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.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Motograter wrote:
Not everyone likes it, that's just like any other game but at least the people that don't like those games have the decency to not derail every last thread about it. If you don't like AoS oj but some people do. That's just how it is

The reason people have the "decency" to not post lots of negatives about other games is because if another game comes along that you don't like it's easy to ignore. Because AoS has come along and replaced WHFB, people who did like and played WHFB but don't like AoS can't just ignore it.

I don't follow. You can certainly ignore AoS as easily as you can ignore any other game. It's hard to excuse most of the negativity regarding AoS threads, it normally comes off as petulant.

It's like, the new Fantastic 4 movie. Pretty terrible by all accounts, but if you still love the comics or the older movies those did not get taken away from you. I'm not going to find any discussions regarding the newest film to complain about it. What good does that do but waste my own free time? To what ends?

 clamclaw wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Motograter wrote:
Not everyone likes it, that's just like any other game but at least the people that don't like those games have the decency to not derail every last thread about it. If you don't like AoS oj but some people do. That's just how it is

The reason people have the "decency" to not post lots of negatives about other games is because if another game comes along that you don't like it's easy to ignore. Because AoS has come along and replaced WHFB, people who did like and played WHFB but don't like AoS can't just ignore it.

I don't follow. You can certainly ignore AoS as easily as you can ignore any other game. It's hard to excuse most of the negativity regarding AoS threads, it normally comes off as petulant.

It's like, the new Fantastic 4 movie. Pretty terrible by all accounts, but if you still love the comics or the older movies those did not get taken away from you. I'm not going to find any discussions regarding the newest film to complain about it. What good does that do but waste my own free time? To what ends?

The older films weren't much better to be fair. Fox are even planning sequels like oh WTF.

On topic yes there are discussions everywhere about different things the problem is in any remotely good thread about AoS is filled with the same whinging of no balance, points etc.

Yes AoS replaced fantasy and i get people are upset but they can ignore AoS, they are choosing not to though. Not sure if they think if they keep whining it'll make people stop playing and buying AoS or what but they keep going.

I had always liked fantasy, been doing this hobby for 20+ years. Last time I had fantasy was 4th ed, maybe 5th too. Stopped it for years though and played loads of other games. Looked at 7th and 8th but it was giant blocks and net listing. I've waited years to get a vampire counts army but old fantasy just didn't let me do it how I wanted it. AoS though has totally changed how I feel about fantasy, where as I used to hate it for its dull, uninspiring boring game play AoS has reinvigorated my fantasy buzz and i have bought more models/books this first 6 weeks than I got in total last year and most of this. AoS has made fantasy relevant and actually talked about which can only be a good thing. The player base was shrinking but now more than ever its getting people interested and bringing old and new players alike into the game which is what we need. Its a good thing, even with old fantasy gone from gw its not gone from anywhere else. Play any edition you want and enjoy it. Play AoS and enjoy it. This hobby is all about fun. Have some, you'll be happier for it

People are angry.

Angry people complain.

It's not gonna end anytime soon.

Yeah you're right. And now we can get angry at the people who are angry... Vicious cycle!

Totally agree with Motograter above though. I always wanted to dust off my Beastmen but the last Fantasy rulesets did nothing to spur my interest. Just felt very rigid and clunky, idk. AoS gave me a new interest in my old non-competitive models. Plus, free rules. Can't complain (well I guess I could, but we've been over that )

I disagree to an extent about AoS background not being warhammer.

I hail from the days of the realm of chaos books, AoS is realm of chaos on steroids, the background now actually transitions onto the table. With fantastical world's to game over, chaos across not just 1 world but 8 realms. The old gods are there, there's a new god and a possibility of further expansion.

On the table I'm no longer bound by points or force construction limits, the game actively encourages mixing up forces, I want to field an all hero army, sure, or just monsters yup that's legal now too. If I want a chaos warband that includes orcs, dwarves or elves then yup it's all OK.

AoS is more proper warhammer than warhammer became, it just seems not to be the warhammer anyone who played 8th knew, those that loved 8th are in a period of mourning it's loss, either you'll accept it in the long run or go find games elsewhere, but there are those of us disillusioned with warhammer and massed battle games that are finding a new interest in AoS, it's refreshed a tired old background that could never quite decide what it was and where the fluff and the tabletop never quite met.

