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.

 warboss wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:

 warboss wrote:

I saw a reference to the halfling hot pot catapult but I didn't see anything for lumpin croop's band, regular halfling archers, or spearmen either. Did I miss those or are they gone as well?

Listening very carefully, i noticed that the words "current" and "sold by the website" were used quite a bit. Even then, this was a pretty big project. I've got all 439 pages printed out at the shop.

Maybe we can petition for a 10th realm where all the models with no rules live now?Unobtania?

Oh, wait, i used too many real vowels.......Unybtynya.....

Is the hot pot catapult still available for sale then up until yesterday? It's listed in the empire list (admittedly in the counts as appendix) but the rest of the halflings that I thought went away at the same time weren't. It just seems odd that they'd mention one and not the other since both were OOP to my knowledge.

From reading the scrolls, i suspect this was some of the old timers writing them. Jeremy Vetock comes to mind, as he always loved the fun part of WFB, especially giants stuffing enemy generals down trousers. The hot pot was extremely cool, he probably wanted to make sure it wasn't forgotton

I fear that people are failing to understand GW's mindset

GW's business plan can be summed up in the following:

If it sells well stop selling it.

If customers ask for X, give them Y

If people don't know about your new products, they're more likely to buy it...

Da Butcha wrote:
*And for the person who thinks these rules are funny, I would point you to Wulfrik the Wanderer. His 'funny' rules:

Issue your opponent with a challenge of your own – you can be as mocking, rude or insulting as you dare; if your opponent rises to the bait and they change expression, even so much as crack a smile or a glimmer of shock, Wulfrik’s challenge is successful and you can re-roll failed hit rolls for any attacks he makes this phase against enemy Heroes.

So, by the rules, be as 'insulting as you dare'. The person who buys Wulfrik now has a special rule that he may not get to benefit from, or a special rule that may alienate his opponents, and it's official! How "funny"!

Requiring the player to actually issue a challenge might have been funny. Giving them a rules benefit for amusing OR shocking their opponent---not so much.

As I said somewhere else: "Hurl racial slurs at your opponent, if he reacts you win!"

A lot of these rules seem to promote behaviour that'd get you kicked out of a store if played to the hilt.

Games Workshop just missed the boat on a couple key things. One of those things is clear communication to their customers. "I know you've just invested hundreds of dollars in our End Times books and the Fantasy system. Let us tell you why we are making this change, how we will support you in the future, and what our goalsare with the new launch". It's basic customer communication, built on market research...which they don't do (at least not under Tom Kirby.

I love the new model style. I just have to think that spending some time doing research would have helped them make the rules and introduce the game in a much better way. Talk with current players about what they like the most; talk with your target audience about why they don't play....and look for combinations that you can build on. You'd probably find that people loved the fluff, didn't like movement trays, thought the cost of entry was too high, and the system for resolving conflicts was too complicated. If that were the case, it would lead you to a very different game than AoS.

The goofy benefits on some cards are a minor part of this for me. The biggest issue is the lack of understanding that one of the basic needs of their core customers is that games be fair and balanced. I really expected them to copy a Warmachine style model....or even copy over the 40K rules with adaptation for Magic and Unit Model Count (to mimic rank).

One of my friends is calling this Games Workshop's "New Coke". He could be right. Maybe I'll get another shot at the CEO application sooner than I thought!

Were there any rumours of no points or balance system? If not how on earth did GW keep that quiet? Surely some staff members have been disgruntled over this?

As for the new Stormcast Eternal archers and character, I love them. They even look great when mixed in with Empire units such as flagellants and War Altars.

I gotta wonder if so many who want to use aos models for 40k realize the scale is very different.. beyond true scale Marines (which still doesn't make sense since the armor is wildly different) this is a big flop for cross game marketing too

If GW would have just put points or some other clear balancing mechanic in place, I think this release would have gone over much better - and possibly sold better too, though of course that remains to be seen!

 Alpharius wrote:
If GW would have just put points or some other clear balancing mechanic in place, I think this release would have gone over much better - and possibly sold better too, though of course that remains to be seen!

This:

They treated vets well with the compendium's covering most old models, even a lot of characters that we had assumed would be squatted. But the lack of any points is proving to be a very alienating matter for a lot of WHFB players.

 quickfuze wrote:
OMG

Nagash, Hand of Dust ....you literally hide a dice in one of your hands and your opponent has to guess which one it is in...this is so dumb.....so dumb

Somewhere hidden in these scrolls is rock, paper, scissors....i bet it's there....

