Honestly if it wasn't for a lack of army building mechanism this game would be very good (not perfect by any means)
Fully agree. If the game had an inherent balance mechanism such as points cost, it had potential for superb fun. Really hoping GW somehow gets their stuff together and patches that. Releasing incomplete rules is even below their level.
Not being able to play a Goblin army, or any huge army, however is...meh. Yeah, technically possible, but I really don't want to move 200+ individual miniatures around.
Bull0 wrote: Putting rules about having mustaches and beards in was insensitive, I doubt anyone dosagrees with that, and it can probably be left there for the sake of sanity
My wife just wore a GARISH, giant stage mustache prop to play this rule... and our friends and I had a blast during the game.
People are REALLY over-thinking this game.
It isn't balanced, nor smart... its silly, and can be enjoyed when treated as the novelty it is. I don't suspect that novelty will last long, but there is plenty of fun to be had.
I still think it should be applied to the figures and not to the players but I'm glad you guys had fun.
Unfortunately the level of house-ruling and pregame discussion required if you don't like the "bring as much as you want" RAW approach (setting wound limits, etc) seems like rather a lot of hassle to go through.
If your aim is to play a quick game rather than a three-hour long battle, which these rules can obviously handle, then this pregame negotiation eats into actual playing time, especially if you're not playing with someone you know well. I wouldn't be surprised if many people find it easier to simply switch to another system that has already done all that work for you.
Fezman wrote: Unfortunately the level of house-ruling and pregame discussion required if you don't like the "bring as much as you want" RAW approach (setting wound limits, etc) seems like rather a lot of hassle to go through.
If your aim is to play a quick game rather than a three-hour long battle, which these rules can obviously handle, then this pregame negotiation eats into actual playing time, especially if you're not playing with someone you know well. I wouldn't be surprised if many people find it easier to simply switch to another system that has already done all that work for you.
Played two games yesterday against someone who I have played before but isn't particualry a friend. Pregame discussion took a minute or two
It isn't balanced, nor smart... its silly, and can be enjoyed when treated as the novelty it is. I don't suspect that novelty will last long, but there is plenty of fun to be had.
Oh, I see. We're all wrong then. Sounds like a great way to invest hundreds, if not thousands of dollars into plastic army men for novelty's sake.
This pretty much confirms what I've been thinking, that it's not longer a war game and is simply a toy game. It has zero regards to any form of strategic depth now with random movement still in, non-standard base sizes, measuring from models, no points or army structure... It's just, as you said, a novelty. And we all know those are great at sustaining a company with this kind of monetary investment.
So, all of a sudden the interest in Kings of War has gone through the roof.
I mean, I know the rules are better than ever. We have cool battle photos, more great art, and the minis look better than ever. But...
...none of that explains the huge increase in interest in the last few days.
Why does everyone suddenly want to play our mass battle fantasy game.
Has something changed?
I find it -very- difficult to believe, from reading just that blurb, that he has 'no idea' what is going on. I take that blurb as a subtle jab at the shake-up going on at his biggest competitor.
Ronnie-worshipers will claim he is genuinely 'out of touch' with what GW is doing, or 'doesn't care', and I call BS on that.
Your primary competitor is -drastically- changing one of their two flagship games, a game that you are in -direct- competition with for market share. The fate of that game will -definitely- have an impact (good or bad) on your own product... yet he doesn't know what's going on?
Everyone in the same market as GW watches what GW is doing. Mantic is already releasing their new version of their own rules, and while the timing of that -could- be coincidental, their release of army lists that cover various WHFB armies surely isn't. I wouldn't be surprised if Mantic did try something else in the next week or two to try to take advantage of the temporary turmoil GW has caused.
... then it is irrelevant. Their wishes don't matter. When writing fiction, the end results matters vastly more than the intent of the author.
"Death of the Author is one of the laziest and intellecually dishonest tropes taught in the humanities today."
However, that said what they want is irrelevant in so much as it is losing them what little respect they do have with existing customers...while hoping to appeal to a new market that may or may not be there for them."
... then it is irrelevant. Their wishes don't matter. When writing fiction, the end results matters vastly more than the intent of the author.
QFT
I don't care at all what the designer -intended-. How I -receive- the product will determine in my mind if what I paid for the product was worth it or not, and whether or not I will continue giving the company my money. GW has dropped from the tournament scene long ago, or so I am told, and supposedly doesn't support it - yet the tournament scene is still pretty large, despite GW's 'intentions'.
What I do find funny is that, in a setting rife with demons and bipedal ratmen and magic and deities and lizardmen and dragons and elves and all that others stuff... we still see arguments about boobs.
... then it is irrelevant. Their wishes don't matter. When writing fiction, the end results matters vastly more than the intent of the author.
"Death of the Author is one of the laziest and intellecually dishonest tropes taught in the humanities today."
Alternatively:
“I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."
Even if someone intended well, if they delivered poorly, their intents don't 'really matter.
... then it is irrelevant. Their wishes don't matter. When writing fiction, the end results matters vastly more than the intent of the author.
"Death of the Author is one of the laziest and intellectually dishonest tropes taught in the humanities today."
Alternatively:
“I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."
Even if someone intended well, if they delivered poorly, their intents don't 'really matter.
Mostly Correct. Their intent is more important, however as they say Crappy quality is crappy quality, AoS rules are an example of poor quality from a balance and player retention standpoint. However, their authors intent of there being good rules are also met with it as well. As the game itself and how they are handling wounds, units, and power are actually quite good, they are simply being plauged by the spectre of hubris that comes with refusing to use an actual system to balance things.
When even the toy/video game crossovers like amiibo have better internally balancing, then you know your game is in trouble.
Well I see it for me as either a great starter set for me, Since I haven't played WFB since the early 80's. Cheap rule book and a set of core models to start with. Not to mention some really nice sculpts. Either way If I choose not to play WFB l just convert it for 40k. LOL
You know, I honestly kinda like Mister Skully? He actually makes a really good Chaos Spawn. They're supposed to be screwed up and not make any physical sense, and I could see Khorne 'rewarding' a champion by turning all his useless boring bones into nifty, throne-suitable skulls...
Spinner wrote: You know, I honestly kinda like Mister Skully? He actually makes a really good Chaos Spawn. They're supposed to be screwed up and not make any physical sense, and I could see Khorne 'rewarding' a champion by turning all his useless boring bones into nifty, throne-suitable skulls...
Spinner wrote: You know, I honestly kinda like Mister Skully? He actually makes a really good Chaos Spawn. They're supposed to be screwed up and not make any physical sense, and I could see Khorne 'rewarding' a champion by turning all his useless boring bones into nifty, throne-suitable skulls...
"Rewarding" in the vaguest sense of the word sometimes lol.
MWHistorian wrote: There are far worse things to talk about than SJW's or Gamergate.
I mean, we have THIS to deal with.
I still can't tell what the head is supposed to be. And that skull acne.....wow.
I do not believe that model has the GW required number of skulls.
Well it is Khorne based so I fear it's still not enough. Good thing I have some skulls to add to it.
This model really needs to be seen to appreciate it's skullishness. Looking down, you see that the shoulders and upper back are muscle stretched over skulls. I've just been referring to it in my games as my "fleshy sack o' skulls".
This of course perfectly reflects it's rule that if it kills a model in combat it eats the skull and heals a wound. (no, not quite making that part up).
And did you know you can have large units of fleshy bags o'skulls? Must collect enough for a large force of them.
The skulls on that thing are certainly lacking ~ its got less than the latest Dark Angels Interrogator Chaplain, Even after they just pushed them into its legs for fun!
Interrogator chappy gets 33 golden skullz
I count 17 on the khorne thing (even with generously including its base and the thing on its arm) ... Are they finally toning down the skulls? or did someone slip up here? (just strikes me as a little odd when good guys are more adorned with skulls than something created by the god with slogan 'skulls for the skull throne' )
I'm not sure if I should ironically or non-ironically like Mr. Sack o' Skulls. And at actually using a Helbrute... or are we on Chaos Dex #83 right now and they've gone from bad to awful to data slate to awful to great? Honestly lost track.
He does perfectly epitomize the current beast of GW. An amalgamation of Khorne knows what all crammed together and pushed out the door to say "Hello, aren't I quaint?"
I'd not be mad if someone game it to me. I'd almost consider buy the AoS starter as a whole to just build the Sigmarines. I'd like to make them into BA Terminators; super sanguine guard or something.
Maybe I'll wait for them to sit around for a year and clearanced out at a local shop.
Davylove21 wrote: I think the lack of points is an oversight, but not enough of an issue to warrant hatred for the game. I genuinely think GW just took a massive leap in the right direction.
So you like the silly clown antics bullgak and don't see how that could put anyone off? Or understand any of the hatred for the absolute butchering of 30 years of established fluff, which has been replaced by something that just isn't anywhere near as good? =\
I plan to not partake in antics and play my first games with wounds as a not-quite-arbitrary points system. Though I think it will appeal to younglings who GW needs to bring in. Nobody can say that cost of entry is too high for AoS now. With regards to the fluff, I'll make a ham-fisted attempt to compare it to my experience watching Terminator Genisys last night. It was one of the worst stories of all time that has been spun out from one of the best, but it does not invalidate the old, just helps me relate to the new.
There has to be a very strict form of list building and points is the universal truth to do it. I don't see some massive paradigm shift coming from current GW to make that happen.
Also, quantity of scenarios just means there's going to be a large glut of bad ones. Most competitive war games have a hand full of strong, player-tested tournament scenarios that really make for a fair game; Malifaux has player tested, Steamroller has been preened for years, and the ITS is on the same path for Infinity.
None of that assuages any fears. They put out campaign books and scenarios previously and I believe they've been met with either tepid interest to outright disdain for there balance.
That feels either very repetitive or requiring a vast wealth of miniatures to meet the specifications of the different scenarios. And still very limiting compared to just putting in a fething points system.
Doot doot doot. A week away, examining myself in the mirror after that ludricous display a hundred(!) pages ago, and AoS dropped in the meantime. I had a couple of thoughts that might be pertinent to comments here, starting with the topic of balance and points values...
One blackshirt explained it yesterday: 'if someone wants to be a douche, you can be a douche back. If someone wants to play nice, then it's great'. True enough, but I'm not so convinced 'cos that was like the excuse GW fans give for points-based cheesery and powergaming. And that was possible because points-based matchups are not inherently balanced; not when you seem to shuttle between picking points values out of a hat, and favouring the newest, biggest toys, like GW does. From others here I get that any kind of playtesting done in Nottingham consists of a couple of guys knocking about, not caring what happens, just waiting to see things blow up. Just as they imagine every other 40K/WFB player doing, which is far from accurate.
You'll get 'those guys' in any game but GW's two seem to really foster them, thanks to what looks like an almost complete breakdown between the studio's apparent intent* (anything-goes, 'narrative-forging' games) and what a great many gamers assume the intent to be. I.e. a heavily points-based system = some kind of competitive, 'tournament' gaming. That so many people can easily hunt out the most overpowered, undercosted units and items, and figure how to slot them into nigh-invincible combos, is more an indication of the attitude of the GW studio (and the overly strategic, 'mathammery' nature of the games) than a failure of points-based wargaming.
I'd say that the abandonment of points in AoS is at least more honest and aware on GW's part. Still don't think it'll make the game much more playable, though.
* 'Course, there's the train of thought that the studio doesn't have much say in the matter, viz. Rick Priestley's reasons for leaving.
Meanwhile, back at the GW store, there was the guy (let's call him a stereotypical GW store inhabitant) who came up to me and the guy I happened to be standing adjacent to (Why us? Who knows?) to tell us about the hilarious new rule he just found: when your hero challenges your opponent's, or something, you can specify which body part he's going to hit. If successful, your opponent has to act as if they recieved the injury themselves. I.e. if their hero's right hand is injured, your opponent has to roll dice and move minis with their left hand for the rest of the game. And that's just the start of the potential japery of that one rule. I'm actually surprised at the effort it took to politely chuckle at his discovery, rather than stare in disbelief.
I was going to download all these free rules 'cos they're free, and one more option for gaming; now I don't think I even want to read them. It sounds like those stupid novelty boardgames that get you to stand up and act like a tool for one game, then gets shoved in the back of a cupboard and forgotten. People say you can just ignore the daft rules or not take them so seriously; but that's not going to be so easy as you think, since people like to play the rules as written. That section that likes to do things by the book, by the letter of the rules, grabbing whatever tiny, arbitrary loophole and advantage they can, are going to leave in droves, or make the game even more intolerable and unplayable for many people. (You can also ignore the daft rules by... playing something else. And a tightly-written, reasonably balanced game hurts no-one on the sliding scale between 'serious' and 'non-serious' gamers.) I've been a bit sceptical but otherwise undecided; but guys, now I honestly think this is the death of WFB. This is the game soiling itself in the last stages of senility.
Oh, and while I didn't get this issue of WD, I wandered into the newsagent and saw the newest issue of W:SS was out! Score!
The attitude that fantasy is just a bit of nonsense and frippery, and to pot with any notions of consistency, dignity or game balance, is something that's irritated me for a long time.
Aye, fantasy's more a type of escapism, and not so serious, consequential and set-in-stone as history (or so some historical players would have you believe), and I'm far from opposed to mixing up themes and stories and having fun with them. At the same time, it's only my opinion and one way of doing things, but I prefer fantasy that has a solid framework, drawing from history or real life, having an internal consistency, having a well thought-out and balanced ruleset or whatever. Something to get your teeth into. Then you can go as serious or wacky as you like with it. 'Anything goes', in official setting or rules, just looks too sloppy and bores me silly before too long.
I mentioned the latest issue of W:SS. Richard 'Too Fat Lardies' Clarke's column in it was on a similar topic. He was having a pop at historical gamers dismissing the whole hobby as 'just a game' (in fact I think he went a bit much like the 'historicals = srs bsns' thing in some places) but some points jumped out at me.
Unlike darts, where the participants simply chuck arrows at a board, or football, where they kick a ball about and fall to the ground crying occasionally, wargaming is a multifarious hobby, where the vast majority of us are also interested in the soldiers, the strategy, and indeed, the general history of warfare...
Frankly, if some people feel I'm wrong and that it is indeed "just a game", then that's fine by me... What does concern me is the on-line reaction those who stood up for wargaming as a learning tool were met with - at best ridicule, at worst vitriol. Their crime? To stand up for the hobby they enjoy.
