Mr.Church13 wrote: If it's anything like the 40k formations there's gonna be a ton of model per scroll.
And all the preview scrolls I've seen have been hefty so I expect getting into the game is gonna be far more than just an HQ and 2 troops.
There are Formation style sheets in AoS. Battalions I believe. But the Scrolls are just essentially unit entries. In fact most of us have a problem with them because they aren't restrictive enough. Many just saying take 1+ models.
Necros wrote: If the scrolls come in each box set, wouldn't that box really be all you need to play that scroll.. and extra models are just extra models?
There is literally no unit size limit per scroll, except for characters. You can bring 50-man blocks of chaos warriors (whatever they're called now) for one scroll each. The only limit is on how big of a douche you're playing against and tedious, pre-game negotiations. GW has turned over all of the responsibility of game design to their customers which is craptastic if you ask me.
Necros wrote: If the scrolls come in each box set, wouldn't that box really be all you need to play that scroll.. and extra models are just extra models?
There is literally no unit size limit per scroll, except for characters. You can bring 50-man blocks of chaos warriors (whatever they're called now) for one scroll each. The only limit is on how big of a douche you're playing against and tedious, pre-game negotiations. GW has turned over all of the responsibility of game design to their customers which is craptastic if you ask me.
Once again I can't wait for this to seep over to 40k so I can run my 200 man Tactical Squad. <sarcasm>
Also my bad I thought the group scrolls we've seen are it.
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...'
But it is fun to play, its just not competitive which I think is the whole point, I always get a giggle out of the SAG whenever it shoots, its either crazy over the top or fizzles so bad i have to laugh. When they write the rules for both 40k and Fantasy they dont write it with balance in mind they write it with fun in mind which is cool by me. My point was that no HQ is created equal and those who must play competitively will focus on the biggest and bestest heroes while other will enjoy other things. Nothing wrong with either approach. I just think the "I am going to use Nagash in an orc/goblin army" is as likely to happen as unbound armies in 40k, for two reasons, one the bonuses from staying as one faction will outweigh nagash or that bloodthirster and two, most people wont allow it (just as they dont often allow unbound). Also Grimgor is an incarnate like Nagash so whats to say his rules are not over the top also? most races have an incarnate of which i think (going off the top of my head here) all of them have models.
I think it's weird that I've gone from never owning enough Warhammer stuff to field a whole unit, let alone an army, to someone who can field a combined Beastman/Chaos Warrior army with no trouble (and no points/FOC limits) thanks to AoS.
Has anyone seen the back of these supposed data sheets? not just the scans of white dwarf, but the real ones? What would the point be of making these warscrolls and not using both sides?
My guess is that their are points on the back. Noone has seen them yet.
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?
We won't be locked into six scenarios. My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios. You can still play with old armies – but by using them in scenarios. As I wrote, by specifying the exact models needed in each scenario – and indeed this is what the scenario leak does! – there is no need for points.
I don't agree that it's terrible marketing. It's clever marketing, in that it creates a product with a user base that keeps spending money. As in MTG where you buy new card packs all the time to keep up in the game (I think that's how it works, don't play it myself). Now "clever marketing" doesn't mean I endorse it. I just think that they actually know what they're doing here – again, like it or not.
If this is the way to go in order to make fantasy survive at all – well, better this than nothing. I for one look forward to trying it out, will proxy a game tomorrow with my 40k orksies and Marines (the latter seem appropriate ...) What I don't like is the new fluff, so far. But on the other hand, it's a new take on what "fantasy" means. Bold, at least.And if I can play Skaven I might just be interested ...
Coyote81 wrote: Has anyone seen the back of these supposed data sheets? not just the scans of white dwarf, but the real ones? What would the point be of making these warscrolls and not using both sides?
My guess is that their are points on the back. Noone has seen them yet.
Except for retailers who got their demo copies already. Busy tonite putting models together.
NO FETHING POINTS ANYWHERE.
Trust me, if it turns out that lots of people at GW US HQ are lying to me, and there is a big rule book, with in depth rules, and points....Wow, i'll be overjoyed. Might not even rip off their balls for lying to me.
But right now, I've got people I've known 20 years telling me "No points, designed that way".
Come Saturday, we'll all know everything. War scrolls and whatever else will be up.
pinkmarine wrote: We won't be locked into six scenarios. My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios. You can still play with old armies – but by using them in scenarios. As I wrote, by specifying the exact models needed in each scenario – and indeed this is what the scenario leak does! – there is no need for points.
If you think that's a good alternative to points then there's no hope for you...
pinkmarine wrote: We won't be locked into six scenarios. My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios. You can still play with old armies – but by using them in scenarios. As I wrote, by specifying the exact models needed in each scenario – and indeed this is what the scenario leak does! – there is no need for points.
If you think that's a good alternative to points then there's no hope for you...
Which part of "'clever marketing' doesn't mean I endorse it" was it you didn't understand?
Do we know when these 'scrolls' are been released?..
I know it's suppose to be Saturday. Although people are saying the morning and some are saying midnight. If it's the latter I find that an odd time to release them..
pinkmarine wrote: My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios.
How does not having a points system make it easier to sell scenarios?
For the customer, if the scenario specifies the models you use then whether or not they have points costs makes absolutely no difference.
For the designer, however... not having points costs would seem to just make it harder to put together balanced scenarios.
Im kinda sad. They had a real opprotunity to make a good game that allowed any units, just add points. If it was true, I would have played maybe a small 150$ lizardmen army.
Nope..........
Yeah.. I was eager to dust off my O&G after like 2 years of being in the attic.
Will probably not happen. I might play a game or two with the starter box, but I just cannot see this turning out to be anything less than a huge dissapointment.
pinkmarine wrote: My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios.
How does not having a points system make it easier to sell scenarios?
For the customer, if the scenario specifies the models you use then whether or not they have points costs makes absolutely no difference.
For the designer, however... not having points costs would seem to just make it harder to put together balanced scenarios.
It makes it easier to sell scenarios because the effort of putting together your own scenario is larger. Again, think casual/for fun player with little or no previous wargaming experience. If you can "teach" that player that "scenario and campaign play is the way this is done" and that "scenarios is something you buy", then you may generate a revenue stream.
And to a company, customers are revenue streams. Nothing more, nothing less.
Of course the gaming community will dislike this and even try to do something about it (eg creating points systems). But the existing player base is likely not very interesting to GW. They need to create a new revenue stream. In fact, if the existing WHFB players move to 40k, no loss. Same revenue, different product. (If they go to non-GW, well, still no loss really because the revenue was not big enough anyway.) All of you sitting with huge fantasy armies you want to use – you are not the solution, you are the problem. They need to sell things. Creating a new rule book that sells one copy/player is not enough. Creating a system where you pull in new players with free rules and a reasonably priced starter set, get them hooked and normalize scenario play? It could work. Perhaps. We'll see.
Do I like this? Do I endorse it? No. But I'm not trying to write how I think it should be, I'm trying to figure out what and why.
Rmac1990 wrote: Do we know when these 'scrolls' are been released?..
I know it's suppose to be Saturday. Although people are saying the morning and some are saying midnight. If it's the latter I find that an odd time to release them..
I think different times for different countries. Heard NZ was first. US at 10am EST.
But this is done by the IT guys in the UK, who don't really keep anyone updated if the change their minds, and things don't go as planned, so could be anytime.
Gothic Class battleships look amazing too, and you're not going to field them in 40k.
It's a really cool picture, but I don't think it does the job of telling us a story about the Age of Sigmar. Can these guys actually fight something that big? If so, why are they fighting dudes with two hand axes. It's an awesome pic, but the fact that things that you can't field in the game look really, really cool doesn't get me hugely excited about the game. If anything, it gets me worried that the game is perhaps focused on the wrong elements in the conflict. If beasties that immense are roaming about, who gives a rat's rear end about a River Troll anymore?
pinkmarine wrote: My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios.
How does not having a points system make it easier to sell scenarios?
For the customer, if the scenario specifies the models you use then whether or not they have points costs makes absolutely no difference.
For the designer, however... not having points costs would seem to just make it harder to put together balanced scenarios.
It makes it easier to sell scenarios because the effort of putting together your own scenario is larger. Again, think casual/for fun player with little or no previous wargaming experience. If you can "teach" that player that "scenario and campaign play is the way this is done", then you may generate a revenue stream.
And to a company, customers are revenue streams. Nothing more, nothing less.
Of course the gaming community will dislike this and even try to do something about it (eg creating points systems). But the existing player base is likely not very interesting to GW. They need to create a new revenue stream. In fact, if the existing WHFB players move to 40k, no loss. Same revenue, different product. (If they go to non-GW, well, still no loss really because the revenue was not big enough anyway.) All of you sitting with huge fantasy armies you want to use – you are not the solution, you are the problem. They need to sell things. Creating a new rule book that sells one copy/player is not enough. Creating a system where you pull in new players with free rules and a reasonably priced starter set, get them hooked and normalize scenario play? It could work. Perhaps. We'll see.
Do I like this? Do I endorse it? No. But I'm not trying to write how I think it should be, I'm trying to figure out what and why.
If GW agree with you that this is a clever idea, they're in for a rude awakening. If this mystical group of newbie players who will form this new "revenue stream" aren't going to be existing players or even existing wargamers, they're going to be young, and that means they're going to expect the scenarios to be either free or filthy, back-alley, dirt cheap. That's not a slight on the younger generation, it's just the trend in gaming at the moment, and no matter how much GW wishes it were so they do not exist in a vacuum, so they will be subject to those trends whether they like it or not.
If they are pursuing the strategy you envision, there is no way in hell the scenarios will be free, or cheap, so GW can look forward to running headlong into another youth gaming trend at the moment; rampant piracy(again, not a "gerroff my lawn!" negative commentary, it's just easier to do and more well-known now than it was when I was younger). Every codex & armybook, every BL novel & novella & e-short, every WD and Visions - literally everything GW publish right now pops up on torrent sites within a couple of weeks of release, so why would these potentially monetised scenarios be any different?
EDIT: Butcha - I think that's supposed to be art of Big Sig himself putting the hammer to Whatsitcalledasaurus, the Mighty God of Salamanders Nobody Had Heard of Until Five Minutes Ago.
RoninXiC wrote: It is absurd to think only new people would like AoS to be a great game.
I AM QUITE CERTAIN that alot of old veterans want this to work and WOULD invest alot of money.
Of course everyone wants it to be a great game. But that means nothing to GW. Only the opinion of those potentially giving their money to GW is interesting. If the revenue potential of the current fantasy player base was that good I think fantasy would sell more. The lack of sales is likely the reason for this approach.
Gothic Class battleships look amazing too, and you're not going to field them in 40k.
It's a really cool picture, but I don't think it does the job of telling us a story about the Age of Sigmar. Can these guys actually fight something that big? If so, why are they fighting dudes with two hand axes. It's an awesome pic, but the fact that things that you can't field in the game look really, really cool doesn't get me hugely excited about the game. If anything, it gets me worried that the game is perhaps focused on the wrong elements in the conflict. If beasties that immense are roaming about, who gives a rat's rear end about a River Troll anymore?
You must be the only person who wants artwork of just the miniatures. That is the plague of modern GW corporate commissioned art and it seems they are making amends here with this epic piece.
People have speculated it is Sigmar himself fighting Khorne in the flesh.
Just looking at that painting has me inspired about the new fluff in ways the stories have not yet been able to do.
Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
Yodhrin wrote: If GW agree with you that this is a clever idea, they're in for a rude awakening. If this mystical group of newbie players who will form this new "revenue stream" aren't going to be existing players or even existing wargamers, they're going to be young, and that means they're going to expect the scenarios to be either free or filthy, back-alley, dirt cheap. That's not a slight on the younger generation, it's just the trend in gaming at the moment, and no matter how much GW wishes it were so they do not exist in a vacuum, so they will be subject to those trends whether they like it or not.
If they are pursuing the strategy you envision, there is no way in hell the scenarios will be free, or cheap, so GW can look forward to running headlong into another youth gaming trend at the moment; rampant piracy(again, not a "gerroff my lawn!" negative commentary, it's just easier to do and more well-known now than it was when I was younger). Every codex & armybook, every BL novel & novella & e-short, every WD and Visions - literally everything GW publish right now pops up on torrent sites within a couple of weeks of release, so why would these potentially monetised scenarios be any different?
I think you are right. I'm not sure this will work, esp. not in the long run. I think they will tie scenarios tightly to new models (harder to rip off for the time being; 3D printers will be the death of this business). But as WHFB didn't sell enough as it was, I guess it was either (i) ditch it all together or (ii) try a new approach, They went for the latter, we'll see how it works.
For my part, personally, I like simple rules. And – oh, heresy! – I would like a similar approach for 40k, since the new Sigmar fluff really doesn't appeal to me.
pinkmarine wrote: My point was exactly that not providing a balancing system (eg points) makes it easier for GW to sell more scenarios.
How does not having a points system make it easier to sell scenarios?
For the customer, if the scenario specifies the models you use then whether or not they have points costs makes absolutely no difference.
For the designer, however... not having points costs would seem to just make it harder to put together balanced scenarios.
It makes it easier to sell scenarios because the effort of putting together your own scenario is larger. Again, think casual/for fun player with little or no previous wargaming experience. If you can "teach" that player that "scenario and campaign play is the way this is done" and that "scenarios is something you buy", then you may generate a revenue stream.
And to a company, customers are revenue streams. Nothing more, nothing less.
Of course the gaming community will dislike this and even try to do something about it (eg creating points systems). But the existing player base is likely not very interesting to GW. They need to create a new revenue stream. In fact, if the existing WHFB players move to 40k, no loss. Same revenue, different product. (If they go to non-GW, well, still no loss really because the revenue was not big enough anyway.) All of you sitting with huge fantasy armies you want to use – you are not the solution, you are the problem. They need to sell things. Creating a new rule book that sells one copy/player is not enough. Creating a system where you pull in new players with free rules and a reasonably priced starter set, get them hooked and normalize scenario play? It could work. Perhaps. We'll see.
Do I like this? Do I endorse it? No. But I'm not trying to write how I think it should be, I'm trying to figure out what and why.
I think the problem people have with this line of reasoning (and a lot of GW's reasoning) is that it doesn't take *that much* more effort to drastically expand the potential for the game by using points values and a decent, playtested set of rules. You can have exactly the same style of scenario-based play, everything that you're suggesting, but ALSO allow people to quickly build fair matches without the scenario.
I think Fantasy needed SOMETHING like this. 8th Ed WHFB is simply too bloated and too expensive to be a viable product. AOS has the potential to really be a true skirmish competitor game which requires <25 models, <$100, <60 minutes to play; that's what it needs to be to compete against X-Wing and Warmachine and Infinity. Yet some of the decisions seem to be completely wrong: completely killing off the Warhammer World to make way for a totally new game: its destroying valuable IP that they've spent decades building, and going to piss off far more potential customers than it attracts. Making it a purely scenario based game: again, there's an entire market of people who want points systems that you could target AS WELL AS the scenario-focussed players for almost no extra effort, so why not do it? Its just baffling.
pinkmarine wrote: It makes it easier to sell scenarios because the effort of putting together your own scenario is larger. Again, think casual/for fun player with little or no previous wargaming experience. If you can "teach" that player that "scenario and campaign play is the way this is done" and that "scenarios is something you buy", then you may generate a revenue stream.
And to a company, customers are revenue streams. Nothing more, nothing less.
It's entirely possible that you are right. However, the alternate theory is that Games Workshop doesn't really care about a competitive or tournament scene, and instead philosophically wants a game that caters to the type of "narrative" player that will buy models, maybe 20 or so at a time, in order to play through campaigns or player-structured games..
It's not a better game, or a worse game, it's a different game. Possibly fantastic for a regular group that treats miniature wargames like RPGs, and possibly lousy for pickup games. They're targetting the friends who will say, "Wouldn't it be cool to run through the Gates of Chaos Campaign? Yeah? Well, let's figure out the models we need and start next week." Or, the ones who will play a game, go "crap, I got stomped, why don't you take out your Chaos Sorcerer and see if I get closer?"
Maybe these groups exist in plentiful numbers, and maybe they don't. I have no idea. Frankly, I think that the demographic of Dakka is more competitive than most -- that is, interested in building the perfect list that will win the highest ratio of games. Personally, I used to be very much this type of player, but over the decades, I've become much more interested in playing models that are cool, armies that work kind of the way their fluff intends, and running more planned games/challenges.
For Age of Sigmar as a game, I'll reserve judgement on the mechanics and fun-factor until I actually play it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Trasvi wrote: I think the problem people have with this line of reasoning (and a lot of GW's reasoning) is that it doesn't take *that much* more effort to drastically expand the potential for the game by using points values and a decent, playtested set of rules. You can have exactly the same style of scenario-based play, everything that you're suggesting, but ALSO allow people to quickly build fair matches without the scenario.
I don't disagree with you that it wouldn't take much to make both camps happy. Hey, I'm all for it. However, GW seems to have a philosophical beef with the competitive thing. I really don't think it's a financial decision. It's almost like, the designers say, "Oh, you're one of those people who want to create min/max lists? Well you CAN'T in this game. HA."
I don't disagree with you that it wouldn't take much to make both camps happy. Hey, I'm all for it. However, GW seems to have a philosophical beef with the competitive thing. I really don't think it's a financial decision. It's almost like, the designers say, "Oh, you're one of those people who want to create min/max lists? Well you CAN'T in this game. HA."
But what do I know?
I agree with you in theory, but in practice this seems to make min/max even more of a thing. Which is kinda, idk sad? Amusing?
Coyote81 wrote: Has anyone seen the back of these supposed data sheets? not just the scans of white dwarf, but the real ones? What would the point be of making these warscrolls and not using both sides?
My guess is that their are points on the back. Noone has seen them yet.
Except for retailers who got their demo copies already. Busy tonite putting models together.
NO FETHING POINTS ANYWHERE.
Trust me, if it turns out that lots of people at GW US HQ are lying to me, and there is a big rule book, with in depth rules, and points....Wow, i'll be overjoyed. Might not even rip off their balls for lying to me.
But right now, I've got people I've known 20 years telling me "No points, designed that way".
Come Saturday, we'll all know everything. War scrolls and whatever else will be up.
GoonBandito wrote: Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
I guess they chose Sigmar as the poster boy for this is because for the rules to make sense, you need to get hammered first. There's "beer" in "beer and pretzels", after all.
Sigmar flies around the 'mortal realms' for thousands of years making friends with gods, peoples, heroes.
Chaos gets bored, comes back.
Sigmar gets his ass kicked hard. Sees this isn't going well. Deserts new friends, leaves, locks his door, and stays in hiding for hundreds of years.
Sigmar hammers out an army of space mar...I mean HEROES!
Realizing he always sucked at WFB, Sigmar has GW right new rules so he can play the game.
The Age of Sigmar has begun!!!
Fluff is a bit lacking, but the pictures are awesome.
Wait is that for real?
I haven't been updated with the End Times but does that mean all the old school heroes and characters are all dead? How are you gonna use them in AoS if they're dead in the fluff?
I see the sanguinary guard are making a fantasy appearance.
I cant even tell what is what anymore, this could easily be 40k at a glance, all of their stuff is looking more and more the same - not a good thing.
