I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
Cronch wrote: ok, and? I'm getting an inferior product as a customer if I don't manage to nab one of those low production run Special Limited Boxes...
Yes. GW has decided it's no longer going to leave a box like Indomitus or Dominion as a 'starter box' when in reality it was just a big 'discount box' for established players to buy a cheap army. Now a 'starter' like the more reasonably priced Recruit edition can do what it was meant to do and bring in players who were on the fence and didn't what to drop major money on a game they may not like.
The only thing that makes the ‘launch boxes’ different to starter sets is the lack of dice. Indomitus and Dominion should have just been the starter sets for the games, with one of the smaller ones to make a cheaper entry.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
Although I am not a fan of the newer starter sets they are still good deals moneywise(at least Recruit and Elite Edition). There is almost no reason to buy the normal boxes/the recruit edition is 32 pound compared to a single squad of necron warriors at 29) when you can instead buy the non-limited starter sets and just sell what you are not using. I think the only exception is the Command Edition as not everyone wants to buy ruins which are a part of the savings.
I do, however, miss the old style box sets like Dark Imperium and the 6th/7th edition sets. Those sets got you started in armies that you hadn't even considered starting. It is thanks to that set that I now have a huge painted Death Guard army.
tneva82 wrote: B) gw has 3 starters(recruit, elite, command). This is and never was starter set,. You want starter set, you buy starter set. This doesn't even have stuff starter sets are. Are you willing to turn this 160e discount box to 250e starter set?
You wot? Starters were always cheap. See Dark Imperium, or in AoS case, Soul Wars. It contains similar contents to Dominion and it's 125€. Accounting for inflation and 10% less minis, it's equivalent today would be ~150€. Where you got that insane 250 from? On top on even more silly statement that discount boxes are cheaper than starters? It was always the other way around
Kanluwen wrote: That's something that I'll never understand.
Why would you let someone preorder something and not pay up front?!
Because in civilized countries, there is something called consumer protection and you have the right to cancel the transaction 14 days after purchase, especially if bought online, so it applied to 99% of Indomitus sales?
To be fair the Soul Wars starter was atrocious simply because it didn't provide you with whole units and expected you to buy the entire range of starters just to field a viable unit.
All in all I think the Soul Wars starter is perhaps one of the worst starters in the games(40k and AoS) because you got illegal number of models for a unit in the set.
Cronch wrote: ok, and? I'm getting an inferior product as a customer if I don't manage to nab one of those low production run Special Limited Boxes when GW clearly could supply plenty of Soul Wars boxes. Why. I mean beyond corporate greed, because as far as I can see, there is no redeeming quality to this shift.
Yeah. Making these starter box limited in quantity is a really unfortunate turn of event
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
They are missing stuff starter sets always have.
They aren't starter sets. They don't have all the stuff starter sets have. Aos3 will have 3 starter sets. This is not one.
40k crowe showed last year serious lack of reading comprehension. Guess aos isn't any better
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
They are missing stuff starter sets always have.
They aren't starter sets. They don't have all the stuff starter sets have. Aos3 will have 3 starter sets. This is not one.
40k crowe showed last year serious lack of reading comprehension. Guess aos isn't any better
tneva82 wrote: B) gw has 3 starters(recruit, elite, command). This is and never was starter set,. You want starter set, you buy starter set. This doesn't even have stuff starter sets are. Are you willing to turn this 160e discount box to 250e starter set?
You wot? Starters were always cheap. See Dark Imperium, or in AoS case, Soul Wars. It contains similar contents to Dominion and it's 125€. Accounting for inflation and 10% less minis, it's equivalent today would be ~150€. Where you got that insane 250 from? On top on even more silly statement that discount boxes are cheaper than starters? It was always the other way around
[
Soul war had less value stuff in it and reduced discount. Models worth more and lower discount. You turn box with more models with bigger discount into lower discount AND add even more stuff what you expect but price increase? 160e now and lower the discount rate. Obviously price is going up
Soul war's equilavent is going to be command edition. Not this.
Cronch wrote: ok, and? I'm getting an inferior product as a customer if I don't manage to nab one of those low production run Special Limited Boxes when GW clearly could supply plenty of Soul Wars boxes. Why. I mean beyond corporate greed, because as far as I can see, there is no redeeming quality to this shift.
Yeah. Making these starter box limited in quantity is a really unfortunate turn of event
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
They are missing stuff starter sets always have.
They aren't starter sets. They don't have all the stuff starter sets have. Aos3 will have 3 starter sets. This is not one.
40k crowe showed last year serious lack of reading comprehension. Guess aos isn't any better
For throwing out insults regarding reading comprehension you don't seem to have any idea what reality is:
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
They are missing stuff starter sets always have.
They aren't starter sets. They don't have all the stuff starter sets have. Aos3 will have 3 starter sets. This is not one.
40k crowe showed last year serious lack of reading comprehension. Guess aos isn't any better
The feth you talking about dude? Get down from your high horse and stop thinking yourself smarter than everybody else. Dark Imperium was literally the same thing than Indomitus minus dice. And they did keep it in production all of 8th , having smaller starter boxes at the same time.
If GW now has decided that the "starter" boxes of the editions are a limited run is just for pure profit. Is a change in their policy, is not something obvious we all are missing. And is an abismal change, BTW. This starter boxes are one of the last "good value" products GW stills has, and they becoming limited boxes suck ass.
Overread wrote: That's one issue, GW's anti-scalper might stop the casual scalpers, which likely have been on the rise a lot (esp for GW). It will also limit most of their customers to a single box, which will naturally spread the stock out a lot more (at least when ordered direct from their own site).
However it might just free up stock for a professional scalper with their bot farm and such, to just swoop in and take even more. Of course GW might find other ways to stop them - eg at the point of delivery and shipping when they spot oddities such as dozens of orders going to the same address or all going to the same block of flats or such.
It's one thing to order 30 copies to the same address, but it would be rare for a whole block of flats or linked addresses or mail boxes to also order tens to hundreds of copies.
This might also explain why sometimes we see stock re-appear after its sold out, because GW have gone through the addresses and orders, spotted an oddity and cancelled the orders.
The real scalpers are the storefronts capable of ordering enough copies while also selling out to eBay.
Albertorius wrote: Yeah, you can call it however you like, but the end result is the same as always: less for more.
But it isn't; the current command edition bears a great deal of similarity to starters of the past. Indomitus is the box that is different with having way more miniatures, a full hardback rulebook, and no terrain.
If someone wants the same starter set GW has historically offered for Warhammer it is right there on the store in non-limited production. One can of course criticize the price/value, but the fact remains that in terms of product given Command Edition is in line with older editions bar 8th.
It isn't that the main starter has gone to limited, it is that we are getting an upsized launch box providing more than the normal starter ON TOP of what we normally got. And two smaller versions that are non-limited. Going back to what we used to have wouldn't mean Indomitus as non-limited, it would mean the Command Edition as the only offering and no Indomitus at all.
And to re-emphasize before I get inevitably called a GW shill anyways; go look at the previous starters and what they had, then compare to the current ones and see which is the most similar.
Albertorius wrote: Yeah, you can call it however you like, but the end result is the same as always: less for more.
But it isn't; the current command edition bears a great deal of similarity to starters of the past. Indomitus is the box that is different with having way more miniatures, a full hardback rulebook, and no terrain.
If someone wants the same starter set GW has historically offered for Warhammer it is right there on the store in non-limited production. One can of course criticize the price/value, but the fact remains that in terms of product given Command Edition is in line with older editions bar 8th.
It isn't that the main starter has gone to limited, it is that we are getting an upsized launch box providing more than the normal starter ON TOP of what we normally got. And two smaller versions that are non-limited. Going back to what we used to have wouldn't mean Indomitus as non-limited, it would mean the Command Edition as the only offering and no Indomitus at all.
And to re-emphasize before I get inevitably called a GW shill anyways; go look at the previous starters and what they had, then compare to the current ones and see which is the most similar.
Da Boss wrote: Fomo is a pretty useful lever for companies to pull, I just find it really obnoxious so I'm turned off rather than hyped by it.
But...missing out on what?
It’s pretty much only a hefty discount. If someone only bought for the savings, rather than the contents? They need to have a serious word with themself.
Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Albertorius wrote: Yeah, you can call it however you like, but the end result is the same as always: less for more.
But it isn't; the current command edition bears a great deal of similarity to starters of the past. Indomitus is the box that is different with having way more miniatures, a full hardback rulebook, and no terrain.
If someone wants the same starter set GW has historically offered for Warhammer it is right there on the store in non-limited production. One can of course criticize the price/value, but the fact remains that in terms of product given Command Edition is in line with older editions bar 8th.
It isn't that the main starter has gone to limited, it is that we are getting an upsized launch box providing more than the normal starter ON TOP of what we normally got. And two smaller versions that are non-limited. Going back to what we used to have wouldn't mean Indomitus as non-limited, it would mean the Command Edition as the only offering and no Indomitus at all.
And to re-emphasize before I get inevitably called a GW shill anyways; go look at the previous starters and what they had, then compare to the current ones and see which is the most similar.
I'm sorry but I disagree. Terrain in starter boxes was dropped for Assault on Black Reach for 40k in 5th and for Battle for Skull Past for Fantasy in 6th. Assault on Black Reach, Dark Vengeance for 6th and 7th, Dark Imperium for 8th, Battle for Skull Pass for 6th and 7th, Isle of Blood for 8th. Indomitus was just the same as older starter boxes that came with a good amount of options and units, with a couple of characters for each side. This new format of Starter (Command edition or whatever) is going back to 4th and older starter boxes that had less value, less variety and less models.
It probably feels less because of the extra terrain that is displacing figures. With how overpriced GW terrain tends to get the Command Edition is probably in GW's eye a huge bargain. Less so for us who have no interest in GW terrain.
To be honest I'd love to get actual figures instead of terrain.
I'm sorry but I disagree. Terrain in starter boxes was dropped for Assault on Black Reach for 40k in 5th and for Battle for Skull Past for Fantasy in 6th. Assault on Black Reach, Dark Vengeance for 6th and 7th, Dark Imperium for 8th, Battle for Skull Pass for 6th and 7th, Isle of Blood for 8th. Indomitus was just the same as older starter boxes that came with a good amount of options and units, with a couple of characters for each side. This new format of Starter (Command edition or whatever) is going back to 4th and older starter boxes that had less value, less variety and less models.
You mean afterAOBR+BFSP right?
Because both of those had scenery.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eldarsif wrote: It probably feels less because of the extra terrain that is displacing figures. With how overpriced GW terrain tends to get the Command Edition is probably in GW's eye a huge bargain. Less so for us who have no interest in GW terrain.
To be honest I'd love to get actual figures instead of terrain.
It's funny you say this because the Command Edition is, in GW's eyes, the "true" starter set intended for new players.
Albertorius wrote: Yeah, you can call it however you like, but the end result is the same as always: less for more.
But it isn't; the current command edition bears a great deal of similarity to starters of the past. Indomitus is the box that is different with having way more miniatures, a full hardback rulebook, and no terrain.
If someone wants the same starter set GW has historically offered for Warhammer it is right there on the store in non-limited production. One can of course criticize the price/value, but the fact remains that in terms of product given Command Edition is in line with older editions bar 8th.
It isn't that the main starter has gone to limited, it is that we are getting an upsized launch box providing more than the normal starter ON TOP of what we normally got. And two smaller versions that are non-limited. Going back to what we used to have wouldn't mean Indomitus as non-limited, it would mean the Command Edition as the only offering and no Indomitus at all.
And to re-emphasize before I get inevitably called a GW shill anyways; go look at the previous starters and what they had, then compare to the current ones and see which is the most similar.
As I said, you can call it however you want.
Calling reality something else does not affect it being real, so I suppose you are correct. It is a strange way of putting it though, especially since your sentiment of 'less for more' is non-sequitor since the comparison was never valid in the first place. It comes across like you don't understand what the starters are or have been.
Eldarsif wrote: It probably feels less because of the extra terrain that is displacing figures. With how overpriced GW terrain tends to get the Command Edition is probably in GW's eye a huge bargain. Less so for us who have no interest in GW terrain.
To be honest I'd love to get actual figures instead of terrain.
Agree. Most of my current armies started by buying one of those boxes and parting it with a friend. And just having smaller forces for running demos or playing with friends was also great. I'm sorry but the "pretty expensive" Command edition gives you... 1 marine captain, 5 intercessors and 3 bikes. That can't compare with a high elven prince on gryphon, one arch mague, 10 sea guards, 10 blademasters, and 5 horse archers. Or 1 chaos lord, 1 chaos aspiring champion, 20 cultists, 1 hellbrute, and 6 chosen.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think we are actually on the same page here; Indomitus/Dominion are starter sets regardless of what they are labeled as, and good sets at that.
The point of criticism is that the smaller, non-limited starters are NOT good sets and that sucks (not saying I agree/disagree, just pointing it out). There is just confusion as to what that criticism is being leveled at.
They are missing stuff starter sets always have.
They aren't starter sets. They don't have all the stuff starter sets have. Aos3 will have 3 starter sets. This is not one.
40k crowe showed last year serious lack of reading comprehension. Guess aos isn't any better
You can parrot GW's line all you want, they have the same kind of content (rulebook, two small armies) as every previous starter set going back to Warhammer 40k 3rd edition and WHFB 6th edition. Except now, after 25 years or so, GW decided they want more money, so they're going to sell fewer models with less of a discount in their new "starter" joke boxes as the real starter box is made limited edition FOMO bait. Dominion will have the same type of content as every previous AOS starter set, except it will be limited time only and will be replaced with pathetically overpriced "starters" in a month. Sorry, but from consumer point of view, this is a bad move, you'd have to be insane to defend it.
I think maybe we can move on from the starter set/limited edition starter discussion? It's not really going to go anywhere other than griping about it and we have every chance of getting more than enough of that during the release weeks.
ik0ner wrote: Less lotr orcs, I assume people mean the orcs from the movies and subsequent GW game - which all looked interesting, more like 80s GW orcs, which is a good thing. Best orcs GW has produced in a very long time. Definitively going to pre-order this even though its a shame about the game.
Overread wrote: I think maybe we can move on from the starter set/limited edition starter discussion? It's not really going to go anywhere other than griping about it and we have every chance of getting more than enough of that during the release weeks.
It's directly related to GW's choices regarding how they release starter sets and these "non" starter sets.
Something I haven't mention is that I am a bit worried that this new orcs are too kunnin' for their own good.
They are basically AoS equivalent to Deathskulls, so yeah, one think is to have smar'er boyz and other is to start to have an entire faction of them to start to shine for their brains far more than their brawnz.
I do welcome the new heavy weapons, and I'd like to see the other Orruks with crude catapults and battering rams, but leave the more precise weapons and stratagems, well, to order.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
CMLR wrote: Something I haven't mention is that I am a bit worried that this new orcs are too kunnin' for their own good.
They are basically AoS equivalent to Deathskulls, so yeah, one think is to have smar'er boyz and other is to start to have an entire faction of them to start to shine for their brains far more than their brawnz.
I do welcome the new heavy weapons, and I'd like to see the other Orruks with crude catapults and battering rams, but leave the more precise weapons and stratagems, well, to order.
Orcs can be more than just mindless automatons that exist solely to be slaughtered by everyone else because "OrKs iZ BaD." I really like the move to Orks being able to do things like strategize and plan.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Not to go off topic but they need to bring in the Vampire Coast from TWW2.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Not to go off topic but they need to bring in the Vampire Coast from TWW2.
You mean from the earlier white dwarf article that they then co-opted and expanded into what is shown in Warhammer 2
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Not to go off topic but they need to bring in the Vampire Coast from TWW2.
They need to make a separate game for the meme armies like vampire coast, chorfs and fimir and maybe even tomb kingz so the rest of the world can move on.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Not to go off topic but they need to bring in the Vampire Coast from TWW2.
They need to make a separate game for the meme armies like vampire coast, chorfs and fimir and maybe even tomb kingz so the rest of the world can move on.
Yeah. They could call it Warhammer: The Old World or something equally wild.
Wish they'd do something like that.
NinthMusketeer wrote: They all but confirmed on stream that Chaos dwarfs are coming in third.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Not to go off topic but they need to bring in the Vampire Coast from TWW2.
They need to make a separate game for the meme armies like vampire coast, chorfs and fimir and maybe even tomb kingz so the rest of the world can move on.
That’s kinda a broad definition of meme army isn’t it? Between one that never existed except as a label on a map and a paragraph of text, one that was a complete, legit army but got dropped because office politics suck, and one that had a current army list and in-production miniatures until a month or two ago.
Sounds more like “things I don’t want to happen because I’m not invested in them” than “meme” to me…
Eldarsif wrote: It probably feels less because of the extra terrain that is displacing figures. With how overpriced GW terrain tends to get the Command Edition is probably in GW's eye a huge bargain. Less so for us who have no interest in GW terrain.
To be honest I'd love to get actual figures instead of terrain.
Agree. Most of my current armies started by buying one of those boxes and parting it with a friend. And just having smaller forces for running demos or playing with friends was also great. I'm sorry but the "pretty expensive" Command edition gives you... 1 marine captain, 5 intercessors and 3 bikes. That can't compare with a high elven prince on gryphon, one arch mague, 10 sea guards, 10 blademasters, and 5 horse archers. Or 1 chaos lord, 1 chaos aspiring champion, 20 cultists, 1 hellbrute, and 6 chosen.
Damn I miss Island of Blood. Such a fantastic set with fantastic sculptures.
Ahtman wrote: I should have saved it but someone photoshopped one of the goblins mounted onto the crab mini and now the set seems hollow without crab cavalry.
I would buy so many crab cavalry if they had them.
