Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 00:15:22
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
You can always ignore bad rules yes. But you can also ignore any rules so having complete rules is better for this reason.
how do you ignore rules, if a corrion based undead army wins every game by sudden death? You would either have to remove a unit or house rule the whole sudden death part of the rules.
They fear that someone will get an unfair advantage over them because no rule says they can't.
And you want to tell me they won't? That suddenly people will be runing a normal weak elf lord on a stead instead of a tyrion with a bucket of special rules? In what world does that happen and in which game. Table top games are not RPG. They are played against other people. Two or more people play against each other. Trying to make play it like an RPG won't work, because either someone has to force others to play the game in a certain way, and this means forcing others to spend their money in a way they may not want to, or someone will always have an edge over others.
Shoving them aside, the newbies greedily feast on the bright colourful goodies
Congratulation to you. In my area all it did was to kill WFB, as no new player is going to start a free for all skirmish system without structure. When there are more then 3, in my area, skirmish games that have structure and are crazy free for all rules wise.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 00:18:15
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Heroic Senior Officer
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote:Are you saying most games need to spell out that you can't hurt someone by shooting his lance, or are saying that good games let you hurt someone by shooting him in the lance? Im saying good games dont say that shooting someones lance or charging someones lance is allowed. Most have guidelines on what should be measured (usually from the base) or what can be used if true line of site is used. Most of us who have played for many years have experience and know that the AOS rules for models and measurements are terrible so we change it. However not all players have experience. A simple blurb saying measure from the base of the model, and line of site from the main body of the model etc would mean that everyone, new or old would not have to suffer through that kind of stupidity. So yes, a good ruleset assumes everyone is dumb (because when it comes to learning new things, we are all dumb at one point) and explains these things. A bad rulset assumes the reader knows what they mean when they say silly things like all measurements are done from the model. Maklmumba I agree about how stupid it is.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/21 00:19:17
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 00:31:15
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I can deal with stupid. Technicly anything can be baned or removed. ETC rule packs, cut slots did that for WFB atleast here. But AoS was suppose to be a new thing and bring new players. How are there suppose to be new players now? They can pick between warmahordes and other skirmish systems. Which are either cheaper or have better rules, or both at the same time. The fluff argument is gone, because the interesting old world is no more. To start aos and have fun they would either have to be super lucky while picking armies, or not be actualy new players, but sesoned veterans of other systems that think about the game the same way.
If one dude buys a box of dwarfs, a warmachine and a leader and the other goes for teclics , tyrion and some phoenix guard. They will soon find out how fun the game is.
IMO the game right now is playable only if one uses scenarios and premade lists. And both players do stupid stuff, no eternals runing away with their flying guys to get sudden death win etc. But then the replayability drops a lot. How many times can one play the same scenarios with the same models with same terrain ? two, maybe three times. And what to do if two players decide to play chaos or eternal, and need an opponent?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 06:45:07
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Tough Tyrant Guard
|
I'm not convinced Warmachine "has better rules." Warmachine's rules are super bloated to the point that experienced players regularly fail to remember them accurately. Conciseness is a virtue, especially in a ruleset designed to be run by human beings.
