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.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
Games workshop, despite some haters, has created some wonderfully balanced games, not all their content has been balanced, but the majority of their rulesets have been, they aren't going to just stop.

The people that wrote the better rulesets have left the company. Games Workshop is a company, the rules were written by the employees. The reason the rules are terrible is because the good designers have left.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

privateer4hire wrote:

 Necros wrote:
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?

Yep. Same thing with Assault on Black Reach except they listed points but still wanted you to face the included forces against each other.
Neither force had all its special rules listed either.
Still too early to judge completely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eldarain wrote:
So is there a requirement to have your army of scrolls selected before the game?

Or are we tailoring as we go?

If one of my previous FLGS's is a sign, you're supposed to tailor as you go.
Every time I showed up, I'd be asked what I was fielding and then 15 minutes later my opponents would have great lists to counter my all-comers army

Again, I don't believe that there is a no points system and that the rules that come in the box is it, don't believe it one bit.

We'll find out this Saturday .

And i hope you are right. I hope that my sales rep lied to me. And all the other retailers getting the same info were lied to. And that the people in charge of the sales reps are also lying to me when I pound them for hours on the phone and we are all looking for a way for stores to actually run leagues and tournaments in the US. I'll be pounding away tomorrow and we'll see what we come up with.

And I hope these guys, some of which I've known for two decades aren't lying, and it's just a case of the GW higher ups in England giving misleading information to the US trade sales team, and they really do have a big book of actual rules and a points system on the way.

I really, really hope that somewhere there is more to the Age of Sigmar than just 4 pages of rules.

And if, as GW has told all the US retailers that indeed, there is no points system at all, that someone at GW wakes up, and puts Jeremy Vetock back to work on 9th edition WFB.

....and lo!.....The Age of Sigmar came to an end when Saint Veetock and his hamster legions smote the false Sigmar and destroyed the bubbleverse and lead the true believers back to the Old World. [b]

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Of course.... I'm just struggling to believe that they won't be modified later to bring in some way of balancing the game. I think at this point it's more likely they will be modified later and GW are just so caught up with the idea of secrecy that they'd rather tell people "Nup, this is it!" and surprise them next month than be honest and say "This is just a stopgap like Ravening Hordes was in 6th edition".

Except that Ravening Hordes had a way to facilitate balanced play (i.e. points). Releasing a system that is such a big risk and leaving a bad first impression is just so...well, GW like.

 mikhaila wrote:
....and lo!.....The Age of Sigmar came to an end when Saint Veetock and his hamster legions smote the false Sigmar and destroyed the bubbleverse and lead the true believers back to the Old World. [b]

Awesome.

I rember Jeremy helping me name my Dwarf army characters for a campaign at the old Glen Burnie US HQ, back when I was a 15 year old kid. That dude is all about the hobby. Everyone was so excited when he got a job across the pond, and then got on the design team.

I think most of us at this point are hoping, against the available information, that there is some greater intricacy that we cannot yet see.

Also have a look at this section:



What is this supposed to mean? I mentioned it a couple of pages back, but 'in the previous battle' is either a misprint (and they meant battle round) or this is meant for some kind of campaign play.

If it was a misprint, then how does someone winning a "major victory" for achieving a sudden death win condition affect a game currently still going on? I would think as soon as someone won a major victory the game ended because, you know, somebody won it already?

All of this is amazingly confusing for a 4 page ruleset.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
The leaked rules I am sure are just the "Basic rules for playing" slips that are common with many starter boxes.

Lets just wait and see everyone, the end is not nigh.

The amount of blind faith you have in GW is truly astounding.

 mikhaila wrote:

 Samurai_Eduh wrote:
Having another look through the rules, it seems to me that you can just walk away from combat? Charging seems to be the only way to get in combat, but if on your turn you are within that 3" range you can just retreat away. There is no more locked in combat.

