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.
2015/07/10 16:00:17
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
It would probably help with the noise if the incoming news weren't bad one after another. People calling out the bashing brigade conviniently ignore the fact that few pages ago we had news of possibly scrapping or toning down slaanesh, before there was a statue confirming their desperate dedication to all this, before there were models and art and there's still no balancing mechanics anywhere to be seen. It's like the people disapointed with all this were forbiden to comment on a constantly developing situation.
Couldn't have put it much better. If people keep expressing their disappointment, it's because GW keeps up the stream of stuff to be disappointed by. Some people think AoS is the best thing since sliced bread; some think it's one more nail in GW's coffin. Are we only allowed to discuss the news about it, in the news discussion thread, with the former viewpoint?
There's talk here about being thankful for the ignore button. I think that's pretty much par for the course. Can't say anything bad about GW. Can't point out AoS's problems. Can't point out alternatives for other disappointed people. Can't prompt an actual discussion. Be quiet. Be ignored.
In any case I'll be interested to see the next couple of half year reports, to see what effect those 10 people who didn't buy AoS had.
Not to mention rooting for it to fail is imo a valid stance just as any other and since when is it obligatory for an independent forum to come to positive conclusion about a product. Maybe the healtiest outcome is actualy a collective spiteful bashing and a sticky with 99 resons not to buy Ark of Simplicity.
Fun fact is that I'm not entirely there atm. I do root for it to fail in it's current form but there was a rumor at some point that the rules are going to let you choose between skirmish and ranked formation with adequate bonuses and drawbacks. If that was actualy a part of an advanced rules supplement and implememted properly, there was a balancing mechanism and they used the warsrolls potential to be a living faq then they could still win me over. Not as in rebase everything and buy sigmarines but like play a game once in a while, buy a good model here or there and not become a spiteful GW hater.
As for ignore button, I think ignoring a lot of things is the only way to enjoy GW especialy their new project so the button itch is kind of natural heh.
It would probably help with the noise if the incoming news weren't bad one after another. People calling out the bashing brigade conviniently ignore the fact that few pages ago we had news of possibly scrapping or toning down slaanesh, before there was a statue confirming their desperate dedication to all this, before there were models and art and there's still no balancing mechanics anywhere to be seen. It's like the people disapointed with all this were forbiden to comment on a constantly developing situation.
Couldn't have put it much better. If people keep expressing their disappointment, it's because GW keeps up the stream of stuff to be disappointed by. Some people think AoS is the best thing since sliced bread; some think it's one more nail in GW's coffin. Are we only allowed to discuss the news about it, in the news discussion thread, with the former viewpoint?
There's talk here about being thankful for the ignore button. I think that's pretty much par for the course. Can't say anything bad about GW. Can't point out AoS's problems. Can't point out alternatives for other disappointed people. Can't prompt an actual discussion. Be quiet. Be ignored.
In any case I'll be interested to see the next couple of half year reports, to see what effect those 10 people who didn't buy AoS had.
None of those things are actually negatives unless you've already got your knickers in a twist. Toned down Slaanesh? Have they gone back through all the existing books adding black bars? No. Frankly nobody knows what's going on with Slaanesh, people are just leaping to negative conclusions. Statue "confirming their desperate dedication"? a) Why is them throwing some marketing effort behind something bad all of a sudden just because it's marketing a game without FOC and points b) who in their right mind gives a gak about a statue
So basically from where I'm standing it's negative bandwagoning where any tiny little thing is leapt on and blown up into some huge deal, and you sound like idiots.
Given how even the most negative rumors didnt reveal the truth about rules, it is safe to assume that anything can happen including the worst crap.
The statue showed quite clearly that this is indeed a main product not something that is going to coexist with for example 9th edition further down the line. It was negative news even if you dont take into acount how embarassing it is.
Putting iconic things on staues is one thing. Putting random crap on statues with a hope that it will make them apear iconic before you even know the reception is another lol.
Btw you state how none of those things are actualy negatives then ignore lack of balance mechanism also art and models which can be negative for sure for some and then state that it's all blown out and makes one sound like an idiot. Insulting baseless and selective, Age of Sycophants defender in a nutshell.
At least stop the "Age of gak/LolzGW" stuff because it makes you sound like a five-year old.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:01:57
2015/07/10 16:02:21
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
pretre wrote:From someone who visited a local store:
So I spent a while at the GW Portland store yesterday. And I learned some interesting things:
1. This week was the largest grossing week in GW North American history.
Standard store disclaimer.
Blimey.
If true, blip on the radar, or successful GW turnaround?
Xyxox wrote:
I think it's fine to say it does not work because it does not work as written. The only way to make it work is to house rule it. I fully expect the future scenarios and future released models to work fine without house rules, though.
