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.

post pre-edit: wtf just happened with my posts? lol


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 oni wrote:
Everybody calm down...

When this steaming pile of gak gets flushed after 5 or 6 months, GW will rush out a rehashed version of WFB. All will rejoice and all will be right with the world.

GW has already committed to this "New Coke" mess, so we all just have to weather the storm until "WFB Classic" arrives.

It will come, because AoS has zero chance of success.

I think this is make or break time for fantasy. When this steaming pile gets flushed, there won't be anything afterwards.

While I am not a long-term player of GW games, I disagree with the sentiment that GW has *never* been interested in producing more competitive, rules-oriented, or balanced versions of their games. While 7E 40k has taken a turn towards more fluff-based casual game play, 5E 40k was supposedly a pretty decent tournament game (until certain armies really upset the meta). Having played a bit of 8E Fantasy as well, I can say that the game was really a decent tournament game. So while Fantasy isn't ever going to be Chess, Age of Sigmar is a move away from 8E towards "beer and pretzel" nonsense that goes too far.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 xttz wrote:

It's not a question of if a balanced ruleset would be beneficial to anyone; of course it would. The underlying issue is that Games Workshop as a company have never ever shown the slightest interest in producing a game like that.

Given the popularity of competitive wargaming do you not think that, maybe just maybe GW should be producing a game like that?

In an ideal world, sure. I also think I should win the lottery and retire at 30 with an awesome car to a luxury home in sunny country.

And I'm pretty sure posting on the Internet is more likely to achieve that than change GW's business practices.

 Thokt wrote:
Looks dead in the water to me. No points could be okay, but how's a total new guy gonna know what to play with?

Beyond that, because there's no wound allocation mechanic, hits are rolled on a model by model basis. I can't even..

Were did you read this? I thought I read the rules and they said roll wounds towards the entire unit and then alot the wounds how you wanted.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 oni wrote:
Everybody calm down...

When this steaming pile of gak gets flushed after 5 or 6 months, GW will rush out a rehashed version of WFB. All will rejoice and all will be right with the world.

GW has already committed to this "New Coke" mess, so we all just have to weather the storm until "WFB Classic" arrives.

It will come, because AoS has zero chance of success.

But that's not how GW, historically, have seen things. If this fails, they'll see it as people don't want to buy fantasy models and just drop it all together.

Much like how Epic was silently canned when its rewrite failed to shift product off the shelves.

rollawaythestone wrote:
While I am not a long-term player of GW games, I disagree with the sentiment that GW has *never* been interested in producing more competitive, rules-oriented, or balanced versions of their games. While 7E 40k has taken a turn towards more fluff-based casual game play, 5E 40k was supposedly a pretty decent tournament game (until certain armies really upset the meta). Having played a bit of 8E Fantasy as well, I can say that the game was really a decent tournament game. So while Fantasy isn't ever going to be Chess, Age of Sigmar is a move away from 8E towards "beer and pretzel" nonsense that goes too far.

Therein lies the catch: 5th was decent until they released the broken armies. With hindsight, 5th looks the best, but the reality was it still had problems that needed fixing. There really is no edition you can look back and say: everything was close to perfect.

migooo wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
I remember once playing an asteroid crewed with a kingdom of minotaurs crossing the cosmos in D&D's Spelljammer.

Never once imagined I'd be able to do the same in Warhammer!

Yeah but spelljammer was good.

Ok searched it, they need to make a new version of this!!!

 Torga_DW wrote:

rollawaythestone wrote:
While I am not a long-term player of GW games, I disagree with the sentiment that GW has *never* been interested in producing more competitive, rules-oriented, or balanced versions of their games. While 7E 40k has taken a turn towards more fluff-based casual game play, 5E 40k was supposedly a pretty decent tournament game (until certain armies really upset the meta). Having played a bit of 8E Fantasy as well, I can say that the game was really a decent tournament game. So while Fantasy isn't ever going to be Chess, Age of Sigmar is a move away from 8E towards "beer and pretzel" nonsense that goes too far.

Therein lies the catch: 5th was decent until they released the broken armies. With hindsight, 5th looks the best, but the reality was it still had problems that needed fixing. There really is no edition you can look back and say: everything was close to perfect.

It is a fallacy often trotted out though. I've read interviews with Alessio where he talks about how there was a move towards making the game more tournament ready, but then, in true GW style, they switched direction halfway through and wandered off in another direction.

 unmercifulconker wrote:

 namiel wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
I'm convinced the lack of points is just a starter set thing. In the break down for how war scrolls work, they talk about in the description were you find the find of upgrades the unit can take.

How can you buy upgrades with no points?

you cant buy upgrades.................

Im sure the bit about warscrolls in the white dwarf talked about the warscroll containing any details of upgrades that a model/unit may be able to take.

Yah it says upgrades are listed under unit description in the white dwarf. Then... nothing else. .. if the upgrade is free then why would you never take it? It makes no sense.

 Talys wrote:
I think surely someone thought of the scenario of a FB veteran bringing his 200 painted wood elves and putting them in one unit.

