Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan

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.

**Tank_Dweller**

Grimtuff wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:
MWG made a similar observation. The HH game release month came and went. What if what whomever first saw those Sigmarines with no prior context thought they were Heresy marines?

My point was more a 'What if the rumours were true' + 'Be careful what you wish for'. Imagine if we are getting a HH game, but it's like AoS.

*Visibly shudders*

We have altered the 30 year old mechanics of one of our games. Pray we do not alter them further.

This deal is getting worse all the time...

**DarkStarSabre**

Azreal13 wrote:
DarkStarSabre wrote:

I think I need to refocus on 40k at this rate.

GW cares not from where the cash flow, so long as it does.

Really, without wishing to drag the thread off into another "try this game" "don't like it for x reason" discussion, if you're really that affected by this release, you need to focus on non GW product if you can, otherwise there'll be nothing else to look at when this tanks through lack of sales and GW does the same thing to 40K through lack of ideas.

Unless you already have existing 40k armies and are canny enough to go through FB trades, ebay and decent second hand from local stores. Cash hasn't flowed anywhere near GW's pockets for a few years now, least not from me. As I said, the aesthetics were one of the main draws of Fantasy. 15 year old me went wide eyed at the 5th ed. Dimetradon-style Lizardmen Salamanders and the other releases in WD 208 way back then. Then my friend brought in WD 206 from two months back and sealed the deal for me in terms of Fantasy. Hell, the 5th. edition core rulebooks had so much art and flavour...all the way down to the little 'cartoon' style bits of art between paragraphs and on the odd page. But now? Now looking at AoS....ew. Reading the bits of fluff we've had? Ew ew ew. Sorry, that's just sad. That's 16 years of 'love' that were chucked out in the trash because the guy who rescued a chemist thinks he knows how wargamers think....after comparing us to card games and his product to porsches.

As a lot of people have already said...

This is the good old dog being put down. Telling people to adapt and move on or to just not care is downright rude. Going back 5 editions the different factions have had their own style, lore and aesthetic...telling us to abandon it all at the drop of a hat is...well...just not cricket.

**Xyxox**

Wonderwolf wrote:
zedmeister wrote:
Xyxox wrote:
Here's a BatRep:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5aBPxtBIGU

That pile up at the end - expect that to be a common occurrence in the game.

Yup.

Was gonna say it. Only skipped and fast-forwarded, but everything just ends up in a big pile, stuck in combat, unable to leave, and at that point it is only alternate rolling of dice till one player wins.

With no incentives to stay back, even with shooty stuff, no objectives, no advantages gained through movement, it's just "run-to-the-middle-and-dice-it-out".

Might be easier to just pile all of your minis on top of each other in the beginning and start saying "pew pew".

**TheWaspinator**

Xyxox wrote:
So after considering the twitter post where a board game reviewer got a review copy of the game, I've sort of come to a realization.

The strategy is to bring more people into the Games Workshop hobby (yeah, I know, but every time I've ever been in a store they always called it the "Games Workshop Hobby").

Since models are used in games, the target demographic is people who play games.

Board Games represents the largest demographic in the entire games demographic.

If they cna pull just one in one hundred board gamers into their market, they will succeed.

So, they make rules that are fairly simple to the war gamers crowd, but may seem just a bit complex to the board gamers. Four pages puts this at about the same level as Monopoly or Risk or maybe a bit higher.

They provide the scenarios where the board gamers get convinced the board is the entire tabletop and they've really got six different games in this box. this sucks in a percentage of the target for market. They then release new models with new war scrolls and new scenarios on a consistent basis, sucking them in even more.

Here's where I see the mistake in this strategy. They do not do market research. Painting models is going to be too much work for most board gamers. They like to play their games out of the box. Had they made the plastic models out of two different colors, and insured a different color of plastic for each different faction, this might be mire successful in sucking in the board gamers. As is, I doubt they'll even get 1 in 1000 board gamers who buy AoS to ever go any further.

The thing is, there are plenty of board games with way more in-depth rules than this. Risk is not the game you should be comparing this to. Look up Star Wars Imperial Assault. It has a 28 page reference rulebook. Not big at all by miniatures games standards, but way more complicated than AOS.

