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.

 Kanluwen wrote:

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.

Aaand, the nitpick of the week award goes to... mr. Kaaaanluuuweeeen.

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.

Fair enough.

What the End Times book selling in... erm, fast, showed though was that there was potential in the setting and the game.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:

Many criticise AoS for being a cold marketing decision - and maybe the Stormcast are only that?

There's another option though. GW lately is doing a lot nostalgia driven releases and uses a lot of old ideas. I remember reading somewhere that Fantasy space marines is an old idea in GW, maybe someone dug it out and they felt justified because it's old or sth.

It doesn't change the fact that the idea back there was as much a cash grab as it is today and doesn't absolves the current staff of going for it in my eyes, but it would make it look better than just pulling sigmarines with bolt stormers out of their asses now.

Also, while I'm the first to confirm that it's a cold, marketing decision, no matter if made now or then, it's not that sigmarines are only that. The moment Blanche is made to draw it and someone else to write them, they become something more, pop art or sth heh. Having something born out of the salesmen checklist is bad and spoils a lot imo but the idea itself still might be good (this one discussed here is not imo heh, might have said that before) despite being tainted like that.

Might have been an unlikely defence from me lol. But really I can't stress enough how great it was from GW to not introduce them straight to Old World, that way people who like the idea can have it without ruining the Old World for guys like me. They showed a drop of respect at least between bad jokes and killing the game thousands still played.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 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.

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.

There were rumors I think about a split in GW about AoS but don't remember whether respected source or just random bs.

Anyway maybe the designers were told to do it, and did it. It's been said for years that the creative is under the suits boot and even Rick Priestley said something along those lines. How do you tell that it's what they wanted?

It's like with Blanche sigmarines concept art. Did he do it because he wanted to, or because he was asked by his friends/ bosses? I'd love to know.

RoperPG wrote:

 Lexington wrote:
The fact that AoS is only told in grand, mythic scale is another one of the setting's big problems. Contrast is an important tool. Throwing it out is foolish.

I'm happy to be corrected, but I can't think of an equivalent example from WFB where this doesn't apply?

We're talking about different things, here, but this is an important related point - you're very right on this, so long as you're only counting the last several years of WHFB. GW's had a brain-drain going on for some time now, but it was somewhat obscured by the earlier work that grounded their IP. To anyone paying attention, AoS's setting probably didn't come as much of a surprise, even if it might be a shock to see just how shallow GW's creative talent pool really is anymore.

NinthMusketeer wrote:Now this I completely disagree with. Have you read the campaign books? Have you looked at some of the maps? Quest for Ghal Maraz has the Stormcast fighting on an ocean of silver (while it's melting no less) in their quest to track down a teleporting fortress... and that's just the first campaign book. As for models, we have the Fyreslayers release of near-naked Dwarves given supernatural might by the magical runes hammered directly into their skin who tunnel by controlling magma and have guns which shoot globs of lava.

This isn't particularly 'weird' stuff - it'd be right at home in Warcraft, all told. The current IP regime at GW just doesn't have the wherewithal to understand that there's more to the fantastic than the big and the impossible. Right here in this thread, there's a lot of chatter about other works that AoS is supposed to resemble, but it always comes out looking worse for the comparison because there's nothing under the setting's' surface level. It doesn't have H. Bosch's dark psychological edge, and GW's conservative sensibilities are never going to allow the wild abandon of Moorcock and classic Heavy Metal if for no other reason than the fact that GW is allergic to sex. Hell, they can't even replicate 'Masters of the Universe's kitsch appeal, because too much of their audience is deathly afraid that someone might view their fantasy hobbies as unserious. It's an empty setting, designed by salesmen to say nothing and offend no one. No wonder it hasn't gained much of a fanbase.

 Lexington wrote:
Right here in this thread, there's a lot of chatter about other works that AoS is supposed to resemble, but it always comes out looking worse for the comparison because there's nothing under the setting's' surface level. It doesn't have H. Bosch's dark psychological edge, and GW's conservative sensibilities are never going to allow wild abandon of Moorcock and classic Heavy Metal if for no other reason than the fact that GW is allergic to sex. Hell, they can't even replicate 'Masters of the Universe's kitsch appeal, because too much of their audience is deathly afraid that someone might view their fantasy hobbies as unserious. It's an empty setting, designed by salesmen to say nothing and offend no one. No wonder it hasn't gained much of a fanbase.

