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.

 kodos wrote:

AoS is not a streamlined version of Warhammer Fantasy.

I would go so far as to call it not even streamlined. Just moving all the rules from the core rulebook to the individual units only gives the illusion of streamlining by hiding the clutter. 4th / 5th edition fantasy was simple. Most units did not have special rules, if they did they would most often be army wide and the game rules could be summarized on 5-10 pages, The rest of the pages used was just there to make the concepts clear or to flesh out the fluff of the game. The game didn't have a ton of "universal special rules" and any player could enter a pick up game without getting into too much surprises .AoS is the opposite of this. It does have slightly simpler core rules, but you can never be sure what a unit really does until you read or remember that specific war scroll.

What 40k needs is to remove 75% of the USR's, point rebalancing, points for formations, and elimination of all the shenanigans such as walker "monsters", jet bike troops, relentless bikes and grav/kill all guns.

 General Kroll wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I believe Atia said something along those lines.

I don't recall seeing that on her blog, got any links?

This was the thread that had the quote. Grain of salt as always:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/695030.page

Reavas wrote:
there are now more Sigmar players than there are 40k which is CRAZY

This isnt crazy at all. We don't have a working point system, and powercreep has gone out off controll.
40k is in a really bad place right now. It isn't that 40k is too complex etc. its just that GW's short term profit scheme of powcreep and free stuff is demanding its toll now . So to return a the question. Our love for "free stuff" did screw us over not ou aversion for AoS. We should have boo'ed at the free rhino's instead of embracing them if you even want to shift the blame from GW's poor policy to their customers.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I believe Atia said something along those lines.

I don't recall seeing that on her blog, got any links?

This was the thread that had the quote. Grain of salt as always:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/695030.page

Interesting stuff, the initial quote doesn't refer to Battle for Vedros at all though, unless there is something else buried in the 11 pages? I'd be intrigued to see it, since Vedros was clearly designed to be a completely seperate ruleset that was easy for entry level beginners, children specifically. While admirable, it was very basic and limited the kinds of units that could be taken. I can't see that working with a larger selection of different units and races, and certainly not with various super heavies and GMCs etc.

Is Vedros even a thing ?

I still don't have seen any picture of the gme actually being sold in a store.

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros.

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

The 40k background & lore will stay..

That's one hell of a claim to make, got anything to back it up?

As I see it, I'm merely stating the obvious, based on what we've seen to date.

The only thing that seems to be there is GW's facebook with pictures of boys playing with dads toys and a few impatient creeps asking where to buy the stuff.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros.

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

The 40k background & lore will stay..

That's one hell of a claim to make, got anything to back it up?

As I see it, I'm merely stating the obvious, based on what we've seen to date.

I would not call that obvious at all. AoS got a huge sales boost when they introduced points to all the things. Further removing points from 40k would not seem to fit the trend at all.

Huh? Where did I say that GW would remove points from 40k? I specifically said that 40k would still have points!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

This suggest even a move further away from having points.

I agree with JonHwangDD. AoS seems to have reached the mellowing point; Battle of Vedros seems like a very likely touch-off point for 40K's rules being rewritten in an AoS 1-2 page rulebook with some sort of Warscrolls for the armies/units (with points).

With the books like Kauyon/Mont'ka and Time of the Wulfen series that seem to mirror the End Time book compilation releases, it does look like we are approaching an End Times for 40K and 8th edition. I'm hoping GW is smart enough not to blow up the lore like the did with AoS, but as unpredictable as they've been in the last few years, I'm not writing anything off.

I myself, am getting off the edition bandwagon. I've bought my last core rulebook & codex from GW. I may still buy the models down the road, but I refuse to pick up another game edition - even with Roundtree at the helm, they've shown their rules writing is atrocious. Instead, I'm working on my own ruleset for my own use.

The difference is that WFB had become a rotting, festering albatross that GW fully intended to cancel, but the creative types pushed End Times. Surprisingly to the suits (but not the creatives), the giant End Times models and books were profitable enough that GW agreed to allow a much cheaper and sustainable version of WFB to survive. Hence, AoS. After the initial shock, AoS turns out to be a decent game, bringing in new blood, and GW allows more work along with "proper" combined Army Books and the General's Handbook, addressing the big complaint about points.

