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.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Korinov wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The latest kit for AoS is three cavalry for £60 British Pounds!

They are big Kaos Kavalry, but even so it's a bit of a joke, and reinforces the impression that ultimately AoS is not going to be a cheap alternative to WHFB but an expensive one.

I dont know they are a 15 wound box, so quite resilient, I dont think you would need more than 1 box for AoS. Yes not cheap but hopefully not many are required in order to have an enjoyable diverse force.

You mean I need to strike them 15 times with a hammer in order to crush them? Well if that's true I'll admit GW plastics have truly come a long way and the price is justified

£60 buys me:
25 men and the rulebook for Bolt Action with a bit left over for some weapon teams.
A full starter set for Warmachine or Hordes, complete with all the rules, templates and two 25 - 30 point sized armies (Basically two armies that are just a couple of£5 blisters away from being complete).
A Warmachine or Hordes starter warband box and enough blisters and units to make it a complete army. The only thing missing being my templates.
A Darkage starter box and a couple of extra units.
Battletech.
An Infinity army.

For the same price as three average at best models I could start up on an entirely new system and either have a complete army or the start of one, hell in Battletech's case I have enough stuff to potentially get 26 people playing right from the start... Or 25 if I ban the use of the Timberwolf.
£60 is not just a little high, £60 is ludicrously expensive.

You could get a full size Infinity force with rules and army builder!

Hint: you need as many as you want for AoS.

To puree, and Talys: It was quite easy to not know about that this stuff (like it is for all the stuff one doesn't know about). Model rail road stuff and Revell/Tamiya were sold in regular toy stores while hobby shops (with Magic/RPG/GW stuff) were off in side streets where you have to actively look for them (if you know that this stuff exists). Toy soldiers didn't lead in any way to miniature wargaming, they were just sold in toy stores like everything else (kinda like Lego, that also wouldn't lead naturally to wargaming even if one could make rules and use the figurines). Just because some regions have high miniature wargaming background radiation doesn't mean it works the same everywhere and the company just not being interested in expanding their reach in any significant way sounds strange. Don't they like money?

Does GW even advertise at all? I mean like in historic/military modeling magazine and not like Destiny/Time Square? Just some outreach beyond WD (or whatever it's called now). Or some related website (gunpla enthusiasts, toy collectors, even something related to board games or video games?). Even if they don't want to aim at a more general public they can't just assume that everyone who is interested already knows of them (in all adjacent niches). The few external collaborations have shown that there are enough people who don't know of them to even create a bubble (and some of these new fans even stuck around and are now part of the hobby). If I remember correctly they used to participate in toy/gaming conventions but that also seems to have dried up.

Now they have licensed their world to everyone for some video games (well, a third of them for a system that doesn't exist anymore) and most of them look like a way to get a quick licensing fee instead of expanding their reach. If they wanted to reach new customers with AoS then they should have done more to reach new people and if they just wanted to aim at their old customer base why create the New Coke of wargaming?

Mymearan wrote:
Very interesting perspective from exactly the type of person GW seems to be targeting. How come you're on this forum btw?

I was introduced by a friend-of-a-friend who plays 40k. Now, I lurk the News section for Age of Sigmar releases And I lurk the P&M section looking at pretty models and wishing I could paint better. And reading the very useful tips and tricks as I try to improve beyond the point of totally embarrassing.

Vermis wrote:

Trina wrote:Price? Let's be honest the starter box of AoS or anywhere from 1-3 boxes of other miniatures still cost less than a case of boosters for Magic. I think I spend more in one release of Magic the Gathering then I will spend in 3 years of Age of Sigmar.

Gotta be honest, from what I hear of Magic, I don't know if that's saying much. Coming from the other end, I could easily spend much less money on many more minis - especially with £100 Archaons and £60-for-3 cav floating around - and get as much or more enjoyment.

But I'd like to know more. What's the put-off of points systems? What's the difference in taking what you want (sort of) from a hypothetically balanced army list, themed around a faction or army?
From what I remember of that MTG starter I got ages ago, I have the feeling that 'faction' element might be the psychological disconnect between CCGs and TTWGs... But until I find it again to reread the rules so I look like less of a numpty, aren't certain cards restricted and the game somewhat self-levelling (i.e. you need certain numbers of lands, creatures, spells etc. most of the time) anyway?
And in AoS' case, if things are lopsided, who's the 'they' that fixes it?

