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.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Which makes more sense than giving stuff away because he is confident it will sell.

I say give it a go. You might like it, you might not, but if you would like the game, it would be too bad if you missed it. I was hooked on the old Chronopia system which this reminds me of.

I like the AOS box, I might even buy it... but I doubt I'll play it. Like nearly all of GW's box bundles, its fairly good value for the number and quality on miniatures you get (if you like the aesthetic) if you can find a use for them.

As for getting MORE of my money/time to play AOS?... I'm a gamer first and foremost, and from the demo game I played of AOS its not going to do anything for me that Warmachine doesn't do better.

Good value?!?
Skull Pass had 100 figures and a rule book for $60.

Aos has 47 figures and a 4 page rule folder for $125.

Bah.

 snurl wrote:
Good value?!?
Skull Pass had 100 figures and a rule book for $60.

Aos has 47 figures and a 4 page rule folder for $125.

Bah.

Skull Pass was a great set.

The best thing about skull pass was how tiny the miniatures were as it meant so many could fit into the starter set!

Relapse wrote:

 snurl wrote:
Good value?!?
Skull Pass had 100 figures and a rule book for $60.

Aos has 47 figures and a 4 page rule folder for $125.

Bah.

Skull Pass was a great set.

Isle of Blood comes with a crap ton of miniatures too. It's also a fantastic value. I think the miniatures that come with AoS are just a lot cooler -- in the sense that, I'm more excited in these 47 miniatures than if they bundled 100 existing Fantasy miniatures.

But what can I say, I'm a sucker for knights with big shoulder pads, and I am actually a huge cat guy (my wife is to blame, though). Yeah, believe it or not, I am the proud owner of a purebred championship show cat If there were a fire or earthquake, I'd let all my minis burn without a second thought and find my cat.

That's assuming you weren't trapped in the burning building Talys as you were so busy typing out another 9 paragraph reply either here or in N&R?

I haven't had a game yet unfortunately but have watched some demos. It certainly looks quite snappy to play compared to WHFB. But, it's completely different to that game, and what got people playing Fantasy for so many years was the replay value through tactical depth. The crunch test will be how long AoS manages to keep people interested and still playing, beyond buying more stuff to spam and throw at your opponent. Answer to that as soon as I get to play a game..

 Pacific wrote:
That's assuming you weren't trapped in the burning building Talys as you were so busy typing out another 9 paragraph reply either here or in N&R?

I haven't had a game yet unfortunately but have watched some demos. It certainly looks quite snappy to play compared to WHFB. But, it's completely different to that game, and what got people playing Fantasy for so many years was the replay value through tactical depth. The crunch test will be how long AoS manages to keep people interested and still playing, beyond buying more stuff to spam and throw at your opponent. Answer to that as soon as I get to play a game..

I post a lot because it takes a long time for glazes to dry. Because I thin them, they take even LONGER. Right now, it's for lights on a Shrine of Aquilla :X I would pay $20 a pot for quick-dry glazes! As a bonus, I'm also watching some Anime thing on Netflix at the same time.

AoS is TOTALLY a different game. It's not even recognizable, other than the models. I mean, I've never seen a reboot so hard, lol.

Well, I played a game or two. AoS is.......different.
In the hands of competent writers it could have been a lot of fun for me and I may even have brought into it for some stand alone fun.

As is I probably won't play it again. Life is too short for rewriting a set of rules.

Relapse wrote:
After seeing White Dwarves selling on Ebay for $15 and more, I think AoS is going to be a shot in the arm for Fantasy instead of a nail in the coffin.

Someone else mentioned WD selling out quickly for the free mini, a different thread, I think, there are so many concerning AOS which is a good thing in itself.

To play Devil's Advocate, rapid selling out of WD and its appearance on eBay for £15 might simply reflect a shorter print run than usual to save money on the free figure.

That said, I think AOS will do well to start with. I have some doubts about its long term prospects. I have two reasons for thinging this.

Firstly, I agree with Blacksails overall analysis that the rules are not bad but lack depth. (The worst that can be said about them in my view is that they could have been written in 1970, and don't show any awareness of developments in wargames since then.)

This kind of quick to learn and play skirmish game can sell a lot quickly when new, but then relies on continually recruiting new players, as it does not hold the ongoing attention of experienced players so well. By experienced players I mean not only current veterans, but also people who start with AOS and develop their level of knowledge and involvement through that game.

