Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A fluff question for people: Khorne troops have loads of skulls, obviously. But could a necromancer bring those skulls back to life and have them biting the Khorne troops in the ass or getting them to act like nipple clamps?
Put it on the necromancer, sorry deathmage, warscroll!
- this unit gets +3 attacks vs. Chaos units due to bringing the dead back to life to bite their ankles.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A fluff question for people: Khorne troops have loads of skulls, obviously. But could a necromancer bring those skulls back to life and have them biting the Khorne troops in the ass or getting them to act like nipple clamps?
He could, but what can a skull do if it doesn't have a body? Most of them don't even have jaws so they can't bite.
I kinda like the Chaos Stuff. Warriors are big, "marauders" are rather human which I like. The beast is .. strange.. but its chaos, so okay. The heroes are pretty sweet too.
agnosto wrote: nor does he condone the making of pew-pew or clang-clang noises when pushing your models around.
Well, duh. You make pew-pew or clang-clang noises during the shooting and melee phases, respectively.
You make marchy and drivey noises(or fwoowoowooowooo if you're an Eldar player) when pushing the models around.
I stand corrected. If you play dwarves, or whatever they're called now, do you have to sing the munchkin song from Wizard of Oz or just the Hi-Ho! song from sleeping beauty?
I like how in the art you can clearly tell the Lord Celestant's mount is draconic-looking, but they somehow couldn't get that across on the actual model and, like the Lizardmen carnosaur, it has this weird almost dog-like face with horns.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A fluff question for people: Khorne troops have loads of skulls, obviously. But could a necromancer bring those skulls back to life and have them biting the Khorne troops in the ass or getting them to act like nipple clamps?
He could, but what can a skull do if it doesn't have a body? Most of them don't even have jaws so they can't bite.
They can still roll menacingly.
You obviously don't remember the skull from trapdoor
Do I need to play a single game to find out the weaknesses of it? No.
People have been playing wargames for 20+ years. Some dozends of different games and editions. You cannot deny people their expertise on game rules. We KNOW when something is broken.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A fluff question for people: Khorne troops have loads of skulls, obviously. But could a necromancer bring those skulls back to life and have them biting the Khorne troops in the ass or getting them to act like nipple clamps?
Put it on the necromancer, sorry deathmage, warscroll!
- this unit gets +3 attacks vs. Chaos units due to bringing the dead back to life to bite their ankles.
Do I need to play a single game to find out the weaknesses of it? No.
People have been playing wargames for 20+ years. Some dozends of different games and editions. You cannot deny people their expertise on game rules. We KNOW when something is broken.
agnosto wrote: nor does he condone the making of pew-pew or clang-clang noises when pushing your models around.
Well, duh. You make pew-pew or clang-clang noises during the shooting and melee phases, respectively.
You make marchy and drivey noises(or fwoowoowooowooo if you're an Eldar player) when pushing the models around.
I stand corrected. If you play dwarves, or whatever they're called now, do you have to sing the munchkin song from Wizard of Oz or just the Hi-Ho! song from sleeping beauty?
Neither, you sing a totally unique, copyrighted and trademarked song which in no way suspiciously resembles either of those songs because all things GW are created in a vacuum and therefore any similarity is totes coincidence.
Do I need to play a single game to find out the weaknesses of it? No.
People have been playing wargames for 20+ years. Some dozends of different games and editions. You cannot deny people their expertise on game rules. We KNOW when something is broken.
agnosto wrote: nor does he condone the making of pew-pew or clang-clang noises when pushing your models around.
Well, duh. You make pew-pew or clang-clang noises during the shooting and melee phases, respectively.
You make marchy and drivey noises(or fwoowoowooowooo if you're an Eldar player) when pushing the models around.
I stand corrected. If you play dwarves, or whatever they're called now, do you have to sing the munchkin song from Wizard of Oz or just the Hi-Ho! song from sleeping beauty?
Neither, you sing a totally unique, copyrighted and trademarked song which in no way suspiciously resembles either of those songs because all things GW are created in a vacuum and therefore any similarity is totes coincidence.
IP! IP! IP so off to court I go!
Sounds suspiciously like someone who got arrested for public urination.
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: Popped into my local GW today to try and talk to the staff about AOS...that was fun.
I basically laid out the contents, rules, price etc etc and the staff had to claim that they did not know a thing, not a snippet or even the merest hint of what may come from them.
The end result? It really dampened my enthusiasm for AOS and I really lost some respect for the staff for having to act dumb. Admittedly that is from orders from head office but you would have thought they could offer something given how much has already been leaked about the game. GW continue to shoot themselves in the foot.
Have you ever been in the shop before?
Because if you hadn't, then I don't know why you really thought you would be able to have some kind of conversation with them about a major release which has had such issues with leaks.
I gotta agree with Kanluwen that you set yourself up for disappointment with your foolishly high expectations.
"Hey guys, tell me about the stuff that you have been told not to talk about, here this is what I have read online"
"Ummm, that's nice....hey Paul, is head office doing those mystery shopper things again? I think this random is seeing if I am going to spill anything"
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A fluff question for people: Khorne troops have loads of skulls, obviously. But could a necromancer bring those skulls back to life and have them biting the Khorne troops in the ass or getting them to act like nipple clamps?
He could, but what can a skull do if it doesn't have a body? Most of them don't even have jaws so they can't bite.
They can still roll menacingly.
You obviously don't remember the skull from trapdoor
Maybe somebody will post a picture of it
I'm sensing that someone never met Bob. (bonus points for whomever gets the reference)
I think most people's idea of whether a game is in a healthy state or not is based upon their (usually) very localised experience. What this tends to discount is those, like myself, that do not really play much and primarily collect and paint armies. Those that collect and barely even construct their armies barely enter into the conversation. Ultimately we have to go on the GW financials to see how things are going, and even then that fails to account for those with massive armies that have not bought anything for years, currency fluctuations and a hundred other dull reasons. So the state of 40k? I really have no idea.
What I do know is that AOS is being bought into my household.
RoninXiC wrote: Well actualyl 40k is pretty much a laughing stock if you go unbound..
And yet no one does (at least competitively).
Of course they don't, because it doesnt work.
Which makes this game that follows it, after they have actually seen what happens, even more of a mystery to me.
Unbound is roundly criticized for being incredibly unbalanced and not fun to play, so everyone uses the alternative. Next game releases with unbound an no alternative at all.
I mean, that takes some monumentally bad management to end up with that scenario.
To be fair I should have offered some context. I am a regular, have been for 10+ years. But it was a relatively new member of staff and the manager was on his day off. But surely give the customer something to try and build some anticipation?
To be fair I should have offered some context. I am a regular, have been for 10+ years. But it was a relatively new member of staff and the manager was on his day off. But surely give the customer something to try and build some anticipation?
New member of staff that knows you fairly well or not well?
If it had been the regular manager, I'm sure you might have gotten some conversation but in any case--the "something to try and build some anticipation" might be something that the new member of staff hasn't actually been brought in on yet.
To be fair I should have offered some context. I am a regular, have been for 10+ years. But it was a relatively new member of staff and the manager was on his day off. But surely give the customer something to try and build some anticipation?
New member of staff that knows you fairly well or not well?
If it had been the regular manager, I'm sure you might have gotten some conversation but in any case--the "something to try and build some anticipation" might be something that the new member of staff hasn't actually been brought in on yet.
If you play someone with an Unbound list of just Wraithknights, Riptides and Heldrakes (which I have never seen) of course you won't have fun. But I doubt they'll have much fun either.
Try playing Unbound as an excuse to make a fluffy or fun list that is otherwise impossible with the Force Organisation chart.
Besides, it is widely agreed that armies made up of the new Codex specific detachments and formations have far more beardy potential than any Unbound army.
What does this have to do with Age of Sigmar? Point is people thought Unbound was going to make the game unplayable. Of course they all had years experience and could tell just by reading the rules, they didn't need to play any games to be so sure of themselves.
If you honestly think GW have been disappointing in their games designs for the last decade then why are you even here? Because some small part of you hopes that you are wrong and that this game will be awesome like all the others before it.
So as amusing as it is to read the doomsday posts and as much fun as I will have reminding you of whats been said after you're still posting months after release, please try not to be so negative.
To be fair I should have offered some context. I am a regular, have been for 10+ years. But it was a relatively new member of staff and the manager was on his day off. But surely give the customer something to try and build some anticipation?
New member of staff that knows you fairly well or not well?
If it had been the regular manager, I'm sure you might have gotten some conversation but in any case--the "something to try and build some anticipation" might be something that the new member of staff hasn't actually been brought in on yet.
Hiring for attitude and not skills folks!
I'm sure that a "skilled" salesperson doesn't need a job working at a GW shop.
If you play someone with an Unbound list of just Wraithknights, Riptides and Heldrakes (which I have never seen) of course you won't have fun. But I doubt they'll have much fun either.
Try playing Unbound as an excuse to make a fluffy or fun list that is otherwise impossible with the Force Organisation chart.
Besides, it is widely agreed that armies made up of the new Codex specific detachments and formations have far more beardy potential than any Unbound army.
What does this have to do with Age of Sigmar? Point is people thought Unbound was going to make the game unplayable. Of course they all had years experience and could tell just by reading the rules, they didn't need to play any games to be so sure of themselves.
But if no one actually plays unbound then that kind of indicates that those people were right, doesn't it?
Triple the salary and the skilled salesperson would probably not take it.
That said he was a young lad, or at least younger than me, so was probably towing the company line to the letter. I think it just threw me, hey maybe he legitimately knew nothing?
That said this release may well be the last roll of the dice for Fantasy. If so, and contrary to my beliefs because of what we currently know, I hope that AOS succeeds.
Unless we're being completely lied to, this game has no points system or any other way of deciding whether two armies are equal. That's way worse than unbound.
XT-1984 wrote: Their argument was that Unbound would destroy the game, not that no one would play Unbound.
If no one plays unbound because they do not like it, and instead of taking note of that and making your next game more to the taste of your actual paying customers, double down and remove all options but unbound, what effect do you think that will have?
Besides, it is widely agreed that armies made up of the new Codex specific detachments and formations have far more beardy potential than any Unbound army.
Two wrongs don't make a right. The fact that bound detachments and multisource forces are broken doesn't excuse broken unbound armies either. They're both legal and they're both horrible ideas that don't excuse each other.
Well with a name like Warboss I would guess you are an Ork player? If so you're right in one respect, every other factions detachments are broken compared to Orks.
My point is I am still of the opinion that we have not seen the bigger picture yet.
I'm going to give this whole thing a chance this Saturday. My FLGS is going to run a demo and print out all the warsrolls for us to try out. I'm going and am going to give it a fair shake, but I'm honestly not excited at all about it.
Yeah Orks do but they are kinda bad. But I guess Orks were never meant to be the 'go to' competitive army. They've always epitomised the 'fun and random' aspect of the game.
When GW introduced allies and unbound they weren't looking at the tournament gamer. Say what you will merits and issues you have about this decision, but GW decided to focus their efforts elsewhere. I started playing 40k in 5th edition, and the group of people I was playing with already allowed both unbound and allies before the rules supported it. It was never about spamming or exploiting it was about saying, I want to try some different guys this game to see if I like them. Allies were mostly used to bolster a force to allow larger games. So when GW introduced these concepts with official rules I kind of liked their 'play it your way' approach.
It looks like they are doing the same thing with AoS but to another extreme. They don't want players to say, "that model is cool, but I don't collect that army so I wont buy it." If this is how they decided they are going to save the fantasy line then so be it. Established players have a right to be butt hurt, but they also have to realize that it was change or bust.
I think the game will end up failing if they do not introduce some kind of balancing mechanic but I'm sure there is a balancing mechanic in the works. My prediction is that GW decided it wasn't worth the man-hours to try to balance all 400 warscrolls they are unveiling for free, and instead we will see a balancing mechanic in an expensive supplement later.
XT-1984 wrote: Well with a name like Warboss I would guess you are an Ork player? If so you're right in one respect, every other factions detachments are broken compared to Orks.
My point is I am still of the opinion that we have not seen the bigger picture yet.
We probably haven't seen the bigger picture but frankly the general trend with GW is that the bigger picture tends to usually be worse. It went from escalation optional and allies to armies of nothing but superheavies and no faction or codex restrictions to just buy more stuff and we'll let you play it completely free in game as long as you spend dollars. As for what I play, I used to play orks and they were my favorite army in 3rd edition as I simply had the most fun with them (but not the best W/L). I currently have tau, IG, blood angels, dark angels, and eldar so pigeon holeing me into one category won't work. I simply don't like the tripling down of stupid that GW's design team has been doing and I see the same theme taking to the next level with AOS.
