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.

 angelofvengeance wrote:


It's been largely sour notes for the past 100 pages or so lol.

Yep, mainly from the same very-vocal 10 people. Mainly.

 Sarouan wrote:
To be honest, the fact rules are free and can be downloaded from the webstore without needing to register an account is certainly not a stranger to why AoS bring back some old WFB players. That's a nice move from GW, I must say.

I was quite surprised about this. I fully expected that you'd have to place the rules/warscolls in a cart and checkout (thus getting you to register on their site). They must have the ability to do this, so this would suggest they did it on purpose.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

What about those of us that want to play mass fantasy battles and find KOW's rules to be lacking?

You currently have 3 options with differing depth / complexity:

b) KoW: Streamlined WHFB, heavy focus on tactic, by far the most tactical game of the merry bunch

"What about those of us who don't like KoW's rules?"
"Play KoW."

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Just to sound a sour note, what if the battle reports so far sound positive because the people playing are easily satisfied?

I said 'looked fun' as in to me, not 'sound positive'. I can see something hyper-positive and still draw my own negative opinion from it. Equally I can watch someone pour scorn on something and still decide I like it.

It also seems a little mean to deride people as 'easily pleased'.

 streamdragon wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

What about those of us that want to play mass fantasy battles and find KOW's rules to be lacking?

You currently have 3 options with differing depth / complexity:

b) KoW: Streamlined WHFB, heavy focus on tactic, by far the most tactical game of the merry bunch

"What about those of us who don't like KoW's rules?"
"Play KoW."

It's not like there were two other options.

There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

What about those of us that want to play mass fantasy battles and find KOW's rules to be lacking?

You currently have 3 options with differing depth / complexity:

b) KoW: Streamlined WHFB, heavy focus on tactic, by far the most tactical game of the merry bunch

"What about those of us who don't like KoW's rules?"
"Play KoW."

It's not like there were two other options.

I realize. I just found those two lines funny is all.

 TrapdoorResident wrote:
There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

If you can't find SOMETHING in this lot that rings your bell you need shootin'.

Some of these you can use any armies and some even have systems for working out their points!
and many of these sets can be dropped right into the Olde World as a setting if its the back ground you are missing.

Armies of Arcana
Fantacide (Written by Rick P)
Mayhem
Bear yourselves valiantly
Sword and spear
Legion of battle
Mighty Armies.
Hordes of the Things
Fantasy Warlord.
Warhammer 1st-8th

 Harry wrote:

 TrapdoorResident wrote:
There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

If you can't find SOMETHING in this lot that rings your bell you need shootin'.

Some of these you can use any armies and some even have systems for working out their points!
and many of these sets can be dropped right into the Olde World as a setting if its the back ground you are missing.

Armies of Arcana
Fantacide (Written by Rick P)
Mayhem
Bear yourselves valiantly
Sword and spear
Legion of battle
Mighty Armies.
Hordes of the Things
Fantasy Warlord.
Warhammer 1st-8th

Don't forget One Page Fantasy!

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Just to sound a sour note, what if the battle reports so far sound positive because the people playing are easily satisfied?

I said 'looked fun' as in to me, not 'sound positive'. I can see something hyper-positive and still draw my own negative opinion from it. Equally I can watch someone pour scorn on something and still decide I like it.

It also seems a little mean to deride people as 'easily pleased'.

I don't mean to deride them. In this vale of tears I approve of any cause for mirth and celebration.

I only question whether the rules have the depth needed for longer-term interest for experienced players, which includes people starting with AOS and developing as they continue to play..

I am sure we can all agree that there are different types of players looking for different things from games.

One man's in-depth tactical game is another man's turgid inacessible crap, to look at it from the other angle.

There's also God of Battles and Wargods.

I've been working out a little pickup game point system in my head, kind of a mix between 40k force organization for scrolls, and the way stuff was classified in the previous army books. Goes something like this..

You have General/HQ scrolls, Core/Troop scrolls, Special/Elite scrolls, and Rare/Heavy scrolls. Like 40k, you need a minimum of 1 General and 2 Core. Max of 2 Generals, 6 Core, 3 Special, 3 Rare. You and your opponent decide on how many scrolls to take.. like “Let’s play a 5 scroll game”

There’s a maximum amount of models you can take on a scroll, and that’s based on whatever was in the old base size. Generals and anything with a name, like Nagash or Karl Franz are all unique so you can only have one. For units, 20mm bases can have a max of 60 models, 25mm = 40, cavalry = 20, ogre sized 9 (3x3 block?). If you would like to have larger units, say a unit of 100 night goblins, you will have to use up 2 scroll slots. I thought you could take the unit sizes from the old army book, but that won’t really work for newer armies so I figured base sizes might be a better way to determine.

