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.

And the sad fest continues....

RoperPG wrote:
Only thing I would suggest is that on anecdotal evidence, the 'anti-AoS' brigade appear to be the majority in Aus/NZ.

I think you'll find in the online wargames community in general Oz/NZ is over represented given the small population, so it might simply be your perceived bias to Oz/NZ making complaints is simply because Oz/NZ has a reasonably large online community.

I'm considering giving it a go, having made peace with the death of WHFB. KoW doesn't seem to be for me and there's not much in the way of generic fantasy skirmish games (it's apparently steampunk/sci-fi or bust). Just treat AoS as a fresh start: It's NOT WHFB and will never be, it just so happens to use the same models and the universe is set in the grim darkness of the far future...hey wait a second

I'd recommend finding out if there's a group playing it near you, if so give it a whirl with existing minis (it'll only cost you the price of printing the paper/ink) then see if it's for you or not. From what I gather, AoS is a quick and casual game to unwind and have a bit of a good time.

If AoS isn't for you, there's a whole host of alternative games out there to play: The many historicals, Frostgrave, X-wing, Warmahordes, KoW, and so on.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

RoperPG wrote:
Only thing I would suggest is that on anecdotal evidence, the 'anti-AoS' brigade appear to be the majority in Aus/NZ.

I think you'll find in the online wargames community in general Oz/NZ is over represented given the small population, so it might simply be your perceived bias to Oz/NZ making complaints is simply because Oz/NZ has a reasonably large online community.

Quite likely, my only knowledge of gaming outside my area is the internet any way! (I did say anecdotal evidence...).


@OP I'd recommend giving AoS a proper go with an open mind.
I've already seen a number of the folks in my local club who were vehemently anti-AoS to begin with have now not only started playing but actively evangelising. Was quite a shock...

RoperPG wrote:
Check in your local GW/FLGS/gaming clubs, see how it's doing there, make your decision based on that.

I definitely agree with that! If your local area is playing it, might be something to seriously consider

RoperPG wrote:
US about evens depending on where you are

This I think is not something that you can say - and if anything, you would say the opposite. In other words, it's one thing to say there's not enough evidence to determine how AoS is truly doing, but to say it's "about even" is: 1) Going against the evidence available "online" 2) Not supported by any fact that I have seen. Indications are in general certainly the opposite, that it is struggling to be adopted... and while I'm totally onboard with folks saying to try it and make up your own mind (which is what my first post here was) to take that a step further and say the reception in the US has been "even" between adoption and rejection is just not supportable.

They renamed Fantasy, changing it to Age of Sigmar.

It was going to be 'Age of Fantasy', but then someone in the boardroom pointed out that it sounded like a cheap erotic thriller on Amazon books.


I'm really curious to know how Tomb Kings fare in the new rules

 RiTides wrote:

This I think is not something that you can say - and if anything, you would say the opposite. In other words, it's one thing to say there's not enough evidence to determine how AoS is truly doing, but to say it's "about even" is: 1) Going against the evidence available "online" 2) Not supported by any fact that I have seen. Indications are in general certainly the opposite, that it is struggling to be adopted... and while I'm totally onboard with folks saying to try it and make up your own mind (which is what my first post here was) to take that a step further and say the reception in the US has been "even" between adoption and rejection is just not supportable.

First, I don't think it really matters how well the game is doing. Either you have local players to play with or you don't. The miniature community is smallish and tends to heavily favor local trends, so even if 40k is the most popular miniature game in the world, if everybody locally plays Malifaux, then that's what matters.

Second, GW is continuing to support AoS heavily. There's new models pretty much every month, and AoS seemed to be equal promotional support to 40k. So, if you are in one of those pockets of AoS players, then game is supported enough to ensure new models and content for a long time to come. The pocket AoS communities should be plenty healthy as a result, even if the national adoption rate is not as strong.