XT-1984 wrote: Well with a name like Warboss I would guess you are an Ork player? If so you're right in one respect, every other factions detachments are broken compared to Orks.
My point is I am still of the opinion that we have not seen the bigger picture yet.
We probably haven't seen the bigger picture but frankly the general trend with GW is that the bigger picture tends to usually be worse. It went from escalation optional and allies to armies of nothing but superheavies and no faction or codex restrictions to just buy more stuff and we'll let you play it completely free in game as long as you spend dollars. As for what I play, I used to play orks and they were my favorite army in 3rd edition as I simply had the most fun with them (but not the best W/L). I currently have tau, IG, blood angels, dark angels, and eldar so pigeon holeing me into one category won't work. I simply don't like the tripling down of stupid that GW's design team has been doing and I see the same theme taking to the next level with AOS.
Sorry, I'm not seeing where super-heavies come in to Adeptus Astartes books. Everyone else and their mum has super-heavies with exception to Sisters of Battle and Adeptus Astartes lol.
I wanna see more warscrolls. We still have no idea how footslogging heroes interact with other units. If they don't at all it's going to be so easy to snipe them so I am interested to see how it will work!
If you play someone with an Unbound list of just Wraithknights, Riptides and Heldrakes (which I have never seen) of course you won't have fun. But I doubt they'll have much fun either.
Try playing Unbound as an excuse to make a fluffy or fun list that is otherwise impossible with the Force Organisation chart.
Besides, it is widely agreed that armies made up of the new Codex specific detachments and formations have far more beardy potential than any Unbound army.
What does this have to do with Age of Sigmar? Point is people thought Unbound was going to make the game unplayable. Of course they all had years experience and could tell just by reading the rules, they didn't need to play any games to be so sure of themselves.
If you honestly think GW have been disappointing in their games designs for the last decade then why are you even here? Because some small part of you hopes that you are wrong and that this game will be awesome like all the others before it.
So as amusing as it is to read the doomsday posts and as much fun as I will have reminding you of whats been said after you're still posting months after release, please try not to be so negative.
I can choose not to play against Unbound armies because Bound is a thing that exists, indeed that's what most people choose to do. AoS doesn't give people that choice, it's all Unbound, all the time - if you genuinely can't see why that's an issue...
Considering the way 40k had Escalation forced into the main game, I don't doubt that WH-AOS will be the equivalent of Warhammer: Sigmar's All-Stars. As long as you buy some fantasy models, I think GW will consider it a success.
XT-1984 wrote: Well with a name like Warboss I would guess you are an Ork player? If so you're right in one respect, every other factions detachments are broken compared to Orks.
My point is I am still of the opinion that we have not seen the bigger picture yet.
We probably haven't seen the bigger picture but frankly the general trend with GW is that the bigger picture tends to usually be worse. It went from escalation optional and allies to armies of nothing but superheavies and no faction or codex restrictions to just buy more stuff and we'll let you play it completely free in game as long as you spend dollars. As for what I play, I used to play orks and they were my favorite army in 3rd edition as I simply had the most fun with them (but not the best W/L). I currently have tau, IG, blood angels, dark angels, and eldar so pigeon holeing me into one category won't work. I simply don't like the tripling down of stupid that GW's design team has been doing and I see the same theme taking to the next level with AOS.
Sorry, I'm not seeing where super-heavies come in to Adeptus Astartes books. Everyone else and their mum has super-heavies with exception to Sisters of Battle and Adeptus Astartes lol.
It was a comment in general about the state of 40k. Besides, with the glories of modern 40k, it doesn't matter what is in a particular codex or where the stupidity is; any player can feasibly use it via unbound, allies, detachments, and formations. GW decided to take that fail and expand it further by abandoning points apparently in AOS.
Just wanted to give a bit of a heads up on some of the rumors flying around
about age of sigmar. I talked to my rep and he was giving me the
scoop on the new edition.
On the 4th the new rules as well as all existing models will be getting
their rules released online. He say the chaos warscrolls and said there
were around 40 to be released. I didn't ask about points as that
controversy hadn't started yet.
Rulebook is short- he likened it to the X-Wing phamplet. As new models are
released, their rules will be available in the box as well as online
(they've been experimenting with this in some new 40k kits). Depending on
how sales go, the plan is for all races to receive updates in the future.
They are planning on releasing 1-3 Fantasy books a year with new units,
scenarios, campaign rules etc. These books will also advance the storyline
as it develops, like privateer does with their book releases.
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: Another new image, the rear cover of WD, more new terrain at the rear?
Spoiler:
Piece on the left is Ophidian Archway reversed. Gateway-looking piece on the right looks like one of the two unreleased terrain items that were seen in Triumph and Treachery rulebook.
I am a sucker for GW terrain and looking forward to add these into my collection.
Just wanted to give a bit of a heads up on some of the rumors flying around
about age of sigmar. I talked to my rep and he was giving me the
scoop on the new edition.
On the 4th the new rules as well as all existing models will be getting
their rules released online. He say the chaos warscrolls and said there
were around 40 to be released. I didn't ask about points as that
controversy hadn't started yet.
Rulebook is short- he likened it to the X-Wing phamplet. As new models are
released, their rules will be available in the box as well as online
(they've been experimenting with this in some new 40k kits). Depending on
how sales go, the plan is for all races to receive updates in the future.
They are planning on releasing 1-3 Fantasy books a year with new units,
scenarios, campaign rules etc. These books will also advance the storyline
as it develops, like privateer does with their book releases.
Ugh, naftka. Any other information on this source confirmed?
Kanluwen wrote: I could have swore that one of the screenshots we saw had a mention of "books to come", but I can't find it again.
Yep, there was a bit in the WD that talked about Warscrolls being "on our website and in books we will make" or something similar. So we know there will be more books, and that they will have rules in them. We don't know if they will have additional core rules or just Warscrolls.
gorgon wrote:So when the CEO goes on and on about kids in his missives...he has no idea who the main TARGET audience is for their products?
Given their financials the last few years, no, they have no idea who actually buys their stuff. They may be targetting kids in his missives, that also might explain why profits are in the toilet and Kirby got the boot.
Bear in mind that we haven't seen any Warscroll for a unit that isn't included in the boxed set. And that Warhammer 40ks Dark Vengeance didn't have points cost included either.
phantajisto wrote: Anyone know the base sizes of the models in the box set? The Stormcast ones look pretty huge, and maybe chaos ones are a bit smaller?
You can bag one off ebay for about 100$, around 125$ (I think?) plus tax if you buy it at an actual GW store or whatever. I wish I had that much money to spend on this release, but after diving into Skitarii and buying an Xbone there's just no way.
MWHistorian wrote: Unbound didn't destroy 40k, but it did help ruin it for me. Im sure im not the only one.
Also, flanking has been a huge and vital part of warfare since the beginning to the present.
No one plays Unbound, I sure haven't, I'm guessing you haven't either, how did it ruin anything really? Any time I've seen it mentioned it's been people playing narrative games or fluffy lists that don't work without Unbound, against people who are completely fine with it. Sounds pretty good to me.
MWHistorian wrote: Unbound didn't destroy 40k, but it did help ruin it for me. Im sure im not the only one.
Also, flanking has been a huge and vital part of warfare since the beginning to the present.
No one plays Unbound, I sure haven't, I'm guessing you haven't either, how did it ruin anything really? Any time I've seen it mentioned it's been people playing narrative games or fluffy lists that don't work without Unbound, against people who are completely fine with it. Sounds pretty good to me.
To repeat. Bound exists in 40k.
With the info we have right now, it is unbound all the time in the AoS Thunderdome.
I think the main problem is this has all the makings of a great introductory wargame for beginners. Simple rules, nothing to complex and not a big investment since the majority of the rules are going to be (for now) free online.
It actually reminds me of the old introductory games that gw introduced when I was young like Spacefleet, kerrunch and Ultra marines. They were aimed at getting you started in wargaming, but they were never the end point of the hobby. W:Aos seems to me like this type of toned down game.
Back in the day when I worked for gw, we had a nightmare of a time on Sundays teaching 'Youngbloods' how to play the game. Having to teach 10+ 12 year olds how to play 40k or Wfb was near impossible. Most if not all just wanted to put there newly bought figures on the table and roll some dice. We tried teaching them in steps with how movement worked and combat but they would often just wouldn't care, they just wanted to use their new shiny figures on the board. I think W:Aos will definately appeal to the younger game, but without anything to advance to many will just get bored, as they need something where they can win through their intellect not their wallet.
I sincerly hope that gw do develope a 'next level' system to go along with W:Aos if only to give these new players a place where they can grow as hobbyists, otherwise I can see a lot of them thinking the game is shallow and for kids and leaving the hobby behind. Although in a weird way W:Aos may end up being a gateway game into 40K for those looking for more depth.
Base sizes. The sigmarites all look to be on 40mm bases bar the lord who id guess is on 60mm
The chaos ones at a guess the lord and helbrute are on 60mm or the lord could be on a 50mm, the marauders look like 25mm and the warriors, bsb and beasmaster id guess at 32mm though they look small so could be 25mm
XT-1984 wrote: Bear in mind that we haven't seen any Warscroll for a unit that isn't included in the boxed set. And that Warhammer 40ks Dark Vengeance didn't have points cost included either.
So you're suggesting that the starter box units won't have points costs/some kind of 'slot' categorisation/unit size limitations, but every other unit will? And if not, why wait until later to provide the 'real' scrolls for the starter units?
Dark Vengeance contained the full rulebook for the game. Which talks about how to set up a game, in which segment it mentions points and FoC's.
AoS's rules, on the other hand, don't mention any kind of organisational mechanics in that segment. So they arn't really comparable.
XT-1984 wrote: AoS comes with a 93 page book and you are comparing 4 pages of it to the entire Dark Vengeance book.
It comes with a 4 page rulebook and a 96 page booklet. AFAIK the contents of said booklet are as yet unknown. It could just be full of background and painting guides.
gorgon wrote: So when the CEO goes on and on about kids in his missives...he has no idea who the main TARGET audience is for their products?
Our market is a niche market made up of people who want to collect our miniatures. They tend to be male, middle-class, discerning
teenagers and adults. We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants. These things
are otiose in a niche. - Tom Kirby
No mention of kids. Games Workshop's products are catered to teenagers and manchildren (though you don't necessarily have to be either to enjoy them).
And yes, GW apparently has no idea who their target audience is.
gorgon wrote: So when the CEO goes on and on about kids in his missives...he has no idea who the main TARGET audience is for their products?
Our market is a niche market made up of people who want to collect our miniatures. They tend to be male, middle-class, discerning
teenagers and adults. We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants. These things
are otiose in a niche. - Tom Kirby
No mention of kids. Games Workshop's products are catered to teenagers and manchildren (though you don't necessarily have to be either to enjoy them).
And yes, GW apparently has no idea who their target audience is.
Are we even sure this is being marketed to our own species?
gorgon wrote: So when the CEO goes on and on about kids in his missives...he has no idea who the main TARGET audience is for their products?
Our market is a niche market made up of people who want to collect our miniatures. They tend to be male, middle-class, discerning
teenagers and adults. We do no demographic research, we have no focus groups, we do not ask the market what it wants. These things
are otiose in a niche. - Tom Kirby
No mention of kids. Games Workshop's products are catered to teenagers and manchildren (though you don't necessarily have to be either to enjoy them).
And yes, GW apparently has no idea who their target audience is.
Kirby's quote is LOL worthy it hurts. I said earlier in this thread that is sort of thing is my actual job. Niche is dangerous in business. Not talking to your customers is insane. You don't have to agree with it , you can choose to ignore it - but it is crucial to know what they think!
This has death spiral written all over it. (That's not a name of a new Sigmarine chapter)
XT-1984 wrote: AoS comes with a 93 page book and you are comparing 4 pages of it to the entire Dark Vengeance book.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
Ah, we do know the contents then. There you go.
You can even see the war scrolls are in the last pages of the book because they have the page numbers on them.
The book was described in the WD article. Fluff, gaming and painting examples, war scrolls. NO RULES. The rules are the 4 pages and that's the game.
In fact, the vast majority of rules are going to be on those war scrolls, but the vast majority of rules will never be used in any given games because you simply cannot fit that many figures on the game board, though I'm sure somebody somewhere will give that a go.