I like the soldiers, strategy and history aspects of wargaming myself, as much as it applies to fantasy. I like recreating certain armies or characters. I like taxing myself in a wargame, same as taxing myself with sculpting, a game of sudoku or The Lords of Midnight or whatever, even chucking arrows or kicking a football if the situation arises. It's one way to go about wargaming. Chucking dice while mucking about with your mates is another way. I can't understand the attitude that the latter is the only natural habitat of fantasy, laxity and 'fun', while the former is just for historicals and dry simulations, too serious and 'boring'. Especially when there's been so much overlap - WFB to WAB, Warmaster to Warmaster Ancients and Hail Caesar et al, DBX to HoTT, and many other fantasy adaptations of historical sets, historical army lists for fantasy sets, etc. Whether you're playing Napoleonics or nose-picking orcs shouldn't make much difference to the elegance of the rules or, indeed, the fun.
That issue of W:SS also had an article about adapting Osprey's Lion Rampant medieval rules for fantasy, ahead of the release of the Dragon Rampant fantasy sequel out later in the year. Guess what book of medieval rules I got this week, too? Intended for retinues or warbands of 40-60 models... doesn't matter how models are based... why does that sound familiar? And oops, it was actually playtested, and has a forum where the author listens to and gives feedback! The daftest rule in it is that retinues entirely consisting of 70's-80's minis get +2 glory. (Those... ageists!) I'm already hanging out on ebay like a vulture, waiting for the folks chased away by AoS in their droves.
Mr. Sack o'Skulls is just a few dongs away from being a Kingdom Death model. If this edition is targeted at younger gamers, then this is a really weird way to take it. I know, phrasing.
... then it is irrelevant. Their wishes don't matter. When writing fiction, the end results matters vastly more than the intent of the author.
"Death of the Author is one of the laziest and intellecually dishonest tropes taught in the humanities today."
Alternatively:
“I think that many confuse applicability with allegory, but one resides in the freedom of the reader, and the other in the purposed domination of the author."
Even if someone intended well, if they delivered poorly, their intents don't 'really matter.
Did nobody watch the news these past few weeks?
No less than the Supreme Court affirmed that intent mattered more than the result.
RoninXiC wrote: I already call BS on the "no need for points because we have scenarios"
It will not work. Not with a dozend armies and 985439854 units.
Points didn't work for play either though. If they did, there wouldn't have been Tier levels where it was recognized that this army/that unit was more 'points efficient' (aka overpowered) and that army/this unit was a poor points investment (aka underpowered).
If points are working, like they largely were in the early version of KoW (most units in most early list armies were largely interchangeable) and in Void 1.1 (everybody could take largely the same core forces differentiated by a few specialty units), you wind up with vanilla/boring complaints.
EDIT: Additionally, game designers from GW have stated that they tended to ballpark estimate what a unit/model 'felt' like points-wise rather than resorting to rigorous math-hammer.
Spinner wrote: You know, I honestly kinda like Mister Skully? He actually makes a really good Chaos Spawn. They're supposed to be screwed up and not make any physical sense, and I could see Khorne 'rewarding' a champion by turning all his useless boring bones into nifty, throne-suitable skulls...
"Ah, human. 234 bones inside your pathetic fleshbag, yet only one skull. Here, let me fix that." -Khorne, probably
RoninXiC wrote: I already call BS on the "no need for points because we have scenarios"
It will not work. Not with a dozend armies and 985439854 units.
Points didn't work for play either though. If they did, there wouldn't have been Tier levels where it was recognized that this army/that unit was more 'points efficient' (aka overpowered) and that army/this unit was a poor points investment (aka underpowered).
If points are working, like they largely were in the early version of KoW (most units in most early list armies were largely interchangeable) and in Void 1.1 (everybody could take largely the same core forces differentiated by a few specialty units), you wind up with vanilla/boring complaints.
That wasn't an issue with the points system though. That was an issue with GW not giving anything the correct points value.
Vermis wrote: ... It sounds like those stupid novelty boardgames that get you to stand up and act like a tool for one game, then gets shoved in the back of a cupboard and forgotten. People say you can just ignore the daft rules or not take them so seriously; but that's not going to be so easy as you think, since people like to play the rules as written. That section that likes to do things by the book, by the letter of the rules, grabbing whatever tiny, arbitrary loophole and advantage they can, are going to leave in droves, or make the game even more intolerable and unplayable for many people. (You can also ignore the daft rules by... playing something else. And a tightly-written, reasonably balanced game hurts no-one on the sliding scale between 'serious' and 'non-serious' gamers.) I've been a bit sceptical but otherwise undecided; but guys, now I honestly think this is the death of WFB. This is the game soiling itself in the last stages of senility.
Very well put. Other than the hack job they did to the rules, it's the change in the general feel of the game that has struck me the most. These silly special rules that GW expects one to act out is a prime example. Granted the people I play with would never expect another gamer to act anything out or even want them to, it is still annoying since I am one of those people that like to adhere to rules. I will still buy it most likely and give it a fair try...if nothing else the miniatures are amazing and will be re-purposed while I stay with 8th edition. I truly hope this isn't the death of WHFB, as I've loved setting for decades, despite the tweaks and every shifting fluff. It was still consistent enough to be recognizable as the world that I first explored in the original release of the roleplaying game. Not that a drastic change in the setting was necessarily a bad thing...the way it was handled is.
Indeed. I have cleaned out a whole swag of off-topic posts. If anyone feels a burning need to discuss representation of women in wargaming, there are other places than this thread to do it in.
privateer4hire wrote: So both the points system method and this method are imperfect. Agreed.
No. The points system works fine, when significant effort is put into pointing things correctly. There is no method at all used in AoS. There just isn't anything at all in the rules to balance your army against your opponents. The points system might not be perfect, but it's far and away better than just having no system whatsoever.
RoninXiC wrote: I already call BS on the "no need for points because we have scenarios"
It will not work. Not with a dozend armies and 985439854 units.
Points didn't work for play either though. If they did, there wouldn't have been Tier levels where it was recognized that this army/that unit was more 'points efficient' (aka overpowered) and that army/this unit was a poor points investment (aka underpowered).
If points are working, like they largely were in the early version of KoW (most units in most early list armies were largely interchangeable) and in Void 1.1 (everybody could take largely the same core forces differentiated by a few specialty units), you wind up with vanilla/boring complaints.
That wasn't an issue with the points system though. That was an issue with GW not giving anything the correct points value.
A good solution might be to make army lists a living document, with points or rules updated periodically based on games played.
GW did a bit of that in the early 2000s.
But anyway point remains, why play this game when you either have to write your own #$%^ rules or cling to hope that someday GW might release the rest of the rules and the might, might, might, maybe, be good.
For example, your unit can be made up entirely of banners and musicians?
No limits on copies of a special character?
It's almost like GW put out a mini rules set, are trolling for feedback secretly, then will put out a ruleset with all the stuff we are complaining about.
Having played my first game with Tomb Kings vs Demons, about 80 wounds each, I must say that summoning is VERY strong... summoned units can charge and shoot when summoned if in range!
TK's won the match, killing lots of Khorne Hounds and blood letters with about 40 free models on the board.
I DO like how your wizards can only summon units you have on the board, since they know the spell because said unit grants it to them.
privateer4hire wrote: So both the points system method and this method are imperfect. Agreed.
No. The points system works fine, when significant effort is put into pointing things correctly. There is no method at all used in AoS. There just isn't anything at all in the rules to balance your army against your opponents. The points system might not be perfect, but it's far and away better than just having no system whatsoever.
Worse than that, it has a system based solely on model count!
So my 5 dragons are vastly out numbered by your hoard of 20 goblins and a troll.
So I get to pick a victory condition that lets me autowin with my poor out numbered army?
It amazes me that people can praise a rules system as AoS for being loose and giving them "freedom" to make armies they couldn't under previous Warhammer editions, and then claim that people who complain about silyness like requiring facial hair to claim bonuses can just ignore those rules, so it's not a problem.
As if people couldn't ignore any rule from the previous editions!
The thing about having a balanced rules system as a baseline is just that. It is then balanced as the BASELINE. If you and your opponent (co-player) can mutually agree on playing the game in a different way then you have always been able to do so. The importance of having a balanced baseline is that when you don't have time, skill or desire to make modifications then the baseline will provide the version you play.
If you want to play an unbalanced game then both players should want this to be the case. So then it's no problem to modify the normal rules of equal points or give one force a beneficial bonus rule. If only one player wants to have a unbalanced game (normally wanting to be the stronger force). Then it's reasonable that this player should have to be satisfyed with an even game until he/she can find an opponent that wants to play with the same modifications.
Also about those facial hair rules. Yes of course it's no big deal and any Empire or Dwarf-playing girl can presumably get those bonuses if she wants. But that's not really the point. Having such rules does (intentionally or not) give off an air of exclusion, discouraging people who don't conform to the presumed group (males) who "should" be playing the game.
It's hard enough getting females interested in wargaming.
RoninXiC wrote: I already call BS on the "no need for points because we have scenarios"
It will not work. Not with a dozend armies and 985439854 units.
Points didn't work for play either though. If they did, there wouldn't have been Tier levels where it was recognized that this army/that unit was more 'points efficient' (aka overpowered) and that army/this unit was a poor points investment (aka underpowered).
If points are working, like they largely were in the early version of KoW (most units in most early list armies were largely interchangeable) and in Void 1.1 (everybody could take largely the same core forces differentiated by a few specialty units), you wind up with vanilla/boring complaints.
That wasn't an issue with the points system though. That was an issue with GW not giving anything the correct points value.
A good solution might be to make army lists a living document, with points or rules updated periodically based on games played.
GW did a bit of that in the early 2000s.
But anyway point remains, why play this game when you either have to write your own #$%^ rules or cling to hope that someday GW might release the rest of the rules and the might, might, might, maybe, be good.
Spartan Games is currently doing the living rules/army lists approach (all free downloads) with their Planetfall game. Every army has significant options that don't exist yet but are covered in the rules that will be released as models are developed. Points values have been clicked up and down, abilities altered, etc. especially when fans come back and note that, say, 75% of games are won by faction X. It's a lot of work on their part to keep up with and at the end of the day, you can still min-max just about any points system to get advantage over somebody who doesn't have that skill or doesn't want to devote their life to researching every possible combo for an easy win button.
My read is that you need scenarios with specified lists/model counts (as provided in the AoS set specifically to cover the models being played) to get the best from this game.
Scenarios that include force lists are good IMO because they have a balancing mechanism already built in.
Anyone else looking forward to making custom Warscroll binders for their army?
I've been scrounging up some arts and crafts stuff today, just to see what I can put together. Hopefully have something together for my Beastmen later this week.
I had no fears left to allay, and this just confirms that I want to stay out of AoS.
As somebody who hates the living daylights out of power gaming opponents and facing min-maxxed lists this confirms that I want to check AoS out.
Scenario (hopefully with suggested force lists) helps level the playing field for folks who have neither time/inclination to research a dozen loopholes and game-breaking combos.
GW had a guy camped out at the Forge World open day whos entire job was to answer questions and talk to people about Age of Sigmar. His entire job is to go to shows and talk to people about the new game. For the first time I think ever they're taking Age of Sigmar to Gencon, Comic Con, all the major wargames conventions in Europe etc. They're throwing a considerable amount of money at putting this in front of new audiences who have never played fantasy before. He was also brutally honest and didn't dodge any questions and answered everything he could. I'll start with the negative stuff first.
This is it. There categorically will not be a '9th' edition of fantasy. Age of Sigmar is the only thing fantasy related GW will do for the considerable future.
He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
There will never be points values.
On to the slightly positive stuff then.
They are going to fully support all modes of play, and will be releasing rules to balance armies against each other. There will be narrative campaigns where your forces are picked for you for specific missions, and there will be a system for tournament players to balance lists that isn't based on model count. He did not know the specifics of this, but said it is definitely coming.
The rules will always be free. He said that they are very very aware that fantasy had a massive buy in for someone to get started, as such the game was designed with the ability to play it with one box of models. There will be army books, but every rule in them will be available, for free, online. The books will just have extra background info and scenarios.
GW really are trying harder than they ever have before to make this work. If you're at one of the shows go and talk to them. They want to talk to you about this, but especially they want your feedback on it. As he said, this is totally uncharted territory for them and they are totally open to rules revisions as they go.
nels1031 wrote: Anyone else looking forward to making custom Warscroll binders for their army?
I've been scrounging up some arts and crafts stuff today, just to see what I can put together. Hopefully have something together for my Beastmen later this week.
These could be printed in a6 with a banner picture of your miniature on top of the name description and then laminated.
That would be quite a geeky thing to do.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
That sounds like GW is doing exactly what they should be doing: free rules, better community interaction and outreach, simpler ruleset yet better support for competitive play...
Yeah, the more I'm hearing about AoS, the more I'm liking it. In a few years we might look back at the initial outrage with a smile and a shrug.
GW had a guy camped out at the Forge World open day whos entire job was to answer questions and talk to people about Age of Sigmar. His entire job is to go to shows and talk to people about the new game. For the first time I think ever they're taking Age of Sigmar to Gencon, Comic Con, all the major wargames conventions in Europe etc. They're throwing a considerable amount of money at putting this in front of new audiences who have never played fantasy before. He was also brutally honest and didn't dodge any questions and answered everything he could. I'll start with the negative stuff first.
This is it. There categorically will not be a '9th' edition of fantasy. Age of Sigmar is the only thing fantasy related GW will do for the considerable future.
He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
There will never be points values.
On to the slightly positive stuff then.
They are going to fully support all modes of play, and will be releasing rules to balance armies against each other. There will be narrative campaigns where your forces are picked for you for specific missions, and there will be a system for tournament players to balance lists that isn't based on model count. He did not know the specifics of this, but said it is definitely coming.
The rules will always be free. He said that they are very very aware that fantasy had a massive buy in for someone to get started, as such the game was designed with the ability to play it with one box of models. There will be army books, but every rule in them will be available, for free, online. The books will just have extra background info and scenarios.
GW really are trying harder than they ever have before to make this work. If you're at one of the shows go and talk to them. They want to talk to you about this, but especially they want your feedback on it. As he said, this is totally uncharted territory for them and they are totally open to rules revisions as they go.