However, there are rumours of advanced rulebooks coming, so perhaps that problem will be addressed.

Secondly, GW's strategy wth AOS seems to be to sell model kits. Financial logic says if the rules are free and the armies are smaller than WHFB, then the individual models will have to be a lot more expensive than now. (Plus a bit of cream on the cake from special edition rulebooks and stuff like the gold dice cup currently offered.)

This naturally raises the danger that people may play the game using alternative models. Of course there are always the super fans and figure collectors, who prefer the GW models whatever the price, and newcomers who are more likely to buy the GW models because they probably will start with a GW starter box set.

My own feelings on it are divided. On the one hand, if I make a small army and a set of terrain pieces, the total cost is relatively limited and it would be fun to do a nice AOS set. On the other hand, I don't like the scale crept Land Marines, and GW aren't offering any new models for any of the other factions yet, so maybe it would be best to plonk down £100 for a Mantic Dwarf army and have done with it. Either way, I don't see it as a game that will justify my spending money every year to continually upgrade my setup.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

To play Devil's Advocate, rapid selling out of WD and its appearance on eBay for £15 might simply reflect a shorter print run than usual to save money on the free figure.

I don't think this is the case. If you look at a regular FLGS, they get X number of copies of White Dwarf every week (let's just say 8 for argument's sake). Of those, 3 might be subscriptions, and 2 might be people who are regulars that usually buy them, and after the week is done, is over 1-2 copies might be left over.

Stores did not order more copies than usual because of the mini (they didn't know about it), and they didn't receive fewer copies, either. The copies that weren't regular store subscriptions were simply phone-reserved and gone before the issues even arrived. I ended up with a second copy only because a non-regular didn't pick theirs up within a few days (and they were told that it would only be held until the end of the day).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
My own feelings on it are divided. On the one hand, if I make a small army and a set of terrain pieces, the total cost is relatively limited and it would be fun to do a nice AOS set. On the other hand, I don't like the scale crept Land Marines, and GW aren't offering any new models for any of the other factions yet, so maybe it would be best to plonk down £100 for a Mantic Dwarf army and have done with it. Either way, I don't see it as a game that will justify my spending money every year to continually upgrade my setup.

I don't think you're the exception to the rule here. Frankly, I'm not sure how I see people spending money in a significant way to upgrade their army every year. But then again, I say that about WMH and Malifaux, too. Most people buy their gaming pieces, and they do add to that, but sparingly. An annual spend might be a couple hundred dollars? Maybe every couple of years they decide they want another army, and might buy a war box; but even that's only a hundred dollars or so. Then they add a couple more models. It's still not huge.

It is certainly *nothing* to the scale of 40k spend, where there are multiple $50+ books that a lot of serious players feel compelled to buy (some serious players feel compelled to buy them all, and there's one or more a month), and where the most popular factions feel like there are hundreds of dollars of cool things to get just to "keep up with the Jones'" -- ie, new edition, new kits, new formations etc.

Also, the army spend is just going to be less, because you're talking about 20-50 model armies, instead of 200-500 model monstrosities.

So your question is pretty good -- how do they make money in a fashion that is significant to GW? I have no idea. I'm sure my $200 I'll spend on AoS is a drop in the bucket, and GW is just in the same boat as everyone else selling low model count games -- they need a lot of people play it. Or, I guess, unless they sell a lot of campaign books.

 Talys wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

To play Devil's Advocate, rapid selling out of WD and its appearance on eBay for £15 might simply reflect a shorter print run than usual to save money on the free figure.

I don't think this is the case. If you look at a regular FLGS, they get X number of copies of White Dwarf every week (let's just say 8 for argument's sake). Of those, 3 might be subscriptions, and 2 might be people who are regulars that usually buy them, and after the week is done, is over 1-2 copies might be left over.

Stores did not order more copies than usual because of the mini (they didn't know about it), and they didn't receive fewer copies, either.

New shoots grow from the death and decay of the old.

 notprop wrote:
They're all commercial projects they live or die by what their creators put into them.

I think you're too easily depressed.

Well. . . Yes.

Technically I am easily depressed. Have been all my life.

