Relapse wrote: I was just told the Mantic website was crashing a lot because of all the traffic happening on it. I know I was having trouble getting in to see stuff.
Any comfirmations?
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: If we now have a "living rulebook" and warscrolls is there any chance of GW adding points/ a balance element if there is a big enough outcry about it?
No, because there is nobody to hear that outcry.
That was my first thought. I guess that red shirts could pass it "upwards" but those ivory towers are difficult to scale.
What I observed was the local GW employee saying that if people want to complain about the negation of WHB, the game which people have spent innumerable dollars and hours to play... he's had people threaten to write letters (sneer). Well, write that letter. Mr. GW employee will gladly give them the HQ address. This was not in a supportive way; it was entirely dismissive. People who have any problem with what GW deigns to bless them with... are the problem.
Prior to that, I had asked for a demo of AoS. Would have preordered then and there, except another demo was being run by a regular with a 10 year old kid, neither of whom were in sight till much later. I was told, no demo for me. No one was playing, but another demo was in progress, so do I want to have a walk through of rules for AoS? I said yes. Another store patron and I then played 8 glade riders and a spellsinger against a giant. It was one turn for me, one for giant. My entire 8 dude glade riders were destroyed, giant took 2 wounds. Giant player bought a giant, but I'm still going, why the hell do I want to play this game?
I mentioned I have 4 current WFB armies, and asked how can I build a list to play against an opponent? Was told, "well, we're gonna play a siege battle. I have empire, you have wood elves. I'm taking 4 cannons, 2 steam engines, and a super HQ (don't remember name). What do you take?" I said, "Uh... so you're saying I can take whatever I want? How does that makes sense? Please realize, I've played with a points and army comp system for 20 or so years of GW games." Response? "It's a new game. It's not about army building. You don't know what's better than what, neither does your opponent. Play lots and figure out what works. Go watch that game in the back corner with an experienced WFB player to see how Ogres vs. Chaos works."
I left without buying anything. I was a gigantic "sell crap to me" target, and was completely turned off by the approach taken by the local GW.
So, yeah. I think these legacy army rules are a cynical ploy to not have a total rebellion from legacy army players. But GW doesn't WANT us to play our oldhammer armies. We ALL need to toe the line, and buy into the new AoS hotness. If we have any issues with the rules, then WE are the problem. We should all get over the crap rules for our old crap, and buy new stuff! We shouldn't even like our old stuff because it is OLD!
At least that is the impression my local GW gave me. It's too bad, because I might have dropped several hundred dollars on legacy WFB models and AoS, but it was made clear that my oldhammer legacy ideas were not welcome. Oh well. Not sure what I'm going to do, now...
Zachectomy wrote: How does initiative work in this game? Does everyone attack at once? Do you alternate based on whose turn it is?
In any case these rules look awful.
Starting with the player whose turn it is you alternate choosing one of your units and making all of their attacks. It means you sometimes have to prioritise a bit, which is new. Seemed weird at first.
So far every time someone has come into this thread and gone "It's not that bad guys!" it is always followed with a "You can just XYZ the rules". Do you realise just how stupid that sounds? If everyone's solution to making the rules of this game work is to not use the rules as they are written then it's a problem with the game, not the people reacting to it. How can anyone not get that?
You never, ever, use any house-rules at all? You follow every single step in the book without modification, however small? GW games are perfectly written for you and your gang?
House-ruling the odd inconsistency or banning a broken unit or two are one thing. AoS demands reconstructing major game mechanics. They may as well just sell models and leave the player base to invent a game.
So far every time someone has come into this thread and gone "It's not that bad guys!" it is always followed with a "You can just XYZ the rules". Do you realise just how stupid that sounds? If everyone's solution to making the rules of this game work is to not use the rules as they are written then it's a problem with the game, not the people reacting to it. How can anyone not get that?
You never, ever, use any house-rules at all? You follow every single step in the book without modification, however small? GW games are perfectly written for you and your gang?
What's your point? No, like a lot of us he probably doesn't, but does that change the fact that this has been a serious, long-running problem with GW's rulesets and only seems to be getting worse? Does it make it any less ridiculous that we have to rewrite the rules to make them work?
Playing the game as written is the default mode of play for literally every other game. This is only an issue for GW games as the design team is so fething incompetent that the games literally do not function without modification, they can't be played as written. This is an issue that most of us have been wanting to see fixed, yet it seems like GW is doing everything it can to make things even worse, actively mocking anyone who still dares to give them money.
Zachectomy wrote: How does initiative work in this game? Does everyone attack at once? Do you alternate based on whose turn it is?
In any case these rules look awful.
The rules aren't bad. Have 3 games in now. Turn sequence is not set.
Each turn you roll off for who goes first. I gambled one game on moving up fast, and praying for the next turn. Got it and pulled off some nice charges. It was a risk, but i was going to get shot up either way.
So, my turn, i do hero stuff, move, shoot, charge, ...and then choose one of my units to pile in and attack, then my opponent does the same. What unit you choose to have fight has a lot of strategy to it. It's not like 8th where everyone fights. Just the nominated unit does damage. So no initiative score at all. Who goes when is determined by the players. Very interesting so far.
Zachectomy wrote: How does initiative work in this game? Does everyone attack at once? Do you alternate based on whose turn it is?
In any case these rules look awful.
The rules aren't bad. Have 3 games in now. Turn sequence is not set.
Each turn you roll off for who goes first. I gambled one game on moving up fast, and praying for the next turn. Got it and pulled off some nice charges. It was a risk, but i was going to get shot up either way.
So, my turn, i do hero stuff, move, shoot, charge, ...and then choose one of my units to pile in and attack, then my opponent does the same. What unit you choose to have fight has a lot of strategy to it. It's not like 8th where everyone fights. Just the nominated unit does damage. So no initiative score at all. Who goes when is determined by the players. Very interesting so far.
I meant initiative in combat. Now it seems like skaven assassins and vampire lords are no faster than dragon ogres with great weapons.
The rules seem like they were written by someone who has never played a wargame and has literally no interest in learning how.
The melee rules with prioritising which attacks to make first really changes the game up a lot and gives it a board gamey feel. It probably hamstrings the armies that had ASF or high Initiative in WFB a bit though. But overall it's an interesting change.
Zachectomy wrote: How does initiative work in this game? Does everyone attack at once? Do you alternate based on whose turn it is?
In any case these rules look awful.
Starting with the player whose turn it is you alternate choosing one of your units and making all of their attacks. It means you sometimes have to prioritise a bit, which is new. Seemed weird at first.
The old Chronopia and Warzone systems were like that, where one player would activate a unit, then his opponent would activate a unit, etc. There were actually a fair bit of tactics involved in trying to decide which units to attack with and which units were going to take a hit. I might actually make some Warscrolls for my Chronopia stuff and bring it in.
Talys wrote: If you wanted it to be base-agnostic, you could measure from the center of the base -- that would eliminate things like facing and square/round differences.
That still leaves the problem of having to overlap bases to be in melee range.
Zachectomy wrote: How does initiative work in this game? Does everyone attack at once? Do you alternate based on whose turn it is?
In any case these rules look awful.
The rules aren't bad. Have 3 games in now. Turn sequence is not set.
Each turn you roll off for who goes first. I gambled one game on moving up fast, and praying for the next turn. Got it and pulled off some nice charges. It was a risk, but i was going to get shot up either way.
So, my turn, i do hero stuff, move, shoot, charge, ...and then choose one of my units to pile in and attack, then my opponent does the same. What unit you choose to have fight has a lot of strategy to it. It's not like 8th where everyone fights. Just the nominated unit does damage. So no initiative score at all. Who goes when is determined by the players. Very interesting so far.
I meant initiative in combat. Now it seems like skaven assassins and vampire lords are no faster than dragon ogres with great weapons.
The rules seem like they were written by someone who has never played a wargame and has literally no interest in learning how.
Like i said, the initiative is determined by the players. It's not based on models. There is no Initiative stat. If i'm charging in one unit, i know it gets to go first. But if several, i have to do some choosing. And so does my opponent. In some chases, like where i have a monster facing a horde, i don't really care. He could kill models, but more move up. Leave him for later. I look for where i need to knock out the enemy before he can hit me. You really have to play it to see it in action.
The thing is, don't judge things by WFB. This is a different game entirely. I keep getting surprised by things, if i try to keep assuming I'm playing WFB.
This is sounding more and more like they raided the Chronopia system, minus the comedy rules and stuff about the bases. Otherwise, it sounds like Chronopia.
This could be a good thing since who ever wins the initiative isn't going to be at a huge advantage.
I always thought the alternating system would be good in 40K, also. It would go a long way to limiting leaf blower armies.
Zachectomy wrote: The rules seem like they were written by someone who has never played a wargame and has literally no interest in learning how.
I think it's the other way around: Someone who has played plenty of wargames was told to write rules for a war game intended for persons who don't want to spend more than a few minutes to learn rules, and who have no desire to ever spend more time than that reading a rulebook.
It's like, "We want you to write the simplest possible rules to play a game with the models. You get a bonus paycheck if it's done in less than 5 pages in 11 point font because we want it to print on 2 sheets of paper."
Zachectomy wrote: The rules seem like they were written by someone who has never played a wargame and has literally no interest in learning how.
I think it's the other way around: Someone who has played plenty of wargames was told to write rules for a war game intended for persons who don't want to spend more than a few minutes to learn rules, and who have no desire to ever spend more time than that reading a rulebook.
Let me get this straight. Your assumption is that they designed a game for people who have no patienc/time to read a few pages of rules but have tons of patience/time to put together and paint large numbers of models? Bizzaro world.
Actually, what you described is a board game, not a war game with models on sprue.
angelofvengeance wrote: Any more leaks or are we still continuing the doom and gloom here? lol
Atia has some pics of stormhost eternal archers and what looks like stormhost troops wielding halberds and swords instead of hammers. There is also a pic she has of Khorne cavalry. No idea if this is stuff coming from next week or not, i would assume next week would be individual releases to compliment the AoS box set.
Zachectomy wrote: The rules seem like they were written by someone who has never played a wargame and has literally no interest in learning how.
I think it's the other way around: Someone who has played plenty of wargames was told to write rules for a war game intended for persons who don't want to spend more than a few minutes to learn rules, and who have no desire to ever spend more time than that reading a rulebook.
It's like, "We want you to write the simplest possible rules to play a game with the models. You get a bonus paycheck if it's done in less than 5 pages in 11 point font because we want it to print on 2 sheets of paper."
"But--"
"Do you want that bonus check?"
This was actually the design philosophy behind KoW, at least according to Alessio Cavatore. I don't think they pulled it off over in nottingham.
If someone wants to PM me their phone number and wants to host my pic/show it on here, I've already painted my white dwarf mini. Computer is still packed up from my move, so I only have the cell and can't load it myself. I don't think.
Relapse wrote: This is sounding more and more like they raided the Chronopia system, minus the comedy rules and stuff about the bases. Otherwise, it sounds like Chronopia.
This could be a good thing since who ever wins the initiative isn't going to be at a huge advantage.
I always thought the alternating system would be good in 40K, also. It would go a long way to limiting leaf blower armies.
As far as I know, you only 'alternate' like that when choosing combats. Whoever's turn it is, picks one of their units. Resolve the attacks for that unit (not BOTH).
Then the other player gets to pick one of their units - it doesn't even have to be the one in the combat listed above. It can be another one they deem more important.
Back and forth until all combats are resolved.
As far as I can see, there are no 'simultaneous strikes', or 'auto-first-strike'. And as far as I can see, Charging gains you no benefit unless your warscroll gives you some benefit for Charging.
Relapse wrote: This is sounding more and more like they raided the Chronopia system, minus the comedy rules and stuff about the bases. Otherwise, it sounds like Chronopia.
This could be a good thing since who ever wins the initiative isn't going to be at a huge advantage.
I always thought the alternating system would be good in 40K, also. It would go a long way to limiting leaf blower armies.
As far as I know, you only 'alternate' like that when choosing combats. Whoever's turn it is, picks one of their units. Resolve the attacks for that unit (not BOTH).
Then the other player gets to pick one of their units - it doesn't even have to be the one in the combat listed above. It can be another one they deem more important.
Back and forth until all combats are resolved.
As far as I can see, there are no 'simultaneous strikes', or 'auto-first-strike'. And as far as I can see, Charging gains you no benefit unless your warscroll gives you some benefit for Charging.
It could be interesting to alternate entire unit activations. I know in Chronopia and Warzone it put shooty and close combat style armies on a more even footing and led to extremely tactical situations.
Me as well. I like the gold helmet and silver armor but I might have gone with a darker color for the hammer handle, something like the old bestial brown.
I think you guys should give this game a try, I actually had alot of fun which I am shocked by. Don't get me wrong I miss the mathhammer. But I was playing with a friend and both of us remembered all the rules for our guys and didn't need to open a book and scan through rules. We didn't need to check recheck rules and try and bounce my always saves on a 4+ and his always hits on a 3+ rules off each other. It was really smooth. Only thing I can see a problem with is my ogres are fat and take alot of room 1inch apart with 10 ogres was pretty damn wide, it brough a whole new meaning to the word gut wall.
We used a self made point system tho. We took the points for a basic model say ogre 25 skink 5 or what ever it was " The base cost with no gear" and used that. We played a 1k game. The base points I mean are from the books of 8th the normal model cost. Unit of 4 ogres say 100 points I had 6 so it was 150 "not going to use the real numbers incase GW is watching -_-. Just because I am paranoid doesn't mean they are not watching.
Played two games today, one big one small. Used Ogres against undead, then against lizardmen.
I was ready to hate this game. I am surprised to say, I had fun.
This ISN'T the Warhammer Fantasy Battle that I loved for 20 years, and walked away from when 8th edition destroyed tactics. This is very different. I suspect that there is a lot of 40K in it; (I wouldn't know, having last played 40K in 2001.)
It could be interesting to alternate entire unit activations. I know in Chronopia and Warzone it put shooty and close combat style armies on a more even footing and led to extremely tactical situations.
I totally agree. It's a fun time when it comes down to having two (or more) units you -really- wanna move, and have to pick only one!
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: If we now have a "living rulebook" and warscrolls is there any chance of GW adding points/ a balance element if there is a big enough outcry about it?
No, because there is nobody to hear that outcry.
That was my first thought. I guess that red shirts could pass it "upwards" but those ivory towers are difficult to scale.
What I observed was the local GW employee saying that if people want to complain about the negation of WHB, the game which people have spent innumerable dollars and hours to play... he's had people threaten to write letters (sneer). Well, write that letter. Mr. GW employee will gladly give them the HQ address. This was not in a supportive way; it was entirely dismissive. People who have any problem with what GW deigns to bless them with... are the problem.
It's entirely reasonable that the clerk replied "Would you like the address for that letter?" when someone threatened to write a letter. If that statement was done in a tone implying that the customer was ignorant of how retail works, and you don't understand why, then pause to consider a similar situation: Walk into a grocery store, and complain to the cashier or the clerk about the products being sold at the grocery store.
That's exactly what someone is doing when they walk into a GW store and complain to the clerk about the quality of the game. You're not complaining to someone who made thing you're buy, or had any part in the process.
The design team are so out of touch with what people want. They are trying to turn age of sigmar into some sort of wired cooperative role playing game were everyone is a DM. They just seem to HATE the whole idea that their are people who even would want to play their game in any sort of competitive fashion let alone tournament play.
AoS is like a huge middle finger to everyone who every enjoyed playing warhammer fantasy with any sort of competitive spirit.
It could be interesting to alternate entire unit activations. I know in Chronopia and Warzone it put shooty and close combat style armies on a more even footing and led to extremely tactical situations.
I totally agree. It's a fun time when it comes down to having two (or more) units you -really- wanna move, and have to pick only one!
A scenario some friends and I played in Warzone represented units being magically plucked from their areas and set on a fog shrouded battlefield. It involved having everyone alternate placing individual units on the table anywhere they wanted. The rule was that no one could place units from their own army within 12" of each other, and by the time set up was over there were 4 armies scattered at all points of the table, intermixed with each other.. Combined with the alternating activation it was a heck of a game. People had to decide if they wanted to preserve their elite units or use grunts to fire up elite units they normally wouldn't get a good crack at. A couple of players made it their goal to have some of their units try to fight their way towards each other to form a fire base while the other two tried to fight towards less populated areas of the table. It was a bloodbath game with no allies and where no army had any real advantage over the others except for tactics used.
I think Age of Sigmar could lend itself well to this type of scenario.
Actually, Lockark, it seems more like they want to turn it into a party game where everyone is more interested in having fun than playing a mature strategy game. Beer and Pretzels, if you will.
Not a game system I'm interested in but the Portal terrain pieces I saw at a GW store are really cool looking and would look great on a normal 40k table.
Lockark wrote: The design team are so out of touch with what people want. They are trying to turn age of sigmar into some sort of wired cooperative role playing game were everyone is a DM. They just seem to HATE the whole idea that their are people who even would want to play their game in any sort of competitive fashion let alone tournament play.
AoS is like a huge middle finger to everyone who every enjoyed playing warhammer fantasy with any sort of competitive spirit.
Games Workshop killed Fantesy.
Yes warhammer fantasy is gone like necromonder or what ever it was epic and all the others. Whats your point?
They let you use your old models and gave you free rules for them. Everyone got exactly what they wanted. Go to rumours on 8th there is what 800+ pages of hate mail? about how it to hard to this to that and it not selling. So they cut it.
People wanted it to die or change to what they wanted, they just never realized maybe all their complaining and turning away their friends would actually kill what they liked.
Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
It was dying specifically because of what THEY did to the game, there was plenty of people who would have jumped in ( or back in) if they would have fixed the buy-in and a couple rules. They could have done that in a number of ways, instead they lack imagination, tried to copy a Warmahordes play style, hoping to grab some of the market back they lost to them. Yet they want to do that with not even a loose game structure, but one with basically none at all.