GW had a guy camped out at the Forge World open day whos entire job was to answer questions and talk to people about Age of Sigmar. His entire job is to go to shows and talk to people about the new game. For the first time I think ever they're taking Age of Sigmar to Gencon, Comic Con, all the major wargames conventions in Europe etc. They're throwing a considerable amount of money at putting this in front of new audiences who have never played fantasy before. He was also brutally honest and didn't dodge any questions and answered everything he could. I'll start with the negative stuff first.
This is it. There categorically will not be a '9th' edition of fantasy. Age of Sigmar is the only thing fantasy related GW will do for the considerable future.
He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
There will never be points values.
On to the slightly positive stuff then.
They are going to fully support all modes of play, and will be releasing rules to balance armies against each other. There will be narrative campaigns where your forces are picked for you for specific missions, and there will be a system for tournament players to balance lists that isn't based on model count. He did not know the specifics of this, but said it is definitely coming.
The rules will always be free. He said that they are very very aware that fantasy had a massive buy in for someone to get started, as such the game was designed with the ability to play it with one box of models. There will be army books, but every rule in them will be available, for free, online. The books will just have extra background info and scenarios.
GW really are trying harder than they ever have before to make this work. If you're at one of the shows go and talk to them. They want to talk to you about this, but especially they want your feedback on it. As he said, this is totally uncharted territory for them and they are totally open to rules revisions as they go.
I agree with anybody that says that getting a perfectly balanced game is hard, if not impossible, but it doesn't help when GW go out of their way to deliberately skewer their system in favour of one force.
Example, a few years ago, the dark elf army book came out.
At the time, an unarmoured human with a spear cost 5 or 6 points.
In the new dark elf book, for 6 points, you got a dark elf spearman with light armour, shield, and the ability to re-roll misses in the first round of combat.
And he had superior stats to his human counter-part.
According to GW, a highly skilled elf warrior aged 1000 years was worth the same as a human peasant with a pointy stick...right...
The worst of it was Gav Thorpe more or less admitting that the Dark elves got this over powered treatment to boost sales...
All elves having ASF was a horrible horrible mistake and instead of realizing that GW kept doubling down with each subsequent elf book.
As for AOS, I'm in the camp that with some sort of balancing system this could have been amazing. It would have been easy to release the AOS version of War of the Ring in a year or so as well for mass battle after more of the new miniatures and such were out. oh well.
wana10 wrote: All elves having ASF was a horrible horrible mistake and instead of realizing that GW kept doubling down with each subsequent elf book.
As for AOS, I'm in the camp that with some sort of balancing system this could have been amazing. It would have been easy to release the AOS version of War of the Ring in a year or so as well for mass battle after more of the new miniatures and such were out. oh well.
I actually thought ASF made sense for warriors who had been fighting for 1000 years or more, combined with Elven dexterity, but the points cost never reflected this boost.
ImAGeek wrote: You really like the idea of having a prescribed force for each battle?
For competitive play? Yes.
If majority of the game is won before play starts because a player is good at Beautiful Minding out some min-max force, that gets to be frustrating to some of us.
Very well since Warhammer fantasy is truly dead. I think that GW should release a free PDF version of warhammer fantasy 8th edition and the army books for them. If there is not going to be another edition of warhamemr fantasy battle then give the old vets who have built up armies over the past years a parting gift beyond the End Times. A swan song much like what happened with the Mordheim and Necromunda special rules.
GW had a guy camped out at the Forge World open day whos entire job was to answer questions and talk to people about Age of Sigmar. His entire job is to go to shows and talk to people about the new game. For the first time I think ever they're taking Age of Sigmar to Gencon, Comic Con, all the major wargames conventions in Europe etc. They're throwing a considerable amount of money at putting this in front of new audiences who have never played fantasy before. He was also brutally honest and didn't dodge any questions and answered everything he could. I'll start with the negative stuff first.
This is it. There categorically will not be a '9th' edition of fantasy. Age of Sigmar is the only thing fantasy related GW will do for the considerable future.
He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
There will never be points values.
On to the slightly positive stuff then.
They are going to fully support all modes of play, and will be releasing rules to balance armies against each other. There will be narrative campaigns where your forces are picked for you for specific missions, and there will be a system for tournament players to balance lists that isn't based on model count. He did not know the specifics of this, but said it is definitely coming.
The rules will always be free. He said that they are very very aware that fantasy had a massive buy in for someone to get started, as such the game was designed with the ability to play it with one box of models. There will be army books, but every rule in them will be available, for free, online. The books will just have extra background info and scenarios.
GW really are trying harder than they ever have before to make this work. If you're at one of the shows go and talk to them. They want to talk to you about this, but especially they want your feedback on it. As he said, this is totally uncharted territory for them and they are totally open to rules revisions as they go.
I figured the old models were going to be toast and this confirms it. The corporate line is this is a serious game. Only time will tell, but I'm sure there's a lot of lost good will with a good portion of the customer base.
That would be something awful, if true. Unless of course it led to a mass dump-off of armies on eBay for prices that are practically giving the figures away. That would be the opposite of awful.
Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Yeah, because instead of just squatting all of the old armies, they decided to shame people with them into giving them up for new garbage. People should accept this and buy as much new garbage as possible since GW gave them such a gift.
No thanks. This is not the sort of company I care to do future business with, especially in a saturated market where I have a vast number of choices.
I wonder if the new Orruks (and other re-imaginings) are going to be different in just aesthetics or scale as well. It would seem foolish to make WH-AOS at a different scale than WHFB, but it's hard to tell based on the images of the Chaos human mauraders.
If it's just aesthetics, I think that's a good idea, but if it's changing the scale as well to force new army purchases...well I think that will be a big mistake.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Commissar-Danno wrote: Very well since Warhammer fantasy is truly dead. I think that GW should release a free PDF version of warhammer fantasy 8th edition and the army books for them. If there is not going to be another edition of warhamemr fantasy battle then give the old vets who have built up armies over the past years a parting gift beyond the End Times. A swan song much like what happened with the Mordheim and Necromunda special rules.
shade1313 wrote: So, truly, "Feth all you guys who have long established armies. Feth you all to hell, and we're going to laugh while we do it."
Giving you everything you need to continue using your old armies without having to pay a dime isn't what I imagine someone does when he wants to feth you, but I suppose interpretations can differ.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
You can't understand how some people might be upset to find the armies they've been collecting for years are going to be squatted and that the lore and fluff is no more? This isn't a free puppy, it's a slap to the face.
I'm kind of excited for the release, I'm wanting to get the AOS box but I don't want the chaos guys, I need to find someone who wants to buy them... Any takers haha
On another note it does seem they are really putting everything into this release, I'm not a warhammer veteran but I've always liked the miniatures and wanted to get it and AOS seems like a good chance for me.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
This is not GW giving away puppies.
Never said it was, bud.
Simply saying that the nonsense that gets posted constantly about how GW shouldn't do this or that because they'll "lose good will with a good portion of the customer base" has been so overplayed that it detracts from any real criticisms.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
You can't understand how some people might be upset to find the armies they've been collecting for years are going to be squatted and that the lore and fluff is no more? This isn't a free puppy, it's a slap to the face.
And it's commentary like this which makes valid criticisms even more difficult to take seriously.
"It's a slap to the face." isn't a bit hyperbolic?
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again: GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Most of the people who don't have nice things to say about GW weren't buying GW product anyhow. Like, "I'm going to sell off all my models on Ebay and I'm never going to buy GW again!" Dude, you said you'd never buy GW stuff a year ago.
A few of the people who seem like they were neutral or favorable to GW are so incensed with AoS not having points that they say they're parting ways. On the other hand, some folks who haven't bought any GW product for a long time are going to give it a go on the strength of nice, cheap models, and some favorable batreps. So on the forum side, they're probably a wash. And then a lot of the people who love 40k are just going to buy it anyways.
Which is actually good news for GW, because listening to the Interwebz, you'd think GW was already out of business and couldn't sell a glass of lemonade on a hot summer day... when they're actually pretty good at making and selling miniatures. In other words, GW surely outperforms the Forum Performance Index, because judging from the forums, GW's sales should be negligible, and KoW should be the #1 wargame. Or WMH, I guess, but nobody seems to be talking about that much now, so they must be going out of business too. O.O
Incidentally, does anyone live in an area where there are still WD75s for sale? Every store including the GW store was sold out before they hit the shelf. Which actually makes me think. GW should just start bundling minis with their $5 magazine (Canadian dollars), LOL. How many WD's would they sell?!
Commissar-Danno wrote: Very well since Warhammer fantasy is truly dead. I think that GW should release a free PDF version of warhammer fantasy 8th edition and the army books for them. If there is not going to be another edition of warhamemr fantasy battle then give the old vets who have built up armies over the past years a parting gift beyond the End Times. A swan song much like what happened with the Mordheim and Necromunda special rules.
Well, you can pirate it all guilt-free now since it's out of print so it'd be a fairly hollow gesture for GW to release a special snowflake version just to appease your ego. Particularly since they did that whole "end times" thing for you AND wrote you all these warscrolls.
I like that supposedly GW is trying really hard to make this work. That's...very unfortunate, as this product is quite possibly one of the biggest piles of crap they've ever produced (or is certainly in the running for it).
It's a damn shame that they couldn't have just put that effort into making WHF better. Personally that's why I don't believe it, it's too stupid. "Let's blow up the world, kill a game people have invested years of their life and thousands of dollars into, alienating all these customers and losing the vast majority of them in the process to competitors, then create this horrid joke of a game to act as its 'replacement' with a completely different art style, background, and models (and supposedly even scale), and then we'll start advertising that game and doing everything we can to make it successful, including making all of the rules completely free, which we acknowledge is part of what killed WHF but couldn't just do it for WHF because...uh..."
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
So yes Im extremely happy with the news that Orcs will be discontinued, how could I not be? I mean the fluff is gone and the game is gone and now the models will be scrapped.
Sidstyler wrote: I like that supposedly GW is trying really hard to make this work. That's...very unfortunate, as this product is quite possibly one of the biggest piles of crap they've ever produced (or is certainly in the running for it).
It's a damn shame that they couldn't have just put that effort into making WHF better. Personally that's why I don't believe it, it's too stupid. "Let's blow up the world, kill a game people have invested years of their life and thousands of dollars into, alienating all these customers and losing the vast majority of them in the process to competitors, then create this horrid joke of a game to act as its 'replacement' with a completely different art style, background, and models (and supposedly even scale), and then we'll start advertising that game and doing everything we can to make it successful, including making all of the rules completely free, which we acknowledge is part of what killed WHF but couldn't just do it for WHF because...uh..."
This would be more meaningful if you didn't already despise GW's game systems I mean, it's not like you liked Fantasy Battle or 40k, right? IIRC, you thought the players in your area were all out to wreck the fun for everyone else, too (so yeah, AoS would probably be the last game on Earth that would be successful there!).
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
This is not GW giving away puppies.
Never said it was, bud.
Simply saying that the nonsense that gets posted constantly about how GW shouldn't do this or that because they'll "lose good will with a good portion of the customer base" has been so overplayed that it detracts from any real criticisms.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
You can't understand how some people might be upset to find the armies they've been collecting for years are going to be squatted and that the lore and fluff is no more? This isn't a free puppy, it's a slap to the face.
And it's commentary like this which makes valid criticisms even more difficult to take seriously.
"It's a slap to the face." isn't a bit hyperbolic?
Then how bout you ignore the invalid criticisms and try addressing the valid ones?
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
This is not GW giving away puppies.
Never said it was, bud.
Simply saying that the nonsense that gets posted constantly about how GW shouldn't do this or that because they'll "lose good will with a good portion of the customer base" has been so overplayed that it detracts from any real criticisms.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
You can't understand how some people might be upset to find the armies they've been collecting for years are going to be squatted and that the lore and fluff is no more? This isn't a free puppy, it's a slap to the face.
And it's commentary like this which makes valid criticisms even more difficult to take seriously.
"It's a slap to the face." isn't a bit hyperbolic?
I was following your hyperbolic lead with "no matter that GW gives you awesome things, people will still call it a personal attack."
I was going off of your parable or whatever. Perhaps you should examine your own arguments a bit closer?
Edit:
And yes, you did say it.
W could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!"
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again: GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
So yes Im extremely happy with the news that Orcs will be discontinued, how could I not be? I mean the fluff is gone and the game is gone and now the models will be scrapped.
This is Great news Kan great news indeed...
A rose by any other name is still a rose. Or Orc
The faction is still called Orcs & Goblins, no? Or are they totally written out of the fluff? I'm actually not an End Times fan, so I have no clue.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
So yes Im extremely happy with the news that Orcs will be discontinued, how could I not be? I mean the fluff is gone and the game is gone and now the models will be scrapped.
This is Great news Kan great news indeed...
A rose by any other name is still a rose. Or Orc
The faction is still called Orcs & Goblins, no? Or are they totally written out of the fluff? I'm actually not an End Times fan, so I have no clue.
I think the books will be more like order, Chaos, death etc etc
I don't think the updated look will be all that different. We've already seen what the updated chaos are beginning to look like and it's not too different. I will go out on a limb and say all the "End Times" models also have the new look of their faction. Again not that different.
Something more akin to the Tyranid aesthetic updates firstly in 3rd and then again in 4th edition 40k.
You know, I think the Fantasy purchasing lull might go on for a while, outside of the Sigmarines and their Khornate pals. Purchasing old armies now is a risky venture, what with the risk that they won't exist in any meaningful way in AOS and will possibly be out-of-size. In fact, I'm wondering if we're going to experience a "second burn" of customers who buy previous models (ie. "I always wanted to do a small Wood self army!") and find, in six months, that their stuff doesn't really fit. I feel like this could be a really big problem.
Accolade wrote: I wonder if the new Orruks (and other re-imaginings) are going to be different in just aesthetics or scale as well. It would seem foolish to make WH-AOS at a different scale than WHFB, but it's hard to tell based on the images of the Chaos human mauraders.
If it's just aesthetics, I think that's a good idea, but if it's changing the scale as well to force new army purchases...well I think that will be a big mistake.
It was rumoured early on, and seems to be backed up by the Chaos models in the starter set, that AOS is a new, larger scale than WHFB.
