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.

Karol wrote:

Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.

I'm sure you meant "studio" but I'm also sure that "stupid" could describe a lot of GW's rule choices/modifications over the years too. Well played sir! =)

Karol wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Marines will get some point drops?

Yeah, let's hope not. They're ridiculous at CURRENT points values.

If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.

There is almost no chance of marine drops.

CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.

Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.

Wayniac wrote:

Karol wrote:
Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.

There are separate teams now for 40k and AOS. The issue is the 40k team is all the old guys from 6th and 7th (Cruddace, Grant, maybe *shudder* Ward again) while the AOS team has a lot of new faces many of whom are also tournament players.

Yep this, and if you been watching the AoS and the 40k podcasts it is VERY clear AOS wants balance in their game between armies and the RnG be more of the special rules (like who goes first each turn, and the realms, etc..) they also are very clear ont he rules and that is a major priority for them, they even want all the rules to be write the same way. But if you listen to the 40k team it is clear they are more narrative focus and expect their players to be able to handle making changes on the table to make a better game while understanding it is RAI and not RAW.


Just listen to... I think #2 from AOSshorts? its the Beastmen one, they talk for at least a good 15-20min how they spent a FULL YEAR making inhouse rules to follow when designing a new codex to make sure they stay as balance as they can.

While some armies are lower tier (I mean new books, like Goblins) they still have some very powerful lists, but a lot of the times other armies counter other armies very well, take HoS for example, one of the better armies, but armies like Skaven or CoS can easily hard counter it, but might not be able to counter SCE, i play BoC and IDK, my BoC is consider middle tier, being one of the newer 2.0 books with the new balances in mind it is clear they were still "scared" to make them ot strong in melee, as we are the fastest "walking" army in the game, i can easily move 15-21" and charge for a normal movement, so making a melee army with almost no Psychic that can move that fast to strong in melee can have problems, instead we win by out moving, body blocking and picking 1 objectives a turn to flank it hard and take it. It is fully possible to win 5-0 in GT's with them. Even the lowest tier armies can go 3-2 at GT's.

Just some perspective from a person that does do GT's with mutli-armies from AOS and still also plays tournaments in 40k (tho only 10-16man ones for 40k as i like AOS better).

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yep this, and if you been watching the AoS and the 40k podcasts it is VERY clear AOS wants balance in their game between armies and the RnG be more of the special rules (like who goes first each turn, and the realms, etc..) they also are very clear ont he rules and that is a major priority for them, they even want all the rules to be write the same way. But if you listen to the 40k team it is clear they are more narrative focus and expect their players to be able to handle making changes on the table to make a better game while understanding it is RAI and not RAW.


Just listen to... I think #2 from AOSshorts? its the Beastmen one, they talk for at least a good 15-20min how they spent a FULL YEAR making inhouse rules to follow when designing a new codex to make sure they stay as balance as they can.

While some armies are lower tier (I mean new books, like Goblins) they still have some very powerful lists, but a lot of the times other armies counter other armies very well, take HoS for example, one of the better armies, but armies like Skaven or CoS can easily hard counter it, but might not be able to counter SCE, i play BoC and IDK, my BoC is consider middle tier, being one of the newer 2.0 books with the new balances in mind it is clear they were still "scared" to make them ot strong in melee, as we are the fastest "walking" army in the game, i can easily move 15-21" and charge for a normal movement, so making a melee army with almost no Psychic that can move that fast to strong in melee can have problems, instead we win by out moving, body blocking and picking 1 objectives a turn to flank it hard and take it. It is fully possible to win 5-0 in GT's with them. Even the lowest tier armies can go 3-2 at GT's.

Just some perspective from a person that does do GT's with mutli-armies from AOS and still also plays tournaments in 40k (tho only 10-16man ones for 40k as i like AOS better).

Precisely. AOS at least, while it still has the GW balance issues (although it is a heated topic of debate if it's intentional to reward "system mastery" of finding the broken combos), at least has a common language for rules (or they are trying to standardize). The 40k team is more fast and loose and seem to still think it's okay to be vague and expect players to discuss/use common sense/etc. the confusion away. Because, again, it's the same people who used "forge then narrative" as an excuse for crap rules in 6th and 7th on the 40k team, at least from the bits that we know now about who is on what team. It's known though that at least some of the AOS team are are tournament guys (Ben Johnson springs to mind) who enjoy cutthroat competitive games as well as laid back throw whatever together games with friends.

