I had been very excited about Kharadron Overlords and bought the army book.
But the prices on the Kharadron kits coupled with the very cool Dark Imperium starter for 40k have me leaning toward 40k again.

The only other AoS player I have in the area (an hour drive) is the guy I gave my starter Khorne to since he refuses to buy GW.
40k, on the other hand, has a weekly gaming presence even when 7th was driving players away.

How has the new 40k release---set for next weekend---affected your AoS plans, if at all?

it hasn't. I had no plans for buying the new 40k set (too pricey). i'm waiting for the digital rulebooks is all, which i'll buy when i'm able to.

I do want a kharadron ship though, somehow. dwarf air pirates are a dream.

I think the main thing is 40k looks like a better version of the AoS rules now.

The starter set doesn't do it for me though, and I generally prefer the fantasy aesthetic.

I'd like to start up a 40k army at some point in the future, but I have many months of AoS to paint first.

sadly the new 40k (which I personally greatly dislike) has killed what little interest there was in AoS that we had been trying to build.

I honestly don't think so. In so far there's been too little a frame to draw conclussions from and we are still a bit away from GHB II. IMO I think it will introduce changes and only then we will be able to truly speak about it.

I really think the character rule in 8th (can't target characters with shooting/psychic behind units unless they have more than 10 wounds) REALLY needs to be ported to AoS. Hero sniping with mass shooting is starting to become a problem.

There's too much shooting in the new AoS armies I think. My only problem with it really.

hasent realy affected my plans at all.

i have allways favored 40k but never their rulebook that at best could be used as a blunt weapon. it was never casual friendly at all.

aos made a nightmare of a game(fantasy) into a playable game but it is clear that GHB needs a lot of work combined whit some actual support for ALL grand alliances and their old sub factions.
i naturaly dont have read the 40k rules books, but fomr waht little i have seen sofar on the tube, there are deffo some ideas there that aos need to use aswell.

as a death player, aos does no longer appeal to me untill i see some death support, so i will be moving to 40k for the time beeing.

I've always played both, but my area is like most areas I've read about... its about 90% 40k and 10% whfb/AOS.

I'd like to see a lot of the 40k stuff make it into AOS. There are a lot of AOS mechanics that I quite simply hate because for me it ruins the immersion.

I won't stop playing AOS. But my meta is primarily driven by 40k. The GW store here only has AOS games going on when we have our club AOS campaign that runs during the summer. Having now read the 40k rulebook and seen the indices myself, I can conclude from my own opinion that 40k 8th ed is several steps the superior game system over AOS.

Other then that, I've never seen a WHFB or AOS game in the five years the store has been here. And the last time I saw a WHFB game in one of our LGS was 2007 at the height of 7th edition WHFB.

*note - I am not omnipotent and everywhere at once so I'm sure some whfb / aos games have been played in public somewhere here, but I've just never seen it, its always always ALWAYS 40k.

I am very excited by 40K, and I know quite a few friends who are prominent AoS podcasters and a big part of the tournament scene are also embracing the new 40K.

But it's not at all at the detriment of AoS. AoS remains my tournament game and my collectors game, whereas 40k gives me an avenue to collect and play a new army (my GSC), I certainly don't plan to collect every single faction in 40k like I do with the Grand Alliances in AoS.

There's probably going to be 9 months or longer with no significant AoS release while 40k takes the spotlight like AoS did during it's launch. If a hobbyist's monthly hobby budget goes on 40k for the next 9 months or so and then back onto AoS when it takes the spotlight once more, it's only a win-win in my eyes

That's one other thing. while i'm excited by the new rules, part of that excitement is that i hope to use the two armies i already have (GSC and marines) more. So it might change my playing options in that i'll hopefully have more of them, but not my buying decisions.

Which are still going to be not much of anything, but more likely will be for AoS if i do

 Bottle wrote:
I am very excited by 40K, and I know quite a few friends who are prominent AoS podcasters and a big part of the tournament scene are also embracing the new 40K.

But it's not at all at the detriment of AoS. AoS remains my tournament game and my collectors game, whereas 40k gives me an avenue to collect and play a new army (my GSC), I certainly don't plan to collect every single faction in 40k like I do with the Grand Alliances in AoS.

There's probably going to be 9 months or longer with no significant AoS release while 40k takes the spotlight like AoS did during it's launch. If a hobbyist's monthly hobby budget goes on 40k for the next 9 months or so and then back onto AoS when it takes the spotlight once more, it's only a win-win in my eyes

The new 40k is definitely in the spotlight right now. But I think in a couple months once the hype dies down things will be somewhat normal again. After DG and Primaris get their codexes I expect an AoS release, at the very least 1 new blood bowl team in plastic and shadespire starter set...which they said is due late 2017. I'll be shocked if AoS doesn't get at least one new army book out before the end of the year. There is still like 4-5 months until oct/november and that is plenty of time. If GW really decides to goof around and drag out the 40k starter set armies then...it's going to be a very dull next few months.

 Bottle wrote:
I am very excited by 40K, and I know quite a few friends who are prominent AoS podcasters and a big part of the tournament scene are also embracing the new 40K.

But it's not at all at the detriment of AoS. AoS remains my tournament game and my collectors game, whereas 40k gives me an avenue to collect and play a new army (my GSC), I certainly don't plan to collect every single faction in 40k like I do with the Grand Alliances in AoS.

There's probably going to be 9 months or longer with no significant AoS release while 40k takes the spotlight like AoS did during it's launch. If a hobbyist's monthly hobby budget goes on 40k for the next 9 months or so and then back onto AoS when it takes the spotlight once more, it's only a win-win in my eyes

Well I was going to post my stance on the matter but Bottle was nice enough to do it for me!

To quote the girl from the taco shell commercial, "Why not both?"

I mean, I would love to participate in both systems, but my time, money, and space are both seriously limited right now. I have about 1800 points of Destruction and 1000 points of Chaos to paint (more if I can use some Reaper models for my armies), but a couple 40K armies already painted and ready to play, with many more painting projects on the back log for 40K. I am having to sell off a bunch of models just to be able to afford the new rulebooks (if anyone is interested in Khador stuff, I can hook you up ). I will participate in both games, but for 40K, it really depends on who I am playing. For AoS, all the local players are (so far) relaxed and laid back, and wanting to get a Narrative Campaign going soon.

40K is what got me into wargaming as a hobby, but AoS has been my exclusive game while 7th Edition kept catering to the local WAAC players. We have a local group of about 5 or 6 AoS players, and all but one of us have more years in 40K (and that one guy got a Dark Angels army recently, but never did much in 40K). I imagine our group will soon transition from the "local AoS group" to the "narrative and relaxed wargamers group", which I am okay with that

Both indeed.

Theres not many in my area who do play. Maybe 8-12, but when you look at 40k players, easily 30 or more. Some play both. I did Khorne for AoS and plan to scifi the guys up a little and use them as khorne for 40k army. Can easily use them still for AoS

I can see how it would effect people though. Its the new hotness, and the 40k 8th ruleset is most of what is good for AoS but improved upon.

I see tem fixing up the AoS rules more in time to come to match how much better 40k 8th is.

I'm doing both. I've slowly been working on my small Bloodbound, but they are a taking a little bit of a back seat as I come full circle and paint up some Dark Eldar again. Another thing that has spurred my 40k focus is the fact that, indeed it looks like a better AoS, and my not-so-favorite local gaming store (read: glorified card shop) is starting a little league with the release of the new edition so I want to help foster a local community so I don't have to drive an hour for a game.

Yeah, AoS had a small prescence here then died, gonna buy my friends Nagash then just BLEGH it.
But I dont regret buying because I only paint 50$, most was bought on credit.

In the long term I don't see any impact really, for a number of reasons but two really big ones.

Some people like fantasy imagery, some people really want high tech weapons and tanks. That preference drives the decision for a lot of people.

Even with the updates to the new edition of 40k, it is a different type of game from AoS. My personal preference is for the light, open, and fairly minimal rules AoS provides, and enjoy playing it in its skirmish form. 40k has more complexity and more moving parts, and I think its a good thing that the two games are more different now than they were in the past because it gives players another distinguishing characteristic to make their decision about.

The only downside to 40k getting the attention for a while is that somebody will point out that AoS isn't getting new releases, thus it is a failure and getting put to bed or some other nonsense.

Honestly if people are saying that AoS is going down just because it's not getting updated didn't pay attention... considering the Kharadron Overlords and Skirmish are still pretty recent...

That and of course 40k is going to get more focus right now, it's getting a new edition and it's the most popular series the company has.

I really think it comes down to: "are you interested" since this IS time, effort, and money being put into this. People are more likely to be dragged into the scene if they look at the models and the battle and say "That looks pretty cool."

Another thing that can attract people to AoS is that it's pretty easy to pick up. Rules are easy to learn and fast to pick up, From there you can introduce other things like campaigns and matched play. Also the games can be pretty quick compared to 40k... which is ironic if you think about it...

 Bottle wrote:
I am very excited by 40K, and I know quite a few friends who are prominent AoS podcasters and a big part of the tournament scene are also embracing the new 40K.

But it's not at all at the detriment of AoS. AoS remains my tournament game and my collectors game, whereas 40k gives me an avenue to collect and play a new army (my GSC), I certainly don't plan to collect every single faction in 40k like I do with the Grand Alliances in AoS.

There's probably going to be 9 months or longer with no significant AoS release while 40k takes the spotlight like AoS did during it's launch. If a hobbyist's monthly hobby budget goes on 40k for the next 9 months or so and then back onto AoS when it takes the spotlight once more, it's only a win-win in my eyes

Thanks Bottle for sharing my sentiments on this whole matter. Saves me some typing.

 Bottle wrote:

There's probably going to be 9 months or longer with no significant AoS release while 40k takes the spotlight like AoS did during it's launch. If a hobbyist's monthly hobby budget goes on 40k for the next 9 months or so and then back onto AoS when it takes the spotlight once more, it's only a win-win in my eyes

I love AoS and have been a big supporter all along, building a group that can get about 10-15 people for tournaments and regularly sees 6-8 at monthly club days, and I think I can safely say 9 months without a significant release would be pretty harmful to the community momentum here. Not looking to whine about it, GW is killing it all around in my opinion, but that would be a big misstep. 40K could handle being on the back burner as the communities were established and they still got releases right? At least a new Tau book and surely some other new stuff, books, models, etc... I don't think here in the states AoS is in a strong enough position, at least locally to handle that kind of blackout period without community casualties.

Either way I'm still loving and playing AoS, Just my 2 cents

mikosan wrote:

 Bottle wrote:

There's probably going to be 9 months or longer with no significant AoS release while 40k takes the spotlight like AoS did during it's launch. If a hobbyist's monthly hobby budget goes on 40k for the next 9 months or so and then back onto AoS when it takes the spotlight once more, it's only a win-win in my eyes

I love AoS and have been a big supporter all along, building a group that can get about 10-15 people for tournaments and regularly sees 6-8 at monthly club days, and I think I can safely say 9 months without a significant release would be pretty harmful to the community momentum here. Not looking to whine about it, GW is killing it all around in my opinion, but that would be a big misstep. 40K could handle being on the back burner as the communities were established and they still got releases right? At least a new Tau book and surely some other new stuff, books, models, etc... I don't think here in the states AoS is in a strong enough position, at least locally to handle that kind of blackout period without community casualties.

Either way I'm still loving and playing AoS, Just my 2 cents

I honestly doubt it will be that long. Remember, in theory there's at least one more army to be released this year PLUS shadespire which will be like 6-8 warbands on launch.

I may not have cannibalized sales but 8th has definitely cannabalized the AoS threads ...been too quiet over here :/

pretty much the final nail in AoS coffin here, we are down to 2 players (counting me)

Blowing dust from my Eldar models from a very different era. I'd like to complete 1000 points of Stormcast army and should GW release the Aelves I think I'll continue to focus my efforts on AoS rather than 40k.

Then there's the skirmish and Path of Glory where I'd like to build a small Tzeench force.

