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.

 Haechi wrote:
That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.

Cry me a river. The description on this board is "Discuss the Warhammer Fantasy background and anything not covered in the other Warhammer Fantasy forums. Both for Age of Sigmar and legacy WHFB."

You could have easily ignored this thread. The title makes it pretty damned obvious what the content of the thread was going to be.

Ouch, guys!

jouso wrote:

 Vermis wrote:

Not sure if serious...

50% chance.

Okay, going by t'other topic, sarcasm is hard to read over the internet.

There's actually a number of 'sarcasm marks'- the backwards question-mark is one, and others are basically squiggly lines of various kinds above a dot.

 Nurgle wrote:
Its been a few months and yet I still want to gouge my eyes out at what AoS is. I spent roughly 500 on Chaos Dwarfs from FW and roughly 200 on Bretonnians so that I could hop in on the endtimes. Now im sitting here with an empty wallet and two half assembled armies that I cant bring myself to even look at. I tried AoS and quit halfway through my fith or sixth game and havent looked back.
Tried watching a lets play of Mordheim on youtube and got the same blues.

Is there any chance GW might bring back WFB? Like actual blocks of infantry?

I agree with everyone else and unfortunately its not very likely. If it does happen, its at least 3 years away. GW works in 2 year lead time production cycles, so they're not likely to drop AoS until its two years old. Then you'd need another two years of development time before they could release wfb 9th (if they wanted to). But remember, GW management liked AoS so much they took down the old space marine statue and shoved him under a staircase. They think Sigmarines are the hot new thing that'll blow the world of wargaming away. My guess it'll take a least 5 years before they're willing to even consider they might have been wrong. Who knows, by then they might have found enough wealthy 12 year olds to support the game and to keep it going. I doubt it, but its possible. Your best bet is to just transition to a new hobby. Others have suggested Kings of War, I agree, its a pretty good game.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Haechi wrote:
That's not the point. The point is people who dislike AoS are polluting the AoS forums all over the internet. You might think it's fair because you're angry at the loss of WHFB, but I, like many others, never played WHFB and really enjoy AoS, and I shouldn't have to through hate messages everyday just so I can have a conversation with others like me.

Cry me a river. The description on this board is "Discuss the Warhammer Fantasy background and anything not covered in the other Warhammer Fantasy forums. Both for Age of Sigmar and legacy WHFB."

You could have easily ignored this thread. The title makes it pretty damned obvious what the content of the thread was going to be.

I don't think Haechi was referring to this thread in particular - rather the overwhelming Hatedom that AoS has generated and its penchant for invading anywhere AoS is discussed, whether or not they're welcome there.

If it's in a General thread, fine I guess, I don't really see the point in complaining ad nauseum about something you can't change, but it's fair enough that the topic is sufficiently broad enough to allow that kind of thing.

But when you've got a topic called "AoS Positivity Thread' or Facebook groups that specifically state they're there for the -positive- and -optimistic- discussion of AoS and then have these people rush in like a tidal wave of bile, shouting about how terrible AoS is, how it's for young children, how it's doomed to failure...you can see how people like Haechi might be a little disgruntled.

Like he says, he likes the game, and he shouldn't have to wade through that bile just to discuss a game he likes. People have a right to express their opinion, but in the proper place and within reasonable bounds of polite interaction.

Personally, I don't like AoS, but I can restrain myself from going places I'm not wanted and ruining the experience for people who do like it. Why not live and let live?

Well, yeah, but it seems like AoS enthusiasts feel it's perfectly acceptible to to the direct opposite in threads like this one, but at the same time complain about it happening to them?

Anyway, this is not a thread to bemoan the elements of AoS, it's being sad at how completely and suddenly GW killed off a much-loved setting.

I know if I am ever going to play KoW, my area is so dead when it comes to gaming that I will be buying and painting multiple forces to loan to other people just to see a game. And if I'm going to do that, it's going to retain as much of the Old World feel as possible.

Dr.Delorean pretty much sums up my feeling towards this. I don't care for Call of Duty, so I don't go to Call of Duty forums to complain about how bad I think something they enjoy is.

Also I'm not a fan of hyperbole that happens in these threads. 'gouge my eyes out', 'everyone hates it'...c'mon guys....I'm presuming we're all adults, let's respect each other like adults.

