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.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Sete wrote:
Great I like space marines.
Now liking space marines and saying you dont like stormcast because they look like space marines... now thats weird. Its as if someone was grasping at straws for some reason.

To be fair if you liked Space Mariens they already existed before Sigmarines were invented so you could just have played 40K? There are lots of similarities between the games.

Sarcasm my fellow citizen.
I dont think they compare at all.
And I play 40k. But I rather play fantasy.
Between Star wars and LoTR I prefer the later.

RoperPG wrote:

As for the contention " I just like my game settings driven by creative minds instead of salesmen."
You do know what happens to creative businesses that don't sell, right?
Suggesting the sales and creative process should be totally separate in any business is either mad or naive.

Mad or naive, both in fact. Still I think that a creation that has to be defended like you just did is nothing exceptional really.

Fun fact though, noone actualy wanted fantasy space marines and I doubt anyone asked for them. Not only was it their inner salesmen, it was a bad salesman who pushed the move based only on sales graphs in a vacuum or sth. Even funnier, actual and honest creative work in this case would probably earn them more money and much more respect.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

coldgaming wrote:

RoperPG wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:

And even if you're ok with it, there's that question of motives.

I'll assume you mean GW's motives, and the answer is - so what? Or, even if there is some shady machiavellian scheme in play here, what would you suggest?

They're a business, so thinking ill of them for trying to improve profitability is insane. If things don't work out, they either go bust or try doing something else. That's kind of how businesses work.
You either like and/or buy their product, or you don't.

I love "the question of motives." Are these people seriously trying to create a product that appeals to people and sells? Are they trying to make money by making things people want? This is some nefarious business.

But they didn't. The launch was a failure as confirmed by Games Workshop.

They also don't sell fething washing machines. If you think that crude attempts at sales in made up universes business are ok, that surely explains you not having a problem with AoS.

They created something noone asked for, and created it with sales in mind. Fail 101.

Unless it was all buzz back then as well with awkward minority of haterz.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sqorgar wrote:

RoperPG wrote:
As for the contention " I just like my game settings driven by creative minds instead of salesmen."
You do know what happens to creative businesses that don't sell, right?
Suggesting the sales and creative process should be totally separate in any business is either mad or naive.

You can safely ignore any post Plumbumbarum makes in the AoS forums. He's always hated the game and GW, and he'll say pretty much whatever he can to make them look bad, regardless of how irrational or hypocritical it may be. So treat his AoS comments more as a manifestation of his disgust rather than as an invitation for reasoned discussion.

Sure but it's actualy you who summoned me with bs claims that can be summed up as "People didn't get AoS universe". It's not true, AoS universe is generic, obvious and cliche. It doesn't make it bad by default ofc, what made it bad was GW's half hearted attitude that added a weak game, bad artwork and atrocious handling of its release. They actualy had the resources to make it a quality product but it's not, it's mediocre at best and it's only now they are trying to improve it.

I hope you will admit that your initial argument back there was crap. I know from your other posts that you can do better.

Maybe you just don't play video games though.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Sure but it's actualy you who summoned me with bs claims that can be summed up as "People didn't get AoS universe". It's not true, AoS universe is generic, obvious and cliche. It doesn't make it bad by default ofc, what made it bad was GW's half hearted attitude that added a weak game, bad artwork and atrocious handling of its release. They actualy had the resources to make it a quality product but it's not, it's mediocre at best and it's only now they are trying to improve it.

SOME people absolutely didn't get it. I've seen several posts by people (here, reddit, BoLS, etc) that were some variation of, "I was down on AoS and its fluff, but after giving it a chance, I rather like it". Maybe they were biased and angry, with the passage of time easing their anger enough to give the game a fair shake, but it's also a bit of having the wrong first impressions. I think some, or even most of them saw something different in the AoS fluff initially and came to a better and more agreeable understanding later.

And I include myself in that. Though I was okay with what I thought AoS fluff was, as I said, I recently started reading the campaign books and was pleasantly surprised to find something more interesting than I anticipated. I mean, I had a handle on the general AoS universe, but I was completely distanced from the ongoing plot or characters. That's changed because I now realize that the ongoing plot and characters may be worth paying attention to after all. And this was in the first campaign book, which has been out almost as long as Age of Sigmar.

I don't think YOU have the wrong impression about AoS. I think you just like being a Negative Nelly. But some people - enough people - had the wrong impressions about what the Age of Sigmar fluff was and was trying to do. When you are looking at a goal and see the ball go off in a different direction, it seems like the game is being played poorly, but in this case, GW was just aiming towards a different goal that wasn't as obvious.