Yarp. This is the narrative/competitive balance excuse all over again. "It works great! As long as you ignore the RAW and place highly personal, arbitrary limits on yourself..."
I'd be surprised by it, personally. I mean, the only sales made this week will be preorders of AoS and White Dwarves, right? I'd imagine that the money won't start rolling in until they actually release the damn thing!
2015/07/10 16:09:25
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
angelofvengeance wrote: Starts at about 8mins in after he's finished ranting! I think I speak for pretty much everyone here- what a f-ing moron.
What a pillock, that witch elf unit cost a lot on its own.
And he couldn't even get the focus right on that video
Pretty lame stuff there, and he's really gonna be pissed at himself if a month down the line if he decides he likes the new version. He isn't exactly exactly the sharpest marble in the bag.
Going on a massive swearathon just proves that he can't argue coherently.
I didn't even bother watching the thing except for a minute or two where the moron started to torch his army. From what you say, I didn't miss anything.
Am I the only one to think the guys that made this video are probably TFG, and wouldn't have been any fun to have a game with?
I'm annoyed with AOS, but I've seen some of the dwarf (Duradin??) stuff that almost makes me want to forgive GW for this. And it's pretty flipping cool ( it's partially inspired by certain parts of the previous dwarfs ). I'm not sure why I was shown as my relationship with GW insider's is odd. Maybe because I constantly ask about Squats or SoB.
And no you didn't miss anything, I just wish I could have the time back.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:12:22
2015/07/10 16:10:14
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
My Pre-order should be in today, I know nothing of Warhammer fluff as I only started playing when 8th edition came out and honestly dont care. I've played every expansion of WoW and couldnt really tell you anything about it.. so im that kind of player lol.
Im not to keen on the split weapon attacks of a unit, I liked just knowing the whole unit hit on 5's, I suppose I could just roll separate colored dice.
Im excited because I buy single boxes that look cool to paint, so I went from having 1 army in 8th to 7 perfect size army's for AoS, So to me it seems GW did one thing right.
I dont agree that people have to fix the rules, that was kinda GW's job, but it is what it is. The joke rules suck but honestly who was going to actually inforce that.
All in all I think this will turn out ok in the end. Just sucks we have to wait for that end to happen.
2015/07/10 16:15:57
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Motograter wrote: Anyone seen the video where the guy sets fire to his fantasy army because he doesn't like age of sigmar? Rather sad and pathetic
Why's that "sad and pathetic"? It's his property which he can do what he wants with as long as he doesn't break any laws in doing so. We might collectively think some of your personal choices are "sad and pathetic" care to list them all out for review?
Personally, I'm holding onto several thousand dollars in Ogre Kingdom and Vampire Count miniatures to see what happens but will in all likelihood throw them in the trash if what I think will happen actually does; slowly phasing out the old armies as they sell stock. I might buy the new models that replace them if I like the way they look but I feel no need to hang onto outdated models simply because someone on the internet thinks that I should.
It's incredibly sad and pathetic. An empty gesture that only wastes his own time and money, and demonstrates that he woul rather throw a public tantrum than have fun gaming by continuing to play with WHFB, trying AoS or using an alternative system. Or, you know, selling/giving away models for a more mentally stable gamer to enjoy.
You throwing your armies in the garbage is slightly less pathetic, assuming you don't film it, but would still be pretty childish. There are hundreds if not thousands of people that are capable of enjoyin those models but you woul rather see them in a landfill because you don't feel you can use them the way you used to.
To be fair, its not s responsibility to be Warhammer Welfare. If he wants to throw them away, so be it.
So be it indeed. It's not his responsibility to act like an adult, he can be as selfish a waste of space in this community as he likes while throwing piles of shoes out his window.
2015/07/10 16:17:17
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
2015/07/10 16:18:55
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
As much as I love to rip on GW (because it's easy) I'm still looking forward to starting my Sigmarine army this weekend.
It'll be a fun game to play with my nephews and I know in a short while the community at large will settle on some mostly balanced tourney rules for pickup games too, so I'm not worried a'tall.
2015/07/10 16:21:30
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
AoS is after a couple of games I've played and theorecrafting:
80% pretty good rules: Synergie, monsters losing strength with wounds lost, quite fluent, lots of options
20% worst rules ever: sudden death, no army construction rules, stupid special rules
Unfortunately, the 20% rules make the game bad.. like really bad. IF you can ignore the 20% AND come up with a way to create balanced armies (which I doubt), it is okay.
But out of the box (without using the boxed minis) it does not work.
2015/07/10 16:23:16
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
What are the stupid special rules? Sudden death is easy to ignore and people are already coming up with tons of different ways to balance, so if those are your biggest complaints, especially seeing as you've been very negative previously, I'm very hopeful.