G

I was talking with a friend at my FLGS before AoS was released and he said that if it didn't do well players would just play the previous edition..

 Commissar Molotov wrote:
People are angry.

Angry people complain.

It's not gonna end anytime soon.

Also it's a case of Meanwhile On The Internet

For those 'looking on the bright side' that they got free rules, and get to dust off their models: That's almost like saying that you got a free surgery to take out one of your kidneys, even though it was really unnecessary.

Seriously, look at the lore, the world was barely elaborated upon in most regions. I mean there were large swathes of land/sea that were barely covered over, let alone areas in the empire that could have been really interesting to make, for example, skirmish games/scenarios for - 'Mutiny in Marienburg' anyone?. The potential GW could have had with this is enormous, and could have catered to both old and new - via AoS rule system & the 'old' version. It could have easily been catered to BOTH groups so that people could really have something rekindled there as well as something rule wise, 'feeling' new.

The appearance of forsaking something in business is simply not good practice - when you are irrationally ignoring profit possibilities. I'm not sure what statisticians were involved in figuring out the AoS/End Times demographic, but methinks they were led more by visionary grey hairs/neck-beards in the decision making than looking at the hobby itself.

Gamesworkshop could have been using the glorious interwebs to further the Warhammer Fantasy interest: making interactive scenarios, campaigns, registering names/history of units/armies, FORUMS, etc. Someone up there is more worried about blowback on their ego and cost from these - vs unseen profit from stirring things Granted AoS is arguably the same when it comes to stirring interest I suppose, but the difference is that you already have variety in one setting - to tap in as deep as you want. Why stop/start prospecting in another area when you still have veins yielding something in the current mine? Dig both areas if you really want, or dig better in the current.

I'm glad people are playing a game and having fun. But it is at the cost of potential - of something that could have been more for the average guy. Regardless, Age of Sigmar is now something entirely different than the stuff that defined WFB - other than the models you can use. Again anyone thinking they have renewed interest because of AoS, could have, I bet, just as easily been persuaded to do so with a significantly less bloated 8th edition, or simply a 3rd edition spin and fancy new artwork. Of course, there are those that prefer an over-the-top Heman universe, but I think they are the fringe, destructive outlook when it comes to the long-lasting outlook of the game.

Why keep the old version if it didn't sell well?

Also, you should NEVER fully develop a setting. It completely destroys the ability to make your own forces and iconography.

Every territory not touched upon is probably the basis for some out there's personal rebel kingdom/chaos stronghold/ undead lair. Telling them what is actually there does nothing but stifle creativity.

I've always loved the model range and factions/creatures of Warhammer fantasy but never the Old World specifically. It felt small and cramped and limiting to my imagination.

I am glad they're taking this new direction in AoS with a wider universe.

They could have retconned the whole thing and started fresh. That would have warranted incredible fluff backlash from the old fans. Instead, not only did they do a whole campaign sending off the Old World, but they made sure everything (or just about) was still usable and made sense in the new setting.

There are so many companies that do invalidate everything before the newest version, and I think we should be thankful that GW did not do that. In my opinion, it is very clear that they care about their fans.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Why keep the old version if it didn't sell well?

Also, you should NEVER fully develop a setting. It completely destroys the ability to make your own forces and iconography.

Every territory not touched upon is probably the basis for some out there's personal rebel kingdom/chaos stronghold/ undead lair. Telling them what is actually there does nothing but stifle creativity.

IF it didn't sell so well, maybe they should have looked at its own release record and level of content in the setting. Some ideas include: instead of stagnating on model selection for armies, and leaving rulebooks in the dust, (amongst many other holes they could have filled) they could have engaged in actually writing/engaging in WF things?

I am all for leaving mystery in the setting and leaving things open; essentially withholding the notion to categorize everything in it. I prefer it that way - to allude to things in varying degrees rather than spelling it all out.
There are still ways of keeping this feeling without going to far - if not add to the mysterious. At worst case scenario, WFB could have taken the ultra detailed approach, and that would have been a better option than blowing it all up.