I'm not even convinced measuring from the model is bad. In Warmachine you measure from the base and it leads to stupid situations where two warbeasts are fighting and they're facing backwards because they overhang the base and *can't* be placed in melee range facing each other. I just don't think you're meant to be super hung up on the accuracy of the measurement in AoS.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 07:44:29
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Storm Trooper with Maglight
Breslau
|
HiveFleetPlastic wrote:I'm not convinced Warmachine "has better rules." Warmachine's rules are super bloated to the point that experienced players regularly fail to remember them accurately. Conciseness is a virtue, especially in a ruleset designed to be run by human beings. I'm not even convinced measuring from the model is bad. In Warmachine you measure from the base and it leads to stupid situations where two warbeasts are fighting and they're facing backwards because they overhang the base and *can't* be placed in melee range facing each other. I just don't think you're meant to be super hung up on the accuracy of the measurement in AoS. I disagree wholeheartedly with both points. First of all - WarmaHordes are one of the best, if not best written system. That game, just like Magic: The Gathering focuses on very precise, properly worded short rules and pictograms that each has a fixed, clear meaning. Warmachine doesn't leave any room for interpretation. There's no arguing if that's possible or not - it just works exactly how it's written. Sure, it might be a bit -too- competitive for some and the rules are sometimes more focused on balanced gameplay than casual fun (guns with 12" range and P+S lower than swords), but it's just the way it was planned by PP - they made a choice for it to be like that and they did it very well. As for measuring - you can't really use that as an argument - sure, it can be annoying, but it's just a matter of the models being produced, not the rules being flawed. Also saying that you aren't "meant to be super hung up on the accuracy of the measurement in AoS" is kinda silly, because that's the very point of true line of sight. The very idea of TLOS is for it to be less arbitrary and more precise/realistic. Edit: forgot to say - I don't really mind measuring from models, but it should be clarified, like in 40k, WZ:R and most likely Infinity (assuming because it's similar to WarZone), that measuring from models is limited to the torso, head and limbs, not weapons or other attachments (shooting a marine in the heraldry).Hell, it might even be nice as it's definetely more skirmishy than simple lines of sight.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/21 07:47:49
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 08:18:12
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Tough Tyrant Guard
|
Klerych wrote: HiveFleetPlastic wrote:I'm not convinced Warmachine "has better rules." Warmachine's rules are super bloated to the point that experienced players regularly fail to remember them accurately. Conciseness is a virtue, especially in a ruleset designed to be run by human beings.
I'm not even convinced measuring from the model is bad. In Warmachine you measure from the base and it leads to stupid situations where two warbeasts are fighting and they're facing backwards because they overhang the base and *can't* be placed in melee range facing each other. I just don't think you're meant to be super hung up on the accuracy of the measurement in AoS.
I disagree wholeheartedly with both points. First of all - WarmaHordes are one of the best, if not best written system. That game, just like Magic: The Gathering focuses on very precise, properly worded short rules and pictograms that each has a fixed, clear meaning. Warmachine doesn't leave any room for interpretation. There's no arguing if that's possible or not - it just works exactly how it's written.
The heart of my perspective here is that being unambiguously written doesn't make a ruleset good. What's good is subjective, and Warmachine's ruleset has negatives that Age of Sigmar's rules do not share - for example, Warmachine's rules are much longer and harder to remember than Age of Sigmar's rules. This is not an insignificant downside, at all - it's just one you have to accept if you want to play Warmachine.
In Warmachine's case in particular, it doesn't really help people a lot if the rules are unambiguous if they still don't understand them because they're so confusing. Like, one of the main reasons an unambiguous ruleset is good is it helps you play the game correctly. If the ruleset is confusing to people (because it's so big, or because different pieces of information that are related are separated) then much of that advantage is lost.
Klerych wrote:As for measuring - you can't really use that as an argument - sure, it can be annoying, but it's just a matter of the models being produced, not the rules being flawed. Also saying that you aren't "meant to be super hung up on the accuracy of the measurement in AoS" is kinda silly, because that's the very point of true line of sight. The very idea of TLOS is for it to be less arbitrary and more precise/realistic.
Edit: forgot to say - I don't really mind measuring from models, but it should be clarified, like in 40k, WZ:R and most likely Infinity (assuming because it's similar to WarZone), that measuring from models is limited to the torso, head and limbs, not weapons or other attachments (shooting a marine in the heraldry).Hell, it might even be nice as it's definetely more skirmishy than simple lines of sight.
The models are made that way for a reason, though, right? Sure, a Bronzeback could fit on the base if it was smaller, but then it wouldn't look as cool. If it could measure melee range from its tusks (and opponents could also measure it to its tusks) then it wouldn't have the issue. I don't think there's a problem with measuring from or to melee weapons in most cases, with some possible dubious exceptions (riflemen firing at raised lances over a wall being an example that someone brought up here somewhere). Like, imagine a pair of duelists standing with swords outstretched but not reaching each other - you'd have no trouble believing they were in combat, I think. Maybe it's just direct-fire ranged weapons that make it weird.