Bottle wrote: I don't think the updated look will be all that different. We've already seen what the updated chaos are beginning to look like and it's not too different. I will go out on a limb and say all the "End Times" models also have the new look of their faction. Again not that different.
Something more akin to the Tyranid aesthetic updates firstly in 3rd and then again in 4th edition 40k.
The aesthetics might not be that different, but the size looks significantly bigger. That is honestly the much bigger problem.
Accolade wrote: I wonder if the new Orruks (and other re-imaginings) are going to be different in just aesthetics or scale as well. It would seem foolish to make WH-AOS at a different scale than WHFB, but it's hard to tell based on the images of the Chaos human mauraders.
If it's just aesthetics, I think that's a good idea, but if it's changing the scale as well to force new army purchases...well I think that will be a big mistake.
It was rumoured early on, and seems to be backed up by the Chaos models in the starter set, that AOS is a new, larger scale than WHFB.
See, I feel like this will be the second great failing of WH-AOS (the first being the lack of points or any concept of balancing). They'll screw up the ability to buy kits as bits for 40k and alien gets old WHFB armies all-together. And I BET those new bigger models will have a nice, higher price tag....
Accolade wrote: You know, I think the Fantasy purchasing lull might go on for a while, outside of the Sigmarines and their Khornate pals. Purchasing old armies now is a risky venture, what with the risk that they won't exist in any meaningful way in AOS and will possibly be out-of-size. In fact, I'm wondering if we're going to experience a "second burn" of customers who buy previous models (ie. "I always wanted to do a small Wood self army!") and find, in six months, that their stuff doesn't really fit. I feel like this could be a really big problem.
The problem that GW had was that there weren't people saying, "I always wanted to do a small Wood Elf army!". Or at least, not enough to matter.
Bottle wrote: I don't think the updated look will be all that different. We've already seen what the updated chaos are beginning to look like and it's not too different. I will go out on a limb and say all the "End Times" models also have the new look of their faction. Again not that different.
Something more akin to the Tyranid aesthetic updates firstly in 3rd and then again in 4th edition 40k.
The aesthetics might not be that different, but the size looks significantly bigger. That is honestly the much bigger problem.
This has happened before in Warhammer's history. Chaos Warriors of 8th are bigger than the original plastic kit of 5th. Night goblins went in the other direction by getting smaller.
I don't it's going to be too much of a problem.
Plus armies are going to be under 50 models now too, so they are projects you'll be able to finish without the look getting updated half way through.
Then how bout you ignore the invalid criticisms and try addressing the valid ones?
Why should I? They've already been addressed, in-depth, by people who probably addressed it better than I could.
It's really annoying to see the constant crap, continually posted, time and time again anytime GW does ANYTHING.
You don't have to read it, or reply.
And by that same virtue, neither do any of the people who come into GW threads to moan about how GW has "wrecked X from days of yore!".
It cuts both ways.
They are relevant to the topic because they are addressing the topic while your latest post is trolling who posts here... so yeah I think the blade is sharper on your side.
But carry on dont let this stop you.
At this point as a collector I have 2 chances, go on a buying spree to get the kits I need to complete my armies or do nothing and wait and see... Im really trying not to close this door but GW is making it really hard for me.
Azreal13 wrote: I can understand a reluctance to commit to a new army when they may end up looking off scale, or, worse, superseded by awesomer sculpts.
The funny part is that when I mentioned such a thing as being frustrating after I bought up a Corregidor force for Infinity(a year prior to Icestorm's release and the jacking up of the scale), people jumped down my throat pretty hard as "just being nitpicky"...
In any case, I'm actually impressed by the Eternals(the free model with White Dwarf is sitting on my painting desk with my Skitarii right now) and the reaction that AoS has gotten locally. Quite a few people who never wanted to get into Fantasy because of the costs associated are now looking at AoS as a chance to do so.
Accolade wrote: You know, I think the Fantasy purchasing lull might go on for a while, outside of the Sigmarines and their Khornate pals. Purchasing old armies now is a risky venture, what with the risk that they won't exist in any meaningful way in AOS and will possibly be out-of-size. In fact, I'm wondering if we're going to experience a "second burn" of customers who buy previous models (ie. "I always wanted to do a small Wood self army!") and find, in six months, that their stuff doesn't really fit. I feel like this could be a really big problem.
The problem that GW had was that there weren't people saying, "I always wanted to do a small Wood Elf army!". Or at least, not enough to matter.
Perhaps, but I think people who buy in to old armies, and then find them outclassed and out-sized are going to be quite upset. And that will be the second big twist GW made on its existing customers, which I think will begin to establish a perception of GW as a company that will pull the rug out from under players for sales.
Bottle wrote: I don't think the updated look will be all that different. We've already seen what the updated chaos are beginning to look like and it's not too different. I will go out on a limb and say all the "End Times" models also have the new look of their faction. Again not that different.
Something more akin to the Tyranid aesthetic updates firstly in 3rd and then again in 4th edition 40k.
The aesthetics might not be that different, but the size looks significantly bigger. That is honestly the much bigger problem.
This has happened before in Warhammer's history. Chaos Warriors of 8th are bigger than the original plastic kit of 5th. Night goblins went in the other direction by getting smaller.
I don't it's going to be too much of a problem.
Plus armies are going to be under 50 models now too, so they are projects you'll be able to finish without the look getting updated half way through.
This isn't just the Chaos Warriors though, this is the entire game changing.
I see all the scale issues that plague Corvus Beli, and I think the problem will be much worse for GW.
EDIT: thanks for the shots, krazy. You got any of the Mauraders?
And as Kan said, the scale issues with Infinifty are quite palpable.
Azreal13 wrote: I can understand a reluctance to commit to a new army when they may end up looking off scale, or, worse, superseded by awesomer sculpts.
The funny part is that when I mentioned such a thing as being frustrating after I bought up a Corregidor force for Infinity(a year prior to Icestorm's release and the jacking up of the scale), people jumped down my throat pretty hard as "just being nitpicky"...
In any case, I'm actually impressed by the Eternals(the free model with White Dwarf is sitting on my painting desk with my Skitarii right now) and the reaction that AoS has gotten locally. Quite a few people who never wanted to get into Fantasy because of the costs associated are now looking at AoS as a chance to do so.
Did you pick up the models knowing there were new models in the pipeline? Otherwise it isn't the same thing, that's just a case of bad timing on your part.
Azreal13 wrote: Did you pick up the models knowing there were new models in the pipeline? Otherwise it isn't the same thing, that's just a case of bad timing on your part.
I picked up Corregidor knowing that they were redesigning the range, and bought NOTHING from the "previous" range. The faction boxes I bought? They were being flogged as "the start of the newly designed range".
I had no reason to expect that the scale issues which happened would, which can be laid pretty squarely at the feet of them getting in a tizzy with CAD and nobody stopping to do any kind of scale tests in the process.
I know we've seen them before, but God those are awful. They're blocky, the anatomy looks off and he doesn't half stand uncomfortably. There are so many better models available. Some quite bulky, heavily armoured ones that don't look unnatural.
Part of the reason for the scale change is simply because its doable now.
You guys seem to ignore the fact that every few editions models get less squat and more "limbsy" and realistically proportioned. The main reason the pre-AOS edition Chaos Warriors look the way they do is simply because that's the easiest method to produce them given the technology and plastic they had at the time with as few errors as possible.
As technology gets better, we're seeing less "3rd Edition Eldar" and more Sigmarite style figures where their arms and limbs are fully sized and posed instead of stuck to their chests or them having no necks.
I know we've seen them before, but God those are awful. They're blocky, the anatomy looks off and he doesn't half stand uncomfortably. There are so many better models available. Some quite bulky, heavily armoured ones that don't look unnatural.
That's because they aren't supposed to look natural, they are supposed to look like spacemarines... Sadly.
I'm usually scornful of GW, especially regarding their prices and poor value for money but I noticed something when I was looking at the new Terminator Genysis wargame starter set.
Age of Sigmar £75, 47 miniatures.
Spoiler:
Terminator Genysis £70, 32 miniatures.
Spoiler:
Age of Sigmar must be the best value for money set GW's done in a long time.
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: I'm usually scornful of GW, especially regarding their prices and poor value for money but I noticed something when I was looking at the new Terminator Genysis wargame starter set.
Age of Sigmar £75, 47 miniatures.
Spoiler:
Terminator Genysis £70, 32 miniatures.
Spoiler:
Age of Sigmar must be the best value for money set GW's done in a long time.
The starter boxes are typically a really good deal by GW standards, so no real surprise here.
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Are we drinking some new rumor koolaid?
New rumor states that the legacy rules and minis that are up now won't mesh with the changed aesthetic and larger scale new releases when the reimagined versions of the factions are released.
notprop wrote: Yeah, Az is still pecivering with RTB01 Space Marines because GW ruined 40k with new bigger sculpts.
Thanks to a "friend" who offered to sell my models when I decided to quit around the start of third, I don't own anything made much before 2010, and I never saw a penny for all those thousands of points of Eldar, Chaos and Blood Angels.
Metal Wraithguard, Aspects, War Walker, Dreadnought, original Land Raider, Rhinos, metal Dreads...
I'm depressing myself just thinking about what they'd be worth if I'd just stuck them in a cupboard at my folks house.
I'll be trying it out this week with some friends to see what we think. I imagine the release schedule is going to be all chaos and sigmarites for the next bit.
I really like the alternating combat system. I really think this is what is going to get me back into fantasy since I am not going to need days of models to play the game. As far as my undead not fitting into what may be coming out? I just look at it as a group pulled out of their reality like in a Moorcock or other fantasy novels with a theme of differing dimensions. It'll work and I won't be scrapping my old stuff. Any excess I have, I can swap out for other Warhammer units people don't want, giving me a fair selection of small armies to try.
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Are we drinking some new rumor koolaid?
New rumor states that the legacy rules and minis that are up now won't mesh with the changed aesthetic and larger scale new releases when the reimagined versions of the factions are released.
Isn't that sometimes the case when going to new editions anyways? I mean, old edition daemonettes don't really mesh with the new ones, etc...
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Are we drinking some new rumor koolaid?
GW PR Rep at Forge World Open Day stated openly, once the new factions get a rework, the old models will go OOP. Said the new Orruks were going to be considerably different from the Orcs of today, so when the Orruks get new models, all old Orc and Goblin models will be pulled.
Accolade wrote: See, I feel like this will be the second great failing of WH-AOS (the first being the lack of points or any concept of balancing). They'll screw up the ability to buy kits as bits for 40k
Only until next year, when 40K will be replaced by Age of Abaddon, with identical gameplay to AoS and new, improved, larger minis...
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
GW had a guy camped out at the Forge World open day whos entire job was to answer questions and talk to people about Age of Sigmar. His entire job is to go to shows and talk to people about the new game. For the first time I think ever they're taking Age of Sigmar to Gencon, Comic Con, all the major wargames conventions in Europe etc. They're throwing a considerable amount of money at putting this in front of new audiences who have never played fantasy before. He was also brutally honest and didn't dodge any questions and answered everything he could. I'll start with the negative stuff first.
This is it. There categorically will not be a '9th' edition of fantasy. Age of Sigmar is the only thing fantasy related GW will do for the considerable future.
He acknowledges that the 'funny' rules are rather silly and don't make for a great intro to the system for new people. His response was that the armies in the box set don't have the silly rules. They're there as kind of a celebration and final send off of the old warhammer armies, and he said you might notice the new armies don't have the stupid noises or imaginary friends. This is deliberate, its designed that you'll only generally play the old stuff with your mates since it's a bit embarassing to play in a public place.
The new races will look different to the old ones. Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
There will never be points values.
On to the slightly positive stuff then.
They are going to fully support all modes of play, and will be releasing rules to balance armies against each other. There will be narrative campaigns where your forces are picked for you for specific missions, and there will be a system for tournament players to balance lists that isn't based on model count. He did not know the specifics of this, but said it is definitely coming.
The rules will always be free. He said that they are very very aware that fantasy had a massive buy in for someone to get started, as such the game was designed with the ability to play it with one box of models. There will be army books, but every rule in them will be available, for free, online. The books will just have extra background info and scenarios.
GW really are trying harder than they ever have before to make this work. If you're at one of the shows go and talk to them. They want to talk to you about this, but especially they want your feedback on it. As he said, this is totally uncharted territory for them and they are totally open to rules revisions as they go.
Accolade wrote: See, I feel like this will be the second great failing of WH-AOS (the first being the lack of points or any concept of balancing). They'll screw up the ability to buy kits as bits for 40k
Only until next year, when 40K will be replaced by Age of Abaddon, with identical gameplay to AoS and new, improved, larger minis...
The one thing people will like is there will end up be real honest to gosh true scale space marines.
Shadowclaimer wrote: Part of the reason for the scale change is simply because its doable now.
You guys seem to ignore the fact that every few editions models get less squat and more "limbsy" and realistically proportioned. The main reason the pre-AOS edition Chaos Warriors look the way they do is simply because that's the easiest method to produce them given the technology and plastic they had at the time with as few errors as possible.
As technology gets better, we're seeing less "3rd Edition Eldar" and more Sigmarite style figures where their arms and limbs are fully sized and posed instead of stuck to their chests or them having no necks.
None of that is anything to do with increasing the scale. Models being more realistically proportioned doesn't automatically result in bigger miniatures.
I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Are we drinking some new rumor koolaid?
GW PR Rep at Forge World Open Day stated openly, once the new factions get a rework, the old models will go OOP. Said the new Orruks were going to be considerably different from the Orcs of today, so when the Orruks get new models, all old Orc and Goblin models will be pulled.
That's actually quite awesome. I was worried they wouldn't be moving ahead on stuff fast, and I'm used to my orcs and orks being dead last to update. I have most every orc model going back to 3rd. The scale creep doesn't bother me, or how things fit with new things. Part of that comes from having so many armies. About 20 at the shop and the old stuff has been coming home to my game room for a long, long time. I'm currently working on a squad of the oldest metal beastmen for AoS and two of the old nick bibby dragon ogres i found on ebay.
But i don't see how this is "orcs going away". it's the same thing as any other time new models came out. People are just still in their flaminganger stage so they are pissed/disappointed about things more. If the new Orruks look even half as good as the other new models, it's going to be glorious.
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Are we drinking some new rumor koolaid?
