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.

And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS hater, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a bad ruleset.

 streetsamurai wrote:
Lol. Wow, such deep tactics. The only thing that merely requires a bit of thought is the zoning one, and personally, I think it reflects badly on a game that such things are encouraged

So the entire deployment, army synergy, combos and buffs, activation order, positioning in order to maximize objective conquest and preparing the field in case of an opponent's double turn aren't relevant?

Right-o.

Neronoxx wrote:
I get the sincere feeling you have never played Necromunda or Mordheim - nostalgia aside, those games were basic as all get out. That or you have never played them and just are sitting in the internet-hyperbole section of the auditorium.

As a still-playing Necromunda player, I'm covering my ears at this blasphemy. It's a GREAT game!

That aside, streetsamurai seems to love bing the contrarian, maybe just trolling?

 TheDraconicLord wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
Lol. Wow, such deep tactics. The only thing that merely requires a bit of thought is the zoning one, and personally, I think it reflects badly on a game that such things are encouraged

So the entire deployment, army synergy, combos and buffs, activation order, positioning in order to maximize objective conquest and preparing the field in case of an opponent's double turn aren't relevant?

Right-o.

But you don't have to memorize a clunky encyclopedia-sized rulebook so its clearly for children.

I never understood the complaint about depth. Chess has miles of depth and the rules can be explained in 2 minutes. Do tactics mean nothing to people?

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Neronoxx wrote:
I get the sincere feeling you have never played Necromunda or Mordheim - nostalgia aside, those games were basic as all get out. That or you have never played them and just are sitting in the internet-hyperbole section of the auditorium.

As a still-playing Necromunda player, I'm covering my ears at this blasphemy. It's a GREAT game!

I believe that's his point. Even though they're 'simple', they're GREAT games!

 TheDraconicLord wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
Lol. Wow, such deep tactics. The only thing that merely requires a bit of thought is the zoning one, and personally, I think it reflects badly on a game that such things are encouraged

So the entire deployment, army synergy, combos and buffs, activation order, positioning in order to maximize objective conquest and preparing the field in case of an opponent's double turn aren't relevant?

Right-o.

Who said anything about relevant. I said it is basic things that you will find in most wargames. But then, at this point, it seems obvious that some AOS fans wants to credit it for having some basic rules that are pretty much present in all wargames.

 streetsamurai wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS fan boy, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a good ruleset. It's an ultra simplistic ruleset which is not even original

But then, it's pretty obvious at this point that you've barely played any other games to make such a claim, and when you say that it is similar to BB makes me wonder if you actually played that game.

And I wouldn't be too happy woth AOS 'growth' of I was you. The fact that after all these release and a brand new box set, it's not doing better than WHFB was before GW decided to can it (which was a few years before the end times)

You do realize that by spouting "a few years before endtimes" that GW would have had to essentially cancel Fantasy at the latest in the first year of 8th edition right? 8th came out in 2011. End Times started rolling out in the summer 2014. Fantasy was dying a slow death before GW canned it.

AoS is a good ruleset, in my opinion, because it's easy to pick-up, plays fast, is suprisingly tight rules with the GHB (which makes actual rules as long as KoW), with scenarios (again GHB) a very good tournament game, and the most important to me is that's it's just fun.

Now, is it the best ruleset? Nope. I reserve that for Wrath of Kings But that said it's a good ruleset that does what I think GW wants and what a lot of people want. I enjoy KoW for my block fantasy gaming, WoK for my fantasy true skirmish (30 models or less) fantasy, Epic Armageddon is still my favorite 6mm system (especially with the support the community has poured into it). I love the look of Spartan games but never could enjoy the rules or get a community together. I generally don't enjoy "gang" type games like Necromunda/Mordhiem because I simply don't have time for campaigns and they flourish in that environment. Infinity just doesn't appeal to me after a read thru of the rules. X-wing is to card gamey for me competitively but it's a great game. Armada if it had more support is fantastic.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Neronoxx wrote:
I get the sincere feeling you have never played Necromunda or Mordheim - nostalgia aside, those games were basic as all get out. That or you have never played them and just are sitting in the internet-hyperbole section of the auditorium.