MB

 Talys wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
My own feelings on it are divided. On the one hand, if I make a small army and a set of terrain pieces, the total cost is relatively limited and it would be fun to do a nice AOS set. On the other hand, I don't like the scale crept Land Marines, and GW aren't offering any new models for any of the other factions yet, so maybe it would be best to plonk down £100 for a Mantic Dwarf army and have done with it. Either way, I don't see it as a game that will justify my spending money every year to continually upgrade my setup.

I don't think you're the exception to the rule here. Frankly, I'm not sure how I see people spending money in a significant way to upgrade their army every year. But then again, I say that about WMH and Malifaux, too. Most people buy their gaming pieces, and they do add to that, but sparingly. An annual spend might be a couple hundred dollars? Maybe every couple of years they decide they want another army, and might buy a war box; but even that's only a hundred dollars or so. Then they add a couple more models. It's still not huge.

It is certainly *nothing* to the scale of 40k spend, where there are multiple $50+ books that a lot of serious players feel compelled to buy (some serious players feel compelled to buy them all, and there's one or more a month), and where the most popular factions feel like there are hundreds of dollars of cool things to get just to "keep up with the Jones'" -- ie, new edition, new kits, new formations etc.

Also, the army spend is just going to be less, because you're talking about 20-50 model armies, instead of 200-500 model monstrosities.

So your question is pretty good -- how do they make money in a fashion that is significant to GW? I have no idea. I'm sure my $200 I'll spend on AoS is a drop in the bucket, and GW is just in the same boat as everyone else selling low model count games -- they need a lot of people play it. Or, I guess, unless they sell a lot of campaign books.

You seem to be assuming the purchasing pattern is game defined and not budget defined. If I've got a fixed budget of, say, $100/month, and I play Malifaux, I can likely spend all of that on Malifaux (and have one of everything), that I could spend more on 40K doesn't matter if I don't have more to spend. If my 40K spend isn't enough to keep up, I'll probably drop it.

It gets more complicated when budget is split; I play 4 games but still only have my $100/month budget. I'll likely spend that on what seems the best value at the time, be it X-Wing ships, malifaux mini's, 40K books, whatever. But it generally goes on either what I need most, or what seems like the best idea. If I need to drop $200 on 40K to get my new force on the table, it has to be worth buying nothing else for 2 months.

Of course, I have a collecting problem so I spend way more than that, but still.

I think it can be defined by both. Certainly I could afford 40K miniatures when I gave up buying them in 2011, but I decided the latest price rises had made them not worth the money any more.

Nowadays I am put off buying anything 40K related by a combination of game dissatisfaction and high prices. Although I gave up buying rules and codexes in 6th edition due to pricing, the changes in the game (Unbound, Flyers, etc) mean I am not very attracted to the game now even if GW halved the price of rules and codexes.

 Talys wrote:
I dunno what the business model is though: if people are buying Isle of Blood (which is a great model value) and other GW models, plus their old models, to play Kings of War, how does Manti make money? O.o

Yes, it's mindshare, but it's not marketshare (expressed in dollars), and it contributes little to the bottom line.

I think you are underestimating the effects of word of mouth and/or free advertising in the form of player base. Purchases of Island of Blood to play KoW won't get Mantic any money INITIALLY, but it will make newcomers to the genre aware of their line and potentially look at their products. Considering that this cost them "$0", while this does not contribute to their bottom line in an obvious way, I can't imagine it harms it either.

Let's see how it does in a month or 6.

You can still pre-order it, which means they haven't sold out. This could be a good or bad depending on the print run. You do get a lot of models, but at least some of them are specific within a given faction (Khorne warriors) and may end up being shelf decorations later.

I think $125 is still a pretty high cost when you can get starter from Privateer Press and Dropzone for a $100 or less. I can get fully painted started from FFG and Wizkids for around $100 as well. There are psychological finance break points that up the scrutiny with $100 being a big one. It's a good deal for GW, but not sure people will look past that.

I've seen 2 games be flashes in the pan at my FLGS store because of a combination of limited supply and poor rules. Star Trek Attack Wing has failed because the rules are a giant mess and the ships are not balanced in their points cost. People grew tired of the treadmill and inconsistent rulings. Dice Masters is the second game and it had severe issues with supply of the starter and then later had rules issues that made people punt.

I suspect once the newness wares off, people won't be as thrilled with AoS unless they heavily house rule it, which then starts issues with "being able to get a game anywhere".