**Watching Paint Dry**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Angry Marine wrote:
Angry Marine wrote:
GW seems to have sent review copies. Sam Healey from the Dice Tower (a Boardgame focused YouTube Network) got one.
https://twitter.com/samhealey74/status/616968183463804928
Thoughts anyone?

Well good news is that GW seems to finally understand the value of reaching out to the customer base.
The bad news is that they still killed Warhammer.

Tale of Painters posted a pic of a box as well.
https://www.facebook.com/taleofpainters?_rdr=p

Interestingly, after a visit to GW HQ for some white dwarf pictures a few months back they sold off some fantasy armies on ebay.

**Xyxox**

TheWaspinator wrote:
The thing is, there are plenty of board games with way more in-depth rules than this. Risk is not the game you should be comparing this to. Look up Star Wars Imperial Assault. It has a 28 page reference rulebook. Not big at all by miniatures games standards, but way more complicated than AOS.

Di you watch the BatRep? Everybody moves to the center, piles up, and then it's a dice roll off.

Yeah, AoS is pretty simple.

**TheAuldGrump**

agnosto wrote:
They would know that if research weren't so darn otiose... (I need to make a meme about this)

Yes, yes you do....

The Auld Grump

**Solidcrash**

I don't own any Warhammer codex ( whatever it called ) because I am heavy 40k. RacerX was right, I just start to interest in AoS now.

To me, it is not Warhammer. Just another brand new game just like Assassinorum: Execution Force. Because logo is not same as Warhammer. Ether Warhammer is died and AoS is rising or they will create another new Warhammer edition. Who know.

Tomorrow I will buy White Dwarf to read more about AoS, if I was still interested then it will be my first fantasy theme wargame.

Sorry Warhammer veteran. Just keep your finger cross whatever if GW keeping going update the Warhammer edition or not.

Look at good side, no more spending on codex and new rulebook for you if GW are truly give up on Warhammer. I disagree that call it "old hammer" because AoS is an "expansion" Warhammer to me. Veteran can keep name Warhammer as Warhammer and warhammer: AoS is AoS.

I sort of hope it is much much more than just roll a dices it out till whoever won the dice roll off... Heh

**ImAGeek**

DarkStarSabre wrote:
Azreal13 wrote:
DarkStarSabre wrote:

I think I need to refocus on 40k at this rate.

GW cares not from where the cash flow, so long as it does.

Really, without wishing to drag the thread off into another "try this game" "don't like it for x reason" discussion, if you're really that affected by this release, you need to focus on non GW product if you can, otherwise there'll be nothing else to look at when this tanks through lack of sales and GW does the same thing to 40K through lack of ideas.

As a lot of people have already said...

This is the good old dog being put down. Telling people to adapt and move on or to just not care is downright rude. Going back 5 editions the different factions have had their own style, lore and aesthetic...telling us to abandon it all at the drop of a hat is...well...just not cricket.

I'm not sure what that has to do with Azraels post because that's not what he was saying at all. He's not saying 'move on and don't care' he's saying 'if you're really that negatively effected by this release that you aren't going to play it, it might be wise to look at games outside of GW, and support other companies, not play 40k and support the company that just ruined the game you loved.'

**Bull0**

There's definitely a point to be made that the future of 40k looks a bit bleak if this is how GW will treat one of its' biggest products... :/

**Xyxox**

ImAGeek wrote:
I'm not sure what that has to do with Azraels post because that's not what he was saying at all. He's not saying 'move on and don't care' he's saying 'if you're really that negatively effected by this release that you aren't going to play it, it might be wise to look at games outside of GW, and support other companies, not play 40k and support the company that just ruined the game you loved.'

Or if you keep buying 40K, then don't buy from GW, buy it from eBay.

**lord_blackfang**

Davylove21 wrote:
Is there any news on what's coming out the week after AoS? I remember reading something like there will be no 40K for months now.

Doesn't the WD "next time" blurb hint at Nurgle?

