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.

They won't do just like AoS, because the outcry was quite big. They know by now that point costs are a huge deal, for example.
But I'd accept with open arms rules simplification

Only if they want to see if the can beat the record of numbers of veteran players leaving that they set when 2nd went to 3rd. No really, that would be the game killer I think. Last I checked AoS wasn't doing too well despite the most beautiful models they ever produced. Most Fantasy players I knew from before simply started playing Kings of War or are still trying to sell their models.

Col. Dash wrote:
Only if they want to see if the can beat the record of numbers of veteran players leaving that they set when 2nd went to 3rd. No really, that would be the game killer I think. Last I checked AoS wasn't doing too well despite the most beautiful models they ever produced. Most Fantasy players I knew from before simply started playing Kings of War or are still trying to sell their models.

This.

I've seen people playing AoS, but none of them were Warhammer Fantasy players. Dumbed down 40K would likely attract some new players, attracted by the simple game play, but it would cost 40K a signifcant portion of it's existing playerbase.

My Fantasy Armies are now KoW armies, and I would just merrily keep playing 7th Edition 40K. I'm sure there would be enough people rage quitting, like there is every edition change, that I could pick up whatever models I need.

it's not an either or thing. 40k doesn't have to get fully flipped upside down and then stabbed like fantasy. it also doean't have to keep adding 20-25 pages of rules every edition. You can clean up some of the bloat without dumbing it down and some lessons learned from sigmar can and should be carried over into 40k. Relatively simple to kearn rules that still leave room for skill, good; no system of army construction or balancing, suicidal. Free rules for models, good. Nuking a setting and eliminating armies without communicating why, also suicide.

I'd prefer getting down to a 3rd edition level of complexity (and please cut down the ap3 and better weapons.... they're freaking everywhere).

But I could handle something closer to AoS level if there were points and army building rules (and since AoS is getting those in about a month, that's probably how it would go down).

I played AOS recently again with points and restrictions this time just to make sure I wasn't dismissing it out of hand earlier last year.

Through my most recent experience I came to the same conclusion, this game is terrible and it's not just because there was a lack of points and restrictions.

I was bored to tears, I pretty much disagree with almost every level of rules design they decided to go with for AOS.

40K doesn't need dumbing down. It needs tightening up, more restrictions added, abuses reigned in and tactics opened up. It needs layers of complexity, not layers of randomness.

In fairness some things could do with being less restrictive. Charging for one.

GW has already tipped their hand with the AoS General's Compendium along with Battle for Vedros.

40k 8E should be very broadly like BfV.

I don't have it in front of me, but the big differences I can remember from Battle For Vedros are:
Target Numbers instead of BS / WS
Toughness instead of Armor Value on Dreadnaught

I could live with changes like that. Those are actually improvements.

Your target number for shooting is always 7-BS so why not just put the actual number you need to roll, instead of a number that you reference on a chart that will always equal 7-BS?

Space Marine Dreadnaughts using the monstrous creature rules, instead of the hybrid approach they use now, would stream line game play, and has already been the direction they've gone with Eldar and Tau. It would also boost the performance of an underperforming unit.

In fairness some things could do with being less restrictive. Charging for one

I certainly agree with this.

IMO charging should be able to be performed from any vehicle (stationary or not). However, If it isn't an assault vehicle or open topped, all charges count as disordered. If it is from a vehicle with the assault rule then the unit could re-roll charge distances.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:

In fairness some things could do with being less restrictive. Charging for one

I certainly agree with this.

IMO charging should be able to be performed from any vehicle (stationary or not). However, If it isn't an assault vehicle or open topped, all charges count as disordered. If it is from a vehicle with the assault rule then the unit could re-roll charge distances.

I'd add charge from outflank and such.

 Blacksails wrote:
As much as part of me thinks the game couldn't get much worse, I think AoSing would be bad. Don't get me wrong, there are some upsides. Rules with models and simpler core rules are nice, but to get those positives while throwing everything else out is not a good trade off.

This.

I would enjoy going back to the complexity of the previous editions more then a further simplification combined with obvious unbalanced units. To the point that if 8th went AoS I would actively seek out an alternative ruleset for my models or sell them all off. No longer being able to play in a GW removes the need for me to buy GW models. If I would game on then I would mostly buy 3th company stuff and would most likely put my own scratch building modelling and casting in overdrive.

I don't have it in front of me, but the big differences I can remember from Battle For Vedros are:
Target Numbers instead of BS / WS
Toughness instead of Armor Value on Dreadnaught

I could live with changes like that. Those are actually improvements.