So far every time someone has come into this thread and gone "It's not that bad guys!" it is always followed with a "You can just XYZ the rules". Do you realise just how stupid that sounds? If everyone's solution to making the rules of this game work is to not use the rules as they are written then it's a problem with the game, not the people reacting to it. How can anyone not get that?
It's the way Palladium RPG games have been run for 30 years. That type of advice isn't restricted to GW fans.
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
Because if you walked into a store and said oh this is cool I said ya here are the rules. Gave you a dictionary and said then you pick a army and gave you another 90 page book. Then said this will cost you 200$ and once you remember it all you can pay 500$+ to try the game out.
Kids who coem in who talk to each other with phones even tho they are in the same room andneed instant gratification the books are a killer. If I hand you a piece of paper that could be the rules for monoply you are more likely to try it especially if it is free.
Hell when is the last time you could say Hey the starter is 150$ want to go halfsee's the rules are there measureing sticks everything. Oh I like the ogres oh save the pdf and you can use your models in hand as them.
So to sum it up:
2 people walk in the store split a 150$ box hell can even split the dice 6 each. Then try any army they like using the same models for 75$
Hell you can even use models from different games to try out new armies. = free
Now to play warhammer fantasy
split on the starter island of blood same price, but you still missing the army books. and for the skaven you need atleast 1 more core unit for skaven and think the same for elf. So thats 185$
Then you like the game want to try a new army well get you check book out thats 60$ for the book and 120$ for a batallion, then you buy a hero/lord and a mage. = 330$+ if your a ogre player.
I assume GW is paying you a lot to say that with a straight face.
I will say this my mother always said if i go on the right path no one will ever get me off it because I am more stubron then a mule. I like this and I am actually enjoying it alot. I will keep saying it til I am dead then I will make sure it is cared on my grave stone "The game is good, you are wrong"
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
If WHFB was Beer and Pretzels, then AoS is fething Gerber and Breast Milk since I cannot fathom it needing to be dumbed down THIS much...
Breotan wrote: Actually, Lockark, it seems more like they want to turn it into a party game where everyone is more interested in having fun than playing a mature strategy game. Beer and Pretzels, if you will.
I think you are right. Anymore, if I want to play a miniatures game involving maneuver & tactics, I play historicals. Beneath the Lily Banners, Drum & Shako, Black Powder, Maurice... historical rules sets have evolved a lot, and many are very playable. I was going to re-base my WHFB armies for Impetus Fantasy, but now I am going to give AoS a chance.
One thing is for certain, though: the gnoblars are staying on their movement trays until it is time to pile in.
Breotan wrote: Actually, Lockark, it seems more like they want to turn it into a party game where everyone is more interested in having fun than playing a mature strategy game. Beer and Pretzels, if you will.
Not a game system I'm interested in but the Portal terrain pieces I saw at a GW store are really cool looking and would look great on a normal 40k table.
except for the whole fact that the person who spent the most money on the biggest modles get's to win most games.
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
If WHFB was Beer and Pretzels, then AoS is fething Gerber and Breast Milk since I cannot fathom it needing to be dumbed down THIS much...
Anwser this question before you insult the rules.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?
You want to know why they dumbed down the rules? Check the you make the call thread..... no one read the same rule the same way. Then with the 5 charts of how to hit someone then the different rules on what ignored armour and so on it gets confusing.
I assume GW is paying you a lot to say that with a straight face.
I will say this my mother always said if i go on the right path no one will ever get me off it because I am more stubron then a mule. I like this and I am actually enjoying it alot. I will keep saying it til I am dead then I will make sure it is cared on my grave stone "The game is good, you are wrong"
If you're enjoying the game, more power to you. The idea that "everyone got what they want" is so ridiculous I can only assume you're one of the many paid GW shills. At least, I'd hope you're paid. Shilling this for free would just be sad.
It's actually pretty different in play then on paper, as someone said on another topic 100 goblins were able to kill Nagash so it's not all doom and gloom.
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
If WHFB was Beer and Pretzels, then AoS is fething Gerber and Breast Milk since I cannot fathom it needing to be dumbed down THIS much...
Anwser this question before you insult the rules.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?
You want to know why they dumbed down the rules? Check the you make the call thread..... no one read the same rule the same way. Then with the 5 charts of how to hit someone then the different rules on what ignored armour and so on it gets confusing.
So... when are we going to see a youtube video of the WFB player setting up his armies in the backyard and shooting them with a pellet gun because he hates AoS so much?
Yaraton wrote: So... when are we going to see a youtube video of the WFB player setting up his armies in the backyard and shooting them with a pellet gun because he hates AoS so much?
It could be interesting to alternate entire unit activations. I know in Chronopia and Warzone it put shooty and close combat style armies on a more even footing and led to extremely tactical situations.
I totally agree. It's a fun time when it comes down to having two (or more) units you -really- wanna move, and have to pick only one!
A scenario some friends and I played in Warzone represented units being magically plucked from their areas and set on a fog shrouded battlefield. It involved having everyone alternate placing individual units on the table anywhere they wanted. The rule was that no one could place units from their own army within 12" of each other, and by the time set up was over there were 4 armies scattered at all points of the table, intermixed with each other.. Combined with the alternating activation it was a heck of a game. People had to decide if they wanted to preserve their elite units or use grunts to fire up elite units they normally wouldn't get a good crack at. A couple of players made it their goal to have some of their units try to fight their way towards each other to form a fire base while the other two tried to fight towards less populated areas of the table. It was a bloodbath game with no allies and where no army had any real advantage over the others except for tactics used.
I think Age of Sigmar could lend itself well to this type of scenario.
You just described Heroscape
That said, agreed that AoS seems to have potential. Store owner and some folks were playing a test game (I was playing Planetfall one table over and watching).
There were a lot of "I can't believe this" statements about the silly rules about mustaches, talking to models, etc.
BUT those who played seemed to have fun and said it was a good game overall.
I need another miniatures game like a hole in the head but I'm really interested in this specific starter since it's not the same old dwarves and goblins models fighting (in the starter, that is).
Yaraton wrote: So... when are we going to see a youtube video of the WFB player setting up his armies in the backyard and shooting them with a pellet gun because he hates AoS so much?
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
Because if you walked into a store and said oh this is cool I said ya here are the rules. Gave you a dictionary and said then you pick a army and gave you another 90 page book. Then said this will cost you 200$ and once you remember it all you can pay 500$+ to try the game out.
Kids who coem in who talk to each other with phones even tho they are in the same room andneed instant gratification the books are a killer. If I hand you a piece of paper that could be the rules for monoply you are more likely to try it especially if it is free.
Hell when is the last time you could say Hey the starter is 150$ want to go halfsee's the rules are there measureing sticks everything. Oh I like the ogres oh save the pdf and you can use your models in hand as them.
So to sum it up:
2 people walk in the store split a 150$ box hell can even split the dice 6 each. Then try any army they like using the same models for 75$
Hell you can even use models from different games to try out new armies. = free
Now to play warhammer fantasy
split on the starter island of blood same price, but you still missing the army books. and for the skaven you need atleast 1 more core unit for skaven and think the same for elf. So thats 185$
Then you like the game want to try a new army well get you check book out thats 60$ for the book and 120$ for a batallion, then you buy a hero/lord and a mage. = 330$+ if your a ogre player.
I never said it was casual. But it sure as hell wasn't a viable tournament game, or else the fantasy tournament scene would still be thriving. The game was already down the path of casual players putting down huge models and rolling lots of dice to cast OP spells and kill everything. The game was bloated and unbalanced. It was good for nothing more than casual games played between friends. Not necessarily a bad thing, but that's what I mean by "beer and pretzels" game.
AOS does simplify things, but its the same exact thing as before. Put down whatever models you want, run at each other, roll lots of dice. Maybe some people prefer it that way, and maybe it will help get new players into the game, but that's probably not much consolation for the people who disliked 8th because of the reasons I mentioned.
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
If WHFB was Beer and Pretzels, then AoS is fething Gerber and Breast Milk since I cannot fathom it needing to be dumbed down THIS much...
Anwser this question before you insult the rules.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?
You want to know why they dumbed down the rules? Check the you make the call thread..... no one read the same rule the same way. Then with the 5 charts of how to hit someone then the different rules on what ignored armour and so on it gets confusing.
It took me like 5 minutes to understand the basics of Warhammer 8th Edition and 30 minutes to know enough about the models in front of me to play a game. The three requirements of WHFB are the ability to read a chart, the ability to measure distances, and the ability to roll dice. Yes, I do agree that WHFB could have been simplified. But there's simplification and writing a dear mess of rules and telling people "figure it out yourself".
I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
It definitely isn't for everyone. Are you going to give Kings of War a shot with your armies?
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
It definitely isn't for everyone. Are you going to give Kings of War a shot with your armies?
Maybe, I've been more of a Firestorm Player recently and this is making me think about selling off the models and just going to Planetfall due to the new rules but I'll wait until the KOW2 rules are released before making a decision. Though apparently the Twilight Kin aren't the best condition right now rules-wise I'm told.
On the one hand, I like most of the new rules. Having watched some battle reports, it looks like the system is intuitive and fun, despite not resembling any previous edition of Warhammer. I like that GW released the core rules and legacy army rules for free.
On the other hand, I find the lack of guidance on army building unacceptable. I would have appreciated it if GW at least suggested "We'll let the community figure out", because that's clearly their strategy. The "lulz" rules might seem endearing now, but a year or more from now they will almost definitely be tedious.
We'll see if this or KoW ends up sticking locally.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?.
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Yes , complicated things take longer to learn than simple things.
I can teach a friend to play checkers in a much shorter time than I can teach them to play Risk. Which means absolutely nothing if Risk is what we want to play .
That's it. That's all you get. It's all you need really, If you're after a more simplified game that is. I can see why it would be painful if you loved the old WHFB
They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink
There Is no WHFB any more, it was failing very hard. And it was either this or nothing. If the rumors are true we are in for some spectacular looking kits however.
ToxicBox wrote: There Is no WHFB any more, it was failing very hard. And it was either this or nothing. If the rumors are true we are in for some spectacular looking kits however.
Well, it was this, or perhaps addressing the issues plaguing WHFB- over-bloated armies, steadfast, magic rules, cost-of-entry, etc etc.
No, they took the ball out into the parking lot and torched it, and then replaced it with a much simpler toy, because after the ball went flat and people stopped playing with it, it made far more sense to get rid of it than to grab the pump and fix it.
Models have a movement, a weapon skill, a ballistic skill, strength, attacks, wounds and save. Models lost initiative, but many gained multiple wounds.
All the art work reminds me of the 2nd ed starter set for 40k which brings back some nostalgic moments. Besides that, this is a totally new game.
Old WHFB is dead in my books, some of my friends will probably want to continue with 8th ed because we are old and used to it. Otherwise this is a new game that has nothing to do with the old one and I don't know how I feel about it yet.
I'll need to get a few games in with this rule set to see how things turn out.
I feel like this will be a LotR/Hobbit mix-up and GW will go back to the old rules soon enough.
Yep. Other than Wounds, Save, Bravery, Move, Abilities, Magic, Weapons (with To Hit, To Wound, Rend and Damage), Command Ability, and Key Words, there are no stats
Yep. Other than Wounds, Save, Bravery, Move, Abilities, Magic, Weapons (with To Hit, To Wound, Rend and Damage), Command Ability, and Key Words, there are no stats
ToxicBox wrote: They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink
They're pretty much identical game-wise.
Skinks save: 6+ wounds:1 most skink weapons are 5+ to hit and the best one wounds on 4+; the skinks can take multiples (with 10 being the common base, so 10 wounds usually).
Nagash save: 3+ wounds:16 most of Nagash's weapons are 3+ to hit and most wound on 2+
Nagash also has several more special rules than the skinks including being able to fly, ability to wipe a model out if opponent doesn't choose which hand you hide a die in, etc.
ToxicBox wrote: They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink
They're pretty much identical game-wise.
Skinks save: 6+ wounds:1 most skink weapons are 5+ to hit and the best one wounds on 4+; the skinks can take multiples (with 10 being the common base, so 10 wounds usually).
Nagash save: 3+ wounds:16 most of Nagash's weapons are 3+ to hit and most wound on 2+
Nagash also has several more special rules than the skinks including being able to fly, ability to wipe a model out if opponent doesn't choose which hand you hide a die in, etc.
Sorry, What I meant was it can take out skinks as easily as it can Nagash. I hadn't actually done the theoryhammer myself. So thank you for doing that
I still can't stop laughing over the fact that a unit of little snakes and reptiles now has a decent chance of wounding the physical manifestation of the God of War and Slaughter.
Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote: I still can't stop laughing over the fact that a unit of little snakes and reptiles now has a decent chance of wounding the physical manifestation of the God of War and Slaughter.
Bravo GW, bravo.
Yeah, nearly as far fetched as a hobbit hamstringing a witch king or killing a war troll
On the other hand, I find the lack of guidance on army building unacceptable. I would have appreciated it if GW at least suggested "We'll let the community figure out", because that's clearly their strategy. The "lulz" rules might seem endearing now, but a year or more from now they will almost definitely be tedious.
My question at this point would be: when GW returns some points cost / FOC and makes a few other hotfixes, how are the AoS rules then?
I assume GW will be forced to do at least that, as they are taking too much gak about it. Theoretically, a system of free rules and scrolls would allow them to update the stuff as they go, which might work out alright.
A: "Nice army. Bunch of chaos warrior looking dudes, looks like this is going to be fun."
B: "Ooooh, no. Those are all individual Chaos Lords. See since a model is a model, it works in my favor to use them all as Chaos Lords for the extra wounds.
...
A: "Wulfrick issues a challenge. Don't bypass the language filter like this. Reds8n
B: *cries*.
A: "Since you changed expression, according to the rules Wulfrick can now re-roll failed to hit rolls."
...
A: "So wait, you're saying this is a new edition with no point costs and stupid gimmicky party rules. Why is it good again?"
B: "Because it frees us from those WAAC guys and lets us create a narrative."
A: You couldn't create your own narrative by breaking the rules from last edition or making your own? And now people who want to play regular, even matches are screwed?"
B: "You don't get it, this is a beer and pretzels game."
A: "A terrible, borderline unplayable beer and pretzels game. I'll give you that."
Delicate Swarm wrote: Once again, WFB was already a beer and pretzels game. It wasn't competitive, and it was dying. Seeming to imply that people get bored of beer and pretzel games after awhile.
I just don't see how this is supposed to help.
If WHFB was Beer and Pretzels, then AoS is fething Gerber and Breast Milk since I cannot fathom it needing to be dumbed down THIS much...
Anwser this question before you insult the rules.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?
You want to know why they dumbed down the rules? Check the you make the call thread..... no one read the same rule the same way. Then with the 5 charts of how to hit someone then the different rules on what ignored armour and so on it gets confusing.
This is pretty much on the money.
Yes and no. He's making factually correct statements, but both the intent behind them and the conclusions drawn from them are flawed.
Yes, it would take me less time to explain AoS' rules to a random non-geek friend than it would have WHFB, but such people aren't going to be any more interested in AoS because no matter how much you "streamline" the rules it still requires an investment of time & money on a scale such people won't be willing to indulge. Those kinds of people can only be hooked into geekery, in my experience, through board & card games, things that don't require them to invest anything beyond a few minutes of time to learn the rules - if they're the people GW is targeting with AoS, AoS is a failure.
Yes, YMDC is full of people arguing a half-dozen different interpretations of many rules, but the reason they can do that is GW wrote crappy rules. The solution to that problem isn't AoS, a game that negates the need for well-written rules by simply abolishing huge chunks of the game system and telling players to either be happy making pchew pchew noises with their mandollies, or else rewrite half the system themselves from scratch. GW has produced some genuinely fantastic games in the past; Epic, BFG, Necromunda, even 3rd Edition 40K before the codex creep and additional content threw things for a loop - all of them reasonably well balanced and immense fun to play. Games like Mordheim, Blood Bowl, and Gorkamorka had big flaws in some areas, but they were still complete game systems and they had redeeming features that far outweighed the problems.
If folk think replacing "this rule is poorly worded, lots of people are arguing about how it works on the table" with "there are no rules for this at all, how the hell do we even play the game?!", I would very much appreciate the number for your dealers, because I would love some of the top-shelf Mescaline that's apparently being consumed
EDIT: OK, mini-rant time - hey stores/websites with a YouTube channel, 'sup. If you're going to go to the time and effort of making an unboxing video for a product, for the love of feth will you stop either A; recording them at such a terrible resolution you might as well be showing people pieces of gray paper as the sprues, and/or B; not even bothering to zoom in, and/or C; zooming in for closeups and then moving the damn sprues about constantly under the camera like a kid on a sugar rush such that pausing the video results in a blurry mess and you give the viewer sodding motion sickness(I'm lookin' at you BOLS)?!
I know you have to get those vids out fast so you can get DEM VIEWZ, but ffs.
Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote: I still can't stop laughing over the fact that a unit of little snakes and reptiles now has a decent chance of wounding the physical manifestation of the God of War and Slaughter.
As opposed to nearly everything hitting on a 4+ in 5E through 8E? GW used so little of the HtH to-hit table, they might as well have made it all coin flips.
I really like the models and most of the rules. The rules of "scream loudly to get a dice roll bonus." or some such, I really don't like. Fun games are great, non competitive games are great, but I just don't like clown antics.
Also, free forming the armies... errrgh. There should have been more structure here. They didn't need to be super granular, but something is needed. Right now, rich players can bring a ton of huge models to the table and others can't afford to do the same.
