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.

I can see why a non-points system would be attractive to GW. All you need to do is listen to the way WE as a community talk about the units of 40k:

"Warp Talons are garbage" says Fred.

"Why do you say that?" asks Bill.

"Well, They have a special blind ability on deep strike that will hardly ever be useful because deep strike scatter makes it dangerous to attempt, and they don't have any grenades to speak of. Other than that, they're power armor jump infantry with dual lightning claws and a 5+ invul save." Fred answers.

"Power armor jump infantry with dual lightning claws and a 5+ invul save? That sounds pretty great, actually." retorts Bill.

"Yeah...well I didn't tell ya the worst part. They're 30pts per model." Fred explains.

"Bah...Warp talons are garbage" Bill exclaims in disgust.

/end scene

So....It's pretty easy to see why GW may think taking points out of the game is a decent idea when they spend a bunch of time and money making great kits that end up gathering dusts in warehouses and on shelves. Yeah...I know...they should give those models better rules or a different point value, you say, but hey...we'll always complain that something is more efficient than something else, and a group of models will always be the red-headed step-children that don't get the respect they deserve.

Except they've just guaranteed they'll never be taken. I'll just take as many of the best thing I can afford $$ wise. I won't waste money on Warp Talons when I can just run a bazillion Oblits.

 Voidwraith wrote:


So....It's pretty easy to see why GW may think taking points out of the game is a decent idea when they spend a bunch of time and money making great kits that end up gathering dusts in warehouses and on shelves. Yeah...I know...they should give those models better rules or a different point value, you say, but hey...we'll always complain that something is more efficient than something else, and a group of models will always be the red-headed step-children that don't get the respect they deserve.

That something can always be improved and that someone will always complain is not a compelling argument to not do that thing at all.

 Voidwraith wrote:
I can see why a non-points system would be attractive to GW. All you need to do is listen to the way WE as a community talk about the units of 40k:

"Warp Talons are garbage" says Fred.

"Why do you say that?" asks Bill.

"Well, They have a special blind ability on deep strike that will hardly ever be useful because deep strike scatter makes it dangerous to attempt, and they don't have any grenades to speak of. Other than that, they're power armor jump infantry with dual lightning claws and a 5+ invul save." Fred answers.

"Power armor jump infantry with dual lightning claws and a 5+ invul save? That sounds pretty great, actually." retorts Bill.

"Yeah...well I didn't tell ya the worst part. They're 30pts per model." Fred explains.

"Bah...Warp talons are garbage" Bill exclaims in disgust.

/end scene

So....It's pretty easy to see why GW may think taking points out of the game is a decent idea when they spend a bunch of time and money making great kits that end up gathering dusts in warehouses and on shelves. Yeah...I know...they should give those models better rules or a different point value, you say, but hey...we'll always complain that something is more efficient than something else, and a group of models will always be the red-headed step-children that don't get the respect they deserve.

It would be better and easier to just redo the points on the Warp Talons.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Voidwraith wrote:


So....It's pretty easy to see why GW may think taking points out of the game is a decent idea when they spend a bunch of time and money making great kits that end up gathering dusts in warehouses and on shelves. Yeah...I know...they should give those models better rules or a different point value, you say, but hey...we'll always complain that something is more efficient than something else, and a group of models will always be the red-headed step-children that don't get the respect they deserve.

That something can always be improved and that someone will always complain is not a compelling argument to not do that thing at all.

I'm really not advocating for no points, I was just saying I could understand why GW would go away from points based on how we deal with the current points system.

Also, we may have a point system in 40k, but GW really sucks at implementing and balancing it. How great does it feel for every codex other than Eldar that their Jetbikes and Super-heavy Lord of War are criminally undercosted? If, in an effort to sell more kits, the aforementioned Warp Talon was updated to cost 15pts per model, would that seem fair to assault marines everywhere?? Yeah...I want there to be a point system in 40k, but I want it to be fair. Right now...it's pretty garbage, and I don't feel worth defending.

I had a game awhile back where my buddy accidentally played with 500ish more points than he should have, and we had a great game despite the lop-sided-ness. I didn't even notice until I was rethinking the game much much later. At the time, I felt cheated, but hey...it was an accident and we had FUN. Since then...I try not to min/max as much and just play with the models I want to play with. Yeah...I still stay within the points limit...but I have more fun now that I'm playing with the models that got me in the game rather than what seems to be most efficient.

the current points system is not really a good thing.

Many armies have a 1 up on abilities/units for the pts cost than others, and some units are pointed -oddly- and you will just never see them played because of it.

You may think a no points system is scary and bad, but the current system is also bad. In some cases, worse.

