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.

Jack Flask wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Warlord Games has tons of terrain from other manufacturers and sells DAK infantry from Perry Brothers. They are fully capable of making DAK, btw.

Warlord Games also sells multiple other games out of their webstore, that's their choice and part of their business model. Just like how they will soon be distributing Wargames Factory miniatures. They're as much a distributor for other companies as they are a miniature producer.

And yet they don't produce DAK infantry which means they are in fact unable to provide an equivalent product, by choice. If they did produce their own DAK infantry then they could sell both, but again that would be their choice.

GW is no more the bad guy for only selling their own miniatures than Privateer Press is for only selling theirs.

 Swastakowey wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:

Swastakowey wrote:(most wargames feature other companies models or terrain here and so on. GW is the only real exception here)

Citation needed. Because last I checked no major wargame company advertised their product alongside a competitor's product without either some mutual deal or an inability to provide an equivalent product. Like it or not Games Workshop follows a horizontal integration model where they want to provide you with everything you could possibly need to play their games.

Well I will take Warlord Games first. Warlord games sells items from other manufacturers IN THEIR sets. They feature other companies terrain (despite also making their own), other companies models (notably perry miniatures and other scales) in their rulebook and more. My black powder book has some cool stuff from other companies.

There are more I will just need to check them when I get home for more details.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Warlord Games has tons of terrain from other manufacturers and sells DAK infantry from Perry Brothers. They are fully capable of making DAK, btw.

They also sell stuff from plenty of other places. I think their Zulu Wars Gatling gun is from some random model maker. They have those cool mdf stuff from another company. I think they recently said they have plans with Wargames Factory (cant remember the company) to help each others ranges grow or something.

Pretty cool company actually.

They have a distribution agreement. How is this so hard to understand. They have no reason not to show off those other miniatures because they can provide them.

They aren't a distributor. At best, they can be considered a part time publisher with Terminator Genisys. ACD is a distributor. They don't sell or market wargames. Warlord does and it specifically markets these competitor products for their games. The Sarista Precision terrain isn't listed under "Sarista Precision products". It's listed under "Bolt Action terrain". That's not even here nor there. You're moving goal posts. The original contention of yours was that no company markets a competitor's product without a mutual deal or the inability to market it themselves. Warlord can make terrain and it's not like Sarista Precision advertises German Infantry or something so your point is demonstrably wrong. How is that so hard to understand.

A few comments.......

Kings of War is nothing like WHF. It's much more comparable to a draughts/chess hybrid in a tabletop model game format.

Jack Flask wrote:
So what you are saying is that from day 1 Mantic hasn't strategically picked armies for their game which are able to be proxied by WHFB models, and that they didn't decide around the same time as the announcement for AoS to add beastmen, lizardmen, Tomb Kings, and Warriors of Chaos to their list of armies despite having no planned dates to release models for them.

When did wargaming become a protected industry? 99% of GW's ideas are not remotely original. There was an unserviced market segment (people who wanted less convoluted rules and/or cheaper models for mass battle) and a company decided to service it, clearly that segment is big enough to be sustainable. And now people have the choice to use the models they've invested time and money in to play a supported game if they want to, and that's a bad thing?

Jack Flask wrote:
Will it make an effort to add new races and units that clearly have no close GW analogue

Examples of such armies have gone to print this week.

Jack Flask wrote:
Repeating your own words doesn't make something true. At the moment no one knows how AoS is doing other than GW, and they've been recorded as being satisfied so far with the results. Now I'm pretty sure that anyone would agree that GW wouldn't tell people if they were dissatisfied for risk of ruining consumer confidence, so we can regard how they feel on the matter.

Except those of us that are ex-GW know that the stores have had a big meeting and been taken to task over sales of AoS being low

 TheCustomLime wrote:

They aren't a distributor. At best, they can be considered a part time publisher with Terminator Genisys. ACD is a distributor. They don't sell or market wargames. Warlord does and it specifically markets these competitor products for their games. The Sarista Precision terrain isn't listed under "Sarista Precision products". It's listed under "Bolt Action terrain". That's not even here nor there. You're moving goal posts. The original contention of yours was that no company markets a competitor's product without a mutual deal or the inability to market it themselves. Warlord can make terrain and it's not like Sarista Precision advertises German Infantry or something so your point is demonstrably wrong. How is that so hard to understand.

When you want to act like an authority on a subject, actually take the time to do your research lest you look foolish. Because I provided an example of Warlord Games role as a publisher which you clearly didn't bother to check.

Even more embarrassing is that Warlord games even describes themselves as a distributor in the first sentence of their own about page.