What I meant with the measurement accuracy was I've seen (maybe not here) people saying, well, measuring from the model is dumb because what if you hit the model with a measuring tool and damage it? But really, you can probably eyeball whatever the melee range is well enough for the purposes of the ruleset.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 08:30:28
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
I don't think there is much in it that is objectively bad. The thing that stands out for me is the Initiaiive roll. This can easily lead to one side getting two turns on the run, which can give a huge tactical advantage if it happens at the right time, probably the second or third turn.
I personally don't like the alternating unit placement, but it is an interesting mechanism that isn't bad in itself, and does give some opportunity for players to balance a game out of their collections.
The Sudden Death rule is fairly bad because it clearly is not well thought out.
The rest of it all works OK. I would prefer more sophistication in tactical factors, fewer special rules, a proper game balance system, and a more streamlined movement and combat system.
But overall it all works as a game.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 13:41:35
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel
|
HiveFleetPlastic wrote:for example, Warmachine's rules are much longer and harder to remember than Age of Sigmar's rules. This is not an insignificant downside, at all - it's just one you have to accept if you want to play Warmachine.
This is true but WM doesn't have especially complex rules. I don't like the game but I did go through a brief phase of warmachine a few years ago and I have no recollection of having to flip through rules books or being especially befuddled by rules. From what I recall the game itself seems intuitive and flows well, I just don't like it much.
|
My PLog
Curently: DZC
Set phasers to malkie! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 16:34:17
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
Posters here may not blink at a huge rulebook but we are hardly representative. I recently tried explaining one of the simplest rulesets I know (Lion Rampant) to someone who does not play many games and ... well, it was an uphill battle. Earlier ITT (or one of the many duplicate threads) someone mentioned how their non-gamer spouse looked at the AoS rules, noted it was not a 300+ page book, and therefore showed interest. Folks who know nothing about the competitiveness of WM/H are turned off simply because the core rules seem overwhelming to them. IME, telling someone "oh it's actually very simple" is not very convincing. I personally do not think WM/H is anything but a complex game, which is not an uncommon attitude even among miniatures gamers. But in any event, the point is not to veer off on a tangent about WM/H so much as to clarify that the pared-down nature of AoS is very much an advantage to certain customers.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 16:42:34
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Stabbin' Skarboy
|
Manchu wrote:Posters here may not blink at a huge rulebook but we are hardly representative. I recently tried explaining one of the simplest rulesets I know (Lion Rampant) to someone who does not play many games and ... well, it was an uphill battle. Earlier ITT (or one of the many duplicate threads) someone mentioned how their non-gamer spouse looked at the AoS rules, noted it was not a 300+ page book, and therefore showed interest. Folks who know nothing about the competitiveness of WM/H are turned off simply because the core rules seem overwhelming to them. IME, telling someone "oh it's actually very simple" is not very convincing. I personally do not think WM/H is anything but a complex game, which is not an uncommon attitude even among miniatures gamers. But in any event, the point is not to veer off on a tangent about WM/H so much as to clarify that the pared-down nature of AoS is very much an advantage to certain customers.
100% This.
Played almost as many games of AOS with the misses as we have 40k n WHFB in like 10 years lol
Also two of my not BG friends have shown interest when i showed them the booklet, that hasn't happened before, normally its just a joke about the rule book being a bit of a phat beast.
Its a shame they couldnt produce mixed rules format.
But you never know, could be a new coke deal...
|
3500pts 1500pts 2500pts 4500pts 3500pts 2000pts 2000pts plus several small AOS armies |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 17:24:46
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Ultramarine Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control
|
One thing I find odd in this whole discussion is how quickly people seem to have forgotten all the things they used to criticise GW for. I am hardly a white knight, indeed I quit GW a few years ago, talked all my gaming buddies into doing the same and only out of idle curiosity did I even take a look at AoS. However, consider the following list of complaints and how AoS has addressed them:
Too expensive : you now have free rules and unit stats and a lower model count.
Too complex : the rules are now only 4 pages plus warscrolls.
Poorly balanced : there are no points values to form the basis of an argument.
To an independent observer it would appear that GW has in fact been responsive to its customers demands. Whilst healthy cynicism assures me that this is all about the money Lebowski it is hard to deny that these three issues have indeed been addressed.