It would need to be something like Mud Crab Cavalry, the Idoneth Crab is very much an ocean dweller.
Not to go off topic but they need to bring in the Vampire Coast from TWW2.
I was really hoping that Luther would show up with a snazzy model but, it doesn't look like that's in the cards.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NinthMusketeer wrote: They all but confirmed on stream that Chaos dwarfs are coming in third.
*soothing voice*
My wallet is telling me nooooo, but my body, my body is telling me YES!
ImAGeek wrote: The only thing that makes the ‘launch boxes’ different to starter sets is the lack of dice. Indomitus and Dominion should have just been the starter sets for the games, with one of the smaller ones to make a cheaper entry.
I have to agree that would be the Model for new edition starters GW always used. I mean everyone wants different things, I guess, but from where I stand I would buy this box later down the road of this edition, like I did with the others. You know enjoy a good start for 2 factions and then expand on that with multipart and convos etc On my own time enjoying the hobby.
You can argue all you want but If you don't care to pay for scenery instead of minis on the new starters and you don't care for the limited drama... you just don't bother to get any of it.
The prices have been increasing rapidly and this is also a way of doing so. I would not be surprised in a few years they find a way of milking it even further... I mean look of how many books you need to buy to play marines and etc.
The limited edition trend is stronger now than ever... Nurgle collectors box sets came and went with no mention of limited, Indomitus came and would be gone if people did not rage, Cursed city came and well lets not even spend more time on this Fiasco...
If someone keeps saying thats what other companies do or GW is here to make money... well no wonder GW gives you cursed city.
I think that AoS is not as famous as is 40k and marines and they keep saying they did loads of boxes for this edition so this may not be that limited at all.
I would say sorry for of topic but cant, this is totally on topic of a release of a limited box that is what starters used to be..
judgedoug wrote: These new models look like an insane reimagining of Nick Lund as filtered through Gary Chalk and I love 'em.
Yeah, they're all kinds of retro and modern fantasy at once - to me, they have a "LoTR as in the current 'Shadow of ...' video games, but then reimagined by the folks who made the new Dark Crystal series" zany horror vibe that works really really well for me, much more than the first AoS orruks and the various 40k Ork iterations since, IDK, 2nd Ed.
Yeah, I've heard a lot of parroting about them looking like LOTR orcs, and I had assumed people were talking about the Weta designs from the films, which is kinda confusing as they look nothing like them, other than perhaps the Fimbul/Narzug style hunter orcs from AUJ/DOS. But now that you've made the comparison to the Shadow of Mordor/War style, I can definitely see it, especially with the patchwork armor/fetishes thing. The helms and shields are straight up Blanche/Miller/Chalk 1980's artwork. Combine that with the background that they've been hiding in swamps and bogs and whatnot for however long, growing leaner than normal AOS orruks over time as evolution/adaptation took over, and it's a perfect way to circle back to the earlier Lund/Goodwin era orcs.
I have to say, in a time when every plastics manufacturer is trying to capture Angus McBride's orcs (there's like, what, three different companies going for this aesthetic now?), to have GW go back to their roots and create an entirely new faction based on their best 80's designs is really refreshing. I thought GW had stagnated with the Kev Adams/Brian Nelson style over the last 30 years, with no chance of them being updated as their primary orc aesthetic had been set.
Not Online!!! wrote: AoS chaos dwarfs will either look like bad or really good.... i am unsure.
If they take from Legion of Azgorth I think they could look phenomenal, but if they go full Reddit memelord and make an army of oversized hats, they could look like a joke. Hopefully it's the former.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I would like a mix of both. To me Warhammer just isn't Warhammer without absurd headwear on the fantasy side.
I figure it'll be both - there's no way they'll avoid doing "Wow, just amazing, look at those giant hats, Eddie! Just like Classic Warhammer(tm)!" but I hope they do it in such a way that you can point to them and go 'haha giant hat meme' but feel a good bit more grounded and in keeping with a more Azgorth-esq aesthetic. I expected Kruelboys to be a range of lolsowhacky nonsense and they turned out very gritty and surprisingly pleasing to my tastes, so I'll be a bit optimistic.
Give the heroes and elite units hats of various elaborate sizes, and keep the battleline units with the LoA style full plate, that would be perfect. And stick to the massive Bull Centaurs like Legions had, as they were amazing!
warl0rdb0b wrote: Give the heroes and elite units hats of various elaborate sizes, and keep the battleline units with the LoA style full plate, that would be perfect. And stick to the massive Bull Centaurs like Legions had, as they were amazing!
Actually I think "medium" basic infantry with medium sized hats, with the more Azhorg heavy plate and helmets for heavy infantry. Hats for the wizards and heroes, and FW style Bull Centaurs and remaking the Executioner in Plastic, and it could be a perfect mix of both aesthetics.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
For the longest time I felt like GW would take the worst units from each faction and put them in a start collecting box set to get them out there. Generally I stay away from the box sets unless it has good chaff units from an army I need.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
For the longest time I felt like GW would take the worst units from each faction and put them in a start collecting box set to get them out there. Generally I stay away from the box sets unless it has good chaff units from an army I need.
And then there's AdMech, for which both version of the Start Collecting boxes were very good.
Uriels_Flame wrote: Better to have lobsters on your piano, than crabs on your organ...
Here's to 3 editions in 6 years!
AoS 1st edition doesn't count.....
That's hardly a fair thing to say. Much of current 40k and AoS is defined by GW's attitude in the creation of 1st ed and the mad scramble to fix it when it failed.
There's no guarantee that they'd be raking in the profits like they do now if it hadn't been for that enlightening experience that their customers don't actually go along with everything they do coupled with the equally enlightening experience of how little it actually takes to satisfy people.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I would like a mix of both. To me Warhammer just isn't Warhammer without absurd headwear on the fantasy side.
I figure it'll be both - there's no way they'll avoid doing "Wow, just amazing, look at those giant hats, Eddie! Just like Classic Warhammer(tm)!" but I hope they do it in such a way that you can point to them and go 'haha giant hat meme' but feel a good bit more grounded and in keeping with a more Azgorth-esq aesthetic. I expected Kruelboys to be a range of lolsowhacky nonsense and they turned out very gritty and surprisingly pleasing to my tastes, so I'll be a bit optimistic.
If GW wanted to make fans of old and new Chaos Dwarfs happy they could just have both hat varieties on the sprue and let people pick their favorite.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
In that same vein, can it really be called "artificial scarcity" at this point?
We've known for years at this point that the GW webstore for the region has its own stock allocation.
We know that the allocation to GW stores is separate from that webstore allocation. We know that when people order directly via the in-store terminals, it gets pulled from the webstore's allocation rather than the store's allocation.
We also know that independent shops get their order info, then have to place an order for the number of sets they expect to sell...and they seemingly don't do it based upon actually gauging their customers.
We know, additionally, that this results in stuff like "OMG the webstore sold out in .3 seconds!!11!!" and also "Three months later, I can still get X/Y/Z at my LGS! they've got bunches of them!".
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
To be honest, the Indomitus / Dominion box is not anything different than the army bundles you get only on december.
They're both bundles limited to as long as stock is available. And it's always a bargain, indeed. That's the point. Frustrating as well when I miss it because I don't have the money for everything I'd like to take at that time of the year.
Are they artificial ? Well, yes. Like all sales in the world at very specific times.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
In that same vein, can it really be called "artificial scarcity" at this point?
...yes?
GW doesn't have a lack of resources. GW's factory isn't controlled by another entity. GW controls the production amounts, the number of units, AND the duration they keep these sets in production. They could, in fact, keep making more and keep stocking them until demand runs out. Its a deliberate choice on their part. They're deliberating using under-production to push sales (either to customers or so the inventory is in indie shops and not with them). It is 100% artificial scarcity, because any random day between now and X years in the future when these molds are worn out, they can put the same box set together and ship it out to anyone who wants to buy it.
Now maybe it'll be in a white or brown unmarked box than a fancy red one, and have a standard cover on the rulebook rather than their current limited edition 'fancy' covers (ie, exactly the same but with less text and logos), but GW can sell these boxes at any time. They don't need to sell the contents of Indomitus (or Dominion, since they'll obviously do the same) at $500 separately (upwards $600 if you buy the individual boxes for skorpekhs, warriors, and various marines rather than starter sets). Its a deliberate choice on their part. The scarcity depends on nothing BUT their choice. So yeah, artificial.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
Right, so we just pretend it is economically viable for GW to produce enough box sets that everyone gets one, but that there also isn't a massive glut and make it so that individual boxes sell terribly afterwards.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
In that same vein, can it really be called "artificial scarcity" at this point?
...yes?
GW doesn't have a lack of resources. GW's factory isn't controlled by another entity. GW controls the production amounts, the number of units, AND the duration they keep these sets in production. They could, in fact, keep making more and keep stocking them until demand runs out. Its a deliberate choice on their part. They're deliberating using under-production to push sales (either to customers or so the inventory is in indie shops and not with them). It is 100% artificial scarcity, because any random day between now and X years in the future when these molds are worn out, they can put the same box set together and ship it out to anyone who wants to buy it.
Now maybe it'll be in a white or brown unmarked box than a fancy red one, and have a standard cover on the rulebook rather than their current limited edition 'fancy' covers (ie, exactly the same but with less text and logos), but GW can sell these boxes at any time. They don't need to sell the contents of Indomitus (or Dominion, since they'll obviously do the same) at $500 separately (upwards $600 if you buy the individual boxes for skorpekhs, warriors, and various marines rather than starter sets). Its a deliberate choice on their part. The scarcity depends on nothing BUT their choice. So yeah, artificial.
No - they're deliberately under producing so that they don't make hundreds or thousands more than they need to that end up rotting on a shelf in some obscure corner.
"Just print on demand" - they have other releases to get to and I will guarantee those machines are full up.
ik0ner wrote: Less lotr orcs, I assume people mean the orcs from the movies and subsequent GW game - which all looked interesting, more like 80s GW orcs, which is a good thing. Best orcs GW has produced in a very long time. Definitively going to pre-order this even though its a shame about the game.
Shame about the game? What do you mean?
I mean that the box would have higher value for me if I found the ruleset included in it to be fun.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, missing out on the savings. I buy things based on value, if it's cheaper and I like it I'm more likely to buy it than if it's overpriced and I like it, I think that's pretty normal.
That's what they're trying to play on, the mentality of missing out on a bargain. It's a pretty commonly used, and effective, method of marketing.
I think it's also a bit scummy, but it's not illegal or anything so they can work away.
Ok. Cancel all box sets. Just do individual releases.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
Right, so we just pretend it is economically viable for GW to produce enough box sets that everyone gets one, but that there also isn't a massive glut and make it so that individual boxes sell terribly afterwards.
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
In that same vein, can it really be called "artificial scarcity" at this point?
...yes?
GW doesn't have a lack of resources. GW's factory isn't controlled by another entity. GW controls the production amounts, the number of units, AND the duration they keep these sets in production. They could, in fact, keep making more and keep stocking them until demand runs out. Its a deliberate choice on their part. They're deliberating using under-production to push sales (either to customers or so the inventory is in indie shops and not with them). It is 100% artificial scarcity, because any random day between now and X years in the future when these molds are worn out, they can put the same box set together and ship it out to anyone who wants to buy it.
Now maybe it'll be in a white or brown unmarked box than a fancy red one, and have a standard cover on the rulebook rather than their current limited edition 'fancy' covers (ie, exactly the same but with less text and logos), but GW can sell these boxes at any time. They don't need to sell the contents of Indomitus (or Dominion, since they'll obviously do the same) at $500 separately (upwards $600 if you buy the individual boxes for skorpekhs, warriors, and various marines rather than starter sets). Its a deliberate choice on their part. The scarcity depends on nothing BUT their choice. So yeah, artificial.
No - they're deliberately under producing so that they don't make hundreds or thousands more than they need to that end up rotting on a shelf in some obscure corner.
"Just print on demand" - they have other releases to get to and I will guarantee those machines are full up.
So i suppose it's more viable to make hundreds or thousands less than they need? Even if plastic models are laughably cheap to make once they get the molds?
You're right, there can be no middle ground between cancelling all boxed sets and artificial scarcity. It's a good thing people only ever argue in good faith on Dakkadakka.
In that same vein, can it really be called "artificial scarcity" at this point?
...yes?
GW doesn't have a lack of resources. GW's factory isn't controlled by another entity. GW controls the production amounts, the number of units, AND the duration they keep these sets in production. They could, in fact, keep making more and keep stocking them until demand runs out. Its a deliberate choice on their part. They're deliberating using under-production to push sales (either to customers or so the inventory is in indie shops and not with them). It is 100% artificial scarcity, because any random day between now and X years in the future when these molds are worn out, they can put the same box set together and ship it out to anyone who wants to buy it.
Now maybe it'll be in a white or brown unmarked box than a fancy red one, and have a standard cover on the rulebook rather than their current limited edition 'fancy' covers (ie, exactly the same but with less text and logos), but GW can sell these boxes at any time. They don't need to sell the contents of Indomitus (or Dominion, since they'll obviously do the same) at $500 separately (upwards $600 if you buy the individual boxes for skorpekhs, warriors, and various marines rather than starter sets). Its a deliberate choice on their part. The scarcity depends on nothing BUT their choice. So yeah, artificial.
No - they're deliberately under producing so that they don't make hundreds or thousands more than they need to that end up rotting on a shelf in some obscure corner.
"Just print on demand" - they have other releases to get to and I will guarantee those machines are full up.
Again with the hyperbole. They don't have to make 'thousands' more than they need.
Companies, including GW, deal with stock issues all the time. If stuff sells out, you make a smaller second wave. And then maybe a smaller third wave after that if it also sells, adjusting up/down to the specifics of sales demand. This is basic business, not some mythical and impossible to divine mystery. Alternately, you keep things in lowkey production if its a continual demand.
Which -gasp- is what they will be doing anyway as these sprues will be part of the starter sets. And like indomitus, they'll bring the character/specialty unit sprues out at a massive price jump and keep around as a long-term fixture. These kits will already be PART of what keeps their machines 'full up.' As I said, they could very easily recreate the indomitus boxes tomorrow if they felt like it. But 250% to 300% profit for the _exact same sprues_ sounds better to them, so they don't.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: So i suppose it's more viable to make hundreds or thousands less than they need? Even if plastic models are laughably cheap to make once they get the molds?
That ignores so much of what it takes to run a business.
Should we just be landfilling plastic so people don't get upset that they didn't get a discount?
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: So i suppose it's more viable to make hundreds or thousands less than they need? Even if plastic models are laughably cheap to make once they get the molds?
That ignores so much of what it takes to run a business.
Should we just be landfilling plastic so people don't get upset that they didn't get a discount?
How about just keep it like it always was, run it with... no dramas. But nooooo. You want to buy a traditional starter you need to do this go there at certain time in the universe do a backflip refresh 1000times and...
smile and be happy how privileged you are to be able to buy our things.
Its ok they are biased towards the man dollies they produce...but clients?
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: So i suppose it's more viable to make hundreds or thousands less than they need? Even if plastic models are laughably cheap to make once they get the molds?
That ignores so much of what it takes to run a business.
Should we just be landfilling plastic so people don't get upset that they didn't get a discount?
So GW could keep this kind of boxes in productions for all of AoS second edition and 8th with Souls Wars and Dark Imperium but NOW they cannot?
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: So i suppose it's more viable to make hundreds or thousands less than they need? Even if plastic models are laughably cheap to make once they get the molds?
That ignores so much of what it takes to run a business.
Should we just be landfilling plastic so people don't get upset that they didn't get a discount?
Y'know, you don't have to try to defend everything Daddy Gw does...
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: So i suppose it's more viable to make hundreds or thousands less than they need? Even if plastic models are laughably cheap to make once they get the molds?
That ignores so much of what it takes to run a business.
Should we just be landfilling plastic so people don't get upset that they didn't get a discount?
Well they SOMEHOW kept Soul Wars in production for a good three years... and i don't see how Soul Wars is any diffrent from this box.
So GW could keep this kind of boxes in productions for all of AoS second edition and 8th with Souls Wars and Dark Imperium but NOW they cannot?
Stop defending the indefensible, dude.
There is literally no way to tell if they "kept making them" or "made more than they could sell". They built a whole other factory, because they couldn't make stuff fast enough. How many specialist games are floating around now as opposed to then?
So GW could keep this kind of boxes in productions for all of AoS second edition and 8th with Souls Wars and Dark Imperium but NOW they cannot?
Stop defending the indefensible, dude.
There is literally no way to tell if they "kept making them" or "made more than they could sell". They built a whole other factory, because they couldn't make stuff fast enough. How many specialist games are floating around now as opposed to then?
Ah yes, because three resin guns for Titanicus every other months is clearly pushing GW' supply lines to the brink of collapse.
So GW could keep this kind of boxes in productions for all of AoS second edition and 8th with Souls Wars and Dark Imperium but NOW they cannot?
Stop defending the indefensible, dude.
There is literally no way to tell if they "kept making them" or "made more than they could sell". They built a whole other factory, because they couldn't make stuff fast enough. How many specialist games are floating around now as opposed to then?
Remember the indomitus set that they "couldn't keep in production"? Most of it is now available at massive markup as two "direct only" sets. So they ARE producing it, just charging you extra for it.
So GW could keep this kind of boxes in productions for all of AoS second edition and 8th with Souls Wars and Dark Imperium but NOW they cannot?
Stop defending the indefensible, dude.
There is literally no way to tell if they "kept making them" or "made more than they could sell". They built a whole other factory, because they couldn't make stuff fast enough. How many specialist games are floating around now as opposed to then?