And you are not demonstrating a strong understanding of the term competitor if you think that Warlord games selling another company's products qualifies under that statement. They advertise other companies products because they stock them, meaning not only are they in fact in a deal, but also that they are making profit of those items being sold out of their own webstore. You know, exactly how brick and mortar works. Sure you can go to Sarissa Precision's website and buy it, but Warlord is banking on you buying it from them considering that your on their site presumably ordering other things from them as well. That way not only is Sarissa making a sale on something but so is Warlord Games, and the best part is that warlord doesn't have to develop a competing product. Nothing about that contradicts anything I said.

There was no moving of goal posts, and in fact you've even misrepresented what I said to move the goalposts yourself.

Jack Flask wrote:
Citation needed. Because last I checked no major wargame company advertised their product alongside a competitor's product without either some mutual deal or an inability to provide an equivalent product. Like it or not Games Workshop follows a horizontal integration model where they want to provide you with everything you could possibly need to play their games.

I specified no major wargame company, which is a significant limitation on the scope of the argument. I'm pretty sure I've seen small 15mm sci-fi manufacturers cross promote products from their "competitors", but that's largely due to how small and tight knit that community is. Then again I don't feel like looking for an example right now, so feel free to disregard this. It's irrelevant anyway since it lies outside the context of a larger scale operation like GW.

Second, I never "inability to market", I said "an inability to provide an equivalent product". This can reference a lack of technical ability (physical don't have the means to manufacture said product) but it also just as easily refers to a conscientious decision on the part of the company to not do so. Thus, they are not competing by virtue of the fact that promoting that product doesn't take money away from them, they don't even offer it. A perfect example outside just major wargames companies would be Armorcast using a Warjack to demonstrate their cinematic effects.

Also mutual deal doesn't refer to both companies having to advertise the other, it means the two companies have mutually beneficial agreement. I.e. Warlord Games stocks Sarissa products which is helping Sarissa to presumably make more sales, while Warlord Games are likely taking some percentage or at the very least adding value to their site by making it look more like a one-stop destination for all things 28mm historical (which is something they very much emphasize). And if you honestly don't believe that Warlord has deals with the companies whose products they stock, well they even state that in their about page:

We’re extremely proud to work in close partnership with the likes of Osprey Publishing, Mongoose Publishing, Italeri, Cutting Edge Miniatures, Empress Miniatures, and many other fantastic companies to offer the finest range of 28mm miniatures and accompanying rule systems in the world!

How does all of this relate to Games Workshop? Because their business model is more like Apple than say Warlord. Apple doesn't want to point you to a competitor, so they offer only their own products as well as products which don't overlap what they manufacture to increase the likelihood that you'll buy everything from Apple in a curated environment where a consumer can't see competing products.

Is it manipulative? Yeah, slightly. Is it immoral? Not in the slightest. It lets them control the environment of the sale, showing their product in the best manner possible which is very important when trying to sell expensive or luxury products. Privateer Press and Mantic do essentially the same thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Baragash wrote:
A few comments.......

Kings of War is nothing like WHF. It's much more comparable to a draughts/chess hybrid in a tabletop model game format.

Jack Flask wrote:
So what you are saying is that from day 1 Mantic hasn't strategically picked armies for their game which are able to be proxied by WHFB models, and that they didn't decide around the same time as the announcement for AoS to add beastmen, lizardmen, Tomb Kings, and Warriors of Chaos to their list of armies despite having no planned dates to release models for them.

When did wargaming become a protected industry? 99% of GW's ideas are not remotely original. There was an unserviced market segment (people who wanted less convoluted rules and/or cheaper models for mass battle) and a company decided to service it, clearly that segment is big enough to be sustainable. And now people have the choice to use the models they've invested time and money in to play a supported game if they want to, and that's a bad thing?

I never said it was nor did I ever claim that GW was original in its choices or design, but you've admitted yourself that there was a market for it related to WHFB. That was the crux of the issue because Swastokowey is trying to make this out as apples to oranges when its really Granny Smith to Honeycrisp (which is which I'll let you decide).

I never said that was a bad thing, and in fact I explicitly stated the opposite. I honestly do think its good that there is a game relatively similar to WHFB for fans of it to play.

 Baragash wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Will it make an effort to add new races and units that clearly have no close GW analogue

Examples of such armies have gone to print this week.

Cool, you should actually provide evidence for those of us who have no idea what you are talking about, its pretty standard procedure in making an argument.

Also I would specifically like to point out that my statement which you quoted was me attempting to summarize the post by Smellingsalts for the benefit of Swastakowey understanding the argument. I was not personally passing judgement on KoW (I don't play it so I don't care, though I am legitimately curious to hear you provide examples. I do quite enjoy wargame unit design concepts).