Having seen and learned from AoS, we have Battle for Vedros, which is test-marketing the 8E prototype outside GW's normal 40k channels. We also have not-End Times for 40k because GW knows they won't end 40k - the 40k background has actual value, and they know it. That's why 40k gets brings loads of license money.into GW.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros.

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

The 40k background & lore will stay..

That's one hell of a claim to make, got anything to back it up?

As I see it, I'm merely stating the obvious, based on what we've seen to date.

I still think that's a hell of a leap to make, and frankly smacks of scaremongering. We've had no indication that Vedros is a test bed for 8th edition. Frankly we've had evidence to the contrary. For one thing rumour mongers have been saying the design team are already working on 8th edition. Vedros has barely hit the shelves, so as test bed, it would be a pretty poor one...either that or the design team have a time machine.

Secondly, Vedros is aimed at a completely different audience, to the kind of gamers and hobbyists that play 40k and keep GWs finances afloat. If anything Vedros is a complete spin off of the game. It's simplicity is such that you'd not be able to fit in the range of models and races currently available.

Frankly your theory is an absolute non starter.

John makes some great points. We know that no matter what the game is being simplified. I've also heard from speculators that there could be two version of 8th. One like default AoS and the other like the generals handbook. AoS's rules were never its problem. The lack of points were. It's models have always been simply outstanding. Even better than a lot of 40k models in my opinion.

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros.

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

The 40k background & lore will stay..

That's one hell of a claim to make, got anything to back it up?

As I see it, I'm merely stating the obvious, based on what we've seen to date.

I still think that's a hell of a leap to make, and frankly smacks of scaremongering. We've had no indication that Vedros is a test bed for 8th edition. Frankly we've had evidence to the contrary. For one thing rumour mongers have been saying the design team are already working on 8th edition. Vedros has barely hit the shelves, so as test bed, it would be a pretty poor one...either that or the design team have a time machine.

Secondly, Vedros is aimed at a completely different audience, to the kind of gamers and hobbyists that play 40k and keep GWs finances afloat. If anything Vedros is a complete spin off of the game. It's simplicity is such that you'd not be able to fit in the range of models and races currently available.

Frankly your theory is an absolute non starter.

I imagine he is right, to a degree. The Vedros pack does seem like a good little starter set similar to Dark Vengence, but with paints! From a buisness standpoint they will release 8th edition with a starter pack. But whether it is Vedros remains to be seen. As there have been no leaks on 8th edition rulebook though, I imagine it may be a later starter pack than Vedros.

Also, how is guessing the starter pack they are releasing 8th edition with scaremongering?

The Vedros pack was a 40k starter set, just repurposed. Shame too, on release it use to be the best bang-for-your-buck starter 40k has ever seen.

I just got Into 40k right as 7th came out and while it's not the most Complicated game, it's deep enough to have a lot of depth to the thought process. And honestly if the rules change so drastically right as I'm about to start my second army(daemons) I'm going to just sell it all and mitigate losses. If nothing else but for running my effort so far.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The difference is that WFB had become a rotting, festering albatross that GW fully intended to cancel, but the creative types pushed End Times. Surprisingly to the suits (but not the creatives), the giant End Times models and books were profitable enough that GW agreed to allow a much cheaper and sustainable version of WFB to survive. Hence, AoS. After the initial shock, AoS turns out to be a decent game, bringing in new blood, and GW allows more work along with "proper" combined Army Books and the General's Handbook, addressing the big complaint about points.

Having seen and learned from AoS, we have Battle for Vedros, which is test-marketing the 8E prototype outside GW's normal 40k channels. We also have not-End Times for 40k because GW knows they won't end 40k - the 40k background has actual value, and they know it. That's why 40k gets brings loads of license money.into GW.

I don't agree. From what I heard, it was 8th edition that was pushed as 'one final go' by the creatives who didn't just want to can fantasy. End times was the farewell song when it was basically known that fantasy was going to be wound up and replaced. Aos has been in the works at gw for a couple of years - there is no way that aos was envisioned, planned, written, art made, moulds designed and made and plastics produced and shipped in the short time that end times was being released ans the suits realised that end times was moving. It was always planned as a minimum investment at launch release. If anything, the suits were probably convinced the 'albatross' of wfb was dead and gone and were surprised that the end times did so well

Aos might be a decent game (arguable) but a lot of its recent success is by gw doing a complete about face and changing everything about Aos from it was originally envisioned to be. The new blood that Aos brought in by its original year was very likely outweighed by the legions of fantasy players who left when thry realised that gw replaced a game they loved with... Something else. And there was the massive fallout and bad press as well. Overall, the launch of Aos fell far short of great.