 Knight wrote:
Blowing dust from my Eldar models from a very different era. I'd like to complete 1000 points of Stormcast army and should GW release the Aelves I think I'll continue to focus my efforts on AoS rather than 40k.

Then there's the skirmish and Path of Glory where I'd like to build a small Tzeench force.

tzeentch can be pretty fun in skirmish, but start a bit sucky. hang in with them though and it gets fun

The Tzaangors and Cultists are beautiful, bit disappointing there are no rules for Ogroid. If I had the money and time I'd gladly bought Kairos just for the coolness factor.

Anyway, I've picked Vandus and Plague Guarden novel, also played two games of skirmish with Stormcasts. I think this settles of what system is going to keep me busy for a while.

The new 40k, as great as it is (not sarcastic, really like it) hasn't dented my interest in AoS one bit. I'm currently knee deep in a project to build an Overlord fleet. I'm also still working on Bloodbound, and I'm aiming to get a Disciples Of Tzeentch airforce. AoS was still doing well in my area right up until 40k came out, and I'm sure that once the excitement dies down it'll return again.

I just started playing AOS and am finding it's very much a fun and heavily underrated game.
Right now, I'm putting together a demon army combined with mortals, beastmen, and Skaven in an escalation league setting.

I believe with the announcement of the GHB II AoS will be just fine, especially with Paths to Glory coming out as well. I think most avid AoS players who are looking at 8th ed 40K will jump right back in to Aos once the new books are dropped.

It's because unfortunately AoS was a failed launch, it had what it needed but stripped right out the gate. When they shut out their old players and kinda nuked the world it really left a bitter taste in people's mouth.

The other problem I see with AoS is that, who the gak is the target audience? Like not trolling here really wanna know who were they trying to appeal to with AoS, it sure as hell was not fantasy players.

I love the AoS game, is very fun with the few small game so have played and I have a full army planned and slow going to get it but, it's so dead at my store almost no one plays it, even our store manager has kinda given up on it.

At least locally, games are more likely to be in whatever system has the 'new' thing going on. I honestly don't think there's much cause for concern; 40k just got its new edition (and it is very, very close to AoS) and so people are drawn to it, expect interest to shift again when AoS gets another new faction or a campaign.

 Captain Joystick wrote:
At least locally, games are more likely to be in whatever system has the 'new' thing going on. I honestly don't think there's much cause for concern; 40k just got its new edition (and it is very, very close to AoS) and so people are drawn to it, expect interest to shift again when AoS gets another new faction or a campaign.

I would agree but AoS never got this effect, it was big for like...a week maybe 2 then died out and turned into 40k again.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
The other problem I see with AoS is that, who the gak is the target audience? Like not trolling here really wanna know who were they trying to appeal to with AoS, it sure as hell was not fantasy players.

40k Space Marine players. Why do you think they invented and then pushed the Stormcast Eternals so hard?

I'd agree to that in part in their appeal but they're also appealing to fans of high fantasy knights and even Dark Souls players since they have extravagant baroque armor, serve a God-king, lose their humanity upon respawning, have lightning and faith based magic and ride dragons made from a highly intelligent one that betrayed it's fellows (the God-beasts) to help the God-king.

Dark souls 3 supports the image further as there are golden winged knights with face masks and a hallowed king who rides a storm drake while fighting you upon a storm (ride the storm!).

As a dedicated fantasy player AoS pulled me right in with it's fantastical setting with limitless possibilities. The realm of life battleplan map was enough to make me fall for the setting.

Anyway, agreed to AoS being on the upswing once GW focuses on it again. Hopefully something nice pops up with the GH2 release like more battletomes.

Baron Klatz wrote:
but they're also appealing to fans of high fantasy knights

I am guilty of enjoying this trope. Oddly enough I don't particularly enjoy Space Marines while I do find Stormcast rather interesting. Lord Relictors for instance are suddenly something else and more than Space Marine's Chaplain. Other imagery that you've mentioned is also quite appealing, the warding lanterns are also an element that I quite like. I don't think I'm in majority, since old WHFB seem to have large dislike for the Stormcast and Marine players seem largely uninterested in them.

So far I am enjoying AoS setting and only wish more people gave it a chance, either the lore or the game. I feel AoS is more of a fantasy tale than the old world was.

Baron Klatz wrote:
I'd agree to that in part in their appeal but they're also appealing to fans of high fantasy knights and even Dark Souls players since they have extravagant baroque armor, serve a God-king, lose their humanity upon respawning, have lightning and faith based magic and ride dragons made from a highly intelligent one that betrayed it's fellows (the God-beasts) to help the God-king.

Dark souls 3 supports the image further as there are golden winged knights with face masks and a hallowed king who rides a storm drake while fighting you upon a storm (ride the storm!).

As a dedicated fantasy player AoS pulled me right in with it's fantastical setting with limitless possibilities. The realm of life battleplan map was enough to make me fall for the setting.

Anyway, agreed to AoS being on the upswing once GW focuses on it again. Hopefully something nice pops up with the GH2 release like more battletomes.

Uhh, if you ask most Dark Souls players what their favourite armour is they're more than likely going to say "Elite Knight set." Just about every player of DS/BB I know (and I know a lot) was in love with the Empire and Bretonnian designs, but despises AoS. They went from quite grounded, gritty and reasonable designs in WHFB to something closer to World of Warcraft.

So far I am enjoying AoS setting and only wish more people gave it a chance, either the lore or the game. I feel AoS is more of a fantasy tale than the old world was.

People will give it a chance when they build on it, but right now it still has the depth of a puddle. Before the Defence Force run in, no, one paper book in a boxed game and a handful of novels (almost all focusing on Sigmarines) does not make for an in-depth setting. The whole thing just feels so empty, probably a result of them trying to turn it into "dude you can have whatever you want in the Realms it's so open lmao" though at least with stuff like the Khador Overlords they seem to have realised their mistake and begun actually trying to put some thought into the world building. No doubt the Crucible 7 PnP RPG will do wonders for it, just because Warhammer lore is always at its most in-depth and interesting when somebody other than Games Workshop is writing it.

 Arbitrator wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
I'd agree to that in part in their appeal but they're also appealing to fans of high fantasy knights and even Dark Souls players since they have extravagant baroque armor, serve a God-king, lose their humanity upon respawning, have lightning and faith based magic and ride dragons made from a highly intelligent one that betrayed it's fellows (the God-beasts) to help the God-king.

Dark souls 3 supports the image further as there are golden winged knights with face masks and a hallowed king who rides a storm drake while fighting you upon a storm (ride the storm!).

As a dedicated fantasy player AoS pulled me right in with it's fantastical setting with limitless possibilities. The realm of life battleplan map was enough to make me fall for the setting.

Anyway, agreed to AoS being on the upswing once GW focuses on it again. Hopefully something nice pops up with the GH2 release like more battletomes.

Uhh, if you ask most Dark Souls players what their favourite armour is they're more than likely going to say "Elite Knight set." Just about every player of DS/BB I know (and I know a lot) was in love with the Empire and Bretonnian designs, but despises AoS. They went from quite grounded, gritty and reasonable designs in WHFB to something closer to World of Warcraft.

So far I am enjoying AoS setting and only wish more people gave it a chance, either the lore or the game. I feel AoS is more of a fantasy tale than the old world was.

People will give it a chance when they build on it, but right now it still has the depth of a puddle. Before the Defence Force run in, no, one paper book in a boxed game and a handful of novels (almost all focusing on Sigmarines) does not make for an in-depth setting. The whole thing just feels so empty, probably a result of them trying to turn it into "dude you can have whatever you want in the Realms it's so open lmao" though at least with stuff like the Khador Overlords they seem to have realised their mistake and begun actually trying to put some thought into the world building. No doubt the Crucible 7 PnP RPG will do wonders for it, just because Warhammer lore is always at its most in-depth and interesting when somebody other than Games Workshop is writing it.

C7 will knock it out the park, if GW lets them do their thing

Uhh, if you ask most Dark Souls players what their favourite armour is they're more than likely going to say "Elite Knight set." Just about every player of DS/BB I know (and I know a lot) was in love with the Empire and Bretonnian designs, but despises AoS. 

Ha, I like just the plain knight set but especially Havel's set. Giants armor and stone set get points for a Stormcast-esque look besides Ornstein as well.

I actually got alot of players to get into Stormcast because of the Dark Souls resemblance and DS players I know like them well enough.

Certainly alot of Dark Souls fans into AoS have converted them for DS bosses and the stone knight look. This one's my favorite:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer/comments/53da7y/artorias_the_warpwalker_stormcast_eternal/

And I know BB fans wouldn't care for Stormcasts but I've heard enough love for the Flesh-Eater Court because of it's theme of disease-like madness corrupting heroes and peasants alike and making them into blood thirsty beasts despite appearing like valiant soldiers in their own eyes. That the vampires keep the gothic and Victorian look certainly helps.

Besides that, AoS takes alot of cues from Dark Souls (and some nice Berserk-like artwork in the chaos book). The settings have three ages and a chaotic cycle they're trying to end, gods walk among mortals and the best background info is hidden piecemeal in the lore sections and fluff bits that can be put together for a larger picture.

Can't say everyone will see Dark Souls in it but I certainly do.

https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GHCw2AI-Lpk/VzOPcCyMnCI/AAAAAAAAAxw/3NTrX9nRYxEepRLHejj5cKTTHyc2MegQACKgB/s1600/age%2Bof%2Bsigmar%2Bartwork%2Bstormcast%2Beternals%2Bstardrake%2Bkhorne%2Bextremis.jpg

Before the Defence Force run in, no, one paper book in a boxed game and a handful of novels (almost all focusing on Sigmarines) does not make for an in-depth setting.

You're forgetting all the battletomes that are filled with that kind of lore, though you mention the Overlords like it's the only book to do so. The Grand Alliance books also gave alot of fluff for the setting and how everything fit.

Though RPG books will do wonders for enlightening people I'm curious why people can't be bothered to read or discuss these sources of lore but the rpg books magically solve all the problems? They're still going to have to buy and read it like you'd do with the novels or battletomes.

The rpg will have more details than some sources but it's just another window of the many GW are providing for their ever growing setting.

C7 will knock it out the park, if GW lets them do their thing

Oh definitely.

Before the Defence Force run in, no, one paper book in a boxed game and a handful of novels (almost all focusing on Sigmarines) does not make for an in-depth setting.

You're forgetting all the battletomes that are filled with that kind of lore, though you mention the Overlords like it's the only book to do so. The Grand Alliance books also gave alot of fluff for the setting and how everything fit.

Though RPG books will do wonders for enlightening people I'm curious why people can't be bothered to read or discuss these sources of lore but the rpg books magically solve all the problems? They're still going to have to buy and read it like you'd do with the novels or battletomes.

The rpg will have more details than some sources but it's just another window of the many GW are providing for their ever growing setting.

The issue there is that the lore is scattered all over the place, the good AoS books are not cheap, generally harder to find if you dont mail order, and AoS is not popular everywhere. A RPG will consolidate all the information in a more usable way. Lore in a wargame can be spread out and not really hurt it, for an RPG it needs to be readily available for GMs and players. I have all the AoS books but I dont think they are a coherent whole and the setting is still very sparse. They give in depth for small parts at a time but so far there really is no overall setting fleshed out (though its likely due to them still not being done with everything, so it makes sense from that perspective)

Indeed, the big difference between AoS and the Old World's setting detail is that the Old World kept building up lore around the same areas and factions over and over again so they kept adding more detail.

Such as when the second-to-last Empire book vaguely mentioned that a imperial noble insulted a Bretonnian's wife and their crusade was stopped by Helmgart cannons. Next book revealed it was Marius who did this and the cannons were actually Helblasters. The smaller setting let them easily expand on the details.

AoS is massive and constantly growing(metaphorically and literally) so it's far harder to pinpoint an area of detailed focus when the entire thing still needs expanding upon and fleshing out.