And no points has been stated multiple times as well.
Azreal13 wrote: Literally everything about this is awesome except the rules.
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: Another new image, the rear cover of WD, more new terrain at the rear?
Spoiler:
Yes, the gate on the right looks like a new terrain piece...with the cool whispy portal energy circling the inside of the gateway...the piece in the back is obviously the back side of the Ophidian Gate we saw earlier.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Azreal13 wrote: Literally everything about this is awesome except the rules.
That's a big part of what makes this whole thing so frustrating. They've put so much work into getting everything else right... but are still overlooking the fact that the rules are what makes the game playable.
But that just brings me back to the idea that having a playable game isn't their focus right now... The 'game' is just to give people an excuse to buy pretty toys. Because buying the miniatures is what GW think our hobby is.
Azreal13 wrote: Literally everything about this is awesome except the rules.
My thoughts exactly (Minus the Sigmarines. feth those guys). Up until the no points/infinite unit sizes and unbound all the time (I could live with the rest) I was ready to cautiously step back into the GW 'verse.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
quickfuze wrote: I hate this release with every ounce of my core, but whatever that monster is in that picture....I want that as a model...in that scale...now
Get pet Komodo Dragon
Put next to Sigmarine model
????
Profit!
Azreal13 wrote: Literally everything about this is awesome except the rules.
And the aesthetic , idiotic names and the tiny little fact that they have killed WHFB. I can't see anything good about AoS with the possible exception of 'free' rules.
Azreal13 wrote: Literally everything about this is awesome except the rules.
That's a big part of what makes this whole thing so frustrating. They've put so much work into getting everything else right... but are still overlooking the fact that the rules are what makes the game playable.
But that just brings me back to the idea that having a playable game isn't their focus right now... The 'game' is just to give people an excuse to buy pretty toys. Because buying the miniatures is what GW think our hobby is.
That's what gets me. My first purchase of Citadel miniatures was in 1977. I bought some adventurers to play D&D. The ONLY reason I bought miniatures WAS TO PLAY A GAME. I got into wargaming shortly thereafter. I collected miniatures TO PLAY GAMES!
Now, Warhammer comes out and I was still buying Citadel miniatures, mostly in support of my AD&D habit. But eventually I get into their game and buy even more minis to support playing that game but even moreso to play Battlesystem. Without highly playable games, I would have never purchased their minis.
I still use my citadel minis for RPGs and war games. I always will, but I have all sorts of choices and many are much cheaper. To support RPGs, I don't need to spend as much on minis as GW minis cost. There are cheaper options and the minis will be fine for my purposes, and now there's another option for mini wargaming where I can still mult-purpose the minis, but the minis are cheaper than Citadel and are fine for both applications.
So with no real rules for this game, there's no real reason for me to collect these minis other than aesthetics. It now becomes an assessment of value vs. cost. The value I get purchasing another company's minis outweighs the value of purchasing these solely due to aesthetics.
I have a collection of thousands of minis spanning nearly four decades. Since they want to sell to collectors, I should be a part of their target demographic, and yet I've sown how they have lost me as a customer by ignoring the playability of the rules for the game that supports the sale of the minis.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Six linked battleplans in the description from WD
[/img]
Get your facts directly out of here, we'll have none of that!
6 scenarios to rule them all. So, after you've played those six scenarios, you're back to crap rules with zero balance. Some people might like to only ever play scenarios but I'm not sure GW should have bet the whole game on that.
unmercifulconker wrote: What even is that thing, a bloodthirster? Cas he looks green and got some wierd beard thing going on that looks like 4 skulls pointing out its chin.
Another God perhaps? I wish to know more.
My guess is thats sigmar and her's about to smack Khorne himself in the noodle.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Six linked battleplans in the description from WD
Spoiler:
How many times was that verified, Xyxox?
Still doesn't contain points costs nor army restrictions though does it?
Not that I can see. And heaven forbid I want to use my Tomb Kings.
Sure, the rules could all be included exclusively in the Warscrolls, but they could also have their own game wide rules. None of which have been explained in the four pages we've seen.
Yeah its not indisputable proof but since we're just throwing hyperbole around why not have it both ways.
unmercifulconker wrote: What even is that thing, a bloodthirster? Cas he looks green and got some wierd beard thing going on that looks like 4 skulls pointing out its chin.
Another God perhaps? I wish to know more.
My guess is thats sigmar and her's about to smack Khorne himself in the noodle.
It's wierd cas it probably is khorne but I always pictured him as a man as when I was a kid and first saw the god cover pages in the csm codex I thought they were the gods so the dude clad in spikey armour with a skull face was khorne to me and imagined him sitting on his throne Conan/riddick style.
XT-1984 wrote: Actually we don't know if that is the case yet Yodhrin.
Oh goody, another Egyptian river sailor.
When a trustworthy store owner spends hours on the phone to a rep, then goes over the head of the rep and spends hours talking to their boss, and still gets the same answer; the four pages are it, there are no points, we designed it that way, there's nothing else coming to change that - yeah, for me that's enough confirmation.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Six linked battleplans in the description from WD
That's the first I've seen of that. Will those be balanced? Probably. How do you extend balance to any games where you use anything outside the box? The only way I see is to play battle scenarios published by GW. There are still no rules for balancing or forming armies.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Six linked battleplans in the description from WD
That's the first I've seen of that. Will those be balanced? Probably. How do you extend balance to any games where you use anything outside the box? The only way I see is to play battle scenarios published by GW. There are still no rules for balancing or forming armies.
Well obviously those rules will be on the invisible 4 additional pages that don't exist but some people are sure GW has lied to us about and actually do exist....since GW has stated themselves that the rules are 4 pages in length and we have literally seen them and read them already....but don't let that stop you from assuming it's all a farce and there's actually an additional rulebook in the box that includes all the missing game mechanics that would make this mess playable.
Verified time and again to contain only fluff, gaming examples, and the war scrolls.
From White Dwarf:
'96 page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar' (perhaps Scenarios are included?)
'its unlike any book we have ever published'
Hardly verified. And certainly not time and again.
EDIT: Or perhaps you are right and Warhammer IS doomed, lets just throw our models in the bin now and save us the trouble of doing it after the rules are officially released.
Six linked battleplans in the description from WD
That's the first I've seen of that. Will those be balanced? Probably. How do you extend balance to any games where you use anything outside the box? The only way I see is to play battle scenarios published by GW. There are still no rules for balancing or forming armies.
Well obviously those rules will be on the invisible 4 additional pages that don't exist but some people are sure GW has lied to us about and actually do exist....since GW has stated themselves that the rules are 4 pages in length and we have literally seen them and read them already....but don't let that stop you from assuming it's all a farce and there's actually an additional rulebook in the box that includes all the missing game mechanics that would make this mess playable.
I think the scenarios culd actually be quite fun to play through. The mechanic is simple and if all else fails you have a roll off of a d6 to determine who interpreted the rules correctly. Highest roll is correct!
I think the scenarios culd actually be quite fun to play through. The mechanic is simple and if all else fails you have a roll off of a d6 to determine who interpreted the rules correctly. Highest roll is correct!
Now you're just a WAAC gamer and this is obviously not a competitive game....and those models are obviously not marines....and there are more rules out there because, reasons.
Sure, the rules could all be included exclusively in the Warscrolls, but they could also have their own game wide rules. None of which have been explained in the four pages we've seen.
Yeah its not indisputable proof but since we're just throwing hyperbole around why not have it both ways.
+ there is the ambiguous line in the Deployment section about having reserves and "fate" playing a hand that isn't explained.
Is it wrong to think the faq for this game will be longer that 4 pages?
Reading the rules am I mistaken that as they currently stand your models cant move their full distance and remain the same facing?
For example moving a chariot base and rotating it sideways at the end of its move makes the rear of the model move more than its move distance, which is against the rules. To move your full allowance in one direction and not break the rules a figure cannot be rotated.
While I would love for the scenarios to be for any two armies to fight in the interest of being fairly objective I would guess that they are actually campaign type missions that play through one after the other much like the missions that came with Dark Vengeance.
I don't doubt there will be scenarios at some point. Just not in this particular publication.
edlowe wrote: Is it wrong to think the faq for this game will be longer that 4 pages?
Reading the rules am I mistaken that as they currently stand your models cant move their full distance and remain the same facing?
For example moving a chariot base and rotating it sideways at the end of its move makes the rear of the model move more than its move distance, which is against the rules. To move your full allowance in one direction and not break the rules a figure cannot be rotated.
am I reading this wrong?
Here, let me translate GW-speak for you:
"It's a living rulebook." ------> "It's a public Alpha version."
Besides, GW's no longer in the business of FAQs or Errata.
I still think, even with balanced armies, the rules don't sound fun. There are already several things that can stack on top of each other to affect your damage output (formation/battalion bonus, leader ability bonus, terrain bonus, winning previous game bonus?). It sounds rather annoying to keep track of all that, and for outcomes to be more about those things than about the actual strengths/weaknesses of the units engaged.
But maybe other warscrolls will add more interesting elements. Or just make way more stuff to keep track of.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I still think, even with balanced armies, the rules don't sound fun. There are already several things that can stack on top of each other to affect your damage output (formation/battalion bonus, leader ability bonus, terrain bonus, winning previous game bonus?). It sounds rather annoying to keep track of all that, and for outcomes to be more about those things than about the actual strengths/weaknesses of the units engaged.
But maybe other warscrolls will add more interesting elements. Or just make way more stuff to keep track of.
Theres probaby a good third party opportunity for some counters/markers for all these abilities. Maybe even a transparent 3" template for combat reach.
I actually hope the warscrolls add more depth to the game in the way you describe, otherwise it will get very boring.
Pacific wrote: What are all these references to Egypt and the Nile?
Sorry if I'm being a bit slow, I don't get it!
The River Nile, in denial.
A term used by people who have no argument so just attempt to belittle people with opposing opinions to their own.
A term also used to describe people who are still in denial I mean there's not really an argument is there, retailers have been told this is it and it was designed this way, if you wanna disbelieve that that's fine but that's pretty much confirmation for now.
Pacific wrote: What are all these references to Egypt and the Nile?
Sorry if I'm being a bit slow, I don't get it!
The River Nile, in denial.
A term used by people who have no argument so just attempt to belittle people with opposing opinions to their own.
A term also used to describe people who are still in denial I mean there's not really an argument is there, retailers have been told this is it and it was designed this way, if you wanna disbelieve that that's fine but that's pretty much confirmation for now.
Not to mention the actual content of the 96 page book and the WD saying there are no additional rules, just scenarios, fluff and painting tutorials.
edlowe wrote: Is it wrong to think the faq for this game will be longer that 4 pages?
Reading the rules am I mistaken that as they currently stand your models cant move their full distance and remain the same facing?
For example moving a chariot base and rotating it sideways at the end of its move makes the rear of the model move more than its move distance, which is against the rules. To move your full allowance in one direction and not break the rules a figure cannot be rotated.
am I reading this wrong?
Will need to go through the motions IRL to confirm but,
Hold your tape measure from any point above the model. Extend the tape measure to see how far it can move. Pick up the model (and rotate it as much as you want) as long as no point goes beyond the maximum movement from where you first measured when placed.
edlowe wrote: Is it wrong to think the faq for this game will be longer that 4 pages?
Reading the rules am I mistaken that as they currently stand your models cant move their full distance and remain the same facing?
For example moving a chariot base and rotating it sideways at the end of its move makes the rear of the model move more than its move distance, which is against the rules. To move your full allowance in one direction and not break the rules a figure cannot be rotated.
am I reading this wrong?
Will need to go through the motions IRL to confirm but,
Hold your tape measure from any point above the model. Extend the tape measure to see how far it can move. Pick up the model (and rotate it as much as you want) as long as no point goes beyond the maximum movement from where you first measured when placed.
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
You can hold out but you'll eventually be in a minority. I still call my cadians Imperial Guard but newer players call them Astra Militarum and so do most of the battle reports (who, if ever, only mention IG name as a side note during the army showcase)
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
You can hold out but you'll eventually be in a minority. I still call my cadians Imperial Guard but newer players call them Astra Militarum and so do most of the battle reports (who, if ever, only mention IG name as a side note during the army showcase)
Just GW covering their bases. I've never had an issue with them changing the names of stuff so other companies can't capitalize on GW's success.
As I've said before, I think the business model here will be the scenarios. Creating a story (or several parallell stories) that moves forward, encouraging you to buy new models in order to play it out. Each scenario contains the info you need for a "balanced" game – or play it with your own models, match up as good as you can.