 Baragash wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Repeating your own words doesn't make something true. At the moment no one knows how AoS is doing other than GW, and they've been recorded as being satisfied so far with the results. Now I'm pretty sure that anyone would agree that GW wouldn't tell people if they were dissatisfied for risk of ruining consumer confidence, so we can regard how they feel on the matter.

Except those of us that are ex-GW know that the stores have had a big meeting and been taken to task over sales of AoS being low

Which you are unable to prove, so pardon me if I don't simply take to word of a person I know nothing about as evidence in its own right.

The new book has 2 surprise armies which feature (confirmed feature) pirates, ninjas, other asian themed stuff and more than likely more. These lists are secret. Another book coming is also a historical supplement.

Obviously these are nothing like GW offerings as forces.

Jack Flask wrote:

 Baragash wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Will it make an effort to add new races and units that clearly have no close GW analogue

Examples of such armies have gone to print this week.

Cool, you should actually provide evidence for those of us who have no idea what you are talking about, its pretty standard procedure in making an argument.

No, but would you like a copy of my NDA?

Jack Flask wrote:

 Baragash wrote:

Jack Flask wrote:
Repeating your own words doesn't make something true. At the moment no one knows how AoS is doing other than GW, and they've been recorded as being satisfied so far with the results. Now I'm pretty sure that anyone would agree that GW wouldn't tell people if they were dissatisfied for risk of ruining consumer confidence, so we can regard how they feel on the matter.

Except those of us that are ex-GW know that the stores have had a big meeting and been taken to task over sales of AoS being low

Which you are unable to prove, so pardon me if I don't simply take to word of a person I know nothing about as evidence in its own right.

*shrugs* There's no inherent value to me in proving anything to you even if I wanted to cost someone their job.

In both these cases, there is sufficient information in the public domain to reach conclusions I would happily publish on a professional level, I got over needing to be right on the internet a long time ago, and I'm certainly not going to do the legwork for someone relying on a burden of proof fallacy to cover up their laziness in not bothering to fully research all the things they're arguing about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Swastakowey wrote:
The new book has 2 surprise armies which feature (confirmed feature) pirates, ninjas, other asian themed stuff and more than likely more. These lists are secret. Another book coming is also a historical supplement.

Obviously these are nothing like GW offerings as forces.

And Brian Blessed*

*This might actually be considered true, depending on your enjoyment, or lack thereof, of the meme.

I don't really understand where is the problem, here. We're talking about game systems, right? Why did it become some kind of a war to know if AoS is better than KoW?

I mean, they're nothing alike.

If it is a comparison between WFB and KoW, now I understand because they're playing in the same category. Still, they work differently in the rules.

The question about what game to play on long term is simple: WFB, as a game system, isn't supported anymore by GW. KoW is by Mantic Games (they even published a new rulebook not so long ago).

The first, you have to find it in second hand (I mean, if you begin now and didn't grab your copy when they were still sold in GW hops ). Not so difficult since there are still a lot of products on the market, but you will be dependant of the offer. The second, you can buy it using the official channels (second hand is possible, sure, but it's not so easy to find as for WFB).

In terms of community, it really depends of where you are. Once you have found players, it's fine. Trouble can come to have "new blood" on the long term; unsupported games tend to have smaller communities as time goes. The good news for WFB is that since it was an old game still played not so long ago, it's still possible to find some players willing to follow.


About miniatures, it's a false debate. You can use whatever you want to play either game (even AoS, actually - I don't see why I wouldn't be able to use my Warmachine/Horde or Anima Tactic human fighter as an Empire trooper, since bases don't matter and everything is measured from the miniature anyway). If people use their GW armies to play KoW, it's good for the KoW playing community and it's good for GW sales. Sure, they don't play GW games...and so what? You should know GW isn't alone anymore in the big miniature game market, now.

Why did it become some kind of a war to know if AoS is better than KoW?

To a lot of people, which game system is #1 is vastly important to them and what they will play. If a game is not #1 it is deemed inferior and people write it off.

This is true on pretty much every forum I read and the stem of many arguments.

I think the important thing here is that even if you don't like games funded by crowd funding, you can't deny that Mantic has a lot of popular backing. Added to which many popular fantasy battle tournaments are now running KoW over AoS/8th, Mantic are selling out on a lot of kits and books and I think we can see that there is real demand for Mantic games.

quiestdeus wrote:
I would really love to see Mantic embrace something like what Malifaux or Warmachine did with the kind-of regional champions who tout the game system and organize events/games/tutorials locally.

They're called "Pathfinders", but of course it requires someone in your local area to be willing to do it.

quiestdeus wrote:
If KoW is such a quality game why did people not flock to it prior to GW pulling the plug on 8th edition?