2015/07/10 16:27:59
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Seriously though, where are these pics of other races/factions for AoS? People have said they've seen Dwarfs (whatever they're called now) and "Aeth" (Elf?) stuff? Would love to see other races' stuff!
-C6
2015/07/10 16:29:06
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
heartserenade wrote: By saying "you can make it work" is acknowledging it does not work as it is presented.
Wrong.
Play it by the rules. Works just fine.
That just happens to be what everyone doesn't want to do.
They want point values and forced balanced, not a suggestive one.
2015/07/10 16:30:14
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Mymearan wrote: What are the stupid special rules? Sudden death is easy to ignore and people are already coming up with tons of different ways to balance, so if those are your biggest complaints, especially seeing as you've been very negative previously, I'm very hopeful.
"It works great! As long as you ignore the RAW and place highly personal, arbitrary limits on yourself..."
Sorry, just can't agree. It didn't help WFB, can't imagine how it'd convince anyone put off by AoS' free-for-all and basic rules. You could end up changing it so much you might as well play something else.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:31:04
RoninXiC wrote: AoS is after a couple of games I've played and theorecrafting:
80% pretty good rules: Synergie, monsters losing strength with wounds lost, quite fluent, lots of options
20% worst rules ever: sudden death, no army construction rules, stupid special rules
Unfortunately, the 20% rules make the game bad.. like really bad. IF you can ignore the 20% AND come up with a way to create balanced armies (which I doubt), it is okay.
But out of the box (without using the boxed minis) it does not work.
Actually, those 20% of rules are really easy to take out - you can just houserule out the "comedy" rules, and getting rid of sudden death is a no-brainer when you find a good army composition rule. And there are some really good ones out there! I'm a fan of Puscifers system for generating points values: (Wounds + Attacks) x Bravery = Points Value. Really simple, and with some small tweaks to the formula, you can use it to get good points values for swarms, magic users, and Undead.
So there 'ya go! Just solved those niggling 20% terrible rules!
heartserenade wrote: By saying "you can make it work" is acknowledging it does not work as it is presented.
Wrong.
Play it by the rules. Works just fine.
That just happens to be what everyone doesn't want to do.
They want point values and forced balanced, not a suggestive one.
So do you play AoS without houserules whatsoever?
Also, nowhere did I mention that AoS doesn't work RAW. But by saying that "you can make it work", implies that it doesn't work RAW. There's a difference.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:35:26
2015/07/10 16:36:03
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Necros wrote: Does anyone play anything without house rules?
Yeah, if you don't play just GW games.
Never houseruled in Warmachine, Infinity or KoW. Never houseruled in MtG. The only time I remember houseruling while not playing a GW game is... I think playing D&D.
I don't know if I'm crazy but houseruling should be optional, not mandatory.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:38:45
2015/07/10 16:42:17
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Necros wrote: Does anyone play anything without house rules?
Yes.
Infinity, Black Powder, Deadzone.
Edit to expand, that means all the wargames I play regularly that are not made by GW. I could add in malifaux, warmahordes and bolt action as games also needing no modification, but I rarely play them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:44:26
2015/07/10 16:42:53
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Necros wrote: Does anyone play anything without house rules?
Yeah, if you don't play just GW games.
Never houseruled in Warmachine, Infinity or KoW. Never houseruled in MtG. The only time I remember houseruling while not playing a GW game is... I think playing D&D.
I don't know if I'm crazy but houseruling should be optional, not mandatory.
The thing about D&D and other RPGs is, you are encouraged to house rule by design. Wargames are supposed to work with RAW.
2015/07/10 16:43:21
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Necros wrote: Does anyone play anything without house rules?
Yeah, if you don't play just GW games.
Never houseruled in Warmachine, Infinity or KoW. Never houseruled in MtG. The only time I remember houseruling while not playing a GW game is... I think playing D&D.
I don't know if I'm crazy but houseruling should be optional, not mandatory.
The thing about D&D and other RPGs is, you are encouraged to house rule by design. Wargames are supposed to work with RAW.
Precisely. And even without house ruling, D&D works straight from the book even if you follow RAW.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:46:41
2015/07/10 16:49:25
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Highly debatable. As I'm sure are claims that any games not geared toward tournament play do or do not "need" houseruling.
Of all the games listed, I house rule every one that I play. MTG (no declining mulligans), Deadzone (preset terrain, changes in campaign rules), 5th edition 40k (hooboy), D&D (Tons).
Heck, there are few games of any type that I don't house rule to make it easier to play.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:52:25
Looking for great deals on miniatures or have a large pile you are looking to sell off? Checkout Mindtaker Miniatures.