The rules themselves (apart from the silly dancing, shouting ones etc...) are not that bad, there are a few exceptions like the things with bases etc. Being simplified doesn't necessarily mean it will be a simple game, KoW for example is a simple rule set but is a very tactical game. I look at some of the rules and can identify with some of them from other systems. The biggest thing that lets this down IMO is the no points unbound thing. I see people are already trying to fix AoS with house rules points values etc, but you shouldn't have to! I should be able to turn up to a random club, get a game in and not have to worry about getting house rules and armies sorted out. I don't have to do this in any other system I play (which is quite a few). I can turn up with Warmahordes for example, get a game agree with points, take out an army list of said points value and bamn away I go! I went to a GW yesterday to try out AoS, there was a game in progress so I watched it and spoke to the manage. I rose my concerns with him and he dismissed them all with a wave of his hand, we don't need points/balance as we don't care about the competitive/tournament scene yadda yadda yadda. If you have a good tight set of rules you can have casual and competitive /tournament play, perfect example of this is Warmahordes and X-wing. If your game system has one without the other it will suffer as a result. All in all I would like to give this a go as long as they address the whole army building points thin and the other silly rules, as it stands it seems to me they are trying to sell (phrasing) us an unfinished product, this rule set would be fine for alpha or beta testing but not as a finished product.
I really like the models and most of the rules. The rules of "scream loudly to get a dice roll bonus." or some such, I really don't like. Fun games are great, non competitive games are great, but I just don't like clown antics.
Also, free forming the armies... errrgh. There should have been more structure here. They didn't need to be super granular, but something is needed. Right now, rich players can bring a ton of huge models to the table and others can't afford to do the same.
We'll see how it goes.
This actually pretty much sums up AoS for me.
However: I will probably play it so infrequently that the few scenarios that come with it will likely be (or feel) non-repetitive. But that's not entirely AoS's fault. The part about no army building structure IS, because building lists, imagining their effectiveness, even if I never play them is a hobby for me, but... I'm more of a SciFi wargamer anyways, and no matter how awesome it is, AoS is is missing jetbikes and energy weapons.
On the bright side, maybe AoS will follow 40k's rules cadence, and there will be a rewrite where the entire game philosophy changes every 12-24 months... faster than even the units can be updated!
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
ToxicBox wrote: They have some, It's in the little wheel next to the abilities. But everything has a fixed to hit, wound and save against everything. A goblin will hit Nagash as easily as a skink
They're pretty much identical game-wise.
Skinks save: 6+ wounds:1 most skink weapons are 5+ to hit and the best one wounds on 4+; the skinks can take multiples (with 10 being the common base, so 10 wounds usually).
Nagash save: 3+ wounds:16 most of Nagash's weapons are 3+ to hit and most wound on 2+
Nagash also has several more special rules than the skinks including being able to fly, ability to wipe a model out if opponent doesn't choose which hand you hide a die in, etc.
Sorry, What I meant was it can take out skinks as easily as it can Nagash. I hadn't actually done the theoryhammer myself. So thank you for doing that
My apologies to you. You're one of the folks I find myself agreeing with in this thread more often than not.
That said, goblins may be able to hit Nagash and a skink unit with same probability but their weapons and their targets' specific stats/abilities make those hits way more likely that a lizard will get injured rather than lord o' the undead
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
Any battle game will just end up as a slugfest in the middle if players expect it to play out that way and don't bother trying, regardless of how deep the rules actually are.
Not claiming AoSis deep, just saying that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
But he has also been house ruling stuff as well has he not? So that could make a difference.
Not sure what people like in signarines, technicaly very good but characterles and odd, I'd say warcraftish space marines.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Someone compared this to 'The Producers' earlier in the thread. Given what I've just sat through and read in the 'scrolls' for existing armies, that previously sarcastic comparison seems entirely legitimate. It's like they set this entire thing up to fail.
'Dance on one leg', 'tell yourself you're worth it into a mirror', 'shout abuse at your unsuspecting opponent', 'wrestle naked with your opponent like Oliver Reed and that other bloke in Women in Love', because deep down, we hate all of you and think you're all idiots, now dance monkeys, dance... It's Grade A insulting to those of us who have spent our money with the company and loved their work for a long time. It's like some extremely costly and elaborate practical joke, I keep waiting for GW to announce 'fooled ya' and bring us a tight ruleset 9th edition, but I know it's not to be.
This game is drivel. I really tried to stay optimistic, I really tried to wrap my head around 'no points costs' and 'warscrolls', then I read all those 'amusing rules' and saw what was actually going down, it's the emperor's new clothes, it's junk, it's a middle finger waved at us and simultaneously asking us to pay for the privilege to do so.
I'm off. See ya Warhammer, it's been 30 amazing years, I loved all but the last one. I'll never forget pints passed last orders at The Pelican with Lady Dieudonné, or chasing fimir through the hinterlands with a poet and a trollslayer, or any of the hundreds of other memories. It was great, thank you.
Now, Mr Ronnie Renton, if you've not already passed out on champagne and cigars, come on down, I have some money I'd like to put your way...
Yes, I find the silly rules funny to read (though idiotic to actualy perform, ride the imaginary horse lol) but the fact that sigmarines dont have any makes the whole thing a mockery of old playerbase. Not making a clown of myself for GWs fun for sure.
In short, first time I ever say or write this - very nice and thank you GW, now crash and burn.
From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
But he has also been house ruling stuff as well has he not? So that could make a difference.
IIRC all he's been house-ruling is measuring from base to base, ignoring Sudden Death and ignoring "no part of the model may move further than the model's move value" rule (since he's measuring from the base in all circumstances, all this does is allow to to pivot models and doesn't give an advantage)
On the models: So both leaders have skull faces right? I guess you can tell the heavily armored skull faced guys apart by the number of spikes? Just make sure to paint the good one blue and the bad one red, I guess....
Ionus Cryptborn (a hint there) is the battle standard for the Stormcast Eternals, so he is more of a second in command rather than the leader. He has been "plucked from the grave by the power of Sigmar".
Bottle wrote: From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
I watched another battle rep just now, with low model count and I think you are right mate this game is not something to be played above 50 models.
The low model game looked a lot smoother and more enjoyable.
A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
Bottle wrote: From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
I watched another battle rep just now, with low model count and I think you are right mate this game is not something to be played above 50 models.
The low model game looked a lot smoother and more enjoyable.
I'm even thinking of going lower for my next game. Would be interesting to see if 20 models a side plays well too.
What's great about this is every boxset force, every battalion, is now more miniatures than you will ever need. Just add a handful of characters and the army is complete. Collecting multiple small armies is going to be really viable now.
Also allows for further theming of armies. My opponent was a Night Goblin player, he was thinking about fielding a Night Goblin Squig herder army as a sub-theme.
The options for themed armies really make AoS incredibly appealing to my eyes. I think total unbound works amazingly at under 50 models.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Now the world don't move to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you may not be right for sommmmmmmme~
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
But he has also been house ruling stuff as well has he not? So that could make a difference.
.
We've been throwing out roughly equal forces on the table. Just sort of guessing and getting close. Like saying "bring 80 wounds worth of stuff". About the only real house rule we did was measure from the bases. Didn't really even decide, just both started doing it, realized that, and said "screw it, this is so much easier". And I didn't bother with the sudden death nonsense when i had the smaller army. Other than that, played it straight up. Less than two hours and fought about 10 rounds.
I just can't get in to AoS enough to bother playing a game. What I've read so far I don't like and frankly I have no interest in another game of loose formations, especially one with no balance and rules that need significant modifications to work.
Bottle wrote: From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
Agreed. We've been playing on a 4x6. We'd have really been stuck into a big scrum in the center on smaller.
You have a lot more movement in AOS. Turn 2 seems to always end in a melee or two somewhere. You need the room to maneuver.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Que?
Personally I cannot find much of "sunshine and rainbows" within this 200+ thread (or the similar one at Warseer) dominated by "tar-and-feathers" posts.
Bottle wrote: From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
Agreed. We've been playing on a 4x6. We'd have really been stuck into a big scrum in the center on smaller.
You have a lot more movement in AOS. Turn 2 seems to always end in a melee or two somewhere. You need the room to maneuver.
Agreed! And I am glad you're having fun. How many models is your 80 wounds? I also found lots of terrain makes the game more fun. I would like to play with Mordhiem amounts of terrain if I can.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Que?
Personally I cannot find much of "sunshine and rainbows" within this 200+ thread (or the similar one at Warseer) dominated by "tar-and-feathers" posts.
Different games. Different outlooks on games.
Warmachine isn't balanced. Everything is "broken" by warhammer standards. Everything is a special little snowflake with superpowers. And yet the game works, is playable, has tournaments, tiered lists, balanced play. Just different. I think AOS has some of that. Lots of units have new little abilities. I can't keep them straight, keep forgetting them all Everything unbalanced makes balance? Dunno. Doesn't compute for me mathematically, and I'm a math person.
Flames of War isn't balanced. The best scenarios build in unbalance to mimic one side advancing, or moving towards objectives, the other defending. Germans have better tanks, the US has much cheaper but more plentiful infantry. Russians have crap but so cheap it doesn't matter. But the game is balanced.
Play enough games, it's easier to find the balance maybe.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?.
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Yes , complicated things take longer to learn than simple things.
I can teach a friend to play checkers in a much shorter time than I can teach them to play Risk. Which means absolutely nothing if Risk is what we want to play .
If I'm not mistaken you don't even need to be able to read that well in order to play Candy Land, you can just take it out of the box and start playing immediately without having to spend ages in comparison pouring over 4 pages of rules and all your warscrolls.
Therefore, Candy Land = best game ever because you don't need to tell your friends anything in order to start playing, they can very easily figure it out themselves.
So it sounds like Age of Sigmar is basically the rich-man's Candy Land, made for people who somehow have enough time to build and paint models but can't be arsed to read, and thus need a game that basically just requires you to roll dice and know what the numbers mean.
Mymearan wrote: Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
It's worth noting that mikhaila was also allegedly stuck with 80 copies of the game and a $5500 investment, and was originally very upset when talking to his GW rep about the game. I don't mean any offense to mikhaila, but I'm not sure if I'd trust any endorsement of the game at this point and I feel the initial reaction to AoS was far more telling. It just feels more like a business decision than anything else, like it was easier to look on the "bright side" and do your best to sell this thing to people than to tell GW it was a farce you want no part of, and put more strain on a relationship with a company that the company itself makes very hard to maintain, despite your best efforts. And even if mikhaila genuinely has changed his mind, he's already conceded that he's had to make changes to the game for organized play in his store, and basically admitted that the game doesn't work as written and needs measurement from the base and a balancing mechanism of some kind (and apparently, a play area much larger than most skirmish games in order to get anything resembling strategic play and not just a mess of models in melee in the center of the board). Apologies if I do offend or if I'm making wild assumptions that aren't true, but I can't help but see it that way.
I mean it makes sense, if I owned two stores and my life and livelihood depended on selling games I'd be doing my best to make this work, too. I'd have to. So I'm not trying to fault you for doing the best with what you were given, I'm just saying it doesn't make a better case for AoS to me.
My mighty chaos warband. Most of it was painted for Dakkacon. Models chosen because I wanted to paint some old metal.
Beastman Shaman, Malagor the Dark Omen. (Ogre Shaman from about 30 years ago)
17 Bestigors (original metal beastmen)
Dragon Ogre Shagoth (The huge dragon ogre from back in 3rd edition)
Gorebeast chariot (pulled by two original beasts of nurgle)
3 spawn (FW nurgle toads)
5 Khorne Bloodcrushers. (my massively converted nurgle warriors on mutated mournfangs, using khorne rules until Plaugerider rules from FW go up)
So a whopping 28 models. Cooper had Daelfs. Two units of 10 executioners, a medusa, a giant, 5 cold one riders, 20 crossbowmen, dreadlord, a hero, a sorceress, 5 witch elves. 55 models.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Que?
Personally I cannot find much of "sunshine and rainbows" within this 200+ thread (or the similar one at Warseer) dominated by "tar-and-feathers" posts.
I think the reaction in this thread has been very mixed, some yay, some nay and a good few shrugged shoulders too. Warseer does seem a bit more negative, but that seems like a smaller cross section of the community compared to dakka (I have no idea of figures of members, that is just the way it seems to me).
Going on social media and the like the reaction has been equally mixed. The issue is will the veterans that leave WHFB / GW as they are abhorred by AOS be replaced by new players? And then will those players stick around for the long term? We really have no idea.
If you set down one of your friends who NEVER heard of warhammer or anything else. How long would it take you to explain every rule in the book to them, then all the rules for their army. Then try and get them to play a game with you and know the rules with out book searching for hours.
Now with that same idea how long would it take you to tell your friend these rules and their army rules?.
I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Yes , complicated things take longer to learn than simple things.
I can teach a friend to play checkers in a much shorter time than I can teach them to play Risk. Which means absolutely nothing if Risk is what we want to play .
If I'm not mistaken you don't even need to be able to read that well in order to play Candy Land, you can just take it out of the box and start playing immediately without having to spend ages in comparison pouring over 4 pages of rules and all your warscrolls.
Therefore, Candy Land = best game ever because you don't need to tell your friends anything in order to start playing, they can very easily figure it out themselves.
So it sounds like Age of Sigmar is basically the rich-man's Candy Land, made for people who somehow have enough time to build and paint models but can't be arsed to read, and thus need a game that basically just requires you to roll dice and know what the numbers mean.
Mymearan wrote: Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
It's worth noting that mikhaila was also allegedly stuck with 80 copies of the game and a $5500 investment, and was originally very upset when talking to his GW rep about the game. I don't mean any offense to mikhaila, but I'm not sure if I'd trust any endorsement of the game at this point and I feel the initial reaction to AoS was far more telling. It just feels more like a business decision than anything else, like it was easier to look on the "bright side" and do your best to sell this thing to people than to tell GW it was a farce you want no part of, and put more strain on a relationship with a company that the company itself makes very hard to maintain, despite your best efforts. And even if mikhaila genuinely has changed his mind, he's already conceded that he's had to make changes to the game for organized play in his store, and basically admitted that the game doesn't work as written and needs measurement from the base and a balancing mechanism of some kind (and apparently, a play area much larger than most skirmish games in order to get anything resembling strategic play and not just a mess of models in melee in the center of the board). Apologies if I do offend or if I'm making wild assumptions that aren't true, but I can't help but see it that way.
I mean it makes sense, if I owned two stores and my life and livelihood depended on selling games I'd be doing my best to make this work, too. I'd have to. So I'm not trying to fault you for doing the best with what you were given, I'm just saying it doesn't make a better case for AoS to me.
Me making AoS work really has nothing to do with the store. I could cancel that order of 80. And have Joe Neet from Mantic coming up to talk somw KOW and I'm going to run tournaments. WFB has been dead and stinking, so I'm not losing much at this point, and run a huge number of other games all nights of the week. I don't need it to work. Not the way GW does, that's for sure. But it would be nice to have it work.
I'm making AoS work because I want to a game with my warhammer models and always wanted to have a skirmish fantasy game. I hated AOS with a passion, just looking at the 4 page rules. I hated the laziness of GW, and the direction. Hate no points. I'll hold this grudge forever and my anger will errupt to fly my GW sales rep at random times. All that anger is very much alive. But having 439 pages of Warscrolls gave me the other 99% of the game. So we tried it, and i had fun. The grudge slipped a bit. I read all the rules again, read more scrolls, figured stuff out. Played more games.
I like the game now because I've played it, and in playing it I liked it. Simple as that. And I know i get a league gong and tournaments and have some fun with it. If it was a turd I couldn't polish, I woudn;t bother. What I think we have instead of a turd is a really good game that GW crapped all over by not putting in a points system. I'll have that fixed enough for a tournament next Sunday and we'll get some more testing in with a couple dozen people.
Trust me, I'm pretty blunt. I really hate the GW store experience. I don't push games i don't like. At best I'll shut up if you want to buy a game I hate and not badmouth it and take your money And dakka isn't the store. I'm less inclined to push GW here, for sure.
About the only house rule we use right now is measuring from the base. Just easier and we are used to it. And probably wouldn't affect much. We just aren't tossing anythng at all on the table. Making an attempt at parity. I'm surprised the games have been so close so far. Curious to see how it works when we up the anti to Glotkin, Nagash, and Malekith in a couple of days.
Also *everywhere* I look is reporting White Dwarf sell outs. I assume this will easily be the best selling issue of White Dwarf since the format change. Not a surprise given it has the first free mini on the cover for aeons. It probably means little in terms of profit for GW, but the interest in the new game would appear to be there.
Please dont even mention the "balance" of AoS in the same sentence as the balane in Warmahorde. They are not even remotely close.
One thing to consider:
Playing a new game for the first time will not give you a 100% feedback on the balance. You are just trying things out, you don't know the rules, the nuances etc.
After a couple of games... you'll realize how easy it is to break a game. Willingly or not.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Turns out, not everyone wanted balanced and as tactically challenging I guess.
Nice, I would love to hear the rules you put forth for your tournament and how it goes. My concern around list building is slowly slipping away, if it becomes an issue i can see limiting heroes/monsters and then using wound count being pretty decent way of doing things. At the very least i forsee some basic guides popping up online.
Here are upcoming Stormcast Eternals that where presented in the Age of Sigmar trailer, some more subtly than others.
Wow those are awesome, i love the griffon and that hero guys is pretty good. Still dont like the gold paint jobs but no one is saying i have to use that anyway.
Bottle wrote: Now the world don't move to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you may not be right for sommmmmmmme~
Whatchutalkingbout Bottle? A tight, unambiguous and well-worded set balanced (or as balanced as possible) set of rules benefits everyone. There is literally no downside to such a thing.
Bottle wrote: From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
Agreed. We've been playing on a 4x6. We'd have really been stuck into a big scrum in the center on smaller.
