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.

Alright guys, hot take:
Warcry is currently more popular than AOS (more people playing/buying).
I think that anyone who likes AOS also likes Warcry, but there seem to be a lot of people that don't like AOS who do like/play/buy Warcry (myself included).
Do you agree or disagree? Give me your anecdata.
I interpret GW announcing years in advance the return of Warhammer Fantasy as a sign of AOS weakness.

I don’t agree or disagree as we don’t have any statistics past the areas we game in.


And I very much doubt it.
When fantasy died they dropped AoS in a heartbeat.
They wouldn’t shoulder a failing game for years and wait it out.

Jackal90 wrote:
I don’t agree or disagree as we don’t have any statistics past the areas we game in.


And I very much doubt it.
When fantasy died they dropped AoS in a heartbeat.
They wouldn’t shoulder a failing game for years and wait it out.

I’m not sure I’m reading the above right.

WHFB was in decline for several years before AoS, so they have shouldered failing games before.

However, I don’t imagine Warcry is a replacement for AoS any more than Killteam or Necromunda will replace 40K. They’re simply another avenue to play with models you have.

 Stormonu wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I don’t agree or disagree as we don’t have any statistics past the areas we game in.


And I very much doubt it.
When fantasy died they dropped AoS in a heartbeat.
They wouldn’t shoulder a failing game for years and wait it out.

I’m not sure I’m reading the above right.

WHFB was in decline for several years before AoS, so they have shouldered failing games before.

However, I don’t imagine Warcry is a replacement for AoS any more than Killteam or Necromunda will replace 40K. They’re simply another avenue to play with models you have.

They tried using end times to revive it and it failed, then almost instantly dropped AoS to try and save it.
They know how it works by now.
If AoS were failing then they wouldn’t announce a fix for it that wasn’t ready for years.

Jackal90 wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I don’t agree or disagree as we don’t have any statistics past the areas we game in.


And I very much doubt it.
When fantasy died they dropped AoS in a heartbeat.
They wouldn’t shoulder a failing game for years and wait it out.

I’m not sure I’m reading the above right.

WHFB was in decline for several years before AoS, so they have shouldered failing games before.

However, I don’t imagine Warcry is a replacement for AoS any more than Killteam or Necromunda will replace 40K. They’re simply another avenue to play with models you have.

They tried using end times to revive it and it failed, then almost instantly dropped AoS to try and save it.
They know how it works by now.
If AoS were failing then they wouldn’t announce a fix for it that wasn’t ready for years.

I believe you are working from a false premise. Warcry isn’t a fix to AoS, nor is AoS failing.

I don’t believe End Times was an attempt to revive WHFB. Those books were put out to bring an end to the Old World and WHFB and usher in AoS. Basically, by that time, they’d already decided to do AoS, they needed to clear out the old to make way for the new. GW is working on a schedule 18+ months into the future.

I think it's safe to assume that the general zeitgeist of the general wargaming scene is dominated by actual "skirmish" games - games with 5-15 miniatures - in 28mm.

They're relatively easy to get into, don't demand a lot on your wallet (unless you chase all of them), and are easy to get from box to table. They aren't as daunting to paint compared to a 40k army, a German Heer infantry company in 15mm, or Caesar's legions in 6mm.

They're also easier to keep interesting with a steady drip feed of new content. It's also why so many 28mm skirmish games have moved to using unit cards. Instead of needing to compile new units in a book, all you need to do is release a new model pack and have the cards online.

So if Warcry/Necromunda are more popular than their larger cousins, it's likely because they're example of a wider wargaming trend.

I think Warcry could certainly have a larger playerbase, but I don't think the Old World exists as a replacement for AoS. It's been marketed thus far as a direct analog for 30k and likely just exists because GW thinks Sigmar is stable but figures if people are going to keep playing 9th age they may as well profit from it. If they were replacing Sigmar it wouldn't be the "old world". They'd revamp Sigmar into rank and file rules using the new art direction. No way they've abandoning Deepkin and Bonereapers and the rest.

I dont know where you are looking, but warcry is dead compared to AOS.