Yeah GW could tweak points here and there, but either they do not care, are bad at it, or are motivated by changing points for sales and not balance- because after 7 editions they still have problems with armies and units that have bad points/effectiveness compared to others.

 Voidwraith wrote:


I'm really not advocating for no points, I was just saying I could understand why GW would go away from points based on how we deal with the current points system.

Well, we all know that GW often makes certain decisions for all the wrong reasons, eh? I do agree with you that its a reason I know GW would cite, but I think its laughable at best.

Also, we may have a point system in 40k, but GW really sucks at implementing and balancing it. How great does it feel for every codex other than Eldar that their Jetbikes and Super-heavy Lord of War are criminally undercosted? If, in an effort to sell more kits, the aforementioned Warp Talon was updated to cost 15pts per model, would that seem fair to assault marines everywhere?? Yeah...I want there to be a point system in 40k, but I want it to be fair. Right now...it's pretty garbage, and I don't feel worth defending.

Oh, I agree the current balance is way off. I have never defended the current point system in any way, quite the opposite really.

I had a game awhile back where my buddy accidentally played with 500ish more points than he should have, and we had a great game despite the lop-sided-ness. I didn't even notice until I was rethinking the game much much later. At the time, I felt cheated, but hey...it was an accident and we had FUN. Since then...I try not to min/max as much and just play with the models I want to play with. Yeah...I still stay within the points limit...but I have more fun now that I'm playing with the models that got me in the game rather than what seems to be most efficient.

I've always done that for my games. I look for efficiency within a theme or using models I want to paint/see on the table. Its a reasonable compromise I've found.

Grey Templar wrote:I say its worse if its accompanied by shoddy rules.

I suppose nothing inherently prevents a pointless system(hehehe) from working, but I can't see any way for it to work outside of fixed lists.

No argument there grey. That said think less 'fixed lists' and more 'themed lists'. For me, it's less about putting down whatever I want and more about putting down what makes sense within the context of the theme, and what's appropriate. And let's say you do, and it doesn't work. You've lost a bit of time. Then you take it onboard and adjust it for the next game. We do it all the time in our games. It takes time though and isn't really suitable if all you've got is two hours on a Saturday afternoon.

MWHistorian wrote:
Which sounds incredibly boring. I like the freedom points gives me.

Dont knock it mwh- it can be fun. total freedom is fine, but do the best you can with what you've got to hand and themed missions also has a place

Deadnight wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:I say its worse if its accompanied by shoddy rules.

I suppose nothing inherently prevents a pointless system(hehehe) from working, but I can't see any way for it to work outside of fixed lists.

No argument there grey. That said think less 'fixed lists' and more 'themed lists'. For me, it's less about putting down whatever I want and more about putting down what makes sense within the context of the theme, and what's appropriate. And let's say you do, and it doesn't work. You've lost a bit of time. Then you take it onboard and adjust it for the next game. We do it all the time in our games. It takes time though and isn't really suitable if all you've got is two hours on a Saturday afternoon.

Yeah, but really its a waste of time for players to have to hash out how the rules are actually going to work before a game.

No other game makes you decide on rules to actually play the game.

If you and I sit down to play chess, we're going to play chess. There is no rule ambiguity. I could play chess with someone from China, neither of us speaking the other's language.

 Wyzilla wrote:
Great? How the hell is having godawful rules, no points system, entire armies squatted, terrible fluff, boring models, and completely killing any real strategy "good"? AOS is complete gak, if it came to 40K I'd want to see nothing but GW finally implode and go bankrupt, thus hopefully allowing some other company to pick up the 40K IP rather than have the entire model range wiped out for incredibly generic models.

Also, just because something is free doesn't make it good. The trash outside a restaurant is free, doesn't mean you should it- it's still garbage.

I find myself agreeing with this, AoS is and will be utter nonsense. Not that I expected anything else from GW whom killed of WHFB whom had a wonderful depth, feel an acutal likebal setting going for it. Instead of the sorry ecuse they dumped on us with AoS

Indeed. That is the funny thing. The AoS fluff isn't terrible, I could get into the premise. It opens up new horizons for the fluff to take, but its just got a gakky game to go with it.

It's awesome how quickly any AoS thread finds the same group of people to derail and argue with anyone who likes the game. Like chum to the waters!

Back to the topic of the thread, until 40K drops in profitability I don't see any need/possibility to totally revamp the system. The game plays well enough as-is and people are still into the game.

Fantasy was clearly a less popular franchise for GW prior to AoS, so a total shake-up of the rules may have been the ticket to put a fresh take on the game in front of players faces.