As a still-playing Necromunda player, I'm covering my ears at this blasphemy. It's a GREAT game!

That aside, streetsamurai seems to love bing the contrarian, maybe just trolling?

ha the classic childish argument that everyone that disagree with you is trolling


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS fan boy, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a good ruleset. It's an ultra simplistic ruleset which is not even original

But then, it's pretty obvious at this point that you've barely played any other games to make such a claim, and when you say that it is similar to BB makes me wonder if you actually played that game.

And I wouldn't be too happy woth AOS 'growth' of I was you. The fact that after all these release and a brand new box set, it's not doing better than WHFB was before GW decided to can it (which was a few years before the end times)

You do realize that by spouting "a few years before endtimes" that GW would have had to essentially cancel Fantasy at the latest in the first year of 8th edition right? 8th came out in 2011. End Times started rolling out in the summer 2014. Fantasy was dying a slow death before GW canned it.

AoS is a good ruleset, in my opinion, because it's easy to pick-up, plays fast, is suprisingly tight rules with the GHB (which makes actual rules as long as KoW), with scenarios (again GHB) a very good tournament game, and the most important to me is that's it's just fun.

Now, is it the best ruleset? Nope. I reserve that for Wrath of Kings But that said it's a good ruleset that does what I think GW wants and what a lot of people want. I enjoy KoW for my block fantasy gaming, WoK for my fantasy true skirmish (30 models or less) fantasy, Epic Armageddon is still my favorite 6mm system (especially with the support the community has poured into it). I love the look of Spartan games but never could enjoy the rules or get a community together. I generally don't enjoy "gang" type games like Necromunda/Mordhiem because I simply don't have time for campaigns and they flourish in that environment. Infinity just doesn't appeal to me after a read thru of the rules. X-wing is to card gamey for me competitively but it's a great game. Armada if it had more support is fantastic.

from the rumour at the times, GW were toying with canning WHFB after 8th edition turned out to ba a dud. From what I rebember, itwas a year ot two before the end time that the decision was taken.

Back on topic, I'm not saying AOS is the worst ruleset ever, but let's not pretend it's great also. It can be good for someone who wants something very simplistic, but that's pretty much all there is to it. It is unoriginal (magic rules are lame as hell, game pretty much consist of rolling 4+) and not a game that requires a lot of tactics.

RazorEdge wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS hater, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a bad ruleset.

Reasons

1: Shooting into combat.
2: formations which have a mandate make up so lack creativity.
3: over powered heroes.
4: over powered monsters.
5: a model on foot costs the same for a model on a mount.
6: lack of weapon choices for nearly all models.
7: no reason not to take full command since it in the same if you didn't.
8 summoning needing to pay the cost for a unit that may not show up.
9: double turns.
10: you buy a box of 3 models and the data slate says 9 cost 90 points you can still take 3 for 90 tho.......
11: magic phase just all wrong.
12 lack of creative special rules making each unit different.
13 no rend no play models.
14: All models are too big and easy to model for advantage.
15: lack of proper syengery between use to exist models.
16: each battletome has about 3 models in it you can head swap to make it a (new) unit looking at you flesh eaters.
17: naked chaos.

If you would like a list on all that's wrong with the
Lore
Names
Models
I can go in.

 streetsamurai wrote:

Who said anything about relevant. I said it is basic things that you will find in most wargames

Ok educate us as to what 40K offers in addition to those basic things.

What a lovely thread to discuss why Warhammer Fantasy failed (It was not the system, it was GW ) and compare it with Age of Sigm...


Oh wait! It is not! Its a thread to discuss what will GW reveal this week.

OgreChubbs wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS hater, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a bad ruleset.