Barfolomew wrote:
Let's see how it does in a month or 6.

You can still pre-order it, which means they haven't sold out. This could be a good or bad depending on the print run. You do get a lot of models, but at least some of them are specific within a given faction (Khorne warriors) and may end up being shelf decorations later.

I think $125 is still a pretty high cost when you can get starter from Privateer Press and Dropzone for a $100 or less. I can get fully painted started from FFG and Wizkids for around $100 as well. There are psychological finance break points that up the scrutiny with $100 being a big one. It's a good deal for GW, but not sure people will look past that.

I've seen 2 games be flashes in the pan at my FLGS store because of a combination of limited supply and poor rules. Star Trek Attack Wing has failed because the rules are a giant mess and the ships are not balanced in their points cost. People grew tired of the treadmill and inconsistent rulings. Dice Masters is the second game and it had severe issues with supply of the starter and then later had rules issues that made people punt.

I suspect once the newness wares off, people won't be as thrilled with AoS unless they heavily house rule it, which then starts issues with "being able to get a game anywhere".

Indeed, this is the mindset I've taken with it. There are many arguably good features of AOS, but without opportunity for deeper gameplay or actually being able to play a fair game without throwing darts at a board, it seems the game will struggle to maintain even the small sales of WHFB after the initial excitement wears off and people go back to fantasy-in-space 40k.

 Da Boss wrote:
Nah, I want GW to improve, not fail.

Perfect.

I went the other way, probably because someone else is footing the bill on this for me.

I quite fancy the Khorne models (will be my first "evil" army for sometime). The Eternals aren't offensive to me and I like them in the flesh and should make good airbrush fodder so quick to paint.

The rules intrigue me. Most of the rules seem to be in the warscrolls, which is fine as it keeps the basics straight forward. They'll be good for quick games at the club either before or after something else.

The final part of the rules is that they are a living rulebook, so while i'm expecting an advanced set at some point I also expect the basic set to be updated in due course. No Errata on this one just a revised rule sheet - I hate Errata sheets so this should be a good thing!

GW seem to be taking the launch seriously enough so hopefully the continued support is up to standard.

@notprop: Is it explicitly stated that the rules are a living rulebook? Everything I've read seems to suggest that there will be no advanced rules.

GW does not have the most sterling record of providing timely errata as their FAQs have in the past left some contentious issues unresolved or worse, applied the 4+ rule to them, so my expectations are not very high. I hope you are correct and that they will soldier through any adversity with updates and errata rather than their more customary "kill unprofitable lines" approach.

 Talys wrote:
Yes, it's mindshare, but it's not marketshare (expressed in dollars), and it contributes little to the bottom line.

I strongly disagree with this. Mind share isn't directly translated into market share, but in a community-based industry like miniature wargaming there's a strong "critical mass" effect where the popular games get and stay popular. For example, if you're a MTG player and you happen to stop by your local store on miniatures night the game with the highest mind share is the one you're most likely to see. And that's also the game you're most likely to buy, if you think that the genre is appealing at all. That's a big part of why GW's games continue to dominate the industry, despite having rules that are textbook examples of terrible game design.

So in the case of Mantic those ex-WHFB players might not be buying new Mantic models right away, but they are going to be sending that hypothetical MTG player over to look at the shelf of KoW starter sets. And when that person goes home to look at the KoW rulebook online they're going to see all those wonderful new Mantic products that they could buy. Meanwhile nobody is going to be doing the same for AoS, outside of GW's official stores.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Talys wrote:
Yes, it's mindshare, but it's not marketshare (expressed in dollars), and it contributes little to the bottom line.

I strongly disagree with this. Mind share isn't directly translated into market share, but in a community-based industry like miniature wargaming there's a strong "critical mass" effect where the popular games get and stay popular. For example, if you're a MTG player and you happen to stop by your local store on miniatures night the game with the highest mind share is the one you're most likely to see. And that's also the game you're most likely to buy, if you think that the genre is appealing at all. That's a big part of why GW's games continue to dominate the industry, despite having rules that are textbook examples of terrible game design.

Agreed.
Free rules and designing for other company's models until they get the Mindshare and critical mass of player base.
Then start building up their more unique factions, special rules, etc once you have people playing and enjoying your game enough to buy models specifically for it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Talys wrote:
Yes, it's mindshare, but it's not marketshare (expressed in dollars), and it contributes little to the bottom line.