It will be interesting to see how 8th pans out, but I don't think they will Aos 40k. As much as I enjoy home brew, narrative focused, collaboratively designed wargames as well as no points, it's a niche within the community that appreciates this sadly. Aos crystallised these feelings, and it's arguable turn around in fortunes is in all likelihood from gw doing an about face in its direction. I might be wrong, but considering the community's reception, I strongly doubt that a company as risk-averse as gw will march 40k down that same unsuccessful road they tried to do with Aos. As much as they might want to do this, you give the community what it wants if you want to make your money's. And the community as a whole don't want an Aos-Ification of 40k.

 General Kroll wrote:

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
I completely disagree. All rules, unit types, special rules etc. should be contained entirely in the main rules. Not everything has to be special snowflake. Sometimes a hammer is just a hammer.

Warscrolls make things needlessly complicated. The rules are all over the place, instead of checking one book, you have to check like 20 different warscrolls now.

Randomness like getting to have two turns in a row is not what I consider to be depth in a game. The last thing an army like fething Tau need is to have two turns of shooting in a row.

I don't want simplicity. I want complexity. 40K is already way too simple of a game.

Personally I think with careful rule writing and a good editor, that it's possible to have a complex game with simple rules.

100% agree, and on the same note, 40k currently is a simple game with complex rules. Having to flip pages doesn't add depth.

Reavas wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros.

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

The 40k background & lore will stay..

That's one hell of a claim to make, got anything to back it up?

As I see it, I'm merely stating the obvious, based on what we've seen to date.

I still think that's a hell of a leap to make, and frankly smacks of scaremongering. We've had no indication that Vedros is a test bed for 8th edition. Frankly we've had evidence to the contrary. For one thing rumour mongers have been saying the design team are already working on 8th edition. Vedros has barely hit the shelves, so as test bed, it would be a pretty poor one...either that or the design team have a time machine.

Secondly, Vedros is aimed at a completely different audience, to the kind of gamers and hobbyists that play 40k and keep GWs finances afloat. If anything Vedros is a complete spin off of the game. It's simplicity is such that you'd not be able to fit in the range of models and races currently available.

Frankly your theory is an absolute non starter.

I imagine he is right, to a degree. The Vedros pack does seem like a good little starter set similar to Dark Vengence, but with paints! From a buisness standpoint they will release 8th edition with a starter pack. But whether it is Vedros remains to be seen. As there have been no leaks on 8th edition rulebook though, I imagine it may be a later starter pack than Vedros.

Also, how is guessing the starter pack they are releasing 8th edition with scaremongering?

The scaremongering element is in the phrase "8th edition is just going to be Vedros" it's patently untrue and a comment only designed to inflame feelings that GW are dumbing down the brand. There's no evidence that this is the case, or indeed that Vedros is a test bed of any kind, be that rules systems or branding. It's aimed at an entirely different audience for a start. You don't test bed something aimed at teens and adults who buy from hobby stores and GW direct, by trying it out on 8 year olds who are seeing the game while out shopping with mummy and daddy at the hardware store.

It's a completely different kettle of fish.

Vedros is no doubt a test bed for a simpler version of the game aimed at children, the company are dipping their toes in a different market and seeing if they can make inroads there. I imagine if they do, the range of Vedros models may increase, however they will be limited by the rule set. But it won't be a progression to a new edition, it will be a seperate game and hobby range aimed at children.

 oldzoggy wrote:

What 40k needs is to remove 75% of the USR's, point rebalancing, points for formations, and elimination of all the shenanigans such as walker "monsters", jet bike troops, relentless bikes and grav/kill all guns.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/698286.page#8833859

 General Kroll wrote:

Personally I think with careful rule writing and a good editor, that it's possible to have a complex game with simple rules.

of course it is, but it would also mean that all things that came after stay in line with the core rules and GW was not able to keep a design for more than 6 months

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The difference is that WFB had become a rotting, festering albatross that GW fully intended to cancel, but the creative types pushed End Times. Surprisingly to the suits (but not the creatives), the giant End Times models and books were profitable enough that GW agreed to allow a much cheaper and sustainable version of WFB to survive. Hence, AoS. After the initial shock, AoS turns out to be a decent game, bringing in new blood, and GW allows more work along with "proper" combined Army Books and the General's Handbook, addressing the big complaint about points.