My hunch is they are not interested in making generic fantasy minis anymore because that IP cant be protected so therefor everything will continue to look more and more stupid (because it is easier to protect that way). I think this is a nail in the coffin for GW.
Possibly fantastic for a regular group that treats miniature wargames like RPGs, and possibly lousy for pickup games. They're targetting the friends who will say, "Wouldn't it be cool to run through the Gates of Chaos Campaign? Yeah? Well, let's figure out the models we need and start next week." Or, the ones who will play a game, go "crap, I got stomped, why don't you take out your Chaos Sorcerer and see if I get closer?"
This is the target audience I think they're after. As you say (and I said) only the future will tell whether this group of people exists or not, or is large enough, or enough interested in paying.
Trasvi wrote: I think the problem people have with this line of reasoning (and a lot of GW's reasoning) is that it doesn't take *that much* more effort to drastically expand the potential for the game by using points values and a decent, playtested set of rules. You can have exactly the same style of scenario-based play, everything that you're suggesting, but ALSO allow people to quickly build fair matches without the scenario.
No, the effort wouldn't be great. But (and I'm speculating of course): By not providing a DIY option they can avoid too much home-brewed campaigning and thereby get more people to buy stuff.
Let's say they put out 4-page scenario modules with two scenario-relevant characters, step by step creating a story. "Oh just 7 bucks, let's split one and play Sunday." The sort of cliff hanger strategy that has worked in tv-shows ands comics since the dawn of time. (Sort of )
oh and those winged guys proped up by their scrolls
hasn't this been done enough? on astorath it looks good. on these the execution is abysmal. It looks like something scibor would make - not a good thing.
Well...er...Suck it up soldier, sucky names are here to stay it seems. Hopefully the proof of the pudding will be in the eating rather than the rubbish name of said pudding.
Milhaila. Have you had a game yet? Does it play well?
Sigmar flies around the 'mortal realms' for thousands of years making friends with gods, peoples, heroes.
Chaos gets bored, comes back.
Sigmar gets his ass kicked hard. Sees this isn't going well. Deserts new friends, leaves, locks his door, and stays in hiding for hundreds of years.
Sigmar hammers out an army of space mar...I mean HEROES!
Realizing he always sucked at WFB, Sigmar has GW right new rules so he can play the game.
The Age of Sigmar has begun!!!
Fluff is a bit lacking, but the pictures are awesome.
Wait is that for real?
I haven't been updated with the End Times but does that mean all the old school heroes and characters are all dead? How are you gonna use them in AoS if they're dead in the fluff?
No, the world just blew up and shattered into 7 realms or some such. All the important people (aka models are still in production) miraculously survived (?). But then again, they're heroic right?. Of course many of the unnamed the masses died, but they were just redshirts; the ones that survived decided to call themselves something different and trademarkable. I have the WD, but haven't yet read it (there are, however, drool marks on every page with pictures, which is just about every page other than the 4-page rules pullout).
Automatically Appended Next Post: On a totally different topic. Have the people who've picked up WD75 noticed that the Stormcast Eternal has the faintest mold lines GW's ever produced? The ones on the legs are so, so very faint, and some of the ones across the helm I could barely see.
Plus, there was not one annoying mold line to remove. The only remediation necessary on the model for me was to fill in the shoulder pads. Like the dark eldar models, the upper torso has a front and back shoulder pad, and where they meet, it's unseemly. And of course, the ridges on the pauldrons are very,very close, but impossible to be perfect (being 2 pieces), so if you're anal, you gotta fix that.
On a totally different topic. Have the people who've picked up WD75 noticed that the Stormcast Eternal has the faintest mold lines GW's ever produced? The ones on the legs are so, so very faint, and some of the ones across the helm I could barely see.
Plus, there was not one annoying mold line to remove. The only remediation necessary on the model for me was to fill in the shoulder pads. Like the dark eldar models, the upper torso has a front and back shoulder pad, and where they meet, it's unseemly. And of course, the ridges on the pauldrons are very,very close, but impossible to be perfect (being 2 pieces), so if you're anal, you gotta fix that.
I don't have the White Dwarf, but most/nearly all new GW models are amazing. I put together one of the new Bloodthirsters and you'd need a microscope to find mould lines there. Not to mention how all the parts fit perfectly together. The torso is build out of 5 or 6 pieces, but it slots together without a single gap. The wings even held fast without glue, when I put them in to see where they go.
GW models really made another huge jump over the last year or so. Even the 2013 new Tac-Marines look like mediocre 3rd party knock-offs by comparison with their "huge" mould-lines.
Now, if only GW rules were only 1/10th the quality of their toys.
My FLGS, The NWGC, are having a few intro games after the Toy Soldier tournament on Saturday evening. I'll try and get along.
I was really optimistic about it all, but the more I read - crikey.
I don't have as much invested in WHFB either financially or emotionally, as a number of members so I think i should apologise for being flippant regarding the new direction. I imagine I'd have a similar reaction if Canon decided to change their lens mounts one day. Or, heaven forbid, Brewdog changed the recipe for Punk IPA!
Also apologies for mincing off in a huff a hundred pages or so ago. Immature behavior unfitting of a grown assed man, that was rightfully brought to my attention.
Gothic Class battleships look amazing too, and you're not going to field them in 40k.
It's a really cool picture, but I don't think it does the job of telling us a story about the Age of Sigmar. Can these guys actually fight something that big? If so, why are they fighting dudes with two hand axes. It's an awesome pic, but the fact that things that you can't field in the game look really, really cool doesn't get me hugely excited about the game. If anything, it gets me worried that the game is perhaps focused on the wrong elements in the conflict. If beasties that immense are roaming about, who gives a rat's rear end about a River Troll anymore?
You must be the only person who wants artwork of just the miniatures. That is the plague of modern GW corporate commissioned art and it seems they are making amends here with this epic piece.
People have speculated it is Sigmar himself fighting Khorne in the flesh.
Just looking at that painting has me inspired about the new fluff in ways the stories have not yet been able to do.
Gothic Class battleships look amazing too, and you're not going to field them in 40k.
It's a really cool picture, but I don't think it does the job of telling us a story about the Age of Sigmar. Can these guys actually fight something that big? If so, why are they fighting dudes with two hand axes. It's an awesome pic, but the fact that things that you can't field in the game look really, really cool doesn't get me hugely excited about the game. If anything, it gets me worried that the game is perhaps focused on the wrong elements in the conflict. If beasties that immense are roaming about, who gives a rat's rear end about a River Troll anymore?
Isn't Angrath the Unbound kinda that big compared to a Space Marine? I figured the minotaur-ish look meant it was just a really really big bloodthirster or something, especially given that the first scenario is those angel guys vs Khorne. Also, that beast doesn't even look physical to me. It looks like it's a tornado in the shape of a minotaur, which again would either mean it's a daemon (who aren't always corporeal) or possibly Khorne himself just observing things (both Khorne and Nurgle have been depicted as in the background towering over everything else as they observe, with Khorne having a vague wind-ish look sort of like that beast in this artwork).
There's another Warhammer Fantasy art of a Keeper of Secrets that's almost that big climbing up a tower to eat a bunch of spearmen (who are valiantly actually getting ready to stab the thing despite how HUGE it is compared to them. Now that takes balls. The art is from the spearmens' perspective). I was under the general impression that some greater demons simply manage to get that big, myself.
This is the target audience I think they're after. As you say (and I said) only the future will tell whether this group of people exists or not, or is large enough, or enough interested in paying.
Considering me and a few of the other folk who're most disappointed with AoSare those guys, I doubt it very much. "Take what you want and tell a story" works with Inquisitor because you're talking max 5 human-scale models per-side, more often 3. Mordheim gets away with quirky and occasionally outright broken rules because it has a great campaign system that is pretty crunchy considering it's a GW game, and has points values and defined factions to enable larger model counts in the 10-20 range.
AoS has too many models involved, and too many types of models, to go with the "take what you want" approach, it obviously lacks a proper points and factions system to support its function with those bigger model counts and wider range of unit types, and it seems to completely lack the deep and detailed "metagame" features that might allow people to overlook the flaws in the core rules. AoS isn't just a bad competitive game, nor is it just a bad pickup game, if it's aimed at "narrative wargamers" it's bad for that too because it's prescriptive when it should be permissive(campaigns & scenarios) and permissive when it should be prescriptive(army selection and the basic rules).
Talys wrote: No, the world just blew up and shattered into 7 realms or some such.
Remind us, which one are you from again?
Talys wrote: On a totally different topic. Have the people who've picked up WD75 noticed that the Stormcast Eternal has the faintest mold lines GW's ever produced? The ones on the legs are so, so very faint, and some of the ones across the helm I could barely see.
Ah, never mind. The one of sunshine and rainbows it seems, where everything is perfectly fine and nothing is ever broken.
More to the point, Talys, your comment on it not being a better game or worse game just a different game is something I have to disagree with: The rules. Are terrible. For that reason alone, no matter how much you may love the aesthetic of the fluff (and I think those Khorne guys are fething ace!!!), the game itself - as written, in the rules - is a total train wreck.
I don't play fantasy (40k for almost two decades though). I am saddened for those who played fantasy. A reboot is not always a good thing, especially if old models are now moot.
Everyone remember mage knight? It was a fun game that was very popular and made weiseman millions. It had power creep and flaws. They rebooted it as mage knight 2.0 (was a good game too). However, in doing so they killed people's collections as 1.0 stuff was not really compatable, which upset many.
By not supporting 1.0 with models or the tourney scene wizkids killed the game. Sure they made a good (possibly better) game, but change is not always good....... esp when you stomp on ppeople's collections. I see this happening to fantasy, especially with the models I have seen. Fantasy was unique, now it is futuristic and 40k ish imho.
Yodhrin wrote: AoS has too many models involved, and too many types of models, to go with the "take what you want" approach, it obviously lacks a proper points and factions system to support its function with those bigger model counts and wider range of unit types, and it seems to completely lack the deep and detailed "metagame" features that might allow people to overlook the flaws in the core rules. AoS isn't just a bad competitive game, nor is it just a bad pickup game, if it's aimed at "narrative wargamers" it's bad for that too because it's prescriptive when it should be permissive(campaigns & scenarios) and permissive when it should be prescriptive(army selection and the basic rules).
I don't interpret the situation in the same way, but you may be totally right in this. As I see it, the prescriptive aspect of the scenarios is exactly the point – imagine an audience that is too "lazy" or lack the commitment to make up their own stories and want it served on a plate. And in the scenarios leaked above, there is absolutely no permissiveness in model selection, it is specified in detail.
I grew up with roleplaying in the 80's, I've designed worlds, rule sets and run campaigns running over several years. But it took time and commitment. Only a few really got that much into it, most people mainly wanted to play their character. (Which was totally ok with me, being a lesser god was quite fun.) I thing that GW imagines that this type of commitment is dwindling. Maybe they want to get people into it this way and eventually influence a fraction to become more hardcore hobbyists?
As I really love the quality of GWs models (not always the sculpts, but the molding is always almost flawless) I really hope they pull this of. Even better if they make a simplified 40k too
If AoS doesn't tank (it might), I'd fully expect them to go more and more towards the "free equipment/upgrades, free transports, no-points-unbound-as-option, no-points-unbound-as-default, no-points-anywhere-anylonger"-route with 40K, starting maybe next year (or however long the lead-time on new products after sales-numbers from AoS is).
455_PWR wrote: I don't play fantasy (40k for almost two decades though). I am saddened for those who played fantasy. A reboot is not always a good thing, especially if old models are now moot.
I have to agree. My only dalliance with Fantasy comes in the form of Warhammer Quest, but I've seen this kinda of thing before when I was just getting into BattleTech as FASA was wrapping things up, and ClickTech came about. Now it's not the same situation - as GW have said, they will be releasing rules for existing models whereas existing BTech players were discarded like yesterday's newspaper - but it's not cool to see something you've either just started or have been playing loyally for years get cast aside in favour of Sigmarines and the most dumbed down ruleset I've seen outside of kids playing with Army Men.
Sun is shining, I've got a ton of Legion of Everblight models to paint, the Tour de France starts tomorrow, I celebrate my 100th post on this excellent forum, and winter the new WD is coming. I'm over and out on this discussion for the time being.
However this turns out, at least GW has succeeded in stirring up enough emotion to have us rambling on here for 200+ pages
Peace! (Or is that totally inappropriate in this context?)
Talys wrote: On a totally different topic. Have the people who've picked up WD75 noticed that the Stormcast Eternal has the faintest mold lines GW's ever produced? The ones on the legs are so, so very faint, and some of the ones across the helm I could barely see.
Ah, never mind. The one of sunshine and rainbows it seems, where everything is perfectly fine and nothing is ever broken.
More to the point, Talys, your comment on it not being a better game or worse game just a different game is something I have to disagree with: The rules. Are terrible. For that reason alone, no matter how much you may love the aesthetic of the fluff (and I think those Khorne guys are fething ace!!!), the game itself - as written, in the rules - is a total train wreck.
I forgot to mention that there were some mold lines around the hammer, too, that were more "traditional" mold lines, but those are easier to clean.
To the point of the rules -- At a glance, they look terrible for a competitive game. Though I could be wrong, they seem the antithesis of a competitive game where two people design an army, buy models, paint them, and do war with them.
But is it FUN?
First, if I treat it like a board game like Space Hulk, take the Sigmarites vs the Chaos, will I and a friend have a good time? If so, it's worth the $120 that the box costs. But it might not have lasting power, because practically speaking, I never play Space Hulk anymore, even though I love the game.
Second, if we then take some other fantasy miniatures, play with the (free) rules, will we enjoy ourselves? If we follow a campaign, as we would an RPG campaign, would the mechanics and storyline be interesting, or would it be more fun to just forget the game entirely and follow the fluff?
Third, if I see occasional cool Fantasy models occasionally, buy them, and toss 'em onto a table and play with a friend that has sort of a comparable force, can we have a good time?
I can't answer any of those questions right now. It's a game seemingly designed for casual, friendly play; possibly narrative or scenario based, and, as I said, the antithesis of all things competitive. Which is why I say it's neither a better or worse game, but a different one.
I'm not even sure that I can think of another miniature game on the market where there appears to be a singular desire to strip away balance, and make the game only playable if both sides WANT to have casual/narrative games, rather than to compete with optimized armies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
pinkmarine wrote: I grew up with roleplaying in the 80's, I've designed worlds, rule sets and run campaigns running over several years. But it took time and commitment. Only a few really got that much into it, most people mainly wanted to play their character. (Which was totally ok with me, being a lesser god was quite fun.) I thing that GW imagines that this type of commitment is dwindling. Maybe they want to get people into it this way and eventually influence a fraction to become more hardcore hobbyists?
As I really love the quality of GWs models (not always the sculpts, but the molding is always almost flawless) I really hope they pull this of. Even better if they make a simplified 40k too
You've actually described the gaming aspect of me precisely. Our gaming group is 20+ years old, with most of us original members, and almost all of us have played RPGs since the 80s (some, the 90s). When we used to play GURPS, Fantasy Roleplay, D&D, or other RPGs, they were multiyear commitments of 8+ hours a night once or twice a week. Probably the most fun I ever had in RPG was playing out the Dragonlance modules in 1st ed AD&D.
The wargaming aspect got bolted on in the late 80s and early 90s, mostly due to Warhammer 40k. When we first started playing, it was in at a more public club/venue, and all of us were awfully competitive. But fast forward, and most of us now are probably in the ideal Games Workshop demographic -- we buy models just because we think they're cool, spend quite a bit of time on the hobby, and like to play them in an often competitive but always friendly way. That is, we all would like to win, but except for relatively rare occasions, all of us are happy to field sub-optimal armies that are more cool than powerful.
The vast majority of our 40k games (around 3/4, I'd say) are scenario based, of our own creation, rather than, "You, me, FIGHT!". Some of those scenarios took a very long time to craft, and some of the tables we play take hours to set up -- some of us might even get together just to set up the scenario one day, then play it a couple times another.
I'm 100% sure all of us will buy AoS, if only for the cool models. Will those models do anything other than collect dust 2 months from now? Who knows.
Are there a lot of people like us in the world, or are we a very rare breed? I have no idea. But we do get folks who want to join us quite often -- though almost always, we decline, because we don't want to grow our group.
All of the fighting lacks any meaning without balance; every victory and loss will be easily excused and cheapened. Competitive player or not, there will be little incentive to see games through because the conclusions will not be satisfying if they aren't predicated on a balanced fight. If you disagree at first, try a few games, you'll get there.
Bull0 wrote: All of the fighting lacks any meaning without balance; every victory and loss will be easily excused and cheapened. Competitive player or not, there will be little incentive to see games through because the conclusions will not be satisfying if they aren't predicated on a balanced fight. If you disagree at first, try a few games, you'll get there.
Yes, I agree. If I lose and I feel like I couldn't win, that cheapens both the win and the loss.
I'm not convinced that Sigmar will or won't be like this, though, when I play with friends in a relatively casual setting. I mean, we won't start unless we THINK the two sides are close, so by definition, at the onset, we'll at least think the fight is going to be balanced. Also, amongst my friends, there isn't a problem with, "crap, that was horrible... take this out or add this in, and let's go again."
GW is abdicating game balance in favor of, "You guys who are playing know your skill levels and units better, so pick your models and YOU figure it out. Have fun!"
I still say the greatest imbalance in 40k is not faction/codex, but skill level. If I play against an inexperienced or significantly less skilled player, my win ratio will be abnormally high (like, close to 100%). Since there is no computerized matchmaking (nor potentially a good opponent!), the best way to have fun for us is just to handicap where necessary, or make the miniature wargames more scenario based. We don't do it in a way like, "you suck, so take 200 more points" -- it's more like, "Yeah, those Blood Angels are pretty weak.. why don't you take a couple extra squads of assault marines next time, and see how it goes?"
In an ideal world, win ratios would be close to 50%, as this provides the most fun for everyone playing. The problem is, it's almost impossible to do with rules, because, well, some people are just smarter
To take a chess example, I hate playing against people that are significantly better or worse than me, because I either lose every game or win every game.
Talys wrote: GW is abdicating game balance in favor of, "You guys who are playing know your skill levels and units better, so pick your models and YOU figure it out. Have fun!"
...and that doesn't feel like a cop out. No siree >_>
Talys wrote: GW is abdicating game balance in favor of, "You guys who are playing know your skill levels and units better, so pick your models and YOU figure it out. Have fun!"
...and that doesn't feel like a cop out. No siree >_>
Also doesn't help new players who know nothing of the game. And this is supposed to be an introductory product.
So are they aiming for new players? If they want inexperienced players who know nothing of balancing or agreeing what is fair to have a jolly good time figuring it out, then good luck.
Are they aiming for old vets to return? They just pissed them off by literally blowing up the setting.
So who are they aiming for?
Maybe they should have done a bit of market research, eh?
I have played fantasy since the late 90s and I have absolutely no fething clue what is actually going on here. This just seems like a total disaster...
I'm not convinced that Sigmar will or won't be like this, though, when I play with friends in a relatively casual setting. I mean, we won't start unless we THINK the two sides are close, so by definition, at the onset, we'll at least think the fight is going to be balanced.