Wayniac wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Yep this, and if you been watching the AoS and the 40k podcasts it is VERY clear AOS wants balance in their game between armies and the RnG be more of the special rules (like who goes first each turn, and the realms, etc..) they also are very clear ont he rules and that is a major priority for them, they even want all the rules to be write the same way. But if you listen to the 40k team it is clear they are more narrative focus and expect their players to be able to handle making changes on the table to make a better game while understanding it is RAI and not RAW.


Just listen to... I think #2 from AOSshorts? its the Beastmen one, they talk for at least a good 15-20min how they spent a FULL YEAR making inhouse rules to follow when designing a new codex to make sure they stay as balance as they can.

While some armies are lower tier (I mean new books, like Goblins) they still have some very powerful lists, but a lot of the times other armies counter other armies very well, take HoS for example, one of the better armies, but armies like Skaven or CoS can easily hard counter it, but might not be able to counter SCE, i play BoC and IDK, my BoC is consider middle tier, being one of the newer 2.0 books with the new balances in mind it is clear they were still "scared" to make them ot strong in melee, as we are the fastest "walking" army in the game, i can easily move 15-21" and charge for a normal movement, so making a melee army with almost no Psychic that can move that fast to strong in melee can have problems, instead we win by out moving, body blocking and picking 1 objectives a turn to flank it hard and take it. It is fully possible to win 5-0 in GT's with them. Even the lowest tier armies can go 3-2 at GT's.

Just some perspective from a person that does do GT's with mutli-armies from AOS and still also plays tournaments in 40k (tho only 10-16man ones for 40k as i like AOS better).

Precisely. AOS at least, while it still has the GW balance issues (although it is a heated topic of debate if it's intentional to reward "system mastery" of finding the broken combos), at least has a common language for rules (or they are trying to standardize). The 40k team is more fast and loose and seem to still think it's okay to be vague and expect players to discuss/use common sense/etc. the confusion away. Because, again, it's the same people who used "forge then narrative" as an excuse for crap rules in 6th and 7th on the 40k team, at least from the bits that we know now about who is on what team. It's known though that at least some of the AOS team are are tournament guys (Ben Johnson springs to mind) who enjoy cutthroat competitive games as well as laid back throw whatever together games with friends.

As someone who plays both AoS and 40k in tournament settings fairly frequently, AoS is a FAR superior tournament game, whether 40k players want to acknowledge it or not, for exactly the reasons you described.

Yeah, it's got some balance issues. Armies with summoning, especially slaanesh, are a bit outside the power curve. Some books are janke and oddly lopsided(Stormcasts) but overall, there are almost always at least 10-12 different factions in the top 16 with 5-10 more you wouldn't be surprised to see there. You also don't have nearly as many 'gotchas' and the super combos aren't nearly as deadly or obnoxious as 40k's are.

In fact, sidebar here: AoS has a much bigger problem with units that are too weak than units that are too strong. Because they have a tendency to make some units do too little damage for their base stats so they can't drop the price on them enough to make them useful without making them something you'd want to spam 100 of just for their raw # of wounds.

It's a big reason why I feel like playing AOS, but not 40k. There are too many wonky things, too much of a crazy and random power curve and insane rules sometimes. Sure AOS has balance issues but the power curve, barring the major outliers, is more like a series of hills than a rollercoaster.

I doubt CA19 will fix that. If the rumors of a not-9th edition next year are true, I hope they do something similar to what they did with AOS 2.0 and clean things up, but not invalidate everything. The guts of 8th edition aren't that bad, it's just everything else layered on top of it that's bloated it up again, perhaps even worse than 7th edition was at this point.

 Lord Clinto wrote:

Karol wrote:

Isn't the whole stupido like a handful of dudes, and even those are split between AoS, w40k and the side games GW makes. It would make it harder to pull off, unless they hired a second team or kicked out the old one. Plus from that articles someone posted a week or so ago, GW logic is sound and focused on marketing. If something is going to be bought in multiples, by many people, then it is great. The more sold the better.