Which is sad, considering Fantasy had the superior ruleset.

"Superior" is entirely subjective. Like it or not, you can't declare a ruleset is better because you like it more.

Many new players and younger kids are able to enjoy AoS because the rules are more simple. Some people don't want to spend 3 to 4 hours learning rules before playing a (what appears to be) boardgame.

There is an entire gaming community outside of Dakka to take into account, not just what we see on forums.

If people think this is a "board game" they should be corrected and not catered to. Wargaming is not a board game, and it shouldn't even try to cater to the simpler minded crowd.

If people want to learn a wargame, they should learn a wargame and not some watered down version of a wargame.

You can, however, judge a ruleset by the quality of the writing, and how well it achieves the goals or desired gameplay through its rules.

How clear the rules are, how simple they are in conveying the instructions, the level of balance, the quality and diversity of scenarios, and how well the game delivers on its intended style of play are all measures you can reasonably assess to determine how good the game is. Same goes for other things, like movies, music, and video games. You can still enjoy what is generally considered to be a sub-par product, but it doesn't make it less sub-par, just a sub-par product you happen to like for whatever reasons. Like the Super Mario Bros movie. Terrible in every sense, but enjoyable none-the-less.

As a 40k player since 3rd... I really like AOS. The rules are streamlined, simple, and its easy to get into fantasy now without a major investment (I had never gotten into fantasy besides buying a few cool models). I played a game tonight that was 5 models per side (mostly hero models I had collected because they were cool sculpts). If you build armies by counting wounds the games are pretty fair.

I know fantasy was dying at pretty much every game store, and 40k is very healthy right now around here. I have seen a good amount of fantasy players start AOS and a good amount of 40k players buying fantasy kits now. The games I have seen played were all about fun, no power gamers. It seems like AOS is the first 'unbound' style game where you play what you want that people are having fun with (great models, broken faction barriers, and free rules help - that app is amazing too).

From what I've seen more fantasy kits are selling. I feel bad for old fantasy lovers but from what I've seen this won't be the end of GW... it was a smart move on their part.

I don't see 40k ever going this route unless the game starts to die like fantasy was. I wouldn't doubt that the HH box set coming out is similar to aos as a small skirmish game/kill squad game. I know many conventions are only going away from GW to box games/board games, and AOS fits this format. This would mean the HH game would make sense as a AOS type game.

40k isn't going anywhere though, fear not brothers!

 Grey Templar wrote:
... and it shouldn't even try to cater to the simpler minded crowd.

There it is, thats the stuff! Alright, that'll do for me. Thanks for the laugh.

If people will recall some of the data that came up during the Chapterhouse lawsuit, I think 40K is safe.

WHFB, Black Library, Citadel, Forge World are roughly 45-50% of GW's profit. The rest is 40K.

Brings some perspective to the whole thing.

 clamclaw wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
... and it shouldn't even try to cater to the simpler minded crowd.

There it is, thats the stuff! Alright, that'll do for me. Thanks for the laugh.

My point is that Wargaming isn't a board game. Why would it try to cater to the board game crowd?

You can bet your entire 40k collection that if the big egg heads at GW are pleased with how AoS turns out they will do the same to 40k. They have stated all along that they are in the business of selling models first, and 40k is supposed to be a beer and pretzels game. Well that is exactly what AoS is, a super casual beer and snacks game 'where the rules are made up and the points don't matter!'

Honestly not having played 40k in well over a year, I wouldn't mind a rules reset. 40k has become far to complicated.

And I think the decurion formations and army builds are probably testing and preparation for war scrolls.

What people need to realise about AoS and its 'success', is that it is a new product in a honeymoon phase. Many Warhammer players will tend to buy it causing a current spike in sales. It remains to be seen whether it has any staying power, and frankly I suspect not.

 SickSix wrote:
You can bet your entire 40k collection that if the big egg heads at GW are pleased with how AoS turns out they will do the same to 40k. They have stated all along that they are in the business of selling models first, and 40k is supposed to be a beer and pretzels game. .

What are those pretzels made out of, solid gold? A B&P is something you can buy on an evening play once, maybe twice and never play it again. w40k armies cost around 500-600$ for 1500pts on avarge. Few cost less, a lot cost a lot more. w40k is not a B&P game. It wasn't one in 5th, when I started to play and from what I heard from vets it was not one in 4th or 3ed edition.

Makumba wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
You can bet your entire 40k collection that if the big egg heads at GW are pleased with how AoS turns out they will do the same to 40k. They have stated all along that they are in the business of selling models first, and 40k is supposed to be a beer and pretzels game. .