Warcry events happen maybe once every 3 months, and have 8 people max, Aos has monthlies with 50+ people, and yearlies with 200+ people.

show me a warcry tourney with over 200 players and i might think about it, but i know literally 2 people who play warcry but 50+ that play AoS

Jackal90 wrote:
They tried using end times to revive it and it failed, then almost instantly dropped AoS to try and save it.

End Times was used to, funnily enough, end WHFB. That's all it was for. AoS would have been in development for quite some time before Endtimes hit.

 Gallahad wrote:
Alright guys, hot take:
Warcry is currently more popular than AOS (more people playing/buying).

Based on...?

I think that anyone who likes AOS also likes Warcry, but there seem to be a lot of people that don't like AOS who do like/play/buy Warcry (myself included).

Needs numbers

Do you agree or disagree? Give me your anecdata.

Disagree. Your conclusion is based on nothing. Even if you're right, you have no way of knowing that.

I interpret GW announcing years in advance the return of Warhammer Fantasy as a sign of AOS weakness.

It seems more valid to intrepret it as a sign of strength, that they don't see internal competition three years from now as likely to hurt AoS sales. (And I say that as someone who's waffling at starting an AoS project partially because of the announcement, because feth rebasing. But more that I want to see pointy elves and giants first.)

Very little reception I've seen locally for Warcry and zero in my immediate group. Also hasn't shown up on any of the painting groups or general hobby forums I frequent. If it's popular it's probably popular in small areas where a community jumps on it and goes nuts. That happens a lot with various games and often can lead to a bizarre expectation of certain people.

You'll find some widely ignored games which catch on in a random city or state...and people from there assume it's just as popular elsewhere. Overall I'm not seeing much which is odd since the miniatures are so cool (the game seems pretty gak just at a glance so I haven't even tried it).

PS: To add to the conversation...should Warcry be bigger than AoS? I think so. Honestly I think a well written (this is where Warcry falls off for me) quality skirmish game is far more enjoyable than an army sized game, particularly at 28mm. Skirmish games in 28mm allow for smaller gaming areas, more in depth rules, more customization, more unique characters, easier painting regimens, and often much more elaborately interesting tables (again, often with far more interesting rules for terrain). Warcry, visually, is one of the far better looking things from GW as far as fantasy goes. AoS has been a visual dud for me, but Warcry has some winners. Do I think skirmish games fit most gamers far better than "army" sized games? Absolutely, and I think a lot of people haven't really figured that out.

I've watched three or four battle reports for Warcry and the rules are...well they're hugely unimpressive to me. I still can see it gathering a decent following though just based on the aesthetic and small model count.

I feel it's important to note that Warcry has only been out since July 2019, barely six months. GW has already announced three new large miniatures for the game and almost twenty new warbands. It's still too early to write the game off as a loss.

 infinite_array wrote:
I think it's safe to assume that the general zeitgeist of the general wargaming scene is dominated by actual "skirmish" games - games with 5-15 miniatures - in 28mm.

They're relatively easy to get into, don't demand a lot on your wallet (unless you chase all of them), and are easy to get from box to table. They aren't as daunting to paint compared to a 40k army, a German Heer infantry company in 15mm, or Caesar's legions in 6mm.

They're also easier to keep interesting with a steady drip feed of new content. It's also why so many 28mm skirmish games have moved to using unit cards. Instead of needing to compile new units in a book, all you need to do is release a new model pack and have the cards online.

So if Warcry/Necromunda are more popular than their larger cousins, it's likely because they're example of a wider wargaming trend.

I wish I lived in that meta, my region is so infatuated with ITC that all anyone wants to do in my meta is pretend we are playing in the LVO. I can't get a skirmish game going to save my life, and the only GW minigame that gets any table time out here is blood bowl (praise nuffell). You know what wargaming trend I hope catches on, gaslands, cheap, silly and fun.

fued wrote:I dont know where you are looking, but warcry is dead compared to AOS.