You have a lot more movement in AOS. Turn 2 seems to always end in a melee or two somewhere. You need the room to maneuver.
Agreed! And I am glad you're having fun. How many models is your 80 wounds? I also found lots of terrain makes the game more fun. I would like to play with Mordhiem amounts of terrain if I can.
Speaking of terrain how a bout some house rules for that too? Like taking off the special crazy stuff and set the normal stuff like impassable, dangerous for swamps that compromises the movement?
We've played a couple of games now at home - high elves v chaos warriors with a few units a side, then a larger empire v chaos warriors game. Mine were the High Elves and Empire armies. Put some details below but I'm not good at writing battle reports so you'll have to excuse the rambling style if you read it! =)
Spoiler:
In the first game, we put the sea guard, swordmasters and mage from the starter box up against 10 warriors with shields, 15 marauders, and a chaos lord - this was an incredibly close fight that came down to 1 chaos warrior, but the special characters on both sides could probably have done more, it served more as a practice game.
The second game pitted an empire state droop detachment - empire general with great weapon, 20 swordsmen, 10 halberdiers, 10 greatswords, 10 handgunners, 10 archers, and 8 empire knights
against more of the same for Chaos - a chaos lord on manticore, an additional lord on foot, 10 warriors with 2 chaos hand weapons, 15 warriors with shields, 15 marauders.
Chaos Warriors were outnumbered so picked the Blunt sudden death objective, I nominated the Knights as the target. I deployed in a line with swordsmen in the middle, flanked either side by the halberds and greatswords, missile troops each end of the line, knights at the back to counterattack. Chaos deployed in blocks opposite, mostly in the middle. The Archers had the option to make a scout move because of their Huntsmen rule, which is nifty, but I kept them where they were.
In each battle round chaos got the first turn, consistently through the game, which was kind of dull. Close combat happened quickly. The chaos lord on manticore was a beast, chewed his way through most of the Knights before I had them fall back to try and survive. He was eventually brought down by the Greatswords, who are very effective - 2 attacks each, wound on 3s, and have rend -1. Swordsmen in the state troops detachment are also pretty good against weak stuff because you get several +1 to hit modifiers (1 for being close to another unit from the detachment, 1 from the general's command ability if you use it, and 1 for every 10 models in the unit above 20 (so +1 at 20, +2 at 30, and so on). This meant for most of the game they were hitting on 2s instead of 4s, which was pretty fun, but their low strength and lack of Rend meant that didn't generally translate into a lot of wounds against chaos warriors.
In the end the Chaos army was wiped out with a substantial chunk of the empire side still alive- most of the greatswords, swordsmen, the general and one cheeky-but-bruised knight. We agreed that all in all it wasn't a balanced battle but that it stayed interesting right through the game. The Knights were reduced to 1 model with 1 wound remaining so that sudden death victory was fairly attainable but it didn't quite pan out - falling back out of combats is fairly safe if you can charge another unit in to take over.
The game is fun if a bit light on depth, but it is just SO easy to get models on the table and play, which is awesome. I don't think it's quite as fun to choose warscrolls as it is to build an army list from a book, and I don't see how it will work competitively the way it is right now, but I will say it is great for just getting battles going and having fast and extremely violent battles once you're in there. My WFB armies have been sat in a figure case for a couple of years, and before that they'd only been used a couple of times.
In terms of rules, we basically followed the RAW I think, although we were limited by what we had in our collections and being a friendly game there wasn't much monkey business going into army selection, which is still a big problem for this rule set!
Measuring from the model sounds like it'd be a problem but generally we just hovered over and measured from the general area of the model, it didn't *feel* all that different to how it normally does.
None of our models had MFA issues though, I can see how it would become a problem if you had that going on.
TL,DR: it is fun and it is a great way to get games going quickly, for my serious mathhammer games I'm sticking with 40k but I think the AoS rules are basically OK.
Bottle wrote: Now the world don't move to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you may not be right for sommmmmmmme~
Whatchutalkingbout Bottle? A tight, unambiguous and well-worded set balanced (or as balanced as possible) set of rules benefits everyone. There is literally no downside to such a thing.
Agreed. If you want to make it silly or play scenarios, you can always homebrew stuff up. Balancing the game is much more difficult, especially if you don't have financial reasons to invest time and effort into it.
AoS is GW deciding that they actually aren't interested in making anything that resembles a game any more. They don't even attempt to get the dumbed-down 4 page core rules right. Why they even bothered to include stats for the models is beyond me - there's absolutely no reason for stats, if there's no balanced starting point. The only way to get an even game is to start with identical armies
Bottle wrote: From my experience if the game turns into a sludgefest you have too many models. Our first game was a right clusterfudge in the centre we gave up at the end of turn 3.
We played 50-80 models a side on a 2ft x 4ft board (2 realm of battle squares)
The second game we played 30-40 models a side on a 4ft x 4ft and this was perfect. Really fun game!
Agreed. We've been playing on a 4x6. We'd have really been stuck into a big scrum in the center on smaller.
You have a lot more movement in AOS. Turn 2 seems to always end in a melee or two somewhere. You need the room to maneuver.
Agreed! And I am glad you're having fun. How many models is your 80 wounds? I also found lots of terrain makes the game more fun. I would like to play with Mordhiem amounts of terrain if I can.
Speaking of terrain how a bout some house rules for that too? Like taking off the special crazy stuff and set the normal stuff like impassable, dangerous for swamps that compromises the movement?
Yeah sounds good! I also thought about terrain only being magical if you first roll a 6, and 1-5 it is mudane.
You have literal "Wizard Bunkers" now. Terrain pieces that give plus rolls to casting, making a failed cast basically impossible.
The scaling of walls is a fun and simple rule though. That worked well.
Bottle wrote: Now the world don't move to the beat of just one drum. What might be right for you may not be right for sommmmmmmme~
Whatchutalkingbout Bottle? A tight, unambiguous and well-worded set balanced (or as balanced as possible) set of rules benefits everyone. There is literally no downside to such a thing.
Well the downside is most games place limits of army structure to create a balanced system. The reason AoS is so explosively fun for me is all the great armies I can create that couldn't before.
I'm not a tournament player though, I'm not even much of a tactician. I place narrative and fun above balance. I can now go to my local GW and play the army I want without having to convince my opponent to play a weird scenario of my own cooking.
I'm still on the fence. I'm sure it could be a lot of fun. It will however require a less competitive mind-set. It's hard not to build an army to win. We all want to win. But one needs to hold back a bit. The same attitude is required for everyone to have fun in 40k or Warmachine. Building an OTT army doesn't make you a strategic genius. The combos are obvious! Winning with the weaker army however, is epic!
Can all those people claiming that the lack of points means that AoS is not a wargame, or even a game, please just stop.
I get that you don't like it. AoS isn't for everyone. And maybe it would have been better if they had put some sort of more obvious balancing mechanism in there to keep you happy. But that's not what I want to talk about here.
Many wargames work perfectly fine without points values or any enforced balancing mechanism thankyou very much. It doesn't make them any less of a wargame or a game.
And I don't just mean historical wargames either, before you jump in with that. The two most obvious examples are Reaper (the rulebook published by tabletop games in the eighties, not the miniatures manufacturer) and the first edition of Warhammer both lacked these things and both were very successful.
Granted, both of those were some time ago. And granted, a different gaming culture has developed since those days. But that does not alter the fact that many people have quite happily been playing wargames of any kind without some sort of imposed balancing mechanism (that likely wouldn't produce 'balanced' games anyway), and claiming that lacking one makes AoS any less of a wargame for it is just ignorant.
Again, I get that many of you don't like it. Thats fair enough, it's not obviously designed to appeal to you. Although I would seriously recommend giving it a try if you have the chance, it's not like it costs you anything and you never know. Some people who were very violently opposed to the idea now rather like the game.
And those of you who have read the stuff about the silly rules about moustaches and the like (which are kind of annoying) and have been put off from even looking at it because of it:
Yes they are a bit annoying.
No, you don't have to do them to play the game, they are voluntary and give you a little bonus if you do them.
No, there aren't many of them. Generally one per faction, and usually on a special character you probably won't even play with anyway - except for the orcs who can charge 2 extra inches if you WAAAAGH.
If you don't like doing it, don't do them, it won't really affect you much. And if your opponent wants to look like a tit, well different strokes for different folks.
I can see the one where you have to insult someone resulting in a few... altercations though. Won't bother me, but somewhere, somehow that gak is going to go very wrong.
@mikhaila: I appreciate your response, I was afraid for a minute that my post would start an argument and was wondering if I should even bother with it at first. I understand where you're coming from better than I did before, though.
I still disagree with people who are now trying to claim Age of Sigmar is a party game or that it's obviously not meant to be taken seriously, because that's not how it's being presented by GW at all. We have some of the best quality artwork GW has ever put out, models that GW claim are the best quality they have ever produced, a trailer/model showcase with epic displays and an epic soundtrack to go along with it, some really nice, new terrain for the game that is likewise probably some of the best they've ever produced...GW isn't trying to sell this as a goofy party game. If I didn't know any better and I bought into this after playing a demo game, only to start discovering the stupid clown antics and gak in the free rules later when I got home, I'd be furious and promptly cancel my pre-order, demanding my money back. If I want a silly "party game" experience I already have that with other, much cheaper games that were made for it, like Munchkin or Cards Against Humanity. But that's not what I bought into GW games for, that's not what people who bought into WHF previously wanted, and if this is just how things are going to be then I guess it's time for me to spend money elsewhere. 40k has already been moving to something like this anyway and I imagine it's only a matter of time now. I won't be buying new models when that comes to pass and will adapt old rules if I feel the need to keep playing the game at that point.
Most likely though I see myself selling everything and just moving on. Never would have thought of it before, but I don't see myself having any enthusiasm to finish my Tau or finish all three flavors of Eldar I have lying around when the rules start giving my hammerheads bonuses to hit for slapping my opponent with a fish or showing up to the game wearing bondage gear to get re-rolls to hit and wound with wyches.
Well I guess all that spiffy marketing is being done for the age of sigmar box set (which features scenarios with predefined armies, so is as balanced as most games) and the game moving forward, which will doubtless feature new books, units, armies. Yes, if you treat the marketing as being for the release of the legacy warscrolls, and the legacy warscrolls then feature the odd silly rule and have no good balance mechanic, you can moan but for god's sake, talk about missing the point.
Sidstyler wrote: when the rules start giving my hammerheads bonuses to hit for slapping my opponent with a fish or showing up to the game wearing bondage gear to get re-rolls to hit and wound with wyches.
Sidstyler wrote: We have some of the best quality artwork GW has ever put out, models that GW claim are the best quality they have ever produced, a trailer/model showcase with epic displays and an epic soundtrack to go along with it, some really nice, new terrain for the game that is likewise probably some of the best they've ever produced...GW isn't trying to sell this as a goofy party game.
These things are not mutually exclusive. Plenty of companies maintain high production values on products that could be considered casual within their niche.
It's weird how dakkadakka, which is supposed to be populated by old timers, is so hung up on balance and competitive play. I think video games did this to us. When I first got into the hobby in the mid 90's we just wanted to manoeuvre cool armies (and tanks!) around and destroy stuff. How did it become a competitive sport?
Kavish wrote: It's weird how dakkadakka, which is supposed to be populated by old timers, is so hung up on balance and competitive play. I think video games did this to us. When I first got into the hobby in the mid 90's we just wanted to manoeuvre cool armies (and tanks!) around and destroy stuff. How did it become a competitive sport?
Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
And if someone wants to build an army like that, then what does it matter to you? Granted, they'd be better off playing Hordes of the Things, where I've seen armies made of those troll toys with the silly hair fighting the most fantastically painted naked female wood elf army I've ever seen.
Norsed wrote: Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
I've played in one tournament in my whole life. Waste of a day. I grew out of competitive gaming years ago. I prefer narrative driven games, and spend more time playing the 40KRPG's than 40K proper.
And I want a balanced game with a tight unambiguous rule set because such a thing benefits everyone.
I never said it was the best game ever.
My point was that no matter how much you may hate it, it's still a game.
That said, even if it's not the best game ever, it doesn't mean people can't like it or have fun with it.
My point has been that unless it is competitive, it's NOT a a game, but rather a form of play, and it cannot be competitive unless the rules are evenly balanced towards all participants.
It's a somewhat philosophical debate, but for example as Roger Caillois puts it, one of the characteristics of a game is that the outcome is uncertain, and I would argue that a game is uncertain only when the win chance is 50/50 - or at least so close that it's very hard to discern who has the advantage.
About the party game approach I don't think so but I find that AOS with the following changes:
Very small armies, movement done from bases ignoring the silliness of measuring from the tip of the sword ( will avoid pile up), ignoring magical terrain and set mundane one instead... with modifiers to movement, fluffy armies, no silly humour, lots and lots of terrain...
Will prevent a bit of the mosh pits, the terrain will actually influence the strategic movement...
Will be the perfect game for me to play at home and introduce my 9 year old to wargaming.
I never said it was the best game ever.
My point was that no matter how much you may hate it, it's still a game.
That said, even if it's not the best game ever, it doesn't mean people can't like it or have fun with it.
My point has been that unless it is competitive, it's NOT a a game, but rather a form of play, and it cannot be competitive unless the rules are evenly balanced towards all participants.
It's a somewhat philosophical debate, but for example as Roger Caillois puts it, one of the characteristics of a game is that the outcome is uncertain, and I would argue that a game is uncertain only when the win chance is 50/50 - or at least so close that it's very hard to discern who has the advantage.
If the win chance is 70/30 or 10/90 it's still uncertain. By the very nature of the fact that you're bringing probabilities into it. I don't see how you can claim otherwise. It might, for you, be a *better* game if the win chance is as close to 50/50 as possible. But that's a different issue.
And I would argue that it doesn't have to be close to 50/50 certainty, though certainly a GOOD game would be as close 50/50 as possible.
And you can have a competition even if the rules aren't evenly balanced towards all participants, it's just an unfair competition and not a GOOD one.
AoS does have some competition, it's still a fight between you and your opponent. It may not be a balanced fight, but it's still a fight, still a competition.
Is the game balanced and structured enough to be played competitively at a tournament level as is? No, but not all games are.
Norsed wrote: Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
I've played in one tournament in my whole life. Waste of a day. I grew out of competitive gaming years ago. I prefer narrative driven games, and spend more time playing the 40KRPG's than 40K proper.
And I want a balanced game with a tight unambiguous rule set because such a thing benefits everyone.
Benefits fluff bunnies most of all, if anything. Competitive players can just ignore 'bad' units and play with a (competitive) subset of units. The rest benefits greatly from not getting penalized for taking what looks good rather than that which gives the most bang for buck.
NAVARRO wrote: About the party game approach I don't think so but I find that AOS with the following changes:
Very small armies, movement done from bases ignoring the silliness of measuring from the tip of the sword ( will avoid pile up), ignoring magical terrain and set mundane one instead... with modifiers to movement, fluffy armies, no silly humour, lots and lots of terrain...
Will prevent a bit of the mosh pits, the terrain will actually influence the strategic movement...
Will be the perfect game for me to play at home and introduce my 9 year old to wargaming.
Short 30 minute games will do fine for him.
Sounds good! Can I ask what sort of modifiers you'll place on movement?
I honestly can't get on board with the negativity for Age of Sigmar. The rules are simple, freely available, don't invalidate old models and expand with each new release. Players can get into 'The Hobby' for a few percentage points of what they would pay to do so a month ago.
I think the lack of points is an oversight, but not enough of an issue to warrant hatred for the game. I genuinely think GW just took a massive leap in the right direction.
Why do we need two games as big and complex as 40K? I don't think a preference for Cartoon Fantasy over Cartoon Science Fiction is enough reason, so well done GW on a brave move well executed.
Norsed wrote: Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
I've played in one tournament in my whole life. Waste of a day. I grew out of competitive gaming years ago. I prefer narrative driven games, and spend more time playing the 40KRPG's than 40K proper.
And I want a balanced game with a tight unambiguous rule set because such a thing benefits everyone.
Benefits fluff bunnies most of all, if anything. Competitive players can just ignore 'bad' units and play with a (competitive) subset of units. The rest benefits greatly from not getting penalized for taking what looks good rather than that which gives the most bang for buck.
Although in the history of GW games that sort of balance has never been achieved. Now if a player wants to choose underpowered units he can just add a couple more models to his army to give a better fighting chance.
Apparently not, and apparently those of us who played Reaper, Warhammer, Laserburn, Heroes or Stargrunt are wrong - apparently we weren't playing a wargame either (okay, Heroes is perhaps not a brilliant example - even more like a roleplaying game)
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Que?
Personally I cannot find much of "sunshine and rainbows" within this 200+ thread (or the similar one at Warseer) dominated by "tar-and-feathers" posts.
Different games. Different outlooks on games.
Warmachine isn't balanced. Everything is "broken" by warhammer standards. Everything is a special little snowflake with superpowers. And yet the game works, is playable, has tournaments, tiered lists, balanced play. Just different. I think AOS has some of that. Lots of units have new little abilities. I can't keep them straight, keep forgetting them all Everything unbalanced makes balance? Dunno. Doesn't compute for me mathematically, and I'm a math person.
Flames of War isn't balanced. The best scenarios build in unbalance to mimic one side advancing, or moving towards objectives, the other defending. Germans have better tanks, the US has much cheaper but more plentiful infantry. Russians have crap but so cheap it doesn't matter. But the game is balanced.
Play enough games, it's easier to find the balance maybe.
Sorry Mik, but there's a difference between intentional asymmetrical balance of the sort you refer to in FoW, and AoS' take what you like, in as big a quantity as you like, FIGHT! "system". And Warmahordes, even though not to my tastes, at least attempts to impose order on proceedings with the points system, plus it has defined factions.