And as for the fantasy space marines - I love the Stormcast. They remain my favorite faction and I think their design (especially the Prosecutors) is amazing. I'm thinking of grabbing some more Stormcast just so that I can paint them as Celestial Warbringers or Knights-Excelsior units. So, I guess GW's cynical cash grab was super effective on me.

Maybe you just don't play video games though.

I could certainly stand to play more.

I wont give GW a pass on this one, they did a terrible job. They marketed poorly, they rehashed art, they wanted to do this on the cheap and it shows. The game is ok, Its not brilliant, its not innovative, its just mediocre. The idea of a quick easy core set of rules made perfect sense. IT was a good idea. They executed poorly. The rules are substandard for a company of their calibre. A company that can make WHFB, 40k, Mordheim, etc... could have and should have done better. for factions, I personally hate the stormcast, cant stand em. but that is too bad. They are there. I did not care for a good many models, so I just dont buy them. That does not mean that the models themselves are bad. The stormcast are well made. They go together easy, have some good options, and while I despise their look, they hit the mark of what they are trying to do damn well. The fluff, well I think the fluff is lazy and uninspired. Some folks think the same of the old world.
I firmly believe they should have made a clean break. I believe they failed utterly with their rollout. They were never realistically going to keep a majority of their fanbase with such a radical departure anyway. So dont try. You will fail and look stupid for it, and will win neither favour nor love from either side. So Just go all in. And they did not do that. Make the round bases standard and get it done. Get rid of the obviously old world armies, completely. Roll out new factions. I would guess that the fyreslayers, stormcast, and whatnot sell pretty good. The entry price has been handled well. You do not have to spend alot for AoS. Almost nothing really. BUT if you do need to buy models, they are on the whole cheaper, and they have not dropped quality, whether or not you like the look of them, the quality is still damn good. While you dont NEED to spend alot for an army, most people will. They will want to. That is success. On that front with GW ramping up on AoS , this game has a future. It will sit comfortably somewhere in the middle of the pack for miniature games, and will do so for the foreseable future. It is already changing and adapting to players expectations with this new generals book coming out.

 Sqorgar wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Sure but it's actualy you who summoned me with bs claims that can be summed up as "People didn't get AoS universe". It's not true, AoS universe is generic, obvious and cliche. It doesn't make it bad by default ofc, what made it bad was GW's half hearted attitude that added a weak game, bad artwork and atrocious handling of its release. They actualy had the resources to make it a quality product but it's not, it's mediocre at best and it's only now they are trying to improve it.

SOME people absolutely didn't get it. I've seen several posts by people (here, reddit, BoLS, etc) that were some variation of, "I was down on AoS and its fluff, but after giving it a chance, I rather like it". Maybe they were biased and angry, with the passage of time easing their anger enough to give the game a fair shake, but it's also a bit of having the wrong first impressions. I think some, or even most of them saw something different in the AoS fluff initially and came to a better and more agreeable understanding later.

Ok but you suggested people were raised with Tolkien clones and somehow weren't equipped to appreciate AoS and that's not it.

I don't think YOU have the wrong impression about AoS. I think you just like being a Negative Nelly.

I don't like being negative, I don't enjoy the part where I insult the game you people like. On the other hand, I don't make a fool of you in from of a girl you like or kill your cat or sth so I consider it not a big deal really and sth a normal guy should take no problem. But it's not nice and I don't enjoy it.

I very much enjoy the freedom to say what I really think though.

And as for the fantasy space marines - I love the Stormcast. They remain my favorite faction and I think their design (especially the Prosecutors) is amazing. I'm thinking of grabbing some more Stormcast just so that I can paint them as Celestial Warbringers or Knights-Excelsior units. So, I guess GW's cynical cast grab was super effective on me

Each their own and all if it hits exactly your tastes but it's not about whether you like them or not. It's about the decision to put space marines lite into Warhammer Fantasy which is a bit like Lucas decision to put Ewoks into RotJ to sell toys. But hey apparently it's mad or naive to hate sth like that.

I doubt fantasy space marines were sth they always wanted to do but just a cash grab yes and it takes away from the universe when you see such motives as its foundation. It's less genuine.

If sigmarines were just a little more subtle and fantasyish, they could grow on me too. Can't stand the marked pauldrons, chambers and all that sm stuff. Just something closer to Blanche's vision would be much, much better.