Remember the indomitus set that they "couldn't keep in production"? Most of it is now available at massive markup as two "direct only" sets. So they ARE producing it, just charging you extra for it.
No no. It's all perfectly simple, see: GW produced so many Indomitus sprues that they completely filled their warehouse, meaning that they had to build a new one. And now they're using Imperium as a way of shifting those extra sprues via Hachette rather than dumping them all in landfill.
Really, GW are heroes here, and we should all praise them.
Cronch wrote: Remember the indomitus set that they "couldn't keep in production"? Most of it is now available at massive markup as two "direct only" sets. So they ARE producing it, just charging you extra for it.
How much extra exactly? The one that costs $5 more than a box of warriors and comes with a Warden, Captain, and Assault Intercessors? The ones designed for bringing new people into the hobby?
To that point there are plenty of opportunities to get discounted sets and if you miss this there will certainly by a SC that will come along soon. Likely this Christmas.
Cronch wrote: Remember the indomitus set that they "couldn't keep in production"? Most of it is now available at massive markup as two "direct only" sets. So they ARE producing it, just charging you extra for it.
How much extra exactly? The one that costs $5 more than a box of warriors and comes with a Warden, Captain, and Assault Intercessors? The ones designed for bringing new people into the hobby?
To that point there are plenty of opportunities to get discounted sets and if you miss this there will certainly by a SC that will come along soon. Likely this Christmas.
The Royal Court and the Honoured of the Chapter. Both of which have absolutely insane prices.
.
Cronch wrote: Remember the indomitus set that they "couldn't keep in production"? Most of it is now available at massive markup as two "direct only" sets. So they ARE producing it, just charging you extra for it.
How much extra exactly? The one that costs $5 more than a box of warriors and comes with a Warden, Captain, and Assault Intercessors? The ones designed for bringing new people into the hobby?
To that point there are plenty of opportunities to get discounted sets and if you miss this there will certainly by a SC that will come along soon. Likely this Christmas.
It's fine that they do this but it is preying on FOMO and encouraging people to buy before they think about it too much. Which is a legitimate, legal business tactic.
I think it's a bit scummy is all, it's really not a big deal.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: The Royal Court and the Honoured of the Chapter. Both of which have absolutely insane prices.
.
Oh you mean the weird filler bundles of stuff that doesn't have a separated box yet? I don't know why someone would buy that. Especially when that stuff is $50 or less on eBay.
But I get your point. If someone needed some specific models and had no idea stuff was on eBay they'd be hard pressed to buy that. The reason it is that price is because they're charging likely what the individual retail would be for a niche run of the moulds.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: The Royal Court and the Honoured of the Chapter. Both of which have absolutely insane prices.
.
Oh you mean the weird filler bundles of stuff that doesn't have a separated box yet? I don't know why someone would buy that. Especially when that stuff is $50 or less on eBay.
But I get your point. If someone needed some specific models and had no idea stuff was on eBay they'd be hard pressed to buy that. The reason it is that price is because they're charging likely what the individual retail would be for a niche run of the moulds.
You keep moving to goalposts to not admit that GW has changed how they make "starter sets" since 9th. And changed it for the worst, for us customers, because in 8th we had both Dark Imperium and 3 levels of "starters" for cheaper.
Da Boss wrote: It's fine that they do this but it is preying on FOMO and encouraging people to buy before they think about it too much. Which is a legitimate, legal business tactic.
I think it's a bit scummy is all, it's really not a big deal.
Legal for sure, and yes their company their rules.
Indomitus, cursed city and lets see if this one... All starters that are labeled something else by GW and sold in bits at a fat margin later on. I think people need to get used to that now... I would rather see people complain massively like they did in indomitus.
Just going to say that this is clearly a new path GW came up with and indomitus was first the jab, but its clear this is going to be the way forward.
I think the prices in the last couple years just got unreasonable and with the examples displayed above is actually a slap in the face.
The period of grace after Kirby is gone with these last events eroding all the good faith relationship built over the years.
Miniatures will get bigger, more heroes more monsters at HUGE prices per mini, not because of rules but because they rather sell one infantry sized mini, call it a hero and charge £25 for it. Or make huge ridiculous kits call it god of something and charge £100.
Its all about creating the false sense of importance of a mini or Box and charge ridiculous prices... the question is are you happy with that? If so then good for you. ( not at you Da boss its generally speaking )
Galas wrote: You keep moving to goalposts to not admit that GW has changed how they make "starter sets" since 9th. And changed it for the worst, for us customers, because in 8th we had both Dark Imperium and 3 levels of "starters" for cheaper.
They have three levels of starters now and they appear to be nearly as cheap as Indomitus. The "off cuts" from the mold are the expensive parts.
Galas wrote: You keep moving to goalposts to not admit that GW has changed how they make "starter sets" since 9th. And changed it for the worst, for us customers, because in 8th we had both Dark Imperium and 3 levels of "starters" for cheaper.
They have three levels of starters now and they appear to be nearly as cheap as Indomitus. The "off cuts" from the mold are the expensive parts.
Imo, there was a huge, huge difference in how much the three split off starter sets cost from Dark Imperium and the ones from Indomitus. Though, it's hard to directly compare them. Dark Imperium had unique sculpts that were then reused in the three sets. Indomitus was just a launch box, and then the majority of those models were released separately. The Plague marines from DI were only in DI and the 3 sets; the separate kit was more versatile but still not the same models. The necrons you get from the Indomitus three starter sets are directly sold separately. The outriders, the marines, etc are all standalone kits that use the same models. I can't recall if there are any exclusives to the Indomitus starter set (by that, I mean models that are only available in that set OR the crazy overpriced "bundles" they released later)
Galas wrote: You keep moving to goalposts to not admit that GW has changed how they make "starter sets" since 9th. And changed it for the worst, for us customers, because in 8th we had both Dark Imperium and 3 levels of "starters" for cheaper.
They have three levels of starters now and they appear to be nearly as cheap as Indomitus. The "off cuts" from the mold are the expensive parts.
They aren't 'off cuts.' They're full sprues. A single sprue each, in fact:
Note the use of the words 'sprue' and 'stock' as part of GW's name for images. These are punched out of their machines as-is, like any other kit.
As for your starter comparison... you'd need Elite (99) Recruit (50) and Rulebook (65) and... we're already $15 past the price of indomitus. Then the above two sprues are another $250.
So, no, not anywhere near as cheap, unless you're using bizarro-math we're getting less for more money is somehow a boon for the customer.
Strangely they produce all these things, and they could easily put them in a shipping box and start selling again 'Indomitus' at any time. The only reason they don't is artificial scarcity
And clearly the plan is to do the same again for AoS.
Thing is, the Dominion box isn't the starter. It's a special box for launching 3rd edition. Just like you have the special army bundles in december every year.
And it's always limited because well...it's a bundle. It's a sale. If it was this price all the time, that means GW sells more for less all the time. And that's what not how they make profit.
All sales are on the same principle, from every company in the world.
And yes, shocking, the separate parts from the Indomitus bundle box are more expensive once available. That's litterally all their single boxes in comparison to the corresponding army bundle boxes in december. Which is why it's a sale.
Scummy ? Well, yes...but all trade is scummy, mind you. It's all based on how much value the buyer gives to what the seller wants to sell - and vice versa. It's never objective.
We understand what GW made Indomitus/Domionion to be. We don't need anyone to explain to us what GW is doing.
We also remember, because we have a memory span longer than 2 years, how this is a change in how they made things for the past... nearly 15 years. And in modern (And not that modern) GW way... its a change for the worse.
Galas wrote: We understand what GW made Indomitus/Domionion to be. We don't need anyone to explain to us what GW is doing.
We also remember, because we have a memory span longer than 2 years, how this is a change in how they made things for the past... nearly 15 years. And in modern (And not that modern) GW way... its a change for the worse.
Basically, yeah. I don't see the point (or benefits) of being fatalistic and resigned to price-gouging as an inevitability, while simultaneously normalizing and supporting it.
And no, selling something for a decent profit then flipping towards selling pieces for the same profit plus more than double the initial price is _not_ 'normal business behavior.' That isn't what a 'sale' is.
Daedalus81 is also (rather conveniently) ignoring Voss' point that they're still producing everything that was in the Indomitus box, so there's no reason why they couldn't make more of it. Kind of shoots his entire "thousands of boxes not selling" theory to pieces.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Daedalus81 is also (rather conveniently) ignoring Voss' point that they're still producing everything that was in the Indomitus box, so there's no reason why they couldn't make more of it. Kind of shoots his entire "thousands of boxes not selling" theory to pieces.
Yeah I think we all know that it is limited because the margins aren't as good and to hype it out as a 'launch exclusive' type product. While sucky, that is far from exclusive to GW and FAR from the most obnoxious example. At least this product actually IS a good deal, a really good one at that. And at the end of the day I would rather us be getting these limited launch boxes than being limited to the Command Edition-equivalent. I think 40k 8th and AoS 2nd are going to mark the best non-limited starters for a while as they got to be almost as big without the limited part.
Anyone else remember during AoS 1st edition when the limited White Dwarf model was literally just exclusive packaging on a generic slayer model that had been out for years?
Sarouan wrote: Thing is, the Dominion box isn't the starter. It's a special box for launching 3rd edition.
It takes special kind of blindness and goalpost shifting to not notice sPeCiAl BoX is totally identical to starters of 40K, AoS, and Fantasy from the last 15 if not 20 years and the only difference is the fact GW jacked price up and limited it to kill discount (that, funnily enough, was bringing new players into the game, as these starters are less useful to existing crowd) then called three small thrash boxes sTaRtErS. I wonder if they will call a single character mini with doubled price a sTaRtEr next edition and the same people will lap that up as well
But then again, it's not new, there were people praising (or at worst being neutral) price hikes and less and less VS boxes before, replacement of SC with trash patrol boxes, end of army boxes, so no wonder GW takes advantage of people begging to be fleeced...
I don't think anyone expects these FOMO boxes to last indefinitely, and most critics of the "Indomitus" business strategy would be satisfied if they simply didn't go out of stock within 15 minutes.
When the annual survey comes around at the end of the year, my main request will be some kind of VIP list, perhaps tied to a Warhammer+ subscription, that provides an opportunity for leisurely ordering of these time-limited deals. E.g. "Dear subscriber, we have a new TS vs. GK box going on sale next month – would you like to reserve one ahead of general availability? Please let us know within 48 hours."
I think a solution as simple as that would please 95% of the folks who are currently frustrated while letting GW keep its favorite new marketing technique – and also providing a reason to sign up beyond the cartoons!
It is frustrating to buy into the hype for something, take in all the content for weeks leading up to the launch, and then get shut out of the party because you couldn't reorient your Saturday afternoon around buying toy soldiers.
CMLR wrote: Something I haven't mention is that I am a bit worried that this new orcs are too kunnin' for their own good.
They are basically AoS equivalent to Deathskulls, so yeah, one think is to have smar'er boyz and other is to start to have an entire faction of them to start to shine for their brains far more than their brawnz.
I do welcome the new heavy weapons, and I'd like to see the other Orruks with crude catapults and battering rams, but leave the more precise weapons and stratagems, well, to order.
Orcs can be more than just mindless automatons that exist solely to be slaughtered by everyone else because "OrKs iZ BaD." I really like the move to Orks being able to do things like strategize and plan.
Again, I can get behind they going more strategical.
I can't get behind a whole faction of them going full on Tzeentch and being succesful.
CMLR wrote: Something I haven't mention is that I am a bit worried that this new orcs are too kunnin' for their own good.
They are basically AoS equivalent to Deathskulls, so yeah, one think is to have smar'er boyz and other is to start to have an entire faction of them to start to shine for their brains far more than their brawnz.
I do welcome the new heavy weapons, and I'd like to see the other Orruks with crude catapults and battering rams, but leave the more precise weapons and stratagems, well, to order.
Orcs can be more than just mindless automatons that exist solely to be slaughtered by everyone else because "OrKs iZ BaD." I really like the move to Orks being able to do things like strategize and plan.
Again, I can get behind they going more strategical.
I can't get behind a whole faction of them going full on Tzeentch and being succesful.
Is that... actually an issue?
What's presented is this:
"Kruleboyz are still brutal, but their cunning makes them more amenable to picking off foes at range and stabbing someone in the back instead of charging in headlong."
That seems on brand for a variety of orcs and goblins (and various subraces of both in the fantasy genre). They're not setting ploys 'underneath the underneath' or playing 5 dimensional chess in their heads. Or pulling the full Xanatos and every failure is actually a victory for the real scheme. They just favor ambushes, poisons, flanking maneuvers and problematic terrain. That's pretty classic gobbo behavior.
Sarouan wrote: Thing is, the Dominion box isn't the starter. It's a special box for launching 3rd edition.
It takes special kind of blindness and goalpost shifting to not notice sPeCiAl BoX is totally identical to starters of 40K, AoS, and Fantasy from the last 15 if not 20 years and the only difference is the fact GW jacked price up and limited it to kill discount (that, funnily enough, was bringing new players into the game, as these starters are less useful to existing crowd) then called three small thrash boxes sTaRtErS. I wonder if they will call a single character mini with doubled price a sTaRtEr next edition and the same people will lap that up as well
But then again, it's not new, there were people praising (or at worst being neutral) price hikes and less and less VS boxes before, replacement of SC with trash patrol boxes, end of army boxes, so no wonder GW takes advantage of people begging to be fleeced...
Hmm. I don't seem to remember any of my starter boxes coming with a limited edition rulebook (of course I may be getting forgetful in my old age ), so apparently there is at least one difference between a launch box and a starter box...
Sarouan wrote: Thing is, the Dominion box isn't the starter. It's a special box for launching 3rd edition.
It takes special kind of blindness and goalpost shifting to not notice sPeCiAl BoX is totally identical to starters of 40K, AoS, and Fantasy from the last 15 if not 20 years and the only difference is the fact GW jacked price up and limited it to kill discount (that, funnily enough, was bringing new players into the game, as these starters are less useful to existing crowd) then called three small thrash boxes sTaRtErS. I wonder if they will call a single character mini with doubled price a sTaRtEr next edition and the same people will lap that up as well
But then again, it's not new, there were people praising (or at worst being neutral) price hikes and less and less VS boxes before, replacement of SC with trash patrol boxes, end of army boxes, so no wonder GW takes advantage of people begging to be fleeced...
Hmm. I don't seem to remember any of my starter boxes coming with a limited edition rulebook (of course I may be getting forgetful in my old age ), so apparently there is at least one difference between a launch box and a starter box...
They changed the cover art on a print run of a rule book. Nothing else inside is changed. That's a cop out if I've ever seen one to call it limited
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: The Royal Court and the Honoured of the Chapter. Both of which have absolutely insane prices.
.
Oh you mean the weird filler bundles of stuff that doesn't have a separated box yet? I don't know why someone would buy that. Especially when that stuff is $50 or less on eBay.
But I get your point. If someone needed some specific models and had no idea stuff was on eBay they'd be hard pressed to buy that. The reason it is that price is because they're charging likely what the individual retail would be for a niche run of the moulds.
You keep moving to goalposts to not admit that GW has changed how they make "starter sets" since 9th. And changed it for the worst, for us customers, because in 8th we had both Dark Imperium and 3 levels of "starters" for cheaper.
Dark imperium had less savings though. And less stuff.
Sure they could keep indomitus. But then we would be back to dark imperium level of saving so rather than 160€ you pay more. If you take item with X price and Y discount and lower the Y of course X is going up.
Elite edition is your dark imperium.
What you are actually saying "I wish they never had produced indominatus and just gone for recruit/elite/command straight away". Ok guess it's fair nobody gets big discount box...but still not seeing why that would be so much better.
Sarouan wrote: Thing is, the Dominion box isn't the starter. It's a special box for launching 3rd edition.
It takes special kind of blindness and goalpost shifting to not notice sPeCiAl BoX is totally identical to starters of 40K, AoS, and Fantasy from the last 15 if not 20 years and the only difference is the fact GW jacked price up and limited it to kill discount (that, funnily enough, was bringing new players into the game, as these starters are less useful to existing crowd) then called three small thrash boxes sTaRtErS. I wonder if they will call a single character mini with doubled price a sTaRtEr next edition and the same people will lap that up as well
But then again, it's not new, there were people praising (or at worst being neutral) price hikes and less and less VS boxes before, replacement of SC with trash patrol boxes, end of army boxes, so no wonder GW takes advantage of people begging to be fleeced...
Hmm. I don't seem to remember any of my starter boxes coming with a limited edition rulebook (of course I may be getting forgetful in my old age ), so apparently there is at least one difference between a launch box and a starter box...
Ironically, Irbis is demonstrating a lack of hindsight since the non-limited Command starter bears the most resemblance to historical starters with the amount of miniatures, softback rules-only book, and terrain. Further, Sarouan isn't even denying that Dominion is a starter; he only said it wasn't the starter, that it is a special launch box. Which is entirely correct; it is not the (or rather "the main") starter entirely by virtue of GW making it limited. They decide what the main starter is, we may think it is a reduced value compared to those in the past but it does not change that category being defined by GW and not us. That may seem a bit pedantic until one considers that it isn't the most analogous to starters of the past anyways; the Command edition equivalent will be*.
*Obviously we haven't seen it yet but I feel it is quite a safe bet to say so. If it turns out I am wrong I will come back and admit it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: What you are actually saying "I wish they never had produced indominatus and just gone for recruit/elite/command straight away". Ok guess it's fair nobody gets big discount box...but still not seeing why that would be so much better.
This. That so many people feel it would be better if instead of Indomitus being limited it simply not exist at all baffles me.