Mainly I would suggest it's because branding and network effects are both incredibly powerful sales and marketing tools. But also, 8th may simply have been good enough for many people that they weren't motivated to switch until WHF became unsupported. Or because KoW wasn't really what they wanted and 8th was, but now 8th is unsupported they'll take what they see as the next best thing. That's a few examples of reasons that apply without even touching on the relative quality of the two games (which of course is subjective anyway).

 Baragash wrote:
Mainly I would suggest it's because branding and network effects are both incredibly powerful sales and marketing tools.

Sorry to rip this out of you argumentation, Baragash, but I can't stress this hard enough.

This, good folks, is why AoS is even being considered as equivalent to vastly superior Wargames. If not for the GW brand backing it up, this "game" would not even be looked at. Period.

It's kind of like how GW is pushing the prices yet again. It's the brand.

Jack Flask wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

They aren't a distributor. At best, they can be considered a part time publisher with Terminator Genisys. ACD is a distributor. They don't sell or market wargames. Warlord does and it specifically markets these competitor products for their games. The Sarista Precision terrain isn't listed under "Sarista Precision products". It's listed under "Bolt Action terrain". That's not even here nor there. You're moving goal posts. The original contention of yours was that no company markets a competitor's product without a mutual deal or the inability to market it themselves. Warlord can make terrain and it's not like Sarista Precision advertises German Infantry or something so your point is demonstrably wrong. How is that so hard to understand.

When you want to act like an authority on a subject, actually take the time to do your research lest you look foolish. Because I provided an example of Warlord Games role as a publisher which you clearly didn't bother to check.

Even more embarrassing is that Warlord games even describes themselves as a distributor in the first sentence of their own about page.

And you are not demonstrating a strong understanding of the term competitor if you think that Warlord games selling another company's products qualifies under that statement. They advertise other companies products because they stock them, meaning not only are they in fact in a deal, but also that they are making profit of those items being sold out of their own webstore. You know, exactly how brick and mortar works. Sure you can go to Sarissa Precision's website and buy it, but Warlord is banking on you buying it from them considering that your on their site presumably ordering other things from them as well. That way not only is Sarissa making a sale on something but so is Warlord Games, and the best part is that warlord doesn't have to develop a competing product. Nothing about that contradicts anything I said.

There was no moving of goal posts, and in fact you've even misrepresented what I said to move the goalposts yourself.

Well, aren't you a barrel of sunshine? In the "About Us" section they describe themselves as a distributor of miniatures in the sense that they distribute their miniatures to local gaming stores. In the same sense that Games Workshop is a distributor. They aren't a distributor like companies like ACD otherwise they would be wholesaling miniatures like X-wing or even 40k. And didn't I mention them being a publisher? I did! Because you didn't read my post in whole. You just flew off the handle trying to put a spin on some information you found without putting consideration towards context. They don't sell these products and different lines. They sell them under their own wargames lines. If they sold them under the "Perry Brothers miniatures" line then yeah, you'd have a point. Furthermore, how they are distrubitor doesn't even matter. We gave you examples of a major miniatures manufacturer advertising other companies products. And yes, they are competitors. Perry Brothers is competing with them for WW2 miniatures and Sarissa Protection is competing with them for terrain sales.

And yeah you did move goal posts. It went from "No major manufacturer advertising competing terrain unless they can't make it themselves" to "But they are a distributor! Why can't you guys see that they are just a distributor?".

 Baragash wrote:

quiestdeus wrote:
I would really love to see Mantic embrace something like what Malifaux or Warmachine did with the kind-of regional champions who tout the game system and organize events/games/tutorials locally.

They're called "Pathfinders", but of course it requires someone in your local area to be willing to do it.

quiestdeus wrote:
If KoW is such a quality game why did people not flock to it prior to GW pulling the plug on 8th edition?

Mainly I would suggest it's because branding and network effects are both incredibly powerful sales and marketing tools. But also, 8th may simply have been good enough for many people that they weren't motivated to switch until WHF became unsupported. Or because KoW wasn't really what they wanted and 8th was, but now 8th is unsupported they'll take what they see as the next best thing. That's a few examples of reasons that apply without even touching on the relative quality of the two games (which of course is subjective anyway).

Thanks for the Pathfinder keyword! Is there a way to look them up and find the one closest to me? I did a BRIEF google search and the top couple links were just about signing up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Swastakowey wrote:
The new book has 2 surprise armies which feature (confirmed feature) pirates, ninjas, other asian themed stuff and more than likely more. These lists are secret. Another book coming is also a historical supplement.

Obviously these are nothing like GW offerings as forces.