Thoughts?

 Harry wrote:

 TrapdoorResident wrote:
There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

If you can't find SOMETHING in this lot that rings your bell you need shootin'.

Some of these you can use any armies and some even have systems for working out their points!
and many of these sets can be dropped right into the Olde World as a setting if its the back ground you are missing.

Armies of Arcana
Fantacide (Written by Rick P)
Mayhem
Bear yourselves valiantly
Sword and spear
Legion of battle
Mighty Armies.
Hordes of the Things
Fantasy Warlord.
Warhammer 1st-8th

I have played a few of those games some I liked some I didn't I have no problem finding games I enjoy playing because I am blessed with friends who enjoy pretty much the same stuff I do.

just saying some people may find no value in them at all, it is all subjective.

and if I can avoid a firing squad that would be good too

 Harry wrote:

 TrapdoorResident wrote:
There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

If you can't find SOMETHING in this lot that rings your bell you need shootin'.

Some of these you can use any armies and some even have systems for working out their points!
and many of these sets can be dropped right into the Olde World as a setting if its the back ground you are missing.

Armies of Arcana
Fantacide (Written by Rick P)
Mayhem
Bear yourselves valiantly
Sword and spear
Legion of battle
Mighty Armies.
Hordes of the Things
Fantasy Warlord.
Warhammer 1st-8th

Lots of good suggestions here I'd add Mordhiem for cool skirmish games.

frankelee wrote:
I can understand the idea of counter trolling people who ask about Kairos Fateweaver combos. Just go, "Yup! Anyone who plays a Skaven wagon thing and Kairos Fateweaver automatically wins every game, see ya later!" I mean if you were playing a regular WFB-like game with Kairos Fateweaver and one of your models had "dragonstomping" which gave you D3 extra attacks every turn, and you went, "I'm using his special ability on this D3 roll and I choose a billion!" it's not like people wouldn't look at you like you had horns growing out of your head. And then hand you a ball and note that you could bounce it.

I personally think if you really want Age of Sigmar to look dumb the best way is to actually review the game and find legitimate things that suck about it. Like, it doesn't scale up very well. Or, battles sometimes devolve into big, messy scrimmages which become boring. When you complain that female gamers can't grow moustaches to suit these unfair rules, or find game hacks that only work if you can't understand basic dice mechanics that anyone over 5 is expected to understand, 99.9% of human beings who hear your argument go, "That's nice," and then never listen to you again.

This is probably the most sensible thing I've seen in this thread.

You do not belong here.

 mikhaila wrote:
Just got the confirmation that the AOS boxes for my shops have left the warehouse. We're going to have a midnight release for the game. Always nice to know the product for big releases is on time.

We're also doing a midnight release at my FLGS. I am pretty excited. For the younger players, I think this will be a fond memory. One day they will post on Dakka about when AoS "used to be good."

migooo wrote:

 Harry wrote:

 TrapdoorResident wrote:
There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

If you can't find SOMETHING in this lot that rings your bell you need shootin'.

Some of these you can use any armies and some even have systems for working out their points!
and many of these sets can be dropped right into the Olde World as a setting if its the back ground you are missing.

Armies of Arcana
Fantacide (Written by Rick P)
Mayhem
Bear yourselves valiantly
Sword and spear
Legion of battle
Mighty Armies.
Hordes of the Things
Fantasy Warlord.
Warhammer 1st-8th

Lots of good suggestions here I'd add Mordhiem for cool skirmish games.

I'll second this. I'm looking at Warrior Heroes-Warbands.

migooo wrote:

 Haight wrote:
Not sure if this was seen yet, but if this is true THANK GOD.

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/07/new-age-of-sigmar-rulebook-prices.html


New Age of Sigmar "other book" replacing old WHFB BRB SKU.

EDIT: Okay the bols link wasn't, but someone got a screen cap of essentially the same thing.