Reasons

1: Shooting into combat.
2: formations which have a mandate make up so lack creativity.
3: over powered heroes.
4: over powered monsters.
5: a model on foot costs the same for a model on a mount.
6: lack of weapon choices for nearly all models.
7: no reason not to take full command since it in the same if you didn't.
8 summoning needing to pay the cost for a unit that may not show up.
9: double turns.
10: you buy a box of 3 models and the data slate says 9 cost 90 points you can still take 3 for 90 tho.......
11: magic phase just all wrong.
12 lack of creative special rules making each unit different.
13 no rend no play models.
14: All models are too big and easy to model for advantage.
15: lack of proper syengery between use to exist models.
16: each battletome has about 3 models in it you can head swap to make it a (new) unit looking at you flesh eaters.
17: naked chaos.

Not to mention fixed to hit and wound rolls, which pretty much remove all the tactical aspect of the game and ultra lame magic rules. But then, these reasons have been given numerous times, but some are voluntarily blind

I'd ask what the announcement schedule was for 7th, but the announcement of announcements meta wasn't even close to this back then.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:

Who said anything about relevant. I said it is basic things that you will find in most wargames

Ok educate us as to what 40K offers in addition to those basic things.

I never claimed that 40k is a great game. But still, at least since there is no fixed to hit and wound rolls, it has bit more depth than AOS

 streetsamurai wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS fan boy, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a good ruleset. It's an ultra simplistic ruleset which is not even original

But then, it's pretty obvious at this point that you've barely played any other games to make such a claim (necro weapons and items rules were not basic, that's an absurd thing to say), and when you say that it is similar to BB makes me wonder if you actually played that game, since there is barely any simlarities between it and AOS.

And I wouldn't be too happy with AOS 'growth' if I was you. The fact is that after all these new releases and two brand new box sets, it's not doing better than WHFB was before GW decided to can it (which was a few years before the end times).

I'e played evey game you've listed - they're all pretty freaking basic. None of those are even a remotely complex tabletop game.
Also, you act like originality is a good thing - you understand that there are only 7 stories in existence right? That every book, every movie, every game you can think of was already thought of? What was your favorite movie? I bet it wasn't an original; so get off that horse, and don't hop back on. It isn't an intelligent argument.

Again, simplicity isn't a bad thing. The fact that you seem to believe so fervently seems to indicate an underlying problem with your perception of what a game is. Do you consider chess a bad game? If so, why does it still exist today?
What about Blackjack? Checkers? Old Maid? Pokemon?
These are all 'basic' games that have carriedon for a vary long time - They might not be for you, but that doesn't mean that you can't understand other people enjoying them or the reasons such. At least, it shouldn't. When someone eats something you don't like, do you make a remark about it? No, probably not. That would be rude wouldn't it? Besides, it doesn't affect you in a direct way - they can eat pizza with pineapples, it won't matter to you.
So why do you do the same about the games other people enjoy, even going so far as to make baseless accusations founded on *internet wisdom* to support the claims? I can only assume it's due to an extreme lack of satisafaction with a personal investment into the hobby, an inability to play the game st a competent level (due to jerk opponents, newness, or just stubborn resistance), or you're just parroting your echo chamber.

Regardless, 'facts' are that AoS is doing far better than WHFB did. Proof can be seen in their last financial reports - there were numerous threads at the time discussing this. Short of actual numbers, we get ratios and percentages that we can build strong inferences from. In case you are unfamiliar, that's considered scientifically sound reasoning for a theory, which is essentially law until proven otherwise.
The Disciples of Tzeentch and Sylvaneth releases were critically acclaimed by many communities as big successes. Stormcasts are popluar - both my local FLGS ordered copies in the double digits and sold out over the weekend (small evidence, but hard to view any other way - nobody played fantasy here before they canned it, so AoS is standing on it's own legs.)

Unless you've played a game like Warmachine, you have no idea what constitutes complex. And even that is basic as checkers compared to other games, such as Armored Core.