If you want to go competitive – well, just play a scenario! Tactics on the field – rather than list building – will be more important.
Again, a game aimed at the less committed casual player.
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
I went into a GW store a couple of months back while on a trip and referred to the Imperial Guard during a conversation, and the staffer interjected(in a serious way, like he was correcting a mistake, not as a joke) with "You mean Astra Militarum" - I swear he visibly wilted under the look of utter disdain that came over my face
They can call things Deathrattlers and Orruks and Departmento Awfulpseudolatinicus all they like, I will not indulge them.
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
You can hold out but you'll eventually be in a minority. I still call my cadians Imperial Guard but newer players call them Astra Militarum and so do most of the battle reports (who, if ever, only mention IG name as a side note during the army showcase)
Just GW covering their bases. I've never had an issue with them changing the names of stuff so other companies can't capitalize on GW's success.
Except that A; in most cases those companies are not capitalising on GW's success so much as existing in a symbiotic relationship with GW's products in a way that both companies benefit and so do their consumers, meaning trying to shut that down is an act of self-vandalising spite, and B; it's totally, utterly ineffective as a tactic since it's been established in a court of law that other companies can use GW's trademarks all they want as long as they don't do so to imply their third-party products are officially sanctioned/made by GW.
I think Deathrattlers sounds quite cool, evokes quite a creepy image in my mind, but it might just be compared to the rest of the new names it doesn't sound bad...
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
I went into a GW store a couple of months back while on a trip and referred to the Imperial Guard during a conversation, and the staffer interjected(in a serious way, like he was correcting a mistake, not as a joke) with "You mean Astra Militarum" - I swear he visibly wilted under the look of utter disdain that came over my face
They can call things Deathrattlers and Orruks and Departmento Awfulpseudolatinicus all they like, I will not indulge them.
Do you still call grots, gretchin? And wraithlords "Eldar Dreadnoughts"? Or should that be Space Elves Dreadnoughts?!
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
You can hold out but you'll eventually be in a minority. I still call my cadians Imperial Guard but newer players call them Astra Militarum and so do most of the battle reports (who, if ever, only mention IG name as a side note during the army showcase)
Thing is what was the name for the orcs again? orkgoorh orcogh whatever! I forgot already... thats how catchy all this BS is.
Bottle wrote:+ there is the ambiguous line in the Deployment section about having reserves and "fate" playing a hand that isn't explained.
No, but we have seen a formation page that allows you to set models aside and bring them in as reserves.
We've seen the 4 pages of hard rules. That's pretty much all we're getting for universal rules. Anything else will almost certainly be on the Warscrolls.
pinkmarine wrote:
If you want to go competitive – well, just play a scenario! Tactics on the field – rather than list building – will be more important.
WaitYoureSerious-LetMeLaughHarder.gif
If anything, one model = one model means that list building is more important than ever. Especially because list building is done on the fly during deployment. Horde armies are basically dead in that a "horde army" used to be lots of little dudes. Whether you go by Models or Warscrolls or anything, as long as one model is considered equal to any other one model, only the strongest models will see the table. Because there is literally no reason other than "I want to handicap myself" to do so.
seriously you guys...
seriously.
just wait.
its very hard for me to understand why everyone is running around losing their minds right now. you dont even know what games workshop is doing. alot of the rumours have been really quite wrong up to this point. what makes all of your assumptions so ironclad and impenetrable? you just know youre right cause they ruined warhammer and theyre a terrible company and blah blah blah.
quite frankly, this thread is absolutely the worst case of impatient anxiety ive ever seen in my life. you guys will actually know something soon. know. knowledge. quite a different beast than assumptions are. so whats the point in chopping your own john thomas' off about warhammer being turned into the worst thing ever when you have no verified idea.
this all seems like unwarranted whining. its like you all hate games workshop so much that you wanted to create a multi hundred page thread of why people should never give gw a cent. and if thats your prerogative, dont give them a cent. but i feel youre all damaging the experiences others could have, and contributing to a society of endless negativity that is constantly displayed here on dakka.
the strangest thing for me is that nothing has actually changed. dont like age of sigmar?okay. youre in the same place you were before it existed. so... lets spread metric gaktons of hate on an internet forum about it so it can get lost in the sea of millions of peoples opinions that nobody cares about weeks after theyre posted. furthermore, in a few weeks, if a mass battle, balanced system is actually coming out, what will you all do? stick to your guns and find a new reason to hate everything? or change your tune and sing the praise of gw all of a sudden, going back on all of the extreme comments that youve made. because if the latter is the case... why not just wait and see this whole time instead of possibly pushing new gamers away when they see all the community has for this game is hatred before its even born? if its the former, who cares that you hate it so much no matter what it is? why would any of your opinions have any weight? it would just be hatred for hates sake. pretty soon this thread will create a new chaos god all about impatience, anxiety, and hate.
who knows, maybe its gonna suck real bad. but seriously, cant we all just WAIT? isnt 200 pages of "**** this is the worst thing ever im gpnna sell my miniatures and burn down gw and start a riot in my hometown and kick a dog and verbally maim anyone who thinks about getting into gw" enough? arent you all bored to death yet?
i dunno. i just like to see flames, feel the heat before i tell everyone my house is burning down and evacuate my family.
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
I went into a GW store a couple of months back while on a trip and referred to the Imperial Guard during a conversation, and the staffer interjected(in a serious way, like he was correcting a mistake, not as a joke) with "You mean Astra Militarum" - I swear he visibly wilted under the look of utter disdain that came over my face
They can call things Deathrattlers and Orruks and Departmento Awfulpseudolatinicus all they like, I will not indulge them.
Do you still call grots, gretchin? And wraithlords "Eldar Dreadnoughts"? Or should that be Space Elves Dreadnoughts?!
In the first case; sometimes I do, as a matter of fact. In the latter case, no, because I never had much experience playing against/reading about Eldar until 3rd Edition, but even if I had, I'm capable of holding nuanced opinions of things that account for intent, and can so justifiably be disdainful of a change made by a company on the basis of naked greed and legal incompetence, and have no particular animosity towards another change made to differentiate one faction from another. I know that a lot of folk around here believe you can only express dislike of something GW has done if you are a twisted, shrivelled, bitter old grognard that despises everything that company has ever done, is doing, and ever will do, but a fair few of us manage to praise the bits we like and criticise the bits we don't without suffering a cranial implosion.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: seriously you guys...
seriously.
just wait.
its very hard for me to understand why everyone is running around losing their minds right now. you dont even know what games workshop is doing. alot of the rumours have been really quite wrong up to this point. what makes all of your assumptions so ironclad and impenetrable? you just know youre right cause they ruined warhammer and theyre a terrible company and blah blah blah.
quite frankly, this thread is absolutely the worst case of impatient anxiety ive ever seen in my life. you guys will actually know something soon. know. knowledge. quite a different beast than assumptions are. so whats the point in chopping your own john thomas' off about warhammer being turned into the worst thing ever when you have no verified idea.
this all seems like unwarranted whining. its like you all hate games workshop so much that you wanted to create a multi hundred page thread of why people should never give gw a cent. and if thats your prerogative, dont give them a cent. but i feel youre all damaging the experiences others could have, and contributing to a society of endless negativity that is constantly displayed here on dakka.
the strangest thing for me is that nothing has actually changed. dont like age of sigmar?okay. youre in the same place you were before it existed. so... lets spread metric gaktons of hate on an internet forum about it so it can get lost in the sea of millions of peoples opinions that nobody cares about weeks after theyre posted. furthermore, in a few weeks, if a mass battle, balanced system is actually coming out, what will you all do? stick to your guns and find a new reason to hate everything? or change your tune and sing the praise of gw all of a sudden, going back on all of the extreme comments that youve made. because if the latter is the case... why not just wait and see this whole time instead of possibly pushing new gamers away when they see all the community has for this game is hatred before its even born? if its the former, who cares that you hate it so much no matter what it is? why would any of your opinions have any weight? it would just be hatred for hates sake. pretty soon this thread will create a new chaos god all about impatience, anxiety, and hate.
who knows, maybe its gonna suck real bad. but seriously, cant we all just WAIT? isnt 200 pages of "**** this is the worst thing ever im gpnna sell my miniatures and burn down gw and start a riot in my hometown and kick a dog and verbally maim anyone who thinks about getting into gw" enough? arent you all bored to death yet?
i dunno. i just like to see flames, feel the heat before i tell everyone my house is burning down and evacuate my family.
We've seen the rules, we've seen some Warscrolls, we've seen bits from the WD. What else are we waiting for now? It's not like people are freaking out over rumours.
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
Yeah, I mean I want there to be a big rulebook coming, but that would mean they were lying to retailers which is pretty reprehensible as well, it's pretty lose lose now.
Considering they told LGS to make up balancing house rules themselves I'm not encouraged by the game having any sort of points / scroll balancing mechanism
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
Yeah, I mean I want there to be a big rulebook coming, but that would mean they were lying to retailers which is pretty reprehensible as well, it's pretty lose lose now.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: seriously you guys...
seriously.
just wait.
its very hard for me to understand why everyone is running around losing their minds right now. you dont even know what games workshop is doing. alot of the rumours have been really quite wrong up to this point. what makes all of your assumptions so ironclad and impenetrable? you just know youre right cause they ruined warhammer and theyre a terrible company and blah blah blah.
quite frankly, this thread is absolutely the worst case of impatient anxiety ive ever seen in my life. you guys will actually know something soon. know. knowledge. quite a different beast than assumptions are. so whats the point in chopping your own john thomas' off about warhammer being turned into the worst thing ever when you have no verified idea.
this all seems like unwarranted whining. its like you all hate games workshop so much that you wanted to create a multi hundred page thread of why people should never give gw a cent. and if thats your prerogative, dont give them a cent. but i feel youre all damaging the experiences others could have, and contributing to a society of endless negativity that is constantly displayed here on dakka.
the strangest thing for me is that nothing has actually changed. dont like age of sigmar?okay. youre in the same place you were before it existed. so... lets spread metric gaktons of hate on an internet forum about it so it can get lost in the sea of millions of peoples opinions that nobody cares about weeks after theyre posted. furthermore, in a few weeks, if a mass battle, balanced system is actually coming out, what will you all do? stick to your guns and find a new reason to hate everything? or change your tune and sing the praise of gw all of a sudden, going back on all of the extreme comments that youve made. because if the latter is the case... why not just wait and see this whole time instead of possibly pushing new gamers away when they see all the community has for this game is hatred before its even born? if its the former, who cares that you hate it so much no matter what it is? why would any of your opinions have any weight? it would just be hatred for hates sake. pretty soon this thread will create a new chaos god all about impatience, anxiety, and hate.
who knows, maybe its gonna suck real bad. but seriously, cant we all just WAIT? isnt 200 pages of "**** this is the worst thing ever im gpnna sell my miniatures and burn down gw and start a riot in my hometown and kick a dog and verbally maim anyone who thinks about getting into gw" enough? arent you all bored to death yet?
i dunno. i just like to see flames, feel the heat before i tell everyone my house is burning down and evacuate my family.
This clearly isnt the only "Age of Sigmar" item GW is releasing. theres plenty of time in the future for more releases. the wd even says "books we release in the future." it could be anything. instead everyone ignores that its just a starter set and thinks the absolute worst about everything.
Mainly it's just sad to me to think that someone might come here expecting to see information about the game they can digest on their own and instead seeing thousands of hateful, butthurt posts. when i first got into the hobby it was so amazing to me and i spent no time on internet forums. Wouldnt it suck if someone was denied that new fresh joy because of pages and pages of gak-talk?
edlowe wrote: Is it wrong to think the faq for this game will be longer that 4 pages?
Reading the rules am I mistaken that as they currently stand your models cant move their full distance and remain the same facing?
For example moving a chariot base and rotating it sideways at the end of its move makes the rear of the model move more than its move distance, which is against the rules. To move your full allowance in one direction and not break the rules a figure cannot be rotated.
am I reading this wrong?
Will need to go through the motions IRL to confirm but,
Hold your tape measure from any point above the model. Extend the tape measure to see how far it can move. Pick up the model (and rotate it as much as you want) as long as no point goes beyond the maximum movement from where you first measured when placed.
ok, so I have a high elf dragon. I measure forward from its head say 10 inches. I move the dragon straight forward 10 inches. I then swing the model round 90 degrees using the head as the pivot. The dragons tail has now moved further than 10 inches. pythagoras theorem. Shouldn't there be some system for being able to rotate a unit during its move especially since every model is now irregularly shaped due to the fact that bases don't count? Something as simple as measure from the centre of the model and you may rotate you model as many times as you like during your movement around this point. Although finding the centre of a model would work best if bases counted.