GW PR Rep at Forge World Open Day stated openly, once the new factions get a rework, the old models will go OOP. Said the new Orruks were going to be considerably different from the Orcs of today, so when the Orruks get new models, all old Orc and Goblin models will be pulled.
That's actually quite awesome. I was worried they wouldn't be moving ahead on stuff fast, and I'm used to my orcs and orks being dead last to update. I have most every orc model going back to 3rd. The scale creep doesn't bother me, or how things fit with new things. Part of that comes from having so many armies. About 20 at the shop and the old stuff has been coming home to my game room for a long, long time. I'm currently working on a squad of the oldest metal beastmen for AoS and two of the old nick bibby dragon ogres i found on ebay.
But i don't see how this is "orcs going away". it's the same thing as any other time new models came out. People are just still in their flaminganger stage so they are pissed/disappointed about things more. If the new Orruks look even half as good as the other new models, it's going to be glorious.
Did you get any idea for any release dates in your conversation with the reps? I am thinking more and more that I'll be getting into this game in a big way with my undead the more I hear about it.
TheKbob wrote: I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
You're aware that GW never really wanted serious competitive play, right? That they know they win far harder without competitive players in the mix.
TheKbob wrote: I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
You're aware that GW never really wanted serious competitive play, right? That they know they win far harder without competitive players in the mix.
TheKbob wrote: I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
Good. It offers more scope for awesome conversions without some boring try hard whining about how it doesn't fit in to precise specifications.
TheKbob wrote: I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
You're aware that GW never really wanted serious competitive play, right? That they know they win far harder without competitive players in the mix.
Never?
Never.
Show me a GW-organized tournament for which the "champion" was determined solely by competitive Win-Loss record and margin of victory. Go on, take as long as you like.
GW only ever wanted people to buy more stuff.
The notion of GW actually wanting competitive play? That's a fiction that you've created of of thin air.
TheKbob wrote: I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
Good. It offers more scope for awesome conversions without some boring try hard whining about how it doesn't fit in to precise specifications.
Instead it offers headache scenarios and even more cheeseball nonsense. Clan rats can't get into 0.5" of a Phoenix, so I guess it's just gonna wreck your day.
And yea, games specifically designed for competitive play are better for casual gaming. But a ton of GW fans who've only ever play GW games will never realize this. And it's a damn shame because some better casual games, like Malifaux, deserve larger player bases.
Show me a GW-organized tournament for which the "champion" was determined solely by competitive Win-Loss record and margin of victory. Go on, take as long as you like.
GW only ever wanted people to buy more stuff.
The notion of GW actually wanting competitive play? That's a fiction that you've created of of thin air.
Ah, so I guess 'Ard Boyz was just a fever dream. Because it totally fit that build of win-loss with higher and higher levels of qualifiers for the main event.
Plus that's what the entirety of 3E-5E 40k was based upon. Fantasy had an 'Ard Boyz, too, and had a booming tournament scene until 8E crapped the bed.
See previous statements about competitive games better for all.
Show me a GW-organized tournament for which the "champion" was determined solely by competitive Win-Loss record and margin of victory. Go on, take as long as you like.
GW only ever wanted people to buy more stuff.
The notion of GW actually wanting competitive play? That's a fiction that you've created of of thin air.
Didn't they have some thing a few years ago that had no comp/soft score?
Skull of Games, Throne of Hardness, Khorneball 2000.... Some crazy crap that was pure win/loss.
Show me a GW-organized tournament for which the "champion" was determined solely by competitive Win-Loss record and margin of victory. Go on, take as long as you like.
GW only ever wanted people to buy more stuff.
The notion of GW actually wanting competitive play? That's a fiction that you've created of of thin air.
Wasn't 'Ard Boyz run by GW? They sent out the packages to local stores to run, with prize support from GW. The winner was determined solely on victory and degrees of victory, and there was no painting requirement.
The fact that it was also a sales gimmick doesn't mean GW didn't also potentially want to foster a competitive scene, knowing that they could make a lot of money through it.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Yeah, thats why GW's financials have been on the up and up the past 2 years, right?
Azreal13 wrote: Apart from all the time that they did, right?
I think we should avoid conflating certain designers having ideas about the game and GW management having ideas about the game.
GW started as a company of gamers that wanted to do fun stuff. Not much of the early attempts at rules writing could be considered balanced or tournament worthy though. Once the company went corporate, the focus shifted into accounting over gameplay. I think Andy Chamber's case is proof enough of that. It's no like he was the only person that wanted a tighter, more focused rules set only to be turned away.
Whelp, there goes my plans to buy a spider rider army.
When it comes to being a massive, depressing disappointment, GW never disappoints.
Orcs and Goblins are still there...
No clue where people are getting these ideas. The rules for old orcs and goblins are up. The models aren't discontinued. They renamed them in the new fluff.
Are we drinking some new rumor koolaid?
GW PR Rep at Forge World Open Day stated openly, once the new factions get a rework, the old models will go OOP. Said the new Orruks were going to be considerably different from the Orcs of today, so when the Orruks get new models, all old Orc and Goblin models will be pulled.
That's actually quite awesome. I was worried they wouldn't be moving ahead on stuff fast, and I'm used to my orcs and orks being dead last to update. I have most every orc model going back to 3rd. The scale creep doesn't bother me, or how things fit with new things. Part of that comes from having so many armies. About 20 at the shop and the old stuff has been coming home to my game room for a long, long time. I'm currently working on a squad of the oldest metal beastmen for AoS and two of the old nick bibby dragon ogres i found on ebay.
But i don't see how this is "orcs going away". it's the same thing as any other time new models came out. People are just still in their flaminganger stage so they are pissed/disappointed about things more. If the new Orruks look even half as good as the other new models, it's going to be glorious.
Did you get any idea for any release dates in your conversation with the reps? I am thinking more and more that I'll be getting into this game in a big way with my undead the more I hear about it.
Nothing at all. They let us know a week in advance Complete mushroom treatment. I'm happy to hear the leaked news from FW open day someone posted above. It gives me something i can tell customers at least.
It's like, GW saw it's best sales when the fostered a community that was actively willing and able to shell out large money to play new armies, try new things, and look to bust metas with irregular builds that went against the grain. Maybe, just maybe, competitive games sell a ton more than just fluffy fun times, but it's not like we have any data supporting this evidence.
*checks the financials and comparing to release trends and competition*
Well, I guess correlation isn't causation, but something sure stinks real bad about their mindset, how they've changed their release pattern and game design, and their continued bottoming out of sales/revenue.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Yeah, because instead of just squatting all of the old armies, they decided to shame people with them into giving them up for new garbage. People should accept this and buy as much new garbage as possible since GW gave them such a gift.
No thanks. This is not the sort of company I care to do future business with, especially in a saturated market where I have a vast number of choices.
Show me a GW-organized tournament for which the "champion" was determined solely by competitive Win-Loss record and margin of victory. Go on, take as long as you like.
GW only ever wanted people to buy more stuff.
The notion of GW actually wanting competitive play? That's a fiction that you've created of of thin air.
Ah, so I guess 'Ard Boyz was just a fever dream. Because it totally fit that build of win-loss with higher and higher levels of qualifiers for the main event.
Plus that's what the entirety of 3E-5E 40k was based upon. Fantasy had an 'Ard Boyz, too, and had a booming tournament scene until 8E crapped the bed.
See previous statements about competitive games better for all.
'Ardboyz tournaments came out of the US Trade Sales team. The guys that understood organized play in the US and who liked selling boatloads of models to Independent Retailers. But the UK squatted any independent thinking, games days, 'ardboyz, the independent GT circuit and throne of skulls in the US. A shame. I sold 2-3 times as much GW back then.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheKbob wrote: It's like, GW saw it's best sales when the fostered a community that was actively willing and able to shell out large money to play new armies, try new things, and look to bust metas with irregular builds that went against the grain. Maybe, just maybe, competitive games sell a ton more than just fluffy fun times, but it's not like we have any data supporting this evidence.
*checks the financials and comparing to release trends and competition*
Well, I guess correlation isn't causation, but something sure stinks real bad about their mindset, how they've changed their release pattern and game design, and their continued bottoming out of sales/revenue.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Some people are so blind to the truth. GW doesn't give a gak about it's customer base, as long as they buy stuff. The are happy to sell 1 box instead of multiple boxes over time. That is the reason why they are in financial woes. Short term vision rather than looking at the big picture, fostering good will to the player base. It's too bad, I love GW's models and the background.
By that very narrow definition, then sure, but its still goal post moving.
Your post was about GW organizing a tournament. The underlying point was about whether or not GW ever wanted a competitive scene.
As for organizing, I'm sure the overwhelming majority of people will feel that the likes of 'Ard Boyz is indeed 'official', seeing as it had GW money and rules support, and was put forward entirely by GW on their own initiative. The only difference between your definition and mine is the location. Pretty shaky argument if you ask me.
As for wanting a competitive scene, it'd be pretty hard to argue that even with your incredibly narrow perspective of 'official', 'Ard Boyz clearly demonstrates that for a time, GW was interested and supported competitive play through an 'official' tournament run across NA.
But if you'd prefer to feel smug about being technically correct by your own (arbitrary) definition, then yes, you're right.
I believe what Melissa and GiraffeX were referring to was the mention of a significant change in style, accompanied by all the current miniatures going OOP.
No self-destruction, but unless you want to 'grab them while you can' and convince GW's accountants that all is well with the world, you're stuck browsing the secondhand market for some pretty fantastic models.
I guess all the tournament packets coming from GW, the prize support, and handling when/where the finals were didn't count because it was GW NA. So much like Kirby, John feels like GW NA is irrelevant and otiose.
So John's thinking is totally in line for "GW proper", I suppose. It just makes zero all sense to the rest of the world.
Spinner wrote: I believe what Melissa and GiraffeX were referring to was the mention of a significant change in style, accompanied by all the current miniatures going OOP.
No self-destruction, but unless you want to 'grab them while you can' and convince GW's accountants that all is well with the world, you're stuck browsing the secondhand market for some pretty fantastic models.
Especially the spider-gobbos.
GW could sell out a lot of stuff easily by letting it be known that <insert faction name here> was going to be released in X number of weeks, even if via purposeful leaks. Especially if those rumors are true and it gets leaked to somebody who has reliably put up rumors in the past. It would be a way of clearing out inventory before the new models hit as some people go on a buying binge to get those models they hadn't quite got around to buying yet.
After all, you will never ever get a chance to buy a new box of Orc Arrer Boyz. your only option now is eBay and eventually that venue will start drying up.
For now, spider-gobbos are still up, and they make fine fleabag riders in KoW.
Can someone please explain the new rules ? I'm confused a bit out of the loop on why they have no point system to build your army. The New Rules are free as well on GW website ?
I hope GW will move away from the 'flavor of the month' release pattern, where one army gets all the love. It would be awesome for an August release to be a unit each for four or six different armies.
Sammoth wrote: Can someone please explain the new rules ? I'm confused a bit out of the loop on why they have no point system to build your army. The New Rules are free as well on GW website ?
JohnHwangDD wrote: I see a lot of nonsense about Ard Boyz, but that wasn't an official GW Tournament run by GW.
Does GW even do Grand Tournaments any more?
Then define for us what you mean by an official tournament run by GW.
Because to me, handing out scenario/rule packages, a format to follow, and prize support is about as official as you can get.
Either way, I feel like the goal posts moved.
They didn't move, they uprooted themselves and fething legged it.
But then, people seldom admit they're wrong on the Internet, even when they're bang to rights, let alone a self confessed troll like John.
It's not my fault that you make poor assumptions. Nor is it surprising, given your posting history.
Also, it's rich that you're calling me "troll". Well, pot, you know what? You're totally fething black. Blacker than black, you fething pot of pots.
Me, I'm just glad to have gotten the current set of Warhammer rules for FREE.
You're mistaking my disagreeing with people because I, you know, disagree with them for your own brand of disagreeing with people just to generate conflict.
One of these things is not like the other, but if you wanna keep violating rule 1 at me, be my guest, I feel justified in saying what I said because you told me in thread that you do this.
As for assumptions?
Well, if a bunch of other people make the same assumption, then I'd say the fault lies with your expression.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I see a lot of nonsense about Ard Boyz, but that wasn't an official GW Tournament run by GW.
Does GW even do Grand Tournaments any more?
Then define for us what you mean by an official tournament run by GW.
Because to me, handing out scenario/rule packages, a format to follow, and prize support is about as official as you can get.
Either way, I feel like the goal posts moved.
They didn't move, they uprooted themselves and fething legged it.
But then, people seldom admit they're wrong on the Internet, even when they're bang to rights, let alone a self confessed troll like John.
It's not my fault that you make poor assumptions. Nor is it surprising, given your posting history.
Also, it's rich that you're calling me "troll". Well, pot, you know what? You're totally fething black. Blacker than black, you fething pot of pots.
Me, I'm just glad to have gotten the current set of Warhammer rules for FREE.
There used to be a place to go to continue uncouth, off-topic, thread-derailing digressions. The Dakka equivalent of stepping outside. What was it called?
Me, I'm just glad to have gotten the current set of Warhammer rules for FREE.
Well, and here's the measure of their value: Would you have honestly paid the standard issue $85 for them and another $50 for these "army books" as released with the standard recycled fluff?
I'm betting a great majority of folks saying "AoS ain't that bad!" would sing a different tune. More so when there are better free games out there previously.
Me, I'm just glad to have gotten the current set of Warhammer rules for FREE.
Well, and here's the measure of their value: Would you have honestly paid the standard issue $85 for them and another $50 for these "army books" as released with the standard recycled fluff?
I'm betting a great majority of folks saying "AoS ain't that bad!" would sing a different tune. More so when there are better free games out there previously.
Oh, there's your problem: you think $85 is a completely reasonable price to pay for a rulebook that doesn't even come with any army lists. GW has done its work well.
I have no dog in this fight. By my 3rd game of 8th edition, I was done; GW had killed my favorite game. They wrecked the charge phase, dumbed down the terrain rules, and reduced tactics to "be the first to kill the horde unit with a total-power tac-nuke-spell." So I know what everyone is going through. You are mourning the loss of something you love, and you want to commiserate with others who share your grief. You don't want to hear Old Uncle Fellblade telling you to get over it and get a new puppy, already. I'm kind of ashamed to say that I enjoyed my games of AoS, but I did, and I look forward to playing more.
