WarSeer > Wargaming > Games Workshop > Games Workshop General Discussion > AoS: myths and reality
View Full Version : AoS: myths and reality
Pages : 1 2 [3] 4
Zywus
I somehow doubt Mantic can survive just by selling rule books though, at some point they're going to need to start producing models that are worth spending actual money on.They've survived this far haven't they?
Asmodios
I somehow doubt Mantic can survive just by selling rule books though, at some point they're going to need to start producing models that are worth spending actual money on. If GW are selling models to KoW players they still going to be making money.
My local store is selling tons of Mantic models they actually took about 3/4 of the AOS section and converted into more shelf space for mantic, so i think many people like the models mantic is producing. I personally hate Mantic's Ogres and elves, but i really like their Humans, Goblins, Orcs and undead. Also the abyssal dwarves and normal dwarves are very nice for the price (Still like GW better). Im going to be purchasing some Mantic goblins to become my forest goblins of my 9th army while my GW goblins are my cave goblins. Not sure how Mantic is doing everywhere but in my experience people often purchase models from the company they are using. Obviously people will continue using their existing armys but i would guess will start future armies with non GW models.
Tuatha Dar
GW may not be the entirety of the fantasy wargaming hobby but they are the reason it is as 'mainstream' as it is, they're the reason so many people got into the hobby and stayed in it, if they were to disappear fantasy wargaming would gradually slide back to the obscure, almost-unheard-of state that it used to be, similar to historical wargaming is now.
For a company like Mantic? Sure since they have a similar type product. But for a company like PP? GW is irrelevant, especially in the US.
broxus
I get your view that many peopl feel like GW owe them something... but reading your point there makes it sound like we should all owe GW something?
I've got nothing but good to say about KoW but it's not about the models. It's the game. It really is excellent. Play it with your GW minis, play it with paper counters, playing it with lumps of gold bullion... it's still a great game.
AoS has some belting models but the game is an abortion (exreme subjectivity). I don't think any amount of band-aid point schemes, ret-cons or .... anything is going to repair it.
Hell even 40k is leaking interest...
I mean look at the decline in search trends https://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F0mbr2
Seems all the GW games trended down after 2008. Not sure what is special about that year.
If you look at WHFB no wonder they had to do something it was doing terrible. I couldn't even do a KoW analysis since it was so mixed in with other historical searches. AoS had a huge spike, then a drop and what looks to be an uptrend on searches, but it is to early to be sure on it.
Lars Porsenna
So Betrayal at Calth was as big a failure as AoS at that store then, working on the basis that they wouldn't be flogging it at half price if it was a successful product right?
You could send them an email and ask, if you are so inclined...
That however does not change the fact that the regular stuff is still 40% off then.
Well in the US fantasy in general is irrelevant. 40k is the minatures game that rules them all.
Niall78
Historical wargaming is able to support dozens of companies both major and minor with model ranges available for nearly any period of history you could think of. From pre-historic eras through to modern warfare. All you need to do is pick up a magazine like Wargames Illustrated to see the diversity and size of the market.
There's even a historical gaming group in your own town :
https://retfordwargames.wordpress.com/about/
Have you gotten hold of any straws yet broxus?
I see you grasping and grasping but I'm not sure you have caught any yet.
Oooh.... Burn.
(Is that the right term?)
eron12
Not where I'm at. Lots of the players at my local store have a 40k army, just like lots have fantasy or flakes of war, but what gets played is warmachine and hordes. In this neck of the woods PP is king.
And I should mention that it has been this way for at least a couple years, since well before AOS or the end times.
AngryAngel
imho GW still have plenty of time to remedy the situation, as much as people crow about KoW on these forums I'm not seeing it catch on large-scale which it needs to do to take WFB's place. Many KoW advocates are pursuing a vendetta against GW and need an alternative system to promote in its place, but Mantic's release schedule is too sparse and their models too poor to pretend that they can possibly compete for the fantasy wargame crown, they're just too small-time.
If GW put out a competitive points packet for AoS tomorrow and followed it up with some less-stormcast-centric world building literature I'm pretty confident that it would be back on top of the fantasy market inside 6 months because their models are super-high quality and the constant stream of new releases keeps people interested and most importantly you can find opponents for GW games almost anywhere. Try walking into any gaming club and asking for a game of beyond the gates of Antares and see how many hands go up, now ask for a game of 40k and see what happens.
However much people complain about burnt bridges and hurt feelings unwilling to forgive the big bad Corp the reality is that people would come back to GW because there is no other wargames company out there that is big enough to do what GW do.
I wouldn't say they have plenty of time, they need to actually see what the issue is and fix it, at some point. At this point, we aren't sure they will or care to try as it seems they blame the customer for not understanding how awesome AoS is. KoW simply put out a rules systems with points and comp, and that can work with competitive gaming, I don't think it is as much a vendetta for everyone. For some it may, but not nearly all of them.