For the love all that is holy, please be an expanded rule book. I'm a fan of the warscrolls (mostly, lulz stuff aside), some of the forces have an elegance and nuance to them that i was happily surprised with given the overall streamlined nature of the game. All that we need now is a real core ruleset rather than the hogslop the box set served up, and i think this could be a pretty good game.

Apparently it's just a fancy version of the book that comes in the AoS box sorry.

Citation needed.

I'm actually having a lot of fun with the Stormhost lore and color schemes. Been toying with them trying to decide how to paint my WD Eternal.

Think I've finally sealed my decision and wrote up some minor fiction and backstory.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/655370.page

Regardless of any individual standpoint on AoS, it cannot work as a replacement for WHFB. Lacking any kind of balancing means that there can never be a 'community' for it in the same way as any other game, because every group and every individual is likely to have their own interpretations of what is 'reasonable' and 'fair' to bring to a game. One of the few advantages GW games had left was ubiquity; take that away and you fracture the community into isolated splinter groups each playing a different game.

I'm genuinely amazed by the fact that people are willing to buy into an expensive system (either through the starter box or just future purchases) where they are required to essentially write their own rules to make it playable to any sensible degree, and that there are people championing an outright exclusion of a segment of the player base (existing or potential), because they apparently aren't having fun right. It doesn't make a whole lot of business sense to deliberately reject customers, either.

Even if we ignore the lack of balance mechanics, the rules themselves are poorly written, vague, and easily exploitable, with a lot of potential for 'modelling for advantage', or accusations of it - punishing creative conversions, rather than encouraging them. The models, while executed well in a technical sense, are both laden down with excessive detail that detracts from the overall aesthetic and somewhat soulless. The cynical inclusion of 'fantasy Space Marines' (which they are in all but name) does not show a lot of effort.

So who is this 'game' (if one can even call it that) supposed to be for, and how is it supposed to recruit more players than WHFB did? It's not for children, because children will fight over the inherent imbalances and be unlikely to invest much in it. It's not for new potential wargamers, who will baulk at GW's prices, the lack of any structure and the poor quality of the rules, in the face of the multitudinous options available for a wargame to invest time and money in. It's not for WHFB veterans, since the rich lore they loved has been replaced with childish drivel and their old armies and game tarnished with mocking, contemptuous "comedy" rules.

AoS just follows the GW trend of the last few years of low effort products intended to maximise short-term profit. The fact that the rules are free, or that they are somehow 'more narrative' is not out of any goodwill, but a lack of effort and interest in actually making a game by the company.

 agnosto wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:


On the other hand, WFB was very static, and if you looked at the path of each unit in a game, they really didn't go that far. The movent in AoS is a lot greater, part from higher movement stats and the changes to charging. Part do to the increases to movement for some banners, special rules, and not paying for change in facing and the easy of skirmishers to move through tight areas. More movemnt is opening up more tactics.

Add to this that with a skirmish system, you can use a lot more scenery, and the scenery adds challenges and opens up tactics by how it changes the board and LOS.

I've been surprised so far by how good the games in AoS have been. But them I think back to Mordheim, and I remember that game could also have a great deal of tactics.

All of this could have been accomplished without "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" the same mechanics that you just listed could have been inserted into the old rules and still retained some tactical depth. In example, free wheels for units with musicians, +d3 charge for units with banners...etc. Alternatively, they could have ported over some of the tactical depth that existed in WHFB into AoS. I think it's fine, it just feels unfinished ruleswise because there is absolutely no depth other than special abilities on warscrolls and then those are just cute gimmicks.

Now there's no need for someone to be concerned about my mournfang cavalry lurking behind my gutwall for the flank charge if they make a bad move and decide to charge in with too weak of a unit or before setting up a counter-charge. Now it's just rugby, run to the middle and pile-in; or at least it feels that way.

I don't know your experiences, I'll assume you have a great depth of knowledge from being in the business so long, but you could actually apply real world tactics in WHFB, based upon ancient generals (at least I did). Sure, 12 year-olds just push models forward and go "boom, boom" and that may be the bulk of your customers but I started out in miniature wargaming with historicals, have a degree in history and approach my games from a different perspective. I liked WHFB because Romans couldn't throw magic around or send a Giant crashing through someone's lines and yet still maintain some semblance of tactics; now I'll have to look elsewhere I suppose. I guess what I need is an alternate history ruleset not based in WW2 but Ancient eras and not 15mm (because I don't paint all that well on large models, I'd hate to see the gack I produce with tiny ones).