Third, I think the public opinion pendulum on AoS is swaying the other direction now. In this forum, it used to just be two or three people defending AoS. Now there are a dozen. Why, in this thread alone, someone decided to compare AoS to a poop sandwich, and it wasn't me who rushed to its defense. I know! I'm as surprised as you are!

As far as this forum goes, I am hopeful for a more positive tone and I do think we're getting there. Part of this is just folks who aren't as interested moving on. I just think you can't then say it's "about even", when if you were to make a new "How is AoS doing?" thread, you'd certainly see more than the "poop sandwich" comment

I don't think hating on AoS is helpful and I'd love to see more useful discussion . But I know how AoS is doing not just as my store, but in most of Maryland, where GW has been extremely popular (I used to game at their HQ all the time until they consolidated it elsewhere). So statements like it's "about even" are where I think people need to be more realistic, is all.

But I'm all for reasonable discussion rather than "poop sandwiches"

I don't think hating on AoS is helpful and I'd love to see more useful discussion .

I don't see the logic in this argument. If someone liked WFB and wanted it to get better and get better support, but got AoS. Then i can't think of many things that would make him happier, then AoS going down and all people who were saying WFB was bad and AoS is the good thing expiriencing their game going down the drain. Considering some WFB players may have waited for WFB getting better for 3-4 editions, it is only natural that they want AoS players expiriance the same thing only in a shorter time frame, so it hurts more.

Edit: delete...no use

 RiTides wrote:
As far as this forum goes, I am hopeful for a more positive tone and I do think we're getting there. Part of this is just folks who aren't as interested moving on. I just think you can't then say it's "about even", when if you were to make a new "How is AoS doing?" thread, you'd certainly see more than the "poop sandwich" comment

The problem is, I don't think anybody really knows what a good adoption rate constitutes. I mean, Infinity just celebrated its 10th year anniversary, but I know I haven't been hearing about it for ten years. Malifaux is 6 or 7 years old, and I never hear anyone talk about it. Warmachine took half a decade to reach any sort of prominence. Age of Sigmar certainly has a better adoption rate than Dark Age or Wrath of Kings. What exactly should AoS's adoption rate look like? How can we decide if it is above the norm or below it, if we have no idea what the norm is?

The only miniature game that has had the success that people seem to think AoS should be seeing is X-Wing, which has all sorts of extenuating circumstances (it's Star Wars, built on a tried and true decade old game system, no hobby aspect, sold in Target) that prove that it is the exception rather than the rule. Kings of War seems to have increased in popularity as well, but mainly because WHFB died - again, extenuating circumstances in its favor. Even then, Kings of War is on its second edition and is capitalizing on WHFB's death by releasing books specifically tailored to WHFB factions.

The truth is, outside of X-Wing, you can't point out ANY miniature game which has had a faster adoption than Age of Sigmar. I don't think you can, at least. It's just that people expect AoS to instantly be at full popularity yesterday.

I think another (hopefully) plus point for AoS is coming in the next couple of months if rumours are true;

It seems to me that a lot of the issues with AoS have moved on from the actual system to the setting, with "endless legions of immortals" deemed to be the backdrop for the whole setting.

If rumourmill is on point, then we'll shortly be seeing an AoS faction that is entirely mortal, has actually had to survive in the mortal realms, and isn't "without number". If the backdrop for them cancels out a few of these issues, it might start winning over some of the fluff stalwarts. Maybe Bottle too.

 Sqorgar wrote:
The truth is, outside of X-Wing, you can't point out ANY miniature game which has had a faster adoption than Age of Sigmar. I don't think you can, at least. It's just that people expect AoS to instantly be at full popularity yesterday.

GW is still the biggest games company around and AoS has one of the largest communities that already own the models so comparing its adoption rate to other games is mostly meaningless.

AoS needs to have huge popularity yesterday and it needs to maintain that because GW are investing a ton of money in it and it's costing them a ton of money distributing it and maintaining the existing model range established by WHFB. We'll see how it goes, but if AoS isn't hugely popular and sustain that huge popularity it's going to be canned by GW or at the very least stagnate like WHFB has for the past 5 years, they can't afford to be investing in something that isn't pulling in big money.