Just really pointing out how lightweight the rules are. Kow deals with this simply by allowing what I said above and it only would take a line of text to fix.
migooo wrote: Considering they told LGS to make up balancing house rules themselves I'm not encouraged by the game having any sort of points / scroll balancing mechanism
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
Yeah, I mean I want there to be a big rulebook coming, but that would mean they were lying to retailers which is pretty reprehensible as well, it's pretty lose lose now.
There's not sorry
No I no there isn't. Which sucks, but I guess at least they were honest then..?
If anything, one model = one model means that list building is more important than ever. Especially because list building is done on the fly during deployment. Horde armies are basically dead in that a "horde army" used to be lots of little dudes. Whether you go by Models or Warscrolls or anything, as long as one model is considered equal to any other one model, only the strongest models will see the table. Because there is literally no reason other than "I want to handicap myself" to do so.
Er, no. If the scenario specifies exactly which models to bring to the battle, there will be no list building. Your line of reasoning assumes that the scenarios will allow for flexibility in this regard. My point is that it doesn't have to be so. you may not like that idea. but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
If anything, one model = one model means that list building is more important than ever. Especially because list building is done on the fly during deployment. Horde armies are basically dead in that a "horde army" used to be lots of little dudes. Whether you go by Models or Warscrolls or anything, as long as one model is considered equal to any other one model, only the strongest models will see the table. Because there is literally no reason other than "I want to handicap myself" to do so.
Er, no. If the scenario specifies exactly which models to bring to the battle, there will be no list building. Your line of reasoning assumes that the scenarios will allow for flexibility in this regard. My point is that it doesn't have to be so. you may not like that idea. but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
Ah, I misunderstood what you were saying then.
Still, it's pretty sad that the only way forward for anything but "make stuff up" play would be "play one of the six given scenarios with the given forces". I mean, that frankly sounds like the worst tournament scene ever! I play skaven, and while I'm aware that Warscrolls for the units are coming, without some way to balance them I have literally 0 guidelines (not even the 6 scenarios) to help me play a balanced game against my friend's dwarves. If Warhammer will literally come down to "make crap up or play Khorne vs Lightning Marines", well, it's been a fun ride at least.
XT-1984 wrote: Well at least the Lizardmen weren't squatted like everyone knew they would be.
Thank goodness.
I'm still gonna call my Ogres, Ogres....forget this Ogor nonsense.
You can hold out but you'll eventually be in a minority. I still call my cadians Imperial Guard but newer players call them Astra Militarum and so do most of the battle reports (who, if ever, only mention IG name as a side note during the army showcase)
Just GW covering their bases. I've never had an issue with them changing the names of stuff so other companies can't capitalize on GW's success.
Yes. Now when those green guys are called orruks instead of orcs it will be impossible for all thise 3rd party bits manufacturers to sell their orc stuff.
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
Its a better argument than the "lets rage on about the bits of information we have now rather than wait for the finished product".
Besides, the GW reps are salesmen. And at this exact moment in time perhaps they are right, there are no points or scenarios in AoS. But maybe in a months time we will get a hard back rulebook.
We just don't know for certain yet, anyone claiming otherwise is either misinformed or worse.
If anything, one model = one model means that list building is more important than ever. Especially because list building is done on the fly during deployment. Horde armies are basically dead in that a "horde army" used to be lots of little dudes. Whether you go by Models or Warscrolls or anything, as long as one model is considered equal to any other one model, only the strongest models will see the table. Because there is literally no reason other than "I want to handicap myself" to do so.
Er, no. If the scenario specifies exactly which models to bring to the battle, there will be no list building. Your line of reasoning assumes that the scenarios will allow for flexibility in this regard. My point is that it doesn't have to be so. you may not like that idea. but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
Ah, I misunderstood what you were saying then.
Still, it's pretty sad that the only way forward for anything but "make stuff up" play would be "play one of the six given scenarios with the given forces". I mean, that frankly sounds like the worst tournament scene ever! I play skaven, and while I'm aware that Warscrolls for the units are coming, without some way to balance them I have literally 0 guidelines (not even the 6 scenarios) to help me play a balanced game against my friend's dwarves. If Warhammer will literally come down to "make crap up or play Khorne vs Lightning Marines", well, it's been a fun ride at least.
Well, I'm speculating of course, but if it's to be a really simple game in order to make it easier to sell to a new audience, simplicity may be key, rather than tournament feasibility. Add to that a "lock in" effect and you've got a business model.
pinkmarine wrote: (There is this game called "chess", kinda popular. No lists.)
The exception being in chess you're both on a relatively even playing field. Meanwhile in the Age Of Sigmar one guy says "Here's my hundreds of orks, how many ten guys did you bring?" And that's RAW.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: This clearly isnt the only "Age of Sigmar" item GW is releasing. theres plenty of time in the future for more releases. the wd even says "books we release in the future." it could be anything. instead everyone ignores that its just a starter set and thinks the absolute worst about everything.
People aren't ignoring that it's a starter set.
They're taking the word from GW reps, and the people in charge of the GW reps, that the four pages of rules are all the rules that the game has, and that there are no points values and no plans to add them in, and they're reading the rules which have been floating around online for the last couple of days.
This isn't people jumping at rumours. This is people looking at a product and finding it wanting.
If there is something else coming out that makes this mess into something that is actually playable, then GW's choice to lead with what they have and not provide clearer information about it right from the start is a very, very bad one. Because people will make judgements based on what they see.
Mainly it's just sad to me to think that someone might come here expecting to see information about the game they can digest on their own and instead seeing thousands of hateful, butthurt posts.
You seem to be having trouble differentiating between criticism and hateful ranting.
For the most part, there has been very little 'butthurt' in this thread. Just a bunch of people posting their opinions (and it certainly hasn't all been negative) about this product.
And frankly, if a game is as bad as this one appears to be, then if I were a prospective new gamer I would absolutely want to know about that before I walked into a GW store and bought it.
pinkmarine wrote: (There is this game called "chess", kinda popular. No lists.)
The exception being in chess you're both on a relatively even playing field. Meanwhile in the Age Of Sigmar one guy says "Here's my hundreds of orks, how many ten guys did you bring?" And that's RAW.
My point is that you can even out the field by specifying the exact models in the scenario. Zero flexibility, high simplicity for the newbie.
The chess comment was a joke. Sorry if it offended.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: seriously you guys...
seriously.
just wait.
its very hard for me to understand why everyone is running around losing their minds right now. you dont even know what games workshop is doing. alot of the rumours have been really quite wrong up to this point. what makes all of your assumptions so ironclad and impenetrable? you just know youre right cause they ruined warhammer and theyre a terrible company and blah blah blah.
quite frankly, this thread is absolutely the worst case of impatient anxiety ive ever seen in my life. you guys will actually know something soon. know. knowledge. quite a different beast than assumptions are. so whats the point in chopping your own john thomas' off about warhammer being turned into the worst thing ever when you have no verified idea.
this all seems like unwarranted whining. its like you all hate games workshop so much that you wanted to create a multi hundred page thread of why people should never give gw a cent. and if thats your prerogative, dont give them a cent. but i feel youre all damaging the experiences others could have, and contributing to a society of endless negativity that is constantly displayed here on dakka.
the strangest thing for me is that nothing has actually changed. dont like age of sigmar?okay. youre in the same place you were before it existed. so... lets spread metric gaktons of hate on an internet forum about it so it can get lost in the sea of millions of peoples opinions that nobody cares about weeks after theyre posted. furthermore, in a few weeks, if a mass battle, balanced system is actually coming out, what will you all do? stick to your guns and find a new reason to hate everything? or change your tune and sing the praise of gw all of a sudden, going back on all of the extreme comments that youve made. because if the latter is the case... why not just wait and see this whole time instead of possibly pushing new gamers away when they see all the community has for this game is hatred before its even born? if its the former, who cares that you hate it so much no matter what it is? why would any of your opinions have any weight? it would just be hatred for hates sake. pretty soon this thread will create a new chaos god all about impatience, anxiety, and hate.
who knows, maybe its gonna suck real bad. but seriously, cant we all just WAIT? isnt 200 pages of "**** this is the worst thing ever im gpnna sell my miniatures and burn down gw and start a riot in my hometown and kick a dog and verbally maim anyone who thinks about getting into gw" enough? arent you all bored to death yet?
i dunno. i just like to see flames, feel the heat before i tell everyone my house is burning down and evacuate my family.
I'm using an analogy here. Suppose GW was a car company, and suppose they were releasing a new car on 4th of July. Very reliable sources and evidence have shown that GW's new car will not have an engine...or a gearbox with it.
Nobody has driven this car yet, but we have driven other cars, and we know, without ever driving GW's car, that it won't work without an engine or a gearbox.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I still think, even with balanced armies, the rules don't sound fun. There are already several things that can stack on top of each other to affect your damage output (formation/battalion bonus, leader ability bonus, terrain bonus, winning previous game bonus?). It sounds rather annoying to keep track of all that, and for outcomes to be more about those things than about the actual strengths/weaknesses of the units engaged.
But maybe other warscrolls will add more interesting elements. Or just make way more stuff to keep track of.
Do you play 40k? With the newest Codices? There are special rules for each unit, plus the formation, plus the detachment, in addition to any character / weapon upgrades taken. It's starting to get out of hand.
I understand wanting to know if something sucks before you buy it. I also understand people often "decide" something sucks or is awesome without knowing anything about it, and that it can massively influence whether something has any support or not. Especially with the internet. What is popular is often picked up by others. behaviour, opinion, what-have-you.
In that sense, i understand people coming here and giving a negative opinion entirely. i get it and condone it but there comes a point where it is completely over the top and just reeks of silliness.
where i live, alot of people buy the make of truck their father's drove. their dad's tell them its great Nd the best truck maker, so thats what they buy. they form an opinion that they hate other trucks before they even drive them, or even think about them. they hate the manufacturers and think their trucks are garbage and are vocal about it to everyone, and imagine how many trucks those people buy with very incomplete knowledge of anything about the truck or if competitors are better? my point is, people's opinions can damage the enjoyment and utility of things in the lives of others. close-mindedness is a terrible attribute to have. right now the question of whether this game sucks or not is answered only with "who knows? it might. we'll see in the next few weeks." Yet people claim unerring knowledge of its suck factor. where does this knowledge come from? prescience? simple answer is its all BS, nobody knows.
Just seems like loads of people on this site passive/aggressively hate their own hobbies and dont want anyone else to enjoy it.
I'm curious as to where the "wait and see" crowd (all, what, three of them?) will concede it's as bad as it appears?
C'mon boys, where the line eh? I mean, it'll be self evident when the opposite view is invalidated because they'll be a points based/alternative balancing system to point to.
Automatically Appended Next Post: This keeps popping into my head recently, can't think why...
Kinda like Warhammer 40,000 Dark Vengeance ?
EDIT: Oh look at that.... It says it right there... A new age of Warhammer dawns in this brand new starter set
I'm not going to throw all my models away just yet.
For example moving a chariot base and rotating it sideways at the end of its move makes the rear of the model move more than its move distance, which is against the rules. To move your full allowance in one direction and not break the rules a figure cannot be rotated.
Rotate freely during the move but don't allow any part of your model to be more than the move distance. It's a lot easier this way.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: Mainly it's just sad to me to think that someone might come here expecting to see information about the game they can digest on their own and instead seeing thousands of hateful, butthurt posts.
They can, it's called page freaking one of this thread. It's been getting updated with all the new pics and info. No one actually has to wade through any of this crap if they just want updates.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: when i first got into the hobby it was so amazing to me and i spent no time on internet forums. Wouldnt it suck if someone was denied that new fresh joy because of pages and pages of gak-talk?
Same here. I bought my Tau, read my codex, I was excited and couldn't wait to buy more stuff. Then I discovered 40k forums shortly after and learned that I was apparently the worst kind of human being for buying Tau to play 40k with. It quickly became apparent to me why everyone at the store was trying to get me to buy Warmachine.
So yeah, I know all about that. And frankly I don't really care if my negativity now is ruining the hobby for anyone else. Maybe if this community wasn't full of donkey-caves to start with, things would be a lot different, but I'm physically incapable of giving a gak anymore about anyone else's enjoyment because I'm sure as gak no one gives a damn about mine. I'll tell you what I've been told before; "If you can't handle it then find a new hobby."