It was hard to make any world shaking outcomes in the old world. Having a world that doesn't feel like a historical setting with a fantasy skin over it is a great plus in my view. I don't feel any need to rush the AoS setting, the lore will come with time.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Indeed, the big difference between AoS and the Old World's setting detail is that the Old World kept building up lore around the same areas and factions over and over again so they kept adding more detail.

Such as when the second-to-last Empire book vaguely mentioned that a imperial noble insulted a Bretonnian's wife and their crusade was stopped by Helmgart cannons. Next book revealed it was Marius who did this and the cannons were actually Helblasters. The smaller setting let them easily expand on the details.

AoS is massive and constantly growing(metaphorically and literally) so it's far harder to pinpoint an area of detailed focus when the entire thing still needs expanding upon and fleshing out.

That is something AoS needs time to develop, but in all honesty GW should have developed a lot more than they did, particularly the starter box should have had more overview and less focus on stormcast, this was not just a new version of warhammer, its a completely new game (I get it they were the new hotness, but they are not gonna save or make AoS a success on their own). games like shadespire and silver tower are going to do wonders, hammerhal is a great start as well. It really felt like they shotgunned stuff out at us and hoped it would stick.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Knight wrote:
It was hard to make any world shaking outcomes in the old world. Having a world that doesn't feel like a historical setting with a fantasy skin over it is a great plus in my view. I don't feel any need to rush the AoS setting, the lore will come with time.

in a miniature wargame setting, there is no need for world shaking outcomes. its basically just a backdrop to your fights. in a total setting like the old world, there is also rpg, card, video, etc... and AoS is going that way as well. But on the same note you do want your fanbase to care about the setting and bring it to life for them. the old world succeeded in doing that over its lifetime in the face of competition like the forgotten realms, greyhawk, dragonlance, etc... AoS ( or more accurately "the mortal realms") has not done that yet. and is out there enough to struggle (like eberron)

 Arbitrator wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:
I'd agree to that in part in their appeal but they're also appealing to fans of high fantasy knights and even Dark Souls players since they have extravagant baroque armor, serve a God-king, lose their humanity upon respawning, have lightning and faith based magic and ride dragons made from a highly intelligent one that betrayed it's fellows (the God-beasts) to help the God-king.

Dark souls 3 supports the image further as there are golden winged knights with face masks and a hallowed king who rides a storm drake while fighting you upon a storm (ride the storm!).

As a dedicated fantasy player AoS pulled me right in with it's fantastical setting with limitless possibilities. The realm of life battleplan map was enough to make me fall for the setting.

Anyway, agreed to AoS being on the upswing once GW focuses on it again. Hopefully something nice pops up with the GH2 release like more battletomes.

Uhh, if you ask most Dark Souls players what their favourite armour is they're more than likely going to say "Elite Knight set." Just about every player of DS/BB I know (and I know a lot) was in love with the Empire and Bretonnian designs, but despises AoS. They went from quite grounded, gritty and reasonable designs in WHFB to something closer to World of Warcraft.

So far I am enjoying AoS setting and only wish more people gave it a chance, either the lore or the game. I feel AoS is more of a fantasy tale than the old world was.

People will give it a chance when they build on it, but right now it still has the depth of a puddle. Before the Defence Force run in, no, one paper book in a boxed game and a handful of novels (almost all focusing on Sigmarines) does not make for an in-depth setting. The whole thing just feels so empty, probably a result of them trying to turn it into "dude you can have whatever you want in the Realms it's so open lmao" though at least with stuff like the Khador Overlords they seem to have realised their mistake and begun actually trying to put some thought into the world building. No doubt the Crucible 7 PnP RPG will do wonders for it, just because Warhammer lore is always at its most in-depth and interesting when somebody other than Games Workshop is writing it.

My favortie armour is the pudgy brother guy armour lol. It was wearable in the new darksouls but weighted a ton.

You mean Onion knight? That's one of my favorites too.

Great characters as well, "I'm a knight of Catarina and you will feel my wrath!".

Edit: I guess bonus points again that by the end of game 3 he's a large armored knight using a sword with the power of a storm to defeat a chaotic giant amidst a long destroyed kingdom.

I'm going to start collecting Age of Sigmar this year. I know of only a few people here who do but no one actually plays that I know of, so if I did want to play here I would likely have to start organising times ect.

40k has seen a resurgence in old players and new alike though but at least a few people are feeling stung by 40k so might look at Age of Sigmar now.

For me my interest in AoS started with acolytes of tzeentch, and I think that release is when a lot of people began to start looking at AOS as more than just “stormcast, khorne, and halfnforgotten legacy models and no fluff.”.

The Karadons are cool- but I strongly suspect that its tje cthulu elves amd the return of Slaanesh that will see AoS really start to take off.

I like that AoS doesn't require people to buy a big $80 rulebook, but at the same time one advantage to a big rulebook is that it's a convenient place to stick a bunch of fluff about the setting and the individual armies.

New 40k is a $60 book and the core rules, like AoS's, are free for download.

I'm into the new 40k , but mostly 'cause it is new (guilty of fleshing out my genestealer cult ). For me AoS remains the game of choice between the two due to the more interesting unit rules in the warscrolls. Oh, and the warscrolls are free - I spend considerably more time on the AoS section that before because of that.

Yeah, i think they made a few decisions with AOS that ultimately are better than 40k; having all the unit stats freely available was huge, and I'm not sure why they changed their mind other than to get some more $25 books sold.

I think its because AOS was an experiment to see if people would buy books even if the rules were free.

Unsurprisingly the answer is no. No most people won't buy a single book if they can get the rules free.

 auticus wrote:
I think its because AOS was an experiment to see if people would buy books even if the rules were free.

Unsurprisingly the answer is no. No most people won't buy a single book if they can get the rules free.

I would need to see sales figures supporting that claim. Everyone in my local group uses a battletome if their army has one available. We just prefer physical media.

We'll never get sales figures. Only anecdotes.

Anecdotally, in my city, and in the two cities nearby where we have joint gaming sessions... out of say 40 people, there are four of us with any books (GHB not counting, everyone has one of those).

I know that all of the sales managers in said region and FLGS have said that the books don't really move either. Now that is concerning the Realmgate Wars books.

Army books, up until Sylvaneth there were only two of us that had books. Once they started putting rules into the books like the artefacts etc... (sylvaneth release), people started buying books again with their armies, because those rules were not freely available. This also caused a minor storm of complaining.

The unit stats are free, but you need the books if you want formations, spells/prayers, and allegiance abilities/command traits. And they actually don't have every units rules available. The Drakesworn Templar was not online until this year, and the Relictor is still not up as an example. So I would say the free rules were largely moot in the first place, as they are more of just a sampling, and people are buying AoS books regardless of the free unit rules. So GW simply skipped that this time around.

I had no problem buying the Bloodbound and Overlord books. The later especially, on account of the artwork.

 auticus wrote:
We'll never get sales figures. Only anecdotes.

Anecdotally, in my city, and in the two cities nearby where we have joint gaming sessions... out of say 40 people, there are four of us with any books (GHB not counting, everyone has one of those).

I know that all of the sales managers in said region and FLGS have said that the books don't really move either. Now that is concerning the Realmgate Wars books.

Army books, up until Sylvaneth there were only two of us that had books. Once they started putting rules into the books like the artefacts etc... (sylvaneth release), people started buying books again with their armies, because those rules were not freely available. This also caused a minor storm of complaining.

Well, even before Sylvaneth, you had to have the battletome for battalions. Based on the rate at which new battetomes for popular armies seem to sell out online, after release, I'd say their sales are respectable. I just don't believe that they aren't selling due to free rules online.

Without a worldwide poll we'll never know. Here, that was very much the case.

I strongly dislike AOS, don't like what GW did with WFB, liked the game concept/style of WFB better, don't like the style or setting and prefer the low-fantasy?? /: Brandon Sanderson/patrick rothfuss/Martin/Raymond E. Feist/LOTR/1000AD - 1600AD style of WFB then the more comic book/marvel style of AOS. A LOT of people feel the same way I do. They are interesting in getting back into 40k but not so much AOS.

So will 40ks success have any effect on AOS. I would say yes because GW will be be pumping RND into 40k and specialist games because they are making so much $$$ there. This will mean not enough support for Sigmar. If the game is to grow then GW need to get more people in by releasing models, and trying harder to catch more peoples imagination.

Then they are stuck between a rock and a hard place, considering WHFB from all reports wasn't selling hardly anything.

People voted with their wallet. WHFB died on the vine. For a variety of reasons.

MadMarkMagee wrote:

So will 40ks success have any effect on AOS. I would say yes because GW will be be pumping RND into 40k and specialist games because they are making so much $$$ there. This will mean not enough support for Sigmar. If the game is to grow then GW need to get more people in by releasing models, and trying harder to catch more peoples imagination.

People were saying the same thing 2 years ago. AoS is still here.

Haha, best evidence I see is this.

Warhammer fantasy sub-reddit, around for nearly a decade finally reached 3000 subs a few months ago.

AoS sub-reddit, reached that number in the first year and now is at over 7000 subs in only 2 years.

So yeah, AoS is doing fine compared to fantasy.

Besides that, how can 40k cannibalize AoS anymore than it did fantasy? Most fantasy players I've seen did both and they dated back to fantasy's glory days.

The only way 40k can hurt AoS is if GW focuses exclusively on it again and lets it's other games wither on the vine. With how they've made clear efforts to never do that again I see little concern.

It can cannibalize sales in the fact that (and I'm talking locally) I had folks actually considering buying into AoS. They were getting fed up with 7th ed and actually liked AoS's rules when I demoed.

Once 8th edition dropped, everybody -- including me since I'd like to actually play a game now and again instead of evangelizing --- bought in. The AoS stuff left on the shelves is not being replaced while new 40k stuff is coming in just about every week.

MadMarkMagee wrote:
I strongly dislike AOS, don't like what GW did with WFB, liked the game concept/style of WFB better, don't like the style or setting and prefer the low-fantasy?? /: Brandon Sanderson/patrick rothfuss/Martin/Raymond E. Feist/LOTR/1000AD - 1600AD style of WFB then the more comic book/marvel style of AOS. A LOT of people feel the same way I do. They are interesting in getting back into 40k but not so much AOS.

So will 40ks success have any effect on AOS. I would say yes because GW will be be pumping RND into 40k and specialist games because they are making so much $$$ there. This will mean not enough support for Sigmar. If the game is to grow then GW need to get more people in by releasing models, and trying harder to catch more peoples imagination.

And yet, a LOT of people weren't buying WHFB in the first place.

What gets me is this idea that the audience is a zero sum game, and that 40k and AoS are pitched at the same crowd. I do not believe they are.

A) Some people want guns, other people don't want any guns. Fantasy is a different beast, and some prefer it over SF, and other people don't.

B) AoS is still more streamlined than 40k. Some people want the extra bits 40k has, others don't.

Both can co-exist just fine.

 privateer4hire wrote:
It can cannibalize sales in the fact that (and I'm talking locally) I had folks actually considering buying into AoS. They were getting fed up with 7th ed and actually liked AoS's rules when I demoed.

Once 8th edition dropped, everybody -- including me since I'd like to actually play a game now and again instead of evangelizing --- bought in. The AoS stuff left on the shelves is not being replaced while new 40k stuff is coming in just about every week.

AoS is kind of in a holding pattern right now, with largely filler releases, while 40k gets launched and it has lead to less AoS stuff to be excited about (though the Kharadron Overlords are pretty sweet).

Once 40k has settled down a bit, I think AoS will see more interesting releases (Shadespire, new campaign, new factions) which will lead to more people being excited about the game. AoS had an uphill battle getting started and the fact that it has become popular at all is really a testament to the game's quality. As long as GW keep releasing good models and supplements, the game will have a life. I think it will always be the slightly smaller, slightly cheaper, slightly more casual little brother to 40k though.

The Path to Glory thing coming up for preorder probably this week will probably have a little bump, but I think the bigger bump will be GHB2.