It is relevant to the individual how both the local and global popularity of AoS is doing. A smaller company can afford to have games that are popular among smaller communities, GW apparently can't.... otherwise they wouldn't have killed WHFB which was still popular in some areas, just not globally.

I don't think you can point to the adoption rate it has had as a positive either, though - this game has the full might of GW behind it, and their stores are pushing it Really hard (like I said, the local manager almost physically restrained me to give me a demo ). That may well lead to it having enough adoption to continue, but like you say, it's hard to know what the needed rate is - the investment into AoS is likely much higher than the other games mentioned, even if only in opportunity cost (having "blown up" the Old World to create it, even with a major PC gaming coming out for it next year in Total War).

So, I get the frustration people have, but in response to Makumba, the only reason I think a former fantasy player could have for wanting AoS to not do well is for another ruleset to become more established (such a 9th Age, or KoW). But because the games are so different, one might not necessitate the other... I'm really hopeful for KoW adoption even though I think with all that GW is putting into AoS, it will continue for some time even without a great adoption rate.

I think part of the expectation of adoption also comes from GW's "new edition" style of releases in the past - almost every fantasy gamer buys the next edition, which obviously isn't happening here (complicated by the fact that the initial rules are free, of course ). So, GW is going through a phase of rejection by their current customers to seek new ones... it is a huge gamble but it seems to me that they are totally committed to it. Will be interesting to see how it plays out, for sure!

Anyway, for my part I want all the best for AoS and KoW, but I just still can't figure out GW's AoS market - walking into the FLGS the other day, the Archaeon "battletome" is $58. Most wargamers are going to quickly know that it's only the basic rules that are free... and will they really be frequently shelling out for these kinds of products? The production quality is high, but I just don't see the hook for that kind of price.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:GW is still the biggest games company around and AoS has one of the largest communities that already own the models so comparing its adoption rate to other games is mostly meaningless.

It'd give them a small leg up, but considering that most people bought those models for a completely different game, I think the legacy models are more beneficial to new AoS players looking for more models than existing WHFB looking to play a new game with them.

AoS needs to have huge popularity yesterday and it needs to maintain that because GW are investing a ton of money in it and it's costing them a ton of money distributing it and maintaining the existing model range established by WHFB. We'll see how it goes, but if AoS isn't hugely popular and sustain that huge popularity it's going to be canned by GW or at the very least stagnate like WHFB has for the past 5 years, they can't afford to be investing in something that isn't pulling in big money.

It's fair to say that AoS has more reach than any other miniatures game out there, bar 40k and X-Wing. There was a lot of resistance against AoS initially, due to replacing WHFB and the confusion concerning the lack of points, but as that slowly dies away, the availability of AoS will become a huge bonus for its adoption in the future. In other words, it has nowhere to go but up, and according to that one recent report, GW's sales are down "only" 5%, meaning AoS wasn't a cataclysmic bomb.

It is relevant to the individual how both the local and global popularity of AoS is doing. A smaller company can afford to have games that are popular among smaller communities, GW apparently can't.... otherwise they wouldn't have killed WHFB which was still popular in some areas, just not globally.

I think WHFB was dwindling - that is, the number of players leaving the game (or playing it without buying new models) was greater than the number of new players coming into it. At some point, WHFB wouldn't have been sustainable. Given that there's about a two year lead time on designing new models (possibly longer when creating a new game system from scratch), they needed to plan ahead. In other words, WHFB was killed not because it wasn't successful enough, but that it wouldn't be one day. I don't think AoS needs to be an instant hit, just so long as it shows the potential for growth in the long run - which I think it is showing.