GW is abdicating game balance in favor of, "You guys who are playing know your skill levels and units better, so pick your models and YOU figure it out. Have fun!"
Yes, but that, IMO, is exactly what might prevent "casual" play.
We put 50 Elves against 50 Orks and initially think it might be balanced. Elves score a solid Victory. What now? Was the initial assessment flawed, or did the Elves-guy play better and/or was favoured by the dice gods? Nobody knows.
Back to start, 40 Elves against 50 Orks. Elves win again. Hmmm. Are we still off? Does it further invalidate the previous game? Or was the game NOW balanced, but Elves played better anyways?
Skaven-Player joins the club and loses against the 50 Orks with his 80 Skaven, but wins against the 40 Elves. So .... huh? Where do we go from here?
Fixed point levels and agreed point-limits for any given game are rarely "balanced". Not just GW. FFG is pretty horrible at it too, in my experience. But the construct of a points limit, and the implicit pre-game/meta-game of creating a good army within a given points limit (ironically list-building only works in the absence of balance, otherwise there'd be no point) creates a framework for a given game precisely so that ... mostly the casual ... gamers can just play the game without thinking about making it work first.
I am sure really, really, really, hard-core competitive types, if they'd wanted to set up AoS tournaments, could hide themselves with calculators and excel-sheets in the basement for a week-end and come up with a system/comp/un-official points system that could make AoS work.
But the guy walking into a store with a bunch of Elves for a pick-up game?
If I play X-Wing and win a 100 points game, I can, in general gaming-terms, be proud of my victory. If I loose, I get that "itch" to be better next time.
Hell, if I win with a "casual list" against a tricked-out double-falcon or something along the lines, I can be doubly proud of myself, because I know I played and won against the odds in an (unfortunately rather) imbalanced game and punch the air for bragging rights.
Hey, if I loose, I might actually buy a Falcon or two .. .because they are probably better than they should be. Ka-Ching! Not ideal, from a gamer-perspective, but a very human impulse GW profited from for a very long time.
With AoS, I am always in the dark of what the outcome of a given game means.
Yodhrin wrote: AoS has too many models involved, and too many types of models, to go with the "take what you want" approach, it obviously lacks a proper points and factions system to support its function with those bigger model counts and wider range of unit types, and it seems to completely lack the deep and detailed "metagame" features that might allow people to overlook the flaws in the core rules. AoS isn't just a bad competitive game, nor is it just a bad pickup game, if it's aimed at "narrative wargamers" it's bad for that too because it's prescriptive when it should be permissive(campaigns & scenarios) and permissive when it should be prescriptive(army selection and the basic rules).
I don't interpret the situation in the same way, but you may be totally right in this. As I see it, the prescriptive aspect of the scenarios is exactly the point – imagine an audience that is too "lazy" or lack the commitment to make up their own stories and want it served on a plate. And in the scenarios leaked above, there is absolutely no permissiveness in model selection, it is specified in detail.
I grew up with roleplaying in the 80's, I've designed worlds, rule sets and run campaigns running over several years. But it took time and commitment. Only a few really got that much into it, most people mainly wanted to play their character. (Which was totally ok with me, being a lesser god was quite fun.) I thing that GW imagines that this type of commitment is dwindling. Maybe they want to get people into it this way and eventually influence a fraction to become more hardcore hobbyists?
As I really love the quality of GWs models (not always the sculpts, but the molding is always almost flawless) I really hope they pull this of. Even better if they make a simplified 40k too
But for me that's what was so genius about Mordheim; the campaign system was very defined in that there were rules for everything, but the vast range of potential combinations of result in each "phase" of the post-game sequence and the way that fed back into the tabletop meant the system essentially wrote a story for you without ever mandating a part of it. You'd get stories like the one about that henchguy who kept ending up in hilariously mismatched fights with opponents that should have crushed him, yet every time he triumphed and he became your most powerful hero, only for him to fail a hilariously easy jump in your second to last game, KO himself, then die when rolling for injuries post-game.
That is the magic of narrative wargaming for me, organising stories and characters out of the events that happen as a result of well-crafted rulesets, and using those stories and characters to inform future gameplay. "You are Commander McGrooblesnork leading the Brave Sigmarite 81st Volunteer Awesome Brigade, fight these four missions in sequence with these exact models, and don't forget to have the mandatory amount of fun!" doesn't appeal in the slightest as the entire basis for the metagame - "historical" scenarios are fun as an occasional thing, but if you want your system to have the kind of replayability necessary to encourage players to stick with it long enough to fork over all the moniez, you really need mechanics that are capable of generating stories without much effort on the part of the players, but which are also flexible enough to allow people to go their own way when they want to.
pinkmarine wrote: And in the scenarios leaked above, there is absolutely no permissiveness in model selection, it is specified in detail.
That's because it's a starter set scenario , designed to work with the models in that box.
GW have done similar things in previous starters. The scenario booklet in the 2nd ed starter set was my introduction to Warhammer 40k. It's a neat way of introducing complex rules in a gradual fashion .
Talys wrote: GW is abdicating game balance in favor of, "You guys who are playing know your skill levels and units better, so pick your models and YOU figure it out. Have fun!"
...and that doesn't feel like a cop out. No siree >_>
Also doesn't help new players who know nothing of the game. And this is supposed to be an introductory product.
So are they aiming for new players? If they want inexperienced players who know nothing of balancing or agreeing what is fair to have a jolly good time figuring it out, then good luck.
Are they aiming for old vets to return? They just pissed them off by literally blowing up the setting.
So who are they aiming for?
Maybe they should have done a bit of market research, eh?
Except, if you play with just the units in the starter box, it's probably well-balanced. And if you and your friends incrementally add on units, that can all stay pretty balanced, too.
Yes, but that, IMO, is exactly what might prevent "casual" play.
We put 50 Elves against 50 Orks and initially think it might be balanced. Elves score a solid Victory. What now? Was the initial assessment flawed, or did the Elves-guy play better and/or was favoured by the dice gods? Nobody knows.
Back to start, 40 Elves against 50 Orks. Elves win again. Hmmm. Are we still off? Does it further invalidate the previous game? Or was the game NOW balanced, but Elves played better anyways?
Skaven-Player joins the club and loses against the 50 Orks with his 80 Skaven, but wins against the 40 Elves. So .... huh? Where do we go from here?
What it actually kills is "pick-up" play.
It's possible that you have a rock-scissors-stones scenario, making it so that points gives you Elves beat Orks beat Skaven beat Elves (or at least the specific lists). That's why, in games between friends, this isn't an issue. When the Skaven play the Orks, they take less stuff, when they play against the Elves, they take more stuff. If the guy buys a Verminlord and suddenly stomps the Elves, they need to adjust their list accordingly. Until the Elvish player gets some new toy.
This is totally counter-intuitive to the competitive mindset as well as the pickup mindset, and also counter to the the export of computer game style play onto the tabletop. But without matchmaking, you have great inequities anyhow, and frankly, I find a lot of games to be lopsided just because of skill. I don't really want a 8 games out of 10 win ratio against someone **because I'm a better player**. My preference is greatly to even it up so that the games are closer.
Except, if you play with just the units in the starter box, it's probably well-balanced. And if you and your friends incrementally add on units, that can all stay pretty balanced, too.
Since when did GW released a balanced starter set?
GoonBandito wrote: Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
Reasonable possibility.
I agree with you two. There's a chance that all the whining and butthurt is actually result of poor reasoning as the 4 page rules are just starter set streamlined "basic rules". GW is famous for gorgeous limited edition rulebooks. Not to mention that there still has to be a bunch of special rules like ASF/ASL and others, so it's not too likely that they could put them all on one page.
Except special rules will be on the different Warcsrolls, and we've been told by multiple retailers that this is it. So all this 'whining and butthurt' is far more reasoned than all the blind 'there's gonna be more coming!!!'
GoonBandito wrote: Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
Reasonable possibility.
I agree with you two. There's a chance that all the whining and butthurt is actually result of poor reasoning as the 4 page rules are just starter set streamlined "basic rules". GW is famous for gorgeous limited edition rulebooks. Not to mention that there still has to be a bunch of special rules like ASF/ASL and others, so it's not too likely that they could put them all on one page.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. This is it. There's nothing else coming or planned:
Except for retailers who got their demo copies already. Busy tonite putting models together.
NO FETHING POINTS ANYWHERE.
Trust me, if it turns out that lots of people at GW US HQ are lying to me, and there is a big rule book, with in depth rules, and points....Wow, i'll be overjoyed. Might not even rip off their balls for lying to me. But right now, I've got people I've known 20 years telling me "No points, designed that way".
Come Saturday, we'll all know everything. War scrolls and whatever else will be up.
I've made the most important point very large and bold in case you missed it. And Mikhalila isn't the only one saying the same thing. There's lots and lots of Denial and people going "Nah, I don't believe this. Surely this can't be it. It'll be good".
Question to the denier head in sand types: What would your reaction be when it is inevitably shown that this really is the sum of all the rules and nothing else is coming?
Warhams-77 wrote: These seem to be from Twitter - via Tabletopwelt.de - some not-so-good quality photos of the terrain kits
That style is generic fantasy in a good way
Thanks for those, and they show what I feared. Those chaos models really are as big as the sigmarines, even the marauders, meaning they are way out of scale with existing chaos models.
Nice scenery though, although the floating on fire is a bit over the top for me.
I guess this si why the vast majority of building type fantasy scenery from GW has gone, its out of scale with the new models.
Talys wrote: GW is abdicating game balance in favor of, "You guys who are playing know your skill levels and units better, so pick your models and YOU figure it out. Have fun!"
...and that doesn't feel like a cop out. No siree >_>
Also doesn't help new players who know nothing of the game. And this is supposed to be an introductory product.
So are they aiming for new players? If they want inexperienced players who know nothing of balancing or agreeing what is fair to have a jolly good time figuring it out, then good luck.
Are they aiming for old vets to return? They just pissed them off by literally blowing up the setting.
So who are they aiming for?
Maybe they should have done a bit of market research, eh?
Except, if you play with just the units in the starter box, it's probably well-balanced. And if you and your friends incrementally add on units, that can all stay pretty balanced, too.
Yes, but that, IMO, is exactly what might prevent "casual" play.
We put 50 Elves against 50 Orks and initially think it might be balanced. Elves score a solid Victory. What now? Was the initial assessment flawed, or did the Elves-guy play better and/or was favoured by the dice gods? Nobody knows.
Back to start, 40 Elves against 50 Orks. Elves win again. Hmmm. Are we still off? Does it further invalidate the previous game? Or was the game NOW balanced, but Elves played better anyways?
Skaven-Player joins the club and loses against the 50 Orks with his 80 Skaven, but wins against the 40 Elves. So .... huh? Where do we go from here?
What it actually kills is "pick-up" play.
It's possible that you have a rock-scissors-stones scenario, making it so that points gives you Elves beat Orks beat Skaven beat Elves (or at least the specific lists). That's why, in games between friends, this isn't an issue. When the Skaven play the Orks, they take less stuff, when they play against the Elves, they take more stuff. If the guy buys a Verminlord and suddenly stomps the Elves, they need to adjust their list accordingly. Until the Elvish player gets some new toy.
This is totally counter-intuitive to the competitive mindset as well as the pickup mindset, and also counter to the the export of computer game style play onto the tabletop. But without matchmaking, you have great inequities anyhow, and frankly, I find a lot of games to be lopsided just because of skill. I don't really want a 8 games out of 10 win ratio against someone **because I'm a better player**. My preference is greatly to even it up so that the games are closer.
So it's not even designed for casual play, it's designed for the people who play with others enough to work out there own balance ?
Forgive me Talys but it seems the more I read of your posts (and a few others) it seems it's showing more of its flaws and that people are wanting a game that this one itself won't even give.
Mordheim as said above was great fun naritive wise, I had a vampire that when it come time to make the killing blow on my friends merc captan.
She would retreat, this happen every battle we had in a campaign lasting a year.
We become friends talking about why she allways refused to kill him and left allowing him to win the battles.
She had no mercy against anyone other.
This isn't a rule set that I think will give anything like that.
It seems the only thing it gives is being related to that other game it destroyed, I don't even think the minis are good enough to pull the game though on its own like I do think 40k does.
GW has a tough few months ahead to forge this game, and if it fails I think GW will be in a very tough time.
It's possible that you have a rock-scissors-stones scenario, making it so that points gives you Elves beat Orks beat Skaven beat Elves (or at least the specific lists). That's why, in games between friends, this isn't an issue. When the Skaven play the Orks, they take less stuff, when they play against the Elves, they take more stuff. If the guy buys a Verminlord and suddenly stomps the Elves, they need to adjust their list accordingly. Until the Elvish player gets some new toy.
This is totally counter-intuitive to the competitive mindset as well as the pickup mindset, and also counter to the the export of computer game style play onto the tabletop. But without matchmaking, you have great inequities anyhow, and frankly, I find a lot of games to be lopsided just because of skill. I don't really want a 8 games out of 10 win ratio against someone **because I'm a better player**. My preference is greatly to even it up so that the games are closer.
You just described, perfectly I may add, a a completely broken rules system.
It doesn't work for anyone, because guess what, you won't, and cannot possibly, know whether your skaven should take less stuff, because those units do not work the same way as they used to. And more to the point, you can take skaven, and or(ruk)cs, and chaos warriors, an empire steam tank if you want to, there are NO factions as such, so how do you possibly house rule that. There are probably somewhere in the region of a billion possible army configurations right now, and you think you will be able to balance all of that at home? Without points and without any sort of army restriction at all it is impossible.
Never mind new players, who wouldnt have any clue at all how to house rule anything. Thats really good for a game designed to bring in new players because the last one didnt have enough people playing it.
If points don't matter, and balance comes down to a gamers agreement, then writing rules for new units is as easy as picking them off the top of your head. Let me ramble for a moment...
Suppose AoS sells well and is seen in gaming clubs around the world. People like the casual style of no points but don't want to buy another army for yet another game. Due to bases meaning nothing and balance being subjective they don't have to. All they need do is draft some rules for their own minis and tahdah - you've got GW Sagmarites vs PP Cryx, Mierce Khthones vs Perry War of the Roses.
While they might be using other peoples miniatures they're playing Games Workshop's game. Isn't that how Kings of War works? We could see a community of warscroll writers converting your favourite miniatures into AoS units.
GoonBandito wrote: Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
Reasonable possibility.
I agree with you two. There's a chance that all the whining and butthurt is actually result of poor reasoning as the 4 page rules are just starter set streamlined "basic rules". GW is famous for gorgeous limited edition rulebooks. Not to mention that there still has to be a bunch of special rules like ASF/ASL and others, so it's not too likely that they could put them all on one page.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. This is it. There's nothing else coming or planned:
Except for retailers who got their demo copies already. Busy tonite putting models together.
NO FETHING POINTS ANYWHERE.
Trust me, if it turns out that lots of people at GW US HQ are lying to me, and there is a big rule book, with in depth rules, and points....Wow, i'll be overjoyed. Might not even rip off their balls for lying to me.
But right now, I've got people I've known 20 years telling me "No points, designed that way".
Come Saturday, we'll all know everything. War scrolls and whatever else will be up.
I've made the most important point very large and bold in case you missed it. And Mikhalila isn't the only one saying the same thing. There's lots and lots of Denial and people going "Nah, I don't believe this. Surely this can't be it. It'll be good".
Question to the denier head in sand types: What would your reaction be when it is inevitably shown that this really is the sum of all the rules and nothing else is coming?
It really depends on your definition of nothing else coming. If you mean it literally meaning that there is no extra books with no rules at all coming then i can assure you you are wrong. If you mean it in the sense that I think Mikhaila means it, in that there is no 9th edition coming or expanded core rule book then yes I agree.
There is definitely campaign books coming, there is definitely missions/scenarios/battles coming with those books. Scenarios will contain ways to build lists. Now I don't know if they will be like the starter set in that they tell you exactly what miniatures you need or if they will be more generic although I am leaning towards more generic, but there is definitely a ton of new stuff both models, terrain and books coming in the next few months.
Will this make AoS fun? no idea, but I am willing to see it before i write it off.
Apple fox wrote: So it's not even designed for casual play, it's designed for the people who play with others enough to work out there own balance ?
Forgive me Talys but it seems the more I read of your posts (and a few others) it seems it's showing more of its flaws and that people are wanting a game that this one itself won't even give.
Mordheim as said above was great fun naritive wise, I had a vampire that when it come time to make the killing blow on my friends merc captan. She would retreat, this happen every battle we had in a campaign lasting a year. We become friends talking about why she allways refused to kill him and left allowing him to win the battles. She had no mercy against anyone other. This isn't a rule set that I think will give anything like that. It seems the only thing it gives is being related to that other game it destroyed, I don't even think the minis are good enough to pull the game though on its own like I do think 40k does.
GW has a tough few months ahead to forge this game, and if it fails I think GW will be in a very tough time.
If you actually read my posts, you'd see that I haven't made any conclusion as to whether or not AoS will be fun. This kind of game generally isn't my thing (low model count skirmisher), so chances are, I probably won't like it. It also doesn't have futuristic guns, which is almost always a deal-killer for me. I'll still buy it because the models are cool.
Sigmar can't do much worse than Fantasy Battle was doing. At least people are TALKING about fantasy now. And I'm pretty sure GW will ship a lot more Sigmar boxes than they have of other Fantasy releases recently.
What I'm trying to do is explain Games Workshop's rationale, and their (apparently) anti-competitive play, pro-campaign stance. Generally speaking, I am not opposed to a tabletop wargame where players evolve balance based on their own gaming group. I'm prefer scenario-based play to pickup/tournament settings of setting up on opposing sides and fighting for no particular reason.
I am trying to tell you that there are people who enjoy the RPG-ish aspect of tabletop miniature warfare; call it a niche or whatever, if you will. And there are people for whom game balance may have some importance, but is low on the scale of importance, because they're used to making balance adjustments for all sorts of things already.
Make no mistake - 100% the most important thing for me is the models, with Sigmar, 40k, or any other miniature wargame. There can be a total absence of rules (ie no game at all), and I'll still buy it if the minis are cool. The difference is, if there are rules that encourage army building, I'll build vast armies; otherwise, I buy a few lone minis, paint them up, maybe play whatever game a few times, and stuff the minis in a display case.
I am not suggesting that there are, or aren't, a lot of people like me. Perhaps we are the minority. Perhaps we buy enough stuff that GW feels inclined to please us with their release cadence and type of product. Who knows. We may seem alien to you, and you might not comprehend our motivators, but we do exist in at least enough numbers to apparently keep 40k going in an incarnation that is unattractive to its detractors. There do exist people who actually really like 40k the way it is today, as baffling as that may seem to you.
And for the zillionth time, I've never, ever said that Sigmar is a good game, or has good rules, or that it will be fun, or that I'll even play it more than one night. I can also say that I haven't played Fantasy Battle ever (despite owning thousands of dollars of WHFB minis), have never felt an inclination to, and likely never will. So Sigmar will get at least 1 more game out of me than WHFB.
GoonBandito wrote: Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
Reasonable possibility.