Your target number for shooting is always 7-BS so why not just put the actual number you need to roll, instead of a number that you reference on a chart that will always equal 7-BS?

Space Marine Dreadnaughts using the monstrous creature rules, instead of the hybrid approach they use now, would stream line game play, and has already been the direction they've gone with Eldar and Tau. It would also boost the performance of an underperforming unit.

Agreed. Whilst the Battle For Vedros rules are pretty simple, that's not a bad thing as long as you keep the need to plan tactics and the units 'feel' right. Weapons stats are listed assuming that you're shooting at something that looks like an ork or marine, so the pre-listed dice rolls assume a T4(ish) target, and the cases where that's not appropriate is taken care of by the Dreadnoughts saving throw, wounds, and the limits on what weapons are allowed to hurt it (basically just Rokkits and Power Klaw).

The latter is something Age of Sigmar doesn't have - in that game, every unit can hurt any other unit, whereas in a world of tanks and titans, it feels right that sometimes the answer is just "no".

There's no Morale rules, but I can honestly admit that Battleshock is one of the not-too-bad ideas in Age Of Sigmar. Morale Tests (as they stand in 40k) are kind of irrelevant...irrelevant...irrelevant...destroyed.
A 'gradual' loss of a unit where you take the odd extra casualty model representing members of the unit fleeing, panic or generally find themselves not fighting as effectively is a nice representation, and still allows for a unit to 'collapse' if it gets really hammered in one go.

Then again full blown AOS'fiyign could be very good for 40k. In FB side AOS was final nail in the coffin so that players took control of rules to themselves. End result? Better rules than ever before.

GW AOS'ifies 40k, maybe then 40k players would finally kick GW out of controlling how they play which results in crappy rules and ever increasing cost of armies.

AoS killed Fantasy and replaced it with a half product of dubious quality. The same would happen to 40K, mainly because GW cannot into writing and rules.

I would like to point out to all the AoS / "Streamlining" fans out that the number of rules in my old 4th edition wfb book + my army book did not even come close to the total number of rules ( in scrolls batle tomes and all other books) I would currently need in a AoS game if I wanted to field the same army again.

The game has changed from:
- Clean and more complex basic rules. With tons of diagrams explaining the more difficult concepts.
- focused units and on the tactical advantage of movement and planning .
-Simple units with almost no special rules.
to
- Simple rules basic rules. with no diagrams at all to help you out.
- Focus on models and focus on the model powers, and list building.
- Complex special rules for every unit in the game.

I would not call this streamlining. This is is really just a shift of complexity to a lower lv creating a more bloated and incoherent ruleset really.

Now I don't claim that the new editions of 40k and WFB where great, they are a mess of aggregated conflicting rules and unbalanced special rules and need a fix fast. But if you really want to streamline the game you are better off revamping one of the old non clutherd rule sets to a modern standard than just giving players the illusion of a streamlined game by dumping all the rules (and worse exceptions to rules) in the unit entries.

So no I would probably dislike the AoSification of 40k with a passion.

My opinion is things need to change in quite a big way, perhaps not AoS but something.
In this day and age I think the rulebooks and codex's could be digital downloads, and then when they realise which rules they have messed up they could simply release downloadable patches as part of a subscription/or your initial payment. As it currently stands once something is released and then paid for we're kind of stuck with that rule, either that or your paid for books become obsolete if they needed to amend rules or point costs.
I'm certain that even now GW know there are rules or units that are simply unbalanced but wait until new editions to sort them out, either that or they exacerbate the problem by releasing something else to counter it.
I'd also like to see two sets of rules, maybe 40k and advance 40k. One for those big games and a tighter more in depth set of rules for what I remember 40k to be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and use either d10's or d12's in place of the current d6's.
Then you could scrap loads of special rules straight away

 oldzoggy wrote:
I would like to point out to all the AoS / "Streamlining" fans out that the number of rules in my old 4th edition wfb book + my army book did not even come close to the total number of rules ( in scrolls batle tomes and all other books) I would currently need in a AoS game if I wanted to field the same army again.

Can you back this up with evidence? I never played that edition, but I doubt that this is true, especially if you used a 'normal' army of about 6-10 different warscrolls.

To my mind, Brutus Aspex has been speaking the Truth.
I personally never tried AoS, mostly because of this "simplification" and what I've had Wind of thanks to some part of my family. This is no simplification. Bolt Action is simple. AoS is under-ruled. I definitly believe they made this according to the tend they have of aiming at the "kikoos" and so may have made a first test to then put it in 40k. It hopefully doesn't seem to be popular.