(and truth be told, GW could use a few lean years to teach them some humility. I mean, sales drop 5% and now they have actual sales? In January, they'll release starter boxes with exceptional value. If nothing else, AoS is helping 40k players get some value)

RiTides wrote:I don't think you can point to the adoption rate it has had as a positive either, though - this game has the full might of GW behind it, and their stores are pushing it Really hard (like I said, the local manager almost physically restrained me to give me a demo ). That may well lead to it having enough adoption to continue, but like you say, it's hard to know what the needed rate is - the investment into AoS is likely much higher than the other games mentioned, even if only in opportunity cost (having "blown up" the Old World to create it, even with a major PC gaming coming out for it next year in Total War).

It's been anything but a smooth transition, and I'm not sure anyone could've predicted exactly how not smooth it would go. I mean, there would be some resistance after losing WHFB, of course, but a large majority of the online AoS hating has come from people that didn't play WHFB. I guess you could say that GW's crappy business practices engendered a lot of ill will, and AoS became the catalyst for all of it to come pouring out. I don't think GW expected that.

I think that AoS will be in the top 5 miniature games eventually - actually, is there a list anywhere of the top miniature games? I'm curious what the top 5 would look like. I'm guessing 40k, X-Wing (or X-Wing then 40k), then maybe Warmachine. What's #4? Infinity? Bolt Action?

Anyway, for my part I want all the best for AoS and KoW, but I just still can't figure out GW's AoS market - walking into the FLGS the other day, the Archaeon "battletome" is $58. Most wargamers are going to quickly know that it's only the basic rules that are free... and will they really be frequently shelling out for these kinds of products? The production quality is high, but I just don't see the hook for that kind of price.

I think Archaon and the Everchosen were big ticket items released specifically for Christmas. I don't think the rest of the AoS releases will be anywhere near that - but I guess the real test will be the new Dwarves in January.

Top 5 TT games last I knew where
1) 40k
2) X wing
3) x wing armada
4) warmachine
5) hordes

 Chute82 wrote:
Top 5 TT games last I knew where
1) 40k
2) X wing
3) x wing armada
4) warmachine
5) hordes

Warmachine and Hordes are kind of the same game...

Actually, thanks for the list. I googled it and came across TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SPRING 2015 - but the website also had older versions going back through at least 2010:

TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE GAMES--FALL/HOLIDAY 2014
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SUMMER 2014
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SPRING 2014
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--FALL 2013
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SUMMER 2013
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SPRING 2013
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--FALL 2012
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SUMMER 2012
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SPRING 2012
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--Q4 2011
TOP 5 NON-COLLECTIBLE MINIATURE LINES--SUMMER 2011

Pretty interesting stuff, though I would've liked more than just the top 5 (and to know how exactly the lists are created). Summer 2013 is the last time Warhammer Fantasy showed up. Before that, it was pretty consistently 1) 40k 2) X-Wing 3) WHFB 4) Warmachine. After WHFB disappears from the list, Warmachine never really moves up, but instead has Star Trek Attack Wing inserted above it. Then that disappears, only to be replaced by Armada. So X-Wing is so popular, even its spin offs are more popular than Warmachine. I don't know if Warmachine would be higher if Hordes was included though.

So, it's safe to say that 40k, X-Wing, and Warmachine are the biggest mini games out there. Warmachine apparently has problems beating whatever X-Wing spin off is popular during that trimester. Before X-Wing, however, the list is fairly consistent. 40k, Warmachine, WHFB, Hordes, Malifaux. Malifaux is so small though, I can only believe that the gulf between Warmachine and whatever is next is pretty huge. Like, 40k, X-Wing, Warmachine, BIG GAP, and then everything else. I would've thought Infinity would've been higher than Malifaux though. Go back to 2010 and Malifaux is replaced with Reaper miniatures.

I guess this is just a really long way of saying that AoS will probably get into the top 5 pretty easily.

Warmachine and hordes are separate because of legal reasons having to do with one of the original owners leaving before hordes was developed.

Save yourself. Run away. Go elsewhere.

 Chute82 wrote:
Warmachine and hordes are separate because of legal reasons having to do with one of the original owners leaving before hordes was developed.

There is no way this is true.

