Age of Sigmar

A Forum to discuss models of the Tau's Enemies, including Alternate Wargame Systems.
User avatar
boomwolf
Shas'La
Posts: 1570

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#11 » Jul 19 2016 07:37

Honestly I have no idea why people hate on AoS.

The old veterans hate it for "killing" fantasy, but apperantly they hated fantasy in the last few years anyway and never bought anything.

People completely unrelated that never played either go wild on it for not having structured play, and while I understand that and it turned me off as well, the new generals handbook fixes that.


Overall, it's a quick and simple game, with depth, that continues the old WFB into a new age, with new factions, remakes of some old guys, and yes some factions that never sold are getting left behind as apperantly they were never as popular to being with as some people would want you to believe.

And it works. The old blood wants you to belive it's a total flop, but the new AoS factions, even the much mocked "sigmarines" sell in vast amounts. Heck, the sells on the year of so since AoS dropped ate higher than the WFB sells the last five years of its long decay.

And it's not only that the models are attractive, the game us just better. WFB was a cluster mess that was completely unapproachable and always seemed to end up with just a mess of a melee in the center no matter who you play. AoS removed much of the bloating and introduced new, simple mechanics that you can learn in ten minutes, yet offer far more room for finesse and expertise.

AoS was a wild bet to try and resurrect the dead WFB, and it worked pretty well, it's just that the old remnants of WFB ate grumpy that they got abandoned.
Well, GW is a company, they are not going to keep pleasing "customers" that hardly buy products, rage anything you do, and outright discourage people from joining the hobby.

Falsegods
Shas'Saal
Posts: 51

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#12 » Jul 19 2016 08:23

Without turning this into a flame-out about AoS, as anecdotal evidence works both ways. You say Sigmarines are wildly popular, yet I know multiple local game stores who no longer order new AoS products as they still have their initial stocks of products. The onlly person I know you bought any number of them was to convert them for a 40K army.

I will have to disagree on the mechanics of WHFB. Yes they were complex, and the barriers to entry for the game where high, but it was nuanced and rewarding game. It had its issues just like all products of human endeavor.

My ultimate condemnation of AoS comes down to it drove away an existing community and made it more difficult for new players to enter the game. Hear me out, the rules are very simple, and they can be generally learned in one sample game. However, the cost of models it are high as anything GW sells, and the complexity essentially makes the an impossible chore for new and young people entering the hobby. Now I am not saying that GW needs to cater to these people, but part of the AoS rollout was making a more accessible game. Now the game is easy but the models are not. I don't know a single player who has entered the hobby because of AoS (again anecdotal), and the only young people who picked up the game was because his father owns a game store and has someone-else assemble and paint his kids models. Nothing wrong with that in macro, but my ultimate point is that AoS doesn't live up to its promise and in destroying WHFB in the process will, in my opinion, produce a long term loss for GW.

User avatar
boomwolf
Shas'La
Posts: 1570

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#13 » Jul 19 2016 08:58

I fail to see how the AoS price entry barrier us any higher than WFB.
Yes, some of the new ranges are rather expensive per model, but the game is intended for a lower model count to begin with and most of the old ranges are still running.
To add to that following the upcoming general handbook info, it seems most of the new factions so far are rather "elite" low model count armies compared to "old world" armies.

I won't claim everything is perfect. But higher quality models costing more makes sense, and the end result seems to be cheaper entry if only because you are not expected to have 50 or so models to even begin to participate,but more along the lines of 20-30.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Posts: 1185

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#14 » Jul 19 2016 09:10

The model count only seems so much lower because the 8th edition raised the model count a LOT. Likewise with your statement about the mess of melee in the middle. That was almost never the case in 7th edition.
For me not AoS killed WHFB as hobby back then but 8th edition did. Almost all my friends stopped playing with the 8th release due a lot of the new/changed rules. AoS just killed my hope for an eventual rehabilitation of WHFB so it feels just that much worse.