A lot of folk, myself included, aren't down on AoS because it's a fast-paced skirmish game, we're down on it because it takes GW's usual "gentlemen's agreements > actual rules" attitude to a ridiculous, self-parodying extreme, and because instead of using the release of Warscrolls for existing factions and models as a way to build some goodwill it seems very much like they were meant as an intentional "WHY SOO SHERIUSH?" trolling of fans who've supported this company for years even decades.
If this was "Warmahordes Fantasy Battle" I'd be all over it, but as it stands GW are trying to sell people an incomplete ruleset and it's not on IMO.
Technically, no, and it hasn't been for some time. By all rights it might as well not exist as GW have erased all traces of it.
But yeah, I'm not one of the ones arguing that games need a point system to be balanced, but you damn well better have some other kind of balancing mechanic instead because you literally can't have a playable game with this "take whatever" mentality.
Davylove21 wrote: I think the lack of points is an oversight, but not enough of an issue to warrant hatred for the game. I genuinely think GW just took a massive leap in the right direction.
So you like the silly clown antics bullgak and don't see how that could put anyone off? Or understand any of the hatred for the absolute butchering of 30 years of established fluff, which has been replaced by something that just isn't anywhere near as good? =\
As I've said before, I think the warscrolls for old units are pretty much a troll of the old player base and nothing much at all to do with age of sigmar other than giving the impression the £1,000's some have sunk into the models wasn't all just thrown by the wayside. (the new models neither have any silly rules nor are remotely the same scale as the old stuff, the new chaos is much larger than the existing line).
With that in mind, taking age of sigmar as meaning the box set itself now and whatever models and scenarios are released going forward, it just feels to me like the alpha stage rules. There is the foundation of a light, easy to play game there, but its missing a lot of the structure needed to be successfully played outside of an established gaming group with friends. I dont think it will ever be a competitive tournament game in the way something like Warmachine or Dropzone Commander is, but it needs something to be viable for pick up games with strangers, which is, at least in the UK, the way itwill be played an awful lot of the time.
There was a comment about 20+ pages ago about Forgeworld doing these scrolls for their fantasy range. I cannot see anything on their website, but if we are going to play with no points and pick up and play it would be a good time for forgeworld to jump on the wagon.....if game balance is out the window they cannot have the usual critism of unbalanced monsters.
Personally I would be very tempted to buy a few of forge world's fantasy gribbilies if they produced the scrolls.
I'd also like to point out that if you read the warscrolls they obviously expect people to still be playing games set in the World That Was with them. Not that you need some dude in a suit to tell you it's okay to do that, but just so you know it's official - you can still set your games in the world we know and love, in all it's derivative glory.
A quote from the beginning of every war scroll, for clarity:
"The warscrolls in this compendium allow you to use your Citadel Miniatures collection in fantastical battle, whether telling epic stories set during the Age of Sigmar, or recreating the wars of the world-that-was."
The new one isn't derivative? lmao, it's basically just a gakky knock-off of Norse mythology (that's the vibe I'm getting from it at least) with a Fantasy version of Space Marines acting as the poster boys!
Sidstyler wrote: The new one isn't derivative? lmao, it's basically just a gakky knock-off of Norse mythology with a Fantasy version of Space Marines acting as the poster boys!
Yeah, the new one's pretty derivative too. Didn't say it wasn't. Doesn't mean people can't enjoy either. I like both, but I'm going to find it easier making scenarios for the world that was.
Sidstyler wrote: The new one isn't derivative? lmao, it's basically just a gakky knock-off of Norse mythology (that's the vibe I'm getting from it at least) with a Fantasy version of Space Marines acting as the poster boys!
I only have one due to WD and he's going to be a Crusader Lord for IQ28.
NoggintheNog wrote: As I've said before, I think the warscrolls for old units are pretty much a troll of the old player base and nothing much at all to do with age of sigmar other than giving the impression the £1,000's some have sunk into the models wasn't all just thrown by the wayside.
The warscrolls for existing units is an issue much like the issue of square vs round bases. It's something GW knew they couldn't actually solve so they just said "frell it" and moved on.
I mean, I can't imagine the reaction to AoS would be this positive if they'd just nuked all their old models, can you? AoS would be close to 100% dead in the water if they DIDN'T release rules for the older models. As it is it was no labor of love, it was a necessity and GW knows it.
Technically, no, and it hasn't been for some time. By all rights it might as well not exist as GW have erased all traces of it.
We were talking about what it means for something to be a "game".
If you are arguing a game must be a product currently being sold, I don't think anyone will be agreeing with you.
Just having a bit of fun I guess. I don't necessarily believe that, I just felt like pointing out that, as far as GW concerned, Inquisitor isn't a game.
NoggintheNog wrote: As I've said before, I think the warscrolls for old units are pretty much a troll of the old player base and nothing much at all to do with age of sigmar other than giving the impression the £1,000's some have sunk into the models wasn't all just thrown by the wayside.
The warscrolls for existing units is an issue much like the issue of square vs round bases. It's something GW knew they couldn't actually solve so they just said "frell it" and moved on.
I mean, I can't imagine the reaction to AoS would be this positive if they'd just nuked all their old models, can you? AoS would be close to 100% dead in the water if they DIDN'T release rules for the older models. As it is it was no labor of love, it was a necessity and GW knows it.
Like they basically did with DoW, Chaos Dwarfs, Squats? In the past. GW do not care and AoS just proves it.
It's an action mini rpg that requires a third person to be a DM basically. It's fun but this is billed as warhammer 9th so you know no DM.
Inquisitor is a Skirmish Game using an older definition than you're used to. Age of Sigmar is not billed as Warhammer 9th, there will not be a Warhammer 9th. And even if AoS was Warhammer 9th, why does that mean it can't have a referee (DM)? Such was expected for editions 1 to 3. And I've run refereed scenarios with 6th too. Editions 4, 5, 7 and 8 are nearly impossible to run a refereed scenario because of having to get individual army books for each army, but if you were rich enough in theory you could do it. People don't tend to do it anymore, no. But that doesn't make it Not A Thing.
Norsed wrote: I'd also like to point out that if you read the warscrolls they obviously expect people to still be playing games set in the World That Was with them. Not that you need some dude in a suit to tell you it's okay to do that, but just so you know it's official - you can still set your games in the world we know and love, in all it's derivative glory.
A quote from the beginning of every war scroll, for clarity:
"The warscrolls in this compendium allow you to use your Citadel Miniatures collection in fantastical battle, whether telling epic stories set during the Age of Sigmar, or recreating the wars of the world-that-was."
Well, technically, GW does not mention 'playing a game' anywhere. It's apparently all about 'playing out stories' now. The word 'game' doesn't seem to exist in any of the materials - not even in the newsletter:
Norsed wrote: I'd also like to point out that if you read the warscrolls they obviously expect people to still be playing games set in the World That Was with them. Not that you need some dude in a suit to tell you it's okay to do that, but just so you know it's official - you can still set your games in the world we know and love, in all it's derivative glory.
A quote from the beginning of every war scroll, for clarity:
"The warscrolls in this compendium allow you to use your Citadel Miniatures collection in fantastical battle, whether telling epic stories set during the Age of Sigmar, or recreating the wars of the world-that-was."
Well, technically, GW does not mention 'playing a game' anywhere. It's apparently all about 'playing out stories' now. The word 'game' doesn't seem to exist in any of the materials - not even in the newsletter:
"The Warhammer Age of Sigmar starter set tells the first chapter of this war against Chaos and is bursting with extraordinary new Citadel Miniatures, epic new stories and a brand new game."
"Yes, these are the rules for playing games of Warhammer Age of Sigmar - presented for the first time here!"
But playing out stories is fine too.
Edit: these are just 2 examples of many. I couldn't be bothered to write anymore because they're everywhere, including in the rules.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Turns out, not everyone wanted balanced and as tactically challenging I guess.
Or some people drink kool aid like it's mother's milk.
For me, my thoughts on balance is that most point systems benefit loop holes and beating the system, leading to min maxing. Balance does not need to be 50/50 for a game to be fun.
My favorite GW game is Necromunda.
Everyone starts out on an even playing field (not taking into account the inherent imbalances between the House Gangs and Outlanders), but after even just 1 campaign game that 50/50 balance is lost.
From there on out the odds will always be stacked in the favour of one gang over the other. But you know what? It doesn't matter. Necromunda is still the most fun game I have ever played. It's fun to battle against the odds to be honest.
For me, with 8th WHFB if you built an unkillable army it was like "great, you beat the system and created a strong army". It might be fun in a super competitive environment, but if you then went and stomped all over a weaker army I doubt it was fun at all.
Now with AoS anyone with 2 brain cells can make an unkillable combo and that means there's no satisfaction from doing so anymore.
People can play weak units now, but play more of them. People can give themselves handicaps if they know they usually beat that opponent. Yes, all this could have been done in 8th, but it is much easier now.
Lastly, the freedom to create ANY army is truly inspiring to me. I love that the same game caters for a small band of heroes, or a couple of monsters or a blob of rank-n-file.
Lastly lastly, the rules are really fun. The games are fun and fast. Terrain is so much better now you no longer have to play the game on an empty field, in fact playing in a ruined city or through some rocky crags is much more fun.
I had many hesitations too, but after playing AoS I can see it will be a game I will absolutely love.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Turns out, not everyone wanted balanced and as tactically challenging I guess.
Or some people drink kool aid like it's mother's milk.
For sure, although there's no need to be so insulting, I think there is plenty of room out there in the gaming world for all types of games.
I also sympathise with you being upset because you do not like the rules, quite a few chaps I have spoken too seem a bit upset about it, but then again that is often the effect change has on some people, especially with things they hold dear.
I think GW will do well introducing new players to the games with this rules set, I will stick to playing the games I already play but I might be tempted to use the AoS rules to introduce younger players to wargaming at some point.
Norsed wrote: Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
I've played in one tournament in my whole life. Waste of a day. I grew out of competitive gaming years ago. I prefer narrative driven games, and spend more time playing the 40KRPG's than 40K proper.
And I want a balanced game with a tight unambiguous rule set because such a thing benefits everyone.
Benefits fluff bunnies most of all, if anything. Competitive players can just ignore 'bad' units and play with a (competitive) subset of units. The rest benefits greatly from not getting penalized for taking what looks good rather than that which gives the most bang for buck.
I'd just love someone who owns a lot of greater daemons, dragons, warmachines and multiple Nagash write the extensive "coalition of the mighty" fluff then pack it all and take a GW shops around the world tour presenting that simple fact to people thinking they were given a narrative rulesets and not a wet dream for that mythical waac douche who loves to see you tabled without any effort.
It's just a lazy, badly written unbalanced simpleton thrown in by a by a boorish and backwards company.
Norsed wrote: Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
I've played in one tournament in my whole life. Waste of a day. I grew out of competitive gaming years ago. I prefer narrative driven games, and spend more time playing the 40KRPG's than 40K proper.
And I want a balanced game with a tight unambiguous rule set because such a thing benefits everyone.
Benefits fluff bunnies most of all, if anything. Competitive players can just ignore 'bad' units and play with a (competitive) subset of units. The rest benefits greatly from not getting penalized for taking what looks good rather than that which gives the most bang for buck.
I'd just love someone who owns a lot of greater daemons, dragons, warmachines and multiple Nagash write the extensive "coalition of the mighty" fluff then pack it all and take a GW shops around the world tour presenting that simple fact to people thinking they were given a narrative rulesets and not a wet dream for that mythical waac douche who loves to see you tabled without any effort.
It's just a lazy, badly written unbalanced simpleton thrown in by a by a boorish and backwards company.
And I'm sure that guy will have lots of fun. And I'm sure lots of people will be dying to play him...
It will take you dozends of games to figure out a truely balanced game.
And if you change any unit, you will probably arrive at a new imbalanced situation.
We can measure from the bases saying "no part of the base can move further than the move allowance" ie: rotating bases gives no advantage.
You get the advantage from the "silly antics" rules without performing the antics.
Now if two people can produce armies that don't result in a one sided battle, we have a playable game.
If you don't want to do the silly antics, just don't do the silly antics. The advantage really won't make a huge difference to you.
Edit: measuring from the base sounds like a good idea though. I need to give it more of a try to see whether we're missing something by not measuring from the figure.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RoninXiC wrote: It will take you dozends of games to figure out a truely balanced game.
And if you change any unit, you will probably arrive at a new imbalanced situation.
You won't ever achieve a perfectly balanced game. You weren't able to achieve that with points systems either. If you don't like it, make some balance yourself or play something else. GW doesn't care.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, not being able to melee attack a phoenix/whatever flying thing because of measuring by figure seems like a non-problem to me. They can't melee back either. So they need shooting down. Because they're in the air, where your pointy things can't reach them. Some of the flyers have a special rule where they can swoop to attack, which allows measuring from a different point, which applies to people attacking them too. So it seems fine to me.
People keep saying the silly rules are relegated to the legacy armies, but how can anyone prove that? The only new AOS armies to come out are the super-serious Sigmarines, blessed by their God-King Sigmar, and the bloody Khorne bloodsecrators (a joke of a name in and of itself), is there any evidence that the antics won't pop up in future armies? And if not, then why do it with the old armies? So you'll be so sick of hearing people scream and act like goats that you'll just beg them buy a new army?
I'm also concerned about the scale of the new miniatures, particularly were I interested in building something from the old WHFB stuff now. The Sigmarines are obviously big, but are any of the Chaos humans in the same scale as WHFB? Or is this another situation where old models will look out of place in short order?
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Turns out, not everyone wanted balanced and as tactically challenging I guess.
Or some people drink kool aid like it's mother's milk.
For sure, although there's no need to be so insulting, I think there is plenty of room out there in the gaming world for all types of games.
I also sympathise with you being upset because you do not like the rules, quite a few chaps I have spoken too seem a bit upset about it, but then again that is often the effect change has on some people, especially with things they hold dear.
I think GW will do well introducing new players to the games with this rules set, I will stick to playing the games I already play but I might be tempted to use the AoS rules to introduce younger players to wargaming at some point.
Was it insulting? If the people who like it love how it was simplified, why didn't they try KoW before and dont want to try now. Anyway just a speculation and maybe it was insulting for someone, I dont do it on purpose though, just have an agressive posting style. I did refer to myself as drinking kool aid and loving the taste a few times so it's rather a thought shortcut.
In general, I have nothing against people who are genuinely positive here and anyone is free to enjoy even the dumbest things, I hate Call of Duty and what it represents but had fun with it (once, 10 minutes and on drugs though lol), maybe I would have silly fun with Age of Simple if I wasn't so opposed to it on fundamental level. Trying to prove that it's a good system or a positive change is an entirely different thing though and warrants a helthy quarrell not to mention borders on impossible heh.
I bash the system not the people. Invalidating things others enjoy is not nice ofc but you wouldnt voice any strongly negative opinion ever if you decided to be that nice. It's not for me heh.
Thanks for sympathy. Despite them blowing the world, killing the fluff and changing the aesthetics not to my liking, it would only take balance mechanism and square bases with a possibility to switch between a skirmish and ranked formation (with appropriate drawbacks and bonuses) for me to play it as a backup game and maybe even shut up. So little so much.
You won't ever achieve a perfectly balanced game. You weren't able to achieve that with points systems either. If you don't like it, make some balance yourself or play something else. GW doesn't care.
Exactly. You can't create a truly balanced game, but you can sure as hell try. GW just won't. Look at what Hawk Wargames did with Dropzone Commander. They have released errata for many different units in the game, changing stats and/or points costs based on what they have experienced from watching tournaments and utilizing player test groups. IF they think a unit is deficient in some way, they alter the stats. The genuinely want every unit a player can purchase to have a good place in the game. GW puts out a single rules release, and refuses to fine tune things until it comes time to make large changes with a new rules edition/army book.
I really can't imagine that if they did any playtesting whatsoever to create the Warscrolls for the older armies, that it didn't occur to them the broken games that would result from no army restrictions and from situations where two players agree to not screw each other over and just have fun- which is nowhere near a certainty when playing with relative strangers in a store or tournament. GW doesn't care.
I just really don't know where to go with AoS. I like the fluff so far, but only in a vacuum - NOT at the cost of losing all the Old World fluff. I can't believe that I, as a gamer who loves to read things like the Gotrek and Felix adventures, have reached a point where there will very likely be no more Old World novels from Black Library. God that world is sad to lose.
I also love the fantasy skirmish-level gaming that uses dispersed units instead of ranks. But other games do it better than AoS, whether GW fans want to admit it or not.
Hell, at this point, AoS and some other things have got me wanting to get back into fantasy gaming, but only partially with GW. Play AoS with Warhammer armies? Nah, I actually want to start buying Skaven (especially the Island of Blood plastics) and use them as stand-ins for Goblins in Confrontation: Age of Ragnorok. They'd be perfect, instead of crazy chaotic Goblin Samurai following the God known as Rat, you'd have actual crazy chaotic Ratmen samurai following the God known as Rat.
Norsed wrote: Games that get used in tournaments tend to have a highly competitive element leak into them over time until the tournament mindset dominates the game. Don't know why, just seems to happen.
I've played in one tournament in my whole life. Waste of a day. I grew out of competitive gaming years ago. I prefer narrative driven games, and spend more time playing the 40KRPG's than 40K proper.
And I want a balanced game with a tight unambiguous rule set because such a thing benefits everyone.
Benefits fluff bunnies most of all, if anything. Competitive players can just ignore 'bad' units and play with a (competitive) subset of units. The rest benefits greatly from not getting penalized for taking what looks good rather than that which gives the most bang for buck.
I'd just love someone who owns a lot of greater daemons, dragons, warmachines and multiple Nagash write the extensive "coalition of the mighty" fluff then pack it all and take a GW shops around the world tour presenting that simple fact to people thinking they were given a narrative rulesets and not a wet dream for that mythical waac douche who loves to see you tabled without any effort.
