Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't think AoS will scale well to 100 figures a side size of games. I know games that size are a problem in 40K, because of slowness of movement and fighting, and the movement and fighting rules in AoS are very similar to 40K. (Individual figure movement, TLoS sighting, and individual figure To Hit, To Wound, To Save rolls.)
It's the number of warscrolls which is going to slow you down, not the individual models. If you had two units of 50 models each, it'll go a lot faster than ten units of ten models each. LoS is just a laser pointer away, and thanks to the 3" buffer around the models (use a 3" stick), movement actually requires less precise measuring (anywhere within that 3"? Stop at the stick).
And as for GW terrain - it's cheaper than LEGO (new Ghostbusters firehouse is $350). Heck, half the reason I play miniatures now is that I can't afford LEGO sets anymore.
Powergaming will always exist, regardless of the system. It always depend on the local community alone, not the system. People seem to believe that a system like AoS doesn't encourage power gaming, when nothing could farther from the truth - any system encourages powergaming the moment you put a model next to another and come to the conclusion that model A performs better than B for exactly the same cost (wound,scroll, gold piece, whatever).
Power gaming is about minmaxing - getting the maximum amount of X for the minimum amount of Y. But when Y is undefined, you can't decide what the value of X should be. That's why so many people are infuriated at the lack of points. There's no Y?!?! There's no limitations to what I can play with? I can just drop Nagash whenever I want? Does not compute! Next time Captain Kirk needs to talk down an enemy AI, he just needs to ask them to minmax AoS.
Edit: Actually, when you think about it, what better system is there to powergame on when AoS's basic premise is "bring whatever you want."
It's more like, "bring whatever you want and work with your opponent to build a fun gaming experience". AoS, as written, is not a competitive system. Without any limitations, and opponents that won't play against brutes, powergaming in AoS would be trying to create as fair-looking a battle as possible.
Powergaming is about making an army that is more powerful than the other guy's although it superficially looks the same power.
Points are one way to do it, if the unit values are incorrect and allow min-maxing.
In AoS power gamers will just take the same number of models and wounds as the other army but pick combos that are more effective.
If GW waited for Warhammer Total War to release and released some stuff to coincide with it, there could have potentially been a revival, with the Total War game bringing in new players
but instead, we now have two very separate settings and new players are going to be confused and dont know wtf is going on with the lore and miniatures
When they go to the GW website first thing they'll notice is, WTF is this weird fantasy space marine crap? Where the hell is Warhammer Fantasy?
and GW's response
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/13 05:04:29
BobtheConquistador wrote: If GW waited for Warhammer Total War to release and released some stuff to coincide with it, there could have potentially been a revival, with the Total War game bringing in new players
but instead, we now have two very separate settings and new players are going to be confused and dont know wtf is going on with the lore and miniatures
When they go to the GW website first thing they'll notice is, WTF is this weird fantasy space marine crap? Where the hell is Warhammer Fantasy?
Yeah, Dawn of War introduced huge loads of new players (me included) to 40k. Total War has an even greater popularity, it could have brought in many, many new players. While the potential is still there for AoS (the miniatures remain the same, after all), I still think it is a wasted opportunity for GW.
Yeah, Dawn of War introduced huge loads of new players (me included) to 40k. Total War has an even greater popularity, it could have brought in many, many new players. While the potential is still there for AoS (the miniatures remain the same, after all), I still think it is a wasted opportunity for GW.
I don't think there is a lot of overlap between video gamers and mini gamers. I mean, I played Dawn of War, Space Marine, Squad Command, and even Chaos Gate, but I never became a 40k player. It seems to me that Warhammer Total War is drawing more attention for being a fantasy Total War than a Warhammer licensed video game.
There is no doubt that video games can get players into tabletop games. It's not like taking heroin, but at the minimum you access a potential audience who otherwise might have totally ignored traditional games. There is plenty of empirical evidence to support the success of video games in boosting their tabletop counterparts.
Dawn Of War created a swell of youngsters coming into 40K.
Publishers of traditional boardgames, like Carcassone and Settlers Of Catan, have reported not only good sales of their digital versions but also a following increase in sales of the physical version.
There are boardgames like Gears Of War and Doom directly based on the videogame release. Even Civilisation, a board game based on a video game based on a board game.