I think you bring up an interesting point about certain similarities with CCGs, and GW making inroads with that audience. It'll be interesting to see how far they might get, and whether CCG players get a taste for other wargames. (For another what-I-remember-of-MTG moment, if you like the tactical aspects of setting up defences and attacks, rethinking your plans based on the other player's actions and successes, playing your hand at the right moment, and just general resource management, I think some non-AoS/40K wargames have the potential to be a pleasant surprise for you.)

And welcome to Dakka.

Thank you for the warm welcome!

Really, people who stick around and get addicted to Magic fall into 3 categories: the ones who end up buying cases and cases of every new release so that they own everything, the ones that buy specific cards to get really powerful decks, and the ones who play pretty casually, and just do the best with what they have and buy stuff kind of occasionally. I like to think myself as the third group, but I probably buy more cards than I should if my head were screwed on right. Magic definitely isn't a cheap to love.

Oh, and anyone looking for "fair" or "balanced" in the world of Magic, it doesn't exist The game becomes more fair with one more booster, because surely there will be a card that will help you. And if not, there's always the promise of the next booster... and if you totally flop two cases later, there's always the next big release where everything becomes irrelevant anyways, and you can start all over, buying boosters! But that's ok, we love it all the same.

I'm not sure I'll ever buy that Archaon model, so it doesn't really bother me that it's pretty expensive. I guess maybe one day I might buy a bloodthirster, but, maybe, one, ever? So no big deal, if I want to put all that effort into building a model. For the time being, the whole game has cost me $200 or so, plus $100 in paint and paintbrushes. Maybe I'll buy something on Boxing Day, if there's a good sale going, but probably most of my spending money will go to Magic.... I don't see myself buying a lot more AoS stuff, even though we're having fun playing it.

Why no points? It might be easier for newbs to get into it or maybe it just gives the illusion of being easier to get started in. A sleight of hand that cracked the door open Heck, if we had a point-based game, we'd all have to figure out how many points we wanted to buy models for, and knowing us, we'd never get rolling.

Oh to close of this crazy long post, in Magic, we all have decks that aren't really balanced against each other. Once upon a time, we tried, but we long since gave up; there are people who just own way better cards than me, so c'est last vie if I lose against a better deck. Maybe they'll pull some punches or whatever but either way, it's still fun, even if I'm at a disadvantage. So when people say AoS armies aren't really balanced against each other or that it's hard to fine tune, well, it just bothers me... less, I guess.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Korinov wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The latest kit for AoS is three cavalry for £60 British Pounds!

They are big Kaos Kavalry, but even so it's a bit of a joke, and reinforces the impression that ultimately AoS is not going to be a cheap alternative to WHFB but an expensive one.

I dont know they are a 15 wound box, so quite resilient, I dont think you would need more than 1 box for AoS. Yes not cheap but hopefully not many are required in order to have an enjoyable diverse force.

You mean I need to strike them 15 times with a hammer in order to crush them? Well if that's true I'll admit GW plastics have truly come a long way and the price is justified

£60 buys me:
25 men and the rulebook for Bolt Action with a bit left over for some weapon teams.
A full starter set for Warmachine or Hordes, complete with all the rules, templates and two 25 - 30 point sized armies (Basically two armies that are just a couple of£5 blisters away from being complete).
A Warmachine or Hordes starter warband box and enough blisters and units to make it a complete army. The only thing missing being my templates.
A Darkage starter box and a couple of extra units.
Battletech.
An Infinity army.

For the same price as three average at best models I could start up on an entirely new system and either have a complete army or the start of one, hell in Battletech's case I have enough stuff to potentially get 26 people playing right from the start... Or 25 if I ban the use of the Timberwolf.
£60 is not just a little high, £60 is ludicrously expensive.

I could also buy 120 models from Perry miniatures. For three models.

Failing,,Don't think so.

Having a rough start,yes.

Allow me to clear up a few things as im a regular player of AoS and am planning to run events in the upcoming year for our club.

As with most reports our group has some "cooling" interest as well,and some have moved on to play other games for now,but a few others are coming back for a game now and then.Many are taking a "wait and see" approach to see how their favored factions releases are handled.

Theres also players who are simply content with getting the new models painted,working on collecting and wanting a game every few months or so.

Its a slow growth thing that will likely never garner the level of high comp tournament play that 40k has and WHFB did have.But this doesn't mean that players don't want events,it just means the events are more fun/fluff oriented but could certainly still have solid prize support for certain achievements reached...things along those lines.

