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.

 455_PWR wrote:

Now if infinity, WWX, battletech, etc, would create an app with free rules and interactive army building/unit profiles, they would go far! Especially since you could have an entire army for the cost of 6 archaon cavalry dudes.

Battletech does have a free Java app that is free that lets you play the game on your computer...Against a bot or against other players. (Or Both...)

It might also be worthwhile to consider why Warhammer 8th did so poorly that GW decided to jettison the game.

I know that, locally, beople were very much not happy with how random the game had become - with random charge distance sticking in people's craws.

And the hardcover army books put the last nail in the coffin - the changeover to Kings of War was happening in my community before Age of Sigmar was a twinkle in some mad designer's eye.

The Auld Grump - ironically, in my groups, more boxes of Island of Blood were bought by a few gamers making armies for Kings of War than were bought by folks wanting Warhammer.... They liked the figures, and hated the rules.

Nothing ironic, at all. Best from both worlds.
IoB minis are some of the nicest starter fantasy soldiers out there. KoW's last edition also was pretty solid---not counting when they started the overpowered army lists like the Basilean/Angel alliance.

Now that I've got my AoS starter painted up (both sides) I plan on getting some games in at FLGS.
I use it like a boxed war game with no possibility of expansions.
Played that way, using scenarios included, it's actually very solid.
The forces are decently balanced and there's enough that you have variety for quite a bit or replayability

I would not have hated AoS fluff nearly as much if it would have made it "not warhammer" I despise the character of sigmar, hell for me he nearly ruined his own trilogy (which is where my intense dislike for the character comes from, great trilogy in spite of him) as a 1 off boardgame I would never have given it a try, as a follow on to warhammer its pretty much an insult, I believe if anyone but gw had tried it, not even the fanbois would have supported this lame duck of a game. its bad, really bad. but after so much investment in time and money I feel compelled to keep playing it a little longer (until i can get rid of all my gw minis) but off the rant, yeah as a standalone board game or even the introduction to a new world/setting, I think it would have been far greater than it is. (of course gw could have not punted and actually made a new game instead of immensely dumbing down the warhammer we already have)

 TheAuldGrump wrote:
It might also be worthwhile to consider why Warhammer 8th did so poorly that GW decided to jettison the game.

I know that, locally, beople were very much not happy with how random the game had become - with random charge distance sticking in people's craws.

And the hardcover army books put the last nail in the coffin - the changeover to Kings of War was happening in my community before Age of Sigmar was a twinkle in some mad designer's eye.

The Auld Grump - ironically, in my groups, more boxes of Island of Blood were bought by a few gamers making armies for Kings of War than were bought by folks wanting Warhammer.... They liked the figures, and hated the rules.

Personally I disliked the random magic. Seeing entire units wiped out by a single spell if the opponent got the lucky dice was just irritating. But maybe too many of my opponents were tricksy elves and slann.

On the other hand, I actually liked that people could fail or succeed on charges, and optimal movement was no longer to inch along until you could trick someone into charging you. I think the problem was that the variation from high to low on charges was too much. But charges also weren't as powerful, so I think people shouldn't have cared as much as some of them did. Getting the charge off no longer made or broke a fight.

I think the main imbalance I saw was the problems caused by steadfast not having a straightforward counter. The obvious fix was that flanking should eliminate steadfast. I don't know why GW didn't include that.

One of the things that I didn't expect with Kings of War was how much I didn't miss some of the things that I had grown used to in Warhammer.

Replacing templates with a die roll for Blast effects, magic that is summed up in a very few spells....

The one thing that I really miss is being able to put characters in units - which I am handling by giving heroes a possible 'Bodyguard' Troop upgrade. More Nerve, more Attacks, loses Individual (and Nimble unless the Bodyguard Troop also has it).

But once a Hero has Bodyguard he is stuck with it - he can't jump in and out of a unit like a Jack-in-the-box. And it does count as a Troop choice for the army.

It was definitely possible for GW to address how complicated WHFB has become, without blowing up the freakin' world.... (Grumble, grumble, gripe, gripe....) I just do not understand why they decided to launch AoS as a replacement - seems like a lot less risk to make it an addition.

Weird truth - locally, people are getting more use out of their Warhammer armies with Kings of War than they were with Warhammer.... We are playing more games.... People have started buying armies again - so it was not just the cost of the figures that was killing Warhammer.

It may come down to how often folks are likely to use their minis - if you play a game a week, then those figures are expensive for the amount of use you get out of them. When you play four games a week... the investment seems a bit more reasonable.

The Auld Grump - if you count the games with my good lady... I play about six games a week... it is downright embarrassing.