game. I just don't have the time or cash for big army games anymore. So I guess I'll see what it's like on sunday
Cheers Pretre. The real crux of this seems to come down to the warscrolls, I will be reserving judgement until we have seen some of these.
However, the rules do seem to be aimed at getting more people into the hobby with a "beers and pretzels" type game. This is not a bad thing? I just hope that the scope for greater complexity for veterans is there.
OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote: If stores want to run tournaments (or simplify pickup games) all they need to do is set some limits for the games played in their store
eg 10 warscrolls worth (perhaps broken down by type if the warscrolls come like that)
after a few weeks everybody who frequents the store will know how much stuff they can bring
(just like not you could, in theory, rock up with 20,000 points of minis but you'd be very unlikely to get a game, or finish it before the store owner threw you out)
this is, of course, dependant on the warscrolls themselves coming with some sort of reasonable balance
(and even if they don't we've plenty of experience with people being obsessed with cherry picking the 'best' units with the 'best' options for their points based games)
this is certainly not going to be the WFB we remember (and the flyer rams that home), but it may (or may not) be a decent if simpler game. We need to see the war scrolls to find out and since they are going to be free (for now) the only ones really suffering are store owners who are being asked to buy sight unseen
and even they are being offered sweetners to do so, gamble it's a hit and get extra stuff etc,
don't gamble and pay more later,
uncomfortable but then that's business (would a smaller company launching something they'd had more access to beforehand give as much free stuff? I suspect not)
I think a lot of the viability of the game hinges on the warscrolls. Hopefully we'll see some leaked photos of warscrolls before this weekend. In order for warscrolls to be useful for balancing opposing armies the warscrolls are going to have to have size limits on the units.
For example, the Khorne Goretide in AoS includes one units of 5 Chaos Warriors and two units of 10 Chaos Marauders. I'm assuming that there will be respective warscrolls for each unit, Chaos Warriors = 5 models, Chaos Marauders = 10 models. The unit size has to be part of the warscroll if the part of the purpose of warscrolls is balance, 5 Chaos Warrios = 10 Chaos Marauders = 5 Stormcast Eternals with hammer and shield etc.
If GW wants anyone to be able to pick a box of the shelf and have a playable unit then each box is going to have a warscroll with the unit size being the box contents.
Working with that assumption I don't see how the game can scale up past skirmish size. If I want to use my 7ed WoC army with warscrolls, I'll have to break up regiments into warscroll sized units. Instead of 2 units, a regiment of Chaos Warriors and a regiment of Chaos Marauders I'll have 7 smaller units. That seems to me to be a very clunky and convoluted way to do a mass battle game.
If warscrolls don't have a definitive unit size, that's even worse for balance and power disparity.
This all looks utter gak..... I'm really unsure what to do with my armies now, I suppose I could try the bland kow game again or just jack it all in and get a new hobby.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: Based on that evidence, and using Occam's razor as a guide, you can reasonably conclude that this is shaping up to be a steaming pile of horse gak
With a shovel.
For folks to use when looking for the pony.
I can't even build up a whole lot of enthusiasm for the figures in the box. There are just not enough of the ones I can even tolerate to make me willing to spend the money. (After painting up an island of Blood set for a commission, I had to admit that the Elves included were damned spiffy. The Skaven... with a few exceptions, were not all that good.)
Formosa wrote: This all looks utter gak..... I'm really unsure what to do with my armies now, I suppose I could try the bland kow game again or just jack it all in and get a new hobby.
You could try other games? Other games are fun too.
You are doing it wrong you just have to forge a narrative 