Having seen and learned from AoS, we have Battle for Vedros, which is test-marketing the 8E prototype outside GW's normal 40k channels. We also have not-End Times for 40k because GW knows they won't end 40k - the 40k background has actual value, and they know it. That's why 40k gets brings loads of license money.into GW.

Uuh development of aos was well underway(more like finalized) when et was released...indeed when aos was started fb was still top3 selling game in usa.

I think the major "issue" with AoS wasn't the streamlining, it was:

1) Destroying the Old World and remaking WHFB without any real transition. End Times came, then boom whole new game. If AoS was just a post-End Times game, where let's say half of the Empire is destroyed and the other half is rebuilding, with rules for both regimented AND skirmish-y (AoS level now) type of games, I think it would have been better received rather than literally blowing up the world and remaking it just so they can copyright everything.

2) The reception to Stormcasts as Fantasy Space Marines didn't help with #1 above. If they had been like a new Elite anti-Chaos faction made of Empire/Bretonnia/Elves/Dwarfs (think almost Deathwatch like, made up of different people) that weren't so obviously Space Marine, they might have made more sense.

3) Not so much lack of points, but the idea that it was originally pitched as essentially how Unbound 40k is: Take anything you want, from any faction, throw down and play! So it came off as not only sloppy and lazy but just reinforcing the at the time poorly perceived notions of balance.

Honestly, having actually tried AoS (only once though) it is not a bad game at all. It has its flaws like any GW game, but it could be made into a pretty enjoyable experience and a lot of things like warscrolls being available for free and simplified playstyle would IMHO greatly benefit 40k. Just not the other stuff, although personally I still really hope that they break up the Imperium and allow different Space Marine chapters to essentially have their own domains and the like to allow for Marine vs. Marine combat without it not making sense in the fluff (except in rare cases), but we all know that won't happen and the same can be said about Stormcasts.

 Gamgee wrote:
John makes some great points. We know that no matter what the game is being simplified. I've also heard from speculators that there could be two version of 8th. One like default AoS and the other like the generals handbook. AoS's rules were never its problem. The lack of points were. It's models have always been simply outstanding. Even better than a lot of 40k models in my opinion.

Aos has tons of problem rulewise. Fluff makes battles pointless since nobody has chance of winning. And art and models have gone to wow wannabe clone art. Funnily enough gw went to MORE easily copied style since they went to style that's dime in the dozen.

John makes some great points. We know that no matter what the game is being simplified. I've also heard from speculators that there could be two version of 8th. One like default AoS and the other like the generals handbook. AoS's rules were never its problem. The lack of points were. It's models have always been simply outstanding. Even better than a lot of 40k models in my opinion.

AOS's rules were always, and still are a problem. The lack of points was just a slap in the face to everyone who ever wanted some remote semblance of balance or competitive play.

I'd argue that it's actually easier to have special rules in different places. Especially in the style of the war scrolls. Non USR for units are much easier to find than the USRs for particular units. In the new style of codecies special rules for units are found in their army list profile, which is kind of like a one stop shop for all things detailing that specific unit. Take an Eldar Pheonix lord. They've got a buttload of USRs and one or two unique ones. Which are easier to find? The unique ones that are right on the actual page for the unit, or the one where I have to go to the glossary in the BRB to find the right page for, and scan through half a dozen other rules?

It's not so much that I dislike the idea of a warscroll. I'm fine with having a units stats and rules laid out in front of me. It's the idea that every unit has individual rules to essentially represent the same thing. USR should be in the main rule book and laid out in an organized fashion, and any unit that has that special rule could have it on the warscroll. Currently there are like 50 different types of shields in AOS, why can't a shield and it's rules be present in the main rules so everyone knows what it does. It's just messy and all over the place. Just have everything laid out in the main rules, and then add them onto the warscroll if it's applicable to the unit.