When the game came out we were all in on the "It needs points" thing and even had a club comp system in the works
We are actually moving away from that now and are finding that using the published Battleplans along with an equal wound count to be quite balanced,we usually restrict Hero/monster and WM scrolls and have a warscroll limit but that's pretty much it.
Example

100 wnds
1-3 Hero,0-3monster,0-3 WM
max 10 WS
No more than one each named hero/monster
All forces need to be from the same faction.

Simple summoning rules-need to have the scroll in your army to summon them(in the total listed above) then summoned models count toward casualties when they are summoned(as per rules).Ive played my Nagash a few times in this 100 wnd format and there was no problem at all..actually lost to a Glottkin/Nurgles deluge list ,great fight though.

Simple and makes for a 1.5 -2.5 hr battle.Also makes it easy if you have an odd number of players or even use teams

The key to making AoS work is using the published Battleplans(scenarios) Adding in the Time of War rules for the different realms adds a very fun aspect to the games.

And anyone who claims it to be totally void of any tactics or strategy simply has not played the game or just have not given it a fair shot using a battleplan,It is no more or less of a wargame than 40k is,it doesn't have all the convoluted layers of special rules/exceptions to keep track of that 40k has but that doesn't mean its a "simpleton" game.For many of us that enjoy it,that is a selling point...easy to play but much more to it to master.

Now it seems that there is still a lot of comparing KoW to AoS going on.I play KoW and I love the movement aspects that it captures from what WHFB was..but lets be honest here,KoW is NOT a mass fantasy army game.Actually I would say KoW uses far less miniatures than many skirmish games mainly due to the fact that you only have your models on the movement trays to represent the units size.I mean you could just place one model on each tray and as long as the tray is the proper size it would work to represent just fine...I don't do that of course and I know most wouldn't even considrer it.But seriously ,KoW is just battling movement trays with each side having from 8-14 or so units(movement trays) to fight with...

 heartserenade wrote:

I could also buy 120 models from Perry miniatures. For three models.

By that logic, I could go to Amazon and buy 200 WWII Army Men Action Figures (plastic toy soldiers), including banners for the USA, UK, Germany, and Japan and a carrying case (bucket) for just $18.95. Shipped to your home. They're even in all sorts of dynamic poses, and I bet if you spent 10 hours each painting and basing them, they'd even look pretty decent from tabletop distance. They're even 2 inches tall, and out of 169 reviews customers rate them 4.8 out of 5 stars.

http://www.amazon.com/Action-Figures--soldiers-Bucket-Soldiers/dp/B00BT5JBVY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1448949381&sr=8-2&keywords=toy+soldiers

Essentially, hobby pricing, whether it's Bolt Action or 40k or AoS, comes down to what's the maximum that largest group of people who really, really like this specific toy soldier are willing to pay? That's what the price of the model will be set at.

Minijack wrote:
 Now it seems that there is still a lot of comparing KoW to AoS going on.I play KoW and I love the movement aspects that it captures from what WHFB was..but lets be honest here,KoW is NOT a mass fantasy army game.Actually I would say KoW uses far less miniatures than many skirmish games mainly due to the fact that you only have your models on the movement trays to represent the units size.I mean you could just place one model on each tray and as long as the tray is the proper size it would work to represent just fine...I don't do that of course and I know most wouldn't even considrer it.But seriously ,KoW is just battling movement trays with each side having from 8-14 or so units(movement trays) to fight with...

Ummm, yeah... The reason you give for KoW not being mass battle is one of the reason WHFB wasn't really a mass battle game. Most mass battle games treat infantry and most smaller model units like KoW. Not the other way around.

Minijack wrote:
Now it seems that there is still a lot of comparing KoW to AoS going on.I play KoW and I love the movement aspects that it captures from what WHFB was..but lets be honest here,KoW is NOT a mass fantasy army game.Actually I would say KoW uses far less miniatures than many skirmish games mainly due to the fact that you only have your models on the movement trays to represent the units size.I mean you could just place one model on each tray and as long as the tray is the proper size it would work to represent just fine...I don't do that of course and I know most wouldn't even considrer it.But seriously ,KoW is just battling movement trays with each side having from 8-14 or so units(movement trays) to fight with...

That's... kinda the point of a mass battle game, you shouldn't have individual models. Even under 8th ed WHFB was really just a HUGE skirmish game.

 Talys wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:

I could also buy 120 models from Perry miniatures. For three models.