Falsegods
Shas'Saal
Posts: 51

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#15 » Jul 19 2016 09:27

boomwolf wrote:I fail to see how the AoS price entry barrier us any higher than WFB.
Yes, some of the new ranges are rather expensive per model, but the game is intended for a lower model count to begin with and most of the old ranges are still running.
To add to that following the upcoming general handbook info, it seems most of the new factions so far are rather "elite" low model count armies compared to "old world" armies.

I won't claim everything is perfect. But higher quality models costing more makes sense, and the end result seems to be cheaper entry if only because you are not expected to have 50 or so models to even begin to participate,but more along the lines of 20-30.


I didn't say it was. But WHFB wasn't supposed to be a casual game the way AoS is supposed be.

With most of the old ranges still running, I fail to see how GW benefited in anyway from axing WHFB, and a lot of ways in which they hurt themselves.

If they had wanted to introduce a skirmish system or alt universe to supplement WHFB that would have been fine. Indeed I got into WHFB via war-hammer skirmish and mordhiem, in the late 90s. What they did was kill one system and replace it with one that is mediocre at best and is having a lot of teething problems.

edit: for minor syntax.

GeorgeJetson
Shas
Posts: 139

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#16 » Jul 19 2016 10:39

Warhammer Total War for you WFB hardcore dudes. I'm sorry broskis, I've felt your pain many times before. Almost every miniature game I've played has been discontinued/scrapped/company that had the rights went bankrupt.

To be honest, my attraction to table top games has always been Sci-Fi (Starfleet Battles, Babylon 5 Wars, Battletech, 40K/BFG) and Historical (Napoleonic/American Civil War/WW2). Fantasy Battle looked cool on the table top, don't get me wrong. But, to me, the attraction of Fantasy has almost always been the individual heroism (I have been playing D&D/Pathfinder longer than I have been playing model games) of small scale (like in a party of 4 players)-- think D&D 1st edition dungeon crawl/puzzler/dragon hunt.

I might try AoS, just because I think some of the models look cool-- those undead skeleton dudes are rad looking. The quality looks pretty amazing, they're using the newer technologies GW (CAD designed molds with vacuum injection molding process) used to make some of the newer 40K stuff (AdMech/Skitarii have some of the best-looking models in the game, IMO, speaking details and such not just aesthetic). Also, some of the Daemon models would be useful for dual purpose Pathfinder/D&D assuming you can base them on either 1", 2", 4" or 6" diameter bases (Med/Lg/Huge/Garg size categories). I think that's truly where GW has shot themselves in the foot-- not designing more armies/models with a more "traditional" fantasy aesthetic-- buying a box of AoS models for $30~$80 is often cheaper than buying "boosters" of 4 minis for $15 (like the Wizkids/WotC minis). Even considering the cost of paints/basing. This would spur demand for their product from both the miniature wargaming guys (AoS players and the pen/paper RPG crowd).

I guess what I am saying is, regardless of the change in rules, I like the new models, but can totally see how Fantasy players might be off-put by some of them. Those winged gold-armour dudes' (Retributors? Sigmarite guys?) masks make them look like Tigris of Gaul. I think that we needn't fear too much about 40K getting "AoS'd," but we might get "BFV'd" (Battle-for-Vedros'd).

Spectralblade
Shas
Posts: 19

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#17 » Jul 19 2016 10:54

The winged Stormcast Eternals are Prosecutors, but I had to Google it so don't blame you for not remembering. The fact that all the vanilla Stormcast soldiers without the dragons are something-ors doesn't help with regards to remembering which is which.