Could things have been done differently? Absolutely - but if so do we as a community genuinely believe that the result would have been no arguments? That everyone would have welcomed 9th edition as the answer to all our gaming prayers? Of course not! All that would have happened is more of the same that we have had for a decade or more - unit x is undercosted, unit y is broken, rule z makes no sense, more YMDC, more codex creep.
If nothing else this new version changes the conversation. For years GW has nailed its colours to the mast and said their games are built for scenarios and narrative gaming, not competitive rigour. Now the abolition of points has forced the issue.
The question now is how will the gaming community approach this new system. As an opportunity to do something different and fun? Or yet another attempt to force something to do a job it was never designed for? Me, I'm going to give it a try on it's own merits. If I want competitive I'll play Infinity or Kings of War; I've no desire to bang a square peg into a round hole...
|
While you sleep, they'll be waiting...
Have you thought about the Axis of Evil pension scheme? |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 17:26:14
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
Manchu wrote:Posters here may not blink at a huge rulebook but we are hardly representative. I recently tried explaining one of the simplest rulesets I know (Lion Rampant) to someone who does not play many games and ... well, it was an uphill battle. Earlier ITT (or one of the many duplicate threads) someone mentioned how their non-gamer spouse looked at the AoS rules, noted it was not a 300+ page book, and therefore showed interest. Folks who know nothing about the competitiveness of WM/H are turned off simply because the core rules seem overwhelming to them. IME, telling someone "oh it's actually very simple" is not very convincing. I personally do not think WM/H is anything but a complex game, which is not an uncommon attitude even among miniatures gamers. But in any event, the point is not to veer off on a tangent about WM/H so much as to clarify that the pared-down nature of AoS is very much an advantage to certain customers.
I agree -- I have seen people who are primarily interested in Magic the Gathering who would never think of 40k, FB, or WMH flip through Sigmar because the rules looked simple and the models were nice. I'm not sure what percentage of those turned into sales, but I imagine that some did. I've heard sales reps convincingly speak to potential customers who have never played a wargame or a miniature game but are interested about why AoS might be good for them. They speak favorably about other games too, but the emphasis on Sigmar in a nutshell is definitely "simple rules, really nice models -- look over here, see?".
From a miniature gaming perspective, AoS being a "gateway drug" into the hobby would be a great thing, regardless of what your favorite game is, and whether you like GW or not, because it bakes a bigger pie, instead of just trying to eat more of the existing pie. It's unlikely to steal a large number of gamers or their dollars away from their favorite "complex game", as it's inexpensive enough to own and play in addition to whatever that other game is.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 17:52:58
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Maryland
|
Manchu wrote:Posters here may not blink at a huge rulebook but we are hardly representative. I recently tried explaining one of the simplest rulesets I know (Lion Rampant) to someone who does not play many games and ... well, it was an uphill battle. Earlier ITT (or one of the many duplicate threads) someone mentioned how their non-gamer spouse looked at the AoS rules, noted it was not a 300+ page book, and therefore showed interest. Folks who know nothing about the competitiveness of WM/H are turned off simply because the core rules seem overwhelming to them. IME, telling someone "oh it's actually very simple" is not very convincing. I personally do not think WM/H is anything but a complex game, which is not an uncommon attitude even among miniatures gamers. But in any event, the point is not to veer off on a tangent about WM/H so much as to clarify that the pared-down nature of AoS is very much an advantage to certain customers. I don't think that's a very good measurement of the quality of AoS as a game. I think you're just looking at the wrong type of people to play miniature wargames. Let's use sports as a comparable example. The official MLB rulebook - in 2014 - was 120 pages long. How long would it take someone to explain all the intricacies of baseball to someone who had never really expressed interest in the sport at all. Then explain tag. Short, simple, easy to explain, and probably wouldn't turn a person off during an explanation. It's fun to play, sure - and you can do it drunk for some extra silliness. But will tag continue to be fun after the 20th time you've played it? The 50th? Even with variations like TV tag and freeze tag. Talys wrote: I agree -- I have seen people who are primarily interested in Magic the Gathering who would never think of 40k, FB, or WMH flip through Sigmar because the rules looked simple and the models were nice. Except that the rules for Magic are extremely complex. There's a reason why a lot of people (both negatively and positively) compare WMH to Magic. These are just people who aren't interested in miniature wargaming in general.