Minijack wrote:

Spoiler:

 Vermis wrote:
On the other hand...

Minijack wrote:Its a very flexible ruleset

Thin, flat things tend to be more flexible, yes.

However if you liked playing in more casual/fluff oriented,non comptetative conditions in the past

There's little fluff beyond sigmarines beating everything in sight. That also describes how 'non-competitive' it is.

customization is even encouraged by GW as evidenced by the events they have held at WW thus far.

Did those involve the campaigns where participants had to, erm, compete for points and objectives?

It is much cheaper to get into than previous editions.Sure the models are up in price as per always but you just don't need as many,,actually for most all units purchasing more than one box is just too much on the field.

Until you get a hold of those battlescrolls that give you great extra rules for buying the 100-200-mini bundles for about £500-1000.

The new model quality is top notch though.

They managed to get the hot plastic into the moulds okay.

They are expensive but by far some of the best fantasy model kits available on the market.

They have skulls and spikes and skulls and hammers and lightning bolts and skulls.

And round bases showcase so much better than square.

I... have no idea what this has got to do with things. Even if it was hard truth.

Ruleset is clear and solid,,but the game just feels empty overall.

It revolves around tactics and maneouvre on the tabletop, not listbuilding a set of special rules beforehand.

If you are in it for the competition than KoW is the way to go.

If you are in it for a quick playing but reasonably thinky game of mass battles and unit-block maneouvre, then KoW is the way to go.

RoperPG wrote:TL;DR - don't ask the internet about AoS. Check in your local GW/FLGS/gaming clubs, see how it's doing there, make your decision based on that.

I would say make your decision on what you like, whether that turns out to be AoS or not. The state of your local gaming scene is one thing, but it'd be a sad kind of hobby to just settle for something you don't particularly enjoy.

Though I guess GW has prepared many, many gamers for that.

If nothing else, the rules are free

The entire four pages of core rules are free, as are the hurried out rules for all the old Warhammer range. All the new factions' rules are hidden between ~£30 'battletome' covers, though.

Bet you're glad you asked, Khrolek.

And the sad fest continues....

So,are you going to refute Vermis' points or just continue with the ad-hominem?

Vermis' last point is false. The rules for the new factions are available free from the website too.

The new line of models are great and the rules seem pretty simple. I don't actually play...just collect/build/paint the GW mini's because they are awesome.

AoS seems to be aimed the the casual/newer player. It does seem to be the kind of game where you'd pick up a case of beer and have a football game on in the background, which is ideal for some of us.

I just don't have the time and desire to learn/play/compete/commit to a huge, in-depth tactical mass battle game. The new AoS ruleset has me considering thinking about maybe entertaining the idea of trying a game because it's so much more casual.

TL;DR- different folks, different strokes. I like making models and pretending to think about playing, so AoS is fine by me.

Grimtuff wrote;


"So,are you going to refute Vermis' points or just continue with the ad-hominem?"

You would like that wouldn't you...

But since it quite obvious that I take a more positive view of the game and Vermis takes a more negative view,I don't see the need to expand further.

its 6 mos after the big release and the haters are STILL on game forums attempting to ram home their point that AoS has failed miserably(as if whfb was rocking a huge community in the past few editions).Yet I see a slow but growing interest in those who want to try it out,a few jumping on board even.And I really should point out that its not just on game forums as im an active member of a large game club and I run game nights at the largest game shop in the city(75+ patrons in the store is normal).I hear the comments and the jabs first hand,face to face and that's fine.especially since most are from long time fantasy players that have reason to be frustrated.I played 8th as well but wasn't that invested in the game.
I also get the pleasure of telling potential new players about the hobby and the game.Kids with their mothers and fathers are always interested in what we are doing seeing all the fantastic figures on the board.Some are intrigued about the need to assemble and paint them,others are turned off by it.And of course price is an issue for some.Then theres always former players from many editions past that are interested in what it has become and most all are very positive about it.Some say they will try a game once they get an army together.