I kind of like Age of Sigmar in terms of the lore and the concepts behind the realms, but I definitely see why people are angry that we lost WFB for it. I wonder if a better move might have been to do Age as another game and reuse the Daemon models' 'use in both games' thing, letting you use WFB models in both Age and WFB, but keeping stuff like the Stormcasts restricted to Age games. Possibly do Age as a 'possible outcome' deal for WFB so people who dislike the ideas with Age can forge a narrative where End Times doesn't end in Age of Sigmar.

abraxus
Shas
Posts: 298

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#18 » Jul 19 2016 01:11

Quite frankly, the only thing I miss from WFB was the look of ranked spear infantry, and you can still rank your unit in AoS, so not really lost.

There are a ton of people that thought the world was ending when WFB went bye bye, however that system only accounted for 15% or so of GW's sales. At the three local stores near me (4 at the time) I NEVER saw anyone playing WFB. Now there is nearly always a game of AoS going on, and there are multiple AoS leagues at all three stores.

Essentially, make your own opinion and don't let the nay-sayers sway you too much. Not every game is for every gamer.

GeorgeJetson
Shas
Posts: 139

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#19 » Jul 19 2016 03:20

With most of the old ranges still running, I fail to see how GW benefited in anyway from axing WHFB, and a lot of ways in which they hurt themselves.


The problem comes in with market share and product marketing mix. If you have one product line that has a shrinking margin due to volume sales in steady decline, it doesn't make sense to continue to divert firm's resources to what is essentially becoming a loss-leader for your distributors and retailers (FLGSs in my area are still trying to get rid of the WFB NOS/Backstock). Especially when we can see that there is a larger demand for the firm's other product lines (40K, 40K boxed games, Horus Heresy). GW takes a lot of flack for what people call "bad business decisions" which are actually quite brilliant business decisions considering that they're a successful company competing in a niche market, which also competes against the much more vast hobby and entertainment market as a whole. These people not realizing that their opinions are fueled by emotional subjectivity-- a product of brand affinity and marketing-- not objective understanding of marketing, business and finance. Ultimately, at the end of the day, GW is publicly traded and has to answer to its shareholders at the end of each quarter. As a shareholder, I would have to wonder why a company keeps investing my cash-flows into a product-line with a shrinking margin and ROI, instead of a) paying that cash to me in dividends, b) diverting it to one of their more profitable product lines or c) starting a newer more-attractive-to-new-customers product line.

AoS appeals to (regardless of what us more seasoned gamers-- I will not say old-- like to think) the younger future life-long gamers coming up now. A generation of gamers raised on Pokémon, Halo, MMOs and CCGs-- I don't have anything against these things, except maybe CCGs, but even as I write this I am googling for Charmander and Squirtle spawns in my zipcode for Pokémon GO.

What would be really sweet is if someone could do a little bit of investigating, maybe get a kick-starter going, and do what WotC/TSR did with 3.5. See if they can get GW to license them the system and other associated IP and maybe some of the molds(!) to produce an open-license version. Look at the popularity of Pathfinder, it can be done, there's a precedent for it.

User avatar
TauMan
Shas'Ui
Posts: 468
Contact:

Re: Age of Sigmar

Post#20 » Jul 19 2016 07:08

Myrdin wrote:With the Horror of AOS on the scene and my army being one of the bottom tier- yes I am a Beastmen player - I was this close to sell of my Fantasy army....
until....
I stumbled upon "9th Age" ruleset.


The 9th Age Ruleset! You mean I can actually pull my Dwarf army out of the closet and...and...

Image
To arms brother Dwarfs! Ironbreakers! Hammerers! Longbeards! Slayers! Warriors! Arise and defend your Stronghold! All is not lost!
The Ninth Age Ruleset is here! DEATH TO THE AGE OF SIGMAR! LONG LIVE THE DWARFS
!



FYI: No one at either game store in the Twin Ports area plays AoS. However there is a brisk sale of AoS models at one store at least - wait for it- for conversion and kit bashing into new and wonderful WH40K units.
8th Edition is here: Keep Calm and Carry On!
N.Y.A.B.X.T.T.

Return to “Enemy Units & Alternate Systems”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests