What would you have done different, AoS

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.

**jouso**

Herzlos wrote:
judgedoug wrote:

GW knew Warhammer had been dead for years. There's only so many times you can retcon the storyline and the number of SKUs for the line were out of control - and certain armies just weren't selling no matter what they did to overpower them (in a... points... based system! gasp). Warhammer was a bloated mess and no one was buying anything. Nuclear option.

As it stands, Age of Sigmar did nothing to Warhammer... Warhammer has had the same unmoving fiction since the early 1980's. The End Times at least progressed it, but any change at all in the Warhammer World would cause internet rage tears no matter what happened. If Warhammer was in a 9th edition and the storyline had progressed, there'd be the same amount of complaints because GW "ruined" something (which in itself is staggering as there's more people who claim GW "ruined" Warhammer than have ever actually played a game of Warhammer)

Warhammer wasn't selling for years because it was totally neglected. The End Times seemed to have caused a pretty big resurgence up to the point the rumours hit that it was going to get squatted hard. I have to admit I can't recall anyone complaining about the fluff advancement in End Times, though there were some about the rule changes (like the 50% lords thing) and Nagash.

I have no figures, but I'm pretty sure the End Times series did more to boost GW's fantasy sales than AoS had. I think GW's fantasy sales are currently only holding on where they are because of other games (oldhammer, Kings Of War and Frostgrave). Even I've been tempted by a few GW boxes for Frostgrave warbands.

This. The end times proved there was plenty of life left in square-based warhammer. Up until thanquol all books sold out. Nagash minis where shipped for a while in blank boxes because they sold way more than they expected. Even morghasts had a few weeks of lead time.

And then the uncertainty. GW trying to milk people with thinning ET books without any new minis and finally AoS.

**hobojebus**

End times could of lasted years instead it was what six months such a wasted opportunity.

The push to make customers buy bigger and bigger armies is what's killing both games.

£500-700 for a regular army just isn't a reasonable figure for most people you should be able to build two or three for that kind of investment it's just toy soldiers.

Then they come out with AoS where £127 gets you seven plastic toys and you wonder why people leave in droves.

**Lithlandis Stormcrow**

hobojebus wrote:
End times could of lasted years instead it was what six months such a wasted opportunity.

A lot of people around here thought exactly that. At least three or so years leading to a renewed 9th edition.

**RoperPG**

hobojebus wrote:
End times could of lasted years instead it was what six months such a wasted opportunity.

Something about ripping a band-aid off slowly...?

**hobojebus**

RoperPG wrote:
hobojebus wrote:
End times could of lasted years instead it was what six months such a wasted opportunity.

Something about ripping a band-aid off slowly...?

The first few books sold out in less than an hour there was a brief moment where wfb players had hope their game was going to get some much needed attention then it became obvious to all the leaks were true and they were destroying the world.

End times shows there was still alot of interest in wfb, the rejection of AoS is a rejection of the poor treatment GW heaped on the community.

**auticus**

I dunno.

Seems to me the rejection of AoS is more about the rejection of modern game design principals.

If AoS had come out with point values I think a lot more people would jump on it. I know in my community that is the case. Granted in my community the perception anyway is most people don't really care as much about the setting or the story (note I'm not saying not care at all I'm saying that the setting is very much ancillary to the game itself, and the game itself could be set on Candy Land and would be ok with a lot of people I know so long as there were points and non exploitive rules)

They don't care about perceived slights by GW on the community, they care about a game that entertains them.

**Herzlos**

I don't think there's anything modern about AoS.

The backlash was that a game which was well loved and played well despite its flaws was replaced by a totally different game whiich totally failed to address any of the flaws.

**123ply**

Haechi wrote:
I wouldn't have destroyed the Old World.

In my version of the story, the Chaos wins and ravages everything but little secret enclaves.
The dwarves would have taken refuge in giant sealed vaults close to the center of the planet, where they met with the magmadroth and become the fireslayers later.
The Slanns would have pulled their cities off the ground, becoming a conglomerate of flying kingdoms hiding in the skies and striking anywhere through teleportation magic.
Sigmar would have indeed become a god and created the Stormcast Eternals atop of a mountain perpetually hidden in a deadly storm of lightning and thunder. hundred of years later, once ready, he unleashed them on the world.
Nagash conquered Khemri and set his realm deep in the desert, where no army could reach them.
Orcs retreated far East and have been fighting the forces of Chaos for centuries.
Dark and High elves formed an alliance and emprisoned Slaneesh himself in forgotten caves far in the south pole. They have have been trying to vanquish him for centuries, fighting in the dark against corrupting magic and slowly becoming something never seen before: the shadowkin.
Wood Elves and Sylvaneth have survived in the forest of Athel Loren thanks to Alarielle's magic, which basically renders the place invisible. Remains of old Bretonnia live there with them as well. They bacome knights of the forest, lead by the Knight of Sinople himself. Now that the SE are trying to reconquer the world, Alarielle brought down the barrier, but Nurgle is coming after her.
The rest of the word is ruled by Chaos. The land has been transformed. The entire Great Ocean has become a land of everchanging metal, ruled by Tzeench, who built his throne on the remains of Ulthuan. Rumors say a Duardin enclave has sprouted from the ground not long ago and is fighting there since.
Khorne rules the north, where everyday, thousands of prisoners are brought by his legions from all over the world to be excuted or take part in savage combats in bloody arenas.
Nurgle has built his new garden in old Lustria.
Most of the ex vampire count and dwarf kingdoms belong to the Skaven.
The center of the empire and Altdorf itself became the capital of Archaon's empire. And at the center of it, the Spire of the Varanguard keeps an eye on everything.

That's pretty much it. I would have made a better fluff.

That is much, MUCH better fluff than the embarrassingly terrible stuff that GW has come out with. I would keep the lizardmen as mortal, physical being rather than being stupid daemons that are just "memories" of the Slann.

**auticus**

Herzlos wrote:
I don't think there's anything modern about AoS.

The backlash was that a game which was well loved and played well despite its flaws was replaced by a totally different game whiich totally failed to address any of the flaws.

Thus the rejection of modern game design by GW, which is what I was talking about. Gamers expect implicitly that modern game design be followed, and if it is not followed many people tend to chaffe at that. When the entire game goes against modern game design, you're going to have a perpetual nuclear fallout - as we saw.

If anything the past year or so was a great behavioral game theory experiment.

**insaniak**

If AoS had come out with point values I think a lot more people would jump on it.

Quite possibly.

It still wouldn't be an adequate replacement for WHFB, though, since even with points values it would still be a completely different type of game.

Far less to do with design principles than with GW choosing to replace a High Fantasy ranked mass battles game with a skirmish game in a ridiculous setting.

**Herzlos**

auticus wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
I don't think there's anything modern about AoS.

The backlash was that a game which was well loved and played well despite its flaws was replaced by a totally different game whiich totally failed to address any of the flaws.

Thus the rejection of modern game design by GW, which is what I was talking about. Gamers expect implicitly that modern game design be followed, and if it is not followed many people tend to chaffe at that. When the entire game goes against modern game design, you're going to have a perpetual nuclear fallout - as we saw.

If anything the past year or so was a great behavioral game theory experiment.

My bad; I thought you meant GW did something modern with AoS and the gamers rejected it.

I'm also not convinced that just adding points would have fixed it, as there are lots of other things the gamers dislike, like what happened to the fluff and what they view as a tactically shallow game. Points would certainly go the furthest towards giving people something to work with.

**RoperPG**

hobojebus wrote:
RoperPG wrote:
hobojebus wrote:
End times could of lasted years instead it was what six months such a wasted opportunity.

Something about ripping a band-aid off slowly...?

The first few books sold out in less than an hour there was a brief moment where wfb players had hope their game was going to get some much needed attention then it became obvious to all the leaks were true and they were destroying the world.

End times shows there was still alot of interest in wfb, the rejection of AoS is a rejection of the poor treatment GW heaped on the community.

Wait, so you're seriously suggesting that GW should have stretched out the end times for a couple of years and *then* binned WFB?
Fail to see how that looks any better.

**123ply**

Also - why are blood warriors better than libarators? Their stats may be even but their USRS put them a tier ahead of liberators. For the sake of balancing, and making the Stormcast even more elite, paladins, judicators etc.. ESPECIALLY liberators should have a save of 3+... if there is any changes to units GW should make it's this. I don't collect, nor am I a huge fan of the SE, but Khorne Blood Warriors eat up liberators despite being sold and in boxes of 10 instead of 5. A 3+ armour basis to the SE would further reinforce the notion of them being trans-being demigods.

**Commodus Leitdorf**

Herzlos wrote:

Warhammer wasn't selling for years because it was totally neglected. The End Times seemed to have caused a pretty big resurgence up to the point the rumours hit that it was going to get squatted hard. I have to admit I can't recall anyone complaining about the fluff advancement in End Times, though there were some about the rule changes (like the 50% lords thing) and Nagash.

I have no figures, but I'm pretty sure the End Times series did more to boost GW's fantasy sales than AoS had. I think GW's fantasy sales are currently only holding on where they are because of other games (oldhammer, Kings Of War and Frostgrave). Even I've been tempted by a few GW boxes for Frostgrave warbands.

While partially true it this ignores the main reason GW killed it. Fantasy was only about 15% of GW total sales and it was not growing. Yeah, the End Times sold like hot cakes but it was not increasing overall share of GW's business so they decided to do something radical.

I mean I'm not an AoS fan....but I'm also not a hater of it either and I can see GW's logic even if I don't fully agree with it. Yeah the End Times sold like gang busters....to that small 15% of GW's market that makes up Fantasy.

I mean was fantasy totally neglected? I know there were things veterans had been asking for for a long time that they finally got that would supposedly rejuvenate interest. "We want a campaign system!" Oh so here's Mighty Empire and Blood in the Badlands...not that they sold that much but they did try to do quite a few things vets wanted and none of it caused a rise in sales. We can argue back and forth about what could have been done with the End Times, however when your sales are being compared to the Juggernaut in the room that is Space Marines you better be able to step up or get dropped.

**RoperPG**

Probably for the same reason Tau are BS3 instead of 4, even though their entire military doctrine is about shooting.
At some point, too powerful is too powerful.
There's plenty of ways of dealing with Bloodwarriors without simply running Liberators at them.

**Herzlos**

RoperPG wrote:

Wait, so you're seriously suggesting that GW should have stretched out the end times for a couple of years and *then* binned WFB?
Fail to see how that looks any better.

**jonolikespie**

Herzlos wrote:
now players don't want their armies to be updated, because the fear what'd happen.

God ain't that the truth. Not just for Fantasy/AoS either... I worry about what happens to the 40k factions I like when an update comes around after the last couple of Space Wolf releases.

**Lithlandis Stormcrow**

jonolikespie wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
now players don't want their armies to be updated, because the fear what'd happen.

God ain't that the truth. Not just for Fantasy/AoS either... I worry about what happens to the 40k factions I like when an update comes around after the last couple of Space Wolf releases.

I know this is off topic but I need to say it:

Incoming Blood Angel Vampire Unit "Blood Angel Blood Drinkers!" They sparkle as they come down from their Bloodhawk transport.

You heard it here folks!

In the topic: I am now very curious as to what Elven units will get the axe, actually.

**Commodus Leitdorf**

Herzlos wrote:

Also, was it 15% of sales because only 15% of the buyers wanted it, or was it that low through neglect?

Hardly neglect, Storm of Magic, Triumph and Treason, Blood in the Badlands, Mighty Empires, etc. They have been putting out supplements that veterans have been saying would "save the game!" and garner more interest for the last few years. Nothing has taken hold except for those few who make up that 15% who grab them. Added to the fact the game has been around for 30+ years. There is a VERY strong secondary market for stuff that buying new is not necessarily a must. Heck my whole Empire army is made from OOP models that I bought second hand. The only new model I bought from them is a unit of Outriders. 4000pt worth of Empire I have built up over the 15 years I've been playing and I bought precisely ONE new box of minis from GW.

Now the End Times/AoS by the time we saw it was already in the works and there was no stopping it. I agree with quite a few people on here (and I have given my 2 cents on it quite a bit too) that they did not need to kill the Old World to rejuvenate the game. Destroy it beyond recognition? Sure! Go nuts! But end it entirely? Ehh

Frankly I was upset at what they did but GW have proven grossly incompetent at marketing their game and balancing it. Decoupling it from them and having the community make a rule set so far has proven to be the most fun I've had with Warhammer in a long while.

**123ply**

Oh and also - the battleshock mechanic should be tweaked, the unit should lose as many models as the difference between the dice roll and the units' bravery characteristics. Makes sense, as battleshock is all of a sudden a big deal and the bravery Stat becomes actually important... battleshock is atm a very underwhelming mechanic.

**Kilkrazy**

auticus wrote:
I dunno.

Seems to me the rejection of AoS is more about the rejection of modern game design principals.

If AoS had come out with point values I think a lot more people would jump on it. I know in my community that is the case. Granted in my community the perception anyway is most people don't really care as much about the setting or the story (note I'm not saying not care at all I'm saying that the setting is very much ancillary to the game itself, and the game itself could be set on Candy Land and would be ok with a lot of people I know so long as there were points and non exploitive rules)

They don't care about perceived slights by GW on the community, they care about a game that entertains them.

I know there are plenty of people who like the rules, I can't argue with that. and good luck to them for having fun. But, really AoS is a very old fashioned game indeed. Its core mechanics date back to the early 1980s. My huge disappointment over AoS was how conservative, dull, limited and unadventurous the rules are.

**coldgaming**

123ply wrote:
Oh and also - the battleshock mechanic should be tweaked, the unit should lose as many models as the difference between the dice roll and the units' bravery characteristics. Makes sense, as battleshock is all of a sudden a big deal and the bravery Stat becomes actually important... battleshock is atm a very underwhelming mechanic.

Not sure I'm reading right, but isn't that what battleshock does already?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commodus Leitdorf wrote:

Now the End Times/AoS by the time we saw it was already in the works and there was no stopping it. I agree with quite a few people on here (and I have given my 2 cents on it quite a bit too) that they did not need to kill the Old World to rejuvenate the game. Destroy it beyond recognition? Sure! Go nuts! But end it entirely? Ehh

With GW and the internet crowd, I think it would have been a lose-lose situation anyway. If they turned the Old World into something else, I imagine people would be just as upset of the "rape" of the Old World, with similar calls that they should have just started fresh.

**RoperPG**

coldgaming wrote:
123ply wrote:
Oh and also - the battleshock mechanic should be tweaked, the unit should lose as many models as the difference between the dice roll and the units' bravery characteristics. Makes sense, as battleshock is all of a sudden a big deal and the bravery Stat becomes actually important... battleshock is atm a very underwhelming mechanic.

Not sure I'm reading right, but isn't that what battleshock does already?

Yeah, unless he means changing what the bravery values are and/or how the dice roll it worked out. Hmmm.

**Commodus Leitdorf**

coldgaming wrote:

With GW and the internet crowd, I think it would have been a lose-lose situation anyway. If they turned the Old World into something else, I imagine people would be just as upset of the "rape" of the Old World, with similar calls that they should have just started fresh.

Oh I agree, there was no pleasing everyone and I think they knew that when they made the decision. Part of the reason we have Warscrolls for armies GW decided to get rid of. It was an attempt to grab as many people as they could from the old player base to build a new AoS player base. I just don't think they expected THAT bad of a reaction.

**Kilkrazy**

I agree. It's inconceivable that GW were genuinely happy to piss off so many existing customers to the point that those same customers would spend the next nine months trying as hard as possible to persuade other people the replacement game was utter gak.

But there it is. The only rational explanation is that GW had no idea what would happen when they blew up the Olde Worlde and canned WHFB.

**Necronntyr**

Hey guys, im thinking to start collect Age of sigmar. I've always been more tournament's player but I don't know exactly Im been atracted by age of sigmar, maybe his stuff, his minis, fluff, and fast system to play, and also its easy to start play. There are tournaments in your contry?
what advices can you give me to start age of sigmar? thanks and sorry for my english, Im trying to learn Im from Spain

**Kilkrazy**

Download the rules and have a few practice games using counters or figures from other games. See if you like the rules. If you do, then you can look at the various army books to see if you like the Sigmar faction or Chaos.

**AegisGrimm**

Sometimes I really wonder if more people are buying pre-AoS Warhammer figures to play Age of Sigmar, or Kings of War? It'd be funny if GW's largest sales of WHFB in the last 8 months are for playing in a competitor's ruleset?

Mantic might have done more to invigorate Warhammer sales than GW in the last couple of years, excluding the big End Times boom of sales.

**coldgaming**

Necronntyr wrote:
Hey guys, im thinking to start collect Age of sigmar. I've always been more tournament's player but I don't know exactly Im been atracted by age of sigmar, maybe his stuff, his minis, fluff, and fast system to play, and also its easy to start play. There are tournaments in your contry?
what advices can you give me to start age of sigmar? thanks and sorry for my english, Im trying to learn Im from Spain

Heelan Hammer has a lot of tournament focus and are running the biggest AoS tournament yet, some 150 players. Really good twice-monthly podcast http://heelanhammer.com

**Kaiyanwang**

auticus wrote:
Herzlos wrote:
I don't think there's anything modern about AoS.

The backlash was that a game which was well loved and played well despite its flaws was replaced by a totally different game whiich totally failed to address any of the flaws.

Thus the rejection of modern game design by GW, which is what I was talking about. Gamers expect implicitly that modern game design be followed, and if it is not followed many people tend to chaffe at that. When the entire game goes against modern game design, you're going to have a perpetual nuclear fallout - as we saw.

If anything the past year or so was a great behavioral game theory experiment.

AoS doesn't "goes against modern design". Is just a sloppy, soulless product selling overdesigned CAD minis (excluded that Tzeentch model, that one is awesome). This is why is a failure.

GW has contempt for the customer base. The warscroll debacle and the poor content of the AoS books is an evidence.

GW is creatively bankrupt. Have now excellent techniques and molds and use them to sell overdesigned, poorly conceived models. It started with 5th edition 40k tough, just think about Space Wolves and GK.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commodus Leitdorf wrote:
Herzlos wrote:

Also, was it 15% of sales because only 15% of the buyers wanted it, or was it that low through neglect?

Hardly neglect, Storm of Magic, Triumph and Treason, Blood in the Badlands, Mighty Empires, etc. They have been putting out supplements that veterans have been saying would "save the game!" and garner more interest for the last few years. Nothing has taken hold except for those few who make up that 15% who grab them. Added to the fact the game has been around for 30+ years. There is a VERY strong secondary market for stuff that buying new is not necessarily a must. Heck my whole Empire army is made from OOP models that I bought second hand. The only new model I bought from them is a unit of Outriders. 4000pt worth of Empire I have built up over the 15 years I've been playing and I bought precisely ONE new box of minis from GW.

The game needed new players; is pointless expand it if the core is rotten and the rules encourage big expensive armies just to start playing.
Me and my group stopped because the codex imbalance and the progressively dumber (8th edition) core rules killed all the fun. If you do not have fun, you are not interested in investing in a game and do not encourage younger people to invest their few money into something more similar to an exercise of frustration than to a game.