Kinda like Warhammer 40,000 Dark Vengeance ?
EDIT: Oh look at that.... It says it right there... A new age of Warhammer dawns in this brand new starter set
I'm not going to throw all my models away just yet.
What do you think this proves..? We know it's a starter set already. We also know it has the full rules in it, all 4 pages.
Kinda like Warhammer 40,000 Dark Vengeance ?
EDIT: Oh look at that.... It says it right there... A new age of Warhammer dawns in this brand new starter set
I'm not going to throw all my models away just yet.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: This clearly isnt the only "Age of Sigmar" item GW is releasing. theres plenty of time in the future for more releases. the wd even says "books we release in the future." it could be anything. instead everyone ignores that its just a starter set and thinks the absolute worst about everything.
People aren't ignoring that it's a starter set.
They're taking the word from GW reps, and the people in charge of the GW reps, that the four pages of rules are all the rules that the game has, and that there are no points values and no plans to add them in, and they're reading the rules which have been floating around online for the last couple of days.
This isn't people jumping at rumours. This is people looking at a product and finding it wanting.
If there is something else coming out that makes this mess into something that is actually playable, then GW's choice to lead with what they have and not provide clearer information about it right from the start is a very, very bad one. Because people will make judgements based on what they see.
Mainly it's just sad to me to think that someone might come here expecting to see information about the game they can digest on their own and instead seeing thousands of hateful, butthurt posts.
You seem to be having trouble differentiating between criticism and hateful ranting.
For the most part, there has been very little 'butthurt' in this thread. Just a bunch of people posting their opinions (and it certainly hasn't all been negative) about this product.
And frankly, if a game is as bad as this one appears to be, then if I were a prospective new gamer I would absolutely want to know about that before I walked into a GW store and bought it.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: right now the question of whether this game sucks or not is answered only with "who knows?
...unless, like a lot of the posters in this thread, you've taken the time to read the rules that have been available online for several days now .
Again, there's no big mystery here . We've seen what's in the box. We've seen the rules. We've been told that those rules are the full game rules, not just condensed, starter rules.
I'm at a loss as to what more you think people should be waiting for before forming an opinion.
AncientSkarbrand wrote: right now the question of whether this game sucks or not is answered only with "who knows?
...unless, like a lot of the posters in this thread, you've taken the time to read the rules that have been available online for several days now .
Again, there's no big mystery here . We've seen what's in the box. We've seen the rules. We've been told that those rules are the full game rules, not just condensed, starter rules.
I'm at a loss as to what more you think people should be waiting for before forming an opinion.
I think most folks are waiting for the warscrolls for their faction...
The crazy ones are waiting for the rumored full rules that GW is denying.
pinkmarine wrote: As I've said before, I think the business model here will be the scenarios. Creating a story (or several parallell stories) that moves forward, encouraging you to buy new models in order to play it out. Each scenario contains the info you need for a "balanced" game – or play it with your own models, match up as good as you can.
If you want to go competitive – well, just play a scenario! Tactics on the field – rather than list building – will be more important.
Again, a game aimed at the less committed casual player.
IF it was for the less committed casual player, they'd be doing it with pre-painted plastic minis.
I don't think even GW knows who the target audience is.
Azreal13 wrote: I'm curious as to where the "wait and see" crowd (all, what, three of them?) will concede it's as bad as it appears?
C'mon boys, where the line eh? I mean, it'll be self evident when the opposite view is invalidated because they'll be a points based/alternative balancing system to point to.
The 'Wait and See' crowd only has to 'wait' for another day or two, then they will be 'seeing' just how good or bad the system is.
I am incredibly leery, but I already own a metric ton of figs, and it will not cost me a single penny to try the game out. I wager most people in this thread also already own figs, for which there should be free lists for come Saturday.
The only thing it will cost to give it a try is a little bit of time. Then folks can make informed decisions/claims/complaints/compliments with at least a little experience with the new game under their belts.
Until then, almost everything in the past 180+ pages of this thread is just hot air, really.
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
Its a better argument than the "lets rage on about the bits of information we have now rather than wait for the finished product".
Besides, the GW reps are salesmen. And at this exact moment in time perhaps they are right, there are no points or scenarios in AoS. But maybe in a months time we will get a hard back rulebook.
We just don't know for certain yet, anyone claiming otherwise is either misinformed or worse.
Just to note here, I don't believe most of us are raging. I'm simply LMAO.
Clearly, ive read them. ive read every page of this thread because i find it somewhat psychologically fascinating.
I don't think that was clear at all - but please do share the psychologically fascinating insights you've been able to glean here!
Just be sure to shine that light in all directions - I'd like to hear your take on GW's collective psych too, and what they were thinking here!
I remember back when I did my Psychology degree! Oh, we all like to pretend we understood others, generally "analyzing" others in a condescending fashion, with that waft of superiority. Those were the days...
The "wait and see" argument is pretty much hoping for a best case scenario of more rules and some sort of points balancing or other army creation system, which would stand as proof that GW are a company of lying liars who lie to their trade sales customers?
Either way, I don't think this is a company I want to do business with.
Its a better argument than the "lets rage on about the bits of information we have now rather than wait for the finished product".
Besides, the GW reps are salesmen. And at this exact moment in time perhaps they are right, there are no points or scenarios in AoS. But maybe in a months time we will get a hard back rulebook.
We just don't know for certain yet, anyone claiming otherwise is either misinformed or worse.
Just to note here, I don't believe most of us are raging. I'm simply LMAO.
I haven't raged (although I really don't like the renaming stuff), I just think there is a lot of questionable stuff here that having the background books won't resolve in any way. I also find it strange how others can be so dismissive of the complete destruction of the old WHFB, and the ending of a game that people have loved for 30 years. I can't imagine the same response would occur if 40k were so dramatically altered as to being the same game only in miniatures and name.
Kinda like Warhammer 40,000 Dark Vengeance ? EDIT: Oh look at that.... It says it right there... A new age of Warhammer dawns in this brand new starter set
I'm not going to throw all my models away just yet.
So what you're saying is that like Dark Vengeance, Age of Sigmar contains the full rules?
So are we getting a 12 page hardcover version later?
GW has NEVER not put the full rules in a starter set for the Main 2, I doubt they're going to start doing cut down starter rules only now.
Still no pictures of the sigmarines and the khorne guys side by side.
I have a feeling, the more I see the images, that there has been significant scale creep, and those chaos forces are as big as the sigmarines.
The box art for the arch thing shows them both but its blurry, they look very similar in size, which would make the chaos ones much bigger than the current stuff.
Just want to edit in another observation, the battle artwork is strikingly similar to the various space marine artwork of the past 20 odd years. It bears no relation to warhammer fantasy at all any more. I think that is quite sad, and regardless of the quality of the gajme itself, or lack thereof, I can't think of any good reason ot make such a drastic switch. Even in the new setting, keeping the feel of the world that has been followed for 30 years by paying customers seems sensible, it wouldnt be a roadblock to new customers, but would keep the old ones.
Apologies. i dont have a psych degree and thats not what i meant to come across at all, that i was analyzing people or even saying i was on a moral ground above anyone whatsoever. i actually meant fascinating, as in i really find it interesting to read and see what people think, and how it changes over time or because of new information. I really didn't intend to appear condescending. I just find people, and their various opinions and methods of expression and cultures very interesting. Sorry if i seemed like an ass. That statement involving my fascination really had nothing to do with my earlier posting or my opinions.
the strangest thing for me is that nothing has actually changed. dont like age of sigmar?okay. youre in the same place you were before it existed.
Wrong. Games of Fantasy in some areas are pretty hard to find. What this ..game.. will do and likely already has done is split an already smaller player base. Some will switch, some will hold their guns, and some will quit altogether. For most, they are upset about the missed opportunity, just like getting a new codex and it sucks. You KNOW you are stuck for another 2 years with crap. In this case, a real fantasy mass battle system may never return, using the rule sets we've become accustomed to.
so... lets spread metric gaktons of hate on an internet forum about it so it can get lost in the sea of millions of peoples opinions that nobody cares about weeks after theyre posted.
Oh right, so you are criticizing people for using an internet forum in the way it was intended? Glad you can be the post-police. Like it or not, the posts about the system, positive or negative, are all on topic. Get off your high and very hypocritical horse.
furthermore, in a few weeks, if a mass battle, balanced system is actually coming out, what will you all do? stick to your guns and find a new reason to hate everything? or change your tune and sing the praise of gw all of a sudden, going back on all of the extreme comments that youve made
.
Opinions can change. You can love your wife till she cheats on you. Are you not allowed to change your mind because you professed it before? I might dislike you right now, but apologizing for being overbearing and hypocritical and that might change. Even publicly!
because if the latter is the case... why not just wait and see this whole time instead of possibly pushing new gamers away when they see all the community has for this game is hatred before its even born?
Again, forums exist to spread ideas, the idea itself is not important.
if its the former, who cares that you hate it so much no matter what it is? why would any of your opinions have any weight?
Obviously you cared enough to try and take us to task?
it would just be hatred for hates sake. pretty soon this thread will create a new chaos god all about impatience, anxiety, and hate.
NoggintheNog wrote: Still no pictures of the sigmarines and the khorne guys side by side.
I have a feeling, the more I see the images, that there has been significant scale creep, and those chaos forces are as big as the sigmarines.
The box art for the arch thing shows them both but its blurry, they look very similar in size, which would make the chaos ones much bigger than the current stuff.
Just want to edit in another observation, the battle artwork is strikingly similar to the various space marine artwork of the past 20 odd years. It bears no relation to warhammer fantasy at all any more. I think that is quite sad, and regardless of the quality of the gajme itself, or lack thereof, I can't think of any good reason ot make such a drastic switch. Even in the new setting, keeping the feel of the world that has been followed for 30 years by paying customers seems sensible, it wouldnt be a roadblock to new customers, but would keep the old ones.
If you wait two days I'm sure there will be all sorts of pictures of them side by side. I also believe you are correct and there is significant scale creep.
I'm also wondering if should AoS be a success, 40K will also get this treatment of a complete reboot.
I can't see this splitting the player-base... because, being frank here... IF there is indeed no balancing mechanism, and none in the pipe-line... then there is no "game" here.
"Game" implies certain things, including providing enough structure that all participants have some expectation of knowing what they are doing.
The "wild west gunshow" that is this game currently SEEMS to have no notion of how big or small a session might be, and that is just the start of the ways in which it is a non-game.
And mind, I am not taking sides, and this is all contingent on the game being exactly what it seems. I feel our last "hope" is a glimpse at the included scenarios, and hoping it provides insight into how GW wants this game played.
If anything, one model = one model means that list building is more important than ever. Especially because list building is done on the fly during deployment. Horde armies are basically dead in that a "horde army" used to be lots of little dudes. Whether you go by Models or Warscrolls or anything, as long as one model is considered equal to any other one model, only the strongest models will see the table. Because there is literally no reason other than "I want to handicap myself" to do so.
Er, no. If the scenario specifies exactly which models to bring to the battle, there will be no list building. Your line of reasoning assumes that the scenarios will allow for flexibility in this regard. My point is that it doesn't have to be so. you may not like that idea. but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
Ah, I misunderstood what you were saying then.
Still, it's pretty sad that the only way forward for anything but "make stuff up" play would be "play one of the six given scenarios with the given forces". I mean, that frankly sounds like the worst tournament scene ever! I play skaven, and while I'm aware that Warscrolls for the units are coming, without some way to balance them I have literally 0 guidelines (not even the 6 scenarios) to help me play a balanced game against my friend's dwarves. If Warhammer will literally come down to "make crap up or play Khorne vs Lightning Marines", well, it's been a fun ride at least.
Well, I'm speculating of course, but if it's to be a really simple game in order to make it easier to sell to a new audience, simplicity may be key, rather than tournament feasibility. Add to that a "lock in" effect and you've got a business model.
And I'm not sure I'll totally dislike this.
It's not just tournament feasibility. If we're locked into the six scenarios, then we are literally down to two armies in Age of Sigmar. Between my friends, we own every single Warhammer Fantasy army except Warriors of Chaos. Which is funny, given that the box set is Warriors of Chaos and a new army! I mean, they're effectively squatting all the old armies. Yes, yes, I realize that they're releasing free Warscrolls for all the existing units, but if I don't have a frame work to use them in, what good does that do me? How do I create a fun, balanced game with a friend if the only thing we have to go on are two armies and six scenarios?