Dont really disagree with your assessment of WFB, and it did have some real world tactics. I've been on the wrong side of those in 800 man battles at Pennsic wars. Getting flanked by a unit when you engage from the front is horrific, even in SCA combat. It's amazingly easy to kill people who have shields and eyes in the wrong direction. When our unit flanked we could generally kill a man every two seconds. 10 people into the flank of 50 made for a huge force multiplier. Even when a couple of people saw you coming, the whole unit didn't. No gods eye view like in wargames.

I understand the arguements about "They didn't need to kill WFB". I wholeheartedly agree. And my anger is most likely larger and more longlasting than most people. I hold grudges forever, and have a long list with GW. I deal with them continuously so they buildup quicker. That said, nothing I do can bring back WFB right now. It's gone. If it ever gets resurrected, i'll support it. 99% of my collection is staying on square bases.

I'm going to play Kings of War, Age of Sigmar and whatever else comes along. And if I have fun with them, or see tactics, or depth to either game, that's what I'll talk about. I'm over the hideous murder of WFB.....(for now. Revenge is always an option for later. ) I just don't feel like comparing WFB to AOS like its a contest where if we can make AOS suck, we get back WFB and the Old World.

migooo wrote:

Spoiler:

 Harry wrote:

 TrapdoorResident wrote:
There are a lot of options, whether you like them or not is a different matter.

If you can't find SOMETHING in this lot that rings your bell you need shootin'.

Some of these you can use any armies and some even have systems for working out their points!
and many of these sets can be dropped right into the Olde World as a setting if its the back ground you are missing.

Armies of Arcana
Fantacide (Written by Rick P)
Mayhem
Bear yourselves valiantly
Sword and spear
Legion of battle
Mighty Armies.
Hordes of the Things
Fantasy Warlord.
Warhammer 1st-8th

Lots of good suggestions here I'd add Mordhiem for cool skirmish games.

Lol he didn't ask for a skirmish game There is a load of skirmish games out there!

 agnosto wrote:
I guess what I need is an alternate history ruleset not based in WW2 but Ancient eras and not 15mm (because I don't paint all that well on large models, I'd hate to see the gack I produce with tiny ones).

FWIW, I actually find 15mm models easier to paint than 28mm. 15mm is my sweet spot, there's a lot of tricks you can get away with to make painting easier that don't work on larger models because it'd look too messy, but the models are still large enough to make out the smaller features of a mansized model (unlike 10mm and 6mm where models start to not look human any more). The only thing I prefer about 28mm models is you can't really convert 15mm models very easily, but that's not a problem if you just want to fill out ranks of tons of troops.

If GW dropped 28mm WHFB in favour of AoS AND reintroduced regular WHFB in 15mm scale, I'd be as happy as a pig in poo.

 Sarouan wrote:
To be honest, the fact rules are free and can be downloaded from the webstore without needing to register an account is certainly not a stranger to why AoS bring back some old WFB players. That's a nice move from GW, I must say.

And yes, if it is just to play your old figurines on the table, that's enough. I can understand people saying the game is fun.

However, publicity of AoS isn't particularly great. They waited too long before making the announcement. And of course, old players used to the 8th edition of WFB and having bought the End Times series have all the rights to feel betrayed. They actually bought rules that are completely useless a few months later. And GW didn't say it clearly at that time.

 mikhaila wrote:

Not willing to say GW did something right just yet.....we'll see how the launch of the starter box goes and where we are at in a month. I made 4 army lists for AoS. Like the players coming into my shop I've got an itch to play with my armies and now have people to play with while at work

Got bored last night, started working on algorithms and classifications for a points system......

Thanks for you feedback, Mikhaila. You put a lot of work in those rules, but don't you think you're actually patching rules instead of the Studio? Isn't that the trouble with GW; getting away with "lazy rule writing" and always throwing back the ball to the players, so that their customers can do the work they should have done in the first place?

Here, the rules are indeed "free", but...would it have been the same if it was a rulebook you have to buy?

No disagreement. This shouldn't be my job. But to play the game, run leagues, run tournaments, grow the community in my store, the job has to be done. So I'm doing the job.