I wonder if the lack of updating in the Warhammer content - prior and during EoT - wasn't almost intentional in the mind of some decision maker - to then save face with some 'new idea' and inflate the success. It would also reassure investors that they're innovating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

burningstuff wrote:
I've always loved the model range and factions/creatures of Warhammer fantasy but never the Old World specifically. It felt small and cramped and limiting to my imagination.

I am glad they're taking this new direction in AoS with a wider universe.

They could have retconned the whole thing and started fresh. That would have warranted incredible fluff backlash from the old fans. Instead, not only did they do a whole campaign sending off the Old World, but they made sure everything (or just about) was still usable and made sense in the new setting.

There are so many companies that do invalidate everything before the newest version, and I think we should be thankful that GW did not do that. In my opinion, it is very clear that they care about their fans.

More like pretending to care, to take your money in anyway possible and insert ground marines to fix things.

Also, limiting your imagination because the Old World felt cramped and small falls short. I suppose I could look at the map of the world and say the same thing. I don't think any new universe is going to fix that problem for anyone thinking that.

The Old World had every Dwarf Hall, Empire city or Elf kingdom of note listed, with at least a brief history and theme. I wanted to use a Dwarf Hall that wasn't some kind of doomed or stupid, but there wasn't one in the whole Old World! I had to make up my own Empire province and elf territory, too, to get some place that wasn't exhaustively catalogued in some RPG supplement. I love reading about the Old World, but for the purposes of creating my very own Warhammer armies, it was indeed small and cramped. The only place with room to expand for human civilizations was Asia, but that continent was purposefully left dark and inscrutable, even though it made no sense in the same world as Finubar the Seafarer.

On the other hand, I can make up dozens of planets for my space marines and never run into, "sorry, can't fit that there 'cause of the halflings."

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
The Old World had every Dwarf Hall, Empire city or Elf kingdom of note listed, with at least a brief history and theme. I wanted to use a Dwarf Hall that wasn't some kind of doomed or stupid, but there wasn't one in the whole Old World! I had to make up my own Empire province and elf territory, too, to get some place that wasn't exhaustively catalogued in some RPG supplement. I love reading about the Old World, but for the purposes of creating my very own Warhammer armies, it was indeed small and cramped. The only place with room to expand for human civilizations was Asia, but that continent was purposefully left dark and inscrutable, even though it made no sense in the same world as Finubar the Seafarer.

On the other hand, I can make up dozens of planets for my space marines and never run into, "sorry, can't fit that there 'cause of the halflings."

See though, when there is too much freedom, to throw in anything in a universe, then you're asking for something that could end up being convoluted/tasteless. The restrictions to fantasy did limit things, but in a way that alluded to consistency in the mind.

So yea, you're in the Empire, its very Holy Roman Empire'ish with yes, some expectations as to what that should look like, and some variation. That's the context most readers/players should reference in their minds. You could still add-in a town, city or even write in a province ( perhaps just a different period in history). What Fantasy didn't jump in on was uniform diversity like d&d or in part like 40k. This i think is just the nature of medieval fantasy -its got the expectation to be medieval - in reference of historical expectation to a degree. The other universes could be somewhat more like a sandbox but that's the nature of high fantasy (or the realm of chaos)

 kveldulf wrote:


More like pretending to care, to take your money in anyway possible and insert ground marines to fix things.

Also, limiting your imagination because the Old World felt cramped and small falls short. I suppose I could look at the map of the world and say the same thing. I don't think any new universe is going to fix that problem for anyone thinking that.

Yes, GW is in the business of profit, but my point is that they found Fantasy failing to achieve that (obviously), and they didn't have to even continue the product line. Many companies drop failing product lines altogether. Of course, they hope taking this path will increase profit. In the course of seeking profit, GW have also shown they love their child and care about their fans, in my opinion. AoS is an attempt to breathe life back into Fantasy.