Sete wrote:
Just patiently waiting for the bretonnia and tomk kings replacement.
Because they will come have no doubt.
But instead of worshipping a lake lady it will be Sigmar.
And TK will have a different look to be the new main army of tje dead. Dattebayo.

They could also worship the life goddess or even Tyrion. I really hope they put a ton of those kinds of options for the future Free People. Different beliefs, civilisations, tactics and what gods are worshipped depending on what realm they're native to.

Definitely eager for Bret-expies but am building up Stormcasts and wanderers in the meantime. Make for a appealing force of holy paladins and eldritch rangers.

(Welcome to the forum, btw, Sete. )

Sete wrote:
Great I like space marines.
Now liking space marines and saying you dont like stormcast because they look like space marines... now thats weird. Its as if someone was grasping at straws for some reason.

I prefer Stormcasts to Space marines, myself. Never can understand the hate for space marines that seems to always come up. They're just sci-fi knights.

Davor wrote:

 Nova_Impero wrote:
I'm going to leave this here.

I usually don't listen to these things, but thought if it improved my view on the fluff of AoS, so be it. It did nothing to it. It didn't deter my view on AoS or make it more positive.

Saying "I'm going to leave this here." I was expecting something Grandiose. That right there made this a total fail for me. Went on too long trying to explain what a fantasy setting can be, that there is lots of versions on it, and I got lost on how this applies to AoS. Guess my attention span wondered.

So what is the point of it? Not being negative, just wondering I didn't get it.

The video's just pointing out what fantasy tropes and genre AoS is focusing on. With it's setting of gods battling it out and champions overcoming trials it's leaning towards mythic and epic fantasy like a mix between the tales of Hercules and DnD.

23:00 gives the best sum up. Heroic fantasies always give rewards at the quest's end, sword and sorcery (WFB) is a reward of suffering as the heroes are wounded and try to survive, Epic fantasy (DnD) gives a mighty reward of power or salvation, Mythic fantasy (Hercules) is a reward of more trials as the champion ever seeks to prove himself.

Cool to see zero dislikes for the video still.

I am one of the people that began this hobby because of the Age of Sigmar. I had never played Warhammer before, it always interested me but never dove in. When AOS was released i was blown away! The rules were simple to learn, the story i found (find) amazing and the concept just got me addicted. I have no say on what it was like before AOS but one look at the art, models and concept and i was hooked!

Jayjayphoto wrote:
I am one of the people that began this hobby because of the Age of Sigmar. I had never played Warhammer before, it always interested me but never dove in. When AOS was released i was blown away! The rules were simple to learn, the story i found (find) amazing and the concept just got me addicted. I have no say on what it was like before AOS but one look at the art, models and concept and i was hooked!

Now if a few months from now Games Workshop announces that Age of Sigmar has failed and they were returning to the mass
combat setting and everything you bought would need to be rebased, buy all new game material to play the game correctly.

I guess you would be kind of upset...This is what happened to the people that played the game for the last 20 years.. hence the anger..

I am one of the old grouchy warhammer players that dislikes AoS, not because I didn't give it a fair shake.. I played it a number of
times and just don't care for the world, the rules or the fact that all models keep getting bigger and bigger in scale..

I don't work for Games Workshop so I don't know what is facts or not... But if there is smoke...there should be fire..
Warhammer was not selling to the level of 40k. but it never did.. 40k has always been the golden child for games workshop.

To boost sales they went with a new direction that is more science fiction than fantasy.. even replacing the statue in front
of GW Headquarters to show they are "all in" on the new direction, so I know AoS is not going away any time soon no matter how it sales.

Only reason GW even linked to the old game is to help move the remaining stock of miniatures. So a year from now they will have removed
any existence of the old world and I am fine.. No one forces me to buy anything.. well food.. I have trouble living without it..

But they changed the rules, the background, base type, went with no point system and also changed the scale... what did they expect
the reaction from their costumers would be.. If star wars battle made the same announcement tomorrow.. would it improve sales or hurt sales?

Baron Klatz wrote:

Sete wrote:
Great I like space marines.
Now liking space marines and saying you dont like stormcast because they look like space marines... now thats weird. Its as if someone was grasping at straws for some reason.

I prefer Stormcasts to Space marines, myself. Never can understand the hate for space marines that seems to always come up. They're just sci-fi knights.

I very much like space marines (prefer csm tough) but hate sigmarines. I think they are out of place and stick out.