I strongly disagree with this. Mind share isn't directly translated into market share, but in a community-based industry like miniature wargaming there's a strong "critical mass" effect where the popular games get and stay popular. For example, if you're a MTG player and you happen to stop by your local store on miniatures night the game with the highest mind share is the one you're most likely to see. And that's also the game you're most likely to buy, if you think that the genre is appealing at all. That's a big part of why GW's games continue to dominate the industry, despite having rules that are textbook examples of terrible game design.

So in the case of Mantic those ex-WHFB players might not be buying new Mantic models right away, but they are going to be sending that hypothetical MTG player over to look at the shelf of KoW starter sets. And when that person goes home to look at the KoW rulebook online they're going to see all those wonderful new Mantic products that they could buy. Meanwhile nobody is going to be doing the same for AoS, outside of GW's official stores.

For a moment, let's just say that everything you're saying is true.

Why then, at most hobby shops, does, Mantic occupy a cubbyhole in a corner, while GW and Privateer Press get premium, prominent display? I used to travel an awful lot (80+ flights a year to major cities around the world), and visited hobby shops wherever I could -- picking up a model or two at a strange city was my little reward to myself I'm not sure I've ever seen even ONE hobby shop with Mantic product in the pimp spot (prominently displayed as you enter the store) except maybe on a New Arrivals shelf . KoW models sit, literally forever. I mean, I go back to the same store 2 years later, and the same box of dwarves is still there, marked down 50%, and a year later it's STILL there. Really, what I see the most prominent from Mantic... is Mars Attacks. Heck, 95% of the time, I see Dreamforge with significantly more prominence than Mantic.

The answer is pretty simple: when I chat with hobby shop owners and managers, it's all about MtG, 40k, and WMH when it comes to profits. Citadel paints, Vallejo at the few places that sell them, and miscellaneous hobby supplies. Woodland Scenics is big where it's sold. At the end of the day, all the hobby shops care about is what moves and what makes them profit.. They don't care about what rules system people love; they care about what sells.

For Age of Sigmar, lots of stores are doing 12:01 July 11 Launch Parties (stores are under strict orders not to sell it before Saturday). Other than Magic, I'm not sure there's any other company that I see that type of thing for.

As a comparison, I'll bet you that during the launch window, Age of Sigmar will outsell the Deadzone box set's lifetime sales. Not that we'll have the data to answer that question, unfortunately -- but how many people do you know who own Deadzone? (I actually have a box, as well as some expansions... but to use as xenos scenery for 40k, lol).

Anyways, TLDR - Hobby shops care about profits, not great rules. The models and books people spend money on are the ones that will be displayed front and center.

 Talys wrote:
Why then, at most hobby shops, does, Mantic occupy a cubbyhole in a corner, while GW and Privateer Press get premium, prominent display?

Because until very recently WHFB was a legitimate game with a dominant market position. Why give a prominent position to KoW when you have WHFB and most of the KoW sales are going to people who just want cheaper WHFB models? Maybe you'll keep an inventory in case someone comes in looking for those specific models, but you'd rather sell them a more expensive WHFB box and rulebooks. But now all of that just changed. GW committed suicide in the fantasy genre and replaced a legitimate game with a trainwreck that will probably make "worst game ever" lists for a long time. If the community moves to KoW (instead of some other rules, or continuing to play old versions of WHFB) then the smart stores are going to reverse those shelf positions.

For Age of Sigmar, lots of stores are doing 12:01 July 11 Launch Parties (stores are under strict orders not to sell it before Saturday). Other than Magic, I'm not sure there's any other company that I see that type of thing for.

But how many of those stores are doing it because they expect AoS to be a success, compared to the number that are desperately hyping the game because they know that GW's stupidity has the potential to cost them a lot of money if/when AoS fails? And how sustainable will that hype be? Will AoS continue to sell once everyone has tried it and can no longer dismiss its flaws as "just rumors"?

As a comparison, I'll bet you that during the launch window, Age of Sigmar will outsell the Deadzone box set's lifetime sales. Not that we'll have the data to answer that question, unfortunately -- but how many people do you know who own Deadzone? (I actually have a box, as well as some expansions... but to use as xenos scenery for 40k, lol).