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/07/21 18:07:08
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 18:27:36
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel
|
Chimera_Calvin wrote:
Too expensive : you now have free rules and unit stats and a lower model count.
Too complex : the rules are now only 4 pages plus warscrolls.
Poorly balanced : there are no points values to form the basis of an argument.
£6 for a plastic infantry model? I would class that as expensive, that price would be just about excusable if they were metal.
GW rules have never really been too complex, what they are is obtuse and poorly designed. On the whole GW's games tend to have very simple core rules, especially in recent years. The problem comes from the massive quantities of needless special rule bloat. AoS seems to be loaded down with special rules, in fact I wouldn't be in the least surprised if all the special rules added together came to a great deal more than 4 pages. A game like infinity is complex, 40k hasn't been since 2nd ed and 8th removed what little complexity remained inWHFB.
AoS is amongst the least balanced games that have ever been made simple because there is no functional balancing mechanism at all.
The only good thing that has come from the AoS debacle for me is that GW has finally moved to free, and allegedly living, rulebooks. Aside from that it appears to be business as usual.
|
My PLog
Curently: DZC
Set phasers to malkie! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 18:29:12
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Frenzied Berserker Terminator
Hatfield, PA
|
bitethythumb wrote:
except that those "many" people, "many of them" complain about the "settra does not kneel" rules :/ saying its "childish" when they can just ignore it, there is literally no pleasing the anti AoS side, to me it seems like most of them are just angry their game of WHFB is gone and they cannot deal with it... play KoW, your models are not wasted, move on, dream on, live, enjoy... AoS is not a bad game no matter how many times you say it the rules are not bad especially if you play it as intended (I mean I enjoyed it and many other people have as well, what are we all mad or wrong for enjoying something?)and GW has said many times "they are a mini company" and that is what they are aiming at, like it or not GW is NOW a mini company with the focus on making minis... heck I would be more than happy for them to get rid of WHFB and 40K rules just to produce miniatures and focus on painting and modelling (having white dwarf be a techniques book with tips etc) and some lore books in between, leave the rules to the great experts at KoW... or other games who created their rules with the players participating, which is exactly what AoS is trying to do, its trying to make YOU make the GAME YOU want... either way sigmarines look bloody awesome and GW still makes the best damn minis out there...
Sorry, but I've been a wargamer for 38 years now and have played all kinds of games covering multiple historical periods, and different flavors of fantasy and sci-fi. I've played games using minis from 10mm all the way up to 54mm. So I've got lots of experience with a variety of rulesets, some good, some bad, but most adequate. AoS is definitely on the bad side. If you have to modify the rules, or impose house rules and a lot of extra work on the rules to make them work from the beginning, then the ruleset is a bad one. I haven't played WHFB in a good 17+ years, so have no stake whatsoever in that game. I call AoS a lousy game solely because of its own failings.
Not even going to bother to try and discuss the old " GW is a mini company and not a rules company" BS, except to say they have been writing gaming rules for 30 years.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/21 18:29:35
CSM 6k points CSM 4k points
CSM 4.5k points CSM 3.5k points
 and Daemons 4k points each
Renegades 4k points
SM 4k points
SM 2.5k Points
3K 2.3k
EW, MW and LW British in Flames of War |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 18:43:53
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
infinite_array wrote:
Let's use sports as a comparable example. The official MLB rulebook - in 2014 - was 120 pages long. How long would it take someone to explain all the intricacies of baseball to someone who had never really expressed interest in the sport at all.
Then explain tag. Short, simple, easy to explain, and probably wouldn't turn a person off during an explanation. It's fun to play, sure - and you can do it drunk for some extra silliness. But will tag continue to be fun after the 20th time you've played it? The 50th? Even with variations like TV tag and freeze tag.