Example this pic

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/stormcast-eternals-go-to-war.jpg

See, I don't like the design of the basic sigmarine but what really kills it for me there are the blue pauldrons with markings, it would look much better if they all had ornate ones or sth. But no, they had to hammer it down so noone misses it - they're just like space marines, forming chambers reforging and owning stuff left and right with righteous anger! They don't look fantasyish but they're not scincefictious either, all I see is a mess.

If the nods to sm were subtlier and artwork was better (the one I posted is just ok at best imo and still among the better ones really), I'm sure GW would be able to win me over, they almost did with Tau heh. I find the design of the Retributors better than basic sigmarines, I'd just make a force of them and use as basic guys. As is, each time I try to like it ( like yesterday when I was checking the art again looking for Bosch), sigmarines stick out and spoil it so much that I give up.

Baron Klatz wrote:

Cool to see zero dislikes for the video still.

You were tempting the devil . There's already 1 dislike.

Thanks baron
I have been around since 2014 but mostly I just lurk
I not a fan of bright colors on sigmarines aswell thats why im going with the Anvils of Heldenhammer color.
Gives me that Black Templar vibe

 Genoside07 wrote:

Now if a few months from now Games Workshop announces that Age of Sigmar has failed and they were returning to the mass
combat setting and everything you bought would need to be rebased, buy all new game material to play the game correctly.

I guess you would be kind of upset...This is what happened to the people that played the game for the last 20 years.. hence the anger..

This has been covered a thousand times in this forum. WHFB wasn't selling. Whether it was because the WHFB playerbase was shrinking or WHFB players just playing with the same 20 year old models instead of buying new ones, WHFB was financially unsustainable. That's not the fault of Age of Sigmar. That's on the WHFB players. Don't blame GW. Blame yourself or god.

To boost sales they went with a new direction that is more science fiction than fantasy..

AoS is not science fiction. Like, at all.

Only reason GW even linked to the old game is to help move the remaining stock of miniatures.

That's not even remotely true. They've removed models, sure, but they've kept quite a few of the old models (even if they changed the fluff on them, like the Flesh-Eater Courts or Seraphon). They've rebased more models than they've replaced.

Baron Klatz wrote:

23:00 gives the best sum up. Heroic fantasies always give rewards at the quest's end, sword and sorcery (WFB) is a reward of suffering as the heroes are wounded and try to survive, Epic fantasy (DnD) gives a mighty reward of power or salvation, Mythic fantasy (Hercules) is a reward of more trials as the champion ever seeks to prove himself.

I guess that is the problem. Waiting till 23:00 of the answer. Then again, it's like how I talk on the forums, ramble on before I get to the point LOL.

 Sqorgar wrote:
That's not the fault of Age of Sigmar. That's on the WHFB players. Don't blame GW. Blame yourself or god.

Rubbish.

GW released a new edition with significant changes that cost them a significant chunk of the player base right off the bat, a situation that could have been avoided with more customer engagement, advertising and pre-release marketing. This was on top of the damage done by the horrible imbalance of Daemons, Dark Elves, Vampires and High Elves from the second half of 7th Edition.

WHFB failed because GW failed at the basics of running a retail business.

 Baragash wrote:

 Sqorgar wrote:
That's not the fault of Age of Sigmar. That's on the WHFB players. Don't blame GW. Blame yourself or god.

Rubbish.

GW released a new edition with significant changes that cost them a significant chunk of the player base right off the bat, a situation that could have been avoided with more customer engagement, advertising and pre-release marketing. This was on top of the damage done by the horrible imbalance of Daemons, Dark Elves, Vampires and High Elves from the second half of 7th Edition.

It cost them a significant chunk of a player base that wasn't really buying anything to begin with.

That's the part you left out of his post and which was a big reason why they've done AoS. People weren't buying things. The people who weren't buying things tended to overlap with the people who got bent out of shape with the shift to AoS and "quit"(I say that in air quotes because despite them saying they're quitting, you'll find them talking about playing 9th Age or 8th).

Customer engagement, advertising, and prerelease marketing don't mean a damn thing when you're talking about the neckbeards who complain about every little aspect of AoS.

WHFB failed because GW failed at the basics of running a retail business.

WHFB failed because players didn't actually support it and hadn't supported it for years.

I'm only going to address the bit that's even a little worth responding to.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It cost them a significant chunk of a player base that wasn't really buying anything to begin with.

That's the part you left out of his post and which was a big reason why they've done AoS. People weren't buying things.