Warcry events happen maybe once every 3 months, and have 8 people max, Aos has monthlies with 50+ people, and yearlies with 200+ people.

show me a warcry tourney with over 200 players and i might think about it, but i know literally 2 people who play warcry but 50+ that play AoS

Warcry isn't really MADE for a tournament scene. Not that you can't do them, but its more made for a campaign and battle scene for fast battles. It's the kind of game that compliments not replaces AoS. It's there for that half hour where you're waiting for your pre-arranged game friend to arrive; its there for when you don't have 4 hours for a full 2K game; its there for when you're just after something smaller scale that doesn't require a small car to transport all the models for etc...

Trying to balance the two against each other is hard because a lot of AoS players are going to play Warcry and vis versa.

Furthermore Warcry is currently the gateway product into AoS. It's something store owners can encourage those on limited budgets or on the fence to try out - much like Killteam.
It's a shame that some groups aren't on board with that, but I'd wonder if those groups are recruiting many new players to their fold or if they are hyper competitive - which whilst not excluding new people, does tend to be harder for new people to get into and often tends to have a group focus more on advancing play rahter than increasing playerbase.

Jackal90 wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I don’t agree or disagree as we don’t have any statistics past the areas we game in.


And I very much doubt it.
When fantasy died they dropped AoS in a heartbeat.
They wouldn’t shoulder a failing game for years and wait it out.

I’m not sure I’m reading the above right.

WHFB was in decline for several years before AoS, so they have shouldered failing games before.

However, I don’t imagine Warcry is a replacement for AoS any more than Killteam or Necromunda will replace 40K. They’re simply another avenue to play with models you have.

They tried using end times to revive it and it failed, then almost instantly dropped AoS to try and save it.
They know how it works by now.
If AoS were failing then they wouldn’t announce a fix for it that wasn’t ready for years.

AoS wasn't a quick fix, it was something GW planned years for in advance. The reason it felt so sudden is because GW totally failed on both consumer feedback before the change and marketing before the change. GW basically built the End Times event to buidl interest into the Old World game; they got that market fired up. However GW intended to END that world. The problem was the Old World had had "end times" type events before and survived and gamers didn't expect GW to drop the game. The sudden drop and change into AoS was exceptionally sudden and jarring.
What was worse was GW didn't take on enough consumer feedback (if any) on what the market wanted (at least the portion GW was marketing toward). So when they stripped the rules and points and armies and made AoS it was a disaster that took several years to repair the damage from.

I'm sure WarCry isn't more popular nationally, or at least won't remain that way, with the way GW releases and pushes these smaller games, then slows support, while continually supporting the main game.

At the same time, at some point there will be a barrier where AoS is just so cumbersome to play. Square bases were rather brilliant for moving 40 minis at once

The way they're moving, they don't need to sell that many troopers anyway, but the game definitely doesn't lend itself to it.

 Stormonu wrote:

Jackal90 wrote:
I don’t agree or disagree as we don’t have any statistics past the areas we game in.


And I very much doubt it.
When fantasy died they dropped AoS in a heartbeat.
They wouldn’t shoulder a failing game for years and wait it out.

I’m not sure I’m reading the above right.

WHFB was in decline for several years before AoS, so they have shouldered failing games before.

However, I don’t imagine Warcry is a replacement for AoS any more than Killteam or Necromunda will replace 40K. They’re simply another avenue to play with models you have.

It was in decline while resources went for AOS. Remember releases sell majority of their sales in first few months. Ergo with no new releases no new sales either. And when GW started design AOS(after which releases were low) FB was top 3 selling game in miniature games.

Poor sales was GW inflicted. No releases, no sales. You don't get sales with old releases only. You need new releases. There's reason why GW throws in lots of new releases. To get sales. Would they drop 95% of releases for 40k then 40k sales would pummel to trickle.

Simply put?

We don’t know, and we likely will never know. That’s because GW don’t publish their performance in that way.

They’ll break it down by different parts of the company (BL, Citadel etc), but never by game system.

Beyond that, we simply have our own local anecdotes. And as we know, the plural of anecdote is, sadly, not data.

No releases, no sales

I recall someone calculated, either here or on /tg/, that WHFB in the last decade leading up to it's death got only marginally fewer releases than 40k.

As to the main question, what is Warcry? I've never once seen anyone play it, or even discuss it locally. On the other hand, the terrain boxes are snatched up by gamers of all manner of games for how much they pack on the cheap.