It's just a lazy, badly written unbalanced simpleton thrown in by a by a boorish and backwards company.
And I'm sure that guy will have lots of fun. And I'm sure lots of people will be dying to play him...
I thought it's your and your brigade idea of a waac player, someone who puts most op stuff possible on the table tables you and loves every minute of it.
Ditching the hyperbole though, I could pretend to be a fluffiest multiples collector in the world and do nothing but finding broken combinations for every game, then just go "Jesus that was obnoxious, let's tone it down next time" and ofc find the next broken combination, or bring more or sth, sort of undercover tfgwaac. If I was smart you wouldnt have a way to prove or even check that. Now I think I will do it heh.
Norsed wrote: You won't ever achieve a perfectly balanced game.
Drop the man made of straw. He's never done nuthin' to ya!
Or, to put it another way: We know. No one's asking for that.
Guy I responded to was:
RoninXiC wrote:
It will take you dozends of games to figure out a truely balanced game.
And if you change any unit, you will probably arrive at a new imbalanced situation.
The main thrust of my point remains whether you're looking for true balance or not: GW isn't interested. They aren't going to be interested. I'm not terribly interested either, though I can understand that for some people it's a concern. If you don't like that, there are many other things that at least try. Age of Sigmar isn't nor will it ever be for you unless you are willing to modify it yourself - which is a perfectly acceptable approach.
You can take my supposed straw man and make sweet love to it for all I care.
Ditching the hyperbole though, I could pretend to be a fluffiest multiples collector in the world and do nothing but finding broken combinations for every game, then just go "Jesus that was obnoxious, let's tone it down next time" and ofc find the next broken combination, or bring more or sth, sort of undercover tfgwaac. If I was smart you wouldnt have a way to prove or even check that. Now I think I will do it heh.
That would be a pretty obnoxious way to play though wouldn't it? Why would you want to treat people that way?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Azreal13 wrote: Norsed, couldn't you at least try posting in a few other threads, you know, to make it less obvious?
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
Ditching the hyperbole though, I could pretend to be a fluffiest multiples collector in the world and do nothing but finding broken combinations for every game, then just go "Jesus that was obnoxious, let's tone it down next time" and ofc find the next broken combination, or bring more or sth, sort of undercover tfgwaac. If I was smart you wouldnt have a way to prove or even check that. Now I think I will do it heh.
That would be a pretty obnoxious way to play though wouldn't it? Why would you want to treat people that way?
Well I'm just trying multiple angles to prove that it's not a narrative ruleset and that the potential for abuse is huge and in fact higher than in a points based system.
Again it's the haac forge harder brigade that perpetuates the myth of an obnoxious waac person that takes pleasure in killing others fun. I'm just roleplaying (forging the narrative?) that.
Ditching the hyperbole though, I could pretend to be a fluffiest multiples collector in the world and do nothing but finding broken combinations for every game, then just go "Jesus that was obnoxious, let's tone it down next time" and ofc find the next broken combination, or bring more or sth, sort of undercover tfgwaac. If I was smart you wouldnt have a way to prove or even check that. Now I think I will do it heh.
That would be a pretty obnoxious way to play though wouldn't it? Why would you want to treat people that way?
Well I'm just trying multiple angles to prove that it's not a narrative ruleset and that the potential for abuse is huge and in fact higher than in a points based system.
Again it's the haac forge harder brigade that perpetuates the myth of an obnoxious waac person that takes pleasure in killing others fun. I'm just roleplaying (forging the narrative?) that.
That's a fair enough point, though I have met a few WAAC types in my time to they're not an entire myth, even if they're not the majority.
But on the other hand, you said you thought you were going to try doing it. Which would be pretty obnoxious.
My problem is that with such a drastically different direction from the last 30 years of Warhammer, AoS almost looks like another company trying to copy the Warhammer IP, but with their own twist to make is just enough different, so they took some "planes" stuff from Magic the Gathering.
I totally liked the idea some of us wondered about when we only had the name of Age Of Sigmar to go by, where it's possibility was that it would be about a new edition of games set back in the far past of Warhammer when Sigmar first showed up, and the building of the Empire. A drastic change in regards to armies like Bretonnia, etc that would not exist yat, but still deeply a part of the Old World fluff.
Us long-term guys could feel like we were playing games to set the stage for the editions our younger selves would play. Play Nagash as one of the earlier times he showed up? Or as heroes fighting alongside Sigmar himself to pacify the great forest? It would be epic, like 40K Horus Heresy.
Ditching the hyperbole though, I could pretend to be a fluffiest multiples collector in the world and do nothing but finding broken combinations for every game, then just go "Jesus that was obnoxious, let's tone it down next time" and ofc find the next broken combination, or bring more or sth, sort of undercover tfgwaac. If I was smart you wouldnt have a way to prove or even check that. Now I think I will do it heh.
That would be a pretty obnoxious way to play though wouldn't it? Why would you want to treat people that way?
Well I'm just trying multiple angles to prove that it's not a narrative ruleset and that the potential for abuse is huge and in fact higher than in a points based system.
Again it's the haac forge harder brigade that perpetuates the myth of an obnoxious waac person that takes pleasure in killing others fun. I'm just roleplaying (forging the narrative?) that.
That's a fair enough point, though I have met a few WAAC types in my time to they're not an entire myth, even if they're not the majority.
But on the other hand, you said you thought you were going to try doing it. Which would be pretty obnoxious.
That was me being silly, too much Age of Sigmar lately I guess heh.
Accolade wrote: People keep saying the silly rules are relegated to the legacy armies, but how can anyone prove that? The only new AOS armies to come out are the super-serious Sigmarines, blessed by their God-King Sigmar, and the bloody Khorne bloodsecrators (a joke of a name in and of itself), is there any evidence that the antics won't pop up in future armies? And if not, then why do it with the old armies?
Well at the moment it's only the legacy armies that have the joke rules, and we don't have any evidence one way or another whether they'll put them in anything in the future but the models in the starter box don't seem to have them. So it's perfectly legit to say so far it's only the legacy armies and there's no reason to believe they'll put them in the new ones, since the only new army we have doesn't have them.
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
You despise GW yet you only joined 4 days ago and have made over 60 posts, all in this thread, all defending gw...
No one needs to label you a plant, you made it obvious yourself!
Accolade wrote: People keep saying the silly rules are relegated to the legacy armies, but how can anyone prove that? The only new AOS armies to come out are the super-serious Sigmarines, blessed by their God-King Sigmar, and the bloody Khorne bloodsecrators (a joke of a name in and of itself), is there any evidence that the antics won't pop up in future armies? And if not, then why do it with the old armies?
Well at the moment it's only the legacy armies that have the joke rules, and we don't have any evidence one way or another whether they'll put them in anything in the future but the models in the starter box don't seem to have them. So it's perfectly legit to say so far it's only the legacy armies and there's no reason to believe they'll put them in the new ones, since the only new army we have doesn't have them.
Which of course is no guarantee they won't at some point in the future. But I agree that it's unlikely.
NAVARRO wrote: About the party game approach I don't think so but I find that AOS with the following changes:
Very small armies, movement done from bases ignoring the silliness of measuring from the tip of the sword ( will avoid pile up), ignoring magical terrain and set mundane one instead... with modifiers to movement, fluffy armies, no silly humour, lots and lots of terrain...
Will prevent a bit of the mosh pits, the terrain will actually influence the strategic movement...
Will be the perfect game for me to play at home and introduce my 9 year old to wargaming.
Short 30 minute games will do fine for him.
Sounds good! Can I ask what sort of modifiers you'll place on movement?
SImply the old stuff with less penalties since units are skirmish after all but things like:
Difficult terrain - reduces 1inch to movement
Very difficult terrain - movement reduced by half
Hazardous terrain ( swamps, lava lakes, possessed jungles) reduces 1 inch to movement too... roll a d6 and on a 1 or 2 you will have a nasty consequence
Impassable terrain nothing can cross it on foot.
Terrain will also add soft and heavy cover making hide and seek more interesting too.
Unclear on consequences of these mods but I think it would make things a bit more interesting and reduce the chances of mosh pits in the middle.
So lots of terrain is the way to go specially if you boost warmachines on a hill, troops will try to avoid a charge in the open.
So the point of AoS is to help produce more sales, since fantasy was falling apart (yet if they released game info, books, and models in a balls out mentality, like with 40k, it could of turned around IMO)
So AOS is to attract new player base as well as satisfy fantasy players.
As a fantasy player who plays quite often I am not remotely interested in AoS.
As a 40kGT player, I am not remotely interested in AoS. There are plenty of 40k armies I'd rather buy.build, play. Im not interested in fantasy 40k....
I do not play warmachine or hordes, but almost all the players I see playing between 3 stores I frequently fancy, Most oft them hate GW and sing the same ole song "gw hates it customers". They now play war-machine, love it, and their mentality on GW has transferred over to their fellow WM players.
So now we have a new player base it has to attract, GL I guess... I am not saying no one is going to be playing AoS, but GW needs to seriously support this game and get it out there. Think late 90's, early 00's. Tons of GW stores, tons of independent people hired by GW to go to local stores and help promote and run demos... I do not see that happening again.
Predictions. 9th edition fantasy to come within a year.
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
You despise GW yet you only joined 4 days ago and have made over 60 posts, all in this thread, all defending gw...
No one needs to label you a plant, you made it obvious yourself!
Yeah, because frankly dakkadakka is a pretty horrible place. But I ended up reading this thread. And then someone got me annoyed. SOMEONE WAS WRONG ON THE INTERNET, a feeling I'm sure we've all had at some point. I'm not defending GW, I'm defending Age of Sigmar. I'm defending the fact that for the first time in ages I can actually go into a GW shop and feel like I'm not massively out of place. I hate everything 40k past first edition. I hate what they've done to white dwarf by turning into an advertising pamphlet with no actual substance. And I hate the fact they blew up the warhammer world, even though I'm kind of liking some of what they're doing with it afterwards.
People can play weak units now, but play more of them.
What? was there some sort of restriction on weak units in your town? must have sucked for those gobbo players
Bottle wrote: People can give themselves handicaps if they know they usually beat that opponent. Yes, all this could have been done in 8th, but it is much easier now.
Huh? How is it much easier?
I cant think of anything easier than 'I will play with 200 less points' or 'you start the game with an extra 200 vps'
How is it so much easier in a game with no inherant balance to start with?
AegisGrimm wrote: My problem is that with such a drastically different direction from the last 30 years of Warhammer, AoS almost looks like another company trying to copy the Warhammer IP, but with their own twist to make is just enough different, so they took some "planes" stuff from Magic the Gathering.
I totally liked the idea some of us wondered about when we only had the name of Age Of Sigmar to go by, where it's possibility was that it would be about a new edition of games set back in the far past of Warhammer when Sigmar first showed up, and the building of the Empire. A drastic change in regards to armies like Bretonnia, etc that would not exist yat, but still deeply a part of the Old World fluff.
Us long-term guys could feel like we were playing games to set the stage for the editions our younger selves would play. Play Nagash as one of the earlier times he showed up? Or as heroes fighting alongside Sigmar himself to pacify the great forest? It would be epic, like 40K Horus Heresy.
But then the baby went out with the bathwater.
I mentioned that idea about 200 pages ago
I would have loved the AOS to be the AOS, it would have been a great look.
Picture pre-Empire tribes in the style of Conan, Orcs that were more feral, dangerous tribes of beastmen, Nagash turning up with his undead, Dwarves trying to re-build their Empire, Skaven plotting as always, Chaos always there, etc etc
Some armies would have missed out, but you could have had a raw, feral look, and the re-boot can have showed us the evolution of Warhammer. For example, the Empire tribes get better weapons when the dwarves pass on their metal knowledge. GW could have milked that for years.
For me, GW's models (most of them ) and artwork have never been the problem. They've always been high quality. The idea of simple rules to get people in the game is not that big a deal for me, I get it.
Two things, two simple things that could have fixed this and made AOS a success
1) A points system. You want a 15 a warscrolls game? 10 Chaos warriors = 1 scroll, 20 clanrats = 1 scroll and so one. EASY! EASY! So EASY
Beginners could have played the scenarios while they learned the rules. Everyone's a winner. That GW didn't do this
2) Move trays GW. move trays. The skirmish game could have easily been war of the ring. People who wanted larger battles would have been happy. People who wanted smaller games would have been happy. You did it with war of the ring. Mantic wrote simple rules for big games. GW could have wrote simple rules as well. You didn't do this? WHY WHY?
With their living rulebook and promised regular updates, GW could have saved fantasy with simple steps.
I don't 'actually mind the lore of AoS. I just find it infuriating that they add all these nonsensical, obnoxious rules like "you have to have a beard to benefit from this rule" or "shout something at the top of your lungs to get a reroll".
Aside from making the game more suitable for loud, smelly neckbeards (who are by no means the majority of players), it basically requires me to dress in drag in order to best make use of my dwarves.
People can play weak units now, but play more of them.
What? was there some sort of restriction on weak units in your town? must have sucked for those gobbo players
Are goblins weak? I meant weak in relation to their points cost. Some units aren't good choices if they are too expensive compared to their battlefield ability. Now that doesn't matter.
Bottle wrote: People can give themselves handicaps if they know they usually beat that opponent. Yes, all this could have been done in 8th, but it is much easier now.
Huh? How is it much easier?
I cant think of anything easier than 'I will play with 200 less points' or 'you start the game with an extra 200 vps'
How is it so much easier in a game with no inherant balance to start with
If you played a pick up game of 8th and said "I want to play with 200 more points". The answer would have been "err no thanks".
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
You despise GW yet you only joined 4 days ago and have made over 60 posts, all in this thread, all defending gw...
No one needs to label you a plant, you made it obvious yourself!
Yeah, because frankly dakkadakka is a pretty horrible place. But I ended up reading this thread. And then someone got me annoyed. SOMEONE WAS WRONG ON THE INTERNET, a feeling I'm sure we've all had at some point. I'm not defending GW, I'm defending Age of Sigmar. I'm defending the fact that for the first time in ages I can actually go into a GW shop and feel like I'm not massively out of place. I hate everything 40k past first edition. I hate what they've done to white dwarf by turning into an advertising pamphlet with no actual substance. And I hate the fact they blew up the warhammer world, even though I'm kind of liking some of what they're doing with it afterwards.
So screw you and your plant gak.
That happens to me alot -_- if people could stop being so wrong I could stop checking 2 or 3 times a day lol.
On a side note I get people are upset but hell it is what it is no point in getting upset over it. There is a topic \/ down there somewhere trying to make a community 8.5 edition. Try working with them to fix 8th if you liked it because this is not leaving anytime soon.
Face it fantasy was good some places not so much in others it had alot of rules and alot of models ect. The new people to join the hobby and are trying to make it more fun and quick to start for the younger kids. Please don't say well i know this one kid who likes to read, because ya there are a few but come on go to walmart and see how many quick fixes there are out there for anything.
There is actually a tablet that has a already built in facebook icon for those to lazy to type those what 8 letters in the search bar? They need to attract younger people and the modern youth "on average" barly takes the time tomake eye contact let alone read a dictonary then a army book. Those days are gone right beside getting fire starter/carve kits for your 8 year old kids.
Now if only jewelry would die out so I do not lose 2 grand a day for a shiny rock
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
But he has also been house ruling stuff as well has he not? So that could make a difference.
.
We've been throwing out roughly equal forces on the table. Just sort of guessing and getting close. Like saying "bring 80 wounds worth of stuff". About the only real house rule we did was measure from the bases. Didn't really even decide, just both started doing it, realized that, and said "screw it, this is so much easier". And I didn't bother with the sudden death nonsense when i had the smaller army. Other than that, played it straight up. Less than two hours and fought about 10 rounds.
Edit: quotes got messed up this text above is a quote from Mikhalia
I know this was posted a few pages back, but felt the need to comment on this. I would say the bolded part is the biggest and most game altering house rule you have done, and has probably made the game more enjoyable. Not that its a bad thing, but the core game itself is never going to be like that in any "competitive setting". The biggest problem I have with this game is that if you want to be competitive or try to win the game your either going to want to use all the models you have available, and hope you can avoid the sudden death loss condition, another thing you've not been playing with, or your going to make your army so that you can just keep summoning new units over and over again.
Also something to be noted, is that thanks to the new measure from the model rules (assuming you aren't house ruling that) you can no longer use third party miniatures , thank to that huge modeling for advantage thing that people discuss all the time. I always liked the look of fantasy and have wanted to get into it for years, but now . . . well now I'm just sad.
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
You despise GW yet you only joined 4 days ago and have made over 60 posts, all in this thread, all defending gw...
No one needs to label you a plant, you made it obvious yourself!
Yeah, because frankly dakkadakka is a pretty horrible place. But I ended up reading this thread. And then someone got me annoyed. SOMEONE WAS WRONG ON THE INTERNET, a feeling I'm sure we've all had at some point. I'm not defending GW, I'm defending Age of Sigmar. I'm defending the fact that for the first time in ages I can actually go into a GW shop and feel like I'm not massively out of place. I hate everything 40k past first edition. I hate what they've done to white dwarf by turning into an advertising pamphlet with no actual substance. And I hate the fact they blew up the warhammer world, even though I'm kind of liking some of what they're doing with it afterwards.
So screw you and your plant gak.
It a shame really, if you'd signed up on a day that it wasn't reported that people were signing up on other forums specifically to post in AoS threads in defence of AoS and were likely stooge accounts, people probably wouldn't have thought anything of it.
Just bad luck I guess, but hey...
frankly dakkadakka is a pretty horrible place
So screw you and your plant gak.
Brilliant way to predispose the community towards you!