You just have to start a tread for AoS positive only or whatever and people should respect that and not come into ruin it. It does actually work for a while anyway. Like most threads it can get derailed at times. But this way you people know you're that group of guys and gals having this fun conversation and should the rude interrupt, you simply move, then if the jackass follows again and again and intrudes its easer mo sort that out. But hopefully they won't bug that far. Worked everywhere else.

 VeteranNoob wrote:
You just have to start a tread for AoS positive only or whatever and people should respect that and not come into ruin it. It does actually work for a while anyway.

It works most of the time actually. I see plenty of civil discussion on AoS here, tactics releases on whatnot.

It's topics like "future of AoS", "my army is being squatted", "look at how successful AoS is in my neck of the woods" that rubs people the wrong way.

Actually as a rule of thumb I'd avoid any AoS thread over 5 pages long. Even if it has a seemingly innocent title

 mazik765 wrote:


Dr.Delorean pretty much sums up my feeling towards this. I don't care for Call of Duty, so I don't go to Call of Duty forums to complain about how bad I think something they enjoy is.

Like you say, you 'don't care' about cod. It makes no sense to go onto a cod forum. But here's the thing - plenty people do care about Aos, or wfb. Some quite passionately - and they've every right to care for it and feel that way.

And by extension, if you do care for Aos (or wfb), it is actually quite ok to go onto forums to complain about how bad something is, in your opinion, even if somewhere in the world, someone else might like it. There are such thing as legitimate complaints and objective reasonings thst can point out faults, flaws and glaring issues. 'Liking' something is not a requirement to participate in a discussion or say your piece. Unless there was a regime change overnight where only vetted and approved opinions towing the party line are allowed to participate.

It's the point of a discussion forum. To speak your piece, It doesn't matter if someone else likes it or dislikes whatever it is you wish to discuss, that has no relevance to your right to step forward and say what you want to say.

jouso wrote:

 VeteranNoob wrote:
You just have to start a tread for AoS positive only or whatever and people should respect that and not come into ruin it. It does actually work for a while anyway.

It works most of the time actually. I see plenty of civil discussion on AoS here, tactics releases on whatnot.

It's topics like "future of AoS", "my army is being squatted", "look at how successful AoS is in my neck of the woods" that rubs people the wrong way.

Actually as a rule of thumb I'd avoid any AoS thread over 5 pages long. Even if it has a seemingly innocent title

That's actually a piece of good advice as well

jouso wrote:
It's topics like "future of AoS", "my army is being squatted", "look at how successful AoS is in my neck of the woods" that rubs people the wrong way.

Aye, that! Putting up a 'positive comments only' title, like some kind of clubhouse sign, is only going to antagonise already-raw feelings.

Deadnight wrote:Like you say, you 'don't care' about cod. It makes no sense to go onto a cod forum. But here's the thing - plenty people do care about Aos, or wfb. Some quite passionately - and they've every right to care for it and feel that way.

That too. As was already said, this is still the WFB section of the board. Imagine you played and enjoyed some other game, and enjoyed talking about it on some online forum, when the game is pulled, CoD is presented as it's natural successor or sequel that you're all but expected to buy into, and the forum switches over to a bunch of people raving about CoD and how they'd never have played that clunky ol' game that came before it.

I think they should have made a new forum section for AOS and kept fantasy battles here - the two are way to opposed to each other to have simply overwritten everything that was fantasy with AOS - especially since people are still playing old school fantasy.

Maybe it was accidental but it still looks pretty trollish to have done that.

On the original topic, I too remain in a kind of denial state about "Old World" Warhammer being gone.

Now, I'm one of those people who likes AoS... at least, the idea of the excellent GW fantasy models, on round bases, fighting in a game that maintains the spirit of WFB but brings the scale down to where I can collect it.

It's the destruction of the Old World, and the annihilation of its characters and story that remains inconceivable. Although I've bought more fantasy product this year than ever before (as I was a 40k player before) I'm still imagining these models fighting in the Empire, or Sylvania, or some Dwarven hold in the World's Edge mountains.

Although I'm an eager and willing fan, entirely open to a new world and new armies, I don't think I'll ever connect with a world of molten silver rivers falling from a chunk of earth floating in space, the way I might with some peasant village in Brettonia.

And, I'm beginning to realize that even though GW won me to their fantasy line with the change to Age of Sigmar, they'll lose me as they kill off the Old World line of products, and replace them space marines riding dragons.