Being in business for yourself has this type of situation all the time. Stores, especially game stores, don't always go right. It's unfair GW didn't do rules. It's also unfair a storm knocked out power for 2 days last week. I lost a lot of money, and then customers bitched at me that I wasn't open and wouldn't answer the phone. There are times i've worked 100 hours a week, and then don't take home a paycheck that month because i need it for the business. My family is very frugal at times Not the first game I've had to fix. Or the first time i've written scenarios or events for GW. either.

 MalusCalibur wrote:
Regardless of any individual standpoint on AoS, it cannot work as a replacement for WHFB. Lacking any kind of balancing means that there can never be a 'community' for it in the same way as any other game, because every group and every individual is likely to have their own interpretations of what is 'reasonable' and 'fair' to bring to a game. One of the few advantages GW games had left was ubiquity; take that away and you fracture the community into isolated splinter groups each playing a different game.

I'm genuinely amazed by the fact that people are willing to buy into an expensive system (either through the starter box or just future purchases) where they are required to essentially write their own rules to make it playable to any sensible degree, and that there are people championing an outright exclusion of a segment of the player base (existing or potential), because they apparently aren't having fun right. It doesn't make a whole lot of business sense to deliberately reject customers, either.

Even if we ignore the lack of balance mechanics, the rules themselves are poorly written, vague, and easily exploitable, with a lot of potential for 'modelling for advantage', or accusations of it - punishing creative conversions, rather than encouraging them. The models, while executed well in a technical sense, are both laden down with excessive detail that detracts from the overall aesthetic and somewhat soulless. The cynical inclusion of 'fantasy Space Marines' (which they are in all but name) does not show a lot of effort.

So who is this 'game' (if one can even call it that) supposed to be for, and how is it supposed to recruit more players than WHFB did? It's not for children, because children will fight over the inherent imbalances and be unlikely to invest much in it. It's not for new potential wargamers, who will baulk at GW's prices, the lack of any structure and the poor quality of the rules, in the face of the multitudinous options available for a wargame to invest time and money in. It's not for WHFB veterans, since the rich lore they loved has been replaced with childish drivel and their old armies and game tarnished with mocking, contemptuous "comedy" rules.

AoS just follows the GW trend of the last few years of low effort products intended to maximise short-term profit. The fact that the rules are free, or that they are somehow 'more narrative' is not out of any goodwill, but a lack of effort and interest in actually making a game by the company.

You may dislike it, but the level to which you feel you need to repeat yourself about it "not being a game" or being "childish drivel" just destroys your own argument. You can have a scholarly discussion without resorting to immature hyperbole.

Whether you want it to exist or not doesn't make it not a game. The rules are there, they're solid, they're playable, and the lore is enjoyable for some of us. Many of us have played games by "winging it" on points and what you table in the past across a dozen different systems, hell the number of times I've had to tell someone just to "play what you have". I've told players to slam their armies together and do 2v1's without counting points and had a blast doing it. Whether you want there to not be a community is irrelevant, there are rules, there is a game, and even without a current point/balance system it is playable and on that fact alone people will play it.

The rules for the old armies are imbalanced and the silliness is absurd (albeit, Warhammer Fantasy always had a dose of that, so I'm not too shocked, I think people just prefer to forget it was ever a humorous game, same with 40k) but as a core system starting with this starter set going forward I definitely see potential for a very solid and interesting game to come into being (thankfully without more joke rules going forward.). I give Games Workshop credit here, we've been bitching for years the story had stagnated (oh no, another Everchosen..) and that the gameplay was being run in the ground without proper fixes, and they finally decided to DO something with it, and even if it fails, I'll give them kudos for at least trying.

Aesthetic is entirely opinion, the aesthetic is no worse to me than the old one (given the Eternals are just Knights of the Blazing Sun-level detail on models that could be made with better technology now, and artwork of the Old World had shown intricacies far worse than this.) If Games Workshop had the ability to make models of this quality ten years ago they would've done it in the same methodology/style, the "squat" style models are just a relic of a bygone age when models couldn't have hanging limbs/scale properly.

I think AOS shows promise, I look forward to getting my starter kit assembled, painted, and playing the hell out of it with my friends and having fun with it. The amount of models you get for the cost is great, and the support they're showing for it from the get-go makes me excited to be a part of a new age of Warhammer and see where it goes (and if it succeeds or fails.)

overtyrant wrote:
Lol he didn't ask for a skirmish game There is a load of skirmish games out there!