Exactly this. It's not really good at what it wants to be.

I'd add cheap and cartoonish in a bad way cgi art, it really doesn't help mr. Roundtree, have some class ffs.

It's a bit sad because mythical Warhammer as an idea has potential to be mind blowing but AoS is not.

Wow some good points made what AoS really is.

Age of Lawyers and Accountants.

Hopefully the Age of Roundtree (saw someone else mention this, I think it fits perfectly) will change this and actually make Age of Sigmar actually really good.

Davor wrote:
Wow some good points made what AoS really is.

Age of Lawyers and Accountants.

Hopefully the Age of Roundtree (saw someone else mention this, I think it fits perfectly) will change this and actually make Age of Sigmar actually really good.

That would be me.

Also, it's hilarious that you don't realise just how much work lawyers and accountants do for businesses. There's a good deal of messing about involved behind the scenes.

Many many things are influenced by the advice businesses receive from lawyers and accountants.

I never gave it much thought angleofvengence, until recently thought Accountants and Lawyers could actually mess up a very good product.

Now seeing why the name changes when they really didn't need them, it actually makes the game look more sillier and childish, something not to be taken serious.

At least as you said angleofvengence The Age of Roundtree is looking to change things around. Sadly small "hic ups" are starting to show up now, so I am hoping the AoR is not done and will flourish.

Well at least warhammer generic fantasy battles is done.
What a boring setting.
It was dead on the water. Completely failed.
Glad they moved on pass that dead beaten horse.

I'd be weary of claims that someone knows the internal thinking and decision making process of GW, from intent to product rollout. Anyway, the GW of the past year has been excellent IMO and it keep getting better for miniwargaming with the overall amount of and quality of options we have from game companies, accessory companies and global community.

Sete wrote:
Well at least warhammer generic fantasy battles is done.
What a boring setting.
It was dead on the water. Completely failed.
Glad they moved on pass that dead beaten horse.

*opens mouth to speak, closes again before I say something mean*

AoS has exactly one more chance for my gaming group, if it doesn't get this points system and FAQ's spot on then It will have lost any interest my gaming group had in it. You know how so many peopled slated Batman vs Superman because it just jumped straight into things without any build up when compared with the Avengers, that spend several years of character and world building before plunging to the kind of story lines that only work with fully invested viewers. I believe AoS has the same problem. It jumped straight into Stormcasts and Khorne to the exclusion of all else, where I believe if the initial release focussed on more familiar factions in relation to this new world and they spent a little while tip toeing around the more fantastical aspects of AoS when they actually dived in it wouldn't have alientated so many players.

GW has been improving on this front, the Iron Jaw and Flesh Eater Court where good battle tomes and actually gave us concepts we know in different settings, but in a way it was well recieved. If it had done this in the first place I feel my friend group at least would be more interested.

Im gonna be honest. Avengers was boring. I dunno why people like it. BvsS was by far a better movie. Perspective amd taste. I reckon.
I just made a post similar to a few I have read around here. Just changed AoS for WHFB. Not pleasant if you are a fan is it? Just trying to prove a point.

So from the looks of it AoS' future is a handful of saddies claiming it's the world's most popular and successful game on the internet and it continuing to have TERRIBLE sales until GW panics.

There's literally no reason to say "never" about any of GW's options, all the reasons people have given so far are, well meaningless. The board of directors could decide to make 9th edition tomorrow and several months later they'd be selling 9th edition in stores. In the same way they decided to change course and come out with lots of board games again.

The lesson of Warhammer Fantasy Battles is that it's not the product that was failing, it's the company. If you do a bad job maintaining the game, treat your customers poorly, and act as if you can't fail while competitors eat your former market share up, your profits will drop. AoS was a weird, misguided, group-think desperation move, and very few people want it. Again, their rethinking of board games shows their executives are in such a desperate situation that they can no longer afford to throw good money after proven bad ideas.

frankelee wrote:
So from the looks of it AoS' future is a handful of saddies claiming it's the world's most popular and successful game on the internet and it continuing to have TERRIBLE sales until GW panics.