The bottom line is,its time to move on past the hate.Im sorry AoS is not what some wanted,hell I would have preferred something in between AoS and what would be 9th edition.


Its just another game...play and let play

 Khrolek wrote:
just curious, but how popular is AoS?

Hard numbers aren't available, but GW apparently suffered another drop in overall sales this past half-year, so it's clearly not blowing the doors off. The most reliable report I've seen is from Bell of Lost Souls' Larry Vela, who said the following:

Bigred wrote:What we've heard from every retailer out there was a strong robust year up until AoS hit on July 4th weekend - followed by the worst 12-week summer for GW sales they had ever seen. (One retailers said is was the worst summer of GW sales in 17 years!), followed by a leveling off and slow regrowth with the arrival of Tau. Still, not back up up to the pre AoS levels.

Several retailers told us they would never treat GW the same after that summer and are strongly diversifying product lines away from them.

I would assume that many people lost interest in GW over the summer and are slowly percolating back. Also note that Tau was never that much of a favorite army and Heresy while a wet dream for veterans is still kind of a niche within a niche for new players. If GW can kickoff 2016 with some strong popular armies getting good releases, I would expect to see interest and traffic pick up again. But Harlequins and Ad-Mech is a hard act to follow.

[...]

I'm certain GW has felt the pain of AoS behind the scenes, regardless of the public face they are putting out. Not one retailer talked about it in positive terms with us.

So, not great.

Honestly, it's hard to see how there could be any other result - AoS just doesn't have much going on to recommend it. The rules are sold as a narrative framework, but it doesn't provide any tools to that end. It just seems to operate under the daft assumption that making it impossible to be "competitive" immediately makes the game a great storytelling experience, rather than just a mess. It also doesn't help that they haven't provided a good world to tell stories in. Its not that the AoS setting lacks for background - it's got far more fluff, on a page-for-page basis as most settings at this point in their lifecycle - but what's there is just so hollow. GW isn't interested in creating anything for AoS that can't be poured into a plastic mold and sold at premium prices, and you just don't get a good world that way.

The bright side of AoS is that this is the game and the universe that GW has been wanting to make for years now. It's the ultimate expression of the confounding strategies and toxic attitude that has defined the company for close to a decade, and all indicators show that it's failed pretty spectacularly. A clear rejection by the market may cause GW to rethink its approach. In fact, there's some indication that it's already happening.

You know, I absolutely hated the idea of Age of Sigmar the minute I heard about it. It is funny that I took so much offense to it, I hadn't played a game of Fantasy for years, stopped really caring about 40k once 3rd edition ended, played some 4th and 5th just because I had armies. But, it still didn't excite me. Once I came around to the idea of Age of Sigmar... I am not going to lie, I am the most excited I have been for a game in years.

Yes, the ruleset is very bare right now, but this was a change from the ground up, and with the way armies are made I am now given complete freedom to truly make WHAT I WANT. I can give my collection any theme I want now, I can finally make my High Elf army with White Lions as my core/line units, I can use all 20 of my Shadow Warriors without worrying how much the skirmisher rules have changed for the worse. I won't spend hours upon hours reading the massive rules time that contradicts itself, has poor wording leading to rules arguments with players. It is truly a game that can be bought and played.

Yes, they leave a lot of the balancing up to the players, but it is a blank slate right now. I have been complaining about Games Workshop for years, hoping for a reason to use my High Elves, which the mid to late 90's and early 2000's are my favorite ever. Even with the absolutely stunning models that have been coming out from other companies for the other games I play, all I want to do is be able to see the jewels of my whole miniatures collection on the table again. All I can do now is just enjoy the game, give my feedback to GW and do my best to help influence Age of Sigmar for the better. The game has potential, I think that with some community support it can really kick butt.