Baseball is terribly boring the first time you play it. Your analogy defeats your point.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 18:45:50
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Maryland
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote: infinite_array wrote: Let's use sports as a comparable example. The official MLB rulebook - in 2014 - was 120 pages long. How long would it take someone to explain all the intricacies of baseball to someone who had never really expressed interest in the sport at all. Then explain tag. Short, simple, easy to explain, and probably wouldn't turn a person off during an explanation. It's fun to play, sure - and you can do it drunk for some extra silliness. But will tag continue to be fun after the 20th time you've played it? The 50th? Even with variations like TV tag and freeze tag. Baseball is terribly boring the first time you play it. Your analogy defeats your point. Fine. Substitute football (American or European), or rugby, or lacrosse, or field hockey, or Jai alai, or golf, or paintball. The point does remain. And it must not be terribly boring, if people are following it long enough to play in Little League up to college level and beyond.
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2015/07/21 18:49:08
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 18:54:57
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
Silent Puffin? wrote:
GW rules have never really been too complex, what they are is obtuse and poorly designed. On the whole GW's games tend to have very simple core rules, especially in recent years. The problem comes from the massive quantities of needless special rule bloat. AoS seems to be loaded down with special rules, in fact I wouldn't be in the least surprised if all the special rules added together came to a great deal more than 4 pages. A game like infinity is complex, 40k hasn't been since 2nd ed and 8th removed what little complexity remained inWHFB. .
Your definition of complex is hilariously different from a normal (non-wargamer) person's. Roll to hit. Roll to wound. Roll to save? Rank bonuses? Flank? What? I forget what I'm supposed to do with this guy now.
Space Hulk is considered a 'complex' game by many people. For a gamer who is used to Parker Brothers or Milton Bradley-style board games, GW games seem needlessly complex. I can't get my friends and family to take the time to learn how to play any FFG game, let alone a wargame.
Candyland is a successful game because it is a simple way to introduce young, inexperienced players to board games. If AoS works the same way for wargames, that is not a bad thing. If you're an experienced WHFB player, there are already plenty of options for you that you will enjoy.
Maybe I'll get everyone into KoW once they get bored with AoS, but I'll never get them into KoW without some kind of gateway game.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/07/21 18:59:16
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 19:09:28
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Ultramarine Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control
|
Silent Puffin? wrote: Chimera_Calvin wrote:
Too expensive : you now have free rules and unit stats and a lower model count.
Too complex : the rules are now only 4 pages plus warscrolls.
Poorly balanced : there are no points values to form the basis of an argument.
£6 for a plastic infantry model? I would class that as expensive, that price would be just about excusable if they were metal.
GW rules have never really been too complex, what they are is obtuse and poorly designed. On the whole GW's games tend to have very simple core rules, especially in recent years. The problem comes from the massive quantities of needless special rule bloat. AoS seems to be loaded down with special rules, in fact I wouldn't be in the least surprised if all the special rules added together came to a great deal more than 4 pages. A game like infinity is complex, 40k hasn't been since 2nd ed and 8th removed what little complexity remained inWHFB.
AoS is amongst the least balanced games that have ever been made simple because there is no functional balancing mechanism at all.
The only good thing that has come from the AoS debacle for me is that GW has finally moved to free, and allegedly living, rulebooks. Aside from that it appears to be business as usual.
My point wasn't that AoS is objectively good in absolute terms, more that it appears to be a genuine attempt at fixing the problems that plagued earlier versions.
Is it cheap? Of course not! You're right that £6 is a ridiculous price for a plastic model but is AoS as a gaming experience cheaper than 8th? Yes, because you don't need an expensive rulebook, expensive army book and enough models to float the Queen Mary.
Is it dumbed down? Arguably so but do X-Wing or Kings of War need 100 pages of rules to be interesting, fun and challenging games? Indeed AoS seems to be following the trend of many recent (and well received) systems with the small core added to by unit specific rules included with the models.
Is there no balance? No! But this is by design. For better or worse GW wants to make a system designed for scenarios and narrative play, not balanced competitive play. This is where my statement about square pegs and round holes is relevant. The most common complaint I've seen so far has nothing to do with whether AoS meets it's own intended goals and everything to do with the fact that it doesn't do things it was never designed for. It's like people complaining that a new motorcycle can't carry a family of four in comfort - it's only a valid criticism if the manufacturer promised this and then failed to deliver, and when did GW EVER promise a balanced and competitive ruleset?
To go back to my point, judge the thing on its own merits
|
While you sleep, they'll be waiting...