Actually that's the past/present since its already happened, minus the hyperbole of course.

The board of directors could decide to make 9th edition tomorrow and several months later they'd be selling 9th edition in stores. In the same way they decided to change course and come out with lots of board games again.

Its been well established they have roughly a two-year lead time, so it would be a while before we'd see anything that dramatic.

The lesson of Warhammer Fantasy Battles is that it's not the product that was failing, it's the company. If you do a bad job maintaining the game, treat your customers poorly, and act as if you can't fail while competitors eat your former market share up, your profits will drop. AoS was a weird, misguided, group-think desperation move, and very few people want it. Again, their rethinking of board games shows their executives are in such a desperate situation that they can no longer afford to throw good money after proven bad ideas.

I agree that is the true lesson, and I think GW didn't figure it out until the terrible AoS launch. But this year they have started to change the way they do business for the better, we'll see how well they stick to it and how it turns out going forward.

frankelee wrote:
So from the looks of it AoS' future is a handful of saddies claiming it's the world's most popular and successful game on the internet and it continuing to have TERRIBLE sales until GW panics.

There's literally no reason to say "never" about any of GW's options, all the reasons people have given so far are, well meaningless. The board of directors could decide to make 9th edition tomorrow and several months later they'd be selling 9th edition in stores. In the same way they decided to change course and come out with lots of board games again.

The lesson of Warhammer Fantasy Battles is that it's not the product that was failing, it's the company. If you do a bad job maintaining the game, treat your customers poorly, and act as if you can't fail while competitors eat your former market share up, your profits will drop. AoS was a weird, misguided, group-think desperation move, and very few people want it. Again, their rethinking of board games shows their executives are in such a desperate situation that they can no longer afford to throw good money after proven bad ideas.

Awww, you're just sad that you are a dinosaur, and not part of the future (of AoS). :-)
But fortunately for you, there is a section of the forum just a few clicks down from this one, where you can harp on and on the greatness of the old days of WHFB with the few others still left there. Or you can move on and spend your time on something positive instead of trying to "poison the well" here.

Spiky Norman wrote:

frankelee wrote:
So from the looks of it AoS' future is a handful of saddies claiming it's the world's most popular and successful game on the internet and it continuing to have TERRIBLE sales until GW panics.

There's literally no reason to say "never" about any of GW's options, all the reasons people have given so far are, well meaningless. The board of directors could decide to make 9th edition tomorrow and several months later they'd be selling 9th edition in stores. In the same way they decided to change course and come out with lots of board games again.

The lesson of Warhammer Fantasy Battles is that it's not the product that was failing, it's the company. If you do a bad job maintaining the game, treat your customers poorly, and act as if you can't fail while competitors eat your former market share up, your profits will drop. AoS was a weird, misguided, group-think desperation move, and very few people want it. Again, their rethinking of board games shows their executives are in such a desperate situation that they can no longer afford to throw good money after proven bad ideas.

Awww, you're just sad that you are a dinosaur, and not part of the future (of AoS). :-)
But fortunately for you, there is a section of the forum just a few clicks down from this one, where you can harp on and on the greatness of the old days of WHFB with the few others still left there. Or you can move on and spend your time on something positive instead of trying to "poison the well" here.

Awww, he thinks AoS has a future...

I tried to get my gaming group to like AoS, I really did. But my gaming group contained 2 Brettonians a Tomb King player, both of whom simply dropped GW all together in favor of Ninth Age because they felt they've been mishandled. The ones who remained where the people who played for the game play, not the narrative, but those people lost interest when things like rolling for initiative and massive charge ranges took most of the tactical edge out.

I follow other peoples AoS, I really enjoy the Realmgate Wars battle reports on this forum. But the kind of narrative they forge just isn't the kind of thing we were into, and why bother balancing the game ourselves when we could just play Ninth, a game we are already familiar with and know we enjoy without having to work to hard at it? As i said, the new way to play AoS will define a lot of its future. If it makes pick up games easy to coordinate and somewhat balanced I will play AoS alongside Ninth, but one game can never replace the other.

