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.

 Davidian wrote:

How's it near you?

I was just at my FLGS on Thursday, they have a massive room for open gaming. I asked if they ever get much for 8th or a variation. They said there are some KoW guys and another group for AoS but that's about it for anything fantasy. The rest is 40K, Infinity, and X-Wing. I'm sure the fact that one of the employees is a big fan of AoS doesn't help

The guys that are going to the ETC have their local groups running, but it is not much outside this bubble.

I am curios how this is going to change when they finally end their beta test of the core rule and put the final second edition online end of the year

Where I'm at, the "tournament" players have picked up T9A and they're playing it. But there's a similar amount of people still playing 8th edition - myself included. KoW is dead though. Bolt Action is picking up a bit.

I've actually been wondering too. Considering restarting this thread.

Still no interest, AoS flared up and died down again, KoW had a dip but is going strong again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
The guys that are going to the ETC have their local groups running, but it is not much outside this bubble.

I am curios how this is going to change when they finally end their beta test of the core rule and put the final second edition online end of the year

I would guess similar to how the final first edition was received, but with less people paying attention.
At least a few more of my reaction which was "there's a second edition!?".

 DarkBlack wrote:

I would guess similar to how the final first edition was received, but with less people paying attention.
At least a few more of my reaction which was "there's a second edition!?".

There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)

Last weekend when my brother and I played a game of 6th Ed. WFB at the store, it generated excitement from the gamers there. Some had never seen that edition played, some were grognards who appreciated seeing a dead system in. Regardless, of all the games being played that day, ours was drawing the most attention.

Make of that what you will.

 Just Tony wrote:
Last weekend when my brother and I played a game of 6th Ed. WFB at the store, it generated excitement from the gamers there. Some had never seen that edition played, some were grognards who appreciated seeing a dead system in. Regardless, of all the games being played that day, ours was drawing the most attention.

Make of that what you will.

6E is the best Warhammer Fantasy, simple as that.

I personally agree, but it still comes to preference and what you want to get out of a gaming experience.

It's more than just preference, when you consider how the game works in a physical sense, from a time requirement. 6E played relatively smoothly, with better balance among various factors where the armies you created made sense from a gaming perspective, and the time and effort required to create and play a game was reasonable. Plus, it had a campaign right in the rulebook!

At the same time, the low damage count set some people off as there is a subset of gamers that want the most destructothon units on the planet.


6th is a game of maneuvering and finesse. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the kind of game people want to plan nowadays.

 Just Tony wrote:
At the same time, the low damage count set some people off as there is a subset of gamers that want the most destructothon units on the planet.

Age of Sigmar does that quite well. It's all about awesome models with epic abilities in legendary battles.

6th is a game of maneuvering and finesse. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the kind of game people want to plan nowadays.

Kings of War covers that aspect quite well.

Those two games a designed to appeal to players on opposite sides of that (Timmy vs Johnny) spectrum and both serve that intention quite well IMO.

I'm amazed how large our local group has grown for 6th. Around 20 playable armies and 2-6 games being played weekly.

 kodos wrote:


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)

They better do, there are intro boxes with rules coming:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/195172949?ref=3lt1q5&token=b882392b

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies).

TMS have attempted to KS these armies individually.

I can't recall the not-Bret results but the not-TK failed to meet the required backing.

Even the starter rules are a bit unenticing. They read like they were written by an accountant.

jouso wrote:

 kodos wrote:


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)

They better do, there are intro boxes with rules coming:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/195172949?ref=3lt1q5&token=b882392b

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies).

Sweet Asuryan's Teeth, those are the worst models I've seen in a long time. When MANTIC beats you out, it's time to stick a fork in it.

 Just Tony wrote:

jouso wrote:

 kodos wrote:


There was a general bad attitude against T9A after the first edition did went into another beta test of the core rules instead of going to start working on the faction books.
Now with the core rules fixed for at least 3-4 years and work starting on the faction books this change and at least be an argument for those who asked for stability (if they stay to their promise)

They better do, there are intro boxes with rules coming:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1516875985/195172949?ref=3lt1q5&token=b882392b

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies).

Sweet Asuryan's Teeth, those are the worst models I've seen in a long time. When MANTIC beats you out, it's time to stick a fork in it.

They are quite diabolical :/ not quite what you'd want as the poster boy for a launch....

The "Not Bretonnians" aren't bad, but there are better alternatives out there. The undead are awful, just looks like a pile of mess going on there.

The problem is, the Quickstarter rules are just there to introduce people to Wargaming in general and not to intro people to T9A.
They use the same names for units and similar profiles, and that is were the connection ends.

They are as much different to the T9A rules as Kings of War is (and target the same group as KoW)

Not-Brets vs not-TK, with the quickstart rules (meaning they're fully legal playable armies)

Yeah, fully playable with Quickstarter and useless for T9A.

And than I have to say that the awful metal/plastic hybrid models from Mantic look better than the UD ones, not talking about the price

55 pounds for those:
https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/023/165/164/9340861612b6b31f6b7da85483bad1b5_original.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&w=680&fit=max&v=1541533896&auto=format&gif-q=50&q=92&s=22ffe6afe4e7a88f4b2f5fc74bd621d8
VS
59 pounds for this:
http://www.manticgames.com/ImageCache/Products/5175.1.1000.1000.FFFFFF.0.jpeg

 Davidian wrote:
TMS have attempted to KS these armies individually.

I can't recall the not-Bret results but the not-TK failed to meet the required backing.