Massed hordes of weak models won't be the thing, as they just leave you open to Sudden Death. The power builds will be small forces made up of the most powerful single model warscrolls, or massed units of the most powerful 'unlimited unit' warscrolls.

As unpleased as I am with the current developments. I hope for Fantasy's sake that this does well. If this fails, WHFB is gone. If it does well, it might still have a chance. It won't be the same, but it'll still be alive at least, and who knows, things could improve. Possibly. Maybe. Probably not... But still, one can hope.

 Torga_DW wrote:


I think this is make or break time for fantasy. When this steaming pile gets flushed, there won't be anything afterwards.

Mantic. Mantic will be left afterwards.

I am sorry, for me the conversation stopped with "The World is Dead".

Warhammer was about playing in the world, using armies based on 30 years of writing and development.

So now I can field my O&G army, and my Empire, and my Skaven.
Great.

Where do they exist? On a bubble floating in space, waiting to be reincarnated by demi-gods? What about the thousands years civilization that led to the Elves and their accursed kin?

Tokens on a table as a pale representation of the archetype they were made to be is just miniature masturbation.
And for ME, I have no interest in playing WITH or AGAINST some hodgepodge mishmash of Goodies vs Badies.

I think if I went to a store and saw people playing an army of High Elves and Skaven and Dwarfs on the SAME SIDE, I would probably shed a small tear and walk away with my head hanging low...

Nope, 7th edition is where I dropped my anchor, and that's where I will fish!

 Lockark wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:

 namiel wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
I'm convinced the lack of points is just a starter set thing. In the break down for how war scrolls work, they talk about in the description were you find the find of upgrades the unit can take.

How can you buy upgrades with no points?

you cant buy upgrades.................

Im sure the bit about warscrolls in the white dwarf talked about the warscroll containing any details of upgrades that a model/unit may be able to take.

Yah it says upgrades are listed under unit description in the white dwarf. Then... nothing else. .. if the upgrade is free then why would you never take it? It makes no sense.

I'd guess upgrades would be things like - replace CCW with Spear/Greatweapon/etc. Each will have a benefit and drawback. Like maybe Greatweapon give +1 to wound, -1 to hit, Spear gives +1 to hit, -1 to wound or something. With a simple benefit and drawback no points mechanic would be needed, theoretically.

 theHandofGork wrote:

 Torga_DW wrote:


I think this is make or break time for fantasy. When this steaming pile gets flushed, there won't be anything afterwards.

Mantic. Mantic will be left afterwards.

Would now also be a good time to mention Darklands, who are going after the lower model count skirmish style fantasy game, have some of the finest sculpts in all of Christendom and have just launched a KS to transition a lot of the core units from resin to metal, dramatically dropping the cost of entry?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 theHandofGork wrote:

 Torga_DW wrote:


I think this is make or break time for fantasy. When this steaming pile gets flushed, there won't be anything afterwards.

Mantic. Mantic will be left afterwards.

Would now also be a good time to mention Darklands, who are going after the lower model count skirmish style fantasy game, have some of the finest sculpts in all of Christendom and have just launched a KS to transition a lot of the core units from resin to metal, dramatically dropping the cost of entry?

I was being glib- really what's left now is other companies making fantasy games. Mantic is doing the big movement block thing and basically cannibalizing the WFB armies into their system. Eventually I'm sure someone will KS a non-Oldhammer Oldhammer game.

 insaniak wrote:

 Talys wrote:
I think surely someone thought of the scenario of a FB veteran bringing his 200 painted wood elves and putting them in one unit.

Massed hordes of weak models won't be the thing, as they just leave you open to Sudden Death. The power builds will be small forces made up of the most powerful single model warscrolls, or massed units of the most powerful 'unlimited unit' warscrolls.

Yeah, fair 'nuff. Basically, the winningest unlimited unit warscrolls was what I meant; I just randomly typed in 'wood elves'

I wasn't really saying that you ONLY take MSU though. You take your boss creatures, and bubble wrap them in a bazillion of the most durable massed models.

But again, if the scenario has a hard limit on model count, this would change things. For example, if you can take anything you want, but we alternate warscroll selection (and it could end at any time if one player calls it), and there's a hard limit of 100 models total.

Just when I thought GW could not do anything more stupid, they release this and totally redeem themselves!!!!

That doesn't really change anything, unless every individual model is equal in strength.

100 Goblins are not equal to 100 Greater Daemons. I

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Torga_DW wrote:
In fairness though, he is right. If you want tight balanced rules, then games workshop probably isn't for you.

Like that guy in 'grumpy old men' said: you can wish into one hand and crap into the other and see which one fills up first.

Exactly. GW is great BnP fun, but it's not, never will be balanced. It's kinda dumb wishing for some nebulous "balance" when GW has been pretty consistent over the past 20+ years at NOT focusing on balance. I wonder if the "balance" crowd works themselves into a tizzy wishing that they were taller, that the world were more fair, etc.