I agree with you two. There's a chance that all the whining and butthurt is actually result of poor reasoning as the 4 page rules are just starter set streamlined "basic rules". GW is famous for gorgeous limited edition rulebooks. Not to mention that there still has to be a bunch of special rules like ASF/ASL and others, so it's not too likely that they could put them all on one page.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. This is it. There's nothing else coming or planned:
Except for retailers who got their demo copies already. Busy tonite putting models together.
NO FETHING POINTS ANYWHERE.
Trust me, if it turns out that lots of people at GW US HQ are lying to me, and there is a big rule book, with in depth rules, and points....Wow, i'll be overjoyed. Might not even rip off their balls for lying to me.
But right now, I've got people I've known 20 years telling me "No points, designed that way".
Come Saturday, we'll all know everything. War scrolls and whatever else will be up.
I've made the most important point very large and bold in case you missed it. And Mikhalila isn't the only one saying the same thing. There's lots and lots of Denial and people going "Nah, I don't believe this. Surely this can't be it. It'll be good".
Question to the denier head in sand types: What would your reaction be when it is inevitably shown that this really is the sum of all the rules and nothing else is coming?
It really depends on your definition of nothing else coming. If you mean it literally meaning that there is no extra books with no rules at all coming then i can assure you you are wrong. If you mean it in the sense that I think Mikhaila means it, in that there is no 9th edition coming or expanded core rule book then yes I agree.
There is definitely campaign books coming, there is definitely missions/scenarios/battles coming with those books. Scenarios will contain ways to build lists. Now I don't know if they will be like the starter set in that they tell you exactly what miniatures you need or if they will be more generic although I am leaning towards more generic, but there is definitely a ton of new stuff both models, terrain and books coming in the next few months.
Will this make AoS fun? no idea, but I am willing to see it before i write it off.
Why is there definitely campaign books coming? All that we know is that there are books coming but we don't know what they are, they could be faction books with backgrounds and collecting the warscrolls for that faction ala the 'forces of Warmachine/hordes' books, unless I've missed something.
All this talk of Mordheim makes me wish I had a group to play that lovely game. Great mix of narrative and competitive. Maybe AoS can come up with some character leveling system to make it more interesting during campaigns.
Apple fox wrote: So it's not even designed for casual play, it's designed for the people who play with others enough to work out there own balance ?
Forgive me Talys but it seems the more I read of your posts (and a few others) it seems it's showing more of its flaws and that people are wanting a game that this one itself won't even give.
Mordheim as said above was great fun naritive wise, I had a vampire that when it come time to make the killing blow on my friends merc captan.
She would retreat, this happen every battle we had in a campaign lasting a year.
We become friends talking about why she allways refused to kill him and left allowing him to win the battles.
She had no mercy against anyone other.
This isn't a rule set that I think will give anything like that.
It seems the only thing it gives is being related to that other game it destroyed, I don't even think the minis are good enough to pull the game though on its own like I do think 40k does.
GW has a tough few months ahead to forge this game, and if it fails I think GW will be in a very tough time.
If you actually read my posts, you'd see that I haven't made any conclusion as to whether or not AoS will be fun. This kind of game generally isn't my thing (low model count skirmisher), so chances are, I probably won't like it. It also doesn't have futuristic guns, which is almost always a deal-killer for me. I'll still buy it because the models are cool.
Sigmar can't do much worse than Fantasy Battle was doing. At least people are TALKING about fantasy now. And I'm pretty sure GW will ship a lot more Sigmar boxes than they have of other Fantasy releases recently.
What I'm trying to do is explain Games Workshop's rationale, and their (apparently) anti-competitive play, pro-campaign stance. Generally speaking, I am not opposed to a tabletop wargame where players evolve balance based on their own gaming group. I'm prefer scenario-based play to pickup/tournament settings of setting up on opposing sides and fighting for no particular reason.
I am trying to tell you that there are people who enjoy the RPG-ish aspect of tabletop miniature warfare; call it a niche or whatever, if you will. And there are people for whom game balance may have some importance, but is low on the scale of importance, because they're used to making balance adjustments for all sorts of things already.
Make no mistake - 100% the most important thing for me is the models, with Sigmar, 40k, or any other miniature wargame. There can be a total absence of rules (ie no game at all), and I'll still buy it if the minis are cool. The difference is, if there are rules that encourage army building, I'll build vast armies; otherwise, I buy a few lone minis, paint them up, maybe play whatever game a few times, and stuff the minis in a display case.
I am not suggesting that there are, or aren't, a lot of people like me. Perhaps we are the minority. Perhaps we buy enough stuff that GW feels inclined to please us with their release cadence and type of product. Who knows.
And for the zillionth time, I've never, ever said that Sigmar is a good game, or has good rules, or that it will be fun, or that I'll even play it more than one night. I can also say that I haven't played Fantasy Battle ever (despite owning thousands of dollars of WHFB minis), have never felt an inclination to, and likely never will. So Sigmar will get at least 1 more game out of me than WHFB.
I honestly don't think they understand the market and everything they are doing is from fumbling around in the dark, 1 step forward, 1 back.
I am a huge RPG player, we incorperate our RPG characters from the iron kingdoms into games of warmachine.
I am part of the niche I think you are trying to describe, GW rational or not I still think what GW are doing is mostly daft.
If they had taken the time to sit back and re do new campaigns in the mordheim rule set, the rules probably wouldn't have been any more difficult as these. I would have been all over that, an update to the mordheim system to get all the current races in. And some new minis with a descent marketing campaign.
I am not entirely disagreeing with you it seems with this post clarifying, but I also think GW is just throwing out something quick in the hope people will bite at the cheepist possible price.
The only reason they choose these factions I think is the ability to repurpose them all to 40k for players there if this all goes bad for them, that will soften the blow.
As a thought seperate I am mostly here for the trainwreck marketing, I am amazed at this :0 GW knows how to make a bad marketing plan for sure.
To be honest, from what I've seen so far, if this was their effort at relaunching WHFB I'd have preferred they just announced that it wasn't making money and they were ceasing production of all products for it.
Coyote81 wrote: All this talk of Mordheim makes me wish I had a group to play that lovely game. Great mix of narrative and competitive. Maybe AoS can come up with some character leveling system to make it more interesting during campaigns.
Mordheim was alright.. it had major oversights and no support after the first few months (Par for the GW course). It has same inherent problem with blood bowl that was never resolved. Pick army with BS4, win game.. Or with bloodbowl, Pick team with AGI 4 and win game. Add ontop of that a faction that gets knowledge (or whatever the "search for loot" ability was that lets you add a die and discard one when you search) and get all 6 artifacts in under 10 games.
Coyote81 wrote: All this talk of Mordheim makes me wish I had a group to play that lovely game. Great mix of narrative and competitive. Maybe AoS can come up with some character leveling system to make it more interesting during campaigns.
Then check out Frostgrave. It's getting great reviews and some have even gone as far to say that it's even better than Mordheim.
Coyote81 wrote: All this talk of Mordheim makes me wish I had a group to play that lovely game. Great mix of narrative and competitive. Maybe AoS can come up with some character leveling system to make it more interesting during campaigns.
Mordheim was alright.. it had major oversights and no support after the first few months (Par for the GW course). It has same inherent problem with blood bowl that was never resolved. Pick army with BS4, win game.. Or with bloodbowl, Pick team with AGI 4 and win game. Add ontop of that a faction that gets knowledge (or whatever the "search for loot" ability was that lets you add a die and discard one when you search) and get all 6 artifacts in under 10 games.
Not forgetting the whole massive advantages of taking double weapons instead of weapon and shield problem.
GoonBandito wrote: Isn't this boxset is just essentially an introduction set? As in designed for complete newbies to the hobby - very streamlined rules, no need to worry about army building (hence why there is no points listed anywhere, you just use the models in the box) and some narrative scenarios to help you structure a game on the tabletop.
While I think GW are doing an absolutely terrible job of selling this new system (their mindset of absolute secrecy until the day it drops is ridiculous in this day and age), I highly doubt this is the be all and end all of the new Warhammer game.
Reasonable possibility.
I agree with you two. There's a chance that all the whining and butthurt is actually result of poor reasoning as the 4 page rules are just starter set streamlined "basic rules". GW is famous for gorgeous limited edition rulebooks. Not to mention that there still has to be a bunch of special rules like ASF/ASL and others, so it's not too likely that they could put them all on one page.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. This is it. There's nothing else coming or planned:
Except for retailers who got their demo copies already. Busy tonite putting models together.
NO FETHING POINTS ANYWHERE.
Trust me, if it turns out that lots of people at GW US HQ are lying to me, and there is a big rule book, with in depth rules, and points....Wow, i'll be overjoyed. Might not even rip off their balls for lying to me.
But right now, I've got people I've known 20 years telling me "No points, designed that way".
Come Saturday, we'll all know everything. War scrolls and whatever else will be up.
I've made the most important point very large and bold in case you missed it. And Mikhalila isn't the only one saying the same thing. There's lots and lots of Denial and people going "Nah, I don't believe this. Surely this can't be it. It'll be good".
Question to the denier head in sand types: What would your reaction be when it is inevitably shown that this really is the sum of all the rules and nothing else is coming?
I said there's a chance, not tht I'm sure - GW made a lot of terrible choices lately, but I try not to be the doom & gloom guy - I value my peace of mind too much to actually care and I won't cry (too much) if the game sucks - I play half a dozen other systems too, so one less means I can find another one. If it's true what you say, then okay, whatever - games pop up and die all the time. Will be sad to watch WFB do it, it's been around since the dawn of time, but this too shall pass.
Question to you, though... what would your reaction be if it turns out that it's actually more in-depth than you claim based on what someone said? Will you eat your shoes? Will you feel like a total tool for believing and propagating that? For convincing others that it's almost as if it was set in stone? No, I think you're decent enough to just say "okay, I was wrong, whatever", but a bajillion others will not even comment on that - they will just shut up pretending that they didn't preach it. Just like those guys that always get pumped about the end of the world - each time they're convinced it'll happen, it never does, they never admit that they were gullible fools. Same thing happens with lots of people on these forums.
All in all I voiced an opinion that there's a chance, you on the other hand act like you're 110% sure. If I am wrong, it's okay, I didn't really preach it, nor I tried to convince others. What if you're wrong?
Coyote81 wrote: All this talk of Mordheim makes me wish I had a group to play that lovely game. Great mix of narrative and competitive. Maybe AoS can come up with some character leveling system to make it more interesting during campaigns.
Mordheim was alright.. it had major oversights and no support after the first few months (Par for the GW course). It has same inherent problem with blood bowl that was never resolved. Pick army with BS4, win game.. Or with bloodbowl, Pick team with AGI 4 and win game. Add ontop of that a faction that gets knowledge (or whatever the "search for loot" ability was that lets you add a die and discard one when you search) and get all 6 artifacts in under 10 games.
You need to play the game more and perhaps did not have enough terrain. BS4 was not remotely enough to autowin mordheim games. There were too many scenarios that allowed you to win without having to hunt down you opponents shooting models and exposing yourself to that BS4 shooting. There are plenty of shooting modifiers in that game as well. honestly the only warbands I was ever really concerned that were broken consisted of either Possessed or Vampires because they started so far ahead stat wise. Even then, enough attacks will get crits through and take those guys down as well.
I said there's a chance, not tht I'm sure - GW made a lot of terrible choices lately, but I try not to be the doom & gloom guy - I value my peace of mind too much to actually care and I won't cry (too much) if the game sucks - I play half a dozen other systems too, so one less means I can find another one. If it's true what you say, then okay, whatever - games pop up and die all the time. Will be sad to watch WFB do it, it's been around since the dawn of time, but this too shall pass.
Question to you, though... what would your reaction be if it turns out that it's actually more in-depth than you claim based on what someone said? Will you eat your shoes? Will you feel like a total tool for believing and propagating that? For convincing others that it's almost as if it was set in stone? No, I think you're decent enough to just say "okay, I was wrong, whatever", but a bajillion others will not even comment on that - they will just shut up pretending that they didn't preach it. Just like those guys that always get pumped about the end of the world - each time they're convinced it'll happen, it never does, they never admit that they were gullible fools. Same thing happens with lots of people on these forums.
All in all I voiced an opinion that there's a chance, you on the other hand act like you're 110% sure. If I am wrong, it's okay, I didn't really preach it, nor I tried to convince others. What if you're wrong?
Me? I have no stake in this. I sold most of fantasy stuff off ages ago and now only tend to Warhammer Quest it from time to time. The success or failure of Age of Space Marines won't affect me in anyshape. I have no interest in a game that looks like 40k. Though, Ironically, I was looking up Warhammer 4th Edition spares the other day...
As for the rights and wrongs business, if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But, the fact that they [GW] destroyed a, for some bods, long enjoyed and treasured game for what is an insipid and uninspired pile just grates. There was a lot of "Surely this isn't it" at the start, but with everything to be shown, confirmed, etc from some trusted people means that the whole "wait and see and stop being whiners" crowd irritates. There's a lot of hatred, denial and just outright "What have you [GW] done?". You can lump me in the last category with a slight sprinkle of the first.
I think Talys had it right in comparing it to Space Hulk a few pages or so back.
It's a boardgame masquerading as a table top game. I imagine the prime concern when making it would of been something simple to demo in shop to attract new players.
Now that I know it's scenario led, I'm probably going to pick it up and will probably get as much fun out of the boxset as I did out of Space Hulk initially.
If GW manage to keep my long term interest by releasing fun scenarios every now and again, so much the better.
In some ways I'm quite excited by it now, and almost nostalgic for old GW who used to crank out something like this every other month
I still have a little bit of faith that this might end up being okay. I just see it as a way for people to start fantasy but now it's the ONLY fantasy game so that's concerning to me.
I dropped 40k (well I still play with my buddies every once in a while but its to simplified for me) and now fantasy might turn into another 40k.
We will see what happens though, it might end up being pretty good! We never really know you til the rules come up and warscrolls tmrw.
I'll be downloading it and maybe having a practice game to test it out but I love 8th so me and my hundreds of ratties will probably stick with that
What happens when later scenarios are released with new model kits to march them but none of your existing models are included in scenarios? I have 100s of Ogre minis, sorry Ogors, but there's no guarantee that these prescriptive battles *shudder at how boring that will be* will support them.
agnosto wrote: What happens when later scenarios are released with new model kits to march them but none of your existing models are included in scenarios? I have 100s of Ogre minis, sorry Ogors, but there's no guarantee that these prescriptive battles *shudder at how boring that will be* will support them.
I agree with this. I have over 400 - 450 skaven models (give or take lol) and I want to make sure they are supported.
My real concern though is how long the current model lineup, for all armies, will last. I have about 500-750 points of empire and wanted to create a large army but I'm afraid that one day in the near future I will check the GW website and BOOM the models will no longer be there. No warning.
That's what scares me the most about this, not the rules, not the new models, not the direction GW wants to go with this, but the support of the model lineup
agnosto wrote: What happens when later scenarios are released with new model kits to march them but none of your existing models are included in scenarios? I have 100s of Ogre minis, sorry Ogors, but there's no guarantee that these prescriptive battles *shudder at how boring that will be* will support them.
I imagine each new kit/scenario will be much like a boardgame expansion.
It wouldn't suprise me if GW hadn't thought more long term than selling the starter and a couple of expansions to each player.
It must suck for exisiting fantasy players to have this come along, but for me I quite like the idea of it.
I've not played fantasy since Ravening Hordes days, and don't have much gaming time at all. I like the initial smaller scale, and I'll be quite happy spending my time painting some of those minis up in prep for an occaisonal game.
That said, some kind of "dimensional/mystic/underworld"-gate of that kind can probably be found even in ancient greek/roman/norse/whatever epics from 1000 to 3000 years ago.
Well, i'm very underwhelmed. This is a clear move to make fantasy more like 40k and you know what, i liked it more as it was. Maybe it will one day grow on me but atm fantasy was better as fantasy was.
Full scan of the White Dwarf is available on the interwebs (I'm not going to post the link, but seriously, go check any number of groups on Facebook and you're bound to find it) and it has an entire page discussing that all existing models will have Warscrolls available online as PDF downloads immediately, with pictures of Ogres and Dark Elves on the page as reference. The picture even has some of the models on round bases and some of the models on square bases.
That said, some kind of "dimensional/mystic/underworld"-gate of that kind can probably be found even in ancient greek/roman/norse/whatever epics from 1000 to 3000 years ago.
Yeah, I love Stargate and all that, but magic portals have been around since written language pretty much.
Plus the pieces look pretty amazing and, strangely enough, AREN'T covered in skulls! Progress!
After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
The realmgates don't really bother me, the name is a bit silly, but thats part of GW, always has been. Its the rules attached to it all that are disappointing me.
The realmgates don't really bother me, the name is a bit silly, but thats part of GW, always has been. Its the rules attached to it all that are disappointing me.
Its the company attached to it that are disappointing me.
After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
ANYONE FOR A GAME OF OLDHAMMER?
I think you've nailed it. I had something similar rattling around in my brain and it always plays out the same. Some vets will stick around, some 40K players will buy in. The idea, though, is to bring new blood into the hobby.
The biggest obstacle to success that I see, however, is there is no real marketing plan attached. Without some heavy marketing, I simply do not see this being successful.
After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
The thing about star gate dimension hammer is that there's no stakes to the games. Who are these people? Why are they fighting? What are they fightin for? Do people live in these realms? Who are they? How do they live?
It's impossible to really get into building an army that you're attached to when it's just "evil/good army #10305." Warhammer had interesting cultures, personalities, nuanced motivations, geography, places of interest, all of which could be drawn upon to formulated personalized armies. I just don't see that happening in a multiverse that exists solely for angels and daemons to fight each other in. It's boring.
The biggest obstacle to success that I see, however, is there is no real marketing plan attached. Without some heavy marketing, I simply do not see this being successful.
This.
I think GW kinda forgot how much work it is to get a new game off and going.
PP, Mantic, Wyrd, etc.. all have Pressganger/Pathfinder/something programmes to get local game-groups going/interested. FFGs, Wizkids, & co. send out tournament packs to encourage stores to run events, promote stuff and get people playing, on top of the powerful licences.
40K has its own self-driven community that keeps recruiting new players, and to an extend, it still holds true that many people "play 40K, cause you can get a game almost anywhere".
But GW probably forgot how that is a rare and precious historical oddity, not a given they can expect to work just like that for any new product (or old product, in the case of WFB) they put out.
Even with a good set of rules, there'd be no guarantee that AoS "catches", and with the rules as they are, I'm struggling to see any sustained gaming-scene growing up around it. Doubly so as they've cut-down on gaming in their stores so much.
The biggest obstacle to success that I see, however, is there is no real marketing plan attached. Without some heavy marketing, I simply do not see this being successful.
This.
I think GW kinda forgot how much work it is to get a new game off and going.
PP, Mantic, Wyrd, etc.. all have Pressganger/Pathfinder/something programmes to get local game-groups going/interested. FFGs, Wizkids, & co. send out tournament packs to encourage stores to run events, promote stuff and get people playing.
40K has it's own self-driven community that keeps recruiting new players, and to an extend, it still holds true that many people "play 40K, cause you can get a game almost anywhere".
But GW probably forgot how that is a rare and precious historical oddity, not a given they can expect to work just like that for any new product (or old product, in the case of WFB) they put out.