Hmm. I don't seem to remember any of my starter boxes coming with a limited edition rulebook (of course I may be getting forgetful in my old age ), so apparently there is at least one difference between a launch box and a starter box...
you could take the A5 Rulebook that was only availabe with the starter as "limited edition" in a wider sense as it was not available outside the box
Ghaz wrote: Hmm. I don't seem to remember any of my starter boxes coming with a limited edition rulebook (of course I may be getting forgetful in my old age ), so apparently there is at least one difference between a launch box and a starter box...
A distinction without a difference. It was an alternate cover.
Ghaz wrote: Hmm. I don't seem to remember any of my starter boxes coming with a limited edition rulebook (of course I may be getting forgetful in my old age ), so apparently there is at least one difference between a launch box and a starter box...
A distinction without a difference. It was an alternate cover.
Alternate covers are litterally what are all their special edition / collector codexes they keep selling for a limited stock everytime they release a new codex.
So yes, it's a collector item.
GW made collector items / limited editions before, they were just not as many as nowadays. And the special bundles limited in stock always existed : they were just mostly released for anniversaries / end of the year like december to get rid of old stock.
Here, they make a special box for the launch of new edition...sure new thing, but that's the same principle.
Scummy ? Like I said, yes it is. Trade is based on scummy behaviour, mind you. Either you accept it or you moan about it pointlessly in the void. That's reality.
tneva82 wrote: What you are actually saying "I wish they never had produced indominatus and just gone for recruit/elite/command straight away". Ok guess it's fair nobody gets big discount box...but still not seeing why that would be so much better.
This. That so many people feel it would be better if instead of Indomitus being limited it simply not exist at all baffles me.
It's very ironic, in the end. When you think about it, when GW release army bundles in december, there's the same lil dance on this forum but since it comes every year, it has less impact.
This time, we had Indomitus happening before (well...if people with very short memories forget all the previous "special boxes" GW released in the years before as well, to be honest). So the most cynical of us like me were getting ready about the same thing for AoS. Now we know. Better to act appropriately.
As for myself...I was hyped for the new Stormcast Eternals but looking at the box, it doesn't appeal me that much. So I'll probably pass this opportunity. Is it a deal ? Well yes surely, but I would rather see the rest of the Stormcast Eternal range when they release the new battletome before buying the new miniatures and get stuck with the old ones anyway for way too long a time. Besides, it's really the vindictors that I like and I'm pretty sure the starters coming later will give me some for a price at the lower levels, if it's based like for 40k v9 (and something tells me it will be).
Like someone said before, people complaining here (and know GW haters, obviously) are mostly moaning for the principles, not really because they really want or intend to buy the box. And of course, moaning about it when it's not even on pre-order (thus no one still has the opportunity to have one) is very funny. How can you complain about availability when it's not even up in the webstore ? You don't even know if you'll manage to grab one or not, in the end. You just complain about the possibility you won't.
At least wait for the pre-order date and moan once it's definitively not available online. Then you will have the rights to complain.
tneva82 wrote: What you are actually saying "I wish they never had produced indominatus and just gone for recruit/elite/command straight away". Ok guess it's fair nobody gets big discount box...but still not seeing why that would be so much better.
This. That so many people feel it would be better if instead of Indomitus being limited it simply not exist at all baffles me.
That’s... not what people are saying? That’s what tneva is saying people are saying, but it isn’t. People would rather it not be limited, than it not exist.
Sarouan wrote: Alternate covers are litterally what are all their special edition / collector codexes they keep selling for a limited stock everytime they release a new codex.
So yes, it's a collector item.
But there's no practical difference, hence difference without a distinction.
Moreover, it changes nothing in regards to the argument that GW didn't need to make Indomitus limited (nor do they need to make Dominion limited) as everything that was in Indomitus is still in production* and on sale (other than a cover for a rulebook) and it's a fairly safe bet that the same will be true with Dominion.
*Except the actual physical box, Irbis, before you start another post with "wRoNg!!!!1".
Sarouan wrote: Alternate covers are litterally what are all their special edition / collector codexes they keep selling for a limited stock everytime they release a new codex.
So yes, it's a collector item.
But there's no practical difference, hence difference without a distinction.
So what, are you saying collector items are pointless to own ? Yes. Yes they are. Like all collector items, it's utterly pointless in the end.
It only has value because it's limited. That's the reality of this world. It's just for the point of having something different / more unique than the others (and somewhat bragging amongst you friends you have it).
Moreover, it changes nothing in regards to the argument that GW didn't need to make Indomitus limited (nor do they need to make Dominion limited) as everything that was in Indomitus is still in production* and on sale (other than a cover for a rulebook) and it's a fairly safe bet that the same will be true with Dominion.
Well, with that reasoning, you could also say GW doesn't need to sell army bundle boxes in december or Start Collecting boxes at all - 'cause in the end, it always depreciates the price of their singular boxes.
Indomitus / Dominion work because it's limited. You see what happens when GW sells way too interesting bundles : the singular boxes sold at a higher price don't sell. And when the starter boxes came for 40k V9, all comparisons were immediately made with Indomitus in mind. Thing is...once Indomitus isn't available anymore, that comparison doesn't have any meanings, except for those who enjoy fuming with anger in their stomach all the time (that's not good for your health, BTW). Starter boxes with Indomitus still around ? Wouldn't have worked the same.
Of course GW has a reason to do that. It's all about sales and stock numbers.
Because you are on the other extreme end of the line doesn't make you any more right or better than the ones you say you despise. You still build your own narrative based on your beliefs only, you don't try to understand the causes or why people are "defending" them.
I am a GW fanboy, yes, and I don't like it when they do limited stuff, no. Especially when I can't have those I tried to have.
Still, that doesn't justify the mindless moaning and complaining without any bounds here...especially because people doing that here are complaining for the possibility they may not have it. And I'm being very generous here, assuming all the usual suspects are actually interested in having one, while I know most of them are just GW haters who enjoy spitting on GW's practices only.
That's something entirely different than being angry once Indomitus was released on pre-order and definitively gone in the same day, and coming here to let out your frustration because you weren't able to have one box.
It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
Thank you for confirming you just complain for the principle of it. "GW is evil, kill GW !"
"Made their offer worse"...for a box that is litterally a bundle. Just LOL.
And don't even say you care about the customers who actually want to have one, really. That's clearly not true.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
The offer isn't worse because Indomitus is limited. The offer is better because Indomitus is available at all. We never got an equivalent starter for any previous edition, even Dark Imperium didn't have nearly as much in it.
Indomitus =/= Baseline starter set. That's the Command edition. Seriously, go back and look at the history of 40k starters. If people were arguing that the Command edition is a worse starter I doubt there would be much pushback, but people are arguing that having a limited Indomitus + ongoing Command is worse than JUST having the Command edition. There's no GW white knighting required to see why that doesn't make sense.
And to reiterate since some individuals seem to have forgotten;
-Indomitus/Dominion are obviously starters and no one denying that.
-Everyone agrees that it would be better if Indomitus/Dominion were not limited.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
The offer isn't worse because Indomitus is limited. The offer is better because Indomitus is available at all. We never got an equivalent starter for any previous edition, even Dark Imperium didn't have nearly as much in it.
Indomitus =/= Baseline starter set. That's the Command edition. Seriously, go back and look at the history of 40k starters. If people were arguing that the Command edition is a worse starter I doubt there would be much pushback, but people are arguing that having a limited Indomitus + ongoing Command is worse than JUST having the Command edition. There's no GW white knighting required to see why that doesn't make sense.
And to reiterate since some individuals seem to have forgotten;
-Indomitus/Dominion are obviously starters and no one denying that.
-Everyone agrees that it would be better if Indomitus/Dominion were not limited.
Again, no one is saying having a limited Indomitus and ongoing command edition is worse than just having the command edition. People are saying that having a limited Indomitus is worse than having a non-limited indomitus.
And people are very much denying that Indomitus and Dominion are starters, that was pretty much how the argument started.
People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
They do a starter set for 40K. It comes with two forces, a set of terrain including a board, dice, rulers, rule book, literally everything a brand new player needs to play a game with a friend. That’s a starter set. It might not have many minis as Dark Imperium, but that didn’t come with a set of terrain. In my opinion it’s a better starter than Dark Imperium because of that.
A starter set should provide what a brand new novice player needs to get STARTED. Indomitable was a launch box aimed at existing players. It’s a way of launching the new edition with a bit of hype and excitement.
Why is it so difficult to understand the difference? It’s almost as if you’re doing it deliberately.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
Well the above quoted post from Cronch shows him clearly stating that Launch Box + Starter is worse than just Starter, so...
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
Well the above quoted post from Cronch shows him clearly stating that Launch Box + Starter is worse than just Starter, so...
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
I’m not seeing how Cronch’s posts are saying that.
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
Well the above quoted post from Cronch shows him clearly stating that Launch Box + Starter is worse than just Starter, so...
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
I’m not seeing how Cronch’s posts are saying that.
Eh, it isn't really worth arguing the point on exactly how we agree. Ultimately we all don't like that Indominions are limited and just disagree on the specific reasoning/extent of our dislike.
NinthMusketeer wrote: People are confusing Indomitus as being the analogy to previous starters, which it is not. It is a starter but not the starter, and we can be sure AoS 3rd will work the same way.
Who was denying it? I missed that.
As has been pointed out before, people are aware that it’s different with 9th/AoS 3, they aren’t confusing Indomitus with anything. The argument is simply that that shouldn’t be the case.
Well the above quoted post from Cronch shows him clearly stating that Launch Box + Starter is worse than just Starter, so...
Also, do you know where there were people denying that Indominions are starters? I haven't seen it at all, and I remain unconvinced that claim was made.
I’m not seeing how Cronch’s posts are saying that.
Eh, it isn't really worth arguing the point on exactly how we agree. Ultimately we all don't like that Indominions are limited and just disagree on the specific reasoning/extent of our dislike.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
What's so wrong with Dominion? 60+ models, a rule book, entry points for the two new armies before their Battletomes come out, Warscroll cards which I personally love to see. What was the downgrade?
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
What's so wrong with Dominion? 60+ models, a rule book, entry points for the two new armies before their Battletomes come out, Warscroll cards which I personally love to see. What was the downgrade?
Dominion isn’t the downgraded option he’s talking about.
limited availability so you need to get it at pre-order if you want to be sure to get one
the older boxes had less content but you could wait for reviews if you were not sure about the purchase
from a costumer point this is a downgrade, as "buy blind or pay more"
Sarouan wrote: So what, are you saying collector items are pointless to own ? Yes. Yes they are. Like all collector items, it's utterly pointless in the end.
It only has value because it's limited. That's the reality of this world. It's just for the point of having something different / more unique than the others (and somewhat bragging amongst you friends you have it).
Cool. Immaterial to the argument at hand.
Sarouan wrote: Well, with that reasoning, you could also say GW doesn't need to sell army bundle boxes in december or Start Collecting boxes at all - 'cause in the end, it always depreciates the price of their singular boxes.
That makes no sense.
Sarouan wrote: Indomitus / Dominion work because it's limited.
But not so limited that they sell out world wide within minutes. That engenders a bad reputation with the company doing so - why do you think the question was asked during Dominion's reveal, and GW said that it, too, would be limited, showing that they've learnt nothing (remember Cursed City? Or do you think that vanishing was for "sales and stock numbers" too?).
The point being made is that they don't need to be limited, or even as limited as they are. None of the miniatures are unique or limited edition. They're all still on sale. They could have kept selling Indomitus for weeks after it went up for pre-order, but instead they settled on a release scheme that saw it unavailable online before the end of the day it went up for pre-order, and that wasn't necessary. Nor was it smart.
Sarouan wrote: Starter boxes with Indomitus still around ? Wouldn't have worked the same.
I never even suggested having Indomitus around at the same time as starter boxes, so perhaps try arguing against what I'm saying, rather than what you wish I'd said.
I don't think Indomitus would be an evergreen product, just that it should not have been so unbelievably limited that it was unavailable within the first day. You could even announce the three starter boxes with "Indomitus will soon be going away, but don't worry because we have three new ways to get started with 40K!". That would've worked wonders.
They could do the same for Dominion. But they won't.
limited availability so you need to get it at pre-order if you want to be sure to get one
the older boxes had less content but you could wait for reviews if you were not sure about the purchase
from a costumer point this is a downgrade, as "buy blind or pay more"
Ah. I see.
Personally I'm excited for the box, I liked what I saw this past weekend. AoS is definitely more of a labor of love when compared to 40K.
It is frustrating to buy into the hype for something, take in all the content for weeks leading up to the launch, and then get shut out of the party because you couldn't reorient your Saturday afternoon around buying toy soldiers.
Yep. Thats pretty much it in a nutshell. Frustrating new experience has opposed to enjoy and buy the hyped box on your own available hobby time, like I always did.
And that is what this leads to for plenty of people who like the product, potentially would buy it but just cant without paying a fine.
Personally turns me off since toys are not on my life priority list... I think GW misses a big chunk of market penetration with galloping high prices on a small fraction of whats required to buy an army, I mean a starter should be something that attracts you to get more so I do ask... if you would get say 40% of 2 armies in a box is it not more attractive to finish off, than say 20%?
But yes on point Sir, enjoyable turned into a Freaking frustrating stunt.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
What's so wrong with Dominion? 60+ models, a rule book, entry points for the two new armies before their Battletomes come out, Warscroll cards which I personally love to see. What was the downgrade?
Dominion isn’t the downgraded option he’s talking about.
I understand, I just missed the original post. Thanks for the heads up!
It is frustrating to buy into the hype for something, take in all the content for weeks leading up to the launch, and then get shut out of the party because you couldn't reorient your Saturday afternoon around buying toy soldiers.
Yep. Thats pretty much it in a nutshell. Frustrating new experience has opposed to enjoy and buy the hyped box on your own available hobby time, like I always did.
And that is what this leads to for plenty of people who like the product, potentially would buy it but just cant without paying a fine.
Personally turns me off since toys are not on my life priority list... I think GW misses a big chunk of market penetration with galloping high prices on a small fraction of whats required to buy an army, I mean a starter should be something that attracts you to get more so I do ask... if you would get say 40% of 2 armies in a box is it not more attractive to finish off, than say 20%?
But yes on point Sir, enjoyable turned into a Freaking frustrating stunt.
I'm not sure I understand. I have preordered a lot of GW stuff over the last year or so and gotten it all. I ordered it through my FLGS with no problems. Is this a problem people are having when they try to order online or something?
I'm not sure I believe you, given that this has happened multiple times and every time it has it gets discussed here.
Togusa wrote: I have preordered a lot of GW stuff over the last year or so and gotten it all. I ordered it through my FLGS with no problems. Is this a problem people are having when they try to order online or something?
Yes. Again, I'm not sure how you could not know this.
I had to set an alarm and interrupt the lunch I was at to get Cursed City. I ordered it within 1 minute of preorders going live (my confirmation says 12:01 pm). A (literal - not exaggerating) minute later there weren't any left to buy. This is what people are annoyed at, especially because it's so unnecessary.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
They do a starter set for 40K. It comes with two forces, a set of terrain including a board, dice, rulers, rule book, literally everything a brand new player needs to play a game with a friend. That’s a starter set. It might not have many minis as Dark Imperium, but that didn’t come with a set of terrain. In my opinion it’s a better starter than Dark Imperium because of that.
A starter set should provide what a brand new novice player needs to get STARTED. Indomitable was a launch box aimed at existing players. It’s a way of launching the new edition with a bit of hype and excitement.
Why is it so difficult to understand the difference? It’s almost as if you’re doing it deliberately.
Because, get this, Indomitus was, in contents, THE SAME as previous STARTER BOXES, except gw didnt include dice and measuring stick. So yes, you call it "a launch box" i call it a starter box with 5 cents of plastic cubes missing. It's not like GW was forced at a gunpoint to withold the dice. It has two STARTING size armies, and a rulebook. It has all you need to START the damn game except some dice that GW decided not to put into the box, despite being able to do so with previous starter boxes since the dawn of time.
And you people go "yep, this isn't a starter, no dice. Yep. I will enjoy the less contents at lesser discount Starter box now!"
Like, come the eff on.
Anyway, I will stop this now, it's clearly pointless, GW said it's not a starter so you lovely folks will happily accept worse deal in shape of the "real" starter. You deserve every single price hike GW pulls off. You deserve to be sold codexes and battletomes with day one errata and you deserve digital codexes being available only as 40k app download code. And you 100% deserve scalpers, after all it's just a limited bundle, not a starter, so it doesn't matter.
I'm not sure I believe you, given that this has happened multiple times and every time it has it gets discussed here.
Togusa wrote: I have preordered a lot of GW stuff over the last year or so and gotten it all. I ordered it through my FLGS with no problems. Is this a problem people are having when they try to order online or something?
Yes. Again, I'm not sure how you could not know this.
I had to set an alarm and interrupt the lunch I was at to get Cursed City. I ordered it within 1 minute of preorders going live (my confirmation says 12:01 pm). A (literal - not exaggerating) minute later there weren't any left to buy. This is what people are annoyed at, especially because it's so unnecessary.
So...order through a GW store or FLGS. I had no issues and got everything I wanted to get with a discount! Sounds like they've taken action this time to prevent that with all the new IP lock outs and printing a whole lot more copies of the Dominion box.
Cronch wrote: It's not about the stupid box, it literally has nothing I want in it, not even the rulebook. It's about the fact that GW decided to make their offer worse for the customer and apparently...people are just fine with that. Yay for less for more! Yay for being fleeced. Yay for limited products that used to be regular stock items in the past. Cheer for Daddy GW as he downgrades your happy meal.