I'm sure you meant "studio" but I'm also sure that "stupid" could describe a lot of GW's rule choices/modifications over the years too. Well played sir! =)

Ment studio. Auto correct is an evil thing, I have to live with, considering my english skill being on the low.

Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse

Well lets hope that is the case. I know that soft cover school books in Poland have to be ordered to print months in advance, and any last minute changes cost extra, so no one does it, they just expect students and teachers to fix the books themselfs. Last year we had a math book, where our teachers just told us to remove some pages to not get confused.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wayniac wrote:
It's a big reason why I feel like playing AOS, but not 40k. There are too many wonky things, too much of a crazy and random power curve and insane rules sometimes. Sure AOS has balance issues but the power curve, barring the major outliers, is more like a series of hills than a rollercoaster.

.

it is true that AoS tournament results are a very interesting thing to read. Slanesh demons are the best army, and hard counter to many list. yet those hardcountered by the best army right now lists still win tournaments, and not just once every 16 months in a 20 men mini event.

VladimirHerzog wrote:

oni wrote:I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.

not really, admech is at its strongest when ran as monofaction anyway, knights die too quickly and when they do, you lose a big part of your army.

There are very specific, very limited builds that take advantage of a finite set of rules that can be mediocre at best. None of which I care to play. I'm not a meta chaser.

Lord Clinto wrote:

 oni wrote:
I hope that AdMech rumor is bogus or includes Questor Mechanicus. Not being able to include Imperial Knights with AdMech will kill the faction.

I don't see how they couldn't include Imperial Knights, I mean they're in the codex itself; GW had done some strange things in the past but....

Right, but the AdMech codex does not include Armigers and using the IK datasheets from the AdMech codex means a loss of Household Traditions rule(s), IK stratagems, relics and warlord traits. That's an absolute massive blow to play-ability.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Marines will get some point drops?

Yeah, let's hope not. They're ridiculous at CURRENT points values.

If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.

There is almost no chance of marine drops.

CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.

Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.

It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".

 Imateria wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Marines will get some point drops?

Yeah, let's hope not. They're ridiculous at CURRENT points values.

If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.

There is almost no chance of marine drops.

CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.

Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.

It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".

Well, I stand corrected though the entire point of softback is a cheaper book with quicker turn around. I'm still quite doubtful of marine drops, but I guess we'll see soon enough.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Marines will get some point drops?

Yeah, let's hope not. They're ridiculous at CURRENT points values.

If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.

There is almost no chance of marine drops.

CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.

Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.

It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".

Well, I stand corrected though the entire point of softback is a cheaper book with quicker turn around. I'm still quite doubtful of marine drops, but I guess we'll see soon enough.

Only if you're doing it in small numbers, like the FW indexes, and/or it's a rush job like the Shadow War Aramgeddon rules book was. Something like CA would need a significant run, which means China becuase you can do it for considerably cheaper.

 Imateria wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Marines will get some point drops?

Yeah, let's hope not. They're ridiculous at CURRENT points values.

If CA is reacting to meta 4-5 months ago, then who knows, they very well maybe point drops on marines stuff. At the same time eldar and tau, could get a points bump.

There is almost no chance of marine drops.

CA is softback. That means they print it in the UK and the turn around time is much faster instead of sending books to print in China and waiting for them to get shipped.

Its entirely possible for them to have made changes in October before going to print. Whether they do or not is a different story, but they certainly wouldn't be sitting on books for 3 months using up valuable warehouse space.

It would have helped if you'd actually looked at a Chapter Approved, quite clearly says "Printed by C & C in China".

Well, I stand corrected though the entire point of softback is a cheaper book with quicker turn around. I'm still quite doubtful of marine drops, but I guess we'll see soon enough.

Only if you're doing it in small numbers, like the FW indexes, and/or it's a rush job like the Shadow War Aramgeddon rules book was. Something like CA would need a significant run, which means China becuase you can do it for considerably cheaper.

Yep. For whatever reason, printers in Europe and the States charge a lot more than printers in Asia. Some don't even bother to keep up on printing advances.
So cheaper printing and a slow boat is most cost effective, but it makes for significant turn around times, but by and large 'quicker turn around' isn't anyone's goal with softbound. Its purely cost (though hardbound and even leather bound aren't particularly costlier in the Asian market, at least not compared to the outrageous mark up western printers put on those formats).