**TheWaspinator**

Or heck, Forbidden Stars (a new 40K spinoff boardgame) has two 16 page rulebooks. And it's cheaper than Age of Sigmar!

**deleted20250424**

XT-1984 wrote:

Ahh yes, I recall the time that Sanguinius (and/or The Saguinor) fought the mighty demon Ka'bandha.

Oh wait, wrong game.

**CatMines**

If Games Workshop is trying to pull in the board game crowd then I think they really screwed this one up. Board games have moved well passed monopoly and risk. People that are playing monopoly and risk are not really in the board game crowd, its a totally different market (Retailers like target carry risk for under 30 USD). The people who call themselves board gamers (the ones who would consider 125 USD within a reasonable range) expect a pretty tight rule set and a lot of replayability these days. Publishers like FFG have really pushed the envelope on board games as we know them and games like Catan and Ticket to Ride are really pushing the smooth action of 'eurogames'. I guess my point is, at $125 GW really wont be able to make me buy this as a board game purchase. Twilight Imperium is selling for only $70 on Amazon right now. Twilight Imperium is a BIG game.

**Azreal13**

Xyxox wrote:
ImAGeek wrote:
I'm not sure what that has to do with Azraels post because that's not what he was saying at all. He's not saying 'move on and don't care' he's saying 'if you're really that negatively effected by this release that you aren't going to play it, it might be wise to look at games outside of GW, and support other companies, not play 40k and support the company that just ruined the game you loved.'

Or if you keep buying 40K, then don't buy from GW, buy it from eBay.

Depends how seriously you want to make sure your cash doesn't go to GW - if that eBay listing is a get out sale or parents getting rid of a moved out child's junk, fair enough, but it could equally be a way to fund more purchases by an active gamer, meaning you're essentially just laundering the money you give to GW!

**JohnnyHell**

It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.

**NoggintheNog**

Bull0 wrote:
There's definitely a point to be made that the future of 40k looks a bit bleak if this is how GW will treat one of its' biggest products... :/

I'm not sure they would want to do the same thing to 40K, but also bear in mind the cost of producing this ruleset is significantly less than the last one I would think.

If they do need to continue cost cutting in the future, this is a possible way of doing it with 40K.

Also, given how the fluff reads, the level of writing talent that created the worlds of both Warhammers (and yes, both were/are very derivative at base level but add in bucket loads of unique character) just is not there any more at GW.

**Xyxox**

JohnnyHell wrote:
It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.

Nobody said it was a board game. GW are targetting board gamers with AoS.

NoggintheNog wrote:
Bull0 wrote:
There's definitely a point to be made that the future of 40k looks a bit bleak if this is how GW will treat one of its' biggest products... :/

I'm not sure they would want to do the same thing to 40K, but also bear in mind the cost of producing this ruleset is significantly less than the last one I would think.

If they do need to continue cost cutting in the future, this is a possible way of doing it with 40K.

Also, given how the fluff reads, the level of writing talent that created the worlds of both Warhammers (and yes, both were/are very derivative at base level but add in bucket loads of unique character) just is not there any more at GW.

One would hope they plan to suck in the board gamers with AoS, then get them hooked on the REAL addictive stuff with 40K.

**warboss**

TalonZahn wrote:
XT-1984 wrote:

Spoiler:

Ahh yes, I recall the time that Sanguinius (and/or The Saguinor) fought the mighty demon Ka'bandha.

Oh wait, wrong game.

Don't be ridiculous. The 40k HH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying demigod figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different. In the AOS, a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. See the difference? Also, one had a sword and this one has a hammer. Totally not the same thing copied over in a desperate attempt to get sales instead of trying god forbid to address the real concerns of the community like engagement, balance, and value.

**atribix**

I'm not sure if anyone has had this idea yet, but I think I may have an explanation for the lack of a points system.

From what I have read, many of the rules were based off of model count .

So to use the situation that many have brought up earlier in the thread, how does one balance 30 bloodthirsters vs 30 goblins if there is no point system?

Here is what I think. To simplify balance, I believe that the more powerful models, will be "worth" more than one on the battlefield. So, a bloodthirster may be worth 3 models in terms of balance and sudden death rules.