All Chaos Wizards know summon everything...and only need a 6 to summon 10 lesser demons!?! That's a below average roll for god sake....can you say blatant money grab. Oh yeah its a skirmish game..yeah right, its a pay to win game now.

Summoning makes sense in the basic game. If i own a block of plaugebearers i can toss it on the battlefield at setup, or i can save it to summon in later. No big deal.

It is only when we think of limiting the amount of troops that summoning seems bat gak crazy.

First rule i put on my "how the feth do i run tournaments" list was 1) No summoning.

 Kirasu wrote:
I gotta wonder if so many who want to use aos models for 40k realize the scale is very different.. beyond true scale Marines (which still doesn't make sense since the armor is wildly different) this is a big flop for cross game marketing too

The scale is identical.

Those Khorne-cultists fit right in with a group of Dark Vengeance Cultists. Slap a Backpack on the Khorne Warriors to make them Berzerkers, or steal their helmets and bits for CSM/Berzerker kits. The plastic Fleshhound is identical in scale to the finecast ones.

It's just that the Sigmar Marines are huge, but presumably they are meant to be Centurion/near-Dreadnought-huge.

 Morathi's Darkest Sin wrote:
So.. reading the Skaven Doombell.. it seems the only way to get thirteen would be to have doctored one of your dice to a seven.. thus the cheater line.

A bit naughty GW.

Making a set of dice for a friend. One has all 6's, the other has all 7's. We will pull them out in the first big megabattle we run, claim victory for the skaven in high squeaky voices. Then nobly offer to play the rest of the game out even though we just won.

 Thraxas Of Turai wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
If GW would have just put points or some other clear balancing mechanic in place, I think this release would have gone over much better - and possibly sold better too, though of course that remains to be seen!

This:

They treated vets well with the compendium's covering most old models, even a lot of characters that we had assumed would be squatted. But the lack of any points is proving to be a very alienating matter for a lot of WHFB players.

GW gave us everything we need to play AoS and use all our old models for free. This should tell you that they know full well that they can't expect another dime from existing players. They've cut their losses and dropped the entire Fantasy community like the hot, rotten potato it is. Which was the smartest move from GW in the last... I dunno, 20 years? I don't know whether they will succeed in attracting a new player base, but there sure as heck wasn't any point in trying to salvage the old one.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Don't forget "Everyone who likes AoS are kids/mentally slowed" (Yes, people have said that), Thraxas.

That's awesome, people are saying that?

Don't get me wrong, i hate the loss of WFB.

But i'm liking Age of Sigmar more and more.

But I'm 54 with a couple of degrees in Mathematics, so instead of 'kid and slowed' can i just try to be 'Immature"?

I can do Immature easily.

 mikhaila wrote:

Making a set of dice for a friend. One has all 6's, the other has all 7's. We will pull them out in the first big megabattle we run, claim victory for the skaven in high squeaky voices. Then nobly offer to play the rest of the game out even though we just won.

Went into my local GW today and had a good close look at the models, they are amazing... and have preordered the box for my two eldest boys.. the eldest taking the Sigmar fellas, the middle one Khorne.. seems a good way to provide a game they don't need me to watch over them constantly to help with rule issues ala 40K.

Also nice to note the terrain is plastic, a normal release as far as the Manager knows, not limited.

I didn't say people who like this game are children. I said that the game is for children.

It took me awhile to figure it out ANY possible reason for GW to do this, but I think I've got it now. This is GW's response to power gaming. Why was Fantasy Battle so expensive? As a lot of people pointed out earlier, you "had" to have big blocks of troops to make them effective. There was a discussion earlier in this thread about how you needed 2 or 3 IOB boxes to have a sword master block of troops that was an effective size. But that isn't true, if you aren't trying to make the most competitive army the sword master's were fine as they were. The biggest problem with 40k right now is that IF you or your opponent want to, they can abuse the heck out of their codex to make a broken army.

There is no power gaming, or broken abuse if there is no balance. It's the biggest hail mary I have ever seen, and I have no idea if it will work or not. Old players have a right to be mad because until GW clarifies some things it's quite a mess, but I think with free rules, don't knock it till you try it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I didn't say people who like this game are children. I said that the game is for children.