Falls short of what? And yeah, coming up with my own lore of creatures to fit into the current real world would present the same problem.

 kveldulf wrote:

See though, when there is too much freedom, to throw in anything in a universe, then you're asking for something that could end up being convoluted/tasteless. The restrictions to fantasy did limit things, but in a way that alluded to consistency in the mind.

So yea, you're in the Empire, its very Holy Roman Empire'ish with yes, some expectations as to what that should look like, and some variation. That's the context most readers/players should reference in their minds. You could still add-in a town, city or even write in a province ( perhaps just a different period in history). What Fantasy didn't jump in on was uniform diversity like d&d or in part like 40k. This i think is just the nature of medieval fantasy -its got the expectation to be medieval - in reference of historical expectation to a degree. The other universes could be somewhat more like a sandbox but that's the nature of high fantasy (or the realm of chaos)

The Old World was very much medieval fantasy - very much a parallel of Greyhawk, if you will, and very Tolkeinesque. The 8 Realms of the Age of Sigmar are much more of what I consider "modern fantasy". Just like popular fiction, the power levels are much higher -- the average warrior is endowed with magic, lead by great heroes and demigods.

Keep in mind, too, that AoS actually leapfrogs a HUGE gap of time -- thousands of years have passed between when the world blew up in End Times and AoS. In between, there was actually a whole cycle of Chaos reigning, a grand alliance of Gods, a time of peace, the disintegration of the alliance, Chaos prevailing, and then the time of great war in which AoS is set.

Should AoS be successful, GW could easily set new adventures during several prequel periods (a la 30k).

 Talys wrote:

 kveldulf wrote:

See though, when there is too much freedom, to throw in anything in a universe, then you're asking for something that could end up being convoluted/tasteless. The restrictions to fantasy did limit things, but in a way that alluded to consistency in the mind.

So yea, you're in the Empire, its very Holy Roman Empire'ish with yes, some expectations as to what that should look like, and some variation. That's the context most readers/players should reference in their minds. You could still add-in a town, city or even write in a province ( perhaps just a different period in history). What Fantasy didn't jump in on was uniform diversity like d&d or in part like 40k. This i think is just the nature of medieval fantasy -its got the expectation to be medieval - in reference of historical expectation to a degree. The other universes could be somewhat more like a sandbox but that's the nature of high fantasy (or the realm of chaos)

The Old World was very much medieval fantasy - very much a parallel of Greyhawk, if you will, and very Tolkeinesque. The 8 Realms of the Age of Sigmar are much more of what I consider "modern fantasy". Just like popular fiction, the power levels are much higher -- the average warrior is endowed with magic, lead by great heroes and demigods.

Keep in mind, too, that AoS actually leapfrogs a HUGE gap of time -- thousands of years have passed between when the world blew up in End Times and AoS. In between, there was actually a whole cycle of Chaos reigning, a grand alliance of Gods, a time of peace, the disintegration of the alliance, Chaos prevailing, and then the time of great war in which AoS is set.

Should AoS be successful, GW could easily set new adventures during several prequel periods (a la 30k).

Hm, I'm not sure what the early greyhawk universe looked like, but the depictions of dress and armour of the human lands in Warhammer are lifted almost exclusively from history. I usually see D&D stuff being more 'inspired' than 'based' - usually.

Maybe Warhammer Forge (forgeworld) can make a split with its model range - much like 30k . I doubt it, but some FW updated bretonnians, estalians or tileans (that way its really similar to 30k balance... heheheh), would be very interesting to see. Unfortunately I heard warhammer forge is being phased out some time ago :(




Automatically Appended Next Post:

burningstuff wrote:

 kveldulf wrote:


More like pretending to care, to take your money in anyway possible and insert ground marines to fix things.

Also, limiting your imagination because the Old World felt cramped and small falls short. I suppose I could look at the map of the world and say the same thing. I don't think any new universe is going to fix that problem for anyone thinking that.

Yes, GW is in the business of profit, but my point is that they found Fantasy failing to achieve that (obviously), and they didn't have to even continue the product line. Many companies drop failing product lines altogether. Of course, they hope taking this path will increase profit. In the course of seeking profit, GW have also shown they love their child and care about their fans, in my opinion. AoS is an attempt to breathe life back into Fantasy.