I know not everyone will enjoy what happened to Warhammer Fantasy Battles, but I am glad I was able get over my complaining just to complain that it was gone and get out and play again. In all honesty the very loose rules pamphlet is a breath of fresh air. A lot of games coming out now have such in depth rules and subtle list building tricks and combos, that it is just so hard to get people into it and start playing. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love X-Wing, Malifaux, Warmachine and soon to be Infinity. Those games each scratch a different gaming itch, and Age of Sigmar does as well. I play so much competitive Warmachine that I get burnt out of it for a bit every now and than. I love the mental workout of Malifaux, but I also want a casual and fun beer and pretzels game with some good laughs and a rulebook that isn't 300 pages long.

If you don't like the game, good for you, there are so many options today that there will be something for you. I am ready to embrace it and see where it goes.

Bottle: are they? I wasn't aware. Didn't notice them among the old world warscrolls. Does that include all the formations, too?

Minijack wrote:You would like that wouldn't you...

Watch out, Grimtuff!

But since it quite obvious that I take a more positive view of the game and Vermis takes a more negative view,I don't see the need to expand further.

Which was the point of my post, to balance out some of the subjective hagiograph...iphising, so I'm satisfied too.

its 6 mos after the big release and the haters are STILL on game forums attempting to ram home their point that AoS has failed miserably(as if whfb was rocking a huge community in the past few editions).

The bottom line is,its time to move on past the hate.Im sorry AoS is not what some wanted,hell I would have preferred something in between AoS and what would be 9th edition.

I'd hazard WFB had a bigger community than thought, but a big part of it - including me - wasn't active because they were waiting to see if GW would pull it's head out and gradually return to sane rules and sane prices. AoS was a huge, just about irrecoverable lurch in the other direction, and an impolite gesture to any players (ex or current) who wanted that stability. It stings. You say it's been 6 months, you could also say it's only been 6 months.
And beyond that seems to be shaping up as a big, forseeable blunder - the people in your store nonwithstanding - as per Lexington's quote and other sources. Shouldn't the number of people who dislike the game, and why, be information as valid and vital to Kholek's, or anyone else's decision, as the number of people who do like it, and why?

Although judging from the parts of your post that I quoted, I'd guess not. People who disagree that it's the best thing to happen to Warhammer, who disagree with the almost spurious reasons why it's good, get dismissed as 'haters'. That pisses me off more than the game itself, and almost makes me echo Grimtuff. Almost: you can think I'm wrong, and you can just say that you think I'm wrong, with no further explanation. No probs. At least no explanation is better than a handwaving, labelling explanation.

On that note...

Its just another game...play and let play

It's a noble sentiment, but I've seen it too often recently (thank you JJ Abrams) to just skim over it. It tends to go:

"X is really good!"

"What about these big bad bits in it?"

"Oh, well, it's just..."

The impression of the given thing, from it's proponents, seems to swing from fantastic to mediocre in the space of those two little words.

NH Gunsmith wrote:
Yes, the ruleset is very bare right now, but this was a change from the ground up, and with the way armies are made I am now given complete freedom to truly make WHAT I WANT.
Yes, they leave a lot of the balancing up to the players, but it is a blank slate right now.

So GW made a game where you can play with whatever models you want; it's just that the biggest wargaming company for decades, didn't make the game very playable.

That said, I understand your enthusiasm, the ability to really shape your force with the models you want. I've been feeling it myself, lately. I've started buying and fiddling with high elves myself, among others. I'm even waiting for a box of stormcast liberators to arrive in the post.
Difference is, I'm getting all that (and a bit of structure and depth) from, and for, Dragon Rampant.

(Which is an answer to SpincycleDreadnought, too)

All I can do now is just enjoy the game, give my feedback to GW

Oh, bless.

@vermis no the formations cannot be found for free, but for each models' warscroll just find it on the webstore and there's a link to its Warscroll on the right hand side. That includes all the new models too. :-)

Edit: for example, here is Archaon's: http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls/aos-warscroll-archaon-everchosen-en.pdf

 Vermis wrote:

I'd hazard WFB had a bigger community than thought, but a big part of it - including me - wasn't active because they were waiting to see if GW would pull it's head out and gradually return to sane rules and sane prices. AoS was a huge, just about irrecoverable lurch in the other direction, and an impolite gesture to any players (ex or current) who wanted that stability. It stings. You say it's been 6 months, you could also say it's only been 6 months.