 Ghaz wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Neronoxx wrote:
I get the sincere feeling you have never played Necromunda or Mordheim - nostalgia aside, those games were basic as all get out. That or you have never played them and just are sitting in the internet-hyperbole section of the auditorium.

As a still-playing Necromunda player, I'm covering my ears at this blasphemy. It's a GREAT game!

I believe that's his point. Even though they're 'simple', they're GREAT games!

D'oh! I seeeee and therefore agree!

OgreChubbs wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS hater, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a bad ruleset.

Reasons

1: Shooting into combat. This doesn't make a bad ruleset. It makes it different.
2: formations which have a mandate make up so lack creativity. There are plenty of difficult choices and fl You mean just like the 40K formations?
3: over powered heroes. That's laughable - especially considering the durability of heroes in 40K
4: over powered monsters. Again, laughable in the broader scope. Some units are scary. None of them over the top.
5: a model on foot costs the same for a model on a mount. Travesty!
6: lack of weapon choices for nearly all models. Most units have 2-3 choices.
7: no reason not to take full command since it in the same if you didn't. And?
8 summoning needing to pay the cost for a unit that may not show up. You don't pay if it doesn't show up. You can summon almost anything to fit the tool you need within your GA.
9: double turns. https://aos-tactics.com/2017/01/08/how-to-optimise-for-the-double-turn/
10: you buy a box of 3 models and the data slate says 9 cost 90 points you can still take 3 for 90 tho....... Now you're just being disingenuous.
11: magic phase just all wrong. Ok, why?
12 lack of creative special rules making each unit different. See skyfires and enlightened
13 no rend no play models. You don't like playing for objectives do you?
14: All models are too big and easy to model for advantage. What advantage exactly? We're measuring base to base in tournaments.
15: lack of proper syengery between use to exist models. You clearly haven't explored the units.
16: each battletome has about 3 models in it you can head swap to make it a (new) unit looking at you flesh eaters. FEC is the only tome that gives you a new unit with headswap. Oh, hey look at these CSM - these are now Chosen.
17: naked chaos. Marauders?

 Ghaz wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Neronoxx wrote:
I get the sincere feeling you have never played Necromunda or Mordheim - nostalgia aside, those games were basic as all get out. That or you have never played them and just are sitting in the internet-hyperbole section of the auditorium.

As a still-playing Necromunda player, I'm covering my ears at this blasphemy. It's a GREAT game!

I believe that's his point. Even though they're 'simple', they're GREAT games!

It is my point, and is the massive deconstructive irony of samurai's post that made me laugh so freakin much.

OgreChubbs wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
And I hear the same old tired argument by the AOS hater, and yet, they never manage to show why and how AOS is a bad ruleset.

Reasons

1: Shooting into combat - makes shooting troops viable in a game where models are generally much faster. Hell, dwarves end up in the other deployment zones by turn 3 if they get some charges off.
2: formations which have a mandate make up so lack creativity. - Not really? Battalions just enhance certain build types. Quite a few armies make due without them.
3: over powered heroes - Not really an issue oddly. Not being able to hide in units means there are almost no overpowered heros
4: over powered monsters - Again, not really an issue. I don't run a single monster and I've won the last local 2 events using a mixed destruction force. Though some monsters are tough if you dedicate half your army to making them that way.
5: a model on foot costs the same for a model on a mount - Just a speed bonus. But with TLOS it can actually be worse at times to put them on a mount. I'd say it evens out.
6: lack of weapon choices for nearly all models - Nope, you normally choose from several weapons for the unit. Same as before really just on a single scroll.
7: no reason not to take full command since it in the same if you didn't - Units should come with them so why wouldn't they be included?
8 summoning needing to pay the cost for a unit that may not show up - How will it not show up? Casting costs are super low. And you get to put it where you want it and it can charge that turn.
9: double turns - Add quite a bit at the tactical level actually
10: you buy a box of 3 models and the data slate says 9 cost 90 points you can still take 3 for 90 tho. - Warscrolls are based on the box sale size. So.....
11: magic phase just all wrong - I think you mean all right. Magic is an enhancer and not longer the dominant force. Also no more 30 minute magic/psychic phases
12 lack of creative special rules making each unit different - Me thinks you actually haven't read most of the warscolls
13 no rend no play models - I run a ton of non-rending models. So do most people I know. Rend helps but only against certain things. You do sometimes want mass attacks.
14: All models are too big and easy to model for advantage - ??
15: lack of proper syengery between use to exist models - A lot
16: each battletome has about 3 models in it you can head swap to make it a (new) unit looking at you flesh eaters - As opposed to WFB where this was extremely common? More units is fine. Specializing is fine. They're not taking anything away.
17: naked chaos - Not sure what this means.