They do a starter set for 40K. It comes with two forces, a set of terrain including a board, dice, rulers, rule book, literally everything a brand new player needs to play a game with a friend. That’s a starter set. It might not have many minis as Dark Imperium, but that didn’t come with a set of terrain. In my opinion it’s a better starter than Dark Imperium because of that.
A starter set should provide what a brand new novice player needs to get STARTED. Indomitable was a launch box aimed at existing players. It’s a way of launching the new edition with a bit of hype and excitement.
Why is it so difficult to understand the difference? It’s almost as if you’re doing it deliberately.
Because, get this, Indomitus was, in contents, THE SAME as previous STARTER BOXES, except gw didnt include dice and measuring stick. So yes, you call it "a launch box" i call it a starter box with 5 cents of plastic cubes missing. It's not like GW was forced at a gunpoint to withold the dice. It has two STARTING size armies, and a rulebook. It has all you need to START the damn game except some dice that GW decided not to put into the box, despite being able to do so with previous starter boxes since the dawn of time.
And you people go "yep, this isn't a starter, no dice. Yep. I will enjoy the less contents at lesser discount Starter box now!"
Like, come the eff on.
Anyway, I will stop this now, it's clearly pointless, GW said it's not a starter so you lovely folks will happily accept worse deal in shape of the "real" starter. You deserve every single price hike GW pulls off. You deserve to be sold codexes and battletomes with day one errata and you deserve digital codexes being available only as 40k app download code. And you 100% deserve scalpers, after all it's just a limited bundle, not a starter, so it doesn't matter.
Wow, an entire field of straw men. If I’m okay with one thing, I must be okay with everything, right?
lare2 wrote: Beyond the obvious SCE and Kruleboyz tomes, has there been any word on others coming once 3rd drops? (please be NH, please be NH)
Nothing yet, though I remember hearing a rumor back in January that Ironjawz/Savage might get a new book along with some new models come Summer/Fall. No idea how reliable that is, but it's a safe bet that we will see at least a couple other factions by the end of the year.
I'm not sure I believe you, given that this has happened multiple times and every time it has it gets discussed here.
Togusa wrote: I have preordered a lot of GW stuff over the last year or so and gotten it all. I ordered it through my FLGS with no problems. Is this a problem people are having when they try to order online or something?
Yes. Again, I'm not sure how you could not know this.
I had to set an alarm and interrupt the lunch I was at to get Cursed City. I ordered it within 1 minute of preorders going live (my confirmation says 12:01 pm). A (literal - not exaggerating) minute later there weren't any left to buy. This is what people are annoyed at, especially because it's so unnecessary.
So...order through a GW store or FLGS. I had no issues and got everything I wanted to get with a discount!
Well, as you can see on H.B.M.C.'s example, is not only a matter of ordering through a GW store or FLGS (I think most people kinda do that for every single item already, you know).
It's trying to order something 5 minutes after it's started being sold and not being able to. As it has happened before. That's clearly not something that's the client's fault.
Could someone open a discussion thread elsewhere about the semantics of what constitutes a 'starter box'? We had pages after pages of this, now, and it doesn't seem to get anywhere.
I'm not sure I believe you, given that this has happened multiple times and every time it has it gets discussed here.
Togusa wrote: I have preordered a lot of GW stuff over the last year or so and gotten it all. I ordered it through my FLGS with no problems. Is this a problem people are having when they try to order online or something?
Yes. Again, I'm not sure how you could not know this.
I had to set an alarm and interrupt the lunch I was at to get Cursed City. I ordered it within 1 minute of preorders going live (my confirmation says 12:01 pm). A (literal - not exaggerating) minute later there weren't any left to buy. This is what people are annoyed at, especially because it's so unnecessary.
So...order through a GW store or FLGS. I had no issues and got everything I wanted to get with a discount!
Well, as you can see on H.B.M.C.'s example, is not only a matter of ordering through a GW store or FLGS (I think most people kinda do that for every single item already, you know).
It's trying to ordering something 5 minutes after it's started being sold and not being able to. As it has happened before. That's clearly not something that's the client's fault.
It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
Because, get this, Indomitus was, in contents, THE SAME as previous STARTER BOXES, except gw didnt include dice and measuring stick. So yes, you call it "a launch box" i call it a starter box with 5 cents of plastic cubes missing. It's not like GW was forced at a gunpoint to withold the dice. It has two STARTING size armies, and a rulebook. It has all you need to START the damn game except some dice that GW decided not to put into the box, despite being able to do so with previous starter boxes since the dawn of time.
And with smaller discount %.
So if they would have this box at permanent addition you would have smaller discount.
It was now 160e. Turn into smaller discount and thus permanent addition would add up to price.
Starter sets had smaller discount % for models. Even 1st grader understand that if you give 40% discount rather than 20% you get smaller price. Why you are having trouble understanding what FIRST GRADER understands?
I sure as hell wouldn't be publicly admitting first graders beats me but each to his own
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
Because, get this, Indomitus was, in contents, THE SAME as previous STARTER BOXES, except gw didnt include dice and measuring stick. So yes, you call it "a launch box" i call it a starter box with 5 cents of plastic cubes missing. It's not like GW was forced at a gunpoint to withold the dice. It has two STARTING size armies, and a rulebook. It has all you need to START the damn game except some dice that GW decided not to put into the box, despite being able to do so with previous starter boxes since the dawn of time.
And with smaller discount %.
So if they would have this box at permanent addition you would have smaller discount.
It was now 160e. Turn into smaller discount and thus permanent addition would add up to price.
Starter sets had smaller discount % for models. Even 1st grader understand that if you give 40% discount rather than 20% you get smaller price. Why you are having trouble understanding what FIRST GRADER understands?
I sure as hell wouldn't be publicly admitting first graders beats me but each to his own
So, you're saying that all previous starter boxes were less discounted than Indomitus?
...somehow, I don't think that's the case, TBH. Then again, putting the big book on the box drives the price up, and some older starters had smaller format books.
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
Right has HBMC point out not sure if your serious but to clarify...
Has I pointed several times, a box being available through an edition lifespan is very different from being available for a week preorder and 1minute online...regardless where you want to buy the stock it will be discontinued and hard or impossible to find at original prices say couple month after its release.
In say, November I would be looking into getting cursed city box as gift to my son... or maybe next year. Unlikely.
Totally fine for Chirstmas bundles its a seasonal context, not fine for a starter which should be relevant through 3 years or so.
Its not the end of the world I buy something else on my own time, but a bit sad to see that my lovely dark imperium was the last of its kind and that in 2021 GW has company turning in profits makes things LESS available...
The difference, for 30€ is
Indomitus: No dice, +2 characters, +11 infantry models, +3 heavy infantry, +3 bikes, -12 small models.
Indomitus had more models than Dark Imperium. Thats obvious. But with the increase in price the difference wasn't that big in the discount (7 more miniatures in total than Dark Imperium). And with Indomitus at least they made a made to order, lets see if with Dominion they have the same grace.
I agree that limiting the availablity of a box set is annoying especially as I'd like to see what is in both battletomes before deciding whether to buy the core box.
The truth of it is that this is not a remotely new practice. The 2009 space Hulk was a limited edition box as was Dread Fleet. I remember hearing that gw made 10,000 copies of Space Hulk but it still took a while to sell out. Dread Fleet never sold out.
The big difference is that gw is massively popular these days. They made 350 million pounds last year. That's the equivalent of more than 8,000 copies of Indomitus a day.
GW said they made more copies of Indomitus than any other box set they have made and I think that's probably true.
My guess is that gw will make 50,000 copies of Dominion but there's a good chance that won't be enough.
lare2 wrote: Beyond the obvious SCE and Kruleboyz tomes, has there been any word on others coming once 3rd drops? (please be NH, please be NH)
Nothing yet, though I remember hearing a rumor back in January that Ironjawz/Savage might get a new book along with some new models come Summer/Fall. No idea how reliable that is, but it's a safe bet that we will see at least a couple other factions by the end of the year.
Cool, thanks for the info. Suppose we're just playing the waiting game.
New greenskin stuff first would make sense though. I like the shift in focus to Destruction this edition. I've zero interest or intent on ever starting a greenskin army but really love the idea of them and fighting them on the table.
Sorry if this was covered, thread jumped a bunch with the latest back and forth… Do we know when Dominion is dropping or how much it’s costing for sure yet?
AduroT wrote: Sorry if this was covered, thread jumped a bunch with the latest back and forth… Do we know when Dominion is dropping or how much it’s costing for sure yet?
I'm pretty certain all we know for now is that it'll be up for preorder sometime this month.
Automatically Appended Next Post: If I remember correctly Indomitus was £120 so I'd be expecting the same price.
AduroT wrote: Sorry if this was covered, thread jumped a bunch with the latest back and forth… Do we know when Dominion is dropping or how much it’s costing for sure yet?
We don't know for sure yet but I'd put good money on it going up for pre-order on June 19th, releasing on July 3rd and costing £125.
AduroT wrote: Sorry if this was covered, thread jumped a bunch with the latest back and forth… Do we know when Dominion is dropping or how much it’s costing for sure yet?
They only confirmed that it will go up for pre-order in June.
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
This is not a helpful thing to propagate. To my knowledge there was only one post in this thread (by you, even?) about a store manager relating better webstore mechanisms to counteract scalpers. Without an official press release that is neither reliable nor can it be taken as company line, regardless of how effective it will be if it's implemented.
Further there is no evidence of higher printing whatsoever. All we have is the announcement that they made "lots", italicized for effect. That is not quantifiable nor the first time they said that in the lead up to a release that sold out quickly.
You run the risk of easing people willing to believe you into a false sense of security. Please don't do that. Until we actually see it play out differently, it's prudent to assume that Dominion is super limited and if you'd like to get one, you should be there the moment it goes on pre-order to try to prevent disappointment.
All of the current Soul Wars sets are now last chance to buy. As are the 3 EtB Sequitors and Start Collecting Vanguard. The 15 sprues of EtB Sequitors I have from Mortal Realms might be worth something in few years
DaveC wrote: All of the current Soul Wars sets are now last chance to buy. As are the 3 EtB Sequitors and Start Collecting Vanguard. The 15 sprues of EtB Sequitors I have from Mortal Realms might be worth something in few years
Oh, will have to buy the Sequitors then. The lady Stormcast is seriously cool, but I never got around to buy them.
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
I love that art, so dam epic. Absolute props to the artist, whoever they may be. The sheer magnitude and feeling it evokes are what I love about Warhammer.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: It's really weird that Vanguard went LCTB...but I think there's a namechange coming.
Just the Start Collecting box. Probably going to be replaced with a new one.
Dang. I really wanted that NH Lord executioner from soul wars, but now people are pulling a DI and charging so much for it. That's on me though.
I'm guessing that SC they previewed a few weeks back (the foot troop with a more fancy base) will be the "Get started with AOS" model that comes with that magazine
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
Oh MAN do I hope that indicates what might be in store for Cities of Sigmar or a similar style army. That's friggin amazing.
It's funny, I have a friend that is very not into wargaming. I have a display case full of space marines, admech, death guard, imperial knights, and saraphon right when you walk into my house. Usually when he comes over for board gaming I might point out something new I've added and he's like "oh that's pretty cool". Well one day when I added an Arkanaut Frigate he walked in and glanced over and yelled "IS THAT A DWARF STEAMPUNK FLYING SHIP????" Almost (not quite! ) got him into AoS right there!
That's the kind of reaction a lot of the new and cool AoS models get. They're just so imaginitive! I wonder what he'll say when I add the new Lord Kroak.
GaroRobe wrote: Dang. I really wanted that NH Lord executioner from soul wars, but now people are pulling a DI and charging so much for it. That's on me though.
I'm guessing that SC they previewed a few weeks back (the foot troop with a more fancy base) will be the "Get started with AOS" model that comes with that magazine
The regular Lord-Executioner doesn't do it for you, I'm guessing?
GaroRobe wrote: Dang. I really wanted that NH Lord executioner from soul wars, but now people are pulling a DI and charging so much for it. That's on me though.
I'm guessing that SC they previewed a few weeks back (the foot troop with a more fancy base) will be the "Get started with AOS" model that comes with that magazine
The regular Lord-Executioner doesn't do it for you, I'm guessing?
Probably because it has 100% less noose and gallows...
Kanluwen wrote: It's really weird that Vanguard went LCTB...but I think there's a namechange coming.
Just the Start Collecting box. Probably going to be replaced with a new one.
Probably, but it doesn't detract from a potential name change. Always found it weird they went with "Vanguard Space Marines" when we already had Vanguard Veterans and Vanguard Stormcast.
Plus the name just sounds bad. "It's the Vanguard Chamber with Vanguard-Hunters, Vanguard-Palladors, and Vanguard-Raptors!".
The Lord Executioner and the Spirit Torment don't hurt that much, since they have other versions avalible separately. However, there is no way to get a mounted Knight of Shrouds outside of the box, and there is no other way to get a Guardian of Souls at all. Which kind of sucks.
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
Stick a couple of bionic eyes in there and it would be all but indistinguishable from something out of the 40K rulebook.
I disagree, there are a lot of subtle differences that are important. The biggest is that the people pulling look healthy. They are well muscled, generally youngish men some of which may have gone shirtless but all of their clothes, while banal, are in reasonably good condition. They look like any random work crew of medieval laborers.
Also crucially is how much the soldiers and priests are on the same level. They do not tower over the workers, and while they have nicer garb it is far from opulent. They are all walking side by side in mixed ranks, giving a sense of them all collectively going forward as a people. 40k art is very good about having the higher-ups be literally above the masses and clad in ludicrously ornate gear, separated as being an entirely different class. Which is a compliment to both sides, as they are serving the setting well in both instances.
Kanluwen wrote: It's really weird that Vanguard went LCTB...but I think there's a namechange coming.
Assuming GW are planning on keeping the Stormcast with the older styled armour around. Its probably going to be replaced with there side of the Soul Wars box. A Night Haunt SC with there half of the box would not surprise me either.
That said there is always the possibility that GW intend to redo all the Stormcast in the new style and the Vanguard are first in line
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
reminds me of good old Warhammer
Woa there sir, as I have been told many, many, many times WHFB was a gritty low-magic setting without massive over-the-top stuff like AoS has.
Only on the table - the lore was always more high magic than the tabletop
Heck in one of the Gotrek and Felix stories there's a full on chaos siege of a city with living siege towers and everything! And an airship piloted by dwarven Billy Connolly
Kanluwen wrote: It's really weird that Vanguard went LCTB...but I think there's a namechange coming.
Assuming GW are planning on keeping the Stormcast with the older styled armour around. Its probably going to be replaced with there side of the Soul Wars box. A Night Haunt SC with there half of the box would not surprise me either.
Bluntly, if they were going to do that for Stormcast? We would see Thunderstrike Brotherhood get the boot first and replaced with the Soul Wars half or some weird amalgation of the two.
Vanguard have always been in a weird spot, thanks to them not having gotten their own book like Extremis did to really solidify "what the subfaction is about". It definitely didn't help that it looked like they got some items jammed into their roster(the Raptors, from what I've been able to gather, were a last minute addition "because they have crossbows too!").
That said there is always the possibility that GW intend to redo all the Stormcast in the new style and the Vanguard are first in line
They've said that the intention is to keep the current Stormcast, yes. The new stuff is just a new variant of armor...although I would not be shocked to see more Vanguard-y styled models coming.
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
reminds me of good old Warhammer
Woa there sir, as I have been told many, many, many times WHFB was a gritty low-magic setting without massive over-the-top stuff like AoS has.
Well I guess those people have never read or even seen the old Chaos Army books. Up until 7th, Warhammer had the same over the top stuff that AoS has, it just never made it to the table and was for style (or terrain) only
it just went down when the over the top stuff was tuned down in the background but therefore made it to the table when things started to change (and went downhill)
Bluntly, if they were going to do that for Stormcast? We would see Thunderstrike Brotherhood get the boot first and replaced with the Soul Wars half or some weird amalgation of the two.
Yeah but the Thunderstrike brotherhood is unfortunately still the only place to get a Lord Relictor. Soul wars is in a similar situation with the Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-charger. But everything in the Vanguard SC is available separately. Of course maybe the Vanguard set just didn't sell very well.
Bluntly, if they were going to do that for Stormcast? We would see Thunderstrike Brotherhood get the boot first and replaced with the Soul Wars half or some weird amalgation of the two.
Yeah but the Thunderstrike brotherhood is unfortunately still the only place to get a Lord Relictor. Soul wars is in a similar situation with the Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-charger. But everything in the Vanguard SC is available separately. Of course maybe the Vanguard set just didn't sell very well.
It being the only place to get a Lord-Relictor means nothing. They could just Direct Only that frame, like they did with the Royal Court/Marine heroes from Indomitus. He's on a frame with all the unit champions anyways.
Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-Charger argument really doesn't work either seeing as how the sprue for that is easier to separate out than the other one.
Spoiler:
That's the Lord-Arcanum and the Evocator-Prime, by the by, on the same frame...who makes a great stand-in for a Lord-Arcanum on foot.
Bluntly, if they were going to do that for Stormcast? We would see Thunderstrike Brotherhood get the boot first and replaced with the Soul Wars half or some weird amalgation of the two.
Yeah but the Thunderstrike brotherhood is unfortunately still the only place to get a Lord Relictor. Soul wars is in a similar situation with the Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-charger. But everything in the Vanguard SC is available separately. Of course maybe the Vanguard set just didn't sell very well.
It being the only place to get a Lord-Relictor means nothing. They could just Direct Only that frame, like they did with the Royal Court/Marine heroes from Indomitus. He's on a frame with all the unit champions anyways.
Lord-Arcanum on Gryph-Charger argument really doesn't work either seeing as how the sprue for that is easier to separate out than the other one.
Spoiler:
That's the Lord-Arcanum and the Evocator-Prime, by the by, on the same frame...who makes a great stand-in for a Lord-Arcanum on foot.
If they're going to sell that sprue separately, you can bet it's going to be like 45 Quid at least if not more, given how a Lord-Aquilor on a Gryph-Charger is 25 Quid, and most Lords (Lord-Veritant, Lord-Ordinator, Lord-Exorcist, Lord Celestant) tend to go for around 20 Quid, and some like Lord-Castellant or the named Lord-Ordinator go for around 23 Quid. Add the fact that GW prices are always going up...
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
reminds me of good old Warhammer
Woa there sir, as I have been told many, many, many times WHFB was a gritty low-magic setting without massive over-the-top stuff like AoS has.
Only on the table - the lore was always more high magic than the tabletop
Heck in one of the Gotrek and Felix stories there's a full on chaos siege of a city with living siege towers and everything! And an airship piloted by dwarven Billy Connolly
Look, if anyone from the Old World deserves to be reincarnated in AoS, it’s Dwarf Billy Connelly. Seriously, a Kharadron Slayer/Shipwright who lost one too many a haul to the grotbag scuttlers and got together with a bunch of like-minded idiots to build the sky ship that could take them all on and win, counting profit in green blood spilled rather than aethergold.
Chikout wrote: This art pretty much sums up why I love AoS.
reminds me of good old Warhammer
Woa there sir, as I have been told many, many, many times WHFB was a gritty low-magic setting without massive over-the-top stuff like AoS has.
Only on the table - the lore was always more high magic than the tabletop
Heck in one of the Gotrek and Felix stories there's a full on chaos siege of a city with living siege towers and everything! And an airship piloted by dwarven Billy Connolly
Look, if anyone from the Old World deserves to be reincarnated in AoS, it’s Dwarf Billy Connelly. Seriously, a Kharadron Slayer/Shipwright who lost one too many a haul to the grotbag scuttlers and got together with a bunch of like-minded idiots to build the sky ship that could take them all on and win, counting profit in green blood spilled rather than aethergold.
Unironically, a Character Skyvessel would be really cool.
Yodhrin wrote: Only in the bizarro-world of GW fandom could customers being upset they're unable to buy product due to mismanagement and scalper-baiting policies be characterised as "hating"
We weren't speaking about people leveling legitimate criticisms--we were speaking about people who claim they do not want the box, complain they cannot get the box, and do both simultaneously with the box still being widely available. Which happened with Indomitus. A lot.
You elected to mischaracterize the original sentiment to create a straw man rather than engaging on a reasonable level. This is something you do frequently across multiple different discussions.
Or, back in Realityville - I responded to your remarks with exactly the level of reasonableness I considered they merited, because I believe your mythical hordes of deserving hypocrites are either a mirage you've unwittingly made for yourself because you're really annoyed by that behaviour but know deep down that nobody will understand that level of annoyance over something so trivial unless you portray it as a plague upon the hobby, or just a deliberate fiction for the same reason, because I've neither seen this supposed stampede of dishonest haters nor seen it complained about literally anywhere else but here, now.
I can't ascertain whether that's typical behaviour for yourself, since I don't have a scoob who you are.
Responding with an even larger strawman doesn't exactly undermine my point...
Also can anyone else decipher the meaning of his last statement there? I get he's saying he doesn't know who I am but... why? I legitimately don't get it.
I think it's in reference to your comment, where you state he acts in a particular way in multiple threads. The implication is that you have been watching what he says whilst, in contrast, he has no idea who you are. Ultimately, the vibe I get is negative - you watch him and therefore must care whereas he doesn't watch you and he doesn't care.
All of the rules have been given a number for easy referencing, and the key sections are clarified with additional points to make everything crystal clear. You’ll also find margin notes which call out referenced rules, points to note, and examples.
Credit where credit is due--the new formatting style looks very well designed. Glad to see look out sir remain* as it was instead of trying to fix what isn't broken, excited if still anxious to see more.
Sasori wrote: Dang, I was really hoping Look out Sir! would make the heros untargetable like in 40k.
Character dependent armies really needed that change.
Yeah, I must say, I’m very disappointed with nothing changing with shooting. It may get nerfs elsewhere with reactions and stuff, but right now I’m pretty concerned with 3rd.
I think people often misunderstand the dynamic of AoS. Say there is a unit being buffed by characters such that it is flat-out better than your units and you cannot beat it in melee. In 40k, asking armies to shoot through it or maneuver to the other side of the unit to bypass LoS is reasonable because every army has ways to do that. In AoS, most armies don't. And many don't have the means to achieve it via magic either. Some can counter-play by deploying their own buffs. But the entire dynamic of supporting buffs in AoS hinges on the ability for characters to be sniped.
Of course, armies relying on their support heroes can counter-play by putting them in cover for a bonus to save rolls, or using a forest to get out of LoS. Unless one happens to be playing against KO who forest's don't block LoS for because it doesn't work against fliers, or against MW shooting that doesn't care about cover or hit rolls. Which is where we get to the point that the armies doing the sniping are the ones flat-ignoring the available counterplay. It actually shows how well they work given the almost total overlap between ignoring them and being an issue.
But if someone really wants to try a game with 40k look our sir I have some Fyreslayers who would be VERY happy to oblige. I am sure Tzeentch would also be quite entertained to mow through the enemy with their now-untouchable wizards behind a wall of horror wounds they summoned.
All of the rules have been given a number for easy referencing, and the key sections are clarified with additional points to make everything crystal clear. You’ll also find margin notes which call out referenced rules, points to note, and examples.
I like the 'groundbreaking new layout' which is... the same as many classic wargames going back to the 60s. Section 10.1.1.etc...
It isn't bad, necessarily, but its weird that they're calling this out as a 'wow' moment.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think people often misunderstand the dynamic of AoS. Say there is a unit being buffed by characters such that it is flat-out better than your units and you cannot beat it in melee. In 40k, asking armies to shoot through it or maneuver to the other side of the unit to bypass LoS is reasonable because every army has ways to do that. In AoS, most armies don't. And many don't have the means to achieve it via magic either. Some can counter-play by deploying their own buffs. But the entire dynamic of supporting buffs in AoS hinges on the ability for characters to be sniped.
Of course, armies relying on their support heroes can counter-play by putting them in cover for a bonus to save rolls, or using a forest to get out of LoS. Unless one happens to be playing against KO who forest's don't block LoS for because it doesn't work against fliers, or against MW shooting that doesn't care about cover or hit rolls. Which is where we get to the point that the armies doing the sniping are the ones flat-ignoring the available counterplay. It actually shows how well they work given the almost total overlap between ignoring them and being an issue.
But if someone really wants to try a game with 40k look our sir I have some Fyreslayers who would be VERY happy to oblige. I am sure Tzeentch would also be quite entertained to mow through the enemy with their now-untouchable wizards behind a wall of horror wounds they summoned.
You're picking out some of the more egregious examples, but this sucks for armies like Nighthaunt who absolutely need their support heros, but they get sniped away real easy by armies that can produce more shooting.
For the Fyreslayers argument, there wasn't even that much shooting around when that battletome came out, so I'd be perfectly fine with allowing it.
I don't buy the terrain argument either. Most tables in AoS are pretty bare, keeping your support heros in cover or out of LoS is much easier said than done. It's not like we have anywhere near the terrain density on average that 40k has in 9th.
This wasn't as big of an issue before, but more and more armies are getting access to better and better shooting. It's trivially easy for most of the recent battletome armies to blow away these characters. I'm hoping there is something that helps balance this out in the future.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think people often misunderstand the dynamic of AoS. Say there is a unit being buffed by characters such that it is flat-out better than your units and you cannot beat it in melee. In 40k, asking armies to shoot through it or maneuver to the other side of the unit to bypass LoS is reasonable because every army has ways to do that. In AoS, most armies don't. And many don't have the means to achieve it via magic either. Some can counter-play by deploying their own buffs. But the entire dynamic of supporting buffs in AoS hinges on the ability for characters to be sniped.
Of course, armies relying on their support heroes can counter-play by putting them in cover for a bonus to save rolls, or using a forest to get out of LoS. Unless one happens to be playing against KO who forest's don't block LoS for because it doesn't work against fliers, or against MW shooting that doesn't care about cover or hit rolls. Which is where we get to the point that the armies doing the sniping are the ones flat-ignoring the available counterplay. It actually shows how well they work given the almost total overlap between ignoring them and being an issue.
But if someone really wants to try a game with 40k look our sir I have some Fyreslayers who would be VERY happy to oblige. I am sure Tzeentch would also be quite entertained to mow through the enemy with their now-untouchable wizards behind a wall of horror wounds they summoned.
You're picking out some of the more egregious examples, but this sucks for armies like Nighthaunt who absolutely need their support heros, but they get sniped away real easy by armies that can produce more shooting.
For the Fyreslayers argument, there wasn't even that much shooting around when that battletome came out, so I'd be perfectly fine with allowing it.
I don't buy the terrain argument either. Most tables in AoS are pretty bare, keeping your support heros in cover or out of LoS is much easier said than done. It's not like we have anywhere near the terrain density on average that 40k has in 9th.
I 100% agree Nighthaunt have it bad, and feel they should have a rule like the Necromancer does to bounce wounds over to minions. I would say that the egregious examples are the ones that most need to be addressed, and 40kLoS wouldn't, certainly not without creating new ones of at least equal severity if not worse. And if the board doesn't have enough terrain in the first place that isn't even an issue with the rules.
This wasn't as big of an issue before, but more and more armies are getting access to better and better shooting. It's trivially easy for most of the recent battletome armies to blow away these characters. I'm hoping there is something that helps balance this out in the future.
This I am actually confused by. Going backwards through to the start of 2020 we have SBL, Lumineth, Slaanesh, DoK, SoB, Seraphon, KO, DoT. Of those, a minority of three are problematic due to shooting and for two of them the problem is down to one ability on one warscroll in the army and it is the same ability on both; MWs on unmodified hit rolls that let them ignore cover & look out sir. The problems AoS has with shooting are the strongest evidence that the problem does not lie in the inherent counterplay options but rather with armies who ignore them. KO only reinforces this with their shooting dominance being so reliant on ignoring LoS-blocking terrain. Shooting overall is also further strengthened by the availability of the double-turn which disproportionately rewards them.
None of what makes for problematic shooting in AoS is down to look out sir not being strong enough. Making it 40k style would mean most armies having no ability to kill supporting characters short of going through the units in front of them. It eliminates more counterplay than it creates, because the only answer to support heroes hiding behind units is to have enough magic to blast them down or have high-movement fliers. As a Nighthaunt player with both at your disposal I can understand why this might not be a problem that comes to mind as readily, but please understand that for a large number of armies it very much would be.
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
When did they mention that?
That is what I was told by the store manager at my local Warhammer store. It was also told to me by my FLGS owner, who heard the same from his GW rep.
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
This is not a helpful thing to propagate. To my knowledge there was only one post in this thread (by you, even?) about a store manager relating better webstore mechanisms to counteract scalpers. Without an official press release that is neither reliable nor can it be taken as company line, regardless of how effective it will be if it's implemented.
Further there is no evidence of higher printing whatsoever. All we have is the announcement that they made "lots", italicized for effect. That is not quantifiable nor the first time they said that in the lead up to a release that sold out quickly.
You run the risk of easing people willing to believe you into a false sense of security. Please don't do that. Until we actually see it play out differently, it's prudent to assume that Dominion is super limited and if you'd like to get one, you should be there the moment it goes on pre-order to try to prevent disappointment.
The store manager has never steered me wrong before, I'm not sure why he'd make this up now only to later lose my business for bull gaking me, which he knows to be something I would do.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I think people often misunderstand the dynamic of AoS. Say there is a unit being buffed by characters such that it is flat-out better than your units and you cannot beat it in melee. In 40k, asking armies to shoot through it or maneuver to the other side of the unit to bypass LoS is reasonable because every army has ways to do that. In AoS, most armies don't. And many don't have the means to achieve it via magic either. Some can counter-play by deploying their own buffs. But the entire dynamic of supporting buffs in AoS hinges on the ability for characters to be sniped.
Of course, armies relying on their support heroes can counter-play by putting them in cover for a bonus to save rolls, or using a forest to get out of LoS. Unless one happens to be playing against KO who forest's don't block LoS for because it doesn't work against fliers, or against MW shooting that doesn't care about cover or hit rolls. Which is where we get to the point that the armies doing the sniping are the ones flat-ignoring the available counterplay. It actually shows how well they work given the almost total overlap between ignoring them and being an issue.
But if someone really wants to try a game with 40k look our sir I have some Fyreslayers who would be VERY happy to oblige. I am sure Tzeentch would also be quite entertained to mow through the enemy with their now-untouchable wizards behind a wall of horror wounds they summoned.
You're picking out some of the more egregious examples, but this sucks for armies like Nighthaunt who absolutely need their support heros, but they get sniped away real easy by armies that can produce more shooting.
For the Fyreslayers argument, there wasn't even that much shooting around when that battletome came out, so I'd be perfectly fine with allowing it.
I don't buy the terrain argument either. Most tables in AoS are pretty bare, keeping your support heros in cover or out of LoS is much easier said than done. It's not like we have anywhere near the terrain density on average that 40k has in 9th.
This wasn't as big of an issue before, but more and more armies are getting access to better and better shooting. It's trivially easy for most of the recent battletome armies to blow away these characters. I'm hoping there is something that helps balance this out in the future.
Give it time, it's likely NH will get a new book sometime in the near future.
I like the 'groundbreaking new layout' which is... the same as many classic wargames going back to the 60s. Section 10.1.1.etc...
It isn't bad, necessarily, but its weird that they're calling this out as a 'wow' moment.
The numbering is old hat, as anyone who played classic hex map and cardboard counters games knows. And as far as I'm concerned, it's about time that they introduced something like this. It's somewhat mind-boggling that miniatures games as a whole have never adopted this rules format.
On the other hand, the notes to the side of the rules *are* unusual, and - if done properly - are a welcome addition for anyone who's desperately trying to chase down that one rule in the rulebook.
I like the 'groundbreaking new layout' which is... the same as many classic wargames going back to the 60s. Section 10.1.1.etc...
It isn't bad, necessarily, but its weird that they're calling this out as a 'wow' moment.
The numbering is old hat, as anyone who played classic hex map and cardboard counters games knows. And as far as I'm concerned, it's about time that they introduced something like this. It's somewhat mind-boggling that miniatures games as a whole have never adopted this rules format.
On the other hand, the notes to the side of the rules *are* unusual, and - if done properly - are a welcome addition for anyone who's desperately trying to chase down that one rule in the rulebook.
I'm kind of unimpressed with that aspect, to be honest, since the sidebar explanations (which aren't that unusual, tbh) don't line up with the rules they're explaining. In fact, most of what we see aren't explaining rules. They're just... additional thoughts that the actual rules aren't covering, or somewhat related rules that you might care about later.
The third note, for example, is explaining the 'shot with all the models that you want to' in 10.0, and the middle note is explaining that targets being in melee/engagement doesn't affect shooting attacks (neither of which are terms they actually bother to use, even though I'd guess that's what 'being within 3"' effectively means) Its somewhat related to 10.1.1, but not really, since 10.1.1 is about the shooting unit and the note is about the target. Presumably its going to get mentioned again somewhere in 13.X when they get around to explaining how to make attacks (and presumably, picking a target).
Mostly I just want to see how deep the cross referencing goes. Both how many steps a reference chain can take you, and if it gets recursive at any point.
Very much Nighthaunt. Our heroes are gonna continue to be blown off the table for the foreseeable.
I know we haven't seen anything yet but so far, as a Nighthaunt player, I'm really disappointed to see the lack of changes to shooting so far. I'd also really like to see random selection when shooting with a unit outside of melee into melee. Something like, for every successful wound roll, roll a die. For every 1-3 rolled, one of your own models is wounded, for every 4-6 rolled, one of the enemy is wounded.
To be fair we only have seen briefest of brief view of shooting rule. Only thing of note was look out sir. Anything else we don't know.
One big thing is of course obscuring terrain. More of that and lots of issues gets solved. Except for those units that ignore LOS but that's not issue with core rules now is it? That's warscroll specific issue to be solved there. Making core rule that aims at that makes armies without that issue struggle unreasonable hard then as THEIR counter plays gets removed resulting in invincible units that will just smash through everything.
Ah, fair enough - not sure why they didn't come to mind.
If NH is a common acronym, has anyone suggested it (and other AOS faction names) to be added to the Dakka Glossary thing, so they get the tooltip to explain them?
Togusa wrote: It's not, but the game stores get x number of copies, and depending on where you live and how popular things are there, it's usually better to preorder from them rather than the GW website.
Hopefully these new protections they've instituted for this release combined with the higher printing of the product will even things out.
That happened when ordering from GW's webstore (I'm not sure if that's H.B.M.C.'s case, but I've seen it reported multiple times, that the xstock on GW's website lasted about 2 minutes).
Plus, it's a different advice from the one you just gave, too ^^
I'm just pointing out for those who choose to order from the webstore that they did mention new protections to make it better, and that I hope it works for those who choose to order from the webstore.
When did they mention that?
That is what I was told by the store manager at my local Warhammer store. It was also told to me by my FLGS owner, who heard the same from his GW rep.
I mean... i was a GW store manager, back in the day. We were mushrooms.
Though, I’m not entirely sure I like the idea of the person who goes second getting an extra CP each time. If you get rid of the random initiative, that’ll give the second player double the CP. if you keep random initiative the game is horrific. Maybe all this talk of being able to react in your opponent’s turn will help random initiative though.
I’m intrigued anyway, Sigmar is one of those games I both love and hate lol.