Have you thought about the Axis of Evil pension scheme? |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 19:18:37
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
infinite_array wrote: Talys wrote: I agree -- I have seen people who are primarily interested in Magic the Gathering who would never think of 40k, FB, or WMH flip through Sigmar because the rules looked simple and the models were nice. Except that the rules for Magic are extremely complex. There's a reason why a lot of people (both negatively and positively) compare WMH to Magic. These are just people who aren't interested in miniature wargaming in general. Magic the Gathering is only complex if you choose for it to be. MtG is very simple if you want to play it that way. Two people can literally buy starter decks and start playing for fun with a few minutes of explanation. I actually know TONS of people like this, who would never, ever win a competitive game of Magic, and who play with decks that have like.... 300 cards (or more!). They REALLY enjoy Magic, and they should not looked down upon as "hobby enthusiasts". I know 60 year old grandmothers who have fun with MtG at the same table as kids and their grandkids, and I think it's a wonderful thing. Just like other tabletop games, you can choose to ignore whatever rules you want, and you can choose to interpret cards as you wish among your friends, and misplay them, too. Which, I see a lot of in the casual players. I don't even point it out anymore when I play with them -- it's just like, "oh, okay, that's how you play that? sure thing. *mental note*"
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/21 19:21:36
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 19:28:43
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel
|
BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Candyland is a successful game because it is a simple way to introduce young, inexperienced players to board games. If AoS works the same way for wargames, that is not a bad thing. If you're an experienced WHFB player, there are already plenty of options for you that you will enjoy.
I hate Candyland, even my 4 year old doesn't like it although he loves Monster Catcher and that's quite a lot more involved.
GW has long needed a new gateway game but did they really need to tear up almost 30 years of wargaming history to do it? If GW had released AoS as a completely new and separate game then there would be a far, far less complaining about it. Its still a poor excuse for a wargame but as something to entice new players its passable (at least from a certain angle, in a certain light). As a replacement for WHFB it is not only completely inadequate it is also insulting to those of use who have invested time and money into that venerable game system. Game systems come and go, I have a big box full of armies for systems that have sunk into the depths, most of which will never see a table again. However I got my first warhammer model when I was 11 and I bought my last when I was about 32, is it any wonder that I am less then impressed with GW? As it happens I would always have had issues with AoS as a game but its clearly not aimed at me.
Something along the lines of Heroquest would have been far better.
Oh I do, I just have a lot of trouble finding them
|
My PLog
Curently: DZC
Set phasers to malkie! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 19:34:49
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Ultramarine Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control
|
 fair enough. Hoping to get a demo in this weekend and you never know I might be joining you in thinking it's terrible... Just giving myself a fighting chance with it
|
While you sleep, they'll be waiting...
Have you thought about the Axis of Evil pension scheme? |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 19:48:35
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
Silent Puffin, I too would have preferred they released AoS in addition to WHFB. I really liked the Old World. However, I'm not considering AoS as a replacement for it, but as a third thing unique to itself. Also, as a collector rather than a gamer, I find what I've learned about AoS really appeals to me.
Honestly, I've been toying with the idea of creating super simple (i.e. terrible) rules for my minis to justify ownership of them without having to play the kinds of games that wargamers like. It would have been somewhere between Space Hulk and ...something even simpler. Now that AoS is out and seems to fit my niche, I'm pretty excited about it. I'll see how I feel after getting in a few games when I get a chance.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 20:03:29
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
[MOD]
Anti-piracy Officer
Somewhere in south-central England.
|
Manchu wrote:Posters here may not blink at a huge rulebook but we are hardly representative. I recently tried explaining one of the simplest rulesets I know (Lion Rampant) to someone who does not play many games and ... well, it was an uphill battle. Earlier ITT (or one of the many duplicate threads) someone mentioned how their non-gamer spouse looked at the AoS rules, noted it was not a 300+ page book, and therefore showed interest. Folks who know nothing about the competitiveness of WM/H are turned off simply because the core rules seem overwhelming to them. IME, telling someone "oh it's actually very simple" is not very convincing. I personally do not think WM/H is anything but a complex game, which is not an uncommon attitude even among miniatures gamers. But in any event, the point is not to veer off on a tangent about WM/H so much as to clarify that the pared-down nature of AoS is very much an advantage to certain customers.