Warcry is a fun little skirmish/campaign system my group plays quite regularly. As to whether it's more popular than AoS is a pretty pointless question and poll as they're both different game types that are based in the same setting. So it could well end up appealing to different groups of players. It's not a particularly fair comparison.

In regards to a game of some sort coming that's set in WFB is an indication that AoS is failing? Nah. It's AoS's success that has most likely given them the confidence (and the money for that matter) to try again in that setting. If AoS had failed, i think they would have pulled out of the fantasy genre entirely at this point. And there's also the fact they would be pulling resources rather than releasing two brand new armies very shortly.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Simply put?

We don’t know, and we likely will never know. That’s because GW don’t publish their performance in that way.

They’ll break it down by different parts of the company (BL, Citadel etc), but never by game system.

Beyond that, we simply have our own local anecdotes. And as we know, the plural of anecdote is, sadly, not data.

All true, but Warcry is certainly more popular in my house. :-)

I use Kings of War for my big fantasy battles fix, but I'm really enjoying putting together small forces of different types for Warcry.

I've seen Warcry played about equal to AoS - but both games are rare compared to 40k

I've not seen necromunda for a while and we have a small 30k group as well

 Ghaz wrote:
I feel it's important to note that Warcry has only been out since July 2019, barely six months. GW has already announced three new large miniatures for the game and almost twenty new warbands. It's still too early to write the game off as a loss.

Don't see that anyone reasonable is writing it off as a loss.


But the thing about the new critters and warband's is, they're cross-game sets, which makes them really easy. Order up a limited run of cards and boxes, stuff existing things in it and call it a day. If they're reasonably priced, they'll sell for both games, and no one will know which.

Take the reaction to the chaos ogre card over in the AoS thread- it's fairly negative, but it's a good model for chaos armies, the fact that's it's nominally a warcry model makes no difference.

Warcry is probably more accessible.

I don't really like what AoS has become. Warcry reminds me a lot more of what AoS was when it launched. It takes risks, goes in weird directions, focused on narrative battles, and generally is very permissive about what you can do with the game. AoS is (now) "if you play at a different point level, it unfairly gives some factions a small advantage... so let's only play it this one way, forever".

There's no way Warcry will be more popular than AoS - wargamers are terminally obsessed with matched play, and Warcry's version of matched play is lame. But at the same time, I feel like if Warcry were to become more popular, it would follow the same trajectory as Age of Sigmar and eventually become everything that I hate about wargaming. In my opinion, AoS is committing all the crimes that Warmachine did shortly before it crashed - too many models on the table, matched play obsession, prohibitively expensive/time consuming for new players to get into, and fewer opportunities for playing non-tournament level games. I'd rather Warcry stick around the Necromunda-level of niche than become another game like that.

Me and my friend were the only ones playing it I have ever seen where we game, and none of our friendship group plays or even bought it.

The main problem is that too many of the card combinations allow "games" or one sided victories.

I'd strongly disagree AOS is heading into Warmachine territory though as, in my experience, none of those statements to are even true.

You can play a small game with a start collecting of most races, if you don't want to glue models then races have an initial push fit option. Model count depends on the ra e - Bonereapers , Ogres, Stormcast, Chaos Warriors etc willnever out umber most armies. My local fills the place once a week for AOS night.....playing matched frienddlyy games. Maybe it's an America problem ?

while I rarely see any gw game played, warcry is certainly more popular locally than AoS, necromunda, and 40k combined. granted that is anecdotal, but that was what was asked.

Just a quickie...

I've noticed Horrors are now available; how does points work in Warcry, and would two boxes of both Horrors suffice?

SamusDrake wrote:
I've noticed Horrors are now available; how does points work in Warcry, and would two boxes of both Horrors suffice?

Warbands are 1,000 points, and I would guess one box of each should be more than enough. I've not seen the actual cards, but splitting's an ability - so I guess you buy Pinks for you warband and split them during the game for free.

Cheers for that.

Definitely false here. Haven't seen anyone play Warcry in store. AOS, by itself, isn't that popular either.