The best part is, if GW did put a competitive packet out, they would be very clearly showing, they screwed up, and know nothing ( Like Jon Snow of course ) so I'd be fine with that. Doesn't change the fact however, they would need to heavily drop new models out there and get off the stormcast love fest they are currently enjoying. As well I think these boxes are coming in a bit on the over expensive side ( opinion of course, but there it is ). I don't think it would happen as soon as 6 months, this is a very niche hobby, and they shook off the ones who had the wish to work with them. As well, even if they drop that stuff back in, who would come back ? The crowd that already have large armies so they'd add nothing to the model sales, short term, but be good for scene longevity long term. Using the gates of antares and 40k thing isn't a good example however, as 40k was more popular then fantasy by far before, let alone now.
It isn't a fact of punishing the big bad corp ( we aren't all man babies about things ) but for some they got out, sold off and moved on, takes a lot to move back once you stepped so far away, especially when you aren't sure you won't be burned again.
veterannoob
Beer is too expensive in Sweden, I wouldn't be able to afford anything. ;)
Tell me about it, as an American studying in Sweden I miss my access to booze with normal alcohol content on every store;)
Yet only three years ago WhFB was the third best selling game in the US...
Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk
Spiney Norman
If you read the blurb on the page you've linked to you'll see the historical wargames club meets once a month in members homes, I know the guys and there is a about five people in total. Our Fantasy wargaming club on the other hand has over 50 members, most of whom began with GW games. We meet weekly in a pub function room playing AoS, WFB, 40k, LotR SBG with a bit of Malifaux, Warmachine, X-wing, Star Trek attack wing and a MTG corner as well, that is the difference that GW has made to the fantasy/sci fi wargaming hobby, it massively raised the profile of fantasy wargaming and meant we have a lot more people playing these games than you typically get playing historicals.
I'm actually going to be running a 30k demonstration game at the Cannon event this year :)
Holier Than Thou
I see you still haven't answered my question about where all these new players are, much like many before you.
If you accept search engine trends as a form of evidence...
https://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F01sgsy%2C%20Kings%20of%20war%2C%2 0Age%20of%20Sigmar&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT
It's rather telling that warhammer has-been under steady decline. KoW has gained traction since 2nd edition and, whist AoS had an initial spike that even exceed search trends for 40k, has since dropped rapidly.
A slightly modified and more correct search, with WHFB as "game" and not "fantasy world", and both AoS and KoW as "search term" (apparently they're not listed as games and/or fantasy worlds and that's quite telling IMHO) is avalaible here (https://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F03mf9x%2C%20Age%20of%20Sigmar%2C% 20Kings%20of%20War%2C%20%2Fm%2F0mbr2&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT)...it seems WHFB as a game was indeed on a very steep decline, KoW isn't really so popular (despite being the official go-to solution for everyone with WHFB withdrawal symptoms) and AoS isn't really catching much attention. Warhammer 40K, on the other hand...
Word of advice: such tools, while quite interesting, are not providing us any proof. I'm not sure, for example, Google Trend is so smart to include "WH40K" searchs to the total of "Warhammer 40.000".
Does that cover it?
I don't think there are that many new players, but to prove it would require access to the market research and sales figures, which don't exist and aren't shared, respectively.
His being unable to prove his belief does not make it false though. All of this is based on assumption and rhetoric.
Overall base has probably fallen.
Out of interest, what is the target of this discussion after so many months. Is it purely love of WFB that is pulling people in to suggest everything is proof of the failure of AoS?
Even if you strip out the hyperbole, exaggeration and misrepresentation, and it is still clear that AoS is a failure by a certain definition.... What is the point?
Not wanting to let groundless statements stand unchallenged?
Arrahed
Since AOS was released GW also started selling miniatures that are mediocre at best. Nothing I would ever spend money on.
The only difference between GW and Mantic products seems to be that Mantic produces solid rules and GW does not.
So if you're confident that GW can recover from losing customers there is not really a reason Mantic can not survive after gaining a lot of customers.
I don't want to start a discussion over miniature quality again. My point is that miniature quality is highly subjective. I prefer a lot of Mantics models over GW's. In addition to that there is also a sub-group of players who are not that into the modeling aspect and would probably gladly buy the much cheaper Mantic models even though they might find them inferior.
But on the subject of there being extra players who aren't represented in forums, that will never be resolved either way. If he got 50 people to sign up and say they are new, it would be dismissed as not enough to prove anything.
Just as some will take a single quote, discounted product or assumed sales figure to support their opinion, none of this actually proves anything.
@ Arrahed - What do you mean Medicore at best? I havent bought gw in a while. Did they change their material, or do you mean the quality, thought and execution of some of the new sillier/lazier kits?
StygianBeach
I am also curious, mediocre compared to what? The new Archaon is too busy for my tastes, I would scratch off alot of detail if I every got one in my hands, but I would not describe it as mediocre.
No, I don't think that's the primary motivation for a lot of AoS detractors. Maybe I'm a little lacking in the emotional investment area, but if I don't like a wargame I don't prowl the forums pointing out thread after thread how bad/stupid/unbalanced/whatever it is...I don't like it, I may do some passing comment on it but that's it. Nothing more.
AoS seems to be some kind of hate-magnet for a lot of people, and it's starting to become a little creepy. Like Flipmode I still don't understand why there's so much acrimony against AoS: a lot of posts are way beyond what can be defined as criticism. For many AoS is a thing to hate, not to discuss about. As I said...it's a little creepy at times.