There absolutely is a place for a simple set of rules to attract newcomers.
There also is a place for a more complex set of rules to satisfy more advanced players.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 20:03:50
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord
|
infinite_array wrote: BobtheInquisitor wrote: infinite_array wrote:
Let's use sports as a comparable example. The official MLB rulebook - in 2014 - was 120 pages long. How long would it take someone to explain all the intricacies of baseball to someone who had never really expressed interest in the sport at all.
Then explain tag. Short, simple, easy to explain, and probably wouldn't turn a person off during an explanation. It's fun to play, sure - and you can do it drunk for some extra silliness. But will tag continue to be fun after the 20th time you've played it? The 50th? Even with variations like TV tag and freeze tag.
Baseball is terribly boring the first time you play it. Your analogy defeats your point.
Fine. Substitute football (American or European), or rugby, or lacrosse, or field hockey, or Jai alai, or golf, or paintball. The point does remain.
And it must not be terribly boring, if people are following it long enough to play in Little League up to college level and beyond.
Yup, the current FA Handbook (English football association) handbook is 600-odd pages long, and that is just for the English version of the game...
Pretty sure Football is just a little bit popular.
|
    
Games Workshop Delenda Est.
Users on ignore- 53.
If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 20:30:40
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Legendary Master of the Chapter
|
And tag continues being played despite not being football.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 20:55:28
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
[MOD]
Solahma
|
infinite_array wrote:I don't think that's a very good measurement of the quality of AoS as a game. I think you're just looking at the wrong type of people to play miniature wargames.
(1) I did not argue that its concision makes AoS a good game. (2) People put off by giant rulebooks are not necessarily "the wrong type of people." What we might call the 'heavy rulebook games' are the subject of most conversation on Dakka but are far from the only games out there. And comparing AoS to tag is really weak. The truth is, AoS has tons of rules just like 40k or WM/H, even if the core rules are pretty light, because most of the rules are actually on the war scrolls. So really it is a matter of perception, i.e., marketing. Kilkrazy wrote:There also is a place for a more complex set of rules to satisfy more advanced players.
A point with which no one disagrees. Is there any concern PP will abandon WM/H in favor of Age of .. er, Menoth (or something)? Complex, tightly-written rules quite obviously have a market. (N.B., WFHB was not serving that market.) What seems less apparent to some posters is the well-established market for more casual (I am now loathe to use that word) miniatures games: if the rulebook isn't 100+ pages, it's just tag?
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2015/07/21 21:04:12
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 21:43:26
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Battlefortress Driver with Krusha Wheel
|
Manchu wrote:What seems less apparent to some posters is the well-established market for more casual (I am now loathe to use that word) miniatures games: if the rulebook isn't 100+ pages, it's just tag?
Epic is one of the best wargames that I have played, it has maybe 20 pages of rules and the entire game (rules, fluff, modelling guides, tournament rules, scenarios and army lists) fits into a book only slightly thicker than a 40K codex. Mordheim is another example of a very simple game, I seem to manage a full game in about 30-40 minutes, yet it provides some interesting and genuinely tactical games, granted the campaign rules are a little bit shakey but hey ho.
GW can do 'casual' games right, or rather they used to be able to do it.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: I really liked the Old World. However, I'm not considering AoS as a replacement for it, but as a third thing unique to itself. .
Given that it follows directly on from the utter travesty that was the End Times and that GW apparently has no plans to release WHFB 9th, I don't see another alternative than to consider WHFB a dead game until such times as GW (or hopefully somebody competent) resurrects it properly.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/21 21:45:44
My PLog
Curently: DZC
Set phasers to malkie! |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 22:05:52
Subject: Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Grim Rune Priest in the Eye of the Storm
|
I do think the Game has become cheaper even though the models are more expensive.
How much does a playable army cost to to plat 8th Edition?
How much does an playable army cost in AoS?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2015/07/21 22:16:49
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar - Your Opinions, Impressions, Reviews
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
St. Louis
|
Will just leave this here. Glad I got out a few editions ago and converted all my bretonnians to guardsmen.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|