Even with a good set of rules, there'd be no guarantee that AoS "catches", and with the rules as they are, I'm struggling to see any sustained gaming-scene growing up around it. Doubly so as they've cut-down on gaming in their stores so much.
They would know that if research weren't so darn otiose... (I need to make a meme about this)
H.B.M.C. wrote: A thought just occurred to me: There have been rumours of a Horus Heresy game coming out.
Think about that for a moment...
.
MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
ANYONE FOR A GAME OF OLDHAMMER?
I think you've nailed it. I had something similar rattling around in my brain and it always plays out the same. Some vets will stick around, some 40K players will buy in. The idea, though, is to bring new blood into the hobby.
The biggest obstacle to success that I see, however, is there is no real marketing plan attached. Without some heavy marketing, I simply do not see this being successful.
Remember. Kirby says this is a niche market (and he is right).
This BOARD and BoLS and others are doing all the Marketing right now.
Guerilla Marketing and Social Media Marketing....
H.B.M.C. wrote: A thought just occurred to me: There have been rumours of a Horus Heresy game coming out.
Think about that for a moment...
.
MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
Most of the more reliable people were putting the HH game for the fall, not summer.
And the contents they suggested don't match up with these.
After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
ANYONE FOR A GAME OF OLDHAMMER?
I think you've nailed it. I had something similar rattling around in my brain and it always plays out the same. Some vets will stick around, some 40K players will buy in. The idea, though, is to bring new blood into the hobby.
The biggest obstacle to success that I see, however, is there is no real marketing plan attached. Without some heavy marketing, I simply do not see this being successful.
Remember. Kirby says this is a niche market (and he is right).
This BOARD and BoLS and others are doing all the Marketing right now.
Guerilla Marketing and Social Media Marketing....
It's all they need.
Well they must be getting some class A word of mouth marketing out of this thread!
Las wrote: The thing about star gate dimension hammer is that there's no stakes to the games. Who are these people? Why are they fighting? What are they fightin for? Do people live in these realms? Who are they? How do they live?
It's impossible to really get into building an army that you're attached to when it's just "evil/good army #10305." Warhammer had interesting cultures, personalities, nuanced motivations, geography, places of interest, all of which could be drawn upon to formulated personalized armies. I just don't see that happening in a multiverse that exists solely for angels and daemons to fight each other in. It's boring.
How has 40k managed to survive then, the stakes in its battles are even smaller. GW can wipe out a hundred inhabited planets as one throw-away fluff blurb and it doesn't mean a thing.
Yeah but it has a Mohawk and a Vielchair so it's fine.
Also if Bols is the market research God help GW that's all I can say.
That place.....
Maybe partnering up with a Colecting mag like lotr did they would get a new influx of people but I'm sure Lord Kirby doesn't want to give any money to anyone save stupid new line for some reason.
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
I would be happy.... If they manage to create some nice miniatures that I can use for my Legion then great, they are never going to top FWsHH books especially if they are not even using the 40k ruleset. It will be a nice distraction with some very useful miniatures at the very least.
On furthur thought I am kinda worried what they might do fluff wise lol
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
Well we don't really know if AoS will turn out to be a fun/playable game yet so it's a bit difficult to imagine, but it would at least give us plenty to talk about.
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
I would be happy.... If they manage to create some nice miniatures that I can use for my Legion then great, they are never going to top FWsHH books especially if they are not even using the 40k ruleset. It will be a nice distraction with some very useful miniatures at the very least.
On furthur thought I am kinda worried what they might do fluff wise lol
Like they already haven't butchered the HH background so anything more couldn't be worse.
Las wrote: The thing about star gate dimension hammer is that there's no stakes to the games. Who are these people? Why are they fighting? What are they fightin for? Do people live in these realms? Who are they? How do they live?
It's impossible to really get into building an army that you're attached to when it's just "evil/good army #10305." Warhammer had interesting cultures, personalities, nuanced motivations, geography, places of interest, all of which could be drawn upon to formulated personalized armies. I just don't see that happening in a multiverse that exists solely for angels and daemons to fight each other in. It's boring.
How has 40k managed to survive then, the stakes in its battles are even smaller. GW can wipe out a hundred inhabited planets as one throw-away fluff blurb and it doesn't mean a thing.
Scale doesn't negate stakes. The Imperium has substance, culture, limitations. You can understand, largely, how it operates, how it's citizens live and this context allows you to conceptualizer how it might be destroyed. Further, the forces that make up the imperium have clear motivations that are often at odds with each other. Ditto for the xenos factions. Character = stakes. We don't have that in AoS yet.
Remember. Kirby says this is a niche market (and he is right).
This BOARD and BoLS and others are doing all the Marketing right now.
Guerilla Marketing and Social Media Marketing....
It's all they need.
It's not though; half the posts in this thread are factually incorrect, based on rumors we had at the time. The only people that look to BoLS or Dakka or even B&C are people already in the hobby. Your whole post is about them trying to market this game to a new generation of hobbyists, and yet the ONLY place this is being discussed? Among existing hobbyists.
Where are the banner ads on other sites? Nowhere.
Where are the back page ads on other sites? Nowhere.
If the only place they are doing the marketing is through existing hobbyists, they will never expand beyond that group. It's a complete disconnect in your logic of what they may be doing.
BOLS and sites like this are not exposing AoS to new players, other than 40k players that might switch over. As RacerX said, that will only maybe get them a net gain.
If they want new players that are not currently into tabletop gaming, they better make sure the independent hobby shops are on board (to target roleplayers and MtG?). They're probably going to need to go beyond that. How about a tie-in with a major computer game title... oops.
So, the pre-made scenarios are the balancing mechanic? So to play that scenario, you have to buy the models listed? What if you play dwarves, and there's only like 3 different scenarios to choose from with dwarf models, is the answer just to buy more stuff? (Don't answer that, cuz I already know the answer, just sayin')
I think pre-made scenarios could work for a point-less system, but it has to be able to work for everyone not just specific minis.
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
I would be happy.... If they manage to create some nice miniatures that I can use for my Legion then great, they are never going to top FWsHH books especially if they are not even using the 40k ruleset. It will be a nice distraction with some very useful miniatures at the very least.
On furthur thought I am kinda worried what they might do fluff wise lol
Like they already haven't butchered the HH background so anything more couldn't be worse.
Thats like saying "They just bombed x town so just let them bomb the entire country cos it can't get any worse"
The game is all flash and no substance. Flashy art and flashy models with nothing behind them. it will sell to the people that like the models at first, but after that.... probably not.
The problem with this discussion of "but you don't know, they might release something that's actually good later" is that all of these negative rumors (which I happen to believe) could have been stopped if GW actually discussed things with players.
"Yes, the box is overly simplistic, but the real rules and the full reboot of 9th fantasy is coming out later." Boom. Done. That's all they would have to say. (If it were true.)
But I don't think that is true. "This is the new game. No points. No balance. No real care for rules. Enjoy." - GW that's probably the truth.
RacerX wrote: After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
ANYONE FOR A GAME OF OLDHAMMER?
Repeated relaunching? you mean the two sets 5 years apart is repeated?
considering 40k got a relaunch after a yeah that is hardly repeated. the re doing Codexes year after year is repeated fantasy was just sort of had eh releases especially since the hardback no fluff army books.
Good starter sets? okay they had nice figures but the rules since the old high elves vs goblins set don't feel improved honestly.
Large kits are fine but power creeping is wrong see how pp creates center piece sets without needing to have said things in order to win.
So now we have an idea of who the target market for this is.
Boardgamers.
Makes sense now. Vets, here's where the are cutting you off with unusable war scrolls for all your models and a nice pat on the head. The future is all about releasing new models with new scenarios to make things easy for people who play board games.
Well good news is that GW seems to finally understand the value of reaching out to the customer base.
The bad news is that they still killed Warhammer.
Guys, don't worry. GW will come out with AOS 2nd edition in 1-2 years and there is (if you don't look at history) a 50/50 chance that they'll address the issues... as well as a 50/50 chance that they'll just double down on no points scrolls finding a way to make them even worse (higher chance if you look at the 40k 6/7th progression).
So now we have an idea of who the target market for this is.
Boardgamers.
Makes sense now. Vets, here's where the are cutting you off with unusable war scrolls for all your models and a nice pat on the head. The future is all about releasing new models with new scenarios to make things easy for people who play board games.
Wasn't Warhammer orginally a board game? I only started in 7th ed, so I'm not that familiar with the exact history.
If so, GW have regressed back to the 80s.
Which explains the derpy model designs.
Well this has been an absolutely amazing thread to read (yes all 200+ pages) and as a vet of this game for close to 20 years, I'm actually excited for a major change. Fantasy had grown stale and boring for me, which caused me to venture into other gaming systems. I'm still in love with the fluff (even the end times) and this for me is got my interest. I'm Hoping that this attempt by GW to get into the skirmish gaming (like Warmachine or Infinity) pays off for them...and in the long run for all of us. Personally I'm looking forward to getting my Ogres on some round bases and delving back into the realm of Mordheim....I mean Age of Sigmar.
Third_Age_of_Baggz wrote: Well this has been an absolutely amazing thread to read (yes all 200+ pages) and as a vet of this game for close to 20 years, I'm actually excited for a major change. Fantasy had grown stale and boring for me, which caused me to venture into other gaming systems. I'm still in love with the fluff (even the end times) and this for me is got my interest. I'm Hoping that this attempt by GW to get into the skirmish gaming (like Warmachine or Infinity) pays off for them...and in the long run for all of us. Personally I'm looking forward to getting my Ogres on some round bases and delving back into the realm of Mordheim....I mean Age of Sigmar.
Just make sure you bring lots of stuff that way your opponent has absolutely no chance ever. Unless he owns more stuff than you that is.
Ok after all the leaks I finaly made up my mind about Arse of Sigmar - I despise it and even the hypothetical, most tactical and balanced ruleset ever brought to my doorstep on a golden plate by Jervis himself wouldnt change that a bit.
Half of the artwork looks like 40k without the cool bits like chainswords tanks guns etc, pictures of models on round bases dont help either.
It's noblish high fantasy, I guess the old stuff despite constant toning down was too nasty for the mums in the shops.
The names are idiotic, orrruks riding ogororos slaying aealaefs and dumbarin, am I supposed to use those with a straight face really.
It all seems to be ripped off hard from things that have ripped off GW for years, sure it happened before but on this scale it reeks of desperation, just like the whole Age of Sensless does tbh.
They killed whfb for this.
In the end there's a little thing called ruleset, or in this case Axe of System pushset. It doesn't look too good.
So, first time in my life GW, I wish you and your Age of Sycophants to flop, and flop hard, starter will not but it might take only a few failed models. Word for the wait and see brigade, Im not loosing my mind as I couldnt care less (though I wasnt negative by default either), Im here for the tragicomedy. Funny bottom line, if all this stuff was made into a single rumor, it would be ridiculed as absurd and dissmised as crazy fear mongering lol.
I'm personally quite upset by this. Really. I think I need to refocus on 40k at this rate. To see the complexity of WFB's rules slaughtered to such a simple state...to see a complete neglect of balance (No points LOLOLOLOLOLOL and bases don't matter! Ayyyy!) and to see the thematic slaughter that took place....
And what makes this even more painful? This is after a year of End Times releases...that averaged about £50 a book with around £120 worth of kits per book (with the exception of the Elves). If their issue with WFB not 'selling' is to slaughter the IP after a failed year of limited 'surprise' releases and hiked up priced kits then god help AoS. 6 months time....
We'll see...
AoS 2: Square Base Boogaloo.
This exciting expansion for AoS allows your units to fight in ranked formations. Only £60, limited edition, limited to 2 copies per store. Exclusive web warscroll that allows your army to win the game on a 2+ but only after you spend £3,000 on 'Grots'.
Alex C wrote: Terrain looks to be the best thing to come out of all this.
But being GW, it will be expensive.
I am most uninspired by the celestial gateway or whatever it's called. It looks like a standard WW2 historical European ruined church with a few statues added to it. I saw a practically identical terrain piece in a model shop today.
RacerX wrote: After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
ANYONE FOR A GAME OF OLDHAMMER?
Repeated relaunching? you mean the two sets 5 years apart is repeated?
considering 40k got a relaunch after a yeah that is hardly repeated. the re doing Codexes year after year is repeated fantasy was just sort of had eh releases especially since the hardback no fluff army books.
Good starter sets? okay they had nice figures but the rules since the old high elves vs goblins set don't feel improved honestly.
Large kits are fine but power creeping is wrong see how pp creates center piece sets without needing to have said things in order to win.
Good game play .... subjective see starter set
This notion of repeated relaunching indicating WHFB's failure is just plain wrong. The 7th edition boxset was Battle for Skull Pass which was released in 2006. The 8th edition boxset was Island of Blood which was released in 2010. So between 2006 and 2015 there have been two editions of WHFB and I would argue that 8th was the most radical with the change in how charge movement was determined in addition to the scale creep in the rules. In that time there was no changes in the fluff while players were required to invest much higher amounts of money on boxsets containing smaller amounts of models in order to field viable units. Any notion that honest attempts were made to redress the very obvious problems that were causing WHFB to decline are erroneous.
The Starter box sets, particularly the Island of Blood one for 8th edition, were also not very playable until further investment was made in unit boxsets such as Swordmasters, Lothern Seaguard, etc.
For instance, the 2006 Battle for Skull Pass box contained: 12 Dwarf Warriors, 8 Dwarf Miners, and 10 Dwarf Thunderers; only the Thunderers were worth fielding on the table in those numbers. Similarly the 2010 Island of Blood box contained 10 Sword Masters of Hoeth and 10 Lothern Sea Guard; due to the scale creep and requirement for huge blocks of troops, in the new 8th edition rules, a High Elf Player would have to invest in a further 2-3 boxes of Sword Masters to field a viable unit.
Davylove21 wrote: Is there any news on what's coming out the week after AoS? I remember reading something like there will be no 40K for months now.
Well, typically GW tells us crapall, so who knows. Generally, one would expect a lot of support for the relaunch of WFB...but this isn't that, so hard to say. My guess is we will see some kits that quickly add on to AoS. There is also a deluxe edition of the fluff book, a painting guide, a novel, a deluxe version novel, some new paint colors and spray, but really thats about 2 weeks of releases.
Going forward, hard to say. The same mindset that thinks AoS will rule the gaming boards probably doubled down hard on new releases for it.
But lately, it's 40k that brings in the cash, so I still expect some 40k releases. (Please please keep doing 2 a month so we can get around to Orks again!)
GW cares not from where the cash flow, so long as it does.
Really, without wishing to drag the thread off into another "try this game" "don't like it for x reason" discussion, if you're really that affected by this release, you need to focus on non GW product if you can, otherwise there'll be nothing else to look at when this tanks through lack of sales and GW does the same thing to 40K through lack of ideas.
Davylove21 wrote: Is there any news on what's coming out the week after AoS? I remember reading something like there will be no 40K for months now.
Well, typically GW tells us crapall, so who knows. Generally, one would expect a lot of support for the relaunch of WFB...but this isn't that, so hard to say. My guess is we will see some kits that quickly add on to AoS. There is also a deluxe edition of the fluff book, a painting guide, a novel, a deluxe version novel, some new paint colors and spray, but really thats about 2 weeks of releases.
Going forward, hard to say. The same mindset that thinks AoS will rule the gaming boards probably doubled down hard on new releases for it.
But lately, it's 40k that brings in the cash, so I still expect some 40k releases. (Please please keep doing 2 a month so we can get around to Orks again!)
Something big and stompy for the Sigmarines would be my bet..
RacerX wrote: After over 200 pages, and lots of thinking in the car driving back and forth to work this week, I think I have the business plan on this figured out.
BRIEF Warhammer brand sales have continued to drop despite
- Repeated relaunching
- Focus on good, playable starter sets
- Addition of more powerful, characterful models (i.e. large scale kits as centerpiece attractors to armies)
- More powerful / deadly gameplay
The existing cycle of release, tweak, RE-release is not working.
Recruitment of NEW gamers is not replacing RETIRING gamers at a sustainable rate.
PROPOSAL Reboot the Warhammer world
- Completely new and fresh world with many dynamic elements, and more potential for expansion.
- Streamlined gameplay, easier entry point in model count and initial expenditure
- Eliminate STEEP LEARNING curve for new players who need to absorb and learn 100 page army books and 300 page rulebooks. INSTANT GRATIFICATION.
- Capitalize on existing STRONG and POPULAR imagery of the highly successful Warhammer 40K line.
- Provide way for existing players to remain in the game if they wish.
- Install thematic and gameplay factors that will entice existing players to purchase newer models (new races/factions/base size/style/gameplay)
- Thematic elements should be such that they tap into the aesthetic already preferred by WH40K players. For example, the scenery is "otherworldy" and suitable for WH40K gaming
- Results in more CROSS-SALES and game system conversions.
- Exiting Range of Models remains viable for the INITIAL RELEASE PERIOD - Ultimately ENTIRE RANGE will be re-tooled to the structure of AoS.
CONTINGENCIES - Eliminate large range of printed materials (high value to inventory)
- Create enough thematic hooks that model range will be attractive to 40K players (i.e. SigMARINES, Chaos warriors) - allow for easy conversions to 40K if desired.
- Maximize Intellectual Property uniqueness - Eliminate generic NAMES and indefensible Real-World, Historical References that are in the Public Domain.
- Steer Capital investment into tooling that can easily be ported AWAY from Warhammer in the event the range completely fails (i.e. Realm Gates, and Scenery Range can be sold as WARP GATES)
- Slowly introduce direct and indirect tie-in content to the Warhammer 40,000 universe. Allow for ultimate MERGING of the I.P and content if necessary.
RISKS - Market Segmentation / Cannibalization - 40K players shifting their SPEND to AoS - Hobbiest Base needs to ultimately EXPAND
- One-Time inventory obsolescence impact as all WH printed materials disposed.
So there's my take.
They are not trying to market to ME, or anyone LIKE ME.
Since I am an older, existing player, I am not the target.
Seems like a sane plan from a business perspective.
But like MIKHAILA has already said earlier, for ME, this is a funeral and I am coming to grips with the death of an old friend.
ANYONE FOR A GAME OF OLDHAMMER?
Repeated relaunching? you mean the two sets 5 years apart is repeated?
considering 40k got a relaunch after a yeah that is hardly repeated. the re doing Codexes year after year is repeated fantasy was just sort of had eh releases especially since the hardback no fluff army books.
Good starter sets? okay they had nice figures but the rules since the old high elves vs goblins set don't feel improved honestly.
Large kits are fine but power creeping is wrong see how pp creates center piece sets without needing to have said things in order to win.
Good game play .... subjective see starter set
This notion of repeated relaunching indicating WHFB's failure is just plain wrong. The 7th edition boxset was Battle for Skull Pass which was released in 2006. The 8th edition boxset was Island of Blood which was released in 2010. So between 2006 and 2015 there have been two editions of WHFB and I would argue that 8th was the most radical with the change in how charge movement was determined in addition to the scale creep in the rules. In that time there was no changes in the fluff while players were required to invest much higher amounts of money on boxsets containing smaller amounts of models in order to field viable units. Any notion that honest attempts were made to redress the very obvious problems that were causing WHFB to decline are erroneous.