Can you PM me the details? I have wanted to start an Asian-inspired force (even considering running Nippon from http://warhammerarmiesproject.blogspot.com/) so I am intrigued. I did not see anything about it in the 2.0 book... is it planned for 3.0? (and if so, when would that be released?)

quiestdeus wrote:

Spoiler:

 Baragash wrote:

quiestdeus wrote:
I would really love to see Mantic embrace something like what Malifaux or Warmachine did with the kind-of regional champions who tout the game system and organize events/games/tutorials locally.

They're called "Pathfinders", but of course it requires someone in your local area to be willing to do it.

quiestdeus wrote:
If KoW is such a quality game why did people not flock to it prior to GW pulling the plug on 8th edition?

Mainly I would suggest it's because branding and network effects are both incredibly powerful sales and marketing tools. But also, 8th may simply have been good enough for many people that they weren't motivated to switch until WHF became unsupported. Or because KoW wasn't really what they wanted and 8th was, but now 8th is unsupported they'll take what they see as the next best thing. That's a few examples of reasons that apply without even touching on the relative quality of the two games (which of course is subjective anyway).

Thanks for the Pathfinder keyword! Is there a way to look them up and find the one closest to me? I did a BRIEF google search and the top couple links were just about signing up.

https://manticforum.com/forum/mantic-games/general-discussion/252473-question-about-pathfinders

quiestdeus wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
The new book has 2 surprise armies which feature (confirmed feature) pirates, ninjas, other asian themed stuff and more than likely more. These lists are secret. Another book coming is also a historical supplement.

Obviously these are nothing like GW offerings as forces.

Can you PM me the details? I have wanted to start an Asian-inspired force (even considering running Nippon from http://warhammerarmiesproject.blogspot.com/) so I am intrigued. I did not see anything about it in the 2.0 book... is it planned for 3.0? (and if so, when would that be released?)

Most of the stuff that was rumoured to be in the 2 lists were jokes (or at least we stretched it a bit so it wasn't obvious), so you won't find ninjas etc in the Uncharted Empires (fantasy) army lists. The historical army lists are being worked on and could suit your needs though.

(If that seems unhelpful, I'm afraid it's as obvious as I'm allowed to be )

No worries Baragash, appreciate what info you can share. Is there an ETA when more information will be available to us plebs, or is that timeline NDA'd too?

Smellingsalts wrote:


The background to KOW is really sad.

The Warhammer background was also what kept me in the game, and we'll have to strongly disagree here. It's not the awesome sorta-historically-based low fantasy that WHFB was, but Age of Sigmar isn't anywhere near that. I like the Mantica background a lot more than what GW is putting out these days. It feels like they're really enjoying what they're writing, rather than just hitting the latest corporate buzzwords and talking up the models, and it's reminiscent of the excellent Fall from Heaven mod for the Civilization games in the way the GW feels reminiscent of Elric and Dune. The background doesn't feel 'copied' from Warhammer Fantasy, at least not to me - they're introducing some minor factions to correspond with the more 'GW-ish' armies, but I can't fault them for that. Dwarves are a rising power in their world, Orcs feel more Tolkienish than GW-like, the main human faction is more Roman-influence than Holy Roman Empire...

And I'll take Brakki Barka over the latest Blood(insert half a word here) any day.

I don't need five billion castable spells to have fun with a game, just like I don't need ten different names for shields or a ton of different special rules. Warhammer was an awesome game, and I wish it was still supported, but for me, if the choice is between Age of Sigmar and Kings of War? I'll be working on some regimental diorama bases, thanks.

If KoW is such a quality game why did people not flock to it prior to GW pulling the plug on 8th edition?

I know the question was for Swastakowey, but I'd like to throw my two cents in here. For me, it was the Warhammer background. I loved playing in the world, I loved reading about it, writing campaign stuff, all sorts of things. I didn't care for a lot of the other stuff GW did, like the price rises, the constant balance cycle and purging of old material, or their general corporate attitude (Spots the Space Marine, anyone?), but none of it was enough to keep me out of the Old World.

Then they blew it up.

Sure, I could just hang around and play eighth edition, just like I could play any earlier edition, but I don't feel 'tied' to GW any more, if that makes sense. It was a bit of brand loyalty, I guess, sort of a feeling of wanting to support the company with this really cool setting despite its flaws. But when one of the entries on their list of 'things we like about Age of Sigmar' is 'we got rid of the old background' (right next to gold spray paint!), that kinda stomps any remaining loyalty into the mud I'm not looking into Kings of War to spite GW, I'm looking into it because GW has nothing left to interest me, and frankly, I wish I had started looking sooner.

quiestdeus wrote:
No worries Baragash, appreciate what info you can share. Is there an ETA when more information will be available to us plebs, or is that timeline NDA'd too?