Quite possibly. I read the part about retreat, and it didn't seem to say anything about "unless in combat" etc. So on your turn, you could move 4-5" directly away from that unit, but do nothing else.

So you might "get away" only to do nothing for the turn and then get beat on again. If you aren't locked in combat, neither is the other guy. Could lead to either a good tactical game, or really stupid stuff happening.

Could I tarpit an enemy unit, then I walk my tarpit out, have another unit shoot at them, and then have a 3rd unit charge the enemy? If so, then the game has some strong tactical options despite the streamlining of the rules.

How about an official Dakkahouse rule:

1 scroll = whatever models come in a box, no more, no less.

You and your opponent need armies with the same amount of scrolls.

There, I fixed the game.

 insaniak wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
In spite of what the GW reps are telling stores.... I just can't believe it. If they are truly going down that path they're going to lose a huge amount of appeal from anyone who isn't simply an avid collector. Even LOTR, a game which leans more heavily on narrative play, has points values so players have some semblance of what should be paired up against what.

At this point I'm mostly thinking "Well, the reps are probably being dumb and not wanting to "spoil" next month's release by saying what is coming out later".

Maybe campaign packs which place limits on things or something like that.

This isn't just down to what the reps are telling people, this is from the rules that we've already seen. There is absolutely no indication in the rules that these are only supposed to apply to the starter set, or that they will be modified later. The rules that we have seen are all that there is.

Yes, they absolutely might release campaigns later than do different things. But for now, this is what it is.

We've seen leaks, and that's it, not even the confirmation from the actual GW company.

I'll hold my breath.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
In spite of what the GW reps are telling stores.... I just can't believe it. If they are truly going down that path they're going to lose a huge amount of appeal from anyone who isn't simply an avid collector. Even LOTR, a game which leans more heavily on narrative play, has points values so players have some semblance of what should be paired up against what.

At this point I'm mostly thinking "Well, the reps are probably being dumb and not wanting to "spoil" next month's release by saying what is coming out later".

Maybe campaign packs which place limits on things or something like that.

This isn't just down to what the reps are telling people, this is from the rules that we've already seen. There is absolutely no indication in the rules that these are only supposed to apply to the starter set, or that they will be modified later. The rules that we have seen are all that there is.

Yes, they absolutely might release campaigns later than do different things. But for now, this is what it is.

We've seen leaks, and that's it, not even the confirmation from the actual GW company.

I'll hold my breath.

Except all the GW sales reps have been talking and selling this new edition to stores across the country and have confirmed everyrthing we've seen here.

GW Reps have all been saying.

"Yeah man, just take your full army against your buddies full army, and just have at it! Oh yeah, and we're not supporting Tournament play for this game what so ever down the road, even though that has been against what we've done for decades now!"

Yeah, I'm not buying it yet. Reps just can't give out too much information for such a big release. Again, stop the fear mongering and just wait, this will be a good release.

 Dr. Delorean wrote:
.
Also have a look at this section:



What is this supposed to mean? I mentioned it a couple of pages back, but 'in the previous battle' is either a misprint (and they meant battle round) or this is meant for some kind of campaign play.

If it was a misprint, then how does someone winning a "major victory" for achieving a sudden death win condition affect a game currently still going on? I would think as soon as someone won a major victory the game ended because, you know, somebody won it already?

All of this is amazingly confusing for a 4 page ruleset.

There is no sign of any campaign rules. But yes, apparently of you win a major victory , you get a bonus in your next game.

Just another sign that this game is designed for friends to play at home, rather than for pick up games.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
So is there a requirement to have your army of scrolls selected before the game?

Or are we tailoring as we go?

There are no rules for army creation. You just bring everything you want to bring, and deploy as much or as little of it as you want.

No solid confirmation on that yet. It sounds completely bogus.

You don't consider an employee of GW telling their business partner in an official context "solid confirmation"?

I was joking before, but seriously; river in Egypt man, river in Egypt.

Believe everything you read on the internet?

I won't believe it till the release. It's already been confirmed that they are putting out books for this new game.