But, I've been a gamer a long time. And, in my experience, valuable IPs always come back. I've seen it with Battletech, and Shadowrun, and even Warzone. I suspect the Old World will be back one day. I'd just prefer it happen before I get too old.

Deadnight wrote:

 mazik765 wrote:


Dr.Delorean pretty much sums up my feeling towards this. I don't care for Call of Duty, so I don't go to Call of Duty forums to complain about how bad I think something they enjoy is.

Like you say, you 'don't care' about cod. It makes no sense to go onto a cod forum. But here's the thing - plenty people do care about Aos, or wfb. Some quite passionately - and they've every right to care for it and feel that way.

And by extension, if you do care for Aos (or wfb), it is actually quite ok to go onto forums to complain about how bad something is, in your opinion, even if somewhere in the world, someone else might like it. There are such thing as legitimate complaints and objective reasonings thst can point out faults, flaws and glaring issues. 'Liking' something is not a requirement to participate in a discussion or say your piece. Unless there was a regime change overnight where only vetted and approved opinions towing the party line are allowed to participate.

It's the point of a discussion forum. To speak your piece, It doesn't matter if someone else likes it or dislikes whatever it is you wish to discuss, that has no relevance to your right to step forward and say what you want to say.

I absolutely agree that there is a place or legitimate criticisms and I think AoS deserves some. but saying it is so bad that it makes someone want to 'gouge out your eyes' is not effective criticism, it's meaningless hyperbole. I understand that people need to vent frustration but I totally sympathize with users who visit this forum because they want to ask legitimate questions or have constructive discussions about a game they enjoy, and instead get bombarded with hyperbolic negativity.

 chaosmarauder wrote:
I think they should have made a new forum section for AOS and kept fantasy battles here - the two are way to opposed to each other to have simply overwritten everything that was fantasy with AOS - especially since people are still playing old school fantasy.

Maybe it was accidental but it still looks pretty trollish to have done that.

I was rather unimpressed when as soon as AoS dropped the forums were all renamed AoS instead of creating new forums for AoS and maybe consolidating the WHFB forums down to 1 or 2. I believe the explanation was that the admins monitor discussion of different games and create new forums based off that, but really I think it's a bad idea to have AoS and WHFB in the same forum given the circumstances.

It's not like mazik said, not liking COD so not going to a COD forum to complain about it.... it's more akin to liking Battlefield and having your "Battlefield discussion" forum which has existed for years being renamed "COD discussion" with the description "For COD and BF discussion". Of course you're going to end up with a gakstorm of posts and threads.

I actually am pretty ambivalent about the mechanics of AoS. Honestly, I would have no problem playing any force from AoS, but in the Old World setting.

As long as it's with a group of like-minded people, the problems with Age of Sigmar take a backseat. But quite frankly, I am not all that exited to support a game system when an entire game setting got swiped away with a bit of a "too bad, play the new setting".

I would be stupidly exited to have a group of 5-10 people willing to use the mechanics of Age of Sigmar but other than the appearance of the Stormcast, completely pretend the Old World never got destroyed. I totally agree with everything Oggthrok posted above.

Unlike the Old World, I just can't get wity the new setting, which is basically half a dozen worlds in the Eye of Terror linked by Webway portals, where Chaos has warped reality to mind-bending extremes.

I don't really see it as WFB ending. Or that anything was taken away.

The game evolved over the years. The 2014 WFB had little in common with the 1984 version.

We still have rules for Tyrion and Teclis and many other special characters in Age of Sigmar. It is easy enough to put a Slayer hero and a human hero on the board and call them Gotrek and Felix.

The new realms are large enough that everything including Bretonia and the Empire can exist.

endur wrote:
I don't really see it as WFB ending. Or that anything was taken away.

The game evolved over the years. The 2014 WFB had little in common with the 1984 version.

We still have rules for Tyrion and Teclis and many other special characters in Age of Sigmar. It is easy enough to put a Slayer hero and a human hero on the board and call them Gotrek and Felix.

The new realms are large enough that everything including Bretonia and the Empire can exist.

But isn't that just it? The realms are large enough, so large in fact nothing has any importance. Battle between Stormcast and Bloodbond in Skull Crag to take the Skull Bastion atop the Bloodied Peak just seems so utterly meaningless when from all the fluff that's came out the realms are practically infinite. The Old World was finite, when something happened in the fluff, it was important. The fall of Karaz-Karak was epic, the last great strong hold of the dwarves brought down by the inevitable tide of Skaven they've been fighting for Centuries. AOS has nothing of the sort.