Honestly your list reads like someone who isn't to familiar with the current state of the game.

 Galas wrote:
What a lovely thread to discuss why Warhammer Fantasy failed (It was not the system, it was GW ) and compare it with Age of Sigm...

Oh wait! It is not! Its a thread to discuss what will GW reveal this week.

Exactly! Back on topic, everyone - this is not a thread for comparing AoS / WHFB / etc.

Discuss the possible news coming from GW, or wait for it to be revealed... but any other discussion belongs elsewhere.

If you want to continue, please start a thread in Dakka Discussions and post a link to it here - thanks.

Hulk's post should be the last on that front - again, feel free to continue this over in Dakka Discussions. Thanks

My bad RiTides.

But seriously, I hope they announce my balloon floating dwarves!!!

Sorry for the last OT - posting on mobile takes forever.

Regardless, I have good hopes for 2017 for all of GW's works.
Bit by bit they change.

I've deleted several posts on both sides of this discussion that came in right after my post above. This isn't the thread for it, folks.

Make one in Dakka Discussions if you want to discuss further, please!

Thanks for understanding

did my post was deleted by mods, or did I erased it my mistake ? DOn't want to repost it if it's the former.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Neronoxx wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

Neronoxx wrote:
I get the sincere feeling you have never played Necromunda or Mordheim - nostalgia aside, those games were basic as all get out. That or you have never played them and just are sitting in the internet-hyperbole section of the auditorium.

As a still-playing Necromunda player, I'm covering my ears at this blasphemy. It's a GREAT game!

I believe that's his point. Even though they're 'simple', they're GREAT games!

It is my point, and is the massive deconstructive irony of samurai's post that made me laugh so freakin much.

Simplicity is good when it achieve something interesting with it (like necro does) Simplicity for the sake of it is not inherently good, especially when it makes a game completely shallow. But then, at this point, it seems pretty obvious that your gaming experience is limited to a few games .

See above, SS - maybe I should've locked the thread so everyone could see the warning first who were simul-pisting

Any word when GW will be revealing the news this week, we're about to get snowed in over here

Good, I'm out. Been already banned too many times for discussing AOS. lol

 RiTides wrote:
See above, SS - maybe I should've locked the thread so everyone could see the warning first who were simul-pisting

Any word when GW will be revealing the news this week, we're about to get snowed in over here

Probably not until Wednesday.

I still am betting they are announcing a new space marine. And Will squat the current ones over time. 30K would probly almost if not become the primary space marine set. Then they will evolve them into new ultra marines to get more sales. The space marines kodels at my local GW have been the same ones there for months.

In all honesty how many people bought a new space marine army, that was not deathwatch or a box set?

At least we know what will one big reveal be.

Link: https://www.facebook.com/1575682476085719/photos/a.1576243776029589.1073741828.1575682476085719/1791355207851777/?type=3&theater

 Captain Azrael wrote:
At least we know what will one big reveal be.

Link: https://www.facebook.com/1575682476085719/photos/a.1576243776029589.1073741828.1575682476085719/1791355207851777/?type=3&theater

No. That's already been announced:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/10/talons-of-the-emperor-in-the-41st-millennium/