This support that the players supposedly weren't giving WHFB was still an eight digit number, and bigger on it's own than almost any other competitor in the market (to the best of my knowledge, pre-X-wing, only PP had a supposed turnover number that could match that), and it's at least twice as much as Mantic's entire business now.

Oh come on. People were not buying Fantasy to begin with is because why would people want to buy when GW didn't support alot of armies insane prices and price increases poor balance and no communication.

So it comes back to GW again. It's not the players fault they were not buying.

Davor wrote:
Oh come on. People were not buying Fantasy to begin with is because why would people want to buy when GW didn't support alot of armies insane prices and price increases poor balance and no communication.

No communication is something that had been going on for how long at that point?
GW didn't support a lot of armies because players didn't buy them. Think back to all the threads about how historicals made great proxies for Bretonnians/Empire. And you wonder why they dumped the stuff that could basically be covered by historicals?
There haven't been actual price increases for a loooooooong time. They've been doing "stealth" price increases by splitting boxes down to fewer contents and making things more expensive that way.

So it comes back to GW again. It's not the players fault they were not buying.

That's not how GW views it. In prior years, whether the rules for something sucked or not it would sell.

Long story short: Yeah. It is the players' fault that GW took the actions they did. GW is all about that money, and when the line stopped being profitable why should they continue it?

 Sqorgar wrote:
WHFB wasn't selling. Whether it was because the WHFB playerbase was shrinking or WHFB players just playing with the same 20 year old models instead of buying new ones, WHFB was financially unsustainable. That's not the fault of Age of Sigmar. That's on the WHFB players. Don't blame GW. Blame yourself or god.

Just stop. Whfb lost players on 7th ed daemon book and then 8th edition changes. Still, End Times books sold in seconds, something that has yet to happen with AoS.

It's GWs fault that it wasn't selling better or attracting more players, they could have fixed it but went the easy way of new start, convenient when you want to shoehorn space marines into fantasy.

Also it was selling, most probably better than AoS is. GW reported a loss in sales in a year of AoS starter and plastic 30k, would never happen if the starter was whfb.

The fact that whfb was unsustainable is made up. It was profitable, just wasn't earning enough in the heads of execs dreaming of more, more, more space marines.

Players killed whfb because they didn't support it, same players were not well read enough to get AoS. You are on fire.

Kanluwen wrote:

Long story short: Yeah. It is the players' fault that GW took the actions they did. GW is all about that money, and when the line stopped being profitable why should they continue it?

What? A-are you Tom Kirby p-perhaps?

If a product is failing, is the responsibility of the producer to fix it, not of the players to buy it regardless. People used to buy WH anyway, previously, because:

1) there was less acceptably good competitors
2) the imbalances were, or at least were perceived, as less dire
3) the entry cost was smaller. In 5th, my Realm of Chaos book had a 1000 points example army composed by 1 Mounted character, 5 knights and 12 chaos warriors. Not easy against bolt throwers and high Elven bullcrap magic, but was an entry army.

GW did not improved, competitors did. GW churned out lots of miniatures, pushed bug monsters and big units, cut corners, fired designers, did not edited/supervised them considering codex writing secondary, discontinued army disenfranchising people that said "never again" (DoW). If you do not update Bretonnia, people will not buy it. If An army sucks or is updated, people will buy less. Resurgence of the Dark Eldar in 40k 5th edition, anyone?

How is all of this anything else than GW complete failure?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Just stop. Whfb lost players on 7th ed daemon book and then 8th edition changes. Still, End Times books sold in seconds, something that has yet to happen with AoS.

This. The Talented mr Ward destroyed Warhammer Fantasy with one death blow. Is like the Sack of Constantinople during the 4th Crusade. Costantinople fell to Turks, but it was already dead. The death blow was inflicted by the 4th crusade. I witnessed directly people go to tournaments, see only Dark Elves, Vampires and Demons, and quit the week after. In my town tournaments were great aggregator (they were not competitive, people went to fight and show the work, there were mandatory painted armies and such).

8th edition is the Turks. 7th ed daemon book is the Sack of Constantinople.

And another comment concerning the "WHFB was not selling". I am not sure about this, but wasn't GW saying to judges that the revenue from WHFB was more than relevant, resolving the lawsuit, in the whole Chapter House thing?

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Long story short: Yeah. It is the players' fault that GW took the actions they did. GW is all about that money, and when the line stopped being profitable why should they continue it?