Live in the Pacific NW? Check out http://ordofanaticus.com
2015/07/10 16:58:44
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
pretre wrote: From someone who visited a local store:
So I spent a while at the GW Portland store yesterday. And I learned some interesting things:
1. This week was the largest grossing week in GW North American history.
2. The rumors about fantasy only being 15% of GW sales was true, but that was AFTER end times, and end times doubled fantasy sales. So prior to end times, fantasy was pulling in only 7-8% of revenue.
3. The store has played about 60 games of Age of Sigmar so far, and all but two players loved it and wanted to buy it.
4. All the new models are upping the scale to a more 32mm format.
5. New orcs sound very World of Warcraft in aesthetic. Lots of animal pelts and bone helmets, very beastial - since they now come from the realm of beasts.
6. GW has told store staff that there will be new model releases for AoS every week as far into the future as they currently project. They are committed to at least one new blister a week forever.
Standard store disclaimer.
Sorry but I call BS in terms of the volume of sales.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/10 16:59:36
2015/07/10 17:00:07
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
For me, I've always wanted to change the rules and make em more fun, for pretty much every game. Even monopoly where you get tons of cash for landing on Free Parking I can see that being an issue for tournaments where everyone has to be on the same page though. I've just always been more of a laid back mountain dew & pretzels basement gamer type.
2015/07/10 17:02:17
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
Hey everyone!
The supplement with the missions and errata will follow, but I wanted to post the Comp Rules we'll be using for this Sunday's Age of Sigmar Tournament. The event will use the below comp system, at the 50 Wound mark.
Army Composition
Games are recommended to be played at 50 or greater points.
For every 25 counted wounds you may take:
- 4 Warscrolls
- 8 Wounds of models with the Hero keyword (only 60% can be spent on a single model, rounding up)
- 6 Wounds of models with the Monster keyword
- 6 Wounds of models with the Warmachine keyword (note that crew Wounds are stilled paid for, but they themselves do not typically have the Warmachine keyword)
- All models with 10 or more wounds must be from the same Compendium
Regardless of Wound Totals
- All named Heroes are 0-1 choices and may not be taken multiple times.
- All unnamed Heroes are 0-2 choices and may not be taken more than twice.
- Models with both the Hero and Monster keyword count against both allowances (and may therefore by limited in some games if only allowed by one of the two categories).
- When a model receives a Wound through an upgrade (for example Blight King Champion upgrade), the bonus is not counted towards your army’s total wounds.
- When a unit exceeds 10 models, receive 2 models for each one purchased with wounds.
i.e. a unit that begins at Five, 1-wound models, would cost 10 wounds total for a unit of 10, but only 15 wounds for a unit of 20 or 20 wounds for a unit of 30.
So even GW stores are admitting that the game doesn't work as written. It's almost as if playing a game in an organized fashion requires some sort of balancing mechanism...
"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake." -Napoleon
Malifaux: Lady Justice
Infinity: &
2015/07/10 17:11:34
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
So I spent a while at the GW Portland store yesterday. And I learned some interesting things:
1. This week was the largest grossing week in GW North American history.
2. The rumors about fantasy only being 15% of GW sales was true, but that was AFTER end times, and end times doubled fantasy sales. So prior to end times, fantasy was pulling in only 7-8% of revenue.
3. The store has played about 60 games of Age of Sigmar so far, and all but two players loved it and wanted to buy it.
4. All the new models are upping the scale to a more 32mm format.
5. New orcs sound very World of Warcraft in aesthetic. Lots of animal pelts and bone helmets, very beastial - since they now come from the realm of beasts.
6. GW has told store staff that there will be new model releases for AoS every week as far into the future as they currently project. They are committed to at least one new blister a week forever.
Standard store disclaimer.
Sorry but I call BS in terms of the volume of sales.
Yeah, I am incredibly skeptical of that claim. It feels like they're (this store) are lying to drum up excitement.
"Come on man, everybody's doing it! AOS4life!"
I've been coming around to this game a bit. What really doesn't sit well with me, beyond the inability to have uniform experiences (ie balance) is the upscaling of the range. Why is that necessary? I feel like this is going to piss off a lot of people who start a WHFB army in the meantime, as they may soon find everything looking out-of-whack. It also really hampers the bits swapping between WH and 40k, which I felt was a great part of the converting process. Although it seems like converting is something GW may not be as into these days.
2015/07/10 17:13:10
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan
People thinking that every wargame needs houseruling are probably 99% GW players.
Like others have already said, a PROPER (not even a good) ruleset can and should be played with the given rules. FAQ and erratas are a given. That's not the problem or the point. Mistakes happen, even to the best.
But GW quite honestly does not give a crap. It is lazy.
I can see that being an issue for tournaments where everyone has to be on the same page though. I've just always been more of a laid back mountain dew & pretzels basement gamer type.
& 