Me, I'm just glad to have gotten the current set of Warhammer rules for FREE.
Well, and here's the measure of their value: Would you have honestly paid the standard issue $85 for them and another $50 for these "army books" as released with the standard recycled fluff?
I'm betting a great majority of folks saying "AoS ain't that bad!" would sing a different tune. More so when there are better free games out there previously.
If they were all complied and printed into a single book like the 40k3 and bundled with starter armies, I'd have paid $85. That's a fair price to have good quality print and all the lists in one handy reference, with the models at half price.
OTOH, if you're trying to say that anyone would pay $85 for 4 pages of web-quality PDF, plus $50 for 30-ish pages of web-quality PDF, that' plainly foolish. PT Barnum notwithstanding, no, I wouldn't pay Mortons prices for McDonalds food.
Printed Rulebook & Lists alone? I'd pay $20 to have GW print the whole thing for me. That's generally comparable to what I'd pay for other rulebooks.
Oh, there's your problem: you think $85 is a completely reasonable price to pay for a rulebook that doesn't even come with any army lists. GW has done its work well. [Citation Needed]
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, no, the $85 core rulebook doesn't work well anymore. We barely saw a blip when 7E relaunched with their massive bloat edition, along with Space Marines. If GW could have charged for AoS, they would have. But through either realization that the rules are bad (not marketable/profitable) or needing to foster a community much like the smaller start ups (or a combo of both) does not bode well for the company. Unless there's some mysteriously third options, which some would say they're wising up or becoming "friendly" and to that I say, nope.
Tell me what flavor of spice you'd like on my hat, so when I'll eat it if GW actually opens back up to be a community based company.
You have some conflicting rules in there. "Summoned units will count against your total wounds" vs "Ignore summoning". I think you may have meant to take that last bullet point out.
Tomb kings have an edge for sure when it comes to summoning. Especially with so many units being able to fly above the battlefield untouched or go beneath the sand and self heal
Honestly my skaven army would basically be dead in the water under those rules, but I fielded a couple hordes of stormvermin and slaves, so I suspect my army won't work at all in AoS.
streamdragon wrote: Honestly my skaven army would basically be dead in the water under those rules, but I fielded a couple hordes of stormvermin and slaves, so I suspect my army won't work at all in AoS.
You never know unless you give it a shot It might surprise you.
streamdragon wrote: Honestly my skaven army would basically be dead in the water under those rules, but I fielded a couple hordes of stormvermin and slaves, so I suspect my army won't work at all in AoS.
Surely there's a rule stating you can place a block of stinky cheese on the table and if your opponent mentions it, you auto-win?
Interesting, List building used to be a huge part of WFB and they threw that out, so they annoyed the Lore fans, the list builders and those who like more intricate rules.
Age of sigmar is 17500yen here in japan, a little too steep for me.
You have some conflicting rules in there. "Summoned units will count against your total wounds" vs "Ignore summoning". I think you may have meant to take that last bullet point out.
Good luck with your tournament.
ah, yep, was working on two documents at once, one for stores, which had different options, and one i picked for the tournament.
thanks
Listbuilding is a relatively new concept for Fantasy. If you go back to 6E, you weren't supposed to create your list until after you rolled for scenario.
ToxicBox wrote: Tomb kings have an edge for sure when it comes to summoning. Especially with so many units being able to fly above the battlefield untouched or go beneath the sand and self heal
Take a look at Chaos. Every Chaos wizard knows the spells to summon all the demons. And other races have various ways to just summon up units. But not all. Summoning makes sense when you have no restriction on what you can field.
"Do i put these zombies on the table? or summon them later"
But in a tournament where you are restricted by wounds, it would be insane. And with the changes to the rules, the armies like VC and TK that lived by summoning actually don't need it any longer. And in some cases, have units that automatically regenerate killed models each turn. Skeletons in the TK list are actually pretty darn good. 3 attacks each, fighting in 3 ranks if you give them spears? Scary. And crumble less than other races with bravery 10.
For the first time I think ever they're taking Age of Sigmar to Gencon, Comic Con, all the major wargames conventions in Europe etc. They're throwing a considerable amount of money at putting this in front of new audiences who have never played fantasy before.
That's nice. Now could they be a little more open about upcoming releases and stop trying to hide everything behind Kirby's wall of silence? If they really are serious about getting this game 'out there', then the secrecy shenanigans have to end.
Ooruks will not look the same as the orcs we currently have. As such, when they get round to releasing Ooruks, the old models will cease production. He did say that you can still use your old models as ooruks, but you won't be able to buy normal orc boys again.
That's horrific. Orcs are one of the defining things about GW.
There will never be points values.
They are going to fully support all modes of play, and will be releasing rules to balance armies against each other.
GW really are trying harder than they ever have before to make this work.
If they were really trying they would have not have abdicated responsibility when it comes to balancing the game.
Look, they want to be a model company. That's cool. I can respect that. But if making the best models is so important to them that they would basically abandon the rules (and any semblance of balance), then perhaps they should stop sitting on that fence and commit to the change. Ditch rules development in-house in favour of outsourcing it. Outsourcing it to perhaps another company that they already have a rules-writing relatioship with...
They want to talk to you about this, but especially they want your feedback on it. As he said, this is totally uncharted territory for them and they are totally open to rules revisions as they go.
Bull gak. If they wanted that they would have done so in advance of killing WFB and bringing this out.
Will you be putting a report about the tournament up, with maybe some pictures? I'd enter this in a heartbeat if I was near your store.
Yep, will try to get some good pictures of the this and some thoughts on the games and the system. Nothing like a tournament with lots of different people to break a game in interesting ways
I'm leaving list building pretty open, so we can see what happens. Lots of my preconceived ideas about "what's good" have been shattered so far Stats and rules are so different, and many models are much easier to hurt.
Commissar-Danno wrote: Very well since Warhammer fantasy is truly dead. I think that GW should release a free PDF version of warhammer fantasy 8th edition and the army books for them.
Kanluwen wrote: Simply saying that the nonsense that gets posted constantly about how GW shouldn't do this or that because they'll "lose good will with a good portion of the customer base" has been so overplayed that it detracts from any real criticisms.
Be fair Kan, GW doesn't have any goodwill left with the community.
Kanluwen wrote: "It's a slap to the face." isn't a bit hyperbolic?
It's metaphorical, not hyperbolic. Hyperbole would be saying that this is akin to catching ebola.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, no, the $85 core rulebook doesn't work well anymore. We barely saw a blip when 7E relaunched with their massive bloat edition, along with Space Marines. If GW could have charged for AoS, they would have. But through either realization that the rules are bad (not marketable/profitable) or needing to foster a community much like the smaller start ups (or a combo of both) does not bode well for the company. Unless there's some mysteriously third options, which some would say they're wising up or becoming "friendly" and to that I say, nope.
Tell me what flavor of spice you'd like on my hat, so when I'll eat it if GW actually opens back up to be a community based company.
Your post, I am confuse. Did I somehow imply that I thought the 8th ed. rulebook ever worked well? WHFB 8th ed. was my ragequit moment.
You must be misunderstanding me. You said that $85 was the standard price to pay for a rulebook. Perhaps it has become so, in the fever-dream community of Games Workshop. But we both know better; it is like paying 3x normal retail for some model glue because it has a Games Workshop sticker on the front. You said yourself there are better rules out there for free- though you didn't name any, and 'better' is subjective- but your point is valid.
But I do not know what we were looking at, to 'barely see a blip'. Sales? Profits? People entering the hobby? (And I don't remember Space Marines in 7th ed. WHFB.)
I'm with JH on this- I'd pay $20 for GW to print the rules and all the warscrolls for me. HA! You know what I expect? I expect card decks of warscrolls, at $20 retail each, for a limited time. (Actually, I can only dream the price point will be $20. This isGW we're talking about.)
Rules that are not marketable/not profitable are not, ipso facto, bad. Apropos of nothing, GW has given away stuff before. Do you remember Ravening Hordes? Also apropos of nothing, how many pages does it take to explain the rules of Go, or chess? Just because a rules set is small does not mean it lacks depth. Heck, aren't Mantic's basic KoW rules less than 10 pages? And that seems to be the go-to rules set for those who are ragequitting WHFB. Also, people (myself included) have been waiting for GW to go out of business for years, but they keep surprising us. When they do fold, it will be a shock.
Btw, you made me lol, there, when you implied that GW was once a community based company. If you are going to eat your hat, choose your own condiments.
Warhammer is dead. GW has finally, officially killed it. Worse, they are using shreds of its corpse to introduce their replacement for it. Go ahead and mourn.
Kanluwen wrote: It's really annoying to see the constant crap, continually posted, time and time again anytime GW does ANYTHING.
Just like it's really annoying to see you instantly go into "SHIELDS UP" mode whenever someone has the temerity to dislike something GW does. If not for the existence of "Everything is Awesome!" Talys, it might be the most annoying thing at this site.
Meh. I still don't know what to think of the game. If they are goimg with scenario/narrative type rules to field armies I could see my friends and I having fun, but with only the Starter Set for now and no information on whats to come I find this gamble to be far too "risky". when I don't even know what I am getting into.
Will you be putting a report about the tournament up, with maybe some pictures? I'd enter this in a heartbeat if I was near your store.
Yep, will try to get some good pictures of the this and some thoughts on the games and the system. Nothing like a tournament with lots of different people to break a game in interesting ways
I'm leaving list building pretty open, so we can see what happens. Lots of my preconceived ideas about "what's good" have been shattered so far Stats and rules are so different, and many models are much easier to hurt.
I'm off work this week, so I'll be getting as many games of this in as I can with my undead. I think it's going to be quite fun, myself. For those times I want ranked forces, I can do KoW. It really seems like a win win here, with a couple of honestly different fantasy systems instead of clones.
streamdragon wrote: Honestly my skaven army would basically be dead in the water under those rules, but I fielded a couple hordes of stormvermin and slaves, so I suspect my army won't work at all in AoS.
Yeah, going -strictly- by wounds just helps to contain the problem a little - it is definitely not a firm 'fix'. Some armies basic 1-wound models do not compare to 1-wound models of other armies.
But it -does- help keep the game from reaching ridiculous levels, and I think that's what Mik is aiming for.
Now that AoS is out, what are the rumors of the next release?
Surely there will be other content, even for 40K before the rumored Tau release in September.
Alpha wrote: Now that AoS is out, what are the rumors of the next release?
Surely there will be other content, even for 40K before the rumored Tau release in September.
Earlier in the thread there have been pics showing some of the next waves of Eternals. Presumably, after those are out, they'll further flesh out Khorne, and after that, probably another faction or 2 before 40k hits again. Take this strictly as a guess, not a rumor. Well, the first part isn't a guess, but the latter part are.
I am one of those old farts who has Warhammered for 20+ years. I drifted away from WHFB because of life, and then bailed after 8th edition, which was IMO a disaster that combined tedious grinding with essentially random, game-deciding events. Judging by sales, this was not just my O.
So I didn't have high hopes for Age of Sigmar. But I gotta say...looking at all the backpatched warscrolls...I can see how this might actually work.
IMO the biggest problem with 8th was that the game didn't match the hobby. The Warhammer hobby asked you to invest absurd amounts of time and money into an army. And then the 8th edition game mocked that. As soon as a game started, you'd be clawing up fistfuls of your carefully-painted wound markers - er, models - as quickly as you put them down. The pride and joy Big Thing that you spent a month painting took a turn 1 cannonball to the face. And then someone got off a Purple Sun or Black Horror FTW. You spend all this time on your army, and then the game is decided by lulz. Very unsatisfying.
You could fix this by rewriting the rules to fit the massive armies that the hobby told us to collect. Warhammer's weakness (well before 8th) has always been that it is too fiddly for a giant mass-combat game. If you're fielding 200 figures, the precise location of characters within units should not matter. You shouldn't have to care if a unit has 47 or 51 of a rank and file dude. The "spear or hand weapon?" decision should not be fraught with peril. You don't need 150 similar-but-different magic items, or 18 different generic Orc & Goblin heroes and wizards. Etc. So get rid of that clutter and build a ruleset focused on multiple big units moving, shooting, and fighting. This is essentially Kings of War.
But Age of Sigmar goes a different way. After years of insisting that the hobby is collecting massive armies chock full of regular dudes, I think GW just looked at what was actually selling. People like fancy heroes, big centerpieces (goony monsters and war machines), shiny cavalry, and a smattering of the rank-and-file figures that catch their eye. So why fight that? Why not build a game where "what people are willing to buy" also works as an army? Don't feel like painting 120 Zombies, 150 Skaven or even 50 Empire State Troops? OK...how about 10? Can you do 10? Come on, you know you can...because that's all you need for a unit. You don't need to do more. Unless you do feel like it. Then do.
(Oh, and also get rid of some of the "18 different generic Orc & Goblin heroes and wizards" clutter.)
I can see the point: GW is trying to align the game with the hobby. I don't know if AoS is going to be fun. But at least it makes sense, which is more than I can say for the last 5 years of WHFB.
I just wish I liked the WWE-meets-Space Marines aesthetic more. I will miss the historical-ish inspiration for WHFB. But then, as I said, I am an old fart.
posted this on that other forum.
Concerning balance.
Here's my suggestion. Players agree on a wounds limit with the following modifiers. One hero and one monster or war machine for every 40 wounds. Heroes with 10 or more wounds count as two choices. Models with a 6+ save or worse half their wounds total. ( 50 clan rats counts as 25 wounds.) Models with the deamon keyword or the deathwizard ability double their wound total.
Also a couple of house rules. You can't summon models you don't have with you, so if you bring 5 locs you can attempt to summon them.
Summoned models may take no action except for fighting in combat until the following turn.
command abilities are once per game.
sudden death applies to wounds not models. It is must be agreed by both players before being applied.
measuring is base to base.
models in combat may not use ranged weapons.
thoughts?
P.s. i know some people think doing this is like polishing a **** but it is a fun thought experiment for me.
Yes it will be interesting...
I have a funny feeling that they'll be removing the Ancient Egyptian theme that Tomb Kings have completely from the undead faction, though.
Kanluwen wrote: Simply saying that the nonsense that gets posted constantly about how GW shouldn't do this or that because they'll "lose good will with a good portion of the customer base" has been so overplayed that it detracts from any real criticisms.