Melissia wrote: I don't 'actually mind the lore of AoS. I just find it infuriating that they add all these nonsensical, obnoxious rules like "you have to have a beard to benefit from this rule" or "shout something at the top of your lungs to get a reroll".
Aside from making the game more suitable for loud, smelly neckbeards (who are by no means the majority of players), it basically requires me to dress in drag in order to best make use of my dwarves.
Yeah, I agree they're stupid. But they really are a minor, easily ignored part of the game that turn up in only a few places. If you really don't like the rest of the game, then fair enough, nothings going to change that. But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
Jaceevoke wrote: We've been throwing out roughly equal forces on the table. Just sort of guessing and getting close. Like saying "bring 80 wounds worth of stuff".
So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
But he has also been house ruling stuff as well has he not? So that could make a difference.
We've been throwing out roughly equal forces on the table. Just sort of guessing and getting close. Like saying "bring 80 wounds worth of stuff".So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
Well, it doesn't really. I guess people just rough-shot it and give the other person a couple extra models or something? There isn't much of a better way to do it.
Brilliant way to predispose the community towards you!
Welcome to Dakka!
I'll admit that was a little bit out of order. A couple of people with no argument except to call me a plant got under my collar and I apologise.
But these boards do get pretty nasty.
So does any board that talks about a hobby with such a large financial and time investment as Wargaming. Emotions can run high, because people care so much.
RoninXiC wrote: Youre wrong.
In 7th i played some deamons and we agreed that ill laways play 250 points down.
You see, we did this because the system wasnt balanced.
At me? Yeah no one cares if you give yourself a handicap. It's the other way round that caused problems.
Besides never said it wasn't possible in 8th or before, just that it's easier now as it is essential. The game is a collaborative effort to create fun, like inquisitor. With no points people can really look at the units themselves and decide how best to balance it themselves.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
Well to start Bret Knights and WoC's are 2 wounds instead of 1 so you get twice as many skaven/skink/goblins.
In general I think people are underestimating the combat phase. Just selecting the right order for your combats is going to be huge. It's something I noticed because of Wrath of Kings but combat is incredibly interesting now. Also baiting is going to be a huge part of this.
Honestly if it wasn't for a lack of army building mechanism this game would be very good (not perfect by any means).
Goblins have the same damage output as an equal wounds' worth of Chaos Warriors in some weapon configurations, just gotta be clever with list construction.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
Simpely wait them out. I get a 4 oclock shadow after a couple hours. I can wait -_-
xaszatm wrote: I guess I'm the opposite. I look at the game and tried it and was just not having fun. It's a shame because I really like the new models but nothing in the game is actually interesting for me to play. It certainly doesn't help that every game I played and saw was reduced to all models bunched up at the middle with more coming from the sides creating this giant ball of violence. I'm happy for people who do enjoy this game but this definitely wasn't fun for me.
Oh, and before people say "you just need to try another game", I tried 3 and watched like 5. There's a limit here.
This!
Thank for your input, that was something I observed too and was thinking about it.
The battle reps that I have seen on youtube had exactly the same problem... all ends in a mass of miniatures in the middle of the table, no movement tactics and this does not scale well at all... more minis = bigger mosh pit... Horribly boring.
I will keep on looking at reviews hopefully the more experienced people get they will find some kind of variety on the final outcome.
Warmachines has anyone played with them?
Mikhaila wrote a post saying movement and tactics mattered a lot, and he had no mosh pits.
But he has also been house ruling stuff as well has he not? So that could make a difference.
.
We've been throwing out roughly equal forces on the table. Just sort of guessing and getting close. Like saying "bring 80 wounds worth of stuff".
So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
You probably need to house-rule it by dividing elite troops from normal troops and then establish an allowed percentage for elites on those 80 wounds? I really dont know! Like only 50% can be elites and since elites have more wounds you would end up with a lot less powerfull minis... thing is there is no way to know how that would work.
Since I will only play this game with my son thats not a problem since I will have control on things but yes this is no good for a normal pick up game with a stranger, this will only be realistic for themed small warband skirmish with your friends.
Unless a group of fellas comes up with a good balance for this game.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
I don't really see that losing one minor advantage in a game without inherent balance is much of a problem. Yeah, if you had to pay points to get the thane and you weren't getting the full benefit I could really see it. But points aren't a thing anymore so... Anyone else that plays dwarfs and doesn't have a beard are in the same boat.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
Simpely wait them out. I get a 4 oclock shadow after a couple hours. I can wait -_-
... even if I did grow a beard (thankfully, I do not), I do not want to have to be the bearded lady for the sake of playing with plastic fething soldiers, thank you very much. If that's what this game requires, the game can go feth itself.
Accolade wrote: People keep saying the silly rules are relegated to the legacy armies, but how can anyone prove that? The only new AOS armies to come out are the super-serious Sigmarines, blessed by their God-King Sigmar, and the bloody Khorne bloodsecrators (a joke of a name in and of itself), is there any evidence that the antics won't pop up in future armies? And if not, then why do it with the old armies?
Well at the moment it's only the legacy armies that have the joke rules, and we don't have any evidence one way or another whether they'll put them in anything in the future but the models in the starter box don't seem to have them. So it's perfectly legit to say so far it's only the legacy armies and there's no reason to believe they'll put them in the new ones, since the only new army we have doesn't have them.
Right, I get that. Personally, I'm not entirely sure what GW is planning to do (though it seems few are). There have been some rumors that they're trying to make AOS models incompatible with WHFB models- I wonder if that would come from upscaling all future releases, making WHFB look out of place and giving the Legacy armies the stupid rules so that they don't feel a part of the game overall. In that regard, it feels questionable whether it's worth even buying pre-AOS models...they seem to have a bad ROI at the moment.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
I don't really see that losing one minor advantage in a game without inherent balance is much of a problem.
It IS a fething problem because it's misogynistic bs, thoughtlessly thrown in by jackasses who don't care about the game.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
Simpely wait them out. I get a 4 oclock shadow after a couple hours. I can wait -_-
Uh dude, her name is MELISSIA I don't think 5 oclock shadows are going to happen.
Yeah, on point, hard not to notice how all these special rules assume it's a man playing and how Sigmar apparently only chose to reincarnate male heroes.
Sorry Sisters of Sigmar, guess you should have won more Morheim games.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
Simpely wait them out. I get a 4 oclock shadow after a couple hours. I can wait -_-
Uh dude, her name is MELISSIA I don't think 5 oclock shadows are going to happen.
Yeah, on point, hard not to notice how all these special rules assume it's a man playing and how Sigmar apparently only chose to reincarnate male heroes.
Sorry Sisters of Sigmar, guess you should have won more Morheim games.
Ah GW never changes...
My point is more of if they be dic..jerks then be one back. Wait them out say I got no where to go after 10 minutes it will pass. Or hell ignore them and do it anyways. But in all honesty I thought she was a dude since you know "g.i.r.l. " guy in real life"
But you would have to play with the worlds bigest....jerk if they apply any of those "fun rules"
Sorry bad grammer day lol trying to sculpt watch my kids and type -_-
via anonymous sources on Faeit 212
I’m hesitant to call it a “Summer Campaign”, because a majority of the
bigger stuff will come out after the summer is over, but the big new
selling point of AoS is going to be vast narrative campaigns and story
arcs. The Realmgate War is going to be the first of these campaigns.
Future campaigns might be more focused, but RgW is primarily going to a
walking tour of the new setting. The release pattering is going to be
formulaic: Here’s the new world (Sans Azyr and Chaos, we go to them during
the final), here’s the evil force that’s making everyone’s life awful,
here’s the good force that’s going to liberate them. Inky, Blinky, Pinky,
and Clyde each get their own named faction, and The Horned Rat and Nagash
will each get their respective 15 minutes of fame.
Once all the new factions are introduced, and the war scrolls proper are
put up, that’s when we finally get the BrB. Don’t think of this as 9th
edition, think of this as the first expansion to Age of Sigmar. It’ll be
much smaller than a core rulebook, but larger than a codex, and will look
and feel a lot like the Horus Heresy books from FW. There will be rules
for list building, missions, campaigns, as well as all the “advanced
rules”, more rules for gods, magic, heroes, loot, more terrain abilities,
and special rules for games on specific realm. Then there’s going to be a
few weeks of 40k, followed by a few weeks to wrap up the Realmgate War.
The conclusion will take the form of an actual, factual summer campaign, as
the forces of order launch an assault on the forces of chaos undecided on
their home turf, all while death and destruction go around making sure
everyone’s having a bad day.
Then a few months later the cycle starts again. There’s going to be a few
weeks of breathing time, setting up the campaigns, introducing characters,
factions, and whatnot, followed by an expansion book that’ll expand on the
rules and let people play their own mini campaigns, followed then a big
conclusion with plenty of heroic deaths and things going south for everyone.
Norsed wrote: But you really don't have to be a loud smelly neckbeard to do well in AoS.
... I literally have to have a beard to gain the full benefit of my Thane's combat abilities. If the person I battle against even has so much as a five o'clock shadow, RAW says I do not benefit from the Honour of the Clan rules. Even if it's true that many people are willing to ignore this kind of stupid, that still means I'm basically rolling the dice and hoping that I don't face off against TFG, where other people don't have to.
I don't really see that losing one minor advantage in a game without inherent balance is much of a problem.
It IS a fething problem because it's misogynistic bs, thoughtlessly thrown in by jackasses who don't care about the game.
Seriously tempted to photoshop one of those old-timey storefront pictures with a GW sign and change the window poster to "No Chicks. No Autistics. No Shys. No Competitives.", because that's the vibe all these little "funny" F-U's AoS contains is giving off.
So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
Well to start Bret Knights and WoC's are 2 wounds instead of 1 so you get twice as many skaven/skink/goblins.
In general I think people are underestimating the combat phase. Just selecting the right order for your combats is going to be huge. It's something I noticed because of Wrath of Kings but combat is incredibly interesting now. Also baiting is going to be a huge part of this.
Honestly if it wasn't for a lack of army building mechanism this game would be very good (not perfect by any means).
But then the poor outnumbered elite unit like bret knights or WoC get the sudden death benefit over the powerful skink/goblin/skaven etc...
How do you think I feel with greaseus rules I have to bargin with the enemy to make them except the bribe lol. My plan is simple except or get a old fashion metal night goblin shoved up your...
While it's been said before, I seriously get the vibe that AoS is just a good excuse for them to sell fantasy Space Marines.
I mean, really- chosen heroes are reforged into much more powerful forms by their God-Emperor, to go forth and wage a holy war against the forces of Chaos, who hold sway over the realms and the innocent, tortured masses.
Which game am even talking about, again? 40K or fantasy?
Breotan wrote: Actually, Lockark, it seems more like they want to turn it into a party game where everyone is more interested in having fun than playing a mature strategy game. Beer and Pretzels, if you will.
I really wish we could decouple the idea that fun = not serious/not mature/not competitive.
Every time I read "...if you just want to have fun instead of playing serious/competitive/whatever..." I want to bash my head against the keyboard because the whole idea is so absurd yet gets repeated so many times. Playing a game of "measure the beard" or "guess which hand" or a staring contest is not my idea of fun.
It's right up there with "...if you play with people who are reasonable then the rules are fine...." as if somehow people who don't like fixing wonky rules aren't reasonable.
Hulksmash wrote: Well to start Bret Knights and WoC's are 2 wounds instead of 1 so you get twice as many skaven/skink/goblins.
So a Bretonnian Grail Knight, iwth two wounds, is equal to two skaven slaves?
I was more shocked that all Bretonnian knights only have a 4+ save, yes they have 2 wounds but there survivability appears to be a lot less against units with rending, like great swords.
I was discussing AoS last night with a friend and it semed pretty obvious to us that GW would do exactly what this new rumour says:
"Here is the Realm of X, here lives the majority of race Y under the yoke of Chaos, now the Sigmarines and the remnants of race Y that hid on Azyr (that's your old minis for race Y) show up and help them to overthrow the masters. Enjoy these new minis for your familiar race Y but with a new design aesthetic to represent their new culture after 500 years of slavery under Chaos."
Relapse wrote: I was just told the Mantic website was crashing a lot because of all the traffic happening on it. I know I was having trouble getting in to see stuff.
Any comfirmations?
Talked to Ronnie, and he really has been blown away. They're having to order more of the books because preorders sky-rocketed in the last week. He was sincere, and caught off guard.
Meh I get called a troll, evil or a plant daily so no worries. But I will say this GW is watching these forums I can't say who tho
I doubt they do, that would almost qualify as customer research! Then again, it would be perfectly GW way of doing things; publish first, research after. Then again, GW did send out some advance copies so..
FWIW, I don't believe mr. Norsed to be a plant. Any GW troll would probably stick with 'narrative is better' line of arguments, as that's what GW is pushing.
So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
Well to start Bret Knights and WoC's are 2 wounds instead of 1 so you get twice as many skaven/skink/goblins.
In general I think people are underestimating the combat phase. Just selecting the right order for your combats is going to be huge. It's something I noticed because of Wrath of Kings but combat is incredibly interesting now. Also baiting is going to be a huge part of this.
Honestly if it wasn't for a lack of army building mechanism this game would be very good (not perfect by any means).
But then the poor outnumbered elite unit like bret knights or WoC get the sudden death benefit over the powerful skink/goblin/skaven etc...
Which so far has been shown to be much harder to achieve than you'd think just reading them based on the battle reports I've been reading. I'm not saying there aren't issues (there are) but I am saying I think people are overstating them a bit.
Still won't be able to play it to often due to no army building mechanism so tournament likely won't happen (which is where I get in most of my games) but I do think the actual rules are pretty good.
via anonymous sources on Faeit 212 I’m hesitant to call it a “Summer Campaign”, because a majority of the bigger stuff will come out after the summer is over, but the big new selling point of AoS is going to be vast narrative campaigns and story arcs. The Realmgate War is going to be the first of these campaigns.
Spoiler:
Future campaigns might be more focused, but RgW is primarily going to a walking tour of the new setting. The release pattering is going to be formulaic: Here’s the new world (Sans Azyr and Chaos, we go to them during the final), here’s the evil force that’s making everyone’s life awful, here’s the good force that’s going to liberate them. Inky, Blinky, Pinky, and Clyde each get their own named faction, and The Horned Rat and Nagash will each get their respective 15 minutes of fame.
Once all the new factions are introduced, and the war scrolls proper are put up, that’s when we finally get the BrB. Don’t think of this as 9th edition, think of this as the first expansion to Age of Sigmar. It’ll be much smaller than a core rulebook, but larger than a codex, and will look and feel a lot like the Horus Heresy books from FW. There will be rules for list building, missions, campaigns, as well as all the “advanced rules”, more rules for gods, magic, heroes, loot, more terrain abilities, and special rules for games on specific realm. Then there’s going to be a few weeks of 40k, followed by a few weeks to wrap up the Realmgate War. The conclusion will take the form of an actual, factual summer campaign, as the forces of order launch an assault on the forces of chaos undecided on their home turf, all while death and destruction go around making sure everyone’s having a bad day.
Then a few months later the cycle starts again. There’s going to be a few weeks of breathing time, setting up the campaigns, introducing characters, factions, and whatnot, followed by an expansion book that’ll expand on the rules and let people play their own mini campaigns, followed then a big conclusion with plenty of heroic deaths and things going south for everyone.
Well, if true that is pretty cool. I'd dig both the RgW campaign and an "advanced rulebook" with army building guidelines, loot tables and such. But... anonymous sources...
Relapse wrote: I was just told the Mantic website was crashing a lot because of all the traffic happening on it. I know I was having trouble getting in to see stuff.
Any comfirmations?
Talked to Ronnie, and he really has been blown away. They're having to order more of the books because preorders sky-rocketed in the last week. He was sincere, and caught off guard.
See there's always a positive side to everything. If Mantic is clever AOS is a win for them.
Teach your young ones with AOS and then let them build a KOW army
Bottle is right though the idea of doing several small themed warbands for every faction is strong in AOS ( did anyone mentioned a Minotaur only warband? Cool!)... So GW did this right, if they are aiming for small collectible groups of minis in box sets this is one way to do it.
I would prefer a more juicy skirmish though, yet this fills a very specific purpose I guess.
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
You despise GW yet you only joined 4 days ago and have made over 60 posts, all in this thread, all defending gw...
No one needs to label you a plant, you made it obvious yourself!
I have to admit that I like the tentative idea of using Wounds to judge the size of and army. It still would require a good-natured pair of friends to have a truly fun game, but that's always been true.
I still dunno about the fluff, though. It just grates on my nerves. I have only a middling knowledge of the deeper parts of the Warhammer fluff, but it seems like it'd be easier to restart Warhammer in a rules-sense exactly like has been done, but to simply introduce the Eternals as a new faction by having the fluff be that right on the edge of cataclysm, Sigmar himself arrives at front of a host of Angel-soldiers to fight back against the Chaos Gods, with the Old World as the battlefield (obviously this woiuld be a rewrite of the last part of the End Times).
To do this they open a "realmgate" from wherever Sigmar has been all these long years, smack right in the middle of a part of the Old World and begin sallying forth. It's be like in the Marvel Comic Universe when a buddy told me that Asgard itself lands directly on Earth.
The narrative of combining armies would be that in addition to new alliances being forged, after the beachhead is achieved by the Eternals, they immediately spread in small groups to act as support to all the races of "good", so that's why you could have an army of Bretonnian knights with a unit or two as Eternals.
Shattering the Old World and throwing away all that fluff is easily worse than any deficiency of the new rules. Keep the damn fluff and make new rules!