Falls short of what? And yeah, coming up with my own lore of creatures to fit into the current real world would present the same problem.

It's one thing when the product fails, its another to let it fail. GW dropped the ball in many ways with Warhammer that yes, of course it failed. When you don't water a plant appropriately it tends to die.. I've stated some examples on this page about what they could have done differently (like the good arm-chair general I am) and stick by those.

As far as falling short, I thought what I said after that made my point obvious. In essence: Making a fictitious world feel bigger is a matter not generally restrained to imagined geography.

 kveldulf wrote:
I've been reading some posts here and there stating they've 'had an interest in warhammer rekindled' due to the release of Age of Sigmar.

AoS is really nothing like WFB so how can one really say its rekindled when even the lore is completely different, let alone the ruleset? It's not 'rekindled' just 'kindled'.

It's as though people think they are jumping in an old looking, re-branded ship but it's actually new.

AoS has the same basic move-shoot-fight Igo-Ugo mechanics of WFB, at the same per-model skirmish game scale as 5E / 6E.

Further, AoS allows me to play my Dogs of War, whereas WFB8 does not.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
Why keep the old version if it didn't sell well?

Also, you should NEVER fully develop a setting. It completely destroys the ability to make your own forces and iconography.

Every territory not touched upon is probably the basis for some out there's personal rebel kingdom/chaos stronghold/ undead lair. Telling them what is actually there does nothing but stifle creativity.

WHFB used to sell well, it was part of the bedrock of the company. GW could have looked at why it declined and addressed those issues. Instead, I think GW looked at things overall and found that Space Mariens account for 50% of all their sales and decided to make a new kind of SMs, the Sigmarines, to enable SMs to account for 75% of sales.

GW probably thought they were being really awesome in destroying the Old World in the End Times, but the result so far is that they have pissed off as many people as they pleased.

They could instead have introduced AoS as a basic ruleset option for WHFB, and added Sigmar to the setting in a way that introduced the Storm Castes while keeping all the old kingdoms too, and updating WHFB to address players' concerns. This at least would have avoided pissing off so many customers.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 kveldulf wrote:
I've been reading some posts here and there stating they've 'had an interest in warhammer rekindled' due to the release of Age of Sigmar.

AoS is really nothing like WFB so how can one really say its rekindled when even the lore is completely different, let alone the ruleset? It's not 'rekindled' just 'kindled'.

It's as though people think they are jumping in an old looking, re-branded ship but it's actually new.

AoS has the same basic move-shoot-fight Igo-Ugo mechanics of WFB, at the same per-model skirmish game scale as 5E / 6E.

Further, AoS allows me to play my Dogs of War, whereas WFB8 does not.

I imagine that fundamentally, about every wargame has at least those basic mechanics. That doesn't make them the same.

I liked dogs of war too. They could have been updated during 'classical' warhammer. Instead, GW like many times during WFB's life, gave us the hand wave more than lists, lore & models.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

WHFB used to sell well, it was part of the bedrock of the company. GW could have looked at why it declined and addressed those issues. Instead, I think GW looked at things overall and found that Space Mariens account for 50% of all their sales and decided to make a new kind of SMs, the Sigmarines, to enable SMs to account for 75% of sales.

GW probably thought they were being really awesome in destroying the Old World in the End Times, but the result so far is that they have pissed off as many people as they pleased.

You're being really presumptuous here. How do you know that GW didn't look at why WFB declined and address the issues with AoS? If Space Marines was the answer they would have just added Space Marines to WFB, but they didn't, instead they do something so drastic that you claim they "pissed off as many people as they pleased". Why do you think they did this?

Here's a few reasons. I wouldn't claim them to be entirely accurate, but it wouldn't surprise me if each one had some truth to it.

1. Most people who played WFB, weren't buying any more WFB.

We've heard that WFB had made up 15% of sales, but how much of that was End Times? Probably a lot. And how much did End Times cost to produce? Again, probably a lot. Because GW keep things close to their chests we can't really say whether that 15% ever translated into an actual profit or not. Even if it did GW would be using predicted sales figures for future development, and the future of WFB probably looked dire. Most players were probably older gamers who already had their figures and new players simply weren't interested.