What are those pretzels made out of, solid gold? A B&P is something you can buy on an evening play once, maybe twice and never play it again. w40k armies cost around 500-600$ for 1500pts on avarge. Few cost less, a lot cost a lot more. w40k is not a B&P game. It wasn't one in 5th, when I started to play and from what I heard from vets it was not one in 4th or 3ed edition.

You misunderstand. 'Beer and pretzels' was never an economic statement. It is a rules statement, as in they never intended or really wanted 40k to be a competitive game.

Pulling the AoS on 40k at least rules wise would definitely kill the competition element of 40k.

Also, fluff wise, 40k is rope for a reboot. Unlike Fantasy 40k has literally been in the 'end times' forever. So killing the emperor and throwing the whole setting into chaos would be super easy and well, fluffy.

I can say this. If they AoS 40k, I will play it. Once.

 SickSix wrote:

Makumba wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
You can bet your entire 40k collection that if the big egg heads at GW are pleased with how AoS turns out they will do the same to 40k. They have stated all along that they are in the business of selling models first, and 40k is supposed to be a beer and pretzels game. .

What are those pretzels made out of, solid gold? A B&P is something you can buy on an evening play once, maybe twice and never play it again. w40k armies cost around 500-600$ for 1500pts on avarge. Few cost less, a lot cost a lot more. w40k is not a B&P game. It wasn't one in 5th, when I started to play and from what I heard from vets it was not one in 4th or 3ed edition.

You misunderstand. 'Beer and pretzels' was never an economic statement. It is a rules statement, as in they never intended or really wanted 40k to be a competitive game.

Pulling the AoS on 40k at least rules wise would definitely kill the competition element of 40k.

Also, fluff wise, 40k is rope for a reboot. Unlike Fantasy 40k has literally been in the 'end times' forever. So killing the emperor and throwing the whole setting into chaos would be super easy and well, fluffy.

I would love to see an advancement in the plot, you're right that the story has been revolving around the same sense of impending doom for ages. "Emperor is dying, Tyranids are coming, Necrons will all wake up, Eldar legends of apocalypse will come true."

It would be awesome for some or all of these to come true eventually. It would not really require a rules reboot, but I could see some big changes being coupled with it.

GW is a capitalist organisation. 40k is their best seller. They won't risk that until the point where there is no choice. They ditched WFB because it wasn't bringing in anywhere near the amount of money as profit. Whether you think they should have rebooted it, gone back to 4th, 5th, 6th edition whatever, (personally I liked 4th and have never felt the need to play any other edition), you've got to remember that they're beholden ONLY to the shareholders. Morally of course, it's us who pay the money and they should be catering to our needs a bit too because if we all stop buying their gak then the shareholders are going to get annoyed...

where was I? shareholders, right. so a shareholder expects the value of his shares to rise year on year. WHFB wasn't doing this. Will Age Of Sigmar? feth knows, but the risk needed to be taken. if it works then everyone's happy.

So will the AOS 40K? they would if they had to. it's highly unlikely that they will have to for quite some time yet. What's most likely is that will spend a couple of years supporting AOS whilst trying out other things - 30k, for e.g., another 40k skirmish game similar to necromunda perhaps, other games to rinse money out of the 40k players whilst they think of another thing to do with the fantasy IP. as long as 40k is their biggest seller they won't do anything with it. if AoS takes over and becomes 75% of their business then they'll do something to 40k PDQ!

 Grey Templar wrote:
If people think this is a "board game" they should be corrected and not catered to. Wargaming is not a board game, and it shouldn't even try to cater to the simpler minded crowd.

If people want to learn a wargame, they should learn a wargame and not some watered down version of a wargame.

So let them eat cake?

Why shouldn't they be catered to? If there is an audience, there is space for a product/game.

Speaking of board games, Space hulk and hero quest verged perilously close to being 'board games'. And they were bloody good fun. If anything, they can act as a gateway game.

You might not intend it grey, but that post of yours comes across as extremely condasdcending, unwelcoming, snobbish and elitist. You're better than that.

So, I love the introduction of AoS. It's a great game. Although, I would have liked two variants of playing the game. (One as the current AoS, and one as 8th Fantasy)
However, if they do end up doing the same thing to 40k, it would be the equivalent of committing seppuku. It would destroy their business.
People need something to hold onto in terms of competition and structure. The points system in 40k supplies that.

If GW figures out they can sell more models in 40k if they go AoS it will happen. However selling overpriced codex and rule books is easy money for GW, copy paste changes a few points and your done. It will be intresting in the next year to see if GW changes the direction of 40k.