 Purifier wrote:
If they think aos was "streamlined" and that we hate streamlined rules because of our hate for aos, then they're so out of touch that we really just need GW to burn down so we can build something from the ashes. Let's hope the people that design the models survive the fire.

I think this is the jist of it. If GW can't critically look at issues fans have with the game, then 40k will never increase its appeal to a larger fan base. Of course fans will never all agree on what the direction for the game is, but that's the nature of human beings (you'll never see everyone agree to anything). However, 40k could easily become a much more accessible game like it was in previous generations.

Well I know as much as I dislike the ITC sometimes they do have a better than average sense of fair play. They seem to like the rules a lot which matters to me. Listening to them explain some things makes me like the rules quite a bit.

As for the models its a matter of opinion. Considering how good AoS is doing I should think they did something right. Considering I was never ever going to get an old fantasy army and I intend to get an AoS army they did something right. Particularity with the generals handbook.

Currently there are like 50 different types of shields in AOS, why can't a shield and it's rules be present in the main rules so everyone knows what it does. It's just messy and all over the place. Just have everything laid out in the main rules, and then add them onto the warscroll if it's applicable to the unit.

Because not all shields do the same thing, Savage Orruks Bone Shields only provide a 5+ in the combat phase, while Chaos Knight Rune Shields provide 5+ against Mortal Wounds, and a Saurus Guard Shield ignores -1 rend.

Not all weapons are the same, many have differing names and have differing stats, that's why they each tend to be towards their own scroll, to make them different rather then homogenized based on one 'Shield'

 General Kroll wrote:

Reavas wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros.

40k will still have "points" of some sort, even though they don't really like to play that way internally.

The 40k background & lore will stay..

That's one hell of a claim to make, got anything to back it up?

As I see it, I'm merely stating the obvious, based on what we've seen to date.

I still think that's a hell of a leap to make, and frankly smacks of scaremongering. We've had no indication that Vedros is a test bed for 8th edition. Frankly we've had evidence to the contrary. For one thing rumour mongers have been saying the design team are already working on 8th edition. Vedros has barely hit the shelves, so as test bed, it would be a pretty poor one...either that or the design team have a time machine.

Secondly, Vedros is aimed at a completely different audience, to the kind of gamers and hobbyists that play 40k and keep GWs finances afloat. If anything Vedros is a complete spin off of the game. It's simplicity is such that you'd not be able to fit in the range of models and races currently available.

Frankly your theory is an absolute non starter.

I imagine he is right, to a degree. The Vedros pack does seem like a good little starter set similar to Dark Vengence, but with paints! From a buisness standpoint they will release 8th edition with a starter pack. But whether it is Vedros remains to be seen. As there have been no leaks on 8th edition rulebook though, I imagine it may be a later starter pack than Vedros.

Also, how is guessing the starter pack they are releasing 8th edition with scaremongering?

The scaremongering element is in the phrase "8th edition is just going to be Vedros"

First, that's not at all what I wrote. As you quoted above, I wrote that "40k 8E rules will be derived from Battle for Vedros." "Derived from" is different from "just going to be". You are derived from your mother; you are not going to be your mother.

Second, it's not scaremongering in the least. I think the coming simplification and streamlining of 40k will only be a good thing. 7E is worse than 2E, and it needs to be pruned back.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Currently there are like 50 different types of shields in AOS, why can't a shield and it's rules be present in the main rules so everyone knows what it does. It's just messy and all over the place. Just have everything laid out in the main rules, and then add them onto the warscroll if it's applicable to the unit.

Because not all shields do the same thing, Savage Orruks Bone Shields only provide a 5+ in the combat phase, while Chaos Knight Rune Shields provide 5+ against Mortal Wounds, and a Saurus Guard Shield ignores -1 rend.

Not all weapons are the same, many have differing names and have differing stats, that's why they each tend to be towards their own scroll, to make them different rather then homogenized based on one 'Shield'

But they really don't need to be. You don't need X different shields, Y different halberds, Z different swords etc.

You are introducing complexity to the rules which is not needed just because you can.

I don't mean to encroach on this thread but if people are interested I have a thread Age of the Imperium.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/689382.page

It is my early attempt to make a 40k with modified rule of AOS and still keeping the flavor and feel of 40k. Feedback and test plays are very welcomed.