Its opened a new experience up to new players thats good imo, you cant judge gw to harshly if whfb really was selling as badly as we heard then its lucky it didnt just get cut loose. End times send off and then reboot/refresh is as good as anyone could hope. I feel the crit that fantasy as a product wasnt broken it was the company is bunk its by the same guys as 40k/30k yet they thrived, i cant believe they'd burn there ip with out serious reason thats got to be one hard move. I think aos will likely never be 40k big but it will develop in to a new creature quite different from whfb or 40k a new age action rpg.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Spiky Norman wrote:

frankelee wrote:
So from the looks of it AoS' future is a handful of saddies claiming it's the world's most popular and successful game on the internet and it continuing to have TERRIBLE sales until GW panics.

There's literally no reason to say "never" about any of GW's options, all the reasons people have given so far are, well meaningless. The board of directors could decide to make 9th edition tomorrow and several months later they'd be selling 9th edition in stores. In the same way they decided to change course and come out with lots of board games again.

The lesson of Warhammer Fantasy Battles is that it's not the product that was failing, it's the company. If you do a bad job maintaining the game, treat your customers poorly, and act as if you can't fail while competitors eat your former market share up, your profits will drop. AoS was a weird, misguided, group-think desperation move, and very few people want it. Again, their rethinking of board games shows their executives are in such a desperate situation that they can no longer afford to throw good money after proven bad ideas.

Awww, you're just sad that you are a dinosaur, and not part of the future (of AoS). :-)
But fortunately for you, there is a section of the forum just a few clicks down from this one, where you can harp on and on the greatness of the old days of WHFB with the few others still left there. Or you can move on and spend your time on something positive instead of trying to "poison the well" here.

Awww, he thinks AoS has a future...

Bless im.

Everyone = Here is your RULE #1 reminder - make sure you're always posting with it in mind.

More future than WHFB as of now.
Getting back on topic, these last few releases seem to have sold pretry well.
Ironjaws was well recwived as fleash eater court.
And Silver tower was a sucess aswell.
Such bad news for a game with no future.

AoS is going to last for a while, GW's too stubborn to do anything but that.

My prediction is that give it five to ten years, and if the company is still standing, they'll release kits with square bases, and a Warhammer Fantasy setting in an attempt to do to AoS what Warhammer 30K did to 40K

My prediction is that give it five to ten years, Games Workshop will go out of business due to the outrage caused when the Sisters of Battle are opened up to male members out of fear that the website The Gary Stu will label them misandrist. Also, Supreme Commander Trump of Earth will declare war on the Martians because they made fun of his tiny hands. Also, in ten years, pants will be considered horribly dated and everybody will instead be wearing skolts (that's a skort (shorts + skirt) mixed with a kilt).

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:

Many criticise AoS for being a cold marketing decision - and maybe the Stormcast are only that?

There's another option though. GW lately is doing a lot nostalgia driven releases and uses a lot of old ideas. I remember reading somewhere that Fantasy space marines is an old idea in GW, maybe someone dug it out and they felt justified because it's old or sth.

It doesn't change the fact that the idea back there was as much a cash grab as it is today and doesn't absolves the current staff of going for it in my eyes, but it would make it look better than just pulling sigmarines with bolt stormers out of their asses now.

Also, while I'm the first to confirm that it's a cold, marketing decision, no matter if made now or then, it's not that sigmarines are only that. The moment Blanche is made to draw it and someone else to write them, they become something more, pop art or sth heh. Having something born out of the salesmen checklist is bad and spoils a lot imo but the idea itself still might be good (this one discussed here is not imo heh, might have said that before) despite being tainted like that.

Might have been an unlikely defence from me lol. But really I can't stress enough how great it was from GW to not introduce them straight to Old World, that way people who like the idea can have it without ruining the Old World for guys like me. They showed a drop of respect at least between bad jokes and killing the game thousands still played.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 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.

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.

There were rumors I think about a split in GW about AoS but don't remember whether respected source or just random bs.

Anyway maybe the designers were told to do it, and did it. It's been said for years that the creative is under the suits boot and even Rick Priestley said something along those lines. How do you tell that it's what they wanted?