Now I may be completely off course here, as the warscrolls that we have seen for the starter set do not mention anything about different model count values, but i do believe think that the two armies are balanced in this sort of way. This makes sure that some armies to not start off with a sudden death objective on turn one, as their fewer models still have an equal count to whatever they are playing against.

So, a 50 model game may have one army with 50 models each worth 1, against another army with 25 models, each worth 2.

**zedmeister**

Azreal13 wrote:

Depends how seriously you want to make sure your cash doesn't go to GW - if that eBay listing is a get out sale or parents getting rid of a moved out child's junk, fair enough, but it could equally be a way to fund more purchases by an active gamer, meaning you're essentially just laundering the money you give to GW!

Funnily enough, this whole debacle has made me miss elements of Warhammer. So much so, that I've started idly looking through ebay for 4th and 5th edition Warhammer models. Hopefully, this 'game' will see a few more sell offs and bargins...

**Angry Marine**

JohnnyHell wrote:
It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.

All the rules require are 3 feet square (9 foot area) in table space. Yep, you can play on small tables.

**deleted20250424**

warboss wrote:
Don't be ridiculous. The 40k HH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.

This is why I like you.

You make me laugh.

**Avrik_Shasla**

Angry Marine wrote:
JohnnyHell wrote:
It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.

All the rules requires are 3 feet square (9 foot area).

Hey! Some people are taller than others!

**Xyxox**

atribix wrote:
I'm not sure if anyone has had this idea yet, but I think I may have an explanation for the lack of a points system.

From what I have read, many of the rules were based off of model count .

So to use the situation that many have brought up earlier in the thread, how does one balance 30 bloodthirsters vs 30 goblins if there is no point system?

Here is what I think. To simplify balance, I believe that the more powerful models, will be "worth" more than one on the battlefield. So, a bloodthirster may be worth 3 models in terms of balance and sudden death rules.

Now I may be completely off course here, as the warscrolls that we have seen for the starter set do not mention anything about different model count values, but i do believe think that the two armies are balanced in this sort of way. This makes sure that some armies to not start off with a sudden death objective on turn one, as their fewer models still have an equal count to whatever they are playing against.

So, a 50 model game may have one army with 50 models each worth 1, against another army with 25 models, each worth 2.

There has been nothing to indicate there is even a small hope for what you are wishing for here. No mention of model counts on war scrolls. The only place where any specific number of models is mentioned is in the scenarios, and those are only for the models in the AoS set.

**Avrik_Shasla**

TalonZahn wrote:
warboss wrote:
Don't be ridiculous. The 40k HH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.

This is why I like you.

You make me laugh.

Sure it's not because you both like Robotech?

**JohnnyHell**

Angry Marine wrote:
JohnnyHell wrote:
It's not a boardgame if it requires a frickin' 6' by 4' board. Can we quit the ridiculous comparisons? Even if it's a simple wargame, it's a wargame.

All the rules requires are 3 feet square (9 foot area).

To be fair, the last time I tried to play Space Hulk I had to use the damn floor, so maybe I shot myself in the foot, hah.

**zedmeister**

Avrik_Shasla wrote:
TalonZahn wrote:
warboss wrote:
Don't be ridiculous. The 40k HH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.

This is why I like you.

You make me laugh.

Sure it's not because you both like Robotech?

I've seen that thread and kickstarter. I don't think anyone who has to take the sustained garbage from palladium books or that Kevin joker fella is quite sane anymore.

**warboss**

Avrik_Shasla wrote:
TalonZahn wrote:
warboss wrote:
Don't be ridiculous. The 40k HH version had a bunch of augmented superwarriors in heavy plate armor created by a god emperor sent forth after a period of great dispair and darkness to conquer the various realms by travelling through magical gates in space during which a flying godlike figure in gold fought a giant demon of hate. This is totally different.

This is why I like you.

You make me laugh.

Sure it's not because you both like Robotech?

Don't be ridiculous. Everyone likes Robotech... some just don't know it yet or have been misled by Palladium's earnest efforts to the contrary.