That said, while I think there is some splitting of consumer money between 40k and AoS, I don't think they're completely overlapping in their markets. Some folks want sci-fi, some don't, and even though the games are similar now, they're different enough to offer different play experiences. Not everyone is going to want both, though some (like myself) will probably alternate between the two but eventually settle on one as a "primary" and play it more (for me, currently thinking AoS, since the "feel" for Chaos Daemons in there just seems more "fun" to me).

 Sqorgar wrote:
I think it will always be the slightly smaller, slightly cheaper, slightly more casual little brother to 40k though.

And for some of us that's a feature, not a bug.

What's wrong with that?

rmeister0 wrote:

MadMarkMagee wrote:
I strongly dislike AOS, don't like what GW did with WFB, liked the game concept/style of WFB better, don't like the style or setting and prefer the low-fantasy?? /: Brandon Sanderson/patrick rothfuss/Martin/Raymond E. Feist/LOTR/1000AD - 1600AD style of WFB then the more comic book/marvel style of AOS. A LOT of people feel the same way I do. They are interesting in getting back into 40k but not so much AOS.

So will 40ks success have any effect on AOS. I would say yes because GW will be be pumping RND into 40k and specialist games because they are making so much $$$ there. This will mean not enough support for Sigmar. If the game is to grow then GW need to get more people in by releasing models, and trying harder to catch more peoples imagination.

And yet, a LOT of people weren't buying WHFB in the first place.

What gets me is this idea that the audience is a zero sum game, and that 40k and AoS are pitched at the same crowd. I do not believe they are.

A) Some people want guns, other people don't want any guns. Fantasy is a different beast, and some prefer it over SF, and other people don't.

B) AoS is still more streamlined than 40k. Some people want the extra bits 40k has, others don't.

Both can co-exist just fine.

People weren't buying WHFB because most of the older players had what they needed and WHFB didn't have the sheer release saturation of 40k. It's somewhat telling that GW were surprised at how well The End Times was doing, as if they realised putting out new stuff would get people buying again or something.

Also, and most importantly, it struggled to gain fresh blood because the cost of entry was absurdly high even for a wargame. In 40k for example, you generally get a 'squad' at its maximum size (usually around ten) with certain rare exceptions like Conscripts. In Fantasy almost every army was at its peak by 'hording' up, which when you're looking at £16 for 10 Empire State Troops is going to put off newbies very quickly. Not to mention WHFB was an even bigger mess at lower points levels than 40k where you could at least get to 500pts and play relatively well, unlike Fantasy which both cost more as a whole AND only became playable properly at 1000pts (and even that's debatable).

I know AoS fanboys like to blame the WHFB fanbase for its flagging - although Hastings stated it was making GW a profit, just not the profit GW wanted - but in the end it was GW outpricing its audience and further driving/keeping them in 40k.

Haha, best evidence I see is this.

Warhammer fantasy sub-reddit, around for nearly a decade finally reached 3000 subs a few months ago.

AoS sub-reddit, reached that number in the first year and now is at over 7000 subs in only 2 years.

So yeah, AoS is doing fine compared to fantasy.

Reddit only really became big a few years ago. AoS only launched a few years ago and with Fantasy players pretty much despising it they naturally weren't going to go to the Fantasy sites, and instead established their own/set down flags on places like Reddit.

 Arbitrator wrote:
People weren't buying WHFB because most of the older players had what they needed and WHFB didn't have the sheer release saturation of 40k.

Also, and most importantly, it struggled to gain fresh blood because the cost of entry was absurdly high even for a wargame. In 40k for example, you generally get a 'squad' at its maximum size (usually around ten) with certain rare exceptions like Conscripts. In Fantasy almost every army was at its peak by 'hording' up, which when you're looking at £16 for 10 Empire State Troops is going to put off newbies very quickly. Not to mention WHFB was an even bigger mess at lower points levels than 40k where you could at least get to 500pts and play relatively well, unlike Fantasy which both cost more as a whole AND only became playable properly at 1000pts (and even that's debatable).

I started getting in Warhammer Fantasy back in the day, and was able to build up a decent force. But it did have its issues. I started wargaming with 40K, and enjoyed it. Then I decided to get into Warhammer Fantasy to give it a shot, picking Lizardmen back before their latest hardback army book. I enjoyed it, and played well in the game at a couple local tournaments with a balanced, mixed army of monsters and infantry.

That said, I did have some gripes with the game:
- The number of repeat models, and the cost involved in newer kits. Back when I first started, it wasn't too bad. But just the sheer number of infantry required was much more than I was used to, even as a Guard player! As GW approached the End Times, that was at the beginning of their "We are a model company!" which drove up the prices of any new kit that came out. So while my Suarus weren't expensive, my Bastiladon and Carnosaur were more expensive than I would have liked by about 10-15%. This was also the same time that saw the demise of the Battalion box, so bulking up armies was more costly than before. Aside from the fact that I was not a real big fan of having so many of the same model or unit on the board.

- Moving the models on the tabletop in formation. UGH. If it wasn't for my magnetic movement trays, I would not have stuck with the game. You have to move the block of infantry as a large block with pivots and stay in formation, and you can't glue them all together on a single base because each model is its own wound tracker, and comes off as a casualty over the game. (I'm not a fan of Kings of War's system of suffering damage on the unit either, but is there a middleground?) I like the IDEA of moving models in large formations into other large formations, but it was hard to do without a good movement tray system. Which leads us into....

- Fitting the miniatures on their bases. Thankfully, Saurus Warriors are easy to fit together and are consistent, . But Chaos Warriors and some other models don't have that luxury, which killed my enthusiasm and curbed my efforts for working on other armies. The finagling of models and bits to fit perfectly on their bases was too much for me - it took me way too long to get my Skinks arms to all fit in formation.

- Limited setting. This one comes from the benefit of hindsight, and yet is also one of the things that kept me out of the game as long as it did. Yes, it sucks that the Old World was paved over for AoS, but it still existed in the past; where Age of Sigmar has almost limitless opportunities for personal fluff and ways to explore the Realms, Warhammer Fantasy was much more akin to a historical game with magic in how it played, as the Old World was mapped out with nothing new likely to happen short of an underwater faction or two rising from the oceans (which would have been cool!). The Old World was certianly awesome in its fluff and setting, but it didn't leave much room for customizing your armies aside from paint jobs. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is something to consider as well.

Aside from the cost aspect, Age of Sigmar fixed my biggest beefs with the game, and I have enjoyed it. I have actually been enjoying it a lot more than 40K recently.

As for 40K eating into AoS sales, it will happen for a while until the next AoS update, without question. It doesn't affect me right now though, as I don't have the money to spend on the new 40K books, so I am pretty much stuck with AoS for the time being, and I'm okay with that (though recently I have been giving a lot of thought to the GW LotR miniatures game and working on more terrain at home).

Here where I am, WHFB wasn't selling because the market was over-saturated with used models that anyone could pick the game up and get a used army for 1/10th the cost of retail.

And as it was generic fantasy, there were a ton of non-gw options as well.

From a business perspective, canning WHFB for AOS was probably one of the smartest things that they could have done.

rmeister0 wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
I think it will always be the slightly smaller, slightly cheaper, slightly more casual little brother to 40k though.

And for some of us that's a feature, not a bug.

I know. I'm a slightly smaller, slightly cheaper, slightly more casual player.

Arbitrator wrote:I know AoS fanboys like to blame the WHFB fanbase for its flagging - although Hastings stated it was making GW a profit, just not the profit GW wanted - but in the end it was GW outpricing its audience and further driving/keeping them in 40k.

I don't think anyone blames WHFB. It just makes a compelling case for why something like AoS was ultimately the right decision. I don't think a mass army game is really what the market (in general) wants. RuneWars is by the biggest board game publisher in the world built on the mechanics of the biggest miniature game in the world and I don't think you could pay people to care about it. CMON has an upcoming kickstarter for Song of Ice and Fire (one of the most popular IPs right now) created by Eric Lang (one of the most popular game designers), and while the kickstarter will do gangbusters on the miniatures alone, it has almost zero chance of catching on.

I agree the fantasies problem was the high cost of entry + sheer amount of effort required to get all those models painted.

I think the problem with WFB was it was a bit too "massed". But I like the idea of units moving around in block formations, it looks nice. They should have just gone for a smaller game size, lower cost, rules reboot, with some sort of magnet/tray system out of the box. Maybe expanded the fluff instead of the a bomb...

A lot of WHFB's failure also stems from Kirby... The "New GW" could have turned it around...

From the AOS games I've watched sigmar looks very messy, more so then 40k because the game seems to be played with more models then 40k.... Not saying the game is messy, it just looks messy to me anyway.

It has been said before but it stands to truth that is 'AoS' had merely been a very, very heavily pushed spin-off/sister game to WHFB it would have gone down well with just about everybody. Hell, they could even have kept the round bases thing. It would've provided a good entry point for new players, give Fantasy players a reason to dabble in something different while adding to their collections and potentially bring over a different audience who might 'move up' to WHFB. At worst they might've risked temporarily annoying hardcore fanboys who believed it was taking resources from 'ranked' WHFB. Instead we got- well, yeah.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water was such a monumentally stupid decision that could only have come about from Kirby. It's so stupid infact it's why I stick to my belief WHFB as a setting was killed primarily because Not-Space Marines wouldn't have fit into the Old World and boy oh boy did Kirby want the sterling of those Space Marine players.

WHFB biggest problem was there annual release.

The chances of your army getting new models was 0.

Ever race was dark eldar, they released a few models and a codex, then 5 months later the next one. Hell if you played brets for an example your book was about3 editions out of date.

I uised the same models for nearly 7 years with not a single update.

 Arbitrator wrote:
It has been said before but it stands to truth that is 'AoS' had merely been a very, very heavily pushed spin-off/sister game to WHFB it would have gone down well with just about everybody. Hell, they could even have kept the round bases thing. It would've provided a good entry point for new players, give Fantasy players a reason to dabble in something different while adding to their collections and potentially bring over a different audience who might 'move up' to WHFB. At worst they might've risked temporarily annoying hardcore fanboys who believed it was taking resources from 'ranked' WHFB. Instead we got- well, yeah.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water was such a monumentally stupid decision that could only have come about from Kirby. It's so stupid infact it's why I stick to my belief WHFB as a setting was killed primarily because Not-Space Marines wouldn't have fit into the Old World and boy oh boy did Kirby want the sterling of those Space Marine players.

Dude, move on. It's been two years. Moving to a new game and setting was the best thing for them to do. From gav thorpe

(Sixth edition invigorated the sales for a while, but as a rules system it simply became less and less accessible. I think 8th edition was a massive step in the wrong direction, enforcing even bigger units and larger armies as a norm, and from there only a complete reinvention was going to work as a game system that was scaleable.

In terms of the background and imagery I tried, along with the artists, other developers and miniatures designers of the time, to create as unique a Warhammer feel for the visuals as possible. But fundamentally Warhammer was just too close to its roots, in terms of Elves, dwarfs, historical armies and so on. It simply lacked the stand out characteristics of an original IP, so while its strength derived from the familiar and unique blend of influences, it left the background open to outright imitation by other creators and manufacturers.

I think most people can admit now that two years on AOS has been turned into a success. It’s certainly the most animated I’ve seen the Warhammer community in about a decade or more.)

Aos was the best decision could have made.

 Arbitrator wrote:
It has been said before but it stands to truth that is 'AoS' had merely been a very, very heavily pushed spin-off/sister game to WHFB it would have gone down well with just about everybody. Hell, they could even have kept the round bases thing. It would've provided a good entry point for new players, give Fantasy players a reason to dabble in something different while adding to their collections and potentially bring over a different audience who might 'move up' to WHFB. At worst they might've risked temporarily annoying hardcore fanboys who believed it was taking resources from 'ranked' WHFB. Instead we got- well, yeah.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water was such a monumentally stupid decision that could only have come about from Kirby. It's so stupid infact it's why I stick to my belief WHFB as a setting was killed primarily because Not-Space Marines wouldn't have fit into the Old World and boy oh boy did Kirby want the sterling of those Space Marine players.