Or man-children, considering how there's a rule in the Dwarf compendium that gives bonuses on beard size

CatMines wrote:
It took me awhile to figure it out ANY possible reason for GW to do this, but I think I've got it now. This is GW's response to power gaming. Why was Fantasy Battle so expensive? As a lot of people pointed out earlier, you "had" to have big blocks of troops to make them effective. There was a discussion earlier in this thread about how you needed 2 or 3 IOB boxes to have a sword master block of troops that was an effective size. But that isn't true, if you aren't trying to make the most competitive army the sword master's were fine as they were. The biggest problem with 40k right now is that IF you or your opponent want to, they can abuse the heck out of their codex to make a broken army.

There is no power gaming, or broken abuse if there is no balance. It's the biggest hail mary I have ever seen, and I have no idea if it will work or not. Old players have a right to be mad because until GW clarifies some things it's quite a mess, but I think with free rules, don't knock it till you try it.

You know that all of that you listed above was due to GW pushing higher model counts as the 'path to victory' though, right?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I didn't say people who like this game are children. I said that the game is for children.

Except Wulfrik, who is for passive-aggressive jackasses.

 mikhaila wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:
Don't forget "Everyone who likes AoS are kids/mentally slowed" (Yes, people have said that), Thraxas.

That's awesome, people are saying that?

Don't get me wrong, i hate the loss of WFB.

But i'm liking Age of Sigmar more and more.

But I'm 54 with a couple of degrees in Mathematics, so instead of 'kid and slowed' can i just try to be 'Immature"?

I can do Immature easily.

I spotted that, a poster used some very discriminatory and offensive language. Thankfully the poster either saw sense and edited it or it was modded for being bang out of order. I do not believe that was aimed at you H.B.M.C, there was a very offensive post.

My take on AOS:

Love the miniatures.
Unsure about the rules, will have to give them a number of games.
Is it the end of WHFB? Possibly, at least as we knew it. But it will take time to see if enough veterans stick around and new blood takes up the game.

I think it is clear that WHFB was not selling like GW wanted it to, so they went off on a massive tangent for the new game.

I set up this:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/654841.page

poll to see if people are going to give AOS a go. Feel free to vote (or not).

 AlexHolker wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I didn't say people who like this game are children. I said that the game is for children.

Except Wulfrik, who is for passive-aggressive jackasses.

GW wrote:The Gift of Tongues: At the start of
the combat phase, Wulfrik can issue an
indelicate challenge in his foe’s tongue
if there is an enemy Hero within 3".
Issue your opponent with a challenge
of your own – you can be as mocking,
rude or insulting as you dare; if your
opponent rises to the bait and they change
expression, even so much as crack a smile
or a glimmer of shock, Wulfrik’s challenge
is successful and you can re-roll failed hit
rolls for any attacks he makes this phase
against enemy Heroes.

Yeah, that's really not good.

 Xyxox wrote:

 Bull0 wrote:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Well bloody resist it!!!

Any success for AOS = 40k getting the same treatment.

It's definitely not that simple.

I think GW already has plans in the pipeline to Sigmar 40K. I also do not believe there will be anything to stop them from Sigmarring 40K short of a dismal failure for AoS.

Yep, it's going to happen.

Last night as i was grooming my mustache and talking to Konrad, Sigmar came to me and let me in on the next step GW will be taking:

-The Adeptus Mechanicus mess with the wrong ancient technology and break time
-Warhammer 30k invades Warhammer 40k
-Horus comes back and kills both the Emperors
-Necrons and Blood Angels interbreed. Not really part of the main story, but GW will leak the sex tape.
-Orks use a Super Traktor Beam to crash every planet in the Humieverse together.
-We get a 14 book long set of Slipcased Hardcovers for "Da Ender Times" that blows up the 40k universe.

Finally, when 30-40k is dead, all existing models get Warscrolls for Age of sigmar. Sigmar of course gets all the space marines, but they have to paint their armor gold. Half the chapters rebel and join chaos to keep their original colors. Half the traitor legions join Sigmar so they can get spiffy gold paint. The space wolves go off and marry into the Ogors since they have similar cultures.

The. Feth.

Seriously? Just insult your opponent?