What? A-are you Tom Kirby p-perhaps?

If a product is failing, is the responsibility of the producer to fix it, not of the players to buy it regardless.

Hur hur hur, is funneh cause you make snarkeh comment.

Read the post I wrote, rather than what you decided to take away from the post.

GW took the actions they did because sales were down. It doesn't matter that sales were down because of GW's actions to GW's eyes, what did matter was that people weren't buying.

GW did not improved, competitors did.

Mantic begs to differ. They're still doing okay, but their entire schtick is being "not-GW complete with former GW designers!" and they haven't really done anything to up their game in terms of quality.

They churned out lots of miniatures, pushed bug monsters and big units, cut corners, fired designers, did not edited/supervised them considering codex writing secondary, discontinued army disenfranchising people that said "never again". If you do not update Bretonnia, people will not buy it.

It didn't matter if Bretonnia got an updated book or not. Bretonnia as a faction had people buying historical models, whether or not the models are good. It's not like it was hard to make a Bretonnian army out of just historicals. The Perry Brothers line would have allowed you to make an army at a fraction of the cost, with the only stuff you'd miss out on being the more fantastic stuff(Pegasi, Damsels, Louen, and maybe the Trebuchet).

If An army sucks or is updated, people will buy less. Resurgence Dark Eldar in 40k 5th edition, anyone?

Dark Eldar in 40k 5th edition was an entire overhaul of a range. What's your point?
Seriously, you do understand that in spite of Dark Elves being given an overhaul of their range that it didn't do well yeah?

How is all of this anything else than GW complete failure?

I'll let you stop and think about things.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Just stop. Whfb lost players on 7th ed daemon book and then 8th edition changes. Still, End Times books sold in seconds, something that has yet to happen with AoS.

This. The Talented mr Ward destroyed Warhammer Fantasy with one death blow. Is like the Sack of Constantinople during the 4th Crusade. Costantinople fell to Turks, but it was already dead. The death blow was inflicted by the 4th crusade.

8th edition is the Turks. 7th ed daemon book is the Sack of Constantinople.

Translation:
"Hurr durr hurr Mat Ward's bad hurr durr hurr."

Oh, and btw?
End Times books did not "sell out in seconds". That happened with ONE book only; End Times: Khaine.
Nagash sold out in a week, Glottkin in the course of a weekend, Khaine in the first 5 minutes of preorders, and Archaon's collector edition sold out before the regular.

And really, saying that the AoS books didn't sell out as some kind of downside?
You don't need the books. There's an app with all of the rules you'd need for the models and to play the game.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

If a product is failing, is the responsibility of the producer to fix it, not of the players to buy it regardless.

An equally valid course would be to drop the product altogether and make something new - a course that is continuously regarded as the inferior one as the FB players at the time of the culling still wanted to play FB (I think that people loathe drastic changes of all kind). Miniature games are a set of rules (+optional setting) plus a set of miniatures. Any one of them or both can be dropped and made anew. GW decided that part of the miniatures could still hold for some time and dropped the rules and setting altogether to make a new one. People that demanded a fixing and were already financially entangled with FB would naturally be against the drop atleast in the beginning (and perhaps after it). Groups that have never heard of FB, have stopped playing, didn't like the rules etc. would be altogether unaffected initially. If numbers say that the latter groups are worth the risk investing into then such a sudden change would naturally be worth it.

The way I think about it, even though GW is this massive company, at its heart is a handful of designers, sculptors, artists etc etc it just seems like none of them wanted to continue with WHFB and wanted to try something new with the fantasy setting.

I think that really comes across in AoS that this is something the GW studio are enjoying to create and I look forward to seeing it evolve.

At the same time the GW studio can be a bit insular and out of touch with the player base. We saw that with the lack of balanced play in the initial outset as they didn't feel it was needed because they are all gamers who don't use those sorts of rules. But in hindsight they can see that was a mistake and are now making amends.

AoS is an incredibly exciting game to be a part of right now, and I am loving it.

It really sucks if WHFB was your thing and you were heavily invested in the setting - but it seems the design studio just wanted to try something new rather than retread the already well beaten path.

So it's not about "fixing" WHFB in my opinion. Their hearts weren't in it anymore and that's why we have AoS. At the end of the day the creative output of GW is just a couple dozen of people.

 Bottle wrote:
The way I think about it, even though GW is this massive company, at its heart is a handful of designers, sculptors, artists etc etc it just seems like none of them wanted to continue with WHFB and wanted to try something new with the fantasy setting.