By that logic, I could go to Amazon and buy 200 WWII Army Men Action Figures (plastic toy soldiers), including banners for the USA, UK, Germany, and Japan and a carrying case (bucket) for just $18.95. Shipped to your home. They're even in all sorts of dynamic poses, and I bet if you spent 10 hours each painting and basing them, they'd even look pretty decent from tabletop distance. They're even 2 inches tall, and out of 169 reviews customers rate them 4.8 out of 5 stars.

http://www.amazon.com/Action-Figures--soldiers-Bucket-Soldiers/dp/B00BT5JBVY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1448949381&sr=8-2&keywords=toy+soldiers

Essentially, hobby pricing, whether it's Bolt Action or 40k or AoS, comes down to what's the maximum that largest group of people who really, really like this specific toy soldier are willing to pay? That's what the price of the model will be set at.

Do you play with miniatures or with strawmen?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Noir wrote:

Minijack wrote:
 Now it seems that there is still a lot of comparing KoW to AoS going on.I play KoW and I love the movement aspects that it captures from what WHFB was..but lets be honest here,KoW is NOT a mass fantasy army game.Actually I would say KoW uses far less miniatures than many skirmish games mainly due to the fact that you only have your models on the movement trays to represent the units size.I mean you could just place one model on each tray and as long as the tray is the proper size it would work to represent just fine...I don't do that of course and I know most wouldn't even considrer it.But seriously ,KoW is just battling movement trays with each side having from 8-14 or so units(movement trays) to fight with...

Ummm, yeah... The reason you give for KoW not being mass battle is one of the reason WHFB wasn't really a mass battle game. Most mass battle games treat infantry and most smaller model units like KoW. Not the other way around.

And yep, pretty much. I can't even think of a mass battle game that treats each model as a single unit. Just imagine controlling hundreds (maybe even thousands) of troops and you have to move each and every single one of them. One turn would last forever.

 Talys wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:

I could also buy 120 models from Perry miniatures. For three models.

By that logic, I could go to Amazon and buy 200 WWII Army Men Action Figures....

No, that's not the same logic at all. Perry miniatures are high quality plastics and metals designed for wargaming, not cheaply made soft plastic army men.

I've seen a few comments about AOS being the main game due to the statue at Warhammer HQ in Nottingham. I visited the place less than a month ago and I can say that there is no statue in sight now

The statue is down? Really? Interesting.

200 Army Men for $19 sounds a great deal, and lets you get up and running with some fun games that you don't have to take seriously because the start-up cost is less than a few sandwiches.

 Talys wrote:

 heartserenade wrote:

I could also buy 120 models from Perry miniatures. For three models.

By that logic, I could go to Amazon and buy 200 WWII Army Men Action Figures (plastic toy soldiers), including banners for the USA, UK, Germany, and Japan and a carrying case (bucket) for just $18.95. Shipped to your home. They're even in all sorts of dynamic poses, and I bet if you spent 10 hours each painting and basing them, they'd even look pretty decent from tabletop distance. They're even 2 inches tall, and out of 169 reviews customers rate them 4.8 out of 5 stars.

http://www.amazon.com/Action-Figures--soldiers-Bucket-Soldiers/dp/B00BT5JBVY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1448949381&sr=8-2&keywords=toy+soldiers

Essentially, hobby pricing, whether it's Bolt Action or 40k or AoS, comes down to what's the maximum that largest group of people who really, really like this specific toy soldier are willing to pay? That's what the price of the model will be set at.

For three GW miniatures NOW you could buy about 40 (aka a Chaos battalion) or 15 (3 boxes of chaos knights, which perfectly fit what these are meant to be - Archaon's Sword of Chaos) a couple of years ago. So what you're saying is that right now there are more people willing to pay more cash for less miniatures in AoS's target customers and that this is GW working as intended?

Welp, I guess it fits with the dying base of AoS. The few that resist are true fanatics and white knights that have the will - and the desire to dump their huge income of cash - to defend and support the brand to its final twitches.

Look at that milking go!

To hell with your army men, I've bought and sold cars for the same price as GW products in Oz.

I've skipped most of this thread because I can only watch Talys run up and down the field with the goalposts in hand before I get exhausted, but I do have one thing to ask:

Do we actually know that it's failing? What hard data is there to show that it's failing?

I ask because without that information the entire conversation comes down to perception, and really that's not worth a great deal.


[EDIT]: And to the people defending the AUD$170 box'o'3 knights, get a grip. That is a ludicrous price. No amount of mental gymnastics, goal-post moving, false equivalencies and cognitive dissonance is ever going to justify that price.

What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

We would be wise not tot forget the BaC box and its astounding success.

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

To clarify, I was told specifically WHFB/AoS, not overall.