But, again, you're talking about the situation as it was a week ago, when GW produced a legitimate fantasy game. With AoS they've essentially conceded that niche in the market to other companies, and that's a priceless opportunity for those half-forgotten and poor-selling WHFB alternatives to stop being poor sellers. A year from now we'll probably be asking how many people know someone who plays AoS, and speculating about how to use AoS models in KoW/WHFB/whatever.

 Peregrine wrote:
But how many of those stores are doing it because they expect AoS to be a success, compared to the number that are desperately hyping the game because they know that GW's stupidity has the potential to cost them a lot of money if/when AoS fails? And how sustainable will that hype be? Will AoS continue to sell once everyone has tried it and can no longer dismiss its flaws as "just rumors"?

Most certainly, AoS is a gamble. It may play out terribly, but I assert that Fantasy sales weren't all that great anyhow, and getting worse by the day, so it's not like GW had a whole lot to lose.

The problem is that you're presenting things as fact, that aren't. You might think that they're the crappiest rules in the world, the worst balanced, and totally unplayable. AoS is polarizing that way, because there are folks who certainly think that.

And yet, there are people who play it and actually find it enjoyable. Folks who would not have bought KoW OR Warhammer Fantasy for various reasons.

Is AoS a flame that flickers and dies, one the burns bright but short, or one that will be a guiding light for GW for years to come? I can't answer that. Frankly, it's not even my sort of game (but neither is KoW, or WHFB). But it was fun to play and I'll buy some models here and there. There's the POSSIBILITY that I'll play it occasionally, whereas there was no possibility that I'd ever play classic Fantasy.

But, again, you're talking about the situation as it was a week ago, when GW produced a legitimate fantasy game. With AoS they've essentially conceded that niche in the market to other companies, and that's a priceless opportunity for those half-forgotten and poor-selling WHFB alternatives to stop being poor sellers. A year from now we'll probably be asking how many people know someone who plays AoS, and speculating about how to use AoS models in KoW/WHFB/whatever.

That's possible! And it's also possible GW will do an about face and produce 9e WHFB set in the Sigmar timeframe.

I think that AoS opens a legitmate demographic for Games Workshop, though it loses an unprofitable one concurrently. Is the new demographic worth what GW loses? I cannot answer that (nor, I think can GW today). I appreciate that you hate a game structured like AoS, but you should see that there are some people who like scenario-based play a lot more than "my points your points, fight!", and you must concede that if two players play a scenario, the likelihood that they'll have a bad matchup is virtually zero.

Does that scratch MY itch? No, not at all. It's clear that AoS is not really for either of us. I want to build thousands of lists, configure thousands of models, and realize hundreds of those combinations in complex games with so hobbyists who really like, and have the time to realize, large, nicely painted armies with exotic models packed with scenery and fortifications -- and largely in a friendly and non-ultra-competitive atmosphere. I don't want to play a game with 20-30 models a side, no matter how great that game is, because it lacks table awesomeness, and that to me is very important.

Does anyone else feel that AoS is different enough from Warhammer that GW would have been better served as selling it in tandem with WHFB?

If they were going to have the war scrolls anyway... then the cannibalized sales would simply have been... sales.

The Auld Grump - I felt the same way about D&D 4th edition... it would have been better run in tandem with 3.X.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Does anyone else feel that AoS is different enough from Warhammer that GW would have been better served as selling it in tandem with WHFB?

If they were going to have the war scrolls anyway... then the cannibalized sales would simply have been... sales.

The Auld Grump - I felt the same way about D&D 4th edition... it would have been better run in tandem with 3.X.

But that requires research and effort.

Yeah, AoS should have been positioned as a smaller, more fun/light-hearted/beer and pretzels approach to WHFB, and put alongside a cleaned up (balanced!) WHFB rulebook for larger battles, with a lot of hoopla made over them being interchangeable.

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
Does anyone else feel that AoS is different enough from Warhammer that GW would have been better served as selling it in tandem with WHFB?

If they were going to have the war scrolls anyway... then the cannibalized sales would simply have been... sales.

The Auld Grump - I felt the same way about D&D 4th edition... it would have been better run in tandem with 3.X.

I think there would have been huge potential for confusion between the two games.

The war scrolls look like stat lines from WHFB army books but a bit simplified. The new models look like the old ones but a bit larger, on different stands and with new (whacky) names. You would have two superficially similar games that actually are incompatible.