40k is living through bad moments. What it needs isn't AoSization; What it needs is to wipe everything up, then to rebuild from ashes with thoughts of logic for the basic rules, character for the special ones and the army and balance in the point system.

Remember this, simplification, effective simplification, is reached through logic. Why? Just because since it's logically done, you'll have no problem either to remember the rules nor to adapt them to situation and so avoid arguing about them, rules that are however likely to cover a large range of situation.

Unfortunatly, this being achieved would mean that two things which seem like chimeras've been brought back to life: a real interest in creating an atmosphere thanks to real passionate people at the head, added to real regard for players' issues and will.

There's not alot to await for now. I trust our comrade when he says it's been formally planned to get AoS'd, Thus I fear that it be only a kind of time bomb that's enventually gonna make 40k dig its grave.

To conclude, I'd say that I'm not buying 8th edition anyway, but if it gets AoS'd, i actually give it up and stick to ancient versions of the game not even getting at all informed of what they do afterwards.. If they go on this way, smaller games will take over them.

One of the simplest rules sets I know was Heroscape - but it managed to cover pretty much everything - tactics, army building, quick and easy combat resolution, special rules, unit and army synergy, cover.

Sadly its pretty much dead now but if they could make something similar for 40k that would be great

If they make it super simple, drop the fliers, superheavies, and formation, then fine. Whatever.

But keep the points, please.

Honestly I think it would be good in parts. E.g. having warscrolls (dataslates?) available for free, removing the need to buy Codexes, simplifying the rules a bit. That would be good. Throwing everything out and revamping, not so much (not that something like that would happen)

 Mr Morden wrote:
One of the simplest rules sets I know was Heroscape - but it managed to cover pretty much everything - tactics, army building, quick and easy combat resolution, special rules, unit and army synergy, cover.

Sadly its pretty much dead now but if they could make something similar for 40k that would be great

While I am a big fan of Heroscape, it's mechanics are well suited to skirmish level battles, and would be abysmal for larger scale encounters.

BTW if you don't know http://heroscapers.com/ has been trying to keep Heroscape alive, with lots of new custom units, buildable terrain, etc...

Although playing Heroscape with some custom 40K units might be fun.

I would love for 40K to be Sigmarized. All data slates for every mini free on the net? Yes please. I am curious why is everyone up in arms here? Who says that if 40K becomes sigmarized that it will come to 4 pages?

Why says it can't be 10 or 20 pages, and the rest of the rules are on the data slates?

Points will still be there.
Special rules will still be there. Now the rules will be on the data slate and no more looking at 3, 4, 5 books or more for how the "latest" rule works. All we need is....

How do units move.
How do units fire.
How does assault happen.
If a new way to to psychic powers, how to do them be it a phase like now, or they go back into the shooting phase.

What happens after shooting and assaults and how does damage get resolved.

Then all the other rules like deep strike, or move through cover or what ever can be on the data scrolls and there will be so much less bloat.

What is wrong with that? You really want to go through 5 books again instead of one book and cards/data scrolls you have for what you are playing with?

Davor wrote:
I am curious why is everyone up in arms here?

It mostly seems to be coming from people who haven't really followed AoS and just know what was said about it at launch. The game has already evolved quite a bit since then, and I feel like GW learned a lot from its mistakes. Just look at the GHB coming out next week!

 EnTyme wrote:

Davor wrote:
I am curious why is everyone up in arms here?

It mostly seems to be coming from people who haven't really followed AoS and just know what was said about it at launch. The game has already evolved quite a bit since then, and I feel like GW learned a lot from its mistakes. Just look at the GHB coming out next week!

It's still taken a year to finish it.

I'm up in arms because AOS is a terrible game, points or not. And I don't want to see 40K go the same way. It used to be that 40K was for people who wanted to push models around, while Fantasy was for people who liked a more serious game. Now because of the sad state of affairs over at GW headquarters we have two mindlessly simple games that about as fun as watching paint dry.

All they've done is taken the rules bloat from the codex's and added them onto war scrolls. I mean, how many different types of shields does there need to be?

Why is AOS so bad for you with points?

Any move that simultaneously dumbs the game down and invalidates EVERY codex in the same move is spitting in the eye of every existing player.

AOS is not Warhammer Fantasy Battles. It's a completely new game, that happens to have downloadable rules for your old Warhammer Fantasy models.