Giving extra CP for going Second isn't going to mitigate that immediately having another (literal) shot at blowing away your opponents army is far more powerful.
Seems to be they're just desperate to cling to Double Turn so they don't have to admit it's a bad rule.
The heroic and monster abilities are... interesting.
I'm definitely in favor of generic abilities to make dispel attempts, so people aren't forced to tote a wizard around (or just live with it in the case of armies without wizards.
On the other hand, I'm leery of battletomes eventual introducing army specific abilities that just break this system- either by allowing multiples per turn, or just introducing 'even more better' ones.
So, I haven't followed AOS much since the first reveals. Is that whole ethos of just four pages of rules (or whatever the total was misleading though it may have seemed at the time due to warscrolls) long out the door with them advertising instead about the complexity of the ruleset instead as a selling feature? Has the pendulum swung completely the other way? Again, this might be old news for many/most here but I only occasionally look at AOS releases for RPG fig purposes.
yukishiro1 wrote: I really dislike this approach of just dumping more rules on top of rules. Now we have heroic abilities too! And monster abilities!
Making the existing rules just work better is so passe. Rules bloat for you! And for you! And for you too!
Its how GW operates.
And I agree with others who commented that the extra CP in no way makes up for the generally devastating effect of a player having a double turn.
Doesn't it even manage to make it worse because if you go second on turn one you get the extra CP on top of the full alpha strike potential of an unmolested army? So if you get double turn then, you end up having even more potential than you did before?
How much impact have CP abilities generally had in 2nd ed?
warboss wrote: So, I haven't followed AOS much since the first reveals. Is that whole ethos of just four pages of rules (or whatever the total was misleading though it may have seemed at the time due to warscrolls) long out the door with them advertising instead about the complexity of the ruleset instead as a selling feature? Has the pendulum swung completely the other way? Again, this might be old news for many/most here but I only occasionally look at AOS releases for RPG fig purposes.
I doubt it. I bet it will still try to keep to 10 pages max including examples. It's just adding one paragraph of rules to 5-page rules adds complexity already.
Anyway, not really liking it much, the extra "tactical" choices of the hero and monster skills are beyond simplistic and there will always be the one obvious thing to pick. It's an illusion of choice.
yukishiro1 wrote: I really dislike this approach of just dumping more rules on top of rules. Now we have heroic abilities too! And monster abilities!
Making the existing rules just work better is so passe. Rules bloat for you! And for you! And for you too!
Its how GW operates.
And I agree with others who commented that the extra CP in no way makes up for the generally devastating effect of a player having a double turn.
Doesn't it even manage to make it worse because if you go second on turn one you get the extra CP on top of the full alpha strike potential of an unmolested army? So if you get double turn then, you end up having even more potential than you did before?
How much impact have CP abilities generally had in 2nd ed?
In the pile of rumors that eventually become true is the rumor of command points reseting each battle round. So you will be unable to bank them. If you choose to go for the double turn, you are making your enemy have more CPs avaliable than you no matter what (well, outside of killing his general or performing heroic actions)
2nd Ed dosn't have the focus on reactive commands that 3rd have, those CP may actually be valuable to mitigate the double turn. We still need o see the new reactions for each phase.
About the new stuff being an illusion of choice. Is not so much about having new choices but about having new tools. Im in love with what this new rules bring to the game.
I like or love every single one of those rules. I am legitimately impressed, as I have grown not to expect this quality of rules writing from GW. Very nice, very thematic, it shows the strengths of GW narrative writing without any of the normal mechanical potholes.
1 CP for going second is not going to counteract the might of a double, though if the rumor that CP expire at the end of turn is true it is a decent bit better than if we can still stockpile.
Finest hour could be an issue if it affects mounts, but making it 1/game mitigates that somewhat and enhances the cinematic appeal IMO.
Standardized command ability ranges are something I did not know I wanted so badly. And champions can issue commands to their own unit!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: To be fair we only have seen briefest of brief view of shooting rule. Only thing of note was look out sir. Anything else we don't know.
One big thing is of course obscuring terrain. More of that and lots of issues gets solved. Except for those units that ignore LOS but that's not issue with core rules now is it? That's warscroll specific issue to be solved there. Making core rule that aims at that makes armies without that issue struggle unreasonable hard then as THEIR counter plays gets removed resulting in invincible units that will just smash through everything.
Right now terrain that obscures los does not work if the shooter or the target can fly. As all Nighthaunt can fly it just makes things even worse for them. They are in a uniquely bad spot for characters getting sniped, having it far worse than any other army.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Eldarsif wrote: There are currently at least two books who never saw an update in 2.0. Idoneth and Maggotkin. I do hope they get a book soon.
They did not get new versions, but Nurgle got boosted by getting their sub factions in Wrath of the Everchosen, then again by the warscroll updates in BR Teclis. GW has done a reasonably good job of keeping it relevant. Idoneth warscroll updates in BR Morathi also gave them a boost as well by expanding their selection of viable units. While they are definitely due to new tomes, other armies (NH and SCE come to mind) need them more. As a Nurgle player, I can wait.
Arbitrator wrote: Giving extra CP for going Second isn't going to mitigate that immediately having another (literal) shot at blowing away your opponents army is far more powerful.
Seems to be they're just desperate to cling to Double Turn so they don't have to admit it's a bad rule.
Well noobs complain, good players beat it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NinthMusketeer wrote: Right now terrain that obscures los does not work if the shooter or the target can fly. As all Nighthaunt can fly it just makes things even worse for them. They are in a uniquely bad spot for characters getting sniped, having it far worse than any other army.
Keyword being now. Unless you have seen rulebook you don't know how it works month later.
"Good players can sort of work with it, therefore it is a good rule!" is such a take. By that logic, no game ever had bad rules, cause good players will always figure a way around it.
Doubleturn sort of works in AoS because close combat alternates who attacks first each time it happens. However with 2.0 having a lot of new armies many didn't have any or many ranged options so close combat was a much bigger part of the core game. As we move on we are seeing more ranged options and ranged is one pure attack from the person who has the turn.
Honestly doubleturn in 2.0 is terrible and I hope they at least make it part of the game in 3.0 instead of the whole "roll a dice at the start of each turn and if you get double you basically win".
Sadly there are many who love the doubleturn - often because its "just different to other games". Others think it promotes different tactical play, when in reality they are just using normal tactical optoins you should learn and use for regular games.
That said GW right now in balance is REALLY addicted to the cinematic "one turn and you do amazing insane stupid wipe the floor with damage" style of balancing. So a doubleturn from their design team fits that.
Yeah, I've yet to see a sane defense of the double turn, just "if you don't like it, git gud" type comments.
Honestly, given how embarrassing the launch of the original edition was under the dying screams of the Kirby era of GW, you'd think they'd want to wipe out the rule that stood out as a horrific idea even in a rule-set that felt like an intern had knocked it out over a lunch break. The general's handbook brought things up to a bare minimum of functionality without houserules, 2nd did a solid job of cleaning up the game's overall act, but somehow the grand-daddy dealbreaker remained enshrined.
"Good players can sort of work with it, therefore it is a good rule!" is such a take. By that logic, no game ever had bad rules, cause good players will always figure a way around it.
It is actually just proof that the person speaking is not a skilled player, actual skilled players know unbeatable double turns are not uncommon because we are experts in setting them up. If I dump 50 MWs on your face without you having a chance to react then either your army has the tools to mitigate that (in which case yes, a skilled player might* be able to come back from it) or it does not. My old tourney list lost plenty of games, but it only ever lost three where it got a round 1-2 double, all of which required not only my opponent to be very skilled but critical errors on my part for them to exploit. And that is just it; winning after getting hit with a 1-2 double is often down to mistakes made by the player who got it, not the victim.
*Assuming they get a subsequent double themselves.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Right now terrain that obscures los does not work if the shooter or the target can fly. As all Nighthaunt can fly it just makes things even worse for them. They are in a uniquely bad spot for characters getting sniped, having it far worse than any other army.
Keyword being now. Unless you have seen rulebook you don't know how it works month later.
Correct, I was outlining the problem as it exists now and why the Nighthaunt army needs more than Look Out Sir from the new edition to counter their shooting woes. At no point did I mean to asset that is how things will continue to work so I find your hostility unwarranted.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: Sadly there are many who love the doubleturn
I agree with everything else you said, save this one point. I do not believe that there are that many people who truly *like* the double turn, I think there are many people willing to find entertainment in it because like it or not random initiative is part of the rules. And I don't think that is a sad thing, nor is there anything wrong with people who genuinely do love it. The sad part lies in people feeling the need to justify that with false claims of tactical nuance, doubly so for there being no need to justify it their enjoyment in the first place.
The double turn is one of those things people like because they're used to it. But the fact that you never, ever, ever see for people calling it to be put into 40k should tell you something. And the fact that nobody ever advertises AOS as being the awesome game everyone should play because of the double turn. It's always this thing to be explained away, never an actual selling point.
The double turn equivalent has been part of the Middle-Earth sbg since it's inception and the games ruleset is considered one of the best GW has ever put out. But from what limited info we've seen, it seems like they could be pulling an equivalent of the heroic actions from it and implementing it into 3.0
Middle Earth has heavy alternate activation elements, making talking about a "double turn" a bit silly. It really ends up being a very different thing.
ME does have the best ruleset of any GW game, but it really only works for small matches. It really starts to chug even at the points values people play at competitively; it would be a disaster in an AOS or 40k sized game.
yukishiro1 wrote: The double turn is one of those things people like because they're used to it. But the fact that you never, ever, ever see for people calling it to be put into 40k should tell you something. And the fact that nobody ever advertises AOS as being the awesome game everyone should play because of the double turn. It's always this thing to be explained away, never an actual selling point.
Yeah, like how you can tell that toughness is a stupid rule because you never see AoS people clamoring for it and you never see people trying to sell the game with it.
See the same with: Invulnerable saves, detachments, the rule of 3, command points as they're implemented in EITHER game, free summoning, requisition point summoning, etc.
It's almost like...AoS and 40k are...different games?! What!?!??!
Hate on the double turn all you want, this is still a really asinine take.
Actually you do regularly see discussions about whether toughness should make a comeback in AOS. But way to defeat your own argument with the very first example, I guess; it certainly makes it easier for everyone else.
"You should play this awesome game called AOS because it has double turns and those are great!" - said nobody, ever.
Also sometimes people won't name a specific rule but a concept - toughness isn't just a rule, it also represents the idea of creating different classes of unit, with some being tougher and harder to kill by others.
Right now in AoS anything can hurt anything else. Yes some units are better than others and some have high save values and thus you might want units with rending to increase the chances of hurting them; but you're only increasing the chance to hurt not the ability to hurt.
Adding something like toughness or other modifers can allow you to have units that can only be hurt by specific other kinds of unit (or weapon profiles if units have more than one weapon). That could mean GW can add/change a bunch of units to be anti-monsters. Suddenly those skaven clanrats can't even hurt the monstrous creature, so the Skaven player has to consider that - either their strategy is to tarpit and sacrifice their clanrats; avoid the creature; or bring some anti-monstrous creature units of their own.
doing such can increase the number of unit types within the army and can help armies with big unit rosters have more niches
Yeah toughness is probably the #1 thing I see people wanting from 40k, followed by invul saves. That those were his first two examples displays the validity of the point he was trying to oppose, ironically.
yukishiro1 wrote: The double turn is one of those things people like because they're used to it. But the fact that you never, ever, ever see for people calling it to be put into 40k should tell you something. And the fact that nobody ever advertises AOS as being the awesome game everyone should play because of the double turn. It's always this thing to be explained away, never an actual selling point.
It's a weird sort of 'sunk cost fallacy' among the fanboys, who you just know would praise GW as genius' if they removed it.
Inquisitor Gideon wrote: The double turn equivalent has been part of the Middle-Earth sbg since it's inception and the games ruleset is considered one of the best GW has ever put out. But from what limited info we've seen, it seems like they could be pulling an equivalent of the heroic actions from it and implementing it into 3.0
As has been said, Middle-Earth using alternating phases, which is very different to Double Turn being part of an I Go, You Go ruleset.
You don't see anybody complaining about the potential of double/triple/quadruple turns in Bolt Action, for example.
Overread wrote: Adding something like toughness or other modifers can allow you to have units that can only be hurt by specific other kinds of unit (or weapon profiles if units have more than one weapon).
That's not even slightly true. 40K has Toughness and (to the detriment of the game) everything can still wound everything.
Overread wrote: Adding something like toughness or other modifers can allow you to have units that can only be hurt by specific other kinds of unit (or weapon profiles if units have more than one weapon).
That's not even slightly true. 40K has Toughness and (to the detriment of the game) everything can still wound everything.
Currently yes and in the past there were some things that were impossible (or nearly so).
It is a structural element which can then be tuned and there is a balance to be found so that it introduces niches without breaking balance.
Right now AoS has no such structural element like that.
The thing is, 40k has tanks and associated anti-tank weapons which are specifically supposed to be strong vs them but inefficient against other targets. In AoS, broadly speaking, a weapon that is good against large targets would also be usable to kill multiple small ones (and exceptions can be dealt with via 'deals extra damage vs monsters' abilities). AoS could certainly add nuance with a toughness score, but doesn't inherently need it quite like 40k does.
The point of S/T is to create units that simply cannot be reasonably dealt with via spamming lots of little attacks; because a Land Raider is not going to go down to massed bolter fire no matter how many of them you have. That such is the preferred method of dealing with tanks shows the unfortunate reality; while the theory of S/T is great GW does not utilize it in a manner that actually makes the system better for it.
Overread wrote: Adding something like toughness or other modifers can allow you to have units that can only be hurt by specific other kinds of unit (or weapon profiles if units have more than one weapon).
That's not even slightly true. 40K has Toughness and (to the detriment of the game) everything can still wound everything.
I'll take everything can wound everything over non-weakening T8 Monstrous Creatures immune to the vast majority of the game's attacks.
NinthMusketeer wrote:The thing is, 40k has tanks and associated anti-tank weapons which are specifically supposed to be strong vs them but inefficient against other targets. In AoS, broadly speaking, a weapon that is good against large targets would also be usable to kill multiple small ones (and exceptions can be dealt with via 'deals extra damage vs monsters' abilities). AoS could certainly add nuance with a toughness score, but doesn't inherently need it quite like 40k does.
The point of S/T is to create units that simply cannot be reasonably dealt with via spamming lots of little attacks; because a Land Raider is not going to go down to massed bolter fire no matter how many of them you have. That such is the preferred method of dealing with tanks shows the unfortunate reality; while the theory of S/T is great GW does not utilize it in a manner that actually makes the system better for it.
True to a point; but if GW wanted they could make it more complex. Eg a spear might be great against a gargant or a dragon, but not as effective against close quarters infantry.
That said it does become a bit more of a tricky thing if dealt with by the idea of the weapon; instead it might be viewed more so as training and experience. Ergo a unit of swordsmen might be trained to fight other humanoid sized enemies and, whilst their weapons might work on a dragon hide, they might lack any training or skill in such a fight.
Meanwhile a dragon-slayer might have the same weapon types, but has specific training to overcome bigger foes.
Overread wrote: Adding something like toughness or other modifers can allow you to have units that can only be hurt by specific other kinds of unit (or weapon profiles if units have more than one weapon).
That's not even slightly true. 40K has Toughness and (to the detriment of the game) everything can still wound everything.
I'll take everything can wound everything over non-weakening T8 Monstrous Creatures immune to the vast majority of the game's attacks.
Aye there's a balancing point. I seem to recall that all the time flying units, when they first came out, were roughly similar. Almost unkillable by anything that wasn't dedicated anti-air and if you spammed air units you could do a lot of damage whilst your opponent was nullified against dealing it back.
OF course there are ways to balance things out. The old Force Organisation chart from 40K was a neat way to limit some unit options to prevent spamming - the game outgrew it (a lot of elites were added to many forces - way more than the force chart allowed); but the concept was sound.
Similarly there is a balance between creating specialist counter niches whilst not creating a situation where unit spam or unit type spam can result in one player being unable to harm the other.
Like many balance discussions around GW rules; there's the theory of how rules can be used and then the practical of how GW might use it and does use it.
Overread wrote: Currently yes and in the past there were some things that were impossible (or nearly so).
Ok... and?
Overread wrote: It is a structural element which can then be tuned and there is a balance to be found so that it introduces niches without breaking balance.
Right... and?
Overread wrote: Right now AoS has no such structural element like that.
Yes. We all know that. Weapons have a To Wound value, meaning that your Grot and my Bloodthirster always get wounded on the same values (barring piled on auras and special rules). It's kinda dumb, as it means your only methods of showing durability are armour saves or pumping up wounds. It's another example of GW creating a rule that doesn't scale well at all.
I mean, can you imagine a version of 40k where Lasguns always wound on 4+'s regardless of what they're firing at, and in order to get around that they have to give individual units even more fething "bespoke" rules to skew the wound rolls. It's far simpler to have a central wounding mechanic that applies to everyone. Why that was ever taken out of Warhammer I do not know.
I believe that, in age of Sigmar, toughness is measured more by Wounds than a Toughness stat. Might not be as granular as 40K having both, but that seems to be how they do it.
It would be nice, however, if the game wasn’t so deadly. The power creep over the last editions has sadly made even basic battle line units way better than they used to be.
I’m still not a fan of GW’s love for deleting entire units in 1 round of shooting/combat in their games; seeing your epic monster you spent hours painting get knocked off the table before you use it is pretty lame, especially if it was just a bunch of clan rats or something.