You know, I've been thinking this for a long time and haven't really given it any credit in my head 'cause GW is a big company and in my experience, when you work for a big company and you're not one of the bigwigs, you do what you're told to do and not what you'd want or think is right to do. If the designers really put their heart to it and wanted it this way I'll be very happy. I'm feeling more optimistic about this hypothesis now

Jayjayphoto wrote:
I am one of the people that began the hobby because of the Age of Sigmar. I never played Warhammer before, it always interested me but never dove in. When AOS was released i was blown away! The rules were simple to learn, the story i found (find) amazing and the concept just got me addicted. I have no say on what it was like before AOS but one look at the art, models and concept and i was hooked!

Awesome to hear that AoS has hit all the right notes for you.

I do miss the old setting abit but the new one is moving along nicely which is really great and keeps pumping out amazing models and kits which is always aces!

 Genoside07 wrote:


Now if a few months from now Games Workshop announces that Age of Sigmar has failed and they were returning to the mass
combat setting and everything you bought would need to be rebased, buy all new game material to play the game correctly.

Except you don't have to rebase or buy anything extra to play a game of AoS with a army out of 8th edition.

I'd say a more appropriate example would be to say that GW changed the setting back to the old world or old world-lite, made entirely new rules that forced your forces to always be 1" between models and have a facing along with other regimental rules and that the AoS lines were slowly being discontinued in favor of armies of slightly smaller models.

 CoreCommander wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:

Cool to see zero dislikes for the video still.

You were tempting the devil . There's already 1 dislike.

Doh!

Sete wrote:
Thanks baron
I have been around since 2014 but mostly I just lurk
I not a fan of bright colors on sigmarines aswell thats why im going with the Anvils of Heldenhammer color.
Gives me that Black Templar vibe

Ah, sorry, I assumed the few posts meant a new user.

I like both the bright and darker Stormcast colors. Makes a cool contrast to eachother when put together in a force.

Davor wrote:

Baron Klatz wrote:

23:00 gives the best sum up. Heroic fantasies always give rewards at the quest's end, sword and sorcery (WFB) is a reward of suffering as the heroes are wounded and try to survive, Epic fantasy (DnD) gives a mighty reward of power or salvation, Mythic fantasy (Hercules) is a reward of more trials as the champion ever seeks to prove himself.

I guess that is the problem. Waiting till 23:00 of the answer. Then again, it's like how I talk on the forums, ramble on before I get to the point LOL.

Haha, better than my ramblings which usually swerve off-topic!

 CoreCommander wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
The way I think about it, even though GW is this massive company, at its heart is a handful of designers, sculptors, artists etc etc it just seems like none of them wanted to continue with WHFB and wanted to try something new with the fantasy setting.

You know, I've been thinking this for a long time and haven't really given it any credit in my head 'cause GW is a big company and in my experience, when you work for a big company and you're not one of the bigwigs, you do what you're told to do and not what you'd want or think is right to do. If the designers really put their heart to it and wanted it this way I'll be very happy. I'm feeling more optimistic about this hypothesis now

Yeah, we've still got Brian Nelson sculpting orcs, we've still got Jervis writing scenarios. The Orruk Megaboss was Brian's first take on an Orc from the mortal realms - does it not feel like a designer unleashed? A Orc no longer constrained by pose - base size - model size or any 'old world' trappings. The Orruk Megaboss is like an Orc straight out of the artwork.

Take the scenarios as well. Jervis has been doing old world scenarios for what 30 years? the 8th edition brb certainly had some fun ones (like the Bugman's delivery scenario). But now we have fights on ice and a-regular shaped boards. Is this not Jervis unleashed in the same way?

Many criticise AoS for being a cold marketing decision - and maybe the Stormcast are only that? - but there is oodles of GW designer personality coming through in AoS. If it had been a play-it-safe marketing call we would have seen points from the outset because that's what all the popular competitors have - instead we get something that comes across like the design team let loose imo. Only now are they being reigned in to cater to the masses.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Hur hur hur, is funneh cause you make snarkeh comment.
Read the post I wrote, rather than what you decided to take away from the post.

Sorry for the snark, but is just something Kirby could say. Words have a weight. You used the word "fault" (error, mistake imperfection, right?) where NOTHING like this can be attributed to players. I took you as much seriously as the sentence you wrote allowed.

GW took the actions they did because sales were down. It doesn't matter that sales were down because of GW's actions to GW's eyes, what did matter was that people weren't buying.