Either when the book hits the shelves or Mantic will reveal it on their blog in the week leading up to release (I don't know what their marketing plan is).

I'd be extremely surprised if Ronnie can't be badgered into revealing at the tournament this weekend or at the open day...

Well, I am grateful that I wasn't flamed as badly as I imagined I would be. The greater passion is usually on the side of the KOW crowd as their ranks include many former WFB players who are casting their vote of anger by moving to KOW. Unlike many on this forum I have read and played both AOS and KOW, so I do know what I am talking about. There are people that get upset that the things I say aren't facts. The things I say are my truth and so they are facts to me. You don't have to agree, but you can't say your position is a fact either. And it really doesn't matter. This thread was started by someone who wanted our opinions, so I gave him mine. They are just as valid as anyone else.

I own a game store. When we have arguments about whether Mantic ripped off GW. All I have to do is hand the parties involved both rule books and that usually solves the argument. Are the two games different. Yes, because if they are not at least 20% different, Mantic finds itself in a courtroom with GW.

Now my experience with Mantic is that I tried to carry their models, but they were so bad! The only box I could sell were the zombies. While WFB was around, nobody wanted to play KOW. That's right, all the guys who are saying KOW is great would not touch it while WFB was around. They still own all their books and could keep playing WFB. 2nd Edition KOW has some minor tweaks, but those tweaks are not so awesome that if WFB was still around, players would have dropped it for KOW. It is still not as good as WFB, go figure.

You can make the argument that Mantic models are cheaper than GW, but I'll go you one better. Reaper Bones are better than Mantic models, and cost a lot less.

So as a store owner, I am going to carry GW models, not Mantic. Both Aos and KOW rules are free online, so I won't be selling KOW books because they are also low quality art. I will sell the AOS books because I have people buying them who don't even play miniatures. So I have explained why I will not carry Mantic products, but let me show you how I think that will affect the gaming community.

First, in order to support leagues and tournaments I have to provide prizes. I have already explained that the vast majority of people prefer GW models to Mantic. Here I will concede not everyone likes all GW models but enough people prefer more of them to Mantic. Now I cannot afford to give away enough product to cover leagues, tournaments, and promotions (even with entry fees, it costs a lot of money to run a brick and mortar store). GW gives me an allotment to do these things. But how do you think they would react if I told them"Can you give me $400.00 in product for my KOW tournament?" It just is not gonna happen. Now you may be thinking "But Mantic will surely support your tournament with free figs." To which I would direct you to the part of my post regarding the quality of Mantic figs and the preference for players for GW.

So since I am carrying GW figs and books, it makes more fiscal sense to run AOS. As this is the case, I believe more flgs will support AOS. GW will also promote the hell out of it, and they have way more dollars than Mantic to do this. This was the point I was making about Mantic constantly HAVING to rely on crowd funding. It's not that they want to do it, they have to because they are a small fish in GW's pond. They can't keep up. I had to explain this to a card player once who asked why I didn't sell his card game, but I sold Magic. I had to explain that while product diversity is a good thing, you have to weigh the different products. Two products that take the same niche. Which one wins? It's the one that turns over the fastest. I sell it and replace it, let's say 5 times faster than the other product. So while I could stock both products, if brand A makes 5 dollars to brand B. Then I am going to put all of my dollars into brand A.

If this logic holds true for flgs, and in particular flgs with in-store gaming tables, then you promote what you sell. So more people will be exposed to AOS, maybe not right away, but in the long run. If this is true, then you have to look at the tournament scene and how it is effected. Stores run tournaments to stoke interest and sell models. You can't have masters tournaments without the hundreds of tournaments that create tournament players and the community. If AOS is played at the micro levels, then the structure to support KOW masters doesn't exist. The WFB masters scene was never that large, often you saw the same core players traveling around and winning tournaments. The fact that there are a handful of people calling their tournaments "master tournaments" has even less impact than the ETC claiming that they will continue with WFB 9th. The old WFB is fractured into groups that will continue to play 8th, KOW, and some that will create WFB9th. But none will have the power that comes with GW backing.

Another problem is that GW was right about the current WFB8th crowd not buying models. Their lore had created a rut that did not force established players to go out and buy new models. AOS has done that as is evident to me in my sales of GW fantasy figures (which have gone up drastically). One thing that contributed to slow sales was the army book rotation. You get an army book, buy the new figures in it that you like, and wait 4 years (at best) before you see a new book and new models. With AOS, they can drop new models any time they want. They don't need army books, the rules come in the box.