The Starter box sets, particularly the Island of Blood one for 8th edition, were also not very playable until further investment was made in unit boxsets such as Swordmasters, Lothern Seaguard, etc.
For instance, the 2006 Battle for Skull Pass box contained: 12 Dwarf Warriors, 8 Dwarf Miners, and 10 Dwarf Thunderers; only the Thunderers were worth fielding on the table in those numbers. Similarly the 2010 Island of Blood box contained 10 Sword Masters of Hoeth and 10 Lothern Sea Guard; due to the scale creep and requirement for huge blocks of troops, in the new 8th edition rules, a High Elf Player would have to invest in a further 2-3 boxes of Sword Masters to field a viable unit.
I think that's a bit cynical. The High Elf portion of IoB was great. 5 Swordmasters is a legal unit, and a good bit of chaff that can do a few wounds on a flank. If you traded your skaven pieces for another HE set you had a good hq for low points, 2 fast cav, 20 sea guard, and 2x 10 sword masters. It was really easy to make HE work.
Third_Age_of_Baggz wrote: Well this has been an absolutely amazing thread to read (yes all 200+ pages) and as a vet of this game for close to 20 years, I'm actually excited for a major change. Fantasy had grown stale and boring for me, which caused me to venture into other gaming systems. I'm still in love with the fluff (even the end times) and this for me is got my interest. I'm Hoping that this attempt by GW to get into the skirmish gaming (like Warmachine or Infinity) pays off for them...and in the long run for all of us. Personally I'm looking forward to getting my Ogres on some round bases and delving back into the realm of Mordheim....I mean Age of Sigmar.
Just make sure you bring lots of stuff that way your opponent has absolutely no chance ever. Unless he owns more stuff than you that is.
Well I guess I now have my excuse to by all those monsterous creatures I've been wanting since Storm of Magic.
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
*Visibly shudders*
We have altered the 30 year old mechanics of one of our games. Pray we do not alter them further.
. Similarly the 2010 Island of Blood box contained 10 Sword Masters of Hoeth and 10 Lothern Sea Guard; due to the scale creep and requirement for huge blocks of troops, in the new 8th edition rules, a High Elf Player would have to invest in a further 2-3 boxes of Sword Masters to field a viable unit.
I think that's a bit cynical. The High Elf portion of IoB was great. 5 Swordmasters is a legal unit, and a good bit of chaff that can do a few wounds on a flank. If you traded your skaven pieces for another HE set you had a good hq for low points, 2 fast cav, 20 sea guard, and 2x 10 sword masters. It was really easy to make HE work.
Oh I thought the models were great don't get me wrong but the point I was making was against RacerX's original premise that WHFB was failing despite repeated relaunches and very playable boxsets. Realistically, due to the rule changes in 8th edition, most players would be looking to field a unit of 30-40 Sword Masters of Hoeth. This meant acquiring the equivalent models from 3-4 Island of Blood boxsets.
That pile up at the end - expect that to be a common occurrence in the game.
Yup.
Was gonna say it. Only skipped and fast-forwarded, but everything just ends up in a big pile, stuck in combat, unable to leave, and at that point it is only alternate rolling of dice till one player wins.
With no incentives to stay back, even with shooty stuff, no objectives, no advantages gained through movement, it's just "run-to-the-middle-and-dice-it-out".
So after considering the twitter post where a board game reviewer got a review copy of the game, I've sort of come to a realization.
The strategy is to bring more people into the Games Workshop hobby (yeah, I know, but every time I've ever been in a store they always called it the "Games Workshop Hobby").
Since models are used in games, the target demographic is people who play games.
Board Games represents the largest demographic in the entire games demographic.
If they cna pull just one in one hundred board gamers into their market, they will succeed.
So, they make rules that are fairly simple to the war gamers crowd, but may seem just a bit complex to the board gamers. Four pages puts this at about the same level as Monopoly or Risk or maybe a bit higher.
They provide the scenarios where the board gamers get convinced the board is the entire tabletop and they've really got six different games in this box. this sucks in a percentage of the target for market. They then release new models with new war scrolls and new scenarios on a consistent basis, sucking them in even more.
Here's where I see the mistake in this strategy. They do not do market research. Painting models is going to be too much work for most board gamers. They like to play their games out of the box. Had they made the plastic models out of two different colors, and insured a different color of plastic for each different faction, this might be mire successful in sucking in the board gamers. As is, I doubt they'll even get 1 in 1000 board gamers who buy AoS to ever go any further.
Gothic Class battleships look amazing too, and you're not going to field them in 40k.
It's a really cool picture, but I don't think it does the job of telling us a story about the Age of Sigmar. Can these guys actually fight something that big? If so, why are they fighting dudes with two hand axes. It's an awesome pic, but the fact that things that you can't field in the game look really, really cool doesn't get me hugely excited about the game. If anything, it gets me worried that the game is perhaps focused on the wrong elements in the conflict. If beasties that immense are roaming about, who gives a rat's rear end about a River Troll anymore?
To me that looks like the jacket art from an LP by a hair band....
Not even all that inspiring. (I will be interested in hearing what my good lady makes of the art... she's a professional artist - I just paint minis. )
That pile up at the end - expect that to be a common occurrence in the game.
Yup.
Was gonna say it. Only skipped and fast-forwarded, but everything just ends up in a big pile, stuck in combat, unable to leave, and at that point it is only alternate rolling of dice till one player wins.
With no incentives to stay back, even with shooty stuff, no objectives, no advantages gained through movement, it's just "run-to-the-middle-and-dice-it-out".
So its basically just the assault phase in 40k, except simplified.
This is horrible.
Xyxox wrote: So after considering the twitter post where a board game reviewer got a review copy of the game, I've sort of come to a realization.
The strategy is to bring more people into the Games Workshop hobby (yeah, I know, but every time I've ever been in a store they always called it the "Games Workshop Hobby").
Since models are used in games, the target demographic is people who play games.
Board Games represents the largest demographic in the entire games demographic.
If they cna pull just one in one hundred board gamers into their market, they will succeed.
So, they make rules that are fairly simple to the war gamers crowd, but may seem just a bit complex to the board gamers. Four pages puts this at about the same level as Monopoly or Risk or maybe a bit higher.
They provide the scenarios where the board gamers get convinced the board is the entire tabletop and they've really got six different games in this box. this sucks in a percentage of the target for market. They then release new models with new war scrolls and new scenarios on a consistent basis, sucking them in even more.
Here's where I see the mistake in this strategy. They do not do market research. Painting models is going to be too much work for most board gamers. They like to play their games out of the box. Had they made the plastic models out of two different colors, and insured a different color of plastic for each different faction, this might be mire successful in sucking in the board gamers. As is, I doubt they'll even get 1 in 1000 board gamers who buy AoS to ever go any further.
But GW already makes board games.
Historically it's made some the most entertaining I've ever played.
To gut one of their core products to appeal to a sector they already have multiple items they can call on defies logic (which doesn't mean it's not true, this is GW after all!)
Grimtuff wrote: MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?
My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.
*Visibly shudders*
We have altered the 30 year old mechanics of one of our games. Pray we do not alter them further.
GW cares not from where the cash flow, so long as it does.
Really, without wishing to drag the thread off into another "try this game" "don't like it for x reason" discussion, if you're really that affected by this release, you need to focus on non GW product if you can, otherwise there'll be nothing else to look at when this tanks through lack of sales and GW does the same thing to 40K through lack of ideas.
Unless you already have existing 40k armies and are canny enough to go through FB trades, ebay and decent second hand from local stores. Cash hasn't flowed anywhere near GW's pockets for a few years now, least not from me. As I said, the aesthetics were one of the main draws of Fantasy. 15 year old me went wide eyed at the 5th ed. Dimetradon-style Lizardmen Salamanders and the other releases in WD 208 way back then. Then my friend brought in WD 206 from two months back and sealed the deal for me in terms of Fantasy. Hell, the 5th. edition core rulebooks had so much art and flavour...all the way down to the little 'cartoon' style bits of art between paragraphs and on the odd page. But now? Now looking at AoS....ew. Reading the bits of fluff we've had? Ewewew. Sorry, that's just sad. That's 16 years of 'love' that were chucked out in the trash because the guy who rescued a chemist thinks he knows how wargamers think....after comparing us to card games and his product to porsches.
As a lot of people have already said...
This is the good old dog being put down. Telling people to adapt and move on or to just not care is downright rude. Going back 5 editions the different factions have had their own style, lore and aesthetic...telling us to abandon it all at the drop of a hat is...well...just not cricket.
That pile up at the end - expect that to be a common occurrence in the game.
Yup.
Was gonna say it. Only skipped and fast-forwarded, but everything just ends up in a big pile, stuck in combat, unable to leave, and at that point it is only alternate rolling of dice till one player wins.
With no incentives to stay back, even with shooty stuff, no objectives, no advantages gained through movement, it's just "run-to-the-middle-and-dice-it-out".
Might be easier to just pile all of your minis on top of each other in the beginning and start saying "pew pew".
Xyxox wrote: So after considering the twitter post where a board game reviewer got a review copy of the game, I've sort of come to a realization.
The strategy is to bring more people into the Games Workshop hobby (yeah, I know, but every time I've ever been in a store they always called it the "Games Workshop Hobby").
Since models are used in games, the target demographic is people who play games.
Board Games represents the largest demographic in the entire games demographic.
If they cna pull just one in one hundred board gamers into their market, they will succeed.
So, they make rules that are fairly simple to the war gamers crowd, but may seem just a bit complex to the board gamers. Four pages puts this at about the same level as Monopoly or Risk or maybe a bit higher.
They provide the scenarios where the board gamers get convinced the board is the entire tabletop and they've really got six different games in this box. this sucks in a percentage of the target for market. They then release new models with new war scrolls and new scenarios on a consistent basis, sucking them in even more.
Here's where I see the mistake in this strategy. They do not do market research. Painting models is going to be too much work for most board gamers. They like to play their games out of the box. Had they made the plastic models out of two different colors, and insured a different color of plastic for each different faction, this might be mire successful in sucking in the board gamers. As is, I doubt they'll even get 1 in 1000 board gamers who buy AoS to ever go any further.
The thing is, there are plenty of board games with way more in-depth rules than this. Risk is not the game you should be comparing this to. Look up Star Wars Imperial Assault. It has a 28 page reference rulebook. Not big at all by miniatures games standards, but way more complicated than AOS.
Well good news is that GW seems to finally understand the value of reaching out to the customer base.
The bad news is that they still killed Warhammer.
TheWaspinator wrote: The thing is, there are plenty of board games with way more in-depth rules than this. Risk is not the game you should be comparing this to. Look up Star Wars Imperial Assault. It has a 28 page reference rulebook. Not big at all by miniatures games standards, but way more complicated than AOS.
Di you watch the BatRep? Everybody moves to the center, piles up, and then it's a dice roll off.
I don't own any Warhammer codex ( whatever it called ) because I am heavy 40k. RacerX was right, I just start to interest in AoS now.
To me, it is not Warhammer. Just another brand new game just like Assassinorum: Execution Force. Because logo is not same as Warhammer. Ether Warhammer is died and AoS is rising or they will create another new Warhammer edition. Who know.
Tomorrow I will buy White Dwarf to read more about AoS, if I was still interested then it will be my first fantasy theme wargame.
Sorry Warhammer veteran. Just keep your finger cross whatever if GW keeping going update the Warhammer edition or not.
Look at good side, no more spending on codex and new rulebook for you if GW are truly give up on Warhammer. I disagree that call it "old hammer" because AoS is an "expansion" Warhammer to me. Veteran can keep name Warhammer as Warhammer and warhammer: AoS is AoS.
I sort of hope it is much much more than just roll a dices it out till whoever won the dice roll off... Heh
GW cares not from where the cash flow, so long as it does.
Really, without wishing to drag the thread off into another "try this game" "don't like it for x reason" discussion, if you're really that affected by this release, you need to focus on non GW product if you can, otherwise there'll be nothing else to look at when this tanks through lack of sales and GW does the same thing to 40K through lack of ideas.
As a lot of people have already said...
This is the good old dog being put down. Telling people to adapt and move on or to just not care is downright rude. Going back 5 editions the different factions have had their own style, lore and aesthetic...telling us to abandon it all at the drop of a hat is...well...just not cricket.
I'm not sure what that has to do with Azraels post because that's not what he was saying at all. He's not saying 'move on and don't care' he's saying 'if you're really that negatively effected by this release that you aren't going to play it, it might be wise to look at games outside of GW, and support other companies, not play 40k and support the company that just ruined the game you loved.'
ImAGeek wrote: I'm not sure what that has to do with Azraels post because that's not what he was saying at all. He's not saying 'move on and don't care' he's saying 'if you're really that negatively effected by this release that you aren't going to play it, it might be wise to look at games outside of GW, and support other companies, not play 40k and support the company that just ruined the game you loved.'
Or if you keep buying 40K, then don't buy from GW, buy it from eBay.
If Games Workshop is trying to pull in the board game crowd then I think they really screwed this one up. Board games have moved well passed monopoly and risk. People that are playing monopoly and risk are not really in the board game crowd, its a totally different market (Retailers like target carry risk for under 30 USD). The people who call themselves board gamers (the ones who would consider 125 USD within a reasonable range) expect a pretty tight rule set and a lot of replayability these days. Publishers like FFG have really pushed the envelope on board games as we know them and games like Catan and Ticket to Ride are really pushing the smooth action of 'eurogames'. I guess my point is, at $125 GW really wont be able to make me buy this as a board game purchase. Twilight Imperium is selling for only $70 on Amazon right now. Twilight Imperium is a BIG game.
ImAGeek wrote: I'm not sure what that has to do with Azraels post because that's not what he was saying at all. He's not saying 'move on and don't care' he's saying 'if you're really that negatively effected by this release that you aren't going to play it, it might be wise to look at games outside of GW, and support other companies, not play 40k and support the company that just ruined the game you loved.'
Or if you keep buying 40K, then don't buy from GW, buy it from eBay.
Depends how seriously you want to make sure your cash doesn't go to GW - if that eBay listing is a get out sale or parents getting rid of a moved out child's junk, fair enough, but it could equally be a way to fund more purchases by an active gamer, meaning you're essentially just laundering the money you give to GW!
Bull0 wrote: There's definitely a point to be made that the future of 40k looks a bit bleak if this is how GW will treat one of its' biggest products... :/
I'm not sure they would want to do the same thing to 40K, but also bear in mind the cost of producing this ruleset is significantly less than the last one I would think.
If they do need to continue cost cutting in the future, this is a possible way of doing it with 40K.
Also, given how the fluff reads, the level of writing talent that created the worlds of both Warhammers (and yes, both were/are very derivative at base level but add in bucket loads of unique character) just is not there any more at GW.
JohnnyHell wrote: It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.
Nobody said it was a board game. GW are targetting board gamers with AoS.
Bull0 wrote: There's definitely a point to be made that the future of 40k looks a bit bleak if this is how GW will treat one of its' biggest products... :/
I'm not sure they would want to do the same thing to 40K, but also bear in mind the cost of producing this ruleset is significantly less than the last one I would think.
If they do need to continue cost cutting in the future, this is a possible way of doing it with 40K.
Also, given how the fluff reads, the level of writing talent that created the worlds of both Warhammers (and yes, both were/are very derivative at base level but add in bucket loads of unique character) just is not there any more at GW.
One would hope they plan to suck in the board gamers with AoS, then get them hooked on the REAL addictive stuff with 40K.
Ahh yes, I recall the time that Sanguinius (and/or The Saguinor) fought the mighty demon Ka'bandha.
Oh wait, wrong game.
Don't be ridiculous. The 40kHH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying demigod figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different. In the AOS, a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. See the difference? Also, one had a sword and this one has a hammer. Totally not the same thing copied over in a desperate attempt to get sales instead of trying god forbid to address the real concerns of the community like engagement, balance, and value.
I'm not sure if anyone has had this idea yet, but I think I may have an explanation for the lack of a points system.
From what I have read, many of the rules were based off of model count .
So to use the situation that many have brought up earlier in the thread, how does one balance 30 bloodthirsters vs 30 goblins if there is no point system?
Here is what I think. To simplify balance, I believe that the more powerful models, will be "worth" more than one on the battlefield. So, a bloodthirster may be worth 3 models in terms of balance and sudden death rules.
Now I may be completely off course here, as the warscrolls that we have seen for the starter set do not mention anything about different model count values, but i do believe think that the two armies are balanced in this sort of way. This makes sure that some armies to not start off with a sudden death objective on turn one, as their fewer models still have an equal count to whatever they are playing against.
So, a 50 model game may have one army with 50 models each worth 1, against another army with 25 models, each worth 2.
Depends how seriously you want to make sure your cash doesn't go to GW - if that eBay listing is a get out sale or parents getting rid of a moved out child's junk, fair enough, but it could equally be a way to fund more purchases by an active gamer, meaning you're essentially just laundering the money you give to GW!
Funnily enough, this whole debacle has made me miss elements of Warhammer. So much so, that I've started idly looking through ebay for 4th and 5th edition Warhammer models. Hopefully, this 'game' will see a few more sell offs and bargins...
JohnnyHell wrote: It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.
All the rules require are 3 feet square (9 foot area) in table space. Yep, you can play on small tables.
warboss wrote: Don't be ridiculous. The 40kHH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.
JohnnyHell wrote: It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.
All the rules requires are 3 feet square (9 foot area).
atribix wrote: I'm not sure if anyone has had this idea yet, but I think I may have an explanation for the lack of a points system.
From what I have read, many of the rules were based off of model count .
So to use the situation that many have brought up earlier in the thread, how does one balance 30 bloodthirsters vs 30 goblins if there is no point system?
Here is what I think. To simplify balance, I believe that the more powerful models, will be "worth" more than one on the battlefield. So, a bloodthirster may be worth 3 models in terms of balance and sudden death rules.
Now I may be completely off course here, as the warscrolls that we have seen for the starter set do not mention anything about different model count values, but i do believe think that the two armies are balanced in this sort of way. This makes sure that some armies to not start off with a sudden death objective on turn one, as their fewer models still have an equal count to whatever they are playing against.
So, a 50 model game may have one army with 50 models each worth 1, against another army with 25 models, each worth 2.
There has been nothing to indicate there is even a small hope for what you are wishing for here. No mention of model counts on war scrolls. The only place where any specific number of models is mentioned is in the scenarios, and those are only for the models in the AoS set.
warboss wrote: Don't be ridiculous. The 40kHH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.
JohnnyHell wrote: It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.
All the rules requires are 3 feet square (9 foot area).
To be fair, the last time I tried to play Space Hulk I had to use the damn floor, so maybe I shot myself in the foot, hah.
warboss wrote: Don't be ridiculous. The 40kHH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.
This is why I like you.
You make me laugh.
Sure it's not because you both like Robotech?
I've seen that thread and kickstarter. I don't think anyone who has to take the sustained garbage from palladium books or that Kevin joker fella is quite sane anymore.
warboss wrote: Don't be ridiculous. The 40kHH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.
This is why I like you.
You make me laugh.
Sure it's not because you both like Robotech?
Don't be ridiculous. Everyone likes Robotech... some just don't know it yet or have been misled by Palladium's earnest efforts to the contrary.