Don't get me wrong, I like high fantasy as much as the next miniture war gamer but I simply can't relate to the peoples of the new world because the only characters they've paid any attention to are the guys who most strongly symbolise the extinction of the world we loved. Perhaps if they took a different approach to the fluff, gave us a small Empire besieged then introduced the Stormcast as saviors, but as of now there is little interest in the weird Asgardian realms, I'd take my good old bastardised Europe of the Old World any day.

 ALEXisAWESOME wrote:

endur wrote:
I don't really see it as WFB ending. Or that anything was taken away.

The game evolved over the years. The 2014 WFB had little in common with the 1984 version.

We still have rules for Tyrion and Teclis and many other special characters in Age of Sigmar. It is easy enough to put a Slayer hero and a human hero on the board and call them Gotrek and Felix.

The new realms are large enough that everything including Bretonia and the Empire can exist.

But isn't that just it? The realms are large enough, so large in fact nothing has any importance. Battle between Stormcast and Bloodbond in Skull Crag to take the Skull Bastion atop the Bloodied Peak just seems so utterly meaningless when from all the fluff that's came out the realms are practically infinite. The Old World was finite, when something happened in the fluff, it was important. The fall of Karaz-Karak was epic, the last great strong hold of the dwarves brought down by the inevitable tide of Skaven they've been fighting for Centuries. AOS has nothing of the sort.

Don't get me wrong, I like high fantasy as much as the next miniture war gamer but I simply can't relate to the peoples of the new world because the only characters they've paid any attention to are the guys who most strongly symbolise the extinction of the world we loved. Perhaps if they took a different approach to the fluff, gave us a small Empire besieged then introduced the Stormcast as saviors, but as of now there is little interest in the weird Asgardian realms, I'd take my good old bastardised Europe of the Old World any day.

I never got the feeling stuff mattered in the Old World either. New races, changes to armies would all come with the progression of the game, as they do now. Those are the real changes, and I love the moving plot in AoS that comes with new armies, characters, etc. The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.

coldgaming wrote:
The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.

That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.

That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.

Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.

On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.

I think things would be understandably different than Earth seeing as each race has dieties (directly) involved. For me, the Old World always felt like it started hugely magical like the AoS setting, but then has settled and entered a calm period.

I much prefer a one world setting, as from the start the new realms sound like a Magic the Gathering set, where there is a world for each color of mana. Which works perfectly fine depending on the setting of a game, but it's so completely jarring compared to the Old World.

I can't see as how the Old World is any less believable than a DnD world, and is probably even more realistic than such fantastical worlds.

I loved the whfb background, but for me it ended long ago. Back when the novels were about inconspicuous characters like Sam Warble, or Felix and Gotrek fumbling around caves without a clue. Characters outside of the game like Konrad, or Johann von Mecklenburg, who didn't have the weight of the game on their shoulders, and whose adventures were interesting without an apocalypse as a consequence of failure. Thankfully I still have all my old boxtrees, and a whole shelf of warhammer literature to read and re-read, so it hasn't really gone.

Like others have said, I'll still play AoS, but using it's mechanics to play games set in the old world.

coldgaming wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.

That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.

Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.

On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.

I can understand your problem if you imagine them all evolving physically like they do on Earth, but not all species in WHFB evolved because WHFB has magic, some races were introduced, created, manipulated, corrupted.

If your only problem with the Old World is that it couldn't have existed using regular Earth "rules", you must absolutely hate 40k and, ya know, a huge chunk of all fantasy and sci-fi worlds

Even if you are attached to the idea of the races evolving to similar levels of technology, I'm not really sure why that's hard to believe on 1 planet. Some event causes multiple sentient species to be in the one place and they'll tend to develop their technology (or lack of it) at a similar rate. You could even picture it a planet that only had 1 sentient species and then some event caused them to evolve differently. Or just use the good old fashion fantasy explanation for anything you want to exist but can't exist in real life "because magic".

But yeah, even though it was only one planet, there was still a bunch of stuff that could have been explored, sections of the map that were only mentioned in passing or brief descriptions. The map was big enough to have lots of shuffling of the races without completely wiping them out (if that's what you wanted, GW for the most part seemed to like the stagnant world the same way they like a stagnant 40k universe..... until they blew it up).