You may want to check that axe you've been grinding. Pretty sure after 2 years, you've just got a handle left.

In theory I like the idea of a rank and flank game with huge armies of minis. I've never actually played such a game, so I might not find it so fun in practice.

It seems like something like 15mm scale with less expensive miniatures that were designed to work really well with movement trays might be better for really big games. (This is not meant to be a dig at WHFB.)

Strangely I've been finding myself more interested in AoS since the new edition of 40k dropped. I think it might be because I probably over-consumed 40k content and AoS is a nice break from all that.

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
In theory I like the idea of a rank and flank game with huge armies of minis. I've never actually played such a game, so I might not find it so fun in practice.

It seems like something like 15mm scale with less expensive miniatures that were designed to work really well with movement trays might be better for really big games. (This is not meant to be a dig at WHFB.)

Strangely I've been finding myself more interested in AoS since the new edition of 40k dropped. I think it might be because I probably over-consumed 40k content and AoS is a nice break from all that.

Yeah something on the epic scale like that old war master game would have worked better for that massed rank and file style. Lots of 15mm models sharing the one base and the like.

Baron Klatz wrote:
I'd agree to that in part in their appeal but they're also appealing to fans of high fantasy knights and even Dark Souls players since they have extravagant baroque armor, serve a God-king, lose their humanity upon respawning, have lightning and faith based magic and ride dragons made from a highly intelligent one that betrayed it's fellows (the God-beasts) to help the God-king.

Dark souls 3 supports the image further as there are golden winged knights with face masks and a hallowed king who rides a storm drake while fighting you upon a storm (ride the storm!).

As a dedicated fantasy player AoS pulled me right in with it's fantastical setting with limitless possibilities. The realm of life battleplan map was enough to make me fall for the setting.

Anyway, agreed to AoS being on the upswing once GW focuses on it again. Hopefully something nice pops up with the GH2 release like more battletomes.

Actually no, Dark Souls is nothing like AoS. AoS is garish and flamboyant, Dark Souls is more somber. Dark Souls is closer to Berserk than to Lord of the Rings, and AoS isn't Berserk. Old WHFB was a little bit closer to berserk compared to AoS, as the focus was on ordinary people desperately fighting against an overwhelming foe instead of super men in shiny armor doing hero things. There's a reason why people call stormcast eternals sigmarines / ground marines.

There's not that many extravagant suits of Armor in dark souls. The most extravagant I can think of is the Armor of Favor set, and I thought that looked ugly. Ornstein and Smough's set come after. They're ok.
I've always liked the Drakeblood set. Such a nice suit of armor, and not too garish, with just a subtle amount of detail.

Is it possible that AoS took some inspiration from Dark Souls? Eh, probably. GW takes inspiration from a lot of things. But I wouldn't call them similar in terms of themes or appearance.

Btw, have they brought back ranks and facings yet? Or is it still like 40k where everything is in a loose formation?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
In theory I like the idea of a rank and flank game with huge armies of minis. I've never actually played such a game, so I might not find it so fun in practice.

It seems like something like 15mm scale with less expensive miniatures that were designed to work really well with movement trays might be better for really big games. (This is not meant to be a dig at WHFB.)

Strangely I've been finding myself more interested in AoS since the new edition of 40k dropped. I think it might be because I probably over-consumed 40k content and AoS is a nice break from all that.

Seems to work fine with KoW.
Then again, their system is unit based rather than model based (that is, in a unit takes enough damage it is removed, as oppposed to WHFB where you have to kill each individual model. Or just make them run away in close combat and run them down)

.

 AoS is garish and flamboyant, Dark Souls is more sombre Dark Souls is closer to Berserk than to Lord of the Rings, and AoS isn't Berserk.

The two swing wildly in theme, though. Dark Souls can go from stinking swamps to shining domains of the gods just as much as AoS does. If you're just focusing on artwork then there's just as much shining Stormcast charges as there are festering Nurgle corrupted lands, darkened lands of death and destroyed landscapes crawling with Skaven.

It's also funny to hear Berserk comparisons when chaos gets artwork heavily inspired by it. (I mean, demons destroying civilizations and corrupting men along with horribly slaughtering them? How could AoS compare...)

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-96cQrU80aoI/VsbVmRMfY_I/AAAAAAAAAFk/c3hzse9AANU/s320/Warhammer-Fantasy-fb-%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B5%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2587%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%2586%25D0%25B0-%25D1%2584%25D1%258D%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B4%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BC%25D1%258B-Age-of-Sigmar-2669734.jpeg

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qBnex-pQgQQ/VsbVmmifirI/AAAAAAAAAFo/KWToUUcwJPc/s1600/Warhammer-Fantasy-fb-%25D0%25BF%25D0%25B5%25D1%2581%25D0%25BE%25D1%2587%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B8%25D1%2586%25D0%25B0-%25D1%2584%25D1%258D%25D0%25BD%25D0%25B4%25D0%25BE%25D0%25BC%25D1%258B-Age-of-Sigmar-2671325.jpeg

focus was on ordinary people desperately fighting against an overwhelming foe instead of super men in shiny armor doing hero things.

If we saw Anor Londo fighting it'd be just that, armies of giant knights using massive weapons while their god threw lightning bolts around and clerics did everything from summoning forth more soldiers via magic to teleporting people back to their safe kingdom.

It's actually mirror opposite of AoS on that front. In Dark Souls you go from godly armies battling demons and god-like dragons that you only hear of in the background to the current struggle of men and undead against demons. In AoS you go from a mortal and undead armies fighting demons to the current godly armies battling demons and god-like dragons (the God-beasts).

Though AoS is actually rebuilding it's "age of fire" unlike Dark Souls so mortal armies should be a common sight again.

There's not that many extravagant suits of Armor in dark souls. 

Between 1,2 & 3 there's quite alot but just focusing on 1 alone has Anor Londo, Berenike knights and the Stone soldiers of darkroot basin that could easily be Stormcast stand-ins especially if you count them as being in a reforged state rather than hollow.

. But I wouldn't call them similar in terms of themes or appearance.

Now appearance can be debatable because there's not much showings of castles and the like for Undead burg and the like (well, probably not until we see more Death stuff as those places are very much in the lore) but otherwise you can get good connections like demon ruins=realm if chaos, B Blighttown=Nurgle's domains, Tomb of giants=realm if Death and the great hollow tree and ash lake could be right out of the realm of life.

Now in themes they are very similar as both are medieval mixes of Greek mythology and high/low fantasy with AoS differing by playing far more with Norse mythology influences and a higher fantasy setting.

Btw, have they brought back ranks and facings yet? Or is it still like 40k where everything is in a loose formation?

Haha, nope. Though you could always use ranks the game is still fluid and streamlined skirmish.(though I refer to it as mass skirmish since you're still using armies rather than individuals. )

 Future War Cultist wrote:
What's wrong with that?

Nothing at all. Being second to the king of tabletop just means you're the prince of it.

Fair enough, I guess you can see it that way. That chaos art does look a little bersek. I kind of like it, actually.

I miss my ranks and blocks of units. The fact they blew up the old world doesn't bother me as much as the departure from rank-and-file combat.

I can handle the fluff change. I play necrons in 40k, and their fluff is quite different from when I started them. I don't like most of the changes there, but it's fine, I'll just do what I want.

I can handle the difference in design and most of the new artwork. I don't like it, but I play lizardmen anyway, so it doesn't really matter. Its not like like I'm being forced to play sigmarines or paint everything gold, or stare at the latest drawing of gold armored men doing golden manly man things.

What I can't handle is that it went from a ranked formation based game to a loose skirmish type game, like 40k.
I already play 40k, I don't need to play fantasy 40k.

 Arbitrator wrote:
It has been said before but it stands to truth that is 'AoS' had merely been a very, very heavily pushed spin-off/sister game to WHFB it would have gone down well with just about everybody. Hell, they could even have kept the round bases thing. It would've provided a good entry point for new players, give Fantasy players a reason to dabble in something different while adding to their collections and potentially bring over a different audience who might 'move up' to WHFB. At worst they might've risked temporarily annoying hardcore fanboys who believed it was taking resources from 'ranked' WHFB. Instead we got- well, yeah.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water was such a monumentally stupid decision that could only have come about from Kirby. It's so stupid infact it's why I stick to my belief WHFB as a setting was killed primarily because Not-Space Marines wouldn't have fit into the Old World and boy oh boy did Kirby want the sterling of those Space Marine players.

After all the wailing and gnashing of teeth LotR kept getting over it "diverting" resources away from WHFB, the amount of vitriol AoS got would likely have been the same. And having yet *another* completely different fantasy game in a completely different setting would have diluted the creative teams and the marketing position for each game.

They needed a game with a smaller model count to get around WHFB's barrier to entry. And now they got it.

Rank and file worked very well for Warmaster, and I really wish that game had gotten some plastic models rather than the really fragile metal they put out. But WHFB had been pushed to a scale that no longer worked in 28mm (or 32mm, or whatever it really is these days).

Yeah, 8th ed whfb was a bit of a mess. Favored huge blocks of infantry too much, which had to be balanced by introducing instant killing super spells...which worked just as well against smaller elite units.
7th ed was better, imo.

Baron Klatz wrote:Haha, best evidence I see is this.

Warhammer fantasy sub-reddit, around for nearly a decade finally reached 3000 subs a few months ago.

AoS sub-reddit, reached that number in the first year and now is at over 7000 subs in only 2 years.

So yeah, AoS is doing fine compared to fantasy.

Besides that, how can 40k cannibalize AoS anymore than it did fantasy? Most fantasy players I've seen did both and they dated back to fantasy's glory days.

The only way 40k can hurt AoS is if GW focuses exclusively on it again and lets it's other games wither on the vine. With how they've made clear efforts to never do that again I see little concern.

The next guy sums it up as well, but here's one grain of sand in the beach that conflicts with your "evidence". Do you know what website/forum/social media/whatever I've never set a digital foot on? Reddit. I've had people read me some things from there, but I've never had any interest to actually hang out there. Do you know how long I've been playing fantasy? Since the tail end of 5th Edition. Know how many armies I had at the height of my playing. EVERY ONE except Wood Elves, Tomb Kings, and enough Skaven to play a full sized force with. Your "evidence" fails to take me OR my brother into account. So we can hardly call it "evidence".

Arbitrator wrote:People weren't buying WHFB because most of the older players had what they needed and WHFB didn't have the sheer release saturation of 40k. It's somewhat telling that GW were surprised at how well The End Times was doing, as if they realised putting out new stuff would get people buying again or something.

Also, and most importantly, it struggled to gain fresh blood because the cost of entry was absurdly high even for a wargame. In 40k for example, you generally get a 'squad' at its maximum size (usually around ten) with certain rare exceptions like Conscripts. In Fantasy almost every army was at its peak by 'hording' up, which when you're looking at £16 for 10 Empire State Troops is going to put off newbies very quickly. Not to mention WHFB was an even bigger mess at lower points levels than 40k where you could at least get to 500pts and play relatively well, unlike Fantasy which both cost more as a whole AND only became playable properly at 1000pts (and even that's debatable).

I know AoS fanboys like to blame the WHFB fanbase for its flagging - although Hastings stated it was making GW a profit, just not the profit GW wanted - but in the end it was GW outpricing its audience and further driving/keeping them in 40k.

Haha, best evidence I see is this.

Warhammer fantasy sub-reddit, around for nearly a decade finally reached 3000 subs a few months ago.

AoS sub-reddit, reached that number in the first year and now is at over 7000 subs in only 2 years.

So yeah, AoS is doing fine compared to fantasy.

Reddit only really became big a few years ago. AoS only launched a few years ago and with Fantasy players pretty much despising it they naturally weren't going to go to the Fantasy sites, and instead established their own/set down flags on places like Reddit.