Of course, Total War:Hammer isn't going to bring anyone to WHFB due to GW canning the game before the video version gets released. This merely is another example of their apparently non-existent marketing strategy.
Of course, Total War:Hammer isn't going to bring anyone to WHFB due to GW canning the game before the video version gets released. This merely is another example of their apparently non-existent marketing strategy.
There is the question of how long they were willing to hang on to a product judged non-profitable with the hope that a game that is to be released next year would potentially bring some new players. FB just lost its critical mass and a new one (for such a large game) takes a lot of time to gather. They may have chosen to start repairing the problem earlier (well earlier for them at least - most people consider it several aeons late).
Of course, Total War:Hammer isn't going to bring anyone to WHFB due to GW canning the game before the video version gets released. This merely is another example of their apparently non-existent marketing strategy.
There is the question of how long they were willing to hang on to a product judged non-profitable with the hope that a game that is to be released next year would potentially bring some new players. FB just lost its critical mass and a new one (for such a large game) takes a lot of time to gather. They may have chosen to start repairing the problem earlier (well earlier for them at least - most people consider it several aeons late).
They could've introduced AoS as a side game (along with the Stormcast releases - even creating them as an army for FB, who knows!) and updated the rest of the Armybooks (I'm looking at you, Brets!) to prepare for TW:W.
And then release a simpler, newbie friendly (hopefully more balanced) 9th ed of FB to cash in on TW:W.
"Let them that are happy talk of piety; we that would work our adversary must take no account of laws."http://back2basing.blogspot.pt/
They could have, but their reasons are their own. It has been posted many times since - they may have wanted to bring the entire attention to AoS (veterans and newbies). There certainly are ways to keep a developed game supported to a certain extent, but whether this would be viable for a game as large as FB, I cannot tell.
I think they were smart enough to realize that releasing AOS alongside WHFB instead of removing WHFB would have been akin to peeing into the wind. There would have been no point, much like the boxed games they put out that don't really do anything, AOS would have died on day 1 as a game.
auticus wrote: I think they were smart enough to realize that releasing AOS alongside WHFB instead of removing WHFB would have been akin to peeing into the wind. There would have been no point, much like the boxed games they put out that don't really do anything, AOS would have died on day 1 as a game.
I don't think that's true. Necromunda, GorkaMorka and Space Hulk being released alongside 40k didn't result in them dying on day 1 or Mordheim alongside WHFB.
Even things like Warbands gained some traction in spite of only being White Dwarf releases. I'm sure if it was supported and expanded on it would have stuck around as well.
Of course it's somewhat important that a game is half decent to begin with as well.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/13 20:37:25
auticus wrote: I think they were smart enough to realize that releasing AOS alongside WHFB instead of removing WHFB would have been akin to peeing into the wind. There would have been no point, much like the boxed games they put out that don't really do anything, AOS would have died on day 1 as a game.
Agreed. I find the AoS system preferrable to Fantasy, but I never would have gone through all the rebasing and would have never tried it out
auticus wrote: I think they were smart enough to realize that releasing AOS alongside WHFB instead of removing WHFB would have been akin to peeing into the wind. There would have been no point, much like the boxed games they put out that don't really do anything, AOS would have died on day 1 as a game.
Agreed. I find the AoS system preferrable to Fantasy, but I never would have gone through all the rebasing and would have never tried it out
But you don't have to rebase your models to try AoS.
I think for every player who wouldn't have tried AoS if WHFB still existed there'd be at least 1 player who would have tried AoS instead of just completely quitting.
If GW released AoS alongside WHFB but stopped updating WHFB and only updated AoS, I reckon anyone who was going to play AoS would have still played it and it wouldn't have accumulated nearly as harsh of a spiteful response from people who don't want to play it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/11/14 10:32:21
I think if AoS was released alongside WHFB it would have been treated as the smaller skirmish game while WHFB was the larger mass battle.
Both would have been played side by side, by the same people as the models work for both.
People would never play WHFB under 2000 points, it would just be AoS, then people wouldn't play AoS with 100+ models, that would just be a game of WHFB.
WHFB and Mordheim coexisted for a long time and they complimented each other, not hurt each other.
Fafnir wrote: Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that.