AoS just feels like an intangible universe where nothing matters.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

coldgaming wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.

That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.

Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.

On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.

I can understand your problem if you imagine them all evolving physically like they do on Earth, but not all species in WHFB evolved because WHFB has magic, some races were introduced, created, manipulated, corrupted.

If your only problem with the Old World is that it couldn't have existed using regular Earth "rules", you must absolutely hate 40k and, ya know, a huge chunk of all fantasy and sci-fi worlds

Even if you are attached to the idea of the races evolving to similar levels of technology, I'm not really sure why that's hard to believe on 1 planet. Some event causes multiple sentient species to be in the one place and they'll tend to develop their technology (or lack of it) at a similar rate. You could even picture it a planet that only had 1 sentient species and then some event caused them to evolve differently. Or just use the good old fashion fantasy explanation for anything you want to exist but can't exist in real life "because magic".

But yeah, even though it was only one planet, there was still a bunch of stuff that could have been explored, sections of the map that were only mentioned in passing or brief descriptions. The map was big enough to have lots of shuffling of the races without completely wiping them out (if that's what you wanted, GW for the most part seemed to like the stagnant world the same way they like a stagnant 40k universe..... until they blew it up).

AoS just feels like an intangible universe where nothing matters.

Everything can be explained by magic indeed. I think it comes down to the sense something gives me. I've always found Warhammer models evocative, but the world and map itself felt forced and inauthentic. But in general I get my fluff kick from the models, tables and rules.

coldgaming wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

coldgaming wrote:
The Old World to me felt constrained and stagnant. I do agree though that clearly a lot of people are itching for a perspective other than the Stormcasts', and they should go down that route.

That didn't really have much to do with the Old World itself and was just how GW approached it. There was a lot that could have been advanced in the Old World without completely destroying it and fething up all the races and there were still plenty of facets yet to be explored.

Well, that was the Old World, as GW was in charge of it. One of my constant problems though was that it was all on one planet. I'm not a sci-fi person, but I find the AoS realms more believable (in the getting into the lore sense) than the Old World. The problem for me was imagining that all of these races built up and evolved on an earth-sized planet to similar levels of sophistication. It's also one of my problems with the whole concept of finding our interpretation of intelligent aliens in real life. They would have to have evolved to such a point during the same blink in time that humans did. It's not whether human-like aliens ever existed, but whether they would exist in proximity in the same nano second (on a universal scale) that we do.

On real earth, there are no comparable species to humans that we would communicate with, do battle with, fight over the same resources with, etc. For there to be a dozen or more on one planet in the Old World was too much for me. Might just be a personal thing about this stuff though.

Good thing the planet was supposed to be roughly twice Earth's size (I have no idea where that statistic comes from, but it popped up a lot) and basically nobody evolved naturally. The Old Ones had a hand in creating almost all of the races and even shaping the continents I'm a way they liked better.

I feel the pain. Not for losing the game, which I think was becoming over-bloated and unwieldy. I miss the setting. I loved the Empire and the renaissance/ middle-ages feel it had to it. I love the minis and the culture and now I have no idea whether any of it remains in the new setting. Of course, I can use my old minis and their warscrolls but as what? Refugees and survivors of Middenheim, Altdorf, Nordland etc? Or will they just be peasant militia thrown into the meatgrinder by the holy golden Sigmarines??

I feel your pain I really do. I used to be like this that WFB the sweeping grandeur was over a Nurgle 8th ed army collecting dust in a box but now I looked at AoS and thought...Why not? I actually in a way prefer the way they look on round bases especially today I was in GW looking at the new Pestilens stuff and I thought you know what theres potential there.. Forces are looking more themed now plus £115 for both the Virulent Horde and Start collecting Pestilens that's rather awesome.

Of course my Nurgle army is still going to get painted and added to at least until I run out of square bases it makes a great display force plus ive spent what 300+ quid on it not going to do what that dude did and get my knickers in a twist and burn a army..

AoS plays faster as well no cards no fiddly ranking system its bam bam bam resolution battleshock is genius in calculating wounds and the such I just haven't seen an army I would collect until now.. I have seen people do fantastic things with the minatures that have come out and now a part of me wants AoS to succeed because whats the point in slipping backwards.. it hurts the company and it hurts us as a collective..

But yeah... you just need to find an army that clicks with you man a piece of Azyr's background that you can call your own..

I miss the Tomb Kings. Now they'll never get Nehekhara back...