It's like with Blanche sigmarines concept art. Did he do it because he wanted to, or because he was asked by his friends/ bosses? I'd love to know.

The second White Dwarf on the Silver Tower goes quite in depth into the design process of the game and I would recommend it!

While the decision to add "Fantasy Space Marines" may have been a decision from up top, the rest of the design process seems to be in the hands of the studio and begins with Blanche and Gallagher concept art, moves through to miniature design and then has fluff and rules written for it.

Again, with the shake-up of fantasy, it may have been called by the bigwigs up top, but the design team must have had full autonomy on how to go about it. I say this because we have design decisions (like the absence of points) which firstly go against the grain of all the competition (making it a bizarre risk to take - bigwigs usually like safe bets) and secondly are known to be the preference of the studio team leaders (we all know Jervis was a big fan of no points since his citadel journal article deploring them).

Rick's comments are obviously dated to the time he still worked at GW, and we can believe it was so until he left (although with a pinch of salt considering his new company is "hey we're GW making all your fav GW games before they turned evil" - so he obviously plays it up). But I think AoS has many hallmarks of the personalities leading the design studio (firstly the aforementioned lack of points - secondly the strong emphasis on a-symmetrical battles and narrative driven campaigns).

From Sad Panda we know Silver Tower has been fully complete since the launch of AoS. From the most recent article we know everything from the Silver Tower's setting, miniature design, rules design and even the idea to make a dungeon crawl boardgame based on the original Warhammer Quest were all decision handled by the design team and not the board members or whatever, it seems the culture which forced Rick Priestly to leave is no longer the status quo. If the Silver Tower had a similar development time to AoS (seems likely, the sculptor who did the Doomseeker did so immediately after completing the Fyreslayer range) - it would seem that the design team had lots of freedom in the creation of AoS too.

Maybe too much freedom. Which is why they are now being reigned in to include matched play (something the player base is desperate for - but is something the studio team don't seem to care for).

Given the poor rules in the assassin game and kill squad I have no real interest in silver tower.

The models look great but I don't buy games for the models I buy them for the game, x-wing you could play with tokens and it'd still be great.

Remove the models from GW games there's nothing of worth left.

Sete wrote:
Well at least warhammer generic fantasy battles is done.
What a boring setting.
It was dead on the water. Completely failed.
Glad they moved on pass that dead beaten horse.

Sete wrote:
Im gonna be honest. Avengers was boring. I dunno why people like it. BvsS was by far a better movie. Perspective amd taste. I reckon.
I just made a post similar to a few I have read around here. Just changed AoS for WHFB. Not pleasant if you are a fan is it? Just trying to prove a point.

Well if you really thought that it was boring, generic, fail, dead beaten horse then why wouldn't you post it, pleasant or not. Only crap part would be that it's good that it's dead, there were actualy posts like that, "I'm glad that it's dead". I was like wtf, if you hate it just go somewhere else, why would you ever wait for this particular company to bring you what you want. I mean I hate Warmachine aesthetics (game is ok) but I'm not sitting here waiting for it to disappear from the face of earth. I'm accused here of being the AoS hater at all cost but I wouldn't like it to die because that would be crap towards those that invest serious money into it now, Sure a little dance on its grave maybe in the heat of the moment heh but I would immediatly say it's a dick move from GW instead of justifying it with pseudo economics bs let alone blaming the consumer base like numerous AoSers, kings of not being a douche, do here.

You also accidently touched part of the problem here. Yes whfb was generic and 40k is an amalgamate of blatant ripoffs where I have a hard time naming a single original thing. What made both stand out is a grimdark twist and OTTness where GW really excells (or excelled maybe looking at AoS), sadly AoS has none of it but is just as generic. Without the trademark GW edge there is nothing to really differentiate it from countless video or card or board game universes, whfb was something established and respected that al the others in the industry looked up to for inspiration but then GW decided to ripoff its own ripoffs for some reason and entered their turf of overly hopeful, epic, magical, colorful, planar and shining fantasy. And they got beaten already imo, without even mentioning the price.

One other thing

Sure, Warhammer Fantasy was essentially generic fantasy. But can we really say that AoS isn't really generic?