So basically, what I am saying is that flgs will stick with GW models, and with that comes the GW powerhouse that will promote them. The promotion of GW models (and AOS) will alter the tpurnament scene. The altered tournament scene will crowd out KOW and many other similar games. That is why I believe in 3 years AOS will still be chugging along and KOW will have a small niche. And if all of this seems horrible to KOW players, you can do something about it. Go out to your flgs and have them order as many Mantic figs for you as your hobby (and wallet) can support. Create a situation where it does not make sense for me not to carry Mantic. If you look deep inside yourself and simply can't find the will to go out and buy Mantic figs, then you have made my point for me.

One last, the guy who wrote Kings of War used to work for GW. Someone scoffed when I said KOW was a GW rip off and said the guys who designed it worked for GW. I thought that that kinda proved my point, but the guy who wrote KOW was Alessio Cavatore. Now I know game design is hard, but isn't that the same guy who wrote the 6th edition Skaven army book that ended up having 15 pages of FAQ's?

Everything GW writes needs about 15 pages of FAQs... probably why they stopped doing FAQs...

I imagine the problem lies with GW leadership and demands rather than their unfortunate staff. Since many of their writers etc have moved on to make some stunning games.

Smellingsalts wrote:
The things I say are my truth and so they are facts to me.

You're talking about your point of view on the matter.

But these aren't facts. It's just your point of view, based on your experience, local playing community preferences and (maybe) your own preference for GW products. And I would be perfectly fine with it. Just call a dog a dog, not a cat. Facts are never subjective.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. A game system may be judged on its quality alone, not on how well it sells or what the local players usually play, or even the price of the miniatures used for it. You may be willing to trust in AoS, it will still not make it a regimental game like KoW. Also, we can only judge on what is really and already here - not what may come later or not.

Smellingsalts wrote:
One last, the guy who wrote Kings of War used to work for GW. Someone scoffed when I said KOW was a GW rip off and said the guys who designed it worked for GW. I thought that that kinda proved my point, but the guy who wrote KOW was Alessio Cavatore. Now I know game design is hard, but isn't that the same guy who wrote the 6th edition Skaven army book that ended up having 15 pages of FAQ's?

I regularly see the same actors playing very different roles on screen, writers producing very different scripts/books, etc. Just because there is a name on the front, does not mean it will be the same as anything else that name has done

And KoW has gone through extensive playtesting and has dedicated rules committee who filter community feedback to ensure that rules are clear, well written, and fit in with established balance. You are free to check out the FAQ/errata of the current KoW2 rules and see whether you think that KoW is poorly written from a rules point of view.

 Sarouan wrote:

Smellingsalts wrote:
The things I say are my truth and so they are facts to me.

You're talking about your point of view on the matter.

But these aren't facts. It's just your point of view, based on your experience, local playing community preferences and (maybe) your own preference for GW products. And I would be perfectly fine with it. Just call a dog a dog, not a cat. Facts are never subjective.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. A game system may be judged on its quality alone, not on how well it sells or what the local players usually play, or even the price of the miniatures used for it. You may be willing to trust in AoS, it will still not make it a regimental game like KoW. Also, we can only judge on what is really and already here - not what may come later or not.

I don't even know why you bothered replying after that beautiful pearl you highlighted.... It shows a total detachment towards any kind of rational conversation.

"I'm right because I'm right" good'un, boss.

 SilverMK2 wrote:

Smellingsalts wrote:
One last, the guy who wrote Kings of War used to work for GW. Someone scoffed when I said KOW was a GW rip off and said the guys who designed it worked for GW. I thought that that kinda proved my point, but the guy who wrote KOW was Alessio Cavatore. Now I know game design is hard, but isn't that the same guy who wrote the 6th edition Skaven army book that ended up having 15 pages of FAQ's?

I regularly see the same actors playing very different roles on screen, writers producing very different scripts/books, etc. Just because there is a name on the front, does not mean it will be the same as anything else that name has done

And KoW has gone through extensive playtesting and has dedicated rules committee who filter community feedback to ensure that rules are clear, well written, and fit in with established balance. You are free to check out the FAQ/errata of the current KoW2 rules and see whether you think that KoW is poorly written from a rules point of view.

I personally don't believe GW has anyone fulfilling an equivalent role within their design process, and that's why we get what we get.

 Sarouan wrote:


Anyway, it doesn't really matter. A game system may be judged on its quality alone, not on how well it sells or what the local players usually play, or even the price of the miniatures used for it. You may be willing to trust in AoS, it will still not make it a regimental game like KoW. Also, we can only judge on what is really and already here - not what may come later or not.

I mean, emphasis above is mine, that is the entire point... right? People who want a regimental game are not going to be satisfied by AoS. AoS is still a game of fantasy battles, it just does not have the same regimental structure as WHFB. That does not make AoS a bad game though (especially as evidenced by how many of us are have fun playing it). Nor does it make KoW better (or worse), it just makes the two games different, which is honestly pretty awesome.