Hey, I generally despise GW and the way they've acted since they became a corporate entity. But suddenly, everything I hated about the last few editions of warhammer has suddenly gone. It's like they've been listening to my dreams or something. They've even managed to put stuff in there I didn't even know I wanted. Of course, there are a few wrinkles - this is GW after all, they always manage to find something to cock up. But on the whole I like it. I'm still sticking to rogue trader for my 40k though. I'm posting in this thread 'cos it's the one that's up on my phone and I'm posting in between bits of work. Can't be bothered to trawl through everything else plus there are a lot of people on thus thread who annoy me, which is probably not the best reason to post but there we go.
But go ahead, proclaim me a plant. Means you don't have to bother acknowledging anything I say. It'll certainly make it easier for you.
You despise GW yet you only joined 4 days ago and have made over 60 posts, all in this thread, all defending gw...
No one needs to label you a plant, you made it obvious yourself!
Norsed: What GW did to Warhammer's background...
Yeah, I really wish they hadn't. On the other hand, I get Einherjar now. Which is kind of cool I guess. Also the new stuff looks like Hammerfall vs Manowar. Which are both things that I like...
Putting rules about having mustaches and beards in was insensitive, I doubt anyone dosagrees with that, and it can probably be left there for the sake of sanity
Sidstyler wrote: @mikhaila: I appreciate your response, I was afraid for a minute that my post would start an argument and was wondering if I should even bother with it at first. I understand where you're coming from better than I did before, though.
I still disagree with people who are now trying to claim Age of Sigmar is a party game or that it's obviously not meant to be taken seriously, because that's not how it's being presented by GW at all. We have some of the best quality artwork GW has ever put out, models that GW claim are the best quality they have ever produced, a trailer/model showcase with epic displays and an epic soundtrack to go along with it, some really nice, new terrain for the game that is likewise probably some of the best they've ever produced...GW isn't trying to sell this as a goofy party game. If I didn't know any better and I bought into this after playing a demo game, only to start discovering the stupid clown antics and gak in the free rules later when I got home, I'd be furious and promptly cancel my pre-order, demanding my money back. If I want a silly "party game" experience I already have that with other, much cheaper games that were made for it, like Munchkin or Cards Against Humanity. But that's not what I bought into GW games for, that's not what people who bought into WHF previously wanted, and if this is just how things are going to be then I guess it's time for me to spend money elsewhere. 40k has already been moving to something like this anyway and I imagine it's only a matter of time now. I won't be buying new models when that comes to pass and will adapt old rules if I feel the need to keep playing the game at that point.
Most likely though I see myself selling everything and just moving on. Never would have thought of it before, but I don't see myself having any enthusiasm to finish my Tau or finish all three flavors of Eldar I have lying around when the rules start giving my hammerheads bonuses to hit for slapping my opponent with a fish or showing up to the game wearing bondage gear to get re-rolls to hit and wound with wyches.
I wouldn't worry too much about 40k. (Might be wrong, and if so I'll pick you up on my way to burn GWHQ). 40k is currently the bulk of GW's profits. Compromising those profits is a huge risk vs changing around WFB that was having poor sales, or dropping LOTR that has worse. And think of FW and 30k. FW makes very little WFB models, and it's mostly a collectors market and can remain that way. But their 40k line is 99.9% of FW.
Bull0 wrote: Putting rules about having mustaches and beards in was insensitive, I doubt anyone dosagrees with that, and it can probably be left there for the sake of sanity
Yeah the lack of female representation apart from a 40k faction that literally consists of "sexy nuns" is my biggest problem with GW by far. Such bs.
On what basis should female representation be a big part of what GW presents? I've looked through the last few pages and seen the word 'mysogyny' brought up as part of the general GW bashing. Seriously?!? I know GW does a lot of things wrong (and a lot of things right by the way) but this angle is ridiculous and has nothing to do with the problems with AoS
I think having a special rule for an existing character that, if you follow the rules as written mean women can never make use of the rule is pretty bad. Not sure I'd say it is misogyny though, more incompetence and insular thinking that is a trademark of GW, they all thought it was funny, they don't play test, so the idea of someone playing who isnt the same as the inhabitants of the studio never occurs to them. That attitude is, I'm certain, precisely why they don't think any way of balancing the game is needed either by the way.
Yeah but trying to indicate that a rule stating you have to have a beard to get the bonus means it is mysogynistic is just overdoing it. From reading a few other things in the thread I believe GW has also put in new rules such as having to jump up and down and other stuff like shouting out stuff; by the same logic those rules are discriminating against people with the inability to jump up and down or speak...
I do agree with you on the incompetence thing though as the new rules for all the old models gives a serious insight into the company's thoughts on the existing players: Serious (although arguably simple and uninteresting) rules for the new shiny stuff...frivolous and badly thought out rules for all the old stuff.
Moopy wrote: They also look like WM- Cygnar colors.
Saying WM isn't balanced is a pretty misguided statement. At best.
Well, Warmachine is unbalance But all parts of it are unbalanced, and leads to everyone having powerful combinations.
The key word for warmachine isn't balance or unbalance. Warmachine WORKS.
They have a system where people can play balanced games. Not with all models, some are very 'meh' compared to other models. I see that in sales all the time. No one, no one at all, buys certain models, and can sit for a couple of years. But each faction has playable armies and competitive armies. Warmachine works as a game and competitive system.
I think it comes down to the fact that GW could make an Awesome faction that already had president in fluff and just gave us spiritwarrior men things that just blinked into existence because it might get SM players into AoS.
I thought that moustache rule was meant to be on the figures not the person playing but still.
Bull0 wrote: Putting rules about having mustaches and beards in was insensitive, I doubt anyone dosagrees with that, and it can probably be left there for the sake of sanity
What?
Is this sarcasm? I can't tell anymore.
40k will probably be Sigmarized
No, I wasn't being sarcastic. I did manage to spell disagrees with an O, though. Silly phone.
I think getting into "let's count the non-sexualised female models available", "let's define sexualization", "let's make broad statements about misogyny" etc is all a bit out of place for a wargame news forum.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: A few weeks ago, Yakface and Legoburner were getting stick for trying to make the rules of Maelstrom's edge as balanced and as tactically challenging as possible.
A few weeks later, GW dump this ruleset on people, and for some people, its sunshine and rainbows.
It's a funny old world.
Que?
Personally I cannot find much of "sunshine and rainbows" within this 200+ thread (or the similar one at Warseer) dominated by "tar-and-feathers" posts.
Different games. Different outlooks on games.
Warmachine isn't balanced. Everything is "broken" by warhammer standards. Everything is a special little snowflake with superpowers. And yet the game works, is playable, has tournaments, tiered lists, balanced play. Just different. I think AOS has some of that. Lots of units have new little abilities. I can't keep them straight, keep forgetting them all Everything unbalanced makes balance? Dunno. Doesn't compute for me mathematically, and I'm a math person.
Flames of War isn't balanced. The best scenarios build in unbalance to mimic one side advancing, or moving towards objectives, the other defending. Germans have better tanks, the US has much cheaper but more plentiful infantry. Russians have crap but so cheap it doesn't matter. But the game is balanced.
Play enough games, it's easier to find the balance maybe.
Sorry Mik, but there's a difference between intentional asymmetrical balance of the sort you refer to in FoW, and AoS' take what you like, in as big a quantity as you like, FIGHT! "system". And Warmahordes, even though not to my tastes, at least attempts to impose order on proceedings with the points system, plus it has defined factions.
A lot of folk, myself included, aren't down on AoS because it's a fast-paced skirmish game, we're down on it because it takes GW's usual "gentlemen's agreements > actual rules" attitude to a ridiculous, self-parodying extreme, and because instead of using the release of Warscrolls for existing factions and models as a way to build some goodwill it seems very much like they were meant as an intentional "WHY SOO SHERIUSH?" trolling of fans who've supported this company for years even decades.
If this was "Warmahordes Fantasy Battle" I'd be all over it, but as it stands GW are trying to sell people an incomplete ruleset and it's not on IMO.
well, yes,,,,and I sort of know this. I never said the balance/unbalance of FOW was the same as AOS. In fact, rather than just make a quick statement, i tried to explain what kind of imbalance was there. But while on the subject of FOW, I've also fought quite a few big battles where we did bring all our models and fought for hours and had fun. FOW is quite a versitile system that can be used for both competitive tournament, small skirmish and narrative. The most carnage i ever saw in any game was the Kursk Tank battle we did. Your army was literally "every tank you own". About a dozen players. At one point we just removed 200 dead tanks and declared the whol center board to have cover from wrecks and smoke. Torched about 500 tanks between both sides and ended in a parking lot stalemate......sort of like it did historically
I just get tired of people shouting "balance!" as if it was some mystical grail to quest for. There are different types of balance, for different types of games. And yes, AOS has little of that currently, i don't argue that. In fact I've got hours of work into a system to use for tournaments at my shop. Work I don't feel I should have had to do. But then, I have to do a lot of crap in my business I don't think I should have to do.
But I think as has come up before, if you are taking the jokes in the Warscrolls as some sort of insult or trolling of the players, you're really taking it to personally. I printed out all the material and put it in binders Friday night and had 20 people reading through them and having a great time. No one was angry, no one took it as some personal insult. Some of them are mad and hate AOS, some can't wait to play and they came in saturday to get games in. But not one person saw it as some insult.
NoggintheNog wrote: As I've said before, I think the warscrolls for old units are pretty much a troll of the old player base and nothing much at all to do with age of sigmar other than giving the impression the £1,000's some have sunk into the models wasn't all just thrown by the wayside.
The warscrolls for existing units is an issue much like the issue of square vs round bases. It's something GW knew they couldn't actually solve so they just said "frell it" and moved on.
I mean, I can't imagine the reaction to AoS would be this positive if they'd just nuked all their old models, can you? AoS would be close to 100% dead in the water if they DIDN'T release rules for the older models. As it is it was no labor of love, it was a necessity and GW knows it.
Absolutely correct sir.
Without the warscrolls for old models, AoS would be a 125.00 kiddies game in a market that would support only a 60.00 game of that type, and maybe a couple of sales to 40k players for bits.
When i read the original rules, saw the price, and didn't know about warscrolls, I had much anger. Mostly of the "how can you be so FETHING stupid" type. But the warscrolls are actually 99% of the game.
RoninXiC wrote: It will take you dozends of games to figure out a truely balanced game.
And if you change any unit, you will probably arrive at a new imbalanced situation.
Naw, even with imperfect systems like "toss out 80 wounds of models" I've had some good games. Not to say someone who works at it a bit can't break that limitation and min/max the crap out of it, of course they can. But if using a simplistic equation like that for army building, people shouldn't be trying so hard to break it. A few games and we see how things go, and are making a better system. A few weeks and we'll have an imperfect point based system. Which is pretty much all GW ever had
Do female dwarves have beards in the Warhammer line?
Having reread the rules i realize the sudden death is not the universal equalizer I thought it was but I am still pondering picking up the set. The models look great and my 6 year old should actually be able to grasp the basic rules and so we could play. There are few who will find that a selling point, but I am convinced that something else is coming that will provide the depth most people are looking for.
At the moment GW is telling the God's Honest Truth to Timmies mom when she comes into the store and is told they can use as much or as little as her kids want. No army books, no rule books, nothing. Just buy this box and go. a couple months from now there will likely be more to choose from, but that's no different than lots of board games with multiple, optional expansions. For the serious player they won't be optional, but for Timmies mom, she can walk out the door box in hand and Know that she has got all she needs.
As a parent I see this no worse than Lego. The deluxe castle should be more than enough to keep the kids busy for months, if not years. If I choose to indulge in excessive capatilism parenting and buy more Lego so my kid has as much as the neighbours, that's my issue, not Lego's. The same goes for this kit.
Again, this lens is not the one that long time gamers will always share, but it's my world view at the moment.
So how does this work with low-quality spam units, like goblins, skink, or skaven, compared to high-quality models like Bret Knights or WoCs?
Well to start Bret Knights and WoC's are 2 wounds instead of 1 so you get twice as many skaven/skink/goblins.
In general I think people are underestimating the combat phase. Just selecting the right order for your combats is going to be huge. It's something I noticed because of Wrath of Kings but combat is incredibly interesting now. Also baiting is going to be a huge part of this.
Honestly if it wasn't for a lack of army building mechanism this game would be very good (not perfect by any means).
It is definitely huge. I got charged by two blocks of Executioners. Brutal models in combat, but a bit fragile. My opponent had to choose which combat to go first with. Luckily my Shaggoth only took 4 wounds. Should have wiped him off the table. Then I ignored two other combats and selected my bestigors to beat up on the executioners who hadn't swung on the yet, killing half of them. And how nice of them, they have a banner! Bestigors love defiling banners and get a bonus to hit against units that have them. Many dead Daelfs.
This reboot was a great opportunity to introduce some diversity into the setting. Especially with single-pose kits where you don't have to worry about parts being compatible with eachother.
Not that it'd stop GW's writing from being awful and ridiculous, but I'd give them props if they started forging narratives that aren't about the glorious conquests of mighty white men. I'm sure part of the fanbase would take that very poorly, but that's all the more reason to do it.
Relapse wrote: I was just told the Mantic website was crashing a lot because of all the traffic happening on it. I know I was having trouble getting in to see stuff.
Any comfirmations?
Talked to Ronnie, and he really has been blown away. They're having to order more of the books because preorders sky-rocketed in the last week. He was sincere, and caught off guard.
Yeah, think the first he heard of it was when i sent him a facebook message, he truly didn't know what was up, and everyone in the thread assumed he did
People running game companies don't have time, or care, to keep track of what the rest of the world is doing. And none of us ever expected a move like this.
Mantic should ride this opportunity as long as they can.
Relapse wrote: I was just told the Mantic website was crashing a lot because of all the traffic happening on it. I know I was having trouble getting in to see stuff.
Any comfirmations?
Talked to Ronnie, and he really has been blown away. They're having to order more of the books because preorders sky-rocketed in the last week. He was sincere, and caught off guard.
Yeah, think the first he heard of it was when i sent him a facebook message, he truly didn't know what was up, and everyone in the thread assumed he did
People running game companies don't have time, or care, to keep track of what the rest of the world is doing. And none of us ever expected a move like this.
Mantic should ride this opportunity as long as they can.
I would bet there is a strategy meeting at Mantic first thing tomorrow morning because a massive opportunity has just been dumped in their laps and they can build more goodwill out of this to produce future sales than anything I could have ever imagined.
Also, I'm sure some people are tasked with watching what the competition does, but I would assume paying attention to rumors would be out. You cannot plan any for of business strategy or tactics based upon the rumors about what your competition might be doing. You can only react to what they actually do.
From the 10th July you'll be able to download the core 2nd Edition Kings of War rules and force lists and try them out for free.
Find out more about the free rules, release date and how you can win a free signed copy of the new rulebook by going to the blog right now!
Ronnie Renton's Facebook:
So, all of a sudden the interest in Kings of War has gone through the roof.
I mean, I know the rules are better than ever. We have cool battle photos, more great art, and the minis look better than ever. But...
...none of that explains the huge increase in interest in the last few days.
Why does everyone suddenly want to play our mass battle fantasy game.
So, all of a sudden the interest in Kings of War has gone through the roof.
I mean, I know the rules are better than ever. We have cool battle photos, more great art, and the minis look better than ever. But...
...none of that explains the huge increase in interest in the last few days.
Why does everyone suddenly want to play our mass battle fantasy game.
Has something changed?
LoL
I think know what kit he would like to paint up next.
Just to state what should be obvious, the drop of the PDF for free rules for KoW2 has been planned by Mantic literally for many many months. That it drops on July 10 is a coincidence and has nothing to do with GW dropping a piece of gak rules set for their WHFB replacement.
Those rules are NOT Mantic taking advantage of GWs misfortune.
Xyxox wrote: Just to state what should be obvious, the drop of the PDF for free rules for KoW2 has been planned by Mantic literally for many many months. That it drops on July 10 is a coincidence and has nothing to do with GW dropping a piece of gak rules set for their WHFB replacement.
Those rules are NOT Mantic taking advantage of GWs misfortune.
No, but it is clear that they realize what's going on and are not sad about the sudden boost in interest/sales.
And the KoW rules are also free and reportedly the next edition (coming soon) is also free.
So no need to buy anything esp. if you've got the models/armies you already want to play with.
EDIT: Looks like folks say coming soon = July 10th for KoW 2nd ed.
Xyxox wrote: Just to state what should be obvious, the drop of the PDF for free rules for KoW2 has been planned by Mantic literally for many many months. That it drops on July 10 is a coincidence and has nothing to do with GW dropping a piece of gak rules set for their WHFB replacement.
Those rules are NOT Mantic taking advantage of GWs misfortune.
No, but it is clear that they realize what's going on and are not sad about the sudden boost in interest/sales.
Right. At this point the increased sales of the rule books with the fluff and an increase in other sales for the game are simply fate expressing itself on the situation. As of right now, Mantic has done nothing to attempt to take advantage of the situation, something I suspect will change in the coming days. Looking at their plans for releases in support of the v2 rules, they may need to do nothing at all and simply carry on with their plans as they currently stand because their stuff should be in direct competition with future releases by GW in support of AoS. New models are coming out to support the KoWv2 rules set and they should be high quality for cheaper prices than you get from GW.
Honestly if it wasn't for a lack of army building mechanism this game would be very good (not perfect by any means).
I agree with this 100%.
The in-game mechanics are pretty sound. There's still a few odd things, but the game does feel pretty streamlined and after you get the hang of it, it can go by very quickly.
It's just the last of comprehensive army building that blows my mind.
Bull0 wrote: Putting rules about having mustaches and beards in was insensitive, I doubt anyone dosagrees with that, and it can probably be left there for the sake of sanity
My wife just wore a GARISH, giant stage mustache prop to play this rule... and our friends and I had a blast during the game.
People are REALLY over-thinking this game.
It isn't balanced, nor smart... its silly, and can be enjoyed when treated as the novelty it is. I don't suspect that novelty will last long, but there is plenty of fun to be had.
EASY