Even releasing new armies doesn't really help if all they do is release "balance" via scenarios with prescribed army lists too. I mean, it's terrible game design and even more terrible marketing. Why should I buy anything beyond exactly enough models for the scenario?
Basically it comes down to: If GW didn't want to make rules anymore, just figures, they should have just farmed out the rules to someone else and made figures like they have apparently want to do for awhile now. If they were intent on making their own rules, they should at least make rules that work.
If anything, one model = one model means that list building is more important than ever. Especially because list building is done on the fly during deployment. Horde armies are basically dead in that a "horde army" used to be lots of little dudes. Whether you go by Models or Warscrolls or anything, as long as one model is considered equal to any other one model, only the strongest models will see the table. Because there is literally no reason other than "I want to handicap myself" to do so.
Er, no. If the scenario specifies exactly which models to bring to the battle, there will be no list building. Your line of reasoning assumes that the scenarios will allow for flexibility in this regard. My point is that it doesn't have to be so. you may not like that idea. but that doesn't mean it's not possible.
Ah, I misunderstood what you were saying then.
Still, it's pretty sad that the only way forward for anything but "make stuff up" play would be "play one of the six given scenarios with the given forces". I mean, that frankly sounds like the worst tournament scene ever! I play skaven, and while I'm aware that Warscrolls for the units are coming, without some way to balance them I have literally 0 guidelines (not even the 6 scenarios) to help me play a balanced game against my friend's dwarves. If Warhammer will literally come down to "make crap up or play Khorne vs Lightning Marines", well, it's been a fun ride at least.
Well, I'm speculating of course, but if it's to be a really simple game in order to make it easier to sell to a new audience, simplicity may be key, rather than tournament feasibility. Add to that a "lock in" effect and you've got a business model.
And I'm not sure I'll totally dislike this.
It's not just tournament feasibility. If we're locked into the six scenarios, then we are literally down to two armies in Age of Sigmar. Between my friends, we own every single Warhammer Fantasy army except Warriors of Chaos. Which is funny, given that the box set is Warriors of Chaos and a new army! I mean, they're effectively squatting all the old armies. Yes, yes, I realize that they're releasing free Warscrolls for all the existing units, but if I don't have a frame work to use them in, what good does that do me? How do I create a fun, balanced game with a friend if the only thing we have to go on are two armies and six scenarios?
Even releasing new armies doesn't really help if all they do is release "balance" via scenarios with prescribed army lists too. I mean, it's terrible game design and even more terrible marketing. Why should I buy anything beyond exactly enough models for the scenario?
Basically it comes down to: If GW didn't want to make rules anymore, just figures, they should have just farmed out the rules to someone else and made figures like they have apparently want to do for awhile now. If they were intent on making their own rules, they should at least make rules that work.
Farming out the rules writing is what their competitors do:
To be fair on the tournament front, most tournaments don't run stock scenarios - the very popular ETC pretty much rebalanced the whole game in 8th, so I'm sure if necessary someone will do it for Age of Sigmar.
It seems like 95% of the people are missing that GeeDubs is not going to cater to a fanbase that barely even exists.
.
Nobody is missing that .
WHFB used to be GW's flagship game. The audience has dwindled due to decisions GW made. Instead of trying to correct their errors in an effort to entice that audience back, they've decided to just scrap the game and start over.
And that's a valid business decision.... But it's not one that will make existing customers happy if what they're wanting is for the game they play now (or did play, and would like to return to) to continue and be improved.
I'm just going to go ahead and deny that round bases will be a thing. IT'S JUST A RUMOUR PEOPLE! Everyone should calm down and wait till they've bought the new game before they rush to judgements. You have to buy the game to know whats in the game.
Reading back, my way of speech was condescending. In that sense, I was wrong and ineffective.I apologize for that and recognize it as a mistake, and perhaps immature.
I also recognize that GW may have royally destroyed WHFB and that would be terrible. It's a giant game with amazing models that need to have a tactically rewarding game based around them and the world they inhabit. I desperately want to invest in it (besides my daemons) because the models are incredible and the game system was apparently complex and rich, generally.
I still recognize the statistically improbable chance that something in the future may change what appears now to be a shallow replacement into something good. The WD article that stated they would release books for the game in the future. The advertisement of what looks like a campaign book coming out. The possibility that the starter box may be a balanced scenario package designed for extreme ease of play and the downloadable warscrolls include a point cost and downloadable rules include more structure. Many possibilities exist that could in very slight ways change the game back into a rewarding system from the ghost that's been represented in rumours. Also, you're correct, of course everybody is entitled to change their minds if it's awesome and they thought it would suck. I hope that happens. But maybe GW just killed it instead.
As for disliking me, that sucks. I didn't intend for that to happen. I just don't get the point of being so emotionally charged until you know the thing's dead. I could have just said "What's the point?" but nobody would have really been affected by that. I think there's still hope, or a statistically improbable chance at least.
Also, that meme you created was awesome and genuinely made me laugh. haha.
ImAGeek wrote: I kind of sadistically would be interested to see the fallout of this kind of reboot but for 40k...
We already did this.
Remember 40k3?
Best edition of 40k, ever.
Wait, 3rd Ed 40K had no points values, no army lists, completely obliterated the galaxy in which the product is set and started the fluff from scratch? Damn, I drank a lot more during my teens than I thought, apparently I blacked the eff out for several years straight and invented a completely fictional version of 40K that was nothing like that.
This looks awful. I actually like the idea of "alignments" for armies and the ability to use warscrolls to mix and match warbands. Lots of fluff opportunities there.
However, the fact that the fluff is boring, boring, stargate good vs evil garbage makes that really unappealing. I really hope they've got some kind of army creation structure coming. This is nutso.
Yodhrin wrote: Wait, 3rd Ed 40K had no points values, no army lists, completely obliterated the galaxy in which the product is set and started the fluff from scratch? Damn, I drank a lot more during my teens than I thought, apparently I blacked the eff out for several years straight and invented a completely fictional version of 40K that was nothing like that.
I'm withholding final-final-FINAL judgement til I see all the warscrolls. Some people have been comparing the AOS 4 page rules to MTG, which I think is a good comparison - when a new Magic set comes out it gets judged by its cards, not the rule booklet that comes with it. The interactions and combos are what make or break a set.
That said, I don't have particularly high hopes that GW's rules have suddenly leveled-up to be on par with WOTC or PP. Oh well, we'll see in a couple of days.
I just picked up my WD75. First of all, the leaked photos do the models no justice. Holy crap, the actual photography is amazing. The Khorne Goretide models are AMAZING. Skuldrak the Khorgorath (the Hellbrute) looks freaking awesome, and Threx Skullbrand (the fella with giant round banner thing) is out of this world. It's quite possibly the first time ever I've been excited about Chaos. Even the Bloodreavers (Fantasy cultists by another name) look really, really awesome.
The Angels have a really lame name (Prosecutors, LOL). But the models and images look spectacular. The wings are very cool -- they make me think "Fan of Knives". The Lord Celestant (cat guy), Lord Relictor (banner dude) and Retributors (2h hammer guys) are incredible.
The other thing that's pretty cool are the two new gold paints. The basecoat looks more gold than Balthazar (FINALLY), and the light gold paint sits between Auric Armor Gold and Runefang Steel, which is wonderful, if you care about such things. I don't know about the Flayed One flesh.
The other thing to note is that WD75 is totally sold out, with long waiting lists at stores where people want one.
Talys wrote: The other thing that's pretty cool are the two new gold paints. The basecoat looks more gold than Balthazar (FINALLY), and the light gold paint sits between Auric Armor Gold and Runefang Steel, which is wonderful, if you care about such things. I don't know about the Flayed One flesh.
Wait, we have a new base paint to replace the good old shining gold finally? I miss GWs old metallics (the new ones separate too easily) but I would be onboard with a new shining gold for a few pots.
Relapse wrote: The FLGS here is pretty stoked on the game and giving a free $35 dollar box of whatever someone who buys a copy wants.
I'd probably drop the cash if mine did that, too.
I mean, I guess I could save myself $90 and just buy the $35 box, but the Chaos blokes in the box are growing on me.
Yep, it's kind of tempting. What's ironic in a good way is that I was getting away from Fantasy and rebased all my demons for 40k before the rumors started coming out about the new Warhammer.
Torga_DW wrote: I'm just going to go ahead and deny that round bases will be a thing. IT'S JUST A RUMOUR PEOPLE! Everyone should calm down and wait till they've bought the new game before they rush to judgements. You have to buy the game to know whats in the game.
There's direct scans from the WD this coming week that explain bases are irrelevant. You can use any shape base you want. Round bases are a 'thing' just as square ones or triangular ones or hex ones are.
Or, you might have been sarcastic... hard to tell.
For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls
1-3 heroes
0-2 monsters
2+ core
No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
2000 points
No super heavies
No Lords of war
maximum 3 sources (detachments/formations).
Personally I think people are forgetting the fact that there is rumoured to be 3 or 4 months of fantasy releases, my local FLGS was telling me yesterday, most questions I asked he said come back Saturday but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc. He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
The problem is at the moment we haven't seen those scenarios and a lot of people are assuming the worst.
Fezza213 wrote: For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls
1-3 heroes
0-2 monsters
2+ core
No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
It's very different, since it results in a unit of 1 skeleton and a unit of 20 skeletons having the same 'cost' to include them in the army.
...but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc.
Which is great if you're interested in playing in campaigns. Less so if you're used to playing stand-alone pick-up games.
He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
If house rules are needed to play the game, then that's a big fail, right at the gate. If GW are acknowledging that the game is unplayable without altering the rules before it is even released then, frankly, the release needs to be cancelled until they can finish writing the rules.
The fact that 40K and WHFB also needed house rules to be functional doesn't make it any less inexcusable for them to release yet another broken ruleset.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sidstyler wrote: The art for this all looks really good, surprisingly. Although it's all really samey, except for Sigmar fighting the earthy-looking colossus.
This, I have to agree with. Visually, I like pretty much everything about this release, and their promotional stuff is fantastic. They appear to have stolen Forgeworld's photographer, which is awesome... I'm a big fan of those battle pics.
Eldarain wrote: That sounds great. Including a campaign in the starter to give us an idea how this will work would be a wise move.
Someone in WFB general has the starter and is assembling it. Hoping to hear some details on what's in that 96 page book.
I dont think we will see a campaign in the starter, I see that as a fully self contained box designed to be played as is so there would be no need to build list as you just have two sides already. I am thinking we will see something next week which will have those details.
Relapse wrote: The FLGS here is pretty stoked on the game and giving a free $35 dollar box of whatever someone who buys a copy wants.
I'd probably drop the cash if mine did that, too.
I mean, I guess I could save myself $90 and just buy the $35 box, but the Chaos blokes in the box are growing on me.
That sounds like a fantastic way to get people excited, generate sales AND clear out a lot of dead stock that would likely just sit on a shelf for who-knows how long. Brilliantly done.
Fezza213 wrote: For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls
1-3 heroes
0-2 monsters
2+ core
No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
2000 points
No super heavies
No Lords of war
maximum 3 sources (detachments/formations).
Personally I think people are forgetting the fact that there is rumoured to be 3 or 4 months of fantasy releases, my local FLGS was telling me yesterday, most questions I asked he said come back Saturday but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc. He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
The problem is at the moment we haven't seen those scenarios and a lot of people are assuming the worst.
Fez
So you don't see anything wrong with valuing 1 wound goblins the same as 1 wound Warriors of Chaos?
ImAGeek wrote: I kind of sadistically would be interested to see the fallout of this kind of reboot but for 40k...
Tempt not the Dark Gods....they might answer you.
This isn't a reboot of WFB. Even GW knows that, and I've talked about it with them. WFB is dead. A lot of the anger is we all know this, we are just in mourning and denial. It's an ongoing funeral. And at the funeral some two of the little kids who don't know better are rolling dice and moving their toys around on the sidewalk, and even though you desperately want to run over and play with them, you're at a funeral.
Some of the new rules are 40k. The turn sequence is Move/magicpsychicherostuff/shooting/assault. You don't charge at the beginning of your turn. You can move up, fire ranged weapons, and then assault 2d6". It will be very fluid, similar to 40k. Maybe even more so, as you are never truly locked in combat. Someone can charge you in their turn, you fight. Next turn you can shoot your bows into them before you fight hand to hand again. Or you can choose to retreat away from the combat and try to get some distance. Retreating does keep you from shooting or assaulting though.