It was rules that gave benefits for having 10x10 regiments that caused the high entry cost. Back during 6th Ed. your average boxed set was a playable regiment parked right at $20-25 US, and you didn't get any real incentive to go past 4 ranks deep, nor any real bonus to go wider than 4 columns other than to get another attack. Tack on the fact that Battalion sets on average got you to 1,000 points minus a character for $90 US, and the barrier for entry was not all that high. It wasn't until the 10 man infantry & 5 man knight sets that you really got to see pricing at its worst. And THEN is when they decided to make 8th a horde game. THAT is what killed WFB. That, and no advertising power, no real support, no real active push like they do for 40K.

And as far as army size? Both my gaming clubs had no problem getting balanced games in at 1,000 points.

Future War Cultist wrote:

 Dakka Flakka Flame wrote:
In theory I like the idea of a rank and flank game with huge armies of minis. I've never actually played such a game, so I might not find it so fun in practice.

It seems like something like 15mm scale with less expensive miniatures that were designed to work really well with movement trays might be better for really big games. (This is not meant to be a dig at WHFB.)

Strangely I've been finding myself more interested in AoS since the new edition of 40k dropped. I think it might be because I probably over-consumed 40k content and AoS is a nice break from all that.

Yeah something on the epic scale like that old war master game would have worked better for that massed rank and file style. Lots of 15mm models sharing the one base and the like.

The problem with Warmaster was that, unlike Epic, it didn't bring anything new to the table except the Epic play style. Monsters? Both systems. Massed ranks? Both systems. I take it back, they had a sphinx in Warmaster. Scads different. It's part of the reason Epic is not as popular as it once was. Almost everything you had in Epic that was exclusive to that game scale is now in 40K proper, so you don't see the support for Epic that you used to. Sure, there are pocket enclaves, but nothing like it was.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Yeah, 8th ed whfb was a bit of a mess. Favored huge blocks of infantry too much, which had to be balanced by introducing instant killing super spells...which worked just as well against smaller elite units.
7th ed was better, imo.

To me personally, 6th was better. 7th broke a couple aspects of the core game that I can't get behind, and the less said about the 7th Ed army books, the better.

rmeister0 wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
It has been said before but it stands to truth that is 'AoS' had merely been a very, very heavily pushed spin-off/sister game to WHFB it would have gone down well with just about everybody. Hell, they could even have kept the round bases thing. It would've provided a good entry point for new players, give Fantasy players a reason to dabble in something different while adding to their collections and potentially bring over a different audience who might 'move up' to WHFB. At worst they might've risked temporarily annoying hardcore fanboys who believed it was taking resources from 'ranked' WHFB. Instead we got- well, yeah.

Throwing the baby out with the bath water was such a monumentally stupid decision that could only have come about from Kirby. It's so stupid infact it's why I stick to my belief WHFB as a setting was killed primarily because Not-Space Marines wouldn't have fit into the Old World and boy oh boy did Kirby want the sterling of those Space Marine players.

After all the wailing and gnashing of teeth LotR kept getting over it "diverting" resources away from WHFB, the amount of vitriol AoS got would likely have been the same. And having yet *another* completely different fantasy game in a completely different setting would have diluted the creative teams and the marketing position for each game.

They needed a game with a smaller model count to get around WHFB's barrier to entry. And now they got it.

Rank and file worked very well for Warmaster, and I really wish that game had gotten some plastic models rather than the really fragile metal they put out. But WHFB had been pushed to a scale that no longer worked in 28mm (or 32mm, or whatever it really is these days).

See above about Warmaster, I don't want to retype. And to address the smaller model count game: Warhammer Skirmish or Mordheim. Both games did exactly that. 250-500 point games which give you a chance to see how the stats function and the basic mechanics of the game as you build to the larger game, WFB. They didn't need AOS to do that, they already had it. They just didn't push it.

I was thinking to move to AoS but 8th edition forced me to stay

 Just Tony wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Yeah, 8th ed whfb was a bit of a mess. Favored huge blocks of infantry too much, which had to be balanced by introducing instant killing super spells...which worked just as well against smaller elite units.
7th ed was better, imo.

To me personally, 6th was better. 7th broke a couple aspects of the core game that I can't get behind, and the less said about the 7th Ed army books, the better.

7th was the edition I started in, so I wouldn't know.
My first lizardman army book was from 6th ed, and judging by the content (tactics articles, alternate army lists, blessings of lizardmen gods, etc), it does seem like 6th ed was a nice edition.

Mordheim was indeed a skirmish level game set in the old WHFB setting, that GW never supported. Like necromunda. Because they hate money.

You know that annoying rule in 7th where swarms crumbled like undead for losing combat? Wasn't in 6th. Same for the cheesefest that was being able to have one unit fight in two combats in one combat phase if they pursued into another unit. Have to look up again whether that second combat had to be someone that was already engaged that turn. But if you had flanking cav, you could potentially run down two units a turn with that one unit. Even more so if that unit caused Fear. 7th gave you a bonus for BSB AND a unit standard, 6th made you choose one or the other. 6th also only needed 4 models to make a rank.

In fact, there are only really two things 7th did that we agree to absorb into 6th over at my current gaming group and over on classichammer.com which is the Insane Courage rule, and the rule where a wizard can only use generic power dice, or the dice they themselves generated. No more Skink power dice batteries for the Slann.

Sad thing was that Mordheim was running LONG after GW sent it to Specials Games to die. I was able to get games for a while, and I think it was shortly after that female Vampire character that hunted Vampires was released that our club moved on from Mordheim and concentrated on WFB or 40K

The next guy sums it up as well, but here's one grain of sand in the beach that conflicts with your "evidence". Do you know what website/forum/social media/whatever I've never set a digital foot on? Reddit. I've had people read me some things from there, but I've never had any interest to actually hang out there. Do you know how long I've been playing fantasy? Since the tail end of 5th Edition. Know how many armies I had at the height of my playing. EVERY ONE except Wood Elves, Tomb Kings, and enough Skaven to play a full sized force with. Your "evidence" fails to take me OR my brother into account. So we can hardly call it "evidence". 

Haha, so? Not every fantasy player uses it nor every AoS player. Reddit and Facebook have been growing in alot of popularity over forums though and it's still a good indicator for how active and growing the fanbases are.

What was Arbitrator trying to say? I suppose his meaning went over my head but the gist of it sounded like Reddit didn't count because people are only now using it. Well seeing how massive the subscriber counts for 40k and general warhammer are that means Fantasy is even worse off if it hasn't sprung up to those numbers despite them "dropping flags there now".

they already had it. They just didn't push it. 

I'll agree to this, though. If they and 6th were properly supported and pushed instead of left to wither then maybe the Old World would only have gotten a high fantasy face-lift instead of a entire setting reboot. Oh well, hindsight being 20/20 and all that.

 ArtyomTrityak wrote:
I was thinking to move to AoS but 8th edition forced me to stay

Haha, can't blame you. If I was a bigger sci-fi fan I'd definitely be getting a imperial guard army instead of Wanderers and Free Guild. Maybe one day though.

So basically your point is that because more Reddit users play 40K than any other GW game that it sets a precedent? Did you also age cap those members? As it stands, you also see a TON more teens who get into 40K and drop it as soon as their dating life takes off. Once again, it isn't a viable metric no matter HOW you try to spin it.

I also said there's a huge general warhammer sub-reddit too. Mix of all GW games fans that's been around as long as the other sub-reddits and shows there's a massive Warhammer community there regardless of whether they play 40k or not.

I take that as a good indicator of what's growing in popularity. Also who cares about age cap? I see "just getting into it" & "returning player" posts pop-up almost daily. Tabletop brings in a huge variety of players that show constant activity in the Reddit. I think that's way more important than trying to predict when they'll put the game on hold down the line. (They usual return sooner or later anyway with their absence replaced by another player)

Impasse reached.


I will prefer hard data over website membership. Why not just use BOLS activity as a marker? They were an AOS haven during the kickoff. Should be just the echo chamber you need. Except that is indeed an echo chamber now, damn near no activity.


See how junk data works? THAT was my point. Not to trash AOS.

Ick, BolS. You just had to make this dirty, didn't you?

I could have said Warseer, but they are not AOS biased enough to be considered.

Please, you've already said enough swear words already. No need to defile this thread further.

I know as far as 40k vs. AoS is concerned, over in the P&M section it seems the only way to get any comments is to be posting a project of the latest 40k stuff. Not many people seem to be working on AoS stuff. I think the AoS Projects thread here gets more traffic.

You know, it's because all the AOS people are too busy playing AOS to post anything anywhere. Least that's what I heard...

They're posting at the main forum, reddit and facebook all the time.

Sadly can't say the same for old fantasy and post-1.3 9th age areas who get mighty quiet at times...

(Seriously, the 9th age mods used that line to defend the inactivity amidst the fan-rage. )

There's also the TGA community website, which is a forum dedicated to AoS which is a bit more active.

That's what I meant by main forum.

 Just Tony wrote:
Impasse reached.


I will prefer hard data over website membership. Why not just use BOLS activity as a marker? They were an AOS haven during the kickoff. Should be just the echo chamber you need. Except that is indeed an echo chamber now, damn near no activity.


See how junk data works? THAT was my point. Not to trash AOS.

 Just Tony wrote:
I could have said Warseer, but they are not AOS biased enough to be considered.

Your argument is that dead forums shouldn't be used, which is something no one here said to do. BoLS nor Warseer were never "havens", please stop pushing that narrative.

No, BOLS was wholesale pushing AOS, to the point that the overly hostile mods and posters chased off pretty much anyone who said anything about AOS, especially if they strayed too far from the Oldhammer thread.

Warseer was mentioned as they never really took off as an overly AOS saturated forum, and the battles between the posters is what got their Old World subforum built, just like this site.


And also, the point is that ANY forum or site isn't necessarily indicative of the whole community, and can't be used as empirical data.

I never found BoLS to be AoS friendly, personally.

Had it been, I would've been posting there, as I've been an AoS fanboy the moment I saw Khorgos Kul in the leaked starter set photos.

BOLS is definitely not a friendly AOS site.

BOLS is not a friendly site. :p

Baron Klatz wrote:
BOLS is not a friendly site. :p

Now THAT I can agree with. However, they were even less friendly to retrogamers.

Hell, I'm trying my hand in joining and re-posting a P&M thread on The Grand Alliance forums, just in hopes that I can get some actual feedback. I'm hoping some reinforcement will help keep my nose to the grindstone, as my projects tend to slack off after the initial exitement. But I'm having a hard time getting any notice here on Dakka, I think it's just too 40k-centric, which is kinda being thrown into greater-than-usual overdrive with the release of 8th ed.

around here AoS is even deader than before,hell, I am considering just giving it up too. 8th had probably a lot to do with it, (not for me of course, I despise 8th) but this is not GW country anymore anyhow.

How did 8th hurt it if that's not GW country?

Anyway, go ahead and move on. No point to a hobby if you're not having fun.

We'll always be here to talk though if you've got a AoS itch.

 Just Tony wrote:
See above about Warmaster, I don't want to retype. And to address the smaller model count game: Warhammer Skirmish or Mordheim. Both games did exactly that. 250-500 point games which give you a chance to see how the stats function and the basic mechanics of the game as you build to the larger game, WFB. They didn't need AOS to do that, they already had it. They just didn't push it.

Warmaster was a specialist game with crappy support. So like all the other games with crappy support, it died. Not because WHFB had monsters too.

Warhammer Skirmish was, simply put, awful. Mordheim was good but lacked a lot, and I mean a LOT, of factions that people actually wanted to play. The AoS rules actually scale down to the individual model level better than WHFB ever did.

I was going to make a spiteful comment about AoS but not kicking that dead horse instead I will give insight from my 2 local stores.

Everyone who bought AoS after whfb liked it due to cooler looking marine type guys. Or the fact the models where new fresh and fancy.
Alot of them bought the new models painted 1 or 2 of the squad then left it.
Now that AoS is not the new hotness and 40k got new marines alot of them quit it dead.