That's part of my gripe with AoS. There's already lots of skirmish games out there if I wanted to play a skirmish game, we didn't need another one. The reason I stuck with WHFB for so long is that it was a popular regimental based game (at least until 8th).

 mikhaila wrote:


Dont really disagree with your assessment of WFB, and it did have some real world tactics. I've been on the wrong side of those in 800 man battles at Pennsic wars. Getting flanked by a unit when you engage from the front is horrific, even in SCA combat. It's amazingly easy to kill people who have shields and eyes in the wrong direction. When our unit flanked we could generally kill a man every two seconds. 10 people into the flank of 50 made for a huge force multiplier. Even when a couple of people saw you coming, the whole unit didn't. No gods eye view like in wargames.

I understand the arguements about "They didn't need to kill WFB". I wholeheartedly agree. And my anger is most likely larger and more longlasting than most people. I hold grudges forever, and have a long list with GW. I deal with them continuously so they buildup quicker. That said, nothing I do can bring back WFB right now. It's gone. If it ever gets resurrected, i'll support it. 99% of my collection is staying on square bases.

I'm going to play Kings of War, Age of Sigmar and whatever else comes along. And if I have fun with them, or see tactics, or depth to either game, that's what I'll talk about. I'm over the hideous murder of WFB.....(for now. Revenge is always an option for later. ) I just don't feel like comparing WFB to AOS like its a contest where if we can make AOS suck, we get back WFB and the Old World.

All good points. Please don't get me wrong; what I'm talking about here is my personal enjoyment, to each their own and I can certainly see worth in AoS. I just scratch my head at some of what I perceive as gaps in the rules. I like the warscrolls and that some of the "depth" that is there is tied to units instead of shoehorning special rules into a brb. It's an almost wargame, almost board game and some people will have an itch scratched but it leaves me cold because it's missing what I expect to be there in a wargame and replaces it with board game silliness and over-simplifications.

I want anyone who enjoys the game to enjoy it, I'm not trying to convince anyone that it's terrible, I'm just saying my piece as I grieve.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

overtyrant wrote:

migooo wrote:
Lol he didn't ask for a skirmish game There is a load of skirmish games out there!

That's part of my gripe with AoS. There's already lots of skirmish games if I wanted to play a skirmish game. The reason I stuck with WHFB for so long is that it was a popular regimental based game (at least until 8th).

Look at it this way instead.

Age of Sigmar isn't replacing Warhammer, even if AOS hadn't existed Warhammer would've been cancelled. Age of Sigmar is a new game in the same universe.

I feel like that's the major issue people are seeing, like Warhammer Fantasy 9th was the other alternative to AOS. Instead of them just deciding that supporting Fantasy's model line wasn't as profitable as they needed it to be so they cancelled it and with that room in their line now wanting to create a smaller entry-level game into tabletop games and the Warhammer Universe.

There obviously was solid business reasons they went about this. I love the people who seem to think Games Workshop Executives just sit in a board room tapping their fingers together plotting how to screw over their playerbase again.

 Shadowclaimer wrote:
Age of Sigmar isn't replacing Warhammer, even if AOS hadn't existed Warhammer would've been cancelled. Age of Sigmar is a new game in the same universe.

While you make a fair point, I think for most people that issue is invisible. This has a lot to do with how GW has released AoS (starting with End Times). They keep insisting AoS is not WHFB 9th but it will be a long time before that feels like a meaningful statement.

 Shadowclaimer wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

overtyrant wrote:

migooo wrote:
Lol he didn't ask for a skirmish game There is a load of skirmish games out there!

That's part of my gripe with AoS. There's already lots of skirmish games if I wanted to play a skirmish game. The reason I stuck with WHFB for so long is that it was a popular regimental based game (at least until 8th).

Look at it this way instead.

Age of Sigmar isn't replacing Warhammer, even if AOS hadn't existed Warhammer would've been cancelled. Age of Sigmar is a new game in the same universe.

I feel like that's the major issue people are seeing, like Warhammer Fantasy 9th was the other alternative to AOS. Instead of them just deciding that supporting Fantasy's model line wasn't as profitable as they needed it to be so they cancelled it and with that room in their line now wanting to create a smaller entry-level game into tabletop games and the Warhammer Universe.

It's now the Hands-off-our-IP-verse lol.