You know, at various points in this thread, I've heard the rules pamphlet compared to x-wing's (apparently by a gw rep). The warscrolls having specific rules on them 'like x-wing' apparently by a gw rep.
And I just noticed the minimum playing area is 3'x3'. Same as x-wing.
That pile up at the end - expect that to be a common occurrence in the game.
Yup.
Was gonna say it. Only skipped and fast-forwarded, but everything just ends up in a big pile, stuck in combat, unable to leave, and at that point it is only alternate rolling of dice till one player wins.
With no incentives to stay back, even with shooty stuff, no objectives, no advantages gained through movement, it's just "run-to-the-middle-and-dice-it-out".
So its basically just the assault phase in 40k, except simplified.
This is horrible.
Wasn't there a 'retreat' option if you're stuck in 3"?
Eggs wrote: You know, at various points in this thread, I've heard the rules pamphlet compared to x-wing's (apparently by a gw rep). The warscrolls having specific rules on them 'like x-wing' apparently by a gw rep.
And I just noticed the minimum playing area is 3'x3'. Same as x-wing.
Are we getting pre-painted blisters next.
Business wise, it would be a smart decision. X-Wing is FFG's biggest seller by far. I think it was like a 3rd of their whole revenue last year.
warboss wrote: Don't be ridiculous. The 40kHH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.
This is why I like you.
You make me laugh.
Sure it's not because you both like Robotech?
Don't be ridiculous. Everyone likes Robotech... some just don't know it yet or have been misled by Palladium's earnest efforts to the contrary.
Well, it's probably because we both enjoy watching some of our favorite ways to pass the time (HHHobby!) be torn apart by people we have no influence over.
It's like a messed up version of Stockholm Syndrome.
Eggs wrote: You know, at various points in this thread, I've heard the rules pamphlet compared to x-wing's (apparently by a gw rep). The warscrolls having specific rules on them 'like x-wing' apparently by a gw rep.
And I just noticed the minimum playing area is 3'x3'. Same as x-wing.
Are we getting pre-painted blisters next.
Business wise, it would be a smart decision. X-Wing is FFG's biggest seller by far. I think it was like a 3rd of their whole revenue last year.
Could you imagine the price of a pre-paint though?
Eggs wrote: You know, at various points in this thread, I've heard the rules pamphlet compared to x-wing's (apparently by a gw rep). The warscrolls having specific rules on them 'like x-wing' apparently by a gw rep.
And I just noticed the minimum playing area is 3'x3'. Same as x-wing.
Are we getting pre-painted blisters next.
Business wise, it would be a smart decision. X-Wing is FFG's biggest seller by far. I think it was like a 3rd of their whole revenue last year.
TheWaspinator wrote: The thing is, there are plenty of board games with way more in-depth rules than this. Risk is not the game you should be comparing this to. Look up Star Wars Imperial Assault. It has a 28 page reference rulebook. Not big at all by miniatures games standards, but way more complicated than AOS.
Di you watch the BatRep? Everybody moves to the center, piles up, and then it's a dice roll off.
Yeah, AoS is pretty simple.
WFB games I ever played/watched either hit a flank and rolled it up until somebody cried uncle (usually around center) or wound up with the largest part of the fight in the center as well.
KoW also did similar. When most of your scenarios are line up and kill each other, there's not a lot of choices.
Hmm, I'm still torn over this. I want to play Fantasy in some form still, but honestly The Hobbit (which is actually my favourite setting by leaps and bounds) has a bigger following locally. I have a bunch of stuff for 3 or 4 Warhammer armies that was enough when I last played, but nowhere near enough for 8th. I was sort of slowly bolstering that when I found deals, but since the end of End Times I've stopped altogether.
So, can my 24 Chaos Warriors be the core of a real force in this game? How about my 2 Cannons and 60 Empire soldiers? My 10 Bretonnian Knights? If the answer is yes, and there are some others involved in the game, I may just take it up.
Eggs wrote: You know, at various points in this thread, I've heard the rules pamphlet compared to x-wing's (apparently by a gw rep). The warscrolls having specific rules on them 'like x-wing' apparently by a gw rep.
And I just noticed the minimum playing area is 3'x3'. Same as x-wing.
Are we getting pre-painted blisters next.
Business wise, it would be a smart decision. X-Wing is FFG's biggest seller by far. I think it was like a 3rd of their whole revenue last year.
Bull0 wrote: There's definitely a point to be made that the future of 40k looks a bit bleak if this is how GW will treat one of its' biggest products... :/
I'm no...given how the fluff reads, the level of writing talent that created the worlds of both Warhammers (and yes, both were/are very derivative at base level but add in bucket loads of unique character) just is not there any more at GW.
Well, when you have to turn to internet fan-boyz to write your stuff, ya gotta expect what ya get
TheWaspinator wrote: The thing is, there are plenty of board games with way more in-depth rules than this. Risk is not the game you should be comparing this to. Look up Star Wars Imperial Assault. It has a 28 page reference rulebook. Not big at all by miniatures games standards, but way more complicated than AOS.
Di you watch the BatRep? Everybody moves to the center, piles up, and then it's a dice roll off.
Yeah, AoS is pretty simple.
WFB games I ever played/watched either hit a flank and rolled it up until somebody cried uncle (usually around center) or wound up with the largest part of the fight in the center as well.
KoW also did similar. When most of your scenarios are line up and kill each other, there's not a lot of choices.
Most of mine tended to turn into battles on the flanks; maybe it has to do with differences in positioning, or both sides going for a refused flank and running into each other...
You know? I've been trying to figure out what the new names remind me of - orruks and deadwalkers and so forth - because it's been bugging me. I knew I'd seen something like that naming pattern before, and -
Oh, there we go.
I think one of the few things I like about this is that giant Sigmar vs. Xenomorph with Horns piece of art - and the problem is that it looks nothing like Warhammer. It's something I could very easily see on a Magic card, or the cover of a computer game, but none of it conjures up images of anything related to the setting and game I'd grown so attached to. It doesn't seem like it shares the world with ratcatchers and their small but vicious dogs, or goblins that get drunk on fungus beer and accidentally leave the squig pen unlocked, or any of the hundreds of interesting little things attached to the Grim World of Perilous Adventure.
It looks neat, but for a company as attached to its IP as GW is, they really took an axe to the stuff.
Hey! At least the Darklands nomenclature is rooted in genuine historical language, not just a pitiful attempt to protect something which doesn't need protecting!
Lord Corellia wrote: Hmm, I'm still torn over this. I want to play Fantasy in some form still, but honestly The Hobbit (which is actually my favourite setting by leaps and bounds) has a bigger following locally.
OH! I get it now!
GW is releasing AoS to boost flagging Hobbit/LotR sales! They think folks that want a decent, tactical ruleset will switch over there! Sales there are gonna go through the roof. (Never mind that Mantic stuff or other systems, mind...)
As a kid growing up in the 70's. My brother and I played "toy soldiers".
It involved having an equal amount of toy soldiers on each side - for fairness.
We were only allowed to pick 2 toy soldiers that were in a laying down pose as part of our team.
We then had an equal amount of marbles, a balanced amount of small and large marbles each.
We set our soldiers up at the ends of the hallway in our parents home and took it in turns to roll marbles at each others soldiers until one person had knocked all of the the soldiers down.
I know for a start that as a pair of brothers aged 7 and 9, we seem to have invented a more complex AND balanced rule system than GW can manage nowadays.
I'm gobsmacked by how poor this release seems.
What I'm even more amazed at, it all the people saying they'd hate to play KoW because it 1) is too simple and 2) doesn't have their beloved WFB background.
Erm... now these people are happily stating they'll give AoS a try? It seems to have exactly the same reasons they won't play KoW.
I've played GW stuff since 1984 and the best thing that GW have done recently - last year or so - was changed my WD subscription to Visions. It forced me to find a local model shop to buy WD.
And because of that, I've since discovered Deadzone, Kings of War and Bolt Action. All my gaming era's covered without GW anymore. I can now watch this train wreck and not care less anymore. I can use all my fantasy armies as they are in KoW so need to qq and sell them.
In all fairness, all the name changes for IP reasons, they started with paints and in 40k started pushing me away anyway.
Problem I have with kings of war is the models they are crap with very few exceptions. Until that changes I won't play it I enjoy painting and kow just doesn't have it for me wish it did would save me a fortune.
Think age of sigma is a weird way for gw to go no idea if its a standalone or new warhammer or even if the new warhammer is around the corner.
I honestly don't know what to think of this game I wish I did I hate skirmish games so its big battles or nothing for me so untill I see something a damn site more impressive than what I have seen so far I think I am stuck with 40k have tryed infinite, warpath, dystopian wars, star wars armada and so many more I just see sigma as nothing more than a gimic untill something more worth while comes along
Thing you may have missed about KoW, although I'm not a player I've seen it mentioned enough, is that you're under no obligation to use any Mantic models in your armies, even at sanctioned events.
They're very much the anti-GW when it comes to that sort of thing, so you can play the rules and use whichever models you like. There's even a semi-official project to make tourney legal lists for all the WHFB factions on the go as I understand it.
I can live with name changes - I've never heard anyone call Imperial Guard anything else - and I have to praise GW for at least being bold with AoS.
WFB was dead for a long time before now, so it'll be a hard task for AoS to be an outright failure. I would love to see how it sells in comparison with Island of Blood over the first month, but I guess that's data we'll never get to know.
Death By Monkeys wrote: GW is releasing AoS to boost flagging Hobbit/LotR sales! They think folks that want a decent, tactical ruleset will switch over there! Sales there are gonna go through the roof. (Never mind that Mantic stuff or other systems, mind...)
Lol, I love pointing out to some of my pals just how wrong they were with LoTR. Back when it started, they derided it for being "too simple" and "a kid's game" and now they're all wishing Fantasy and 40K were as elegant and well-balanced! My only real issue with the LoTR/ Hobbit rules is how some profiles are handled in comparison to their book/ film counterparts. The rules are pointed well and balanced, but something like a Warrior of Gondor or Rider of Rohan should be better than they are portrayed in-game (with an appropriate points increase, of course!)
Again, I love my Warhammer stuff. My Empire army especially, but I don't know the future of it and that's enough to worry me into not buying a damn thing for now. The love is keeping me interested in what GW will pull out though.
Put the models together today, so we can play some without proxies now! I must say, i think these are some of the most stunning models GW has ever done. It reminds me of opening the box of Space Hulk and seeing the high quality of the models.
Mold lines are nearly non-existent. The Khorne Lord and relictor are personal favorites. I can see this set selling just for the models, especially for 40k projects.
10penceman wrote: Problem I have with kings of war is the models they are crap with very few exceptions. Until that changes I won't play it I enjoy painting and kow just doesn't have it for me wish it did would save me a fortune.
I play KoW. I actually own very few Mantic fantasy models. People need to get out of the GW hhhobby mindset of thinking you have to stick to 1 company for both the game and models.
Do as I do.... use the good GW models with the good KoW ruleset. I've also discovered a few other good fantasy models that fit my armies and aren't Mantic or GW.
I just wish I'd taken this step years ago.
there are in fact two supplementary books coming with lists for historical armies and for fantasy armies that we don’t make miniatures for, like medieval human armies, and lizard-, beast- or rat- men forces.
Well, I finally read the WD75 over coffee this morning. I was too excited about the Stormcast Eternal yesterday to read it. I wrote this in the Discussions thread already, but it's worth mentioning here:
It says clearly on the page before the rules describing the box contents (P.20):
"Perhaps the most exciting thing in the box after the jaw-dropping miniatures, is the 96-page book detailing the opening battles of the Age of Sigmar."
That 96 page book probably isn't a zillion battlescrolls in microscopic print; more likely, you can download the full battlescrolls online (there are a thousand fantasy kits after all), and the 96 page book contains a combination of battlescrolls and scenarios detailing the opening battles of AoS.
So, if Scenarios are not your thing (a) make up your own balancing system or mechanism or (b) play something else.
I read through the rules; they look to be exactly what Games Workshop wanted -- a simple system that takes minutes to learn, enabling you to pew-pew your model collection in skirmishy battles. There is no way this game will "scratch my itch" -- it's missing vehicles, huge robots, medium robots, guns, large armies, looks to use minimal terrain, and it isn't nearly complex enough for me. Then again, WHFB wasn't the thing for me either, because ranks of models in movement trays have little appeal to me. But this might be a decent time killer for little pockets of time. Or it might be a nice box of models to paint up and put into a display case
I can believe the reasoned post about abandoning the current market of WFB and trying to create a new market of buyers for AOS, except for one thing:
GW is pushing the old WFB IP with Mordheim, Vermintide, Total War, etc. games.
That doesn't disprove it, but it makes me scratch my head.
If people play one of these games and like it, and say, "Hey, that's really cool! How can I explore this more?" , the answer has to be "you can't. GW doesn't make this stuff any more." It's the same weird decision that sees Bloodbowl as a video game (and BFG, and Space Hulk, etc.), but not as a playable game from the owner of the IP.
Except that at least with Bloodbowl or Battlefleet Gothic, the developer knew what they were getting into. Did the guys who are working on Vermintide, or Warhammer: Total War (or whatever) know that GW was going to blow up and completely abandon the IP they were working in? It's one thing to develop a game that serves as an ad for a game GW no longer makes. It's another to maybe think GW will be able to promote your game to their players, only to discover that GW has completely destroyed the setting of your game in their player base.
On a completely unrelated topic, has anyone else noted (because I don't see any comments on it), the complete lack of customization so far?
You don't have magic items. You don't have weapon and armor choices. So far, nothing in the game can be fielded in any way other than the way it is packaged. Is the warscroll for an Empire Hero going to have the options for greatweapons/handweapons/shields/mounts/pistols/lance/blah/blah/blah? I recognize that the Warscrolls we have now are for the newest units only, but does anyone really think that the options for customization that were previously available are still going to be there?
On a completely unrelated topic, has anyone else noted (because I don't see any comments on it), the complete lack of customization so far?
You don't have magic items. You don't have weapon and armor choices. So far, nothing in the game can be fielded in any way other than the way it is packaged. Is the warscroll for an Empire Hero going to have the options for greatweapons/handweapons/shields/mounts/pistols/lance/blah/blah/blah? I recognize that the Warscrolls we have now are for the newest units only, but does anyone really think that the options for customization that were previously available are still going to be there?
Yep, this is a lot like GW's competition. It makes for a much simpler game modelling-wise, which is a complaint that many people have about 40k -- "I don't want to think about what gun to glue onto the Space Marine". It also makes unit selection more equitable and makes it less likely that you'll find min/max optimizations or configurations that are clearly superior (why take a chainsword when a bolt pistol is better in every way).
Not for me, as I love deciding those types of things. But no different than WMH models.
On the bright/dark side, it means GW is probably going to make more snapfit models. Again, not really my thing, but a lot of people prefer them to multipart plastic, because they are just easier to build. It appeals to a different niche of modeler/painter (than me).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rabidaskal wrote: Anyone think there gonna be chaos Stormcast Eternals?
They're called Blood Warriors -- all the models on p. 18 are fantasy CSM
Da Butcha wrote: I can believe the reasoned post about abandoning the current market of WFB and trying to create a new market of buyers for AOS, except for one thing:
GW is pushing the old WFB IP with Mordheim, Vermintide, Total War, etc. games.
That doesn't disprove it, but it makes me scratch my head.
The reason for that is likely those licensing deals were struck before AOS became what it ultimately did. It takes more years to make a videogame than it does a tabletop one in general (cheap mobile cash ins excluded). What will be telling is if 3-5 years from now new ones conti ue to get announced (beyond sequels of course like total warhammer 2).
Talys wrote: On the bright/dark side, it means GW is probably going to make more snapfit models. Again, not really my thing, but a lot of people prefer them to multipart plastic, because they are just easier to build. It appeals to a different niche of modeler/painter (than me).
I enjoy building models, but sometimes I prefer snapfit. Nothing irks me more than wondering aloud to myself "but why did they give me this model in 14 pieces if it only goes together ONE WAY?!?"
Da Butcha wrote: I can believe the reasoned post about abandoning the current market of WFB and trying to create a new market of buyers for AOS, except for one thing:
GW is pushing the old WFB IP with Mordheim, Vermintide, Total War, etc. games.
That doesn't disprove it, but it makes me scratch my head.
If people play one of these games and like it, and say, "Hey, that's really cool! How can I explore this more?" , the answer has to be "you can't. GW doesn't make this stuff any more." It's the same weird decision that sees Bloodbowl as a video game (and BFG, and Space Hulk, etc.), but not as a playable game from the owner of the IP.
Except that at least with Bloodbowl or Battlefleet Gothic, the developer knew what they were getting into. Did the guys who are working on Vermintide, or Warhammer: Total War (or whatever) know that GW was going to blow up and completely abandon the IP they were working in? It's one thing to develop a game that serves as an ad for a game GW no longer makes. It's another to maybe think GW will be able to promote your game to their players, only to discover that GW has completely destroyed the setting of your game in their player base.
On a completely unrelated topic, has anyone else noted (because I don't see any comments on it), the complete lack of customization so far?
You don't have magic items. You don't have weapon and armor choices. So far, nothing in the game can be fielded in any way other than the way it is packaged. Is the warscroll for an Empire Hero going to have the options for greatweapons/handweapons/shields/mounts/pistols/lance/blah/blah/blah? I recognize that the Warscrolls we have now are for the newest units only, but does anyone really think that the options for customization that were previously available are still going to be there?
Different mechanic. They aren't pushing WFB at all. They Sold the rights to use the IP to someone to make a game. Any advertising for them from the videogame is just a bonus on top of what's important, the $$$$$. And given a choice of things to make a videogame of Mordheim is a hell of a lot better story than AoS.
Da Butcha wrote: On a completely unrelated topic, has anyone else noted (because I don't see any comments on it), the complete lack of customization so far?
I'm not that worriedl Remember, this is the intro set, so GW is keeping it simple. Compare the 40k starter forces vs the DA / CSM Codices, the BA / Nids Codex, etc..
As a general Nay-Sayer - this move towards basing the new game dramatically on Norse Mythology (looking at the leaked excerpts) is a very good move (for me at least) by GW.
Hell, depending on what the full rules are like I might actually be tempted to start up AoS.
Example of the Viking Realms compared to the Sigmar Realms
Spoiler:
In Norse Mythology, there are nine worlds, and these are divided into three levels.
In the first level is Asgard, the home of the Aesir.
Vanaheim, the home of the Vanir.
Alfheim, the home of the Light Elves.
In the middle is Midgard "Middle Earth", the home of the Humans. Midgard is connected to Asgard by Bifrost "The Rainbow Bridge".
Jotunheim, the home of the Giants.
Svartalfheim, the home of the Dark Elves.
Nidavellir, the home of the Dwarfs.
Niflheim is to the north, somewhere in Niflheim under the ground is Helheim home of the dead.
Muspelheim is to the south, it is the home of the fire Giants and Demons.
rabidaskal wrote: Anyone think there gonna be chaos Stormcast Eternals?
I hear fully half the brotherhoods turned when Sigmar's most trusted lieutenant fell to Chaos.
That would be a shocking turn of events. I can't imagine what the realms would do if Sigmar was greviously injured in the culmination of that great betrayal and his stormcast eternals and the realms had to continue without him.