Sigmar gave them alot of what they wanted new releases and new space marines. Now AoS is neither so they are quitting it. Alot of the people who jumped onto AoS where impulsive and just wanted new stuff.

If AoS doesn't end up dead I will be surprised, they got rid of all the old whfb fans now the new ones are quitting because its old.

WHFB had a update once every 4+ months, so when you bought a army you had those exact same models and book for years. So if you didnt play a super popular army you where brets or dark eldar, doomed to a life of 1990s models. It almost amazes me people where suprised when end times came out and people bought so much, it was the first real mass release and update for whfb since I started in 1998. Then they like recanted it lol

rmeister0 wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
See above about Warmaster, I don't want to retype. And to address the smaller model count game: Warhammer Skirmish or Mordheim. Both games did exactly that. 250-500 point games which give you a chance to see how the stats function and the basic mechanics of the game as you build to the larger game, WFB. They didn't need AOS to do that, they already had it. They just didn't push it.

Warmaster was a specialist game with crappy support. So like all the other games with crappy support, it died. Not because WHFB had monsters too.

Warhammer Skirmish was, simply put, awful. Mordheim was good but lacked a lot, and I mean a LOT, of factions that people actually wanted to play. The AoS rules actually scale down to the individual model level better than WHFB ever did.

Warmaster was dead on arrival. EVERY store I went to in a five county area could barely GIVE it away. Even when they clearance it out, it sat there forever. It didn't die because it wasn't supported, It died because it was awful and only a few diehards would play it. It went to Specialist Games so a few more dollars could be milked out of it without needing mainline support.

And your opinion of Warhammer Skirmish and Mordheim are noted, and I disagree with them wholeheartedly. Especially since damn near every faction/race was given Warband rules through Town Cryer. AOS isn't even REMOTELY the same game, so you can't say it gave people what they wanted in a Warhammer skirmish game.

OgreChubbs wrote:I was going to make a spiteful comment about AoS but not kicking that dead horse instead I will give insight from my 2 local stores.

Everyone who bought AoS after whfb liked it due to cooler looking marine type guys. Or the fact the models where new fresh and fancy.
Alot of them bought the new models painted 1 or 2 of the squad then left it.
Now that AoS is not the new hotness and 40k got new marines alot of them quit it dead.

Sigmar gave them alot of what they wanted new releases and new space marines. Now AoS is neither so they are quitting it. Alot of the people who jumped onto AoS where impulsive and just wanted new stuff.

If AoS doesn't end up dead I will be surprised, they got rid of all the old whfb fans now the new ones are quitting because its old.

WHFB had a update once every 4+ months, so when you bought a army you had those exact same models and book for years. So if you didnt play a super popular army you where brets or dark eldar, doomed to a life of 1990s models.

This is my experience as well. I had one store employee try to hard sell me AOS, saying how popular it was, but couldn't give me a straight answer about game nights for it.

 Just Tony wrote:


Warmaster was dead on arrival. EVERY store I went to in a five county area could barely GIVE it away. Even when they clearance it out, it sat there forever. It didn't die because it wasn't supported, It died because it was awful and only a few diehards would play it. It went to Specialist Games so a few more dollars could be milked out of it without needing mainline support.

I'd disagree, but maybe it was a US / UK thing. It was well received and played in my area; it was different strategically. I'd definitely disagree it was awful! If it really did die then they wouldn't have supported it with other armies all the way down to Kislev and Araby, separate Warmaster magazine and a forgeworld line (and that's before you think about Warmaster Ancients/historicals and Battle of Five Armies). I think this might be a local/country experience. Warmaster was culled at the same time as the other specialist games, if it had done that badly it's support would have dried up a lot earlier.

I found all of our super competitive hardcore tournament guys abandoned AOS day one. I note that any stores that are primarily tournament driven have had zero AOS presence and likely will never have an AOS presence.

Our GW store has a small group of us that play and do campaigns. About on par with what we had in whfb.

The difference is that its only us doing that, with a couple of new diehard tournament players that travel to the AOS tournaments, and the primary tournament players are no longer part of that community.

To a lot of people that are tournament oriented, the game might as well be dead. However, 9th age and KOW and Rune Wars are also largely dead and ignored here as well, with the main tournament games being xwing and 40k.

As to warmaster - that game died here as well without ever having had a chance. That was largely because there was no tournament support for it, as the bulk of my city back in the late 90s were primarly tournament guys and they played tournament games. Warmaster not having any large GT support did not interest them, and campaign play was non existent here back then in the public eye.

Baron Klatz wrote:
How did 8th hurt it if that's not GW country?

Anyway, go ahead and move on. No point to a hobby if you're not having fun.

We'll always be here to talk though if you've got a AoS itch.

Its not so much about not having fun, its about no community or people who play, I have heard all about "this facebook group and that" but when its time to toss dice, nothing but crickets. 4 guys are not enough to keep it going. By not GW country I mean that other games are the top dogs here, its not supported by most gamestores and those that do, they do 40k mostly,peeps loves their marines, there is a GW but its the usual broomcloset masquerading as a game store.

Ah, I see. Thanks for clearing that up.

On another note, can't believe Warmaster was such a flop. It looked so awesome too. :(

If AoS doesn't end up dead I will be surprised, they got rid of all the old whfb fans now the new ones are quitting because its old. 

Boy I hope you mean that anecdotally because those statements don't stack up well to other AoS communities be they online or local.

There's alot of old hands and wfb fans that transferred to AoS (one example being myself) and there's alot of players interested in just fantasy and stay with it instead of moving over to 40k because they want swords and sorcery, not tanks and bolters.

Again, AOS completely took over my area and even after the release of 40k it's still get a major presence. I don't know how well it's doing overall but I'd judge it to be a success in this part of the world.

Just 40K is being played regularly in my local GW store. Apart from the inevitable intro game, AoS is pretty dead. Even Blood Bowl sees more action since I have introduced it to some folk in the store.
The upcoming cthulhu elves and future releases have to be awesome or otherwise AoS goes the way of the dodo like all the other GW specialist games. But I guess diehard AoS fans will claim that it´s player base just play at home like the LOTR guys.

 Strg Alt wrote:
Just 40K is being played regularly in my local GW store. Apart from the inevitable intro game, AoS is pretty dead. Even Blood Bowl sees more action since I have introduced it to some folk in the store.
The upcoming cthulhu elves and future releases have to be awesome or otherwise AoS goes the way of the dodo like all the other GW specialist games. But I guess diehard AoS fans will claim that it´s player base just play at home like the LOTR guys.

Here in the US we've got a lot of bit GT level tournaments on the dockets. Locally we have a 3-game tournament once a month that has 16-20 guys show up of about 40 that it rotates around. I think some might dive a bit into 40k but I think the real thing that's slowed stuff down lately is the up in the air status due to the GHB II which is what most are waiting for before building their yearly tournament army

Gotta love all the AoS online places still having constant activity and streams of newbies and old hands joining but it's the local anecdotal evidence the anti-AoS crowd uses.

Where i am in the U.S AOS is all but dead. My group who had all just bought new armies or vastly increased them thinking that we would get some sort of a 9th age/ skirmish mix (almost like what they did with power level and points in the recent 40k release) gave it up almost overnight. We all played the 9th age for a bit but once it set in that the world we enjoyed was dead and never coming back people just stopped playing. Theres a big KOW presence in my area but it hurts a little bit every time i look at my all goblin army collecting dust and i just can't bear to bring it out again.

But onto my main point about 40k stealing sales its kind of a weird question. On one hand nobody but a couple of people (like the same 6 people were playing AOS anyway so there wasn't really anything to steal. At the same time my entire group and tons of people i haven't seen sense i was a kid are back for 40k. Its a mad rush to buy models every time a store gets shipments and the 40k sections are empty with a few random boxes in that entire section of the local stores. I don't see AOS getting much support in the future when they could update a 40k army that will make them more then the entire AOS line.

Honestly i poped in here just to see if AOS had gained any real traction from when i left it shortly after release but honestly it sounds a lot like it did after release. Some places seem to have small pockets of people that play but most people don't see anyone playing it.

Hopefully AOS works out because i would never wish someones favorite game dying on them (that happened to me with WHFB and i know how much it sucks). Maybe if you guys are lucky 40ks crazy popularity could draw some fresh people into AOS.

Well I wouldn't worry about lack off support. There's alot of big things coming in the AoS pipeline being new releases and more campaign activity and GW stated in 2015 they have the next 5 years all planned for AoS releases so we'll definitely be seeing more constant support to come.

Also, as Future War Cultist and others have stated, there are places that are AoS > 40k. The hobby scene is completely random but AoS still has alot of popularity due to all the releases and supports it's been getting and 40k players it pulled in during 7th.

Will those players go back now with 8th? Sure, why wouldn't they? 8th is 40k with the AoS treatment they liked. Doesn't stop them from coming back though when the hype switches again and the pure AoS players that'll likely try out 40k now.

That's the beauty of the hobby. You play what you enjoy and there's no limits to your enjoyment but your own interests.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Gotta love all the AoS online places still having constant activity and streams of newbies and old hands joining but it's the local anecdotal evidence the anti-AoS crowd uses.

The reason that I don't give any of that online any real credibility is that when its our group in FB that has about 100 "members" but 4 of us play, that makes me skeptical of all online. If you went by facebook you would think we have masses of people playing weekly, we don't. I got in 1 game yesterday, (we dont play points, but I used 4 units of wolf riders (total of 20), 1 goblin chariot, 1 mtd chieftain, 1 spearchukka, and 1 solid unit of ardboys, because they are ardboys, I fought against 4 units of 10 kairic a-holes, 2 units of 10 tzaangors, and a gaunt summoner. cleaned their clock.) but that was 2 people playing.

That's fine but using "my local area" doesn't help either as that can't be used for the entire fanbase.

Do the members actual contribute or are they like lurkers?

Baron Klatz wrote:
That's fine but using "my local area" doesn't help either as that can't be used for the entire fanbase.

Do the members actual contribute or are they like lurkers?

if by lurker you mean weirdo in a tank top walking around with goblins in a box, then yes I contribute but no about half put something in once in a while, most just log in and do nothing,. The thing about local area (while you are correct its not the entire fanbase) is that if thats what you see and experience, then its pretty much your reality,. I have seen groups in places like England that have a large following but since thats thousands of miles away, it does me no good.

Haha, well I certainly don't think you're a weirdo.

It's fine to say it's a reality in your local area (why wouldn't you? No one wants to drive hours out of their way for a place with activity) my problem is saying AoS will be dead because a few areas don't play it or favor 40k over it when there's clearly places the opposite of that.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Haha, well I certainly don't think you're a weirdo.

It's fine to say it's a reality in your local area (why wouldn't you? No one wants to drive hours out of their way for a place with activity) my problem is saying AoS will be dead because a few areas don't play it or favor 40k over it when there's clearly places the opposite of that.

I don't think it will go away any time soon, but it certainly is not a good sign that it has not completely captured markets that used to be firmly in GW's hands. That is not entirely AoS fault, but it hurt more than helped in many places. AoS really reminds me most of D&D 4th edition (which I still run) in that I no one asked for it to be made, didnt want it to destroy what came before it. Its fun, but would never call it a "great" game. It split the fan base in ways a new edition of a game rarely does unless its a radical departure.

I don't think it'll go away at all.

Way too many IP and copyright benefits that the Old World couldn't give it and infinite space to build on.

It's only been two years and has done pretty well with big contributions to GW's huge profits. We'll have to see down the years how it'll continue to go but if keeps up the performance it's been doing it'll be the successful little brother of 40k and make back the fandom that wfb accumulated over 30 years.

Baron Klatz wrote:
I don't think it'll go away at all.

Way too many IP and copyright benefits that the Old World couldn't give it and infinite space to build on.

It's only been two years and has done pretty well with big contributions to GW's huge profits. We'll have to see down the years how it'll continue to go but if keeps up the performance it's been doing it'll be the successful little brother of 40k and make back the fandom that wfb accumulated over 30 years.