The lethality of both AOS and 40k are a direct result of the scoring system. When you score based on having bodies on an objective, but your ruleset does not provide any way to remove bodies from an objective other than killing them, massive lethality is required to avoid the game just devolving into an exercise in who can squeeze 1 more grunt onto the objective than the other guy, which isn't entertaining gameplay.
GW has kinda backed itself into a corner here, and the only ways out are (1) coming up with a more dynamic scoring system, or (2) adding back into the game rules that allow you to force models off an objective by some means other than simply killing them. For example...the old morale systems where units actually fled physically on the table, not by being removed as if they were killed.
Overread wrote: Currently yes and in the past there were some things that were impossible (or nearly so).
Ok... and?
Overread wrote: It is a structural element which can then be tuned and there is a balance to be found so that it introduces niches without breaking balance.
Right... and?
Overread wrote: Right now AoS has no such structural element like that.
Yes. We all know that. Weapons have a To Wound value, meaning that your Grot and my Bloodthirster always get wounded on the same values (barring piled on auras and special rules). It's kinda dumb, as it means your only methods of showing durability are armour saves or pumping up wounds. It's another example of GW creating a rule that doesn't scale well at all.
I mean, can you imagine a version of 40k where Lasguns always wound on 4+'s regardless of what they're firing at, and in order to get around that they have to give individual units even more fething "bespoke" rules to skew the wound rolls. It's far simpler to have a central wounding mechanic that applies to everyone. Why that was ever taken out of Warhammer I do not know.
AoS simply gives things that are tougher a higher wounds count or a fnp (fnp not being a pain to play since damage boils over). It is the same end result unless one needs the nuance of units that are extremely difficult to kill with normal weapons without an equivalent increase in durability against high-potency weapons. It works because if you shoot a giant with a hundred arrows yeah, it will die, just as it would to a few ballista shots. A tank, on the other hand, will absolutely die to a few lascannon shots but emerge perfectly fine from a bullets. The latter case is impractical to execute with AoS' fixed wound system as giving the tank extra wounds would also increase its durability against those lascannon shots and that isn't really the point, nor do simple armor saves grant the granularity to manage that without causing collateral issues. So 40k really has a need for S/T values that AoS does not.
Now the natural counter-argument is that nuance could still be used to improve AoS. And you are right it could. But GW is already failing, abundantly, at doing it in 40k so I think there is a strong sentiment among AoS players of 'why bother?'
yukishiro1 wrote: The double turn is one of those things people like because they're used to it. But the fact that you never, ever, ever see for people calling it to be put into 40k should tell you something. And the fact that nobody ever advertises AOS as being the awesome game everyone should play because of the double turn. It's always this thing to be explained away, never an actual selling point.
Or by people who have learned to deal with it.
99.99% of problems with double turn are problems with battletomes and not rule itself.
And without it many matchups would be decided before game starts. Like in 40k look lists, see who goes first, know final result and even points for each +-5.
Many matchups depend on chance of double turn for one side to have a shot. Both aos and40k
Noobs complain, good players laugh and win either way(
What you wrote contradicts itself, which certainly makes refuting it easy.
It can't both be the case that how the double turn shakes out determines who wins in many "many matchups" but that good players "laugh and win either way." These are literally mutually exclusive possibilities.
yukishiro1 wrote: What you wrote contradicts itself, which certainly makes refuting it easy.
It can't both be the case that how the double turn shakes out determines who wins in many "many matchups" but that good players "laugh and win either way." These are literally mutually exclusive possibilities.
Option - there are not many "good players" playing AOS? I think that, logically, that would allow for both of tneva's scenarios.
I once got this answer when asking a good player about the double turn:
In a strictly back-and-forth turn structure, it becomes increasingly easy to predict which side is going to win as the game goes on. When the balance of the battle tips to one side, the momentum will generally continue in that direction. This encourages players to build for the alpha strike, dealing a blow in the first turn that the opponent can hopefully never recover from. In extreme cases, the roll for initiative in the first turn of a game of 40K can all but determine the outcome immediately, and you might as well not play the game at all. In AoS, you can't rely on an alpha strike to carry you through to victory, because a timely double turn from your opponent can shift the momentum back in their favour.
Similarly, as the second player, you can't rely on a double turn to recover your position. This discourages you from over-extending - if you play for the double turn and then don't get it, the impact can be just as devastating against you when your enemy gets to retaliate. It's an essential risk/reward mechanic that keeps the game interesting.
it comes down that players cannot play for early turn wins like in 40k because if you have bad luck and/or are the bad player you are not able to make the killing blow and the opponent can still win later on
the problem with 40k here is not that there is no double turn to counter alpha strike but the game is kind of too slow that you don't see full number of turns in tournaments so that the possibility to take advantage from an over-extending opponent is limited
the better comparision would be Kings of War, which is similar sized in number of units with strict alternating turns and double turn there is not needed to prevent that the player who gets the first turn has a much higher chance to win the game
and I never heard the argument that the possibility of double turn is needed in KoW to compensate for Alpha Strike possibilities or to break the monumentum
this comes just down to the usual everything that GW is doing is well designed and makes a lot of sense and is needed to make that game what it is, until it is gone than it is the best thing GW has ever done (we had the same discussions with vehicle facings/armour in 40k)
Yeah, like how you can tell that toughness is a stupid rule because you never see AoS people clamoring for it and you never see people trying to sell the game with it.
See the same with: Invulnerable saves, detachments, the rule of 3, command points as they're implemented in EITHER game, free summoning, requisition point summoning, etc.
It's almost like...AoS and 40k are...different games?! What!?!??!
Hate on the double turn all you want, this is still a really asinine take.
Man, I would love to see strength and toughness in AoS.
kodos wrote: I once got this answer when asking a good player about the double turn:
In a strictly back-and-forth turn structure, it becomes increasingly easy to predict which side is going to win as the game goes on. When the balance of the battle tips to one side, the momentum will generally continue in that direction. This encourages players to build for the alpha strike, dealing a blow in the first turn that the opponent can hopefully never recover from. In extreme cases, the roll for initiative in the first turn of a game of 40K can all but determine the outcome immediately, and you might as well not play the game at all. In AoS, you can't rely on an alpha strike to carry you through to victory, because a timely double turn from your opponent can shift the momentum back in their favour.
Similarly, as the second player, you can't rely on a double turn to recover your position. This discourages you from over-extending - if you play for the double turn and then don't get it, the impact can be just as devastating against you when your enemy gets to retaliate. It's an essential risk/reward mechanic that keeps the game interesting.
it comes down that players cannot play for early turn wins like in 40k because if you have bad luck and/or are the bad player you are not able to make the killing blow and the opponent can still win later on
the problem with 40k here is not that there is no double turn to counter alpha strike but the game is kind of too slow that you don't see full number of turns in tournaments so that the possibility to take advantage from an over-extending opponent is limited
the better comparision would be Kings of War, which is similar sized in number of units with strict alternating turns and double turn there is not needed to prevent that the player who gets the first turn has a much higher chance to win the game
and I never heard the argument that the possibility of double turn is needed in KoW to compensate for Alpha Strike possibilities or to break the monumentum
this comes just down to the usual everything that GW is doing is well designed and makes a lot of sense and is needed to make that game what it is, until it is gone than it is the best thing GW has ever done (we had the same discussions with vehicle facings/armour in 40k)
In practice I don't see it working out that way from watching games tho. Either the player going first commits and gets crushed if his opponent gets a double turn, or he plays cagey, the player going second gets to alpha strike first and set up for a double turn. If he gets it he often does enough crippling damage that a return double is not enough to claw back and if he doesn't get the double he is still fine because he got in the the first good hit, and gets a 2nd chance at a double.
It might have been something that worked in the first edition but the game has changed a lot since then and, like 40k, seems to be running into lethality issues that make getting 2 magic/shooting/charge phases without a reply from your opponent back breaking. As well as more shooting and mobility that means that 'overextending' is much less a thing now.
As for Toughness in AoS. Its a matter of design space. A lot of weapons are samey, there is no real difference between a 3+, 4+ attack and a 4+, 3+ attack. its even easier to figure out what the 'best' weapon is because there is a variable less to consider (your targets Toughness), its just less readily apparent because there are not a lot of weapon options within units.
kodos wrote: I once got this answer when asking a good player about the double turn:
In a strictly back-and-forth turn structure, it becomes increasingly easy to predict which side is going to win as the game goes on. When the balance of the battle tips to one side, the momentum will generally continue in that direction. This encourages players to build for the alpha strike, dealing a blow in the first turn that the opponent can hopefully never recover from. In extreme cases, the roll for initiative in the first turn of a game of 40K can all but determine the outcome immediately, and you might as well not play the game at all. In AoS, you can't rely on an alpha strike to carry you through to victory, because a timely double turn from your opponent can shift the momentum back in their favour.
Similarly, as the second player, you can't rely on a double turn to recover your position. This discourages you from over-extending - if you play for the double turn and then don't get it, the impact can be just as devastating against you when your enemy gets to retaliate. It's an essential risk/reward mechanic that keeps the game interesting.
it comes down that players cannot play for early turn wins like in 40k because if you have bad luck and/or are the bad player you are not able to make the killing blow and the opponent can still win later on
the problem with 40k here is not that there is no double turn to counter alpha strike but the game is kind of too slow that you don't see full number of turns in tournaments so that the possibility to take advantage from an over-extending opponent is limited
the better comparision would be Kings of War, which is similar sized in number of units with strict alternating turns and double turn there is not needed to prevent that the player who gets the first turn has a much higher chance to win the game
and I never heard the argument that the possibility of double turn is needed in KoW to compensate for Alpha Strike possibilities or to break the monumentum
this comes just down to the usual everything that GW is doing is well designed and makes a lot of sense and is needed to make that game what it is, until it is gone than it is the best thing GW has ever done (we had the same discussions with vehicle facings/armour in 40k)
The thing is the double turn doesn't actually stop alpha strikes happening. In a game where mid-table objectives are often a core part of the gameplay and where you have perhaps only 4-5 functional turns in most games, you can't spend too many turns sitting back in case your opponent gets a double turn. If you sit back and don't advance into the game board, then you're giving your opponent early game advantage in potentially securing more objectives. You are sacrificing board control on the chance that a single dice roll will let your opponent act twice in a row.
So pretty much every army has to press their advantage when it is their turn.
Because the doubleturn is totally disconnected from the actual game state you can't really plan for it. You can't plan to get it nor to not get it; similarly you can't plan the same for your opponent. Furthermore planning to get it and planning not to get it are almost mutually exclusive strategies. In the end you have to pick only one and because the chance of the double turn happening is completely random, its a huge gamble.
Most "ahh but it might let the underdog win" or "it might change the predictable game result" etc... are honestly quite poor justifications for the mechanic. Yes it might do those things, or it might take a balanced game and tip it in favour of one person ; or it might let the person who is winning win so much the underdog hasn't even got a chance. It is a huge thing and its just a single dice roll each turn with limited practical strategy connected to it. Heck one of the strategies I hear people rolling out to "deal" with it is to learn to screen your powerful units with chaff and weaker infantry - that's not a doubleturn strategy, that's just a good solid normal strategy for the game in the first place.
Which I think does highlight that AoS might well have a lot of new wargamers and also highlights how poor the wargaming community is with teaching and sharing knowledge of game strategy. IT's avast gaping black hole within the hobby. We can get huge amounts of articles on dice theory and painting and building, but when it comes to actually playing the game its a wasteland.
Which I think does highlight that AoS might well have a lot of new wargamers and also highlights how poor the wargaming community is with teaching and sharing knowledge of game strategy. IT's avast gaping black hole within the hobby. We can get huge amounts of articles on dice theory and painting and building, but when it comes to actually playing the game its a wasteland.
this
so yes, it comes down to good and bad players can handle it or not, but not in the way that a good player can recover from a double turn, but that a bad player cannot use a double turn to his full advantage
and this is also a strategy I have seen by good players, if the see/know that the opponent has less expierence they give him the chance for the first double turn because they know that it won't be use in a way to win the game
and those players also don't share their actual gameplay but come up with "learn to position and use your units" instead of going into details on how to use it or share their deployment against different opponents
AoS gives possibilities for strategy and tactical gameplay, but not in a way most people think of a mass-skirmish game
if most players would are on the same "good" level, double strike is an issue
Fiends of Slaanesh were a good test of anti-monster not so good vs infantry type of unit. That would be a good way of replicating S+T, but it must be a failure or something because there dosn't seem to be many units like that. Some few are getting the "Your number of attacks is equal to the number of enemy models within range". If these two rules were more extended into the system it would be a solid S+T system.
The first new Slaanesh tome had the core issue that with the way depravity worked there just wasn't any reason to take troops beyond your battleline requirements. The rest of your points were best spent on leaders and especially multiwound leaders because they were the only things that would generate loads of depravity to summon more models to the table.
Fiends were slightly too expensive (I felt) but when they didn't have battleline and when they couldn't generate depravity there just was no reason to take a unit of fiends over another leader.
It was an issue that plagued the book and its thankfully a bit better now with the new version.
Regarding S/T etc. I would not want it back. First of all, all it does is add one extra step to combat resolution, and second of all, it gives GW more space to muck up. AoS one saving grace as a game is how easy it is to learn and how little design space there is in the core rules for GW to muck it up. Adding more elements increases the chance for GW Balance to appear exponentially.
Cronch wrote: Regarding S/T etc. I would not want it back. First of all, all it does is add one extra step to combat resolution, and second of all, it gives GW more space to muck up. AoS one saving grace as a game is how easy it is to learn and how little design space there is in the core rules for GW to muck it up. Adding more elements increases the chance for GW Balance to appear exponentially.
Its not an extra step, your already rolling that dice. Comparing the stats barely takes any time
Heh, people saying double turn stops alpha strikes--it doesn't. My tourney list back in the day was alpha strike with single-drop deployment so I could choose second. Play every round assuming I will NOT get the double, because if I did I just won and there was no need to plan for it. There was zero element of planning for both outcomes, because only one of those outcomes actually required forward planning. And if I theoretically got into a case where a double would have been disadvantageous? Just don't take it.
And people wonder why shooting & magic are so dominant.
Age of Sigmar already has armor save and wounds, so two profile values to represent how tough a model is. And both of them can be affected by the weapon/unit attacking them, in the form of rend and damage. So does the game really need a third profile value that does the same thing?
Bleh I hate double turn. If they don't have some serious counter-balance AoS will be a pass again for me. Maybe bidding for first? I dunno. I like everything else so far at least.
Yeah, I imagine it'll be somewhere in the £125-150 range. Hopefully on the lighter side. Now I just need to decide if I like the weird, stubby legged proportions enough to try and order one.
Albino Squirrel wrote: Age of Sigmar already has armor save and wounds, so two profile values to represent how tough a model is. And both of them can be affected by the weapon/unit attacking them, in the form of rend and damage. So does the game really need a third profile value that does the same thing?
No, I think two is enough to give you the good spread on the axis of "rigid but brittle" to "punching bag that won't die". I personally just find it odd the way they went about that. Why roll for both hitting and wounding when there isn't anything to compare them to? You don't need double the randomness, one arbitrary roll would give you that (I suppose it does even out spikes a bit, but I would put money on that not being the reason). I'd prefer there be a "dodge" and "toughness" stat to compare to, so elves could be dodgy and ironjaws could tank it. Then you could compare it to the "accuracy" and "power" of the attack to see what you need to hit and wound. There's be no need for saves, which would give some people a lesser sense of involvement (a lot of people feel good saving their models), but would speed things up and give you a better range of defensive stats. Wounds are mostly fine as is.
I think saves are important, they do give the other player some sense of contribution and event during their opponents turn. Even if it is purely reactionary its still gives them something to do besides watch their opponent play their turn and remove models.
Now sure its not as fun as having your own turn, but it is something I think in a game with long turns per person its important to keep both sides engaged.
Which is another downside of the doubleturn, because it means one person has to wait twice as long for their turn to do something besides reactionary roles (and some close combat attacks)
Separate hit and wound rolls are important because they counteract randomness. Rolling really well on the hit roll AND the wound roll is exponentially less likely than just one, the opponent getting a crappy save roll to boot even more so. It helps laws of average curb down random dice rolls so that things aren't totally random all the time. Ties into why MWs on 6s to hit are such an issue while on 6s to wound are not--the former skips both of those other rolls while the latter only one. People don't like it when they lose a key unit to one good roll, just like they don't enjoy losing the game to one good initiative roll. Non TFGs don't like being on the winning side of that either. Hit/wound/save falls into the butter zone of being enough rolls to keep randomness in check while also not bogging down gameplay.
Well after receiving the Slaanesh Twins today,
I must say their profile makes far more sense.
Box opened, they are tinier and far smaller than
expected on the pictures.
Nothing on part with the KoS as far as
size is concerned.
As a consequence, a lot of very fragile,
small parts in the kit.
A good example of how one can be mislead
by judging from a few preview pictures...
Pre-orders are usually announced on a Sunday, around 6pm U.K. time. I concede I may have missed an announcement that the, erm, announcement, is coming today.
In other news, I just built my Kragnos. What a really lovely kit! Nothing too fiddly, and I’d argue designed for sub-assemblies of the tactical rock, Kragnos and the shield.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Pre-orders are usually announced on a Sunday, around 6pm U.K. time. I concede I may have missed an announcement that the, erm, announcement, is coming today.
In other news, I just built my Kragnos. What a really lovely kit! Nothing too fiddly, and I’d argue designed for sub-assemblies of the tactical rock, Kragnos and the shield.
Now to find a painting guide and copy it
You did
Check back tomorrow to find out when you’ll be able to pre-order the Dominion boxed set!
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Pre-orders are usually announced on a Sunday, around 6pm U.K. time. I concede I may have missed an announcement that the, erm, announcement, is coming today.
) got him into 