Noir wrote:

Minijack wrote:
 Now it seems that there is still a lot of comparing KoW to AoS going on.I play KoW and I love the movement aspects that it captures from what WHFB was..but lets be honest here,KoW is NOT a mass fantasy army game.Actually I would say KoW uses far less miniatures than many skirmish games mainly due to the fact that you only have your models on the movement trays to represent the units size.I mean you could just place one model on each tray and as long as the tray is the proper size it would work to represent just fine...I don't do that of course and I know most wouldn't even considrer it.But seriously ,KoW is just battling movement trays with each side having from 8-14 or so units(movement trays) to fight with...

Ummm, yeah... The reason you give for KoW not being mass battle is one of the reason WHFB wasn't really a mass battle game. Most mass battle games treat infantry and most smaller model units like KoW. Not the other way around.

+1

Napoleonics games that work on a unit over model basis aren't mass battle games? Puh-lease.

Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

We would be wise not tot forget the BaC box and its astounding success.

Unwisely, I completely forgot about that.

Baragash wrote:

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

To clarify, I was told specifically WHFB/AoS, not overall.

Ah, ok. So compared to WHFB numbers then? With the lack of 40k releases for a while, it should still be interesting to see the interim report.

 Baragash wrote:

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

To clarify, I was told specifically WHFB/AoS, not overall.

So that's box sets and panic buying, followed by tumbleweed?

Herzlos wrote:

 Baragash wrote:

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

To clarify, I was told specifically WHFB/AoS, not overall.

So that's box sets and panic buying, followed by tumbleweed?

Sounds like a very likely scenario.

 Thud wrote:

 Baragash wrote:
What I've been told 3rd hand on the ex-employee grapevine isn't "hard data", but the YoY I was quoted was double-digit positive for the first two months then double-digit negative after that.

Assuming that's correct, that would mean that Eldar, Space Marines and AOS release combine for a great success, while AOS on its own is a disaster.

Considering GW have rolled out 3 out of 4 of their 40k heavy hitters in this financial period (Eldar, Tau, SM, lacking an edition change), I'd expect moderate growth. Devation from that would be a god pointer to AOS's success.

In the past three years GW have released all of their 40K heavy hitters including SMs, Tau, and a new edition rulebook, multiple times, and registered sales decline year on year. There's no reason to expect things to have changed recently, so to be honest I would expect further decline in January's mid-year report.

If we see a sales increase in the January mid-year report, it presumably would signal a massive success for AoS.

I think if sales are up, it'll be a massive success of BaC, not AoS.

It was a brilliant move launching AoS and BaC in the same quarter, because we'll never be able to split them out. Desperate, but brilliant.

Hopefully they can push Blood Bowl out next year to mask the performance of AoS there too.

Herzlos wrote:
I think if sales are up, it'll be a massive success of BaC, not AoS.

It was a brilliant move launching AoS and BaC in the same quarter, because we'll never be able to split them out. Desperate, but brilliant.

Hopefully they can push Blood Bowl out next year to mask the performance of AoS there too.

Mask the lack of AoS sales from who? People on dakka? It's not like they can hide it from themselves which is what matters the most to their decision making. Even if they fool us into thinking AoS is doing well, so what? Most aren't going to buy it anyway because it's a terrible game that deserves to die (regardless of sales)

 Kirasu wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I think if sales are up, it'll be a massive success of BaC, not AoS.

It was a brilliant move launching AoS and BaC in the same quarter, because we'll never be able to split them out. Desperate, but brilliant.

Hopefully they can push Blood Bowl out next year to mask the performance of AoS there too.

Mask the lack of AoS sales from who? People on dakka? It's not like they can hide it from themselves which is what matters the most to their decision making. Even if they fool us into thinking AoS is doing well, so what? Most aren't going to buy it anyway because it's a terrible game that deserves to die (regardless of sales)

All they need to do is keep the rot from being seen by the investors. Those are the people they really need to mask the decline from. Do remember that the majority of investors have zero to no knowledge of the community (or desire to know of it) They care about numbers, and that's what GW is trying to do.

 Kirasu wrote:

Mask the lack of AoS sales from who?

I am guessing from investors?

What solid Information we have worldwide is from independents who report less sales than WHFB or no sales at all, everything else are assumptions, speaking for my country the story is less sales or no sales.

We can assume that the range has failed, but we do not know what targets GW has set for the range and what demographic they want to have, so we assume the AOS to be a replacement of WHFB and set to the same standards when this may not be true.

For example GW may have in their plan to have just 40k AOS be in the place of LOTR/Hobbit and create specialists games to fill the gap that has been created by the fall of WHFB as the second core game.