But it's not great B&P fun. I'm a B&P game player and loose systems are the opposite of fun. I don't want to pull out a crystal ball and summon the spirits of gaming in order to read the mind of some drooling mongrel that seems completely unable to write a coherent sentence much less a game rule. No, B&P games are board games, B&P games are games like cards against humanity; GW is unable to make a light, enjoyable game. It's ok that they can't but the last thing someone drinking and goofing around wants are rules that are so poorly written that the author didn't even know what he meant when he wrote them.

This fallacy of GW games as B&P is up there in the annoy-o-meter with GW being it's own hobby unto itself or Donald Trump's combined (seriously dude, just shave it off).

 ImAGeek wrote:
How can anyone think that a game with no balancing mechanic at all is a good idea..?

Balance is not always important to me for a good game.

I like to play games where I have little to no chance quite often, I love playing my Bloodbowl gobbos for example and they almost always stand no chance.

I have played a few historical battles where my back was up against the wall also.

The game only needs balance when players all need a equal chance of winning, (or at least the chance to stand a chance ) like a tourney or whatever.

It would be best to for one system to please both parties though for sure, although I am not that sure whether it is completely achievable.


With regards to this AoS thing, its not really my cup of tea, mainly the minis are terrible, but the rules themselves i have no problem with, sounds a bit different to what I am used to also.

 insaniak wrote:

 Talys wrote:
I think surely someone thought of the scenario of a FB veteran bringing his 200 painted wood elves and putting them in one unit.

Massed hordes of weak models won't be the thing, as they just leave you open to Sudden Death. The power builds will be small forces made up of the most powerful single model warscrolls, or massed units of the most powerful 'unlimited unit' warscrolls.

So since I play skaven and "apparently" massed weak models won't be a thing (which sucks because I have 400ish models for my skaven army) I will be bringing:
Thanqoul and Boneripper
Seerlords of some kind
2 hellpits
3 doomwheels
Plague furnace (I wonder how they will work now??)

Not as much fun as fielding 200 models in a 2000 point game tho

 insaniak wrote:
That doesn't really change anything, unless every individual model is equal in strength.

100 Goblins are not equal to 100 Greater Daemons. I

To be fair. they did say nothing is going to be particularly the same.

Its possible GREATER Daemons might suffer a bit against mass hoards of smaller things.

Looking at the In box units. i wonder if there are any balancing hints.

The rules doesn't seem to explain this well.

So, since their is no initiative, wich side fight first ? And does dead models can fight back?

 insaniak wrote:
That doesn't really change anything, unless every individual model is equal in strength.

100 Goblins are not equal to 100 Greater Daemons. I

No, but if I read the alternating deployment (rumor) correctly, it could be:

- Player A deploys 1 greater daemon
- Player B deploys 1 goblin boss (whatever that may be...)
- Player A deploys 1 greater daemon
- Player B deploys 99 goblins
- Player A deploys 1 greater daemon
- Player B calls it quits

Then you have 3 greater daemons vs 99 goblins and 1 goblin king.

Is there a mechanism to prevent this? I think this is what we all kind of want to know...

The warscrolls in the box don't seem to have any points system on them. Only rules, no unit sizes either? Just says "any number of models" for the Angels.

 streetsamurai wrote:
The rules doesn't seem to explain this well.

So, since their is no initiative, wich side fight first ? And does dead models can fight back?

Both players must empty their wallets out on to the table, then yell WAAAGH! as loud as they can. Add the amount of money each player had to the decibel level of their WAAAGH!, higher number goes first.

Seriously though, I think it's pretty safe to say folk have divided into three camps now; GIRFUY(google it) GW, the Postmodernist "rules are so 20th century" crowd, and the folk enjoying an Egyptian river cruise.

At this point I've written off AoS as a system; it's a joke by the looks of things. I just want to see pretty pictures of the other Chaos models.

 Talys wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
That doesn't really change anything, unless every individual model is equal in strength.

100 Goblins are not equal to 100 Greater Daemons. I

No, but if I read the alternating deployment (rumor) correctly, it could be:

- Player A deploys 1 greater daemon
- Player B deploys 1 goblin boss (whatever that may be...)
- Player A deploys 1 greater daemon
- Player B deploys 99 goblins
- Player A deploys 1 greater daemon
- Player B calls it quits

Then you have 3 greater daemons vs 99 goblins and 1 goblin king.

Is there a mechanism to prevent this? I think this is what we all kind of want to know...

When the first player stops, the second player is still allowed to keep going until he runs out of either models or table space.

So in your example, player a goes on to deploy another 27 Bloodthirsters, gains Sudden Death victory conditions, and the game is practically over before it begins.

 insaniak wrote:

When the first player stops, the second player is still allowed to keep going until he runs out of either models or table space.

So in your example, player a goes on to deploy another 27 Bloodthirsters, gains Sudden Death victory conditions, and the game is practically over before it begins.

Ahh in that case I misread the rumor!

I could have old person brain right now and not know what I'm talking about, but.. thinking about the last time I got a starter box, it was the WFB one that had skaven in it. I think I remember the book listing the units in the box didn't really have the points or anything, just stats and it was like "Hey, just set up these guys and play" .. could be the same thing here? Make it simple for what comes in the box, and the web rules/scrolls or some secret book we'll suddenly have to buy will have points or some other you-can-only-have-this-many rule?