Be fair Kan, GW doesn't have any goodwill left with the community.
Tell that to all the White Knights here and on Warseer and BoLS...
So... has anyone done a post yet to compare rumor to reality? What was accurate, what was gak, and which sources are creditable (credible? incredible?)?
And once that's over, we could stick a fork in this thread and call it done.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Yes it will be interesting...
I have a funny feeling that they'll be removing the Ancient Egyptian theme that Tomb Kings have completely from the undead faction, though.
I might have to get a Sphinx soon then, for my Necron army.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: I don't think it'll be anything other than new models and warscrolls, though.
New terrain! Don't forget that.
That's at least one thing to look forward to...
TBF Terrain could be counted under models, but I will admit I did forget about them. For some reason I was under the (false) impression the Gate and Ruins went up for pre-order already.
At least there's something in this release that you can look forward to and enjoy, H.B.M.C.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: At least there's something in this release that you can look forward to and enjoy, H.B.M.C.
Are you kidding? I think the Khornate stuff in the AoS box is fantastic. Hell I even like the one thing that everyone here seems to hate (that Khorne skull beast thingy with the tiny head).
Chikout wrote: posted this on that other forum.
Concerning balance.
Here's my suggestion. Players agree on a wounds limit with the following modifiers. One hero and one monster or war machine for every 40 wounds. Heroes with 10 or more wounds count as two choices. Models with a 6+ save or worse half their wounds total. ( 50 clan rats counts as 25 wounds.) Models with the deamon keyword or the deathwizard ability double their wound total.
Also a couple of house rules. You can't summon models you don't have with you, so if you bring 5 locs you can attempt to summon them.
Summoned models may take no action except for fighting in combat until the following turn.
command abilities are once per game.
sudden death applies to wounds not models. It is must be agreed by both players before being applied.
measuring is base to base.
models in combat may not use ranged weapons.
thoughts?
P.s. i know some people think doing this is like polishing a **** but it is a fun thought experiment for me.
Please post in my wounds thread in warhammer general. Very close to your suggestion
It's odd at first that they are resting the arrow on the wrong side of the bow, but then I noticed that they are actually using their index fingers as the arrow rest, which I guess is a benefit of wearing plate gauntlets. So as long as they tilt the bow to the left, technically it would work.
I just can't believe it's an army the size of fething 40k terminators. I thought the bases were the new 32mm ones, and then I see they are 40mm? If they are priced anything like terminators, Sigmarines armies are gonna cost a mint to field as an army outside of the great deal of the starter set.
The biggest thing that worries me about AoS beyond the rules is that the prices are going to skyrocket yet again. Smaller armies, sure, but at prices even higher than now? Yeesh.
Matt.Kingsley wrote: At least there's something in this release that you can look forward to and enjoy, H.B.M.C.
Are you kidding? I think the Khornate stuff in the AoS box is fantastic. Hell I even like the one thing that everyone here seems to hate (that Khorne skull beast thingy with the tiny head).
The Skull beast seems like it can have a lot of uses in 40K as well.
Chikout wrote: posted this on that other forum.
Concerning balance.
Here's my suggestion. Players agree on a wounds limit with the following modifiers. One hero and one monster or war machine for every 40 wounds. Heroes with 10 or more wounds count as two choices. Models with a 6+ save or worse half their wounds total. ( 50 clan rats counts as 25 wounds.) Models with the deamon keyword or the deathwizard ability double their wound total.
Also a couple of house rules. You can't summon models you don't have with you, so if you bring 5 locs you can attempt to summon them.
Summoned models may take no action except for fighting in combat until the following turn.
command abilities are once per game.
sudden death applies to wounds not models. It is must be agreed by both players before being applied.
measuring is base to base.
models in combat may not use ranged weapons.
thoughts?
P.s. i know some people think doing this is like polishing a **** but it is a fun thought experiment for me.
Please post in my wounds thread in warhammer general. Very close to your suggestion
Problem is with models with 6+ save counting as 1/2 wound is that some elite units have 6+ saves (wardancers or witch elves) one way is to limit this rule to those with min 10 models in the unit. i notice that elite units are all min size 5 instead of 10.
AegisGrimm wrote: It's odd at first that they are resting the arrow on the wrong side of the bow, but then I noticed that they are actually using their index fingers as the arrow rest, which I guess is a benefit of wearing plate gauntlets. So as long as they tilt the bow to the left, technically it would work..
There's no 'wrong' side. Different styles of archery use either.
The bigger problem is the lack of flights, and the ring on the end that they're using to draw it back is going to hit that index finger and make the 'arrow' tumble.
The Sigmarines remind me of Dark Souls, that's why I like them. Still don't want to touch the game, but will be looking to find a cheap lot to mess around with. I like those models.
If they were truly a minis company, they'd be selling them in one or two packs for a reasonable price, IMO. This current product line still flies in the face of that.
fellblade wrote: Did I somehow imply that I thought the 8th ed. rulebook ever worked well? WHFB 8th ed. was my ragequit moment.
I'm with JH on this- I'd pay $20 for GW to print the rules and all the warscrolls for me. HA! You know what I expect? I expect card decks of warscrolls, at $20 retail each, for a limited time. (Actually, I can only dream the price point will be $20. This isGW we're talking about.)
TheKbob wrote: Unless I'm misunderstanding you, no, the $85 core rulebook doesn't work well anymore.
I don't think the big expensive rulebook has ever worked terribly well. What worked well was having the smaller book in a good value starter set.
I don't know for sure, but at a guess I'd say ever since GW started with having their big rulebooks (was it 6th ed WHFB and 3rd ed 40k?) I would think the big rulebooks probably sold less than the starter sets did.
Personally, the only times I've bought big rulebooks is when they have been very cheap (either on sale because they were being replaced or 2nd hand from players who were quitting the game).
You do realise this is an internet discussion forum and not a pub where you are trying to start a drunken brawl? Maybe try and be less condescending, eh?
Who else is considering trying to take the big gribbly monster thingy and at least trying to convert it into something cool? For "Fantasy" AoS, or 40K? I'm on the fence, frankly. I feel kinda like I did about the Slaughterbrute. But that was way too expensive to buy for conversion purposes. But since I'm loving the Khorne infantry models, I'm gonna get at least one of these in the mix. Maybe a nasty counts-as greater daemon? A chunky Daemon Prince?
You do realise this is an internet discussion forum and not a pub where you are trying to start a drunken brawl? Maybe try and be less condescending, eh?
Well, do you realize that this is H.B.M.C. - his default rhetorical mode is snarky (and often totally unnecessary, downright quixotic) condescension? I think it's a psychological tic. I think he's physiologically incapable of turning it off.
Kanluwen wrote: Said it before, saying it again:
GW could go up and down the street giving people free puppies and still there would be people shouting that "GW tried to kill me--I'm allergic to dogs!".
Quite frankly, GW can't do anything without "losing good will with a good portion of the customer base" if you listen to posters on forums.
Most of the people who don't have nice things to say about GW weren't buying GW product anyhow. Like, "I'm going to sell off all my models on Ebay and I'm never going to buy GW again!" Dude, you said you'd never buy GW stuff a year ago.
Well my purchases were never higher than last few months, I'd say $200 a month and it's kind of scary to think about what would happen if GW provided a good ruleset and I'd smell some real money the same time. Now I will probably buy only the things I need to finish and then actively try to avoid GW models. I love them, my hands tremble when I open the box but I'm not supporting all the crap. I already stopped buying codieces because of deviantartey artwork so I guess I will stop with minis as well, or at least considerably limit my spending.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: You do realise this is an internet discussion forum and not a pub where you are trying to start a drunken brawl? Maybe try and be less condescending, eh?
What, and ruin all my fun?
catharsix wrote: Who else is considering trying to take the big gribbly monster thingy and at least trying to convert it into something cool? For "Fantasy" AoS, or 40K? I'm on the fence, frankly. I feel kinda like I did about the Slaughterbrute. But that was way too expensive to buy for conversion purposes. But since I'm loving the Khorne infantry models, I'm gonna get at least one of these in the mix. Maybe a nasty counts-as greater daemon? A chunky Daemon Prince?
I want it to be just some random Khornate thing in Dark Heresy/Deathwatch.
TheKbob wrote: I like that no one else pointed out "serious game" and the lack of points values, serious scenario play, no standardization of bases, and measuring from models (including weapons) without an extremely restrictive modeling requirements.
This game will never be taken seriously in a competitive fashion and is flushing the good will of whatever remained in the Fantasy base. They're going all-in on a game losing strategy, IMO. Time will tell, but I'd not invest heavily in it unless you're planning 40k conversions... and even then...
You're aware that GW never really wanted serious competitive play, right? That they know they win far harder without competitive players in the mix.
Never?
Never.
Show me a GW-organized tournament for which the "champion" was determined solely by competitive Win-Loss record and margin of victory. Go on, take as long as you like.
GW only ever wanted people to buy more stuff.
The notion of GW actually wanting competitive play? That's a fiction that you've created of of thin air.
It must have been the thin air from around Rick Priestley's mouth when he confirmed that both 40k and fantasy had tourney oriented rulesets.
Or maybe Allesio writes narrative rules lol.
It's actualy your notion that is created out of thin air, coming from your flawed analysis based on your own limited knowledge and influenced by a significant wishful thinking.
Interesting to see that many of those who have actually tried the game seem to like it, or are at least positively surprised. Maybe a company with 20+ years of experience in the field are not totally lost? Maybe it has been quite extensively tested? And while I'm not totally sold on the fluff at least they're trying to do something new to a very conservative genre.
I'm not trying to take sides here. Watching somewhat from the sidelines I find the development interesting.
But I must admit I have a strong temptation to sell off my 40k models, codices and rules and give this a shot...
catharsix wrote: Who else is considering trying to take the big gribbly monster thingy and at least trying to convert it into something cool? For "Fantasy" AoS, or 40K?
*raises hand* I have already converted 2 Keepers of Secrets as my Giants of Albion. And two OOPVC Nightmares that I play as Ogres
I own a 3rd KOS, along with a Belakor and Champ on boobworm, for reasons completely forgotten. I think the Boobworm was supposed to convert into a counts as Dark Pegasus, but I have no clue about the Belakor.
Plus a couple Nightmares in the bitz pile as well, to convert into another Ogres & Ogre Maneater. My abandoned DoW was getting kinda nuts.
The game is broken out of the gate. Several instant win combos have already been found. Just take a single Tomb King Carrion, choose the sudden death that lets you win if you survive six turns, and simply fly around the field immune to enemy attentions.
That sounds like fun!
You know what else sounds like fun? Showing up for a pickup game with a handful of units as a new player and getting beaten in the face by crazy summoning spells and special characters/combos galore. You have 50 skaven slaves? Cool! I have 52 Blood Knights that are by this game considered their equal.
The rules have promise, but I am disappointed in the execution. It is a half-cocked product that makes pickup games impossible and that needs to be fixed by the player-base out of the gate. I was really excited about it for a while, but that enthusiasm has been killed in the hardest way possible. GW even put some rules into the game that actively mock their player-base. Really? I have no idea what they were even aiming for at this point. Any other new game that tried this would be laughed out of the market. This deserves no better.
pinkmarine wrote: Interesting to see that many of those who have actually tried the game seem to like it, or are at least positively surprised. Maybe a company with 20+ years of experience in the field are not totally lost? Maybe it has been quite extensively tested? And while I'm not totally sold on the fluff at least they're trying to do something new to a very conservative genre.
I'm not trying to take sides here. Watching somewhat from the sidelines I find the development interesting.
But I must admit I have a strong temptation to sell off my 40k models, codices and rules and give this a shot...
Make no mistake, GW is taking a big gamble here, and I am pretty convinced they realize this. For the first time since... well... forever, they've -really- detached themselves from their usual modus operandi. if it works - great for them! If it fails... I imagine we'll see the growth of the tail-spin they seem to have been in the past few years.
So far, AoS seems like it has potential, but it's like they put in things to deliberately sabotage it. No army building rules? Ugh. Out-of-control summoning rules? Ugh.
It really strikes me from time to time, the thought that it is all really stupid.
Moments like this I think, what would a not brain dead company do? A not completly brain dead and blind company would want to have a proper, mass battle, unit based wargame set in the old world released at the time Warhammer Total War is out. The wargame would have to be rebooted anyway because the latest, narrative relaxed casual fun edition was a flop and could turn out to be too clunky and hard to get into for the majority of pc gamers. Why not release a skirmish simpleton in the meantime for a significant cash grab, test the waters in how far they can go with streamlining, draw in new blood like more kids, warcraft crowd etc and maybe make the angry vets sell their stuff, they will come back crawling for a whfb reboot anyway. And the reboot would come with a bang, they'd either pretend that they listened to the community or just go lolol we said no 9th edition but this is not 9th just whfb trololol.
Far fetched maybe and not my hopes or sth, I just really find it hard to believe that a company can be that brain dead and can have such a bad timing.
pinkmarine wrote: Interesting to see that many of those who have actually tried the game seem to like it, or are at least positively surprised. Maybe a company with 20+ years of experience in the field are not totally lost? Maybe it has been quite extensively tested? And while I'm not totally sold on the fluff at least they're trying to do something new to a very conservative genre.
I'm not trying to take sides here. Watching somewhat from the sidelines I find the development interesting.
But I must admit I have a strong temptation to sell off my 40k models, codices and rules and give this a shot...
Make no mistake, GW is taking a big gamble here, and I am pretty convinced they realize this. For the first time since... well... forever, they've -really- detached themselves from their usual modus operandi. if it works - great for them! If it fails... I imagine we'll see the growth of the tail-spin they seem to have been in the past few years.
So far, AoS seems like it has potential, but it's like they put in things to deliberately sabotage it. No army building rules? Ugh. Out-of-control summoning rules? Ugh.
Thing is, I don't think they're that stupid. Greedy? Yes. (Corporations are – think Gordon Gekko ) Prepared to kill off lots of fluff and lose a not-very-profitable player base? Yes. Deliberately stupid? No. But as you say, prepared to take a big risk. I think they're quite gutsy in this.
As I suggested several pages ago (and rumors & leaks point in that direction), scenarios will provide balance for new players. Someone above passed on a rumor that we'll see a campaign supplement with a balancing system. That'll probably be directed towards experienced and more competitive players. Of course they'll not provide this for all the old models. The point of their business is to sell new models, they don't make money from armies already bought.