2. Skirmish games are much more popular.

I'm incredibly new to the scene but the vast majority of independent miniature games are either skirmish, warband, or even RPG. I think it's fair to say GW's major competitor is Privateer Press with their WarmaHordes. Clearly the majority of gamers no longer care much for regiments and prefer a more personal kind of game. I certainly do which is why I'm here for AoS and not WFB.

3. Old gamers were looking for something new, new gamers weren't looking for something old.

WFB is old now, and no new editions were going to change that. I've seen 8th edition and it looks very similar to 4th or 5th I used to play as a teenager. Obviously they've changed a lot at the nitty-gritty level of things but the core game is largely the same thing, and people do get bored of that. A lot of WFB players probably moved on to other things and there wasn't enough new players to replace them. 40k will probably go the same way some day and GW will probably have to replace that. Maybe with something like AoS but in-space (heh).


I don't know how you can assume that GW didn't make a proper analysis. They probably did and you just didn't like the answer, and I'm not going to lie and say that I wouldn't feel the same way if years from now AoS got replaced by something entirely different.

 kveldulf wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 kveldulf wrote:
I've been reading some posts here and there stating they've 'had an interest in warhammer rekindled' due to the release of Age of Sigmar.

AoS is really nothing like WFB so how can one really say its rekindled when even the lore is completely different, let alone the ruleset? It's not 'rekindled' just 'kindled'.

It's as though people think they are jumping in an old looking, re-branded ship but it's actually new.

AoS has the same basic move-shoot-fight Igo-Ugo mechanics of WFB, at the same per-model skirmish game scale as 5E / 6E.

Further, AoS allows me to play my Dogs of War, whereas WFB8 does not.

I imagine that fundamentally, about every wargame has at least those basic mechanics. That doesn't make them the same.

I liked dogs of war too. They could have been updated during 'classical' warhammer. Instead, GW like many times during WFB's life, gave us the hand wave more than lists, lore & models.

If you look at the Mantic's Kings of War, frequently bandied as the successor to WFB, it's a very different game. Kings of War is a block game, not a model game - blocks don't attrit on a per-wound basis. A lot of others are big on different flavors of alternating unit activation. AoS is clearly a true WFB successor, stripped to the bare bones. KoW is more of a fancier "wooden blocks" game.

It's hard to stay enthusiastic about a game system that officially delists the army you spent time and money on.

 clamclaw wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Motograter wrote:
Not everyone likes it, that's just like any other game but at least the people that don't like those games have the decency to not derail every last thread about it. If you don't like AoS oj but some people do. That's just how it is

The reason people have the "decency" to not post lots of negatives about other games is because if another game comes along that you don't like it's easy to ignore. Because AoS has come along and replaced WHFB, people who did like and played WHFB but don't like AoS can't just ignore it.

I don't follow. You can certainly ignore AoS as easily as you can ignore any other game. It's hard to excuse most of the negativity regarding AoS threads, it normally comes off as petulant.

It's like, the new Fantastic 4 movie. Pretty terrible by all accounts, but if you still love the comics or the older movies those did not get taken away from you. I'm not going to find any discussions regarding the newest film to complain about it. What good does that do but waste my own free time? To what ends?

Whether or not GW directly supports WHFB is directly related to how easy it is to get a game of WHFB. Especially for those of us who mostly gamed at GW stores. If we want to get new players in to WHFB, the books aren't being sold any more so we'd have to direct people to 2nd hand sources. Miniatures are being repackaged on to round bases.

I mean for feth sakes, for some stupid reason dakkadakka decided to rename the WHFB to the AOS forum instead of making a new one.

Your Fantastic 4 analogy falls short. The new F4 movie in no way changes what existed before, it's naive to think AoS doesn't change WHFB for people who still prefer the old game.

What good does it do but waste YOUR own free time? Well you don't have to read it, you don't have to respond to it. Don't blame me for wasting your time, you're wasting your own time. If it's so easy for WHFB players to ignore AoS then it shouldn't be too hard for you to ignore people complaining about AoS. You easily could have ignored this thread, especially give the title is pretty self explanatory.