Another interesting things: All Mephiston, All the Time!!! All characters are outside of units and cannot join them. You can't mix warscrolls. But judging by the major and minor characters in AOS, they will all have a lot more wounds and attacks. I'm betting on Glottkin having 20 wounds and Nagash 12.
New terrain is coming out, but unlike some of the older fantasy terrain (temple of skulls, arcane fulcrums, ancient temple ruins) there is really no way to convert it to 40K use. Sad.
Fezza213 wrote: For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls
1-3 heroes
0-2 monsters
2+ core
No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
2000 points
No super heavies
No Lords of war
maximum 3 sources (detachments/formations).
Personally I think people are forgetting the fact that there is rumoured to be 3 or 4 months of fantasy releases, my local FLGS was telling me yesterday, most questions I asked he said come back Saturday but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc. He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
The problem is at the moment we haven't seen those scenarios and a lot of people are assuming the worst.
Fez
I'm not sure we are "assuming the worst". Just assuming GW does average is pretty grim and scary. They don't do a lot of support. And they truly don't give a skavens tail about balance. The system you posted got sent out to stores as a suggestion. It will encourage people to only bring the baddest, broken, OP stuff they can possibly get their hands on. Why not? If Nagash is equal in cost to a Goblin hero. Why would you ever take less than the 3 biggest characters you have in your collection. Might be fun, but will certainly be the death of any models that aren't the best of the best.
I read the scenarios in AoS today. Not bad and they will probably work if you just own the starter box. But if you are hoping for scenarios for your old WFB army, i'd say start writing them yourself for you and your friends. You won't see much from GW, and certainly not beyond the starter box and whatever new they put out. They will be focused on AoS, not on old models .
Relapse wrote: The FLGS here is pretty stoked on the game and giving a free $35 dollar box of whatever someone who buys a copy wants.
I'd probably drop the cash if mine did that, too.
I mean, I guess I could save myself $90 and just buy the $35 box, but the Chaos blokes in the box are growing on me.
That sounds like a fantastic way to get people excited, generate sales AND clear out a lot of dead stock that would likely just sit on a shelf for who-knows how long. Brilliantly done.
Actually, they're going to order it in if needed. There's a fairly good sized Fantasy crowd here.
Fezza213 wrote: For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls
1-3 heroes
0-2 monsters
2+ core
No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
2000 points
No super heavies
No Lords of war
maximum 3 sources (detachments/formations).
Personally I think people are forgetting the fact that there is rumoured to be 3 or 4 months of fantasy releases, my local FLGS was telling me yesterday, most questions I asked he said come back Saturday but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc. He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
The problem is at the moment we haven't seen those scenarios and a lot of people are assuming the worst.
Fez
So you don't see anything wrong with valuing 1 wound goblins the same as 1 wound Warriors of Chaos?
Your assuming that chosen will only have 1 wound. Looking at the warscrolls for the starter kit all of the "troop" type of units all have 2 wounds.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I still think, even with balanced armies, the rules don't sound fun. There are already several things that can stack on top of each other to affect your damage output (formation/battalion bonus, leader ability bonus, terrain bonus, winning previous game bonus?). It sounds rather annoying to keep track of all that, and for outcomes to be more about those things than about the actual strengths/weaknesses of the units engaged.
But maybe other warscrolls will add more interesting elements. Or just make way more stuff to keep track of.
Do you play 40k? With the newest Codices? There are special rules for each unit, plus the formation, plus the detachment, in addition to any character / weapon upgrades taken. It's starting to get out of hand.
Honestly, I haven't played any 40k since before 7th edition was released. I'm not a fan of the formation/detachment special rules.
I suppose it will really come down to the warscrolls, and if the units can be used in different and interesting ways. I do find the lack of normal terrain rules disappointing. At this smaller scale, and with everything essentially skirmishing, there can be a lot more terrain than in a Warhammer Fantasy game. But it won't really matter, since it won't have much of an impact unless you use the special terrain rules, in which case it will have a stupid and random impact.,
Fezza213 wrote: For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls 1-3 heroes 0-2 monsters 2+ core No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
2000 points No super heavies No Lords of war maximum 3 sources (detachments/formations).
Personally I think people are forgetting the fact that there is rumoured to be 3 or 4 months of fantasy releases, my local FLGS was telling me yesterday, most questions I asked he said come back Saturday but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc. He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
The problem is at the moment we haven't seen those scenarios and a lot of people are assuming the worst.
Fez
I'm not sure we are "assuming the worst". Just assuming GW does average is pretty grim and scary. They don't do a lot of support. And they truly don't give a skavens tail about balance. The system you posted got sent out to stores as a suggestion. It will encourage people to only bring the baddest, broken, OP stuff they can possibly get their hands on. Why not? If Nagash is equal in cost to a Goblin hero. Why would you ever take less than the 3 biggest characters you have in your collection. Might be fun, but will certainly be the death of any models that aren't the best of the best.
I read the scenarios in AoS today. Not bad and they will probably work if you just own the starter box. But if you are hoping for scenarios for your old WFB army, i'd say start writing them yourself for you and your friends. You won't see much from GW, and certainly not beyond the starter box and whatever new they put out. They will be focused on AoS, not on old models .
You might not be assuming the worst but certainly a large number are.
Isn't that how heroes work now? there has been talk about factions gaining bonuses so if i want to run an orc army would it really be that beneficial to also run nagash? And isnt the scenario you just described how most games work anyway? In my 40k Ork army its a warboss, painboy or zhagstrukk. My big mek with shokk attack gun only gets brought out for lols, my weirdboy is the same unless you happen to come across some sort of synergy/formation which benefits from the two then purely on power value neither the big mek or weirdboy get a game. How many "useless" HQ's are there? If you are taking an orc and goblins army what about taking a hero who buffs your orcs and goblins? Due to the way the hit, wound and saves work all rolling on a fixed number (modified by rend and specials only) it is definitely possible that that lowly goblin unit could kill nagash or a bloodthirster. Its unlikely but definitely possible.
I agree though, scenarios will be aimed at new AoS units but I am definitely expecting ways which you can field old units maybe not the best ways but still able to otherwise certain races will be obsolete until GW get around to releasing stuff.
Torga_DW wrote: I'm just going to go ahead and deny that round bases will be a thing. IT'S JUST A RUMOUR PEOPLE! Everyone should calm down and wait till they've bought the new game before they rush to judgements. You have to buy the game to know whats in the game.
There's direct scans from the WD this coming week that explain bases are irrelevant. You can use any shape base you want. Round bases are a 'thing' just as square ones or triangular ones or hex ones are.
Or, you might have been sarcastic... hard to tell.
Nope, i'm putting my foot down. The new basing system will NOT be round, it'll be square like it always was. Until the new game hits the stores there's just NO WAY to tell.
Relapse wrote: The FLGS here is pretty stoked on the game and giving a free $35 dollar box of whatever someone who buys a copy wants.
I'm just giving my guys the 35.00 in cash For all my grumbling about the death of WFB, i still want people playing. Gives me more incentive to work on that points system. Selling AoS for 90 at both shops. Tossed an offer for folks on Dakka in the swap shop, but shipping might not make it as good as your local shop might offer. But certainly better than GW.
Fezza213 wrote: For list building, I see nothing wrong with something like this:
10 warscrolls
1-3 heroes
0-2 monsters
2+ core
No unit may have more then 25 wounds (25 can be changed to any number agreed upon). That would mean you could play with 20 1 wound skeletons (aka horde) or 10 2 wound chosen etc etc. Considering that looking at the warscrolls we have seen then that 20 man skeleton unit would have the capability of killing anything due to rolling on a fixed number (saves make it harder of course).
That is no different to me then the previous fantasy army composition tables, or 40k:
2000 points
No super heavies
No Lords of war
maximum 3 sources (detachments/formations).
Personally I think people are forgetting the fact that there is rumoured to be 3 or 4 months of fantasy releases, my local FLGS was telling me yesterday, most questions I asked he said come back Saturday but one that stood out was that he said that going forward there would be a very heavy focus on campaigns which would have campaign specific rules and ways of playing/building lists etc etc. He did say that some house rules would always needed but pointed out that we already do this for old fantasy as well as 40k.
The problem is at the moment we haven't seen those scenarios and a lot of people are assuming the worst.
Fez
I'm not sure we are "assuming the worst". Just assuming GW does average is pretty grim and scary. They don't do a lot of support. And they truly don't give a skavens tail about balance. The system you posted got sent out to stores as a suggestion. It will encourage people to only bring the baddest, broken, OP stuff they can possibly get their hands on. Why not? If Nagash is equal in cost to a Goblin hero. Why would you ever take less than the 3 biggest characters you have in your collection. Might be fun, but will certainly be the death of any models that aren't the best of the best.
I read the scenarios in AoS today. Not bad and they will probably work if you just own the starter box. But if you are hoping for scenarios for your old WFB army, i'd say start writing them yourself for you and your friends. You won't see much from GW, and certainly not beyond the starter box and whatever new they put out. They will be focused on AoS, not on old models .
You might not be assuming the worst but certainly a large number are.
Isn't that how heroes work now? there has been talk about factions gaining bonuses so if i want to run an orc army would it really be that beneficial to also run nagash? And isnt the scenario you just described how most games work anyway? In my 40k Ork army its a warboss, painboy or zhagstrukk. My big mek with shokk attack gun only gets brought out for lols, my weirdboy is the same unless you happen to come across some sort of synergy/formation which benefits from the two then purely on power value neither the big mek or weirdboy get a game. How many "useless" HQ's are there? If you are taking an orc and goblins army what about taking a hero who buffs your orcs and goblins? Due to the way the hit, wound and saves work all rolling on a fixed number (modified by rend and specials only) it is definitely possible that that lowly goblin unit could kill nagash or a bloodthirster. Its unlikely but definitely possible.
I agree though, scenarios will be aimed at new AoS units but I am definitely expecting ways which you can field old units maybe not the best ways but still able to otherwise certain races will be obsolete until GW get around to releasing stuff.
Fez
From what I looked at in my preview copy of AoS, it looks like in addition to Warscrolls there will be Battalion scrolls. Similar to 40k. Take X, Y, and Z, get this bonus. The chaos one listed pretty much the starter set models. You gain two abilities:
1) If a unit from the battalion successfully charged this turn, then all other units from that battalion get to re-roll charge dice.
2) If any unit died this turn, the units in the battalion get one additional attack from all weapons. For instance, the Khorne lord gets two weapons. I think his sword has 4 attacks, which goes to 5. The pet fleshhound gets 3 attacks and goes to 4. Most models have one weapon, which might have multiple attacks, might do more than 1 wound, and might even double as a ranged weapon.
So if similar things are available for each army, there is a reason to take those troops. And heroes will have abilities that aid their troops.
But..If I can just add any hero to my force? Those little bonuses from key words probably aren't going to equal what Nagash or a Blood thirster can do. Or Tamurkhan on a Toad Dragon I hear Forgeworld will also have warscrolls up for their stuff.
Which brings up a bonus about AoS. If we can't take the silly game seriously, then it's the perfect time to bring out the Toad Dragons and War Mammoths.
This doesn't make your point. Quite the opposite, in fact... GW's apparent unwillingness to make options equally useful in 40K doesn't make it any more palatable in a new game.
I rather strongly suspect that most players would prefer that SAG to be more fun to put on the table, rather than just writing it off as 'Oh well, that's the way it is...'
I'm still expecting them to suddenly release a big top secret book with organized play rules with point values and all. When that day comes, I'll yell, "See! I tolja!!" .. even if it's 10 years from now.
Necros wrote: I'm still expecting them to suddenly release a big top secret book with organized play rules with point values and all. When that day comes, I'll yell, "See! I tolja!!" .. even if it's 10 years from now.
"Naw man, you can't just buy a few units to get started."
"You gotta pick a Warscroll and buy like $300 worth of models, assemble all 50 or so of them, and paint em' long before you even come close to playing your first game"
"Naw man, you can't just buy a few units to get started."
"You gotta pick a Warscroll and buy like $300 worth of models, assemble all 50 or so of them, and paint em' long before you even come close to playing your first game"
It sells itself, really!
Some scrolls are as few as one fig, or five. Where do you get 50 models/$300 from? I mean, based on what we know, you -could- make some warscrolls that big, but I don't see where it's a requirement, unless I missed something...
" border="0" />