I mean what do we have in AoS? When you drag it down to basics (in the same way you drag WHF down to it's basics to call it generic), AoS is a bunch of poorly defined worlds, fighting, in a battle between Generic Fantasy Humans, Generic Fantasy Dwarfs, Generic Dwarf Fortress Dwarfs, Lizardmen, Trees that will rape and eat you and Generic Fantasy Elves vs Big Necromancer and Generic Undead with some vaguely out there undead monsters vs Orcs and Ogres which are now basically just big orcs vs Skaven, Chaos Daemons, Beastmen and Warriors of Chaos, none of which have changed dramatically

And most of the specific original stuff within factions existed back in fantasy as well as in AoS

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:
The second White Dwarf on the Silver Tower goes quite in depth into the design process of the game and I would recommend it!

I wouldn't exactly put too much stock into this. There have been a lot of "behind the design process" articles in White Dwarf over the years, yet none of them had a bored, irritated Rick Priestley muttering "this is what we were told to work on by Sales, even thought we didn't want to." It's almost as if White Dwarf isn't an independent journalistic investigation into GW, but some form of...advertising.

 Bottle wrote:
Again, with the shake-up of fantasy, it may have been called by the bigwigs up top, but the design team must have had full autonomy on how to go about it. I say this because we have design decisions (like the absence of points) which firstly go against the grain of all the competition (making it a bizarre risk to take - bigwigs usually like safe bets)

On the other hand, we do have actual independent journalism, as well as public statements in investor's reports, showing that Tom Kirby, the bigwig at GW during AoS' development, thought game rules aren't important except as a mechanism to sell miniatures - which makes a whole lot of sense when you break down its major design components, especially in relation to GW's earlier productions.

The problem there being that the game rules can have a drastic effect on the purchasing of figures if the gamers care about rules

For example, I never started a Skaven army in Warhammer, mainly because the game would have demanded I have a metric fuckton of models (both to buy and to paint), making it a much more difficult investment than with say, Ogres or Bretonnians

 Lexington wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:
The second White Dwarf on the Silver Tower goes quite in depth into the design process of the game and I would recommend it!

I wouldn't exactly put too much stock into this. There have been a lot of "behind the design process" articles in White Dwarf over the years, yet none of them had a bored, irritated Rick Priestley muttering "this is what we were told to work on by Sales, even thought we didn't want to." It's almost as if White Dwarf isn't an independent journalistic investigation into GW, but some form of...advertising.

Sure, you can believe they are lying through their teeth if it helps with your conspiracy theories!

 Bottle wrote:
Again, with the shake-up of fantasy, it may have been called by the bigwigs up top, but the design team must have had full autonomy on how to go about it. I say this because we have design decisions (like the absence of points) which firstly go against the grain of all the competition (making it a bizarre risk to take - bigwigs usually like safe bets)

On the other hand, we do have actual independent journalism, as well as public statements in investor's reports, showing that Tom Kirby, the bigwig at GW during AoS' development, thought game rules aren't important except as a mechanism to sell miniatures - which makes a whole lot of sense when you break down its major design components, especially in relation to GW's earlier productions.

We're in agreement here. The people at the top didn't care for the rules and so gave the design studio full say in it. With Jervis leading it up, that's how we get a game with no points and narrative scenarios (as it fills his "director and film" idea of wargaming). There's probably more involvement from the top now considering the rocky start AoS had as a result of the rules + narrative.

 Sqorgar wrote:
My prediction *REDACTED*....also, in ten years, pants will be considered horribly dated and everybody will instead be wearing skolts (that's a skort (shorts + skirt) mixed with a kilt).

*speaks into lapel mic* He knows too much, He knows about the skorts! Bravo team, take him, NOW! Move, move, move!

Sete wrote:
More future than WHFB as of now.
Getting back on topic, these last few releases seem to have sold pretry well.
Ironjaws was well recwived as fleash eater court.
And Silver tower was a sucess aswell.
Such bad news for a game with no future.

Do you have any evidence for any of that?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:


Sure, you can believe they are lying through their teeth if it helps with your conspiracy theories!

You have to appreciate that WD has some form of bias to it - everything is the best thing ever! The writers will never mention anything they didn't like about it, so it's not a good source of information (except maybe partial background).