To what ends?

To what ends do we post on internet forums at all? We just do it because we have an interest. At the end of the day we're just typing out messages to people we'll likely never meet about toy-fething-soldiers. Don't act like typing "AoS is awesome" does more good or has a better end than posting "AoS sucks".

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Motograter wrote:
Not everyone likes it, that's just like any other game but at least the people that don't like those games have the decency to not derail every last thread about it. If you don't like AoS oj but some people do. That's just how it is

The reason people have the "decency" to not post lots of negatives about other games is because if another game comes along that you don't like it's easy to ignore. Because AoS has come along and replaced WHFB, people who did like and played WHFB but don't like AoS can't just ignore it.

I don't follow. You can certainly ignore AoS as easily as you can ignore any other game. It's hard to excuse most of the negativity regarding AoS threads, it normally comes off as petulant.

It's like, the new Fantastic 4 movie. Pretty terrible by all accounts, but if you still love the comics or the older movies those did not get taken away from you. I'm not going to find any discussions regarding the newest film to complain about it. What good does that do but waste my own free time? To what ends?

Whether or not GW directly supports WHFB is directly related to how easy it is to get a game of WHFB. Especially for those of us who mostly gamed at GW stores. If we want to get new players in to WHFB, the books aren't being sold any more so we'd have to direct people to 2nd hand sources. Miniatures are being repackaged on to round bases.

I mean for feth sakes, for some stupid reason dakkadakka decided to rename the WHFB to the AOS forum instead of making a new one.

Your Fantastic 4 analogy falls short. The new F4 movie in no way changes what existed before, it's naive to think AoS doesn't change WHFB for people who still prefer the old game.

What good does it do but waste YOUR own free time? Well you don't have to read it, you don't have to respond to it. Don't blame me for wasting your time, you're wasting your own time. If it's so easy for WHFB players to ignore AoS then it shouldn't be too hard for you to ignore people complaining about AoS. You easily could have ignored this thread, especially give the title is pretty self explanatory.

To what ends?

To what ends do we post on internet forums at all? We just do it because we have an interest. At the end of the day we're just typing out messages to people we'll likely never meet about toy-fething-soldiers. Don't act like typing "AoS is awesome" does more good or has a better end than posting "AoS sucks".

So every game that a group of hobbyists enjoy can never be discontinued or changed? You can't really expect companies to support everything they have ever made/sold, that's impossible. I'm not going to expect Chevy to keep making parts for their 1972 Camaro because they've moved on to a new model. Windows no longer supports or updates Windows ME. I think we can expect the same that GW was not going to eternally keep updating a game that had largely lost steam and sales over the last years.

I'm sure it's much more difficult to find WHFB games now, because the game as we knew it is done. On the other hand, people still play older editions of 40K and WHFB all the time. If there are really as many people who are so cross with GW for ending WHFB as Dakka makes it seem, it should be no hurdle to grab your same gaming group and play a game of 8th edition.

I guess I try to get by in life without unneeded negativity. In my mind spending time being upset with something that you have no control over would just make me more upset. But you're right on the last point, if somebody wants to vent and talk about their gripes with AoS then it does nothing better or worse than people talking about how they like it. To each their own.

The Old World fluff and relative geographical size of the Empire was not what led to the downfall of WHFB. They could easily have put put the game on the same world with the new rules mechanics, along with Chaos hordes and Sigmarite factions.

The samey-ness of the rules over many years, and GW's own lackluster support was what lead to the downfall.

And on the topic of Kings of War, at least my lovingly painted models stay on display on the table for the life of the entire unit.

The single casualty figure removal mechanism used by WHFB had been superceded in historical wargame rules by the end of the 1980s.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The single casualty figure removal mechanism used by WHFB had been superceded in historical wargame rules by the end of the 1980s.

Yes, and that's part of what makes AoS a WFB game, where KoW is not a WFB game.

Neither is AoS.

I know I am a guy who loves the backstory of a game more than the mechanics. I can get my wife to play games set in the Warhammer world with Kings of War rules, but the WHFB rules just make her chuckle and say "no.....I don't think so".