I was having a think about how AoS could work in a competitive setting and, inspired by the rumour of 'hundreds of scenarios' I think I've got an idea of where it could go.
I think the key is going to be not trying to recreate the feel of old FB by choosing an army and fighting 3 pitched battles but rather embracing the unbound style, warscrolls and keywords in a way that encourages a lot of experimentation with armies. I'll outline it here but if anyone has a thread somewhere else I'll happy elaborate there.
My suggestion would be to treat the army building like a deck building game, you start with a soft limit eg bring any 100 models. Literally any models the player likes. However, each round of the tournament is going to place different limits on what can be chosen from that pool. Points are awarded based on how early a major or sudden death victory is achieved, and if a player isn't able to meet the minimum requirements of the scenario the other player gets a small victory. The gamble for the players then is how far do they tilt their armies towards the extremes, knowing that they may lose some games before they even start.
Scenarios should have a lot of variation built in to them. A few examples I thought of:
Tank battle: Min 10 models Max 30. Only models with a save of 4+ or better can be used. Favours the guy who spams elite troops.
Raiding party: A skirmish between advance elements, Min 5 models Max 20. Only models with a move of 8" or higher, or special deployment rules may be used (gives Dwarfs a chance).
The fellowship: Min 5 models, max 10 models. Only models with a wound value of 4 or higher may be used. No mounted models.
Clash of the titans: Min 1 model, Max 10 models. Only models with wounds higher than 5 or monsters may be used.
Battle of the dregs: Min 10 models, Max 40 models. Only models with 1 attack and a save lower than 5+ may be used, no heroes.
Alliance: Min 10 models, mix 40 models: Each unit must use a different warscroll.
Army of the pure: Min 15 Max 40. Models must belong to the same faction eg free people, gitmob. Max 5 warscrolls.
Unbound: Min 20 Max 50. Any models may be used.
Alliance of the free people: Min 20 Max 40. Min 6 unique warscrolls.
So the idea would be to have quite a few rounds played, and the challenge of army building would become about gambling on what scenarios will be played. You can absolutely take 100 bloodthirsters, but will the scenarios that let you use them be enough to counter the scenarios that don't?. I've read through a few army compendiums, and there's some good balance built in there. The weaker swarm troops usually have rules that give them bonuses in large numbers but using up your troop allowance on them will sacrifice the extra synergy and bonuses you can get through having more type of unit. Likewise you can absolutely cherry pick what appears strongest from each army, but may suffer from a lack of synergy in some scenarios versus the guy who picks a single race.
I have to say earlier in the thread I said I was super-casual, but this actually makes me want to run a tournament! I think I'm sold.
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: As you are very much a game/rules based player SS what elements did you think worked and which ones didn't (except the lack of balance obviously).
Rolling to wound feels redundant now that toughness isn't a stat. The game would be better off with removing that step entirely, and simply having 'to hit', damage, attacks and rend as weapon stats.
Hero abilities, reactionary charges and random initiative are good.
Seems to be a straightforward skirmish game. Nothing revolutionary, but quick and streamlined, great as a gateway game where someone new to wargames can buy a small handful of minis they like the look of and get playing right away.
I hope the community comes up with a good points value system, the game is worthless without it, and GW reps have said there will never be points values for it.
Community will need to sort out rules amendments and balancing, much like netepic and coreheim, taking it out of GW's hands is actually a good thing.
Thraxas Of Turai wrote: As you are very much a game/rules based player SS what elements did you think worked and which ones didn't (except the lack of balance obviously).
Rolling to wound feels redundant now that toughness isn't a stat. The game would be better off with removing that step entirely, and simply having 'to hit', damage, attacks and rend as weapon stats.
Not if they're planning on having modifiers to the to-hit and to-wound rolls (or re-rolls of those rolls). And they already do have effects that specify rerolling to-hit or specify rerolling to wound individually.
catharsix wrote: Who else is considering trying to take the big gribbly monster thingy and at least trying to convert it into something cool? For "Fantasy" AoS, or 40K? I'm on the fence, frankly. I feel kinda like I did about the Slaughterbrute. But that was way too expensive to buy for conversion purposes. But since I'm loving the Khorne infantry models, I'm gonna get at least one of these in the mix. Maybe a nasty counts-as greater daemon? A chunky Daemon Prince?
If I do end up getting the box to use the models in INQ28 & Mordheim, I dunno...if you tone it down a bit(fill in the melty-skullskin bits, leave off some of the weird bonetail things sprouting out of his shoulders and fill in their sockets, use a decent actual head) it might make a good base for a Chaos Troll? Otherwise it's probably going to end up as DP or Spawn bait.
insaniak wrote: Only until next year, when 40K will be replaced by Age of Abaddon, with identical gameplay to AoS and new, improved, larger minis...
Don't even joke...
... although that's what the Horus Heresy game will end up being, should it ever come out.
It will probably happen that way GW can copyright the stats system they use.
Would that even work? I mean, I can believe GW would think it would work, but I'm sure I remember reading about a series of legal decisions regarding the computer games industry a few years back that basically established you can't copyright game mechanics or even names of game mechanics, only the specific combination of mechanics and names of mechanics that make up your game.
You can't copyright game mechanics. Just the wording.
scarletsquig wrote: Community will need to sort out rules amendments and balancing, much like netepic and coreheim, taking it out of GW's hands is actually a good thing.
If you need to do that much work to correct a 4-page rule set, why not just start from scratch and write a good one? Or use a better existing one (KoW 1 was 10 pages and worked quite well)? Or modify a better existing one?
One of the pictures posted in this thread showed off all the models (or their electronic CAD brethren). One thing that it showed was that the Khorne Cultist guys didn't have to have a Standard and a Horn.
Is this correct? Is it possible to not have 2 standard bearers and 2 musicians?
pinkmarine wrote: As I suggested several pages ago (and rumors & leaks point in that direction), scenarios will provide balance for new players. Someone above passed on a rumor that we'll see a campaign supplement with a balancing system. That'll probably be directed towards experienced and more competitive players. Of course they'll not provide this for all the old models. The point of their business is to sell new models, they don't make money from armies already bought.
I can only see that as a way for them to spoon feed you army lists to buy. Each scenario starting with a "You need to use the following models...", kind of like historics orders of battle but with even less flexibility.
I like casual gaming, but I don't want that level of spoon feeding or cynical selling.
I wonder how much their old WHFB line has sold since AoS has been announced.
Both my wife and I have just pretty much finished off the armies we are working on due to the AoS announcement as neither of us want to wait and find the aesthetics for her wood elves and my Goblins change dramatically.
Nightwolf829 wrote: The game is broken out of the gate. Several instant win combos have already been found. Just take a single Tomb King Carrion, choose the sudden death that lets you win if you survive six turns, and simply fly around the field immune to enemy attentions.
That sounds like fun!
You know what else sounds like fun? Showing up for a pickup game with a handful of units as a new player and getting beaten in the face by crazy summoning spells and special characters/combos galore. You have 50 skaven slaves? Cool! I have 52 Blood Knights that are by this game considered their equal.
The rules have promise, but I am disappointed in the execution. It is a half-cocked product that makes pickup games impossible and that needs to be fixed by the player-base out of the gate. I was really excited about it for a while, but that enthusiasm has been killed in the hardest way possible. GW even put some rules into the game that actively mock their player-base. Really? I have no idea what they were even aiming for at this point. Any other new game that tried this would be laughed out of the market. This deserves no better.
Broken for competitive play maybe. Most of these "instant win" combos just involve saying. "Right, have an awesome day" and finding another person to play games with. The game can probably be fixed. Just takes a bit of work. I'm running a tournament Sunday. Interested to see how people break it.
Nightwolf829 wrote: The game is broken out of the gate. Several instant win combos have already been found. Just take a single Tomb King Carrion, choose the sudden death that lets you win if you survive six turns, and simply fly around the field immune to enemy attentions.
That sounds like fun!
You know what else sounds like fun? Showing up for a pickup game with a handful of units as a new player and getting beaten in the face by crazy summoning spells and special characters/combos galore. You have 50 skaven slaves? Cool! I have 52 Blood Knights that are by this game considered their equal.
The rules have promise, but I am disappointed in the execution. It is a half-cocked product that makes pickup games impossible and that needs to be fixed by the player-base out of the gate. I was really excited about it for a while, but that enthusiasm has been killed in the hardest way possible. GW even put some rules into the game that actively mock their player-base. Really? I have no idea what they were even aiming for at this point. Any other new game that tried this would be laughed out of the market. This deserves no better.
Broken for competitive play maybe. Most of these "instant win" combos just involve saying. "Right, have an awesome day" and finding another person to play games with. The game can probably be fixed. Just takes a bit of work. I'm running a tournament Sunday. Interested to see how people break it.
I thought the rules read that if you out number the enemy they choose the victory condition. So could just pick something else to kill or survive etc.
Sounds like a solid plan by having an influx of new Fantasy players after playing Warhammer: Total War. Kinda like how Dawn of War introduced a lot of videogamers to tabletop wargaming. For sure, a lot of these new players will be looking for a fantasy mass battle wargame filled with characters and units and places they recognize from the videogame.
All right, Imma throw this out to the crowd. I'm thinking that AoS seems pretty ridiculous. Particularly the bit about there being no consideration of points.
And bear with me on this analogy - I'm in no way implying that GW has a fraction of the innovative spark that Apple has - but in a weird way, this reminds me of Apple releasing the iMac.
I don't know if anyone else remembers when Apple first came out with the colored, bulbous iMacs. It was a complete redesign of the Mac from their old off-white boxes. But one of the most curious omissions (at least at the time) with the iMac was the lack of a disk drive. It had a CD drive and you could connect it to the internet. And sure, that's the standard now. But remember back to those dark old days when we still used floppies. It was a radical thought to mass-produce a computer with no floppy drive. But Apple did. And they went with it.
And now we use any floppies that we might dig out of dusty boxes as drink coasters.
I'm not saying GW or AoS have ANY of the brilliance of Apple and that first iMac. I'm just putting this out here to point out that none of us can see the future yet. We don't know how the paradigm will change.
angelofvengeance wrote: Can we just take the mithering and whatnot elsewhere please? Like Dakka Discussions? This isn't really my idea of a N&R thread..
And yet you keep posting about them, so you must be looking a lot.
I think you just can't admit how much you like them. Don't worry, you can come out now, it's ok to paint them. Just wash up afterwards and don't let anyone know
pinkmarine wrote: Interesting to see that many of those who have actually tried the game seem to like it, or are at least positively surprised. Maybe a company with 20+ years of experience in the field are not totally lost? Maybe it has been quite extensively tested? And while I'm not totally sold on the fluff at least they're trying to do something new to a very conservative genre.
I'm not trying to take sides here. Watching somewhat from the sidelines I find the development interesting.
But I must admit I have a strong temptation to sell off my 40k models, codices and rules and give this a shot...
Make no mistake, GW is taking a big gamble here, and I am pretty convinced they realize this. For the first time since... well... forever, they've -really- detached themselves from their usual modus operandi. if it works - great for them! If it fails... I imagine we'll see the growth of the tail-spin they seem to have been in the past few years.
So far, AoS seems like it has potential, but it's like they put in things to deliberately sabotage it. No army building rules? Ugh. Out-of-control summoning rules? Ugh.
I'm been saying for a while that GW are no longer able to create games. This is likely because there's been a drain of skills to other companies that don't seem so full of BS, but also because the corporate side are only interested in turning stuff out rather than offering quality or innovation. Games Workshop can't make games - they rehash 40k over and over (not had a radical change since 3rd edition) and fantasy has gone down hill until it's scrapped and this mess was produced in its place where balance just doesn't exist. The only other games they've made in recent years are the hopeless Dreadfleet and Space Hulk, the best thing released is a rerelease of a game designed in much better times. To think when I was young you'd go to GW and there would be games all around the walls and models up to the ceiling. Now they have barely any variety in games offered and most models are only available online anyway.
pinkmarine wrote: As I suggested several pages ago (and rumors & leaks point in that direction), scenarios will provide balance for new players. Someone above passed on a rumor that we'll see a campaign supplement with a balancing system. That'll probably be directed towards experienced and more competitive players. Of course they'll not provide this for all the old models. The point of their business is to sell new models, they don't make money from armies already bought.
I can only see that as a way for them to spoon feed you army lists to buy. Each scenario starting with a "You need to use the following models...", kind of like historics orders of battle but with even less flexibility.
I like casual gaming, but I don't want that level of spoon feeding or cynical selling.
Agreed, I don't like it either, but I think that's the logic they're going by. At least initially.
And yet you keep posting about them, so you must be looking a lot.
I think you just can't admit how much you like them. Don't worry, you can come out now, it's ok to paint them. Just wash up afterwards and don't let anyone know
I don't look at all. I read this thread though and it's hard to miss a pic of a statue.
I'd love to admit how much I like them but sadly they look dumb and I don't like them
JohnnyHell wrote: Wot no Space Marine conversions online yet? C'mon, I wanna see how others solve the 'make them hold a bolter' issue before I have to do it!
I've seen at least 2 a GK terminator and a BA captain.
JohnnyHell wrote: Wot no Space Marine conversions online yet? C'mon, I wanna see how others solve the 'make them hold a bolter' issue before I have to do it!
JohnnyHell wrote: Wot no Space Marine conversions online yet? C'mon, I wanna see how others solve the 'make them hold a bolter' issue before I have to do it!
Awesome. So far, Sigmarines have been a symbol of fail to me, I love that GW is so committed as to adorn their HQ with it.
"This is the new GW success story - let's celebrate in advance!" Please tell me they didn't replace the Space Marine..
One thing that's cool: they probably used the existing CAD files for making this thing. I'm guessing they just split the sprues in two through the centerline, so each bit is split in the middle, and it's simply made out of carved blocks of hard plastic foam (wood-like carving plastic) with a large 3-axis CNC wood mill that's available in pretty much any industrial wood shop. Few hours of machine time, then assemble, paint, done - and the whole thing probably only cost them a few grand.
at actually using a Helbrute... or are we on Chaos Dex #83 right now and they've gone from bad to awful to data slate to awful to great? Honestly lost track.