They have made some moves that I personally think are good, with having C7 do a AoS rpg, the boardgame tie ins, they are really trying to make a setting that appeals to people ( I dont think they did a good job out of the gate with it, and I dont think its nearly as good as the old world, but time will tell) I dont believe they will ever recover their former glory, warhammer lived in a vacuum more or less for its early years, it didnt have to compete with what AoS will, and that competition is really good. In many ways GW will have to content itself with being a fish in the pond, not the big fish in a little pond.

Oh, I very much agree with all of that.

They missed out on so much opportunities for a glorious start to the game and setting. The learned their lesson for 8th but AoS would've taken off immediately if the grand alliance books and handbook were initial releases and they made a "realm chronicles" fluff book to fully explain the setting, the 8 realms, the age of myth and the age of chaos.

Heck, starting in the age of myth with the mortal empires and majority of the factions being from the Old World would've made the transition seamless and then build up to the glorious Stormcast.Though Stormcast are a far better option for a starter set source due to ease of painting and building, I think a starter set with a collection of armored Lantic knights, Order Draconis Aelves and Duardin would've served the same purpose as well give a good grim tone to the setting as Order goes from loss to loss until the Stormcast arrive to turn the tide.

Also, agreed on GW being a fish in a pond or as I see it just another kingdom among many after their crumbling empire finally fell. I find this good as this means no more resting on laurels and letting games stagnate. They'll stay towards the top by working for it and making their games and systems top-notch and able to stand up to the opposition.

Baron Klatz wrote:
Oh, I very much agree with all of that.

They missed out on so much opportunities for a glorious start to the game and setting. The learned their lesson for 8th but AoS would've taken off immediately if the grand alliance books and handbook were initial releases and they made a "realm chronicles" fluff book to fully explain the setting, the 8 realms, the age of myth and the age of chaos.

Heck, starting in the age of myth with the mortal empires and majority of the factions being from the Old World would've made the transition seamless and then build up to the glorious Stormcast.Though Stormcast are a far better option for a starter set source due to ease of painting and building, I think a starter set with a collection of armored Lantic knights, Order Draconis Aelves and Duardin would've served the same purpose as well give a good grim tone to the setting as Order goes from loss to loss until the Stormcast arrive to turn the tide.

Also, agreed on GW being a fish in a pond or as I see it just another kingdom among many after their crumbling empire finally fell. I find this good as this means no more resting on laurels and letting games stagnate. They'll stay towards the top by working for it and making their games and systems top-notch and able to stand up to the opposition.

You know, now that you mention "turning the tide" I think that is really the biggest "change/feeling" in both AoS and 8th edition. Previous "grimdark" was all about the inevitable defeat, but the new stuff seems...more "optimistic" I admit, while I am more of a death/destruction kind of player, I did enjoy the stormcast making khorne their b**** in the starter set. There is something about the "good guys" not just barely clinging on, but going on the offensive that feels "right" after so long...maybe its just me.

I was thinking about a single thing that could boost popularity and sales. Imagine a hypothetical Guide to the Mortal Realms (for those of you familiar with the Guide to Glorantha): a 300 page, full colour, packed with setting information, no model photoshots, no battleplans, battalions, rules or anything that remotely addresses the gaming side - just text and pictures . It would be much better than the Realmgate wars books in terms of building up a setting knowledge base since you need to "only buy one book". Such a thing may render part of the battletomes obsolete(the first 1/3 - the army description), but I guess their sales aren't as great aswell due to the free core rules. I've never held or seen physically any of the older WHFB setting books like Lost and the Damned etc, but It is some knid of circulating common knowledge that they were immensely popular. One of the factors why 40k pulls so far ahead of 40k is that it still retains its setting knowledge base and 2 years from its launch AoS is still struggling in that direction. We all know that the setting is supposed to be as open as it could be, but perhaps it is finally time to address this matter...

I think a book that fleshes out all of the mortal realms, maps, places of interest, people of interest, Time of War rules... that this would be huge in attracting more attention.

Granted this will only really appeal to the narrative style players more so than the competitive players who largely don't care about background, but it would be huge none the less.

 auticus wrote:
I think a book that fleshes out all of the mortal realms, maps, places of interest, people of interest, Time of War rules... that this would be huge in attracting more attention.

Granted this will only really appeal to the narrative style players more so than the competitive players who largely don't care about background, but it would be huge none the less.

You would need creative people for this line of work. I can´t see GW pulling this of. When the new White Dwarf hit the stores everybody was hyped about it´s content including me. There were additional rules for Deathwatch Overkill, Blood Bowl, Imperial Knight: Renegade, etc. However the last issues were just advertisement material. GW is just too lazy nowadays to provide their customers with exciting new stuff for their games.

I would love a book like that. But is it not true that part of the appeal of AoS is that they can basically make it all up as they go along provided that it fits into the 8 realms and four grand alliance framework? They're not tied down by anything. Well, almost anything.

The book wouldn't be the be all end all of everything in the realms. It would expand on them greatly though. Right now there are very few points of interest in the realms from the "official material".

Remember that "official material" matters most to many people.

Indeed, always more room for the realms to be filled out so a fluff book (and upcoming rpg) can only do good!

Also a bestiary would be glorious.

You would need creative people for this line of work. I can´t see GW pulling this of.

You haven't read the AoS novels, battletomes or Hammerhal background book then.

GW has amazing ideas for the setting, we just need them all in one place!

What about the possibility that any slowing down of sales is just in anticipation of the second generals handbook?

 Future War Cultist wrote:
What about the possibility that any slowing down of sales is just in anticipation of the second generals handbook?

I think there's a lot to that, actually. Since most folks who follow AoS know it's coming "any time now," the more competitive players (which is probably the majority, still, in most places) are likely holding off to see what the points value tweaks are.

That said, the Path to Glory coming this week might be a nice stopgap for that (I know I'm picking it up, and its timing is actually pretty good since we're wrapping up a Skirmish campaign). I'm sure I'm not the only one excited by a new supplement, though I don't think it will have the impact GHB2 most likely will.

 Just Tony wrote:


Warmaster was dead on arrival. EVERY store I went to in a five county area could barely GIVE it away. Even when they clearance it out, it sat there forever. It didn't die because it wasn't supported, It died because it was awful and only a few diehards would play it. It went to Specialist Games so a few more dollars could be milked out of it without needing mainline support.

And your opinion of Warhammer Skirmish and Mordheim are noted, and I disagree with them wholeheartedly. Especially since damn near every faction/race was given Warband rules through Town Cryer. AOS isn't even REMOTELY the same game, so you can't say it gave people what they wanted in a Warhammer skirmish game.

I said AoS Skirmish gives players of AoS what they want in a skirmish game. Mordheim did NOT give everyone who played WHFB what they wanted in a skirmish game. The very structure of the rules were different, and while you can claim that Town Cryer put out a lot of rules for alternate forces they were not part of the main game, and the Specialist magazines were very difficult for a lot of players to get. I played Mordheim for many years.

I've spent quite a bit of money on 40k (and also Bloodbowl) these past 2 months. Now the dust is settling though, I am hankering after more AoS again and there's no doubt in my mind that AoS is going to be my main game moving forward still (I prefer the AoS rules to the 40k 8th rules).

Can't wait for my next tournament. A 100 capacity event in September! Also can't wait for GHBII and Path to Glory. Now with all the supplements I have steam and motivation to get my smaller projects up to certain levels (I.e get my Bloodbound and Troggoths forces complete for Skirmish, get my Death complete for Path to Glory).

40k has been super exciting since its release, but it's settling into my secondary game (not my primary) quite comfortably.

What about the other regulars on the AoS boards?

I'm literally 50/50 on both. When we get together it's always one game of each. Having said that, I've got two active AoS armies and only one active 40k army so right now AoS comes out slightly ahead.

40k has always been by and far the dominant game here.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
It's because unfortunately AoS was a failed launch, it had what it needed but stripped right out the gate. When they shut out their old players and kinda nuked the world it really left a bitter taste in people's mouth.

The other problem I see with AoS is that, who the gak is the target audience? Like not trolling here really wanna know who were they trying to appeal to with AoS, it sure as hell was not fantasy players.

I love the AoS game, is very fun with the few small game so have played and I have a full army planned and slow going to get it but, it's so dead at my store almost no one plays it, even our store manager has kinda given up on it.

AoS was made for those who like sifi.

I assume they thought, hey if we introduce sifi into fantasy people who like both will play it. Rather then no one likes it and ditches it.

But it is almost enjoyable if you do not play against the stormcast or the elves in wooden suits.

I played I think 6 time and so far I refused every game with anyone who has a stormcast army.... it almost makes it a fantasy game again.

OgreChubbs wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
It's because unfortunately AoS was a failed launch, it had what it needed but stripped right out the gate. When they shut out their old players and kinda nuked the world it really left a bitter taste in people's mouth.

The other problem I see with AoS is that, who the gak is the target audience? Like not trolling here really wanna know who were they trying to appeal to with AoS, it sure as hell was not fantasy players.

I love the AoS game, is very fun with the few small game so have played and I have a full army planned and slow going to get it but, it's so dead at my store almost no one plays it, even our store manager has kinda given up on it.

AoS was made for those who like sifi.

I assume they thought, hey if we introduce sifi into fantasy people who like both will play it. Rather then no one likes it and ditches it.

But it is almost enjoyable if you do not play against the stormcast or the elves in wooden suits.

I played I think 6 time and so far I refused every game with anyone who has a stormcast army.... it almost makes it a fantasy game again.

I did not know nature fey spirits, dwarfs with flaming runes in there skin riding magma dragons Or a bunch dudes who turn into lightning bolts when they die were sifi.

An army of super paladins is too much for you? Aos is mythical/epic fantasy, it is more fantastical then the old world.

 Bottle wrote:
I've spent quite a bit of money on 40k (and also Bloodbowl) these past 2 months. Now the dust is settling though, I am hankering after more AoS again and there's no doubt in my mind that AoS is going to be my main game moving forward still (I prefer the AoS rules to the 40k 8th rules).

Can't wait for my next tournament. A 100 capacity event in September! Also can't wait for GHBII and Path to Glory. Now with all the supplements I have steam and motivation to get my smaller projects up to certain levels (I.e get my Bloodbound and Troggoths forces complete for Skirmish, get my Death complete for Path to Glory).

40k has been super exciting since its release, but it's settling into my secondary game (not my primary) quite comfortably.

What about the other regulars on the AoS boards?

It's been going on a similar path in my area, and all my friends and group of players who like AoS and attended multiple tournaments and event before 8th are still standing behind AoS, myself included. It is our primary game. BUT, and unlike you, I find the 40k's 8th edition rules an improvement over the AoS rules, and right now, the number of events dropped hard. So we're all preparing new armies for 40k, because it's basically the same game with slightly better rules. But we also keep working on our AoS, and I'm myself building a 2000pts Tomb King force like I've never seen anywhere before (I'll drop a pic on the project thread soon). We also have an AoS tournament in September, so that good... but if GHBII doesn't come out soon, and with better rules (PLEASE HAVE THE CHARACTER TARGETING RULE OF 8TH), I'm afraid less and less people are going to play.

But with GHBII, and the new sea/sky/cthulu Aelves, I'm confident things will lift off again.

Just putting this out there, but when I popped into my local GS this Saturday there was one game of AoS going on (I just saw stormcast) and after I had at them they're now almost sold out of Overlords. So with this evidence I think AoS is still doing well in my area but without asking anyone I still can't be completely sure.

Managed to make it to my FLGS for the first time in a while this weekend. Lots of 40k going on, but I was surprised to see a couple people looking at the AoS kits. We've got a lot of growing interest in my area, and I'm hoping to drum up a little more. I anyone happens to be in the Amarillo, TX area on August 5-6, stop by Amacon at the Amarillo Civic Center. I'll be demoing Age of Sigmar both days