It turns out that such decisions devoid of an analysis of why the sales were down are prone to dire consequences...

Mantic begs to differ. They're still doing okay, but their entire schtick is being "not-GW complete with former GW designers!" and they haven't really done anything to up their game in terms of quality.

Yes, but the overall market of competitors is growing and chewing up space.

It didn't matter if Bretonnia got an updated book or not. Bretonnia as a faction had people buying historical models, whether or not the models are good. It's not like it was hard to make a Bretonnian army out of just historicals. The Perry Brothers line would have allowed you to make an army at a fraction of the cost, with the only stuff you'd miss out on being the more fantastic stuff(Pegasi, Damsels, Louen, and maybe the Trebuchet).

This is a valid point, but in this case, leaving the faction in a limbo instead of squatting and moving on is utterly dishonest toward those who planned to start a bretonnian army. Furthermore, if I feel something different from contempt for a mini company (not the case of GW), I can even decide to support such company if the products are source of fun and not of frustration.

Seriously, you do understand that in spite of Dark Elves being given an overhaul of their range that it didn't do well yeah?

The game was already dead when that happened. Undead, or dying, let's say. Update factions is important ALONG with reasonable price ALONG with good ruleset. Is not rocket science, MOST people get it, you know.

I'll let you stop and think about things.

I think you should reserve such condescending attitude for when you write posts with a content appropriate for such attitude. Next time, bring actual arguments or avoid comments like this, for the sake of the discussion. Furthermore, is quite embarrassing to read. Thanks. (see below).

Translation:
"Hurr durr hurr Mat Ward's bad hurr durr hurr."

Nice comeback. I am almost too astonished by your argument to answer. Such high quality posting. Your 20k+ posts are all like this? This is an... original use of bytes and time, let's say.
I will try: Mr Ward is actually talented. Ward had may good ideas and his codex were usually codex with all the models at least usable. Ward was a "wild talent" that needed an editor, an editor saying "Matt this is great" and "Matt this is bad". He did what he did not out of malice. But:
- In lotr, he started a trend of models completely crazy in term of lore like orc shamans. In my experience, this drove people away from lotr sbg
- In 5th edition 40k, GK and necrons, and the start of an arms race trend
- in fantasy, demons. Like it or not, THAT codex was actually the first book of the End of Times.. in a way.

So Ward, maybe not because his choices but because was "following orders", set up a lot of bad trends, and we can see the effects today. Now if you have an actual comeback to this, ok, but after 2 "hurr dhurr" I think is just the case to put you on Ignore.

 Bottle wrote:
But now we have fights on ice and a-regular shaped boards.

The reliance on the realms of battle boards is a little weird. It's obviously opened up some options as far as creating irregular shaped playing fields and standardizing terrain features - but the realms of battle boards are the definition of luxury: completely optional and stupidly expensive. And yet the game scenarios are obviously built around these things.

I like how they are creatively used, but it just seems absurd to base Age of Sigmar around a game element that pretty much nobody wants or could afford. I'm hoping that when they release the new realm of battle AoS board, it will be more reasonably priced (or at least, purchased incrementally, $50 at a time rather than $300 all at once).

 CoreCommander wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

If a product is failing, is the responsibility of the producer to fix it, not of the players to buy it regardless.

An equally valid course would be to drop the product altogether and make something new - a course that is continuously regarded as the inferior one as the FB players at the time of the culling still wanted to play FB (I think that people loathe drastic changes of all kind). Miniature games are a set of rules (+optional setting) plus a set of miniatures. Any one of them or both can be dropped and made anew. GW decided that part of the miniatures could still hold for some time and dropped the rules and setting altogether to make a new one. People that demanded a fixing and were already financially entangled with FB would naturally be against the drop atleast in the beginning (and perhaps after it). Groups that have never heard of FB, have stopped playing, didn't like the rules etc. would be altogether unaffected initially. If numbers say that the latter groups are worth the risk investing into then such a sudden change would naturally be worth it.

Of course. drop or fix - but admit the faults, not blame the customers... because that is just insanity.
Time will tell if it was a good move. I'd say not

 Sqorgar wrote:
But now we have fights on ice and a-regular shaped boards.

The reliance on the realms of battle boards is a little weird. It's obviously opened up some options as far as creating irregular shaped playing fields and standardizing terrain features - but the realms of battle boards are the definition of luxury: completely optional and stupidly expensive. And yet the game scenarios are obviously built around these things.