So I'm calm, collected, friendly and generally a great opponent. Then Wulfrik gets within 3" of an enemy and I suddenly scream "Eat gak and die witch flaps!", and, because my opponent is obviously taken aback, I get re-rolls?

No... no... no...

I could very easily see them following the Hordes/Warmachine model, and turning 40k into a nearly-identical twin of AoS so that you can play one against the other, or include models from both games in your army...

Played some smaller games down at my local today, and I have to say I am quite surprised, its not all bad, and it has alot of potential, but really, really needs some points costs in there, with points costs and house rules, it would be pretty decent; not on par with many of the other wargames out there, but decent.


The sudden death victories are awful though, easily abusable, and ought to just be ignored. The silly 'jump up and down and scream' rules should go, and things like being behind cover should give you the save modifier, etc, but the general mechanics to the game itself seem tolerable.

With a 'high caliber' company like GW, we shouldn't have to do any of this, and if this style transfers to 40k, then, well, I don't know if I will ever be able to touch another GW model.

I feel for the fantasy players, having everything snatched away like this, but if you aren't too bitter, try it, it's kinda entertaining in a quirky way, and has potential to be good, balance is the key issue atm.

I hate to think what "special rules" GW might make for Slaaneshi models.

Peen-comparison challenge?

 Swastakowey wrote:

Albino Squirrel wrote:
This notion some people have (that something without point values can't be considered a game) is absurd. There are plenty of very good miniature games that don't have point values...

A game where every model is different stat wise, ruleswise and model count wise needs points. This game has shallow history behind it so using scenarios is impossible.

History games and more realistic games can indeed be without points because variations among troops is usually minimal.

In fantasy it is kind of important to know how many goblins a stegadon is roughly worth. Because without detailed back story information or rules telling us we have no real idea. The only way you can get a balanced game is by playing games to find out how units compare and then getting an idea this way. But have fun doing that with hundreds if unit types.

Name a wargame that has more than 50 unit types with drastically different rules and does not have a balancing system? You will not find one easily that is for sure and there is a reason for that.

GW was just being lazy and thought they would make anybody willing to play this play test it themselves.

Well, I don't dispute that THIS game should have point values. Not because the stats are very different. You have to hit, to wound, and armor save which are all between 3+ and 6+. Only four different possible values which scale linearly. Then you have number of attacks and number of wounds which can vary a lot, and movement rate. The thing that makes it seem pretty hard to me to come up with a good scenario and forces is all the special abilities and how they can stack.

Anyway, my issue was with people saying that the definition of being a game requires point values. It doesn't. Black Powder and Hail Caesar are great games without points and with a wide variety of troop capabilities. Same with Tomorrow's War. And it isn't too hard to come up with good scenarios for those games.

 Alex C wrote:
I hate to think what "special rules" GW might make for Slaaneshi models.

Peen-comparison challenge?

Man-boob comparison challenge.

Albino Squirrel wrote:
And it isn't too hard to come up with good scenarios for those games.

So rather than having a points system, you have a scenario system which places limits (artificial or otherwise) on the units both players can take. In other words, the same effect via a different method. You're still adding structure/limits where there currently are none. You do see that, don't you?

OR, just have a points system, which covers all the bases and doesn't require you to write specific scenarios.

 Alpharius wrote:

CatMines wrote:
It took me awhile to figure it out ANY possible reason for GW to do this, but I think I've got it now. This is GW's response to power gaming. Why was Fantasy Battle so expensive? As a lot of people pointed out earlier, you "had" to have big blocks of troops to make them effective. There was a discussion earlier in this thread about how you needed 2 or 3 IOB boxes to have a sword master block of troops that was an effective size. But that isn't true, if you aren't trying to make the most competitive army the sword master's were fine as they were. The biggest problem with 40k right now is that IF you or your opponent want to, they can abuse the heck out of their codex to make a broken army.

There is no power gaming, or broken abuse if there is no balance. It's the biggest hail mary I have ever seen, and I have no idea if it will work or not. Old players have a right to be mad because until GW clarifies some things it's quite a mess, but I think with free rules, don't knock it till you try it.

You know that all of that you listed above was due to GW pushing higher model counts as the 'path to victory' though, right?

I guess your right about that, and even the new rules still encourage larger unit sizes (I've seen a couple units that have bonuses at 30+). It's still a step in... a direction. Maybe not the right one. I just can't imagine any other reason for GW to do this.