I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
GW Reps have all been saying.

"Yeah man, just take your full army against your buddies full army, and just have at it! Oh yeah, and we're not supporting Tournament play for this game what so ever down the road, even though that has been against what we've done for decades now!"

Yeah, I'm not buying it yet. Reps just can't give out too much information for such a big release. Again, stop the fear mongering and just wait, this will be a good release.

I think you're missing the point where Mikhaila talks about a 20 year relationship with his rep, generally you don't get that kind of flippancy from that kind of retail relationship. Generally, you get "Listen, the company is telling me to say this but wink, wink." That's been my experience anyway. Who knows maybe every rep is sleazy ex-used care salesman and has no problem lying to someone who's kept them gainfully employed for decades...that's a pretty pessimistic view of human nature though.

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

Some random thoughts on possible ways for TOs to comp or structure events:

Specifying a number of warscrolls for each player to bring / field. eg. min 3 max 10.

Limiting the number of models a player can bring per warscroll. eg. 30 wounds worth (since a lot of models seem to have multiple wounds).

Defining a "standard" number of models for the purposes of sudden death objectives.

By not giving us any sort of predefined structure, this kinda does open things up for TOs to run things however they want.

 Necros wrote:
How about an official Dakkahouse rule:

1 scroll = whatever models come in a box, no more, no less.

You and your opponent need armies with the same amount of scrolls.

There, I fixed the game.

Or. You would have, if each box contained a unit of more or less equal power.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
Believe everything you read on the internet?

I won't believe it till the release. It's already been confirmed that they are putting out books for this new game.

I believe that a company who's reps are famous for obfuscation and denial regarding how much they know about new releases are not suddenly going to just start feeding their business partners large amounts of information if that info is outright lies. I believe even GW are not stupid enough to instruct their reps to feed their business partners, knowingly or otherwise, outright lies. I believe that mikhaila has done or said absolutely nothing in the past to make me doubt their veracity. Suggesting that people who are taking a trustworthy person, who was evidently genuinely astounded by the utterly illogical ineptitude of AoS as a system and spent several hours on the phone with a rep trying to clarify the situation only to have people's fears pretty much confirmed, at their word are the gullible ones while you insist there are no tanks in GW, that I believe takes the biscuit.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

the rules don't mention anything about tournaments. You could however bring 100000 models to my house, spend 3 hours trying to squeeze a 100th of them on to my gaming table while we laughed and drank beer and I asked how you kept you sanity putting that many models together. When I was drunk and you were done we would play one round and I would lose and she'd no tears over it.
Or you could bring a force that would offer meaningful competition based on the gaming social contract and we could still drink beer and actually get a couple games in.
Your call my friend.

Kendo wrote:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

the rules don't mention anything about tournaments. You could however bring 100000 models to my house, spend 3 hours trying to squeeze a 100th of them on to my gaming table while we laughed and drank beer and I asked how you kept you sanity putting that many models together. When I was drunk and you were done we would play one round and I would lose and she'd no tears over it.
Or you could bring a force that would offer meaningful competition based on the gaming social contract and we could still drink beer and actually get a couple games in.
Your call my friend.

How about just the beer, the laughs and a game that actually works? I'd bring the beer, I brew my own.

Kendo wrote:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

the rules don't mention anything about tournaments. You could however bring 100000 models to my house, spend 3 hours trying to squeeze a 100th of them on to my gaming table while we laughed and drank beer and I asked how you kept you sanity putting that many models together. When I was drunk and you were done we would play one round and I would lose and she'd no tears over it.
Or you could bring a force that would offer meaningful competition based on the gaming social contract and we could still drink beer and actually get a couple games in.
Your call my friend.

Seeing that Games Workshop already confirmed through Reps that there are planned leagues and tournaments, I'd assume so.

Clearly the real balancing mechanic will be dollars spent based on MSRP.