Being able to play AoS with the folks who enjoy it and seamlessly put those exact same figures on trays to play KoW is such a unique place for the hobby to be in. There is no reason both communities cannot harmonize as the games scratch two very different itches. At the end of the day the rules for both are FREE. You purchase models once and can use them in both systems... I do not understand where the competition comes from. Ok, that was rhetorical, I do understand... but the point is it does not need to be that way.

Smellingsalts wrote:

Another problem is that GW was right about the current WFB8th crowd not buying models. Their lore had created a rut that did not force established players to go out and buy new models. AOS has done that as is evident to me in my sales of GW fantasy figures (which have gone up drastically). One thing that contributed to slow sales was the army book rotation. You get an army book, buy the new figures in it that you like, and wait 4 years (at best) before you see a new book and new models. With AOS, they can drop new models any time they want. They don't need army books, the rules come in the box.

I've already explained why I didn't switch to Kings of War before they axed fantasy (it had nothing to do with which was the better game) and if you find that GW stuff sells better than Mantic stuff at your store, I certainly can't fault you for carrying one over the other! This makes no sense to me, though. You're equating the army book and model release cycle with the lore, and I absolutely cannot see how the lore would have 'not forced' people to get new models. It inspired me to get new models - I was coming up with different tribes for my Waaagh!, figuring out how they ended up under my warboss, which big bosses were trouble and which were relatively loyal, all kinds of fun stuff. The new background does nothing for me like that. They keep saying it's open, it's freeing, it's so big that you can do whatever you want, but all I see is a blank expanse created specifically to talk up the new models. That's not an immersive background, that's a stretched-out Saturday morning cartoon. Are there good bits? Well, yeah, there's some neat stuff, but it's buried under a lot of...less than stellar ideas, and just like I don't want to rewrite the game rules to make it work, I don't want to dig through the muck to find the few remaining cool concepts. Not when there's other options.

Blame the rules, blame the prices, blame the corporate attitude, blame simple neglect for why WFB apparently wasn't selling enough, and that might be the answer. Probably a mixture of all four. But there's no way it had anything to do with the background.

And yes, Cavatore wrote Kings of War. It's incredibly streamlined compared to WFB AND AoS. I don't think he was the underlying reason for the giant FAQ.

I love the a+hole atat.sent of unlike the other people here I read both so I know want I'm talking about. Failing of course to you a brain that would tell him the people unlikely to have read both are the AOS players.

I start to not believe salt own a store as he posted elsewhere. Where your store at salt, fix my misbelief.

Noir wrote:
I love the a+hole atat.sent of unlike the other people here I read both so I know want I'm talking about. Failing of course to you a brain that would tell him the people unlikely to have read both are the AOS players.

I start to not believe salt own a store as he posted elsewhere. Where your store at salt, fix my misbelief.

??? I assume your on a smart phone, autocorrect is not working out for you.

I love the a+hole statment of unlike the other people here I read both so I know want I'm talking about. Failing of course to use a brain that would tell him the people unlikely to have read both are the AOS players.

I start to not believe salt own a store as he posted elsewhere. Where your store at salt, fix my misbelief.

Before WFB went away, Fantasy sales were a rare occurrence. After AOS my fantasy sales are much much better. Lower bar for entry, rules that you may find simple, but that appeal to a larger section of the total population (not just gamers). I loved WFB. I played it from the beginning (still have my little brown books). I do like regimental combat, not just skirmish. I don't like Mantics figures, and we will have to agree to disagree about their rules, which I think are not good. I think pre-measurement + fixed charge rules are a bad idea. I don't like combat phases in which only one side fights. I don't like pulling units apart after combat. I don't like having only 6 spells. I like characters to be customized/different. I like a lot of magic items (which KOW does not have compared to WFB). In KOW, characters act like they are in a skirmish game because they can't join units. I hate that in a regimented combat games. I like beautiful art that is lacking in Mantic products. I like great figures that Mantic doesn't make. For me, in KOW the figures don't even matter. You can put anything you want on the bases that you are pushing around. You can say that about any miniatures game I guess, except it doesn't ring true to me for any game except KOW. The authors don't care whose miniatures you use. KOW is so generic that it feels like vanilla. I hate that about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm not making an A++hole statement. Many of the posts here have actually said they have not read both sets of rules. Others have accused me of not reading KOW, which I have. First as free downloads online, and then when I picked up the KOW 2nd Edition rules. I invite you to come visit my store, At Ease Games, in San Diego and I would enjoy talking to you in person.

So you like AoS for it's simple rules but hate KoW for having simple rules?