I was a KS backer and got my minis. It took a while but the TK KS did indeed go ahead. Same for Bret minis, there are pics of painted minis already around.

 kodos wrote:
Yeah, fully playable with Quickstarter and useless for T9A.

Quickstarter is good enough for under 1:30h quick games where you can get a grasp of the rules and if you like the whole thing move on to the big version for which you'll need quite a few more minis. The thing is you don't really have to, it's nice enough as a stand alone game, especially if you come from older editions where 1.500 point levels were the norm.

I'm speaking only from my own experience regarding t9A...

In my humble opinion the game started off as exactly what the remainder of the Warhammer Fantasy Community wanted, which was the same game with a few tweaks to continue using our toys and playing a game we were happy with... I actually felt like 1.1 of T9A was one of the best versions of Fantasy Battle we've ever had.

Then somewhere the focus shifted and 1.3 dropped. Suddenly the game was no longer going to be a community-based, updated version of Warhammer, but a different game entirely. The game ceased being about a community project to grow the hobby, but a never-ending balance project to make changes to differentiae itself from Warhammer and appease a small group of tournament players (mostly in Europe). I live in Ohio where in 2015 we had a solid, thriving Warhammer Fantasy community. That community first took a hit when AoS was released, and has continued to dwindle each time a 9th Age rules change nerfs an army a little bit more.

I don't even want to get started on my issues with the 9th Age forums. Some time ago, I started a thread stating my opinion that unless some changes were made to help the hobby player, that essentially the game was doomed here in the US. I offered up all types of constructive ways to help the community as I would rather see the game flourish rather than dwindle away. My thread was met with nothing short of rampant name calling and venom almost entirely from players outside the US that couldn't care less about the game outside of their own bubble. I was banned, and the name of my thread and comments were actually changed by an admin who messaged me and told me that I was being too negative. That was the last straw for me, but it taught me something. It taught me that while people used to throw rocks and have issues with Warhammer Fantasy for being beholden to a company (Games Workshop) for it's focus on appeasing share holders. What instead we have is a game without any clear focus that's currently beholden to nobody... If 9th Age misses a stated deadline, oh well nobody cares. If 9th Age nerfs a unit or army build that you may have spent hours building and painting, oh well nobody cares. If 9th Age loses an entire fan base of people who were actively working to support it, sadly nobody cares.

When people ask me now if I've left the 9th Age, I have no problem saying, "I didn't leave t9A, the game left me." I've been playing Warhammer Fantasy for almost 25 years now, so I'm not about to rage quit. Instead, I'll go back and play 8th edition or other previous editions of WFB. The funny thing is that since I've switched back to WFB, I've had absolutely no problem finding opponents who also miss the Old World.

Yeah, it seems as 9th Age becomes more and more "ETC: The Game", the casual players are migrating back to some form of 8th, whether that be standard, Warhammer Armies Project, or Age of Rebuilding.

What is Age of Rebuilding?

I tried to get into 9th but what I wanted out of the game was not a priority.

Age of Rebuilding is a community driven alt/post End Times where Incarnates never happened, Archaon didn't win, and the various factions are dealing with the results of such.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/583687008756874/

 Platuan4th wrote:
Yeah, it seems as 9th Age becomes more and more "ETC: The Game", the casual players are migrating back to some form of 8th, whether that be standard, Warhammer Armies Project, or Age of Rebuilding.

I think 9th Age is a niche in a niche. Small group of players that are quite fanatical about it. Kudos for doing the rules. They certainly spend a lot of hours on the ruleset. I do think think 9th Age has a shrinking playerbase, but in the end that doesn't really matter solong the ones that are playing it have fun.

 Wolflord Patrick wrote:
I'm speaking only from my own experience regarding t9A...

In my humble opinion the game started off as exactly what the remainder of the Warhammer Fantasy Community wanted, which was the same game with a few tweaks to continue using our toys and playing a game we were happy with... I actually felt like 1.1 of T9A was one of the best versions of Fantasy Battle we've ever had.

I have made this point several times in past threads and agree wholeheartedly. I downloaded all of 1.1 printed out army books and the magic book, and even one copy of the full rulebook, and have files of 1.1 on two computer and a USB stick. So I wont ever lose it.

 Wolflord Patrick wrote:

Then somewhere the focus shifted and 1.3 dropped. Suddenly the game was no longer going to be a community-based, updated version of Warhammer, but a different game entirely.

This was understandable, and for legal reasons. It was also clever. I think the idea from the start was to recreate 8th edition WHFB as the 'incumbent' system, fix it then migrate away to a completely new game. In this they were successful as the new game gained a measure of traction it would otherwise have lacked.
the concept held promise the trouble is its design by committee, this worked well while they had a solid common goal - take 8th edition and fix it. It worked less well when the game migrated and has since homogenised into a soulless grey paste, largely due to pandering to an revolving circle of complaints at any unit that stands out in capability..

 Wolflord Patrick wrote:

When people ask me now if I've left the 9th Age, I have no problem saying, "I didn't leave t9A, the game left me." I've been playing Warhammer Fantasy for almost 25 years now, so I'm not about to rage quit. Instead, I'll go back and play 8th edition or other previous editions of WFB. The funny thing is that since I've switched back to WFB, I've had absolutely no problem finding opponents who also miss the Old World.

Go back to 1.1, and host armies. I set all my games of T9A 1.1 in the Old World and named all the units back and added special characters ported directly from 8th. I have zero interest in the specific background from T9A, i downloaded one army book just out of curiosity. It's nicely done but not for me. I want my Warhammer with decent rules. 1.1 does this, the books were well balanced with very few flaws and none were gamebreaking and fit the Wathammer factions very closely lacking only special characters.