I would suspect in that case there will be amendments. However, reading strictly what is in these rules, you could bring those 10000 models you mentioned. I suspect though that there will be additional rules for those scenarios, as GW has always been very explicit that the core rules are not the exact set of rules you are looking for in regards to tournaments. every tournament I have ever played in had house rules or extra rules as part of some organized play system to add further perceived ed balance to the basic rule set.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Clearly the real balancing mechanic will be dollars spent based on MSRP.

Ding! Ding! We have a winner.

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

the rules don't mention anything about tournaments. You could however bring 100000 models to my house, spend 3 hours trying to squeeze a 100th of them on to my gaming table while we laughed and drank beer and I asked how you kept you sanity putting that many models together. When I was drunk and you were done we would play one round and I would lose and she'd no tears over it.
Or you could bring a force that would offer meaningful competition based on the gaming social contract and we could still drink beer and actually get a couple games in.
Your call my friend.

Seeing that Games Workshop already confirmed through Reps that there are planned leagues and tournaments, I'd assume so.

So you believe the Reps are telling the truth about Leagues and Tournaments but lying to all of the Store Owners about the rules?

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:
Games workshop, despite some haters, has created some wonderfully balanced games, not all their content has been balanced, but the majority of their rulesets have been, they aren't going to just stop.

Games Workshop is a company which holds international tournaments where hundreds of masters participate in, they aren't going to create a game that cannot be balanced.

GW runs almost no tournaments now, and haven't for years, so not sure what you're talking about here. The big tournaments are all run by independents. It wasn't always this way, GW initiated the "Grand Tournament" system, and even had 'Ard Boyz competitive tournies for a few years more recently. But it hasn't been that way for some time...

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

the rules don't mention anything about tournaments. You could however bring 100000 models to my house, spend 3 hours trying to squeeze a 100th of them on to my gaming table while we laughed and drank beer and I asked how you kept you sanity putting that many models together. When I was drunk and you were done we would play one round and I would lose and she'd no tears over it.
Or you could bring a force that would offer meaningful competition based on the gaming social contract and we could still drink beer and actually get a couple games in.
Your call my friend.

Seeing that Games Workshop already confirmed through Reps that there are planned leagues and tournaments, I'd assume so.

So you believe the Reps are telling the truth about Leagues and Tournaments but lying to all of the Store Owners about the rules?

Was just going by your logic.

 Necros wrote:
How about an official Dakkahouse rule:

1 scroll = whatever models come in a box, no more, no less.

You and your opponent need armies with the same amount of scrolls.

There, I fixed the game.

Nagash or a Bloodthirster ? vs. 10 goblins?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:

 Avrik_Shasla wrote:

Kendo wrote:
I don't think you need your proposed fix. The whole deployment system is a super strategic aspect of the game where each opponent is constantly counting and assessing the other enemies strengths and determining if now is the time to drop that 100 strong unit of skagen slaves and try for overwhelming numbers or keep numbers low and go for sudden death.

You serious? From what everyone is believing online, I can bring 10,000 models to a tournament and fight against anyone there, and it's legal.

the rules don't mention anything about tournaments. You could however bring 100000 models to my house, spend 3 hours trying to squeeze a 100th of them on to my gaming table while we laughed and drank beer and I asked how you kept you sanity putting that many models together. When I was drunk and you were done we would play one round and I would lose and she'd no tears over it.
Or you could bring a force that would offer meaningful competition based on the gaming social contract and we could still drink beer and actually get a couple games in.
Your call my friend.

Seeing that Games Workshop already confirmed through Reps that there are planned leagues and tournaments, I'd assume so.

First I've heard of that. Sales reps will certainly encourage stores to run things...if they can...but GW has feth all to do with running events. As of monday, they had no plans, or suggestions, for running events. The only thing i heard was limiting people to same number of war scrolls, wounds, or models. None of these work. I'll be working with my rep and his boss tomorrow on trying to figure out how to run an event, and have each person bring roughly the same strength army.