I assembled my free Eternal and it is a nice model (head is tiny though.) But besides the models everything seems pretty horrible. I'm truly saddened by the demolition of the background and I was not even that invested in the FB. I still cannot believe that there would be no army balancing mechanic whatsoever. That would mean that the game is dead on arrival and it is hard to believe that GW would be that stupid.(and if they are, this thing deserves and needs to die, lest they try something similar with 40K.)
But lets try to be constructive: Mikhaila, you have the 90-page book. Can you tell us anything more about the setting? Are the different realms and their denizens described? Is there more info on Red Slayers? Is there any maps?
Talys wrote: On the bright/dark side, it means GW is probably going to make more snapfit models. Again, not really my thing, but a lot of people prefer them to multipart plastic, because they are just easier to build. It appeals to a different niche of modeler/painter (than me).
I enjoy building models, but sometimes I prefer snapfit. Nothing irks me more than wondering aloud to myself "but why did they give me this model in 14 pieces if it only goes together ONE WAY?!?"
The reason is to get rid of undercuts (dead areas that can't be built with a 2 part mold) and to allow for more complex bits. On metal minis, you get a lot of places where between a tabard and cloak you have a solid mass. With GW models, this almost never happens anymore; you have pieces that you can hold at any angle and see "into" the model. Plus, with GW minis that are like you describe (like the new Chaplain), it's physically impossible to cast it in 3 or 4 pieces and get as much detail, because of the shape and pose, even though it's posed one way.
Of course, a lot of people don't care about such things too. Sometimes, it can only be appreciated at a technical level as, "sweet, how did they do that?" -- the problem being, a lot of folks wouldn't even notice "that" was something unusual or difficult in the first place.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wulfmar wrote: As a general Nay-Sayer - this move towards basing the new game dramatically on Norse Mythology (looking at the leaked excerpts) is a very good move (for me at least) by GW.
Hell, depending on what the full rules are like I might actually be tempted to start up AoS.
Example of the Viking Realms compared to the Sigmar Realms
Spoiler:
In Norse Mythology, there are nine worlds, and these are divided into three levels.
In the first level is Asgard, the home of the Aesir.
Vanaheim, the home of the Vanir.
Alfheim, the home of the Light Elves.
In the middle is Midgard "Middle Earth", the home of the Humans. Midgard is connected to Asgard by Bifrost "The Rainbow Bridge".
Jotunheim, the home of the Giants.
Svartalfheim, the home of the Dark Elves.
Nidavellir, the home of the Dwarfs.
Niflheim is to the north, somewhere in Niflheim under the ground is Helheim home of the dead.
Muspelheim is to the south, it is the home of the fire Giants and Demons.
If they give us Fantasy Space Wolves, I might be sold But no Santa Chariot, LOL.
Ashiraya wrote: Hmm. So far Diablohammer 40k looks... I am not sure what to think of it. The art style is solid and the rules are a disaster.
Keep in mind that these are the starter's rules. Maybe they'll be more and some FAQ's after the initial release.
I'd willing to bet the "advanced" gamers get a campaign book before Christmas (or sooner) to make this much more like WFB. core rules simple, then add an (optional) extra layer on top
Hi, I'm new to the Dakka forum but have been following this thread from the beginning and it's been an emotional minefield with all the conflicting rumors, arguments and theories about this new release. I feel I need to put some of my jumbled thoughts on Age of Sigmar into words before my mind finally fails me.
First off, I don't hate what I have seen of the rules. A little lacking in depth for my usual tastes but I will see how it actually works on the tabletop before I commit or quit. Typically my main criteria (in order of importance to me) for a wargame I would like to play are :
Background - Does it engage my interest - Too early to say on AOS but what I've seen seems interesting as long as I don't try to think it is warhammer fantasy battle (and ignore some of the weird names)
Ruleset - Easy to understand, easy to house rule if required - This seems to be OK for AOS, not great but not bad.
Ruleset - Tactical and strategic depth - Does terrain affect the battle, does deployment, do different strategies affect the outcome of the battle i.e. refused flank, use of fast cavalry, etc, or is it just line em up and knock them down. - This is where AOS has me stumped, I can't see any depth and long term replayability but maybe I'm just missing something.
On the Subject of Balance and no points cost.
This concerns me the most and the only way I can see of creating a fair game is to use the Witchfinder General method.
If your not familiar with this game, it is a small model count skirmish game with no points cost on the forces and in which you fight any given battle twice, once with your own force and once using your opponents.
In this way you self regulate the spamming of impossible to beat armies as you may win with your ultimate waac force but then loose to that force in the repeat battle gaining no overall victory. It actually brings up some interesting list building tactics with the aim of creating a force that has a weakness you can exploit but hopefully not be spotted by your opponent.
Crimson wrote: I assembled my free Eternal and it is a nice model (head is tiny though.) But besides the models everything seems pretty horrible. I'm truly saddened by the demolition of the background and I was not even that invested in the FB. I still cannot believe that there would be no army balancing mechanic whatsoever. That would mean that the game is dead on arrival and it is hard to believe that GW would be that stupid.(and if they are, this thing deserves and needs to die, lest they try something similar with 40K.)
But lets try to be constructive: Mikhaila, you have the 90-page book. Can you tell us anything more about the setting? Are the different realms and their denizens described? Is there more info on Red Slayers? Is there any maps?
Do you have any Grey Knight terminator or regular PA heads to try out? You'll obviously lose out on the halo with those. Sanguinary guard or the head from the BA upgrade sprue might work. If someone has both the GK models and sanguinary guard models, a comparison shot with the eternal might be a good idea to post.
@Talys It is one of those things that you do not notice (or at least I did not) until you see it done badly. For example Mantic's KOW dwarfs (admittedly a kit done 4/5+ years ago) had no undercuts and horrible areas where beards and weapons merged into clothes and looked terrible. Not a knock on Mantic, I like a lot of there models. But when a plastic miniature lacks undercuts and is done badly it looks awful. I think we saw some really good plastic technology with the Lord on Sharpclaw from Island of Blood, that was a real advance.
TheWaspinator wrote: It's kind of bad that our best hope right now is that GW is lying to us and these aren't the real complete rules.
Yup.
This is an instance where it may have been better for them to say nothing or state that they haven't been informed of anything like they usually do(in my experience). That's what's really leaning me towards the "not lying" side.
Necros wrote: So, the pre-made scenarios are the balancing mechanic? So to play that scenario, you have to buy the models listed? What if you play dwarves, and there's only like 3 different scenarios to choose from with dwarf models, is the answer just to buy more stuff? (Don't answer that, cuz I already know the answer, just sayin')..
That scenario in the pic is a starter set scenario. So yes, that one is assuming you have the listed models.
We don't know how other scenarios will work yet, if there are any.
atribix wrote: Here is what I think. To simplify balance, I believe that the more powerful models, will be "worth" more than one on the battlefield. So, a bloodthirster may be worth 3 models in terms of balance and sudden death rules.
There has been no sign of anything like this in the material seen so far.
The 'balancing mechanic' is Sudden Death. That's it.
Bi'ios wrote: Any way to shrink those GIGANTIC pics? Spoiler tags or something? Please, do.
Can we get a pre-emptive mod warning against quoting those giant pics without spoiler tags just to comment with a few words as well?
I'm curious to see how the construction of the flying guys goes. I'm curious if you can make the HQ with flying feathered wings to sub in for a model until FW decides to do Sanguinius. From the previously published scale pic, the eternals seem about truescaled marine size and would dwarf over normal marines (but likely still smaller than a proper primarch model).
Those box pics make me look forward to this even more; say what you like about GW, but in terms of content, quality and quantity there are still few things that compare to GW starter sets.
warboss wrote: On a positive note, new players will continue to receive welts from their friends as the whippy sticks remain. *snap* OUCH!
BLUE WHIPPY STICKS!!!
I think blue was traditionally reserved for centimetre whippy sticks, I believe the old Epic 40k whippy sticks came in blue. But these one look like inches to me.
So.... even though the rest of AoS my be a steaming pile of gak, at least we have new whippy sticks!!
warboss wrote: On a positive note, new players will continue to receive welts from their friends as the whippy sticks remain. *snap* OUCH!
BLUE WHIPPY STICKS!!!
I think blue was traditionally reserved for centimetre whippy sticks, I believe the old Epic 40k whippy sticks came in blue. But these one look like inches to me.
So.... even though the rest of AoS my be a steaming pile of gak, at least we have new whippy sticks!!
Nooooooo, only Epic is allowed to have blue whippy sticks! I still have mine and they confuse the hell out of opponents when they see them where they were expecting the red sticks.
Far be it from me to defend GW on something, but these kinds of warnings about "essential pointed components" have been on their products as long as I can remember. It's the law. It's what took the plastic Killa Kans off sale for a while.
atribix wrote: Here is what I think. To simplify balance, I believe that the more powerful models, will be "worth" more than one on the battlefield. So, a bloodthirster may be worth 3 models in terms of balance and sudden death rules.
There has been no sign of anything like this in the material seen so far.
The 'balancing mechanic' is Sudden Death. That's it.
Or, 'field exactly these models per the scenario'..
Far be it from me to defend GW on something, but these kinds of warnings about "essential pointed components" have been on their products as long as I can remember. It's the law. It's what took the plastic Killa Kans off sale for a while.
And damn me if the warning is not needed. With their harder plastic and their pretty good casting pointy plastic bits are POINTY. I stabbed myself with a Skull Pass spear just yesterday. Gobbo didn't want me to take his spider friend to cut off his leg, it seems.
Yeah because scenario-based play is so prevalent! Seriously, we get that this is basically going to work out almost OK for friendly games at your house with your mates, that dead horse is well and truly flogged Talys et al
Far be it from me to defend GW on something, but these kinds of warnings about "essential pointed components" have been on their products as long as I can remember. It's the law. It's what took the plastic Killa Kans off sale for a while.
And damn me if the warning is not needed. With their harder plastic and their pretty good casting pointy plastic bits are POINTY. I stabbed myself with a Skull Pass spear just yesterday. Gobbo didn't want me to take his spider friend to cut off his leg, it seems.
Hurts like feth too, and is always a lot more unexpected than it should be...
God that battle report shows a really dull game with little tactics... Measuring from the tip of weapon is horrible too. IS there no effect from normal terrain whatsoever?
NAVARRO wrote: God that battle report shows a really dull game with little tactics... Measuring from the tip of weapon is horrible too. IS there no effect from normal terrain whatsoever?
There is no 'normal' terrain. Everything has special effects now.
Whether they're fun or not is utterly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, unless really well supported with new ones (and GW doesn't have exactly a stellar record in supporting stuff now does it?) they're going to get stale real quick.
Plus, I don't want to play scenarios all the time, sometimes I like a stand up fight to see who is the better player.
Far be it from me to defend GW on something, but these kinds of warnings about "essential pointed components" have been on their products as long as I can remember. It's the law. It's what took the plastic Killa Kans off sale for a while.
I wasn't actually commenting on the warning, which is fine, I just found the particular wording ironic in light of the current discussion. Not a very good joke, since it went right past everyone.
I actually can't believe how depressed this makes me. Maybe because warhammer was there when I lost my family. And now it's gone.
So I wonder what else they will destroy in the next 3-5 years.
A note on warscrolls : you know people and other systems that have unit cards are small, these are big honking things that will either require you to buy a subscription or cary a round a cut out parts of instruction sheets or books of course
NAVARRO wrote: God that battle report shows a really dull game with little tactics... Measuring from the tip of weapon is horrible too. IS there no effect from normal terrain whatsoever?
There is no 'normal' terrain. Everything has special effects now.
So in order for this game to be slightly fun you would need to discard special terrain rules and come up with something more normal... then discard measurement rules and use the miniatures bases instead of their ponytails, annnnd finally come up with some sort of point system for the cards. THese are the things so far that are more visible I do wonder how many more fiascos are hidden inside of these 4 pages and scrolls.
NAVARRO wrote: God that battle report shows a really dull game with little tactics... Measuring from the tip of weapon is horrible too. IS there no effect from normal terrain whatsoever?
There is no 'normal' terrain. Everything has special effects now.
So in order for this game to be slightly fun you would need to discard special terrain rules and come up with something more normal then discard measurement rules and use miniatures bases instead of ponytails, annnnd come up with some sort of point system for the cards. THese are the things more visible so far I do wonder how many more fiascos are hidden on these 4 pages and scrolls.
It would be easier to stick with an old edition oaf WHFB.
I agree... or move your minis and collections to other games.
Early days but from that battle rep I assume that scaling up the army it will end up in a bigger mosh pit on the middle of the table making things a huge unnecessary mess!
First, Khorne sent those sigmarsissie boys back to their side of the bubble with tails between their legs. There was some ebb and flow to the battle, but then my mighty Khorne lord smacked him with his axe and banished him from existance. The khorne lord looks inferior to the sigmarite battlecat, until that is you look at the special abilitie of the axe. If he wounds you can basically get instant death if he rolls a 5+ at the end of the round. Giving him a huge equalizer.
This brings up Point #1: The special abilities on the warscrolls are the real rules. Just like in Warmachine, the special rules and inter actions between those rules are going to be huge.
Point #2: Position is important. It isn't a rush to the center. We had no objectives at all, and yet the terrain on the board and how we moved around it added a lot to to the tactics. I tried to draw off two of his small units with my 5 chaos warriors, and then managed to get the charge on the guys with wings, killing two. His heavy guys with 2 handed hammers then tore stuff up harshly because of their "roll a 6 and take 2 mortal wound rule". 6's to hit basically took out two of my warriors each turn. I only had some parity because my Khorne here with the whip came in and got lucky on some roles.
Point #3: Special rules for your army are huge, pay attention to them. The khornate troops work well together, i kept my force within range of both the banner and the lord. I got better charges and movement, and lots of extra attacks. My opponent now knows to burn down that banner with holy lightning as fast as he can. On turn 1 my Blood Reavers made it 15" across the field, whipped along by khornes fury and a 6 on the run dice. I was in hand to hand on turn 2.
Point #4: It was fun as hell. I can't wait to see what my large collection of models get for special abilities. The game actually has some legs. I think position and movement are huge. Interaction between abilities is huge. How you time your charges and attacks is huge. In fact, almost all the things we did made a difference in the game. I had to really think about some things, and know i'm barely scratching the surface of the game.
How to balance armies? Well, I have no Fething Clue yet. But i'm getting to work on it and the first tournament at my shop is next Sunday.
NAVARRO wrote: I agree... or move your minis and collections to other games.
Early days but from that battle rep I assume that scaling up the army it will end up in a bigger mosh pit on the middle of the table making things a huge unnecessary mess!
Already getting into KoW. It's more like some older systems I played back in the 80s.
First, Khorne sent those sigmarsissie boys back to their side of the bubble with tails between their legs. There was some ebb and flow to the battle, but then my mighty Khorne lord smacked him with his axe and banished him from existance. The khorne lord looks inferior to the sigmarite battlecat, until that is you look at the special abilitie of the axe. If he wounds you can basically get instant death if he rolls a 5+ at the end of the round. Giving him a huge equalizer.
This brings up Point #1: The special abilities on the warscrolls are the real rules. Just like in Warmachine, the special rules and inter actions between those rules are going to be huge.
Point #2: Position is important. It isn't a rush to the center. We had no objectives at all, and yet the terrain on the board and how we moved around it added a lot to to the tactics. I tried to draw off two of his small units with my 5 chaos warriors, and then managed to get the charge on the guys with wings, killing two. His heavy guys with 2 handed hammers then tore stuff up harshly because of their "roll a 6 and take 2 mortal wound rule". 6's to hit basically took out two of my warriors each turn. I only had some parity because my Khorne here with the whip came in and got lucky on some roles.
Point #3: Special rules for your army are huge, pay attention to them. The khornate troops work well together, i kept my force within range of both the banner and the lord. I got better charges and movement, and lots of extra attacks. My opponent now knows to burn down that banner with holy lightning as fast as he can. On turn 1 my Blood Reavers made it 15" across the field, whipped along by khornes fury and a 6 on the run dice. I was in hand to hand on turn 2.
Point #4: It was fun as hell. I can't wait to see what my large collection of models get for special abilities. The game actually has some legs. I think position and movement are huge. Interaction between abilities is huge. How you time your charges and attacks is huge. In fact, almost all the things we did made a difference in the game. I had to really think about some things, and know i'm barely scratching the surface of the game.
How to balance armies? Well, I have no Fething Clue yet. But i'm getting to work on it and the first tournament at my shop is next Sunday.
Mikhaila... It sounds genuinely fun, and the rules interactions do call to mind the parts of Warmachine/Malifaux that I actually like.
I think that is what irks me most right now... As lighter-complexity, accessible miniature games go, I could easily/happily find a place in my collection for plenty of Age of Sigmar. It really is the lack of a balancing/construction mechanism giving me the willies...
If only those existed, or tomorrow's war-scrolls better implied a way of doing it... I would be very excited right now.
KoW for my blocks of troops, and this for beer 'n pretzels fun would serve me just fine... if the later gives me just a LITTLE bit more to work with.
Talys wrote: @Bull0 - just because scenario based play can't or won't be.
Why not wait to see if the scenarios look fun, or, god forbid, try one, before panning them?
One of the scenarios has been posted. It's a basic intro one, but doesn't appear to be the 'first' one in the list since it refers to a previous scenario.
First, Khorne sent those sigmarsissie boys back to their side of the bubble with tails between their legs. There was some ebb and flow to the battle, but then my mighty Khorne lord smacked him with his axe and banished him from existance. The khorne lord looks inferior to the sigmarite battlecat, until that is you look at the special abilitie of the axe. If he wounds you can basically get instant death if he rolls a 5+ at the end of the round. Giving him a huge equalizer.
This brings up Point #1: The special abilities on the warscrolls are the real rules. Just like in Warmachine, the special rules and inter actions between those rules are going to be huge.
Point #2: Position is important. It isn't a rush to the center. We had no objectives at all, and yet the terrain on the board and how we moved around it added a lot to to the tactics. I tried to draw off two of his small units with my 5 chaos warriors, and then managed to get the charge on the guys with wings, killing two. His heavy guys with 2 handed hammers then tore stuff up harshly because of their "roll a 6 and take 2 mortal wound rule". 6's to hit basically took out two of my warriors each turn. I only had some parity because my Khorne here with the whip came in and got lucky on some roles.
Point #3: Special rules for your army are huge, pay attention to them. The khornate troops work well together, i kept my force within range of both the banner and the lord. I got better charges and movement, and lots of extra attacks. My opponent now knows to burn down that banner with holy lightning as fast as he can. On turn 1 my Blood Reavers made it 15" across the field, whipped along by khornes fury and a 6 on the run dice. I was in hand to hand on turn 2.
Point #4: It was fun as hell. I can't wait to see what my large collection of models get for special abilities. The game actually has some legs. I think position and movement are huge. Interaction between abilities is huge. How you time your charges and attacks is huge. In fact, almost all the things we did made a difference in the game. I had to really think about some things, and know i'm barely scratching the surface of the game.
How to balance armies? Well, I have no Fething Clue yet. But i'm getting to work on it and the first tournament at my shop is next Sunday.
)
WAY?!?" 