I've always said that I would happily try AoS rules in the old setting if some of the more important parts got tweaked and some of the brokenness removed. I just need rules that do not occupy more of my brain than the portion having fun with using the feat of pushing little models guys around to enhance my my emotional attachment to the setting.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Neither is AoS.

I know I am a guy who loves the backstory of a game more than the mechanics. I can get my wife to play games set in the Warhammer world with Kings of War rules, but the WHFB rules just make her chuckle and say "no.....I don't think so".

I've always said that I would happily try AoS rules in the old setting if some of the more important parts got tweaked and some of the brokenness removed. I just need rules that do not occupy more of my brain than the portion having fun with using the feat of pushing little models guys around to enhance my my emotional attachment to the setting.

I am confused, because that is exactly what Age of Sigmar is... 4 pages of rules with very little in the way of clutter. It spells out very clearly how and what to do. What are the important parts that you want to see tweaked and where is the brokenness?

I think your wife would give the AoS rules a try if she is willing to give KoW a try.

Your Fantastic 4 analogy falls short. The new F4 movie in no way changes what existed before, it's naive to think AoS doesn't change WHFB for people who still prefer the old game.

Golly! You’re right! I just checked my WHFB8 rule book and the ink is starting to fade away! It’s all being replaced with the Age of Sigmar rules! Hold on, I’d better check my... oh no... the 6th edition rulebook I picked up on clearance the other day! And my WHFRP2e books! All of them are being changed to Age of Sigmar... why is this happening to me? It isn’t fair...

I am confused, because that is exactly what Age of Sigmar is... 4 pages of rules with very little in the way of clutter. It spells out very clearly how and what to do. What are the important parts that you want to see tweaked and where is the brokenness?

The rules are not as bad at all as the Warscrolls, but I am a big fan of units having points/balancing mechanisms, or even at the most some sort of limit to how many of each sort of unit could be in an army, like the old Core, special, rare types of categories of old WHFB. The outnumbering rule is not a very precise way of balancing things.

There are also things that just leave an odd taste in my mouth. From little things like Skaven rat swarms gaining a free swarm base every hero phase, to the other problems that can crop up that people have put forth. Some of the (legitimate, not the obvious tongue in cheek) things units can do are just too much. I have seen lots of instances of things in the past where games have had mechanics happen like in AoS, and the fans pounced on them for it.

I am actually a big fan of smaller rulesets.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I can get my wife to play games set in the Warhammer world with Kings of War rules, but the WHFB rules just make her chuckle and say "no.....I don't think so".

I've always said that I would happily try AoS rules in the old setting if some of the more important parts got tweaked and some of the brokenness removed.

So you can't get your wife to play games set in the Warhammer world with AoS rules? If she can play KoW, she can play AoS, and you can ignore both the KoW and AoS backgrounds.

If you are playing with your wife, why is "brokenness" an issue? Do you need to curb stomp her into the ground when you play? Is she in the habit of clubbing baby seals in her spare time? You can't just sit down with her and play a game "for fun"?

Did you even try AoS? Or did your preconceptions stop the whole thing dead in its tracks. Did you totally miss that the game has several non-points-based balancing mechanisms, and did you give them a fair chance? Or is it an issue of you being so conditioned by the notion of "points" that you can't conceive of any other way to play a fantasy battle game?

Are you even playing Skaven rat swarms? Does an extra base of swarms really unbalance the game?

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The Old World fluff and relative geographical size of the Empire was not what led to the downfall of WHFB. They could easily have put put the game on the same world with the new rules mechanics, along with Chaos hordes and Sigmarite factions.

That would have been terrible, introducing the Sigmarines to the Old World. Frankly, I'm glad they drew a line under WHFB and stopped adding new stuff to it. My biggest fear was that WHFB would end up with fantasy versions of Newcrons and the Ward Knights and Murderdeathkill McGoresplatter names and so on. Instead GW killed it in its relative Young Elvis phase, and tacked on an easy to ignore or hand wave End Times/AOS that very much feel like separate entities, the way Crusade is an easily ignored vestigial tail on Babylon 5. Sigmarines in Altdorf would have been a lot more shark-jumpy.