AoS wasn't an "impolite gesture". That's just you seeing what you want to see. If anything, the ability to use pretty much ALL your existing Warhammer models in AoS - with square bases! - was a fething olive branch of epic proportions. GW bent over backwards to accommodate existing and lapsed WHFB players.

And beyond that seems to be shaping up as a big, forseeable blunder - the people in your store nonwithstanding - as per Lexington's quote and other sources. Shouldn't the number of people who dislike the game, and why, be information as valid and vital to Kholek's, or anyone else's decision, as the number of people who do like it, and why?

They say opinions can't be wrong, but they can be uninformed or biased as crap. The people who dislike AoS, and have actually played the game more than one aborted experience against another bitter WHFB player, absolutely have pertinent opinions on the game they are encouraged to share in a respectful, constructive manner. But the majority of the AoS haters haven't played the game, wouldn't play the game, and never want to play the game - so their opinions on the quality of AoS is the definition of uninformed and biased. Heck, I'm even okay with them sharing their uninformed and biased opinions so long as they don't personally insult others who disagree with them.

It takes time to build a community, and due to the resentment GW built over the years and through killing WHFB, AoS has had trouble doing that. I think that right now, it is more important to be supportive of the fledgling community. We gain nothing by being bitter and angry towards other miniature gamers, and the entire market will suffer when companies become afraid to experiment and explore. There will always be friction between communities, but there's room for all. What's important is that we don't make the mini game community as a whole into one big impotent nerd rage machine.

Although judging from the parts of your post that I quoted, I'd guess not. People who disagree that it's the best thing to happen to Warhammer, who disagree with the almost spurious reasons why it's good, get dismissed as 'haters'. That pisses me off more than the game itself, and almost makes me echo Grimtuff. Almost: you can think I'm wrong, and you can just say that you think I'm wrong, with no further explanation. No probs. At least no explanation is better than a handwaving, labelling explanation.

I think the "hater" dismissal is largely used for the people who dislike AoS that have no interest in having a constructive discussion. I guess you could say that AoS fans dismiss them outright because they dismiss AoS outright. I would think that any constructive discussion to be had would begin with admitting that AoS can be appealing to some players, then move into discussion about how certain decisions made negatively impact the game, players, and community - but if someone can't even allow for the idea that liking AoS isn't wrong, childish, or stupid, then I guess I have no problems dismissing them as a "hater".

RoperPG wrote:
TL;DR - don't ask the internet about AoS. Check in your local GW/FLGS/gaming clubs, see how it's doing there, make your decision based on that.
Only thing I would suggest is that on anecdotal evidence, the 'anti-AoS' brigade appear to be the majority in Aus/NZ.
US about evens depending on where you are, and appear to be the minority in Europe, particularly the UK.

Rubbish mate. Maybe in one wee building in Nottingham, but elsewhere in the UK the popularity of AoS is every bit as dependent on the local scene as the US. Thankfully it was DoA here in all but one local club, and even the GW staff have the decency to look embarrassed when they try and flog it to Realhammer fans, so I don't have to deal with it.



EDIT: And as for this "Gah, like, brah, it's totes been six months already, like, get over it brah" nonsense - matey, the Warhammer World has been one of the major focuses of my hobby/free time since I was five years old, that's 25 bloody years, and I am hardly unique, yet you expect folk to just get over it? To just ignore GW metaphorically guzzling down the fiction that made their company what it is, turning around, and spattering a massive liquid gak in our faces then holding out their hands and saying "£75 please"? Nowp. If people enjoy AoS, they enjoy it, so more power to them - that doesn't mean I have to like it, nor does it place me or anyone else under some obligation to stop expressing that opinion or to stop trying to persuade others to agree.