Stormcasts where awful, but Archaon and the knights where ok although far to big for my taste.
No one is saying we know 100% certain. The information we have so far point toward AoS failing. Nothing more, nothing less.
That sort of comment always seem to come up in threads after a few pages. Why are you still here? Why are you discussing this? (With the implication that people not enjoying AoS should leave)
The thing is; this wasn't set up as a AoS forum. The name is Warhammer general. One of the new Warhammer games is AoS. Most posters here were around long before AoS. If you created a new AoS forum and people joined up to trash the game, that could perhaps be described as creepy. That's not the case though.
Apart from people already being around the forum before AoS struck, I'd say AoS has become a symbol for the perceived arrogance shown by GW towards their customers ("they actually thought they could put in a minimum of effort and release *that* and we'd gobble it up and ask for dessert!?") that's why people is still invested, even if we don't care for the game itself.
I don't care if people criticise AoS constructively or destructively...that's part of the life on the web. I'm a little creeped out when people keep posting the same thing post after post, thread after thread...and those things are soaked wet in hate. It's a level of emotional distress usually reserved for something a little more serious than wargames. Or commercial products in general.
So, the question isn't "why this people are still here, why they discuss about AoS"...it's more like "why they discuss it in such an over-the-top way".
Would you say that this thread is an example of people discussing AoS in a "over-the-top way" with posts "soaked wet in hate"?
You might think so, but not really. On the internet, people fly into huge violent rages over the smallest things. And fans of commercial products are often quite emotionally invested in those products. When a popular boyband splits up, people actually set up suicide hotlines specifically for the teenage girls who lose their will to love over it.
So even though I don't agree, and find it unpleasant, I do understand where people who hate AOS come from. If they were really into WHFB, and are not into AOS, its replacement, then hating AOS and expressing this isn't that weird.
Apologies if double post, odd on phone.
This thread started as a reasonable discussion. After more than a few pages it has descended into bile, leaps of logic and well... an argument rather than a discussion.
I was certainly a part of that, but the level at which every little thing is now posted as 'Look, proof, it failed.' is just strange, as Allen has said very clearly.
As you say, it is a general Warhammer thread. So is that what is driving it? Love of WFB?
Folomo
Maybe to help people see that investing heavily in AoS is a risk?
Not sure TBH, but that could be an option.
Awww... That is nice of them. Cheers! :)
I think for the same reason there are "sensationalized" news reporting.
For a small subset of the people in this thread...I would say yes to the "over-the-top way" with posts :D. Later in the day or by tomorrow I will make a summary post for this thread, as I think there are many myths spun from both pro and anti-AoSers listed here, which I hope people would stop talking about as if they are the truth in future posts in the forums (cross fingers :P!)
Investing in any wargame is a risk. If we look at history, GW is the safest bet.
I agree with the sentiment that AoS is just the latest flag for the anti-GW crowd to wave. It does seem to be quite relentless and far in excess of what AoS deserves.
AoS is fine as a basic rule set and i think it is still too early to declare it a failure.
I find the hate posted over and over is primarily geared toward recruitment toward other games that the poster favors.
It is geared toward the apparent recruitment strategy of people largely play what everyone else is and avoids what everyone hates or dislikes.
I also have found it to be very effective.
Yeah, definitely. Not the whole thread, of course, but there are lots of posts that are a little too much emotive if we consider we're talking about wargames. I concede that the "GW perceived arrogance" explanation is at least a partial excuse/explanation for the constant barrage of "AoS is a failure" we see lately, but honestly...we're at the point of throwing around google search graphs to better discuss how bad AoS is tanking. The situation may have got out of hand.
Again, not saying everyone should only speak well of AoS: but (at least IMHO) in the past weeks many of the debates we had seemed to be done just for the sake of discussing. I've seen people bashing AoS background without having ever read one of the novels, for example. Seems at least quite strange, even for the standards of interwebz discussions.
I've seen people bashing AoS background without having ever read one of the novels, for example. Seems at least quite strange, even for the standards of interwebz discussions.
Having taken a gander at what's available in the BL previews section, they're not exactly a revelatory experience. Boring, depthless, scrabbling for personality and coming up hilariously short, designed to sell rather to engage, and end up failing at both.
So, I mean, great Stormcast pieces, but... :p
I think the $305 price tag for the last 5 minis released for AoS might disagree.
Yeah gameplay-wise it may have a lower point of entry. But a first-time customer first looks at how much you can get at a certain price. They'll be less inclined to look at the quality of the miniatures (first-timers are impressed with any thing really) and more at the quantity.
That's why cheap bulk kits for each race are such a mistake. Beginners want bulk, veterans want bulk, everyone wants some quantity to flesh out their pricey items.
Hate is an interesting word to use in thia context. It is hard hitting, certainly, and draws powerful connotations.
But it is unfortunate to label all arguments and critique of age of sigmar as hate.
If I say, as is my opinion, that aos is a shoddy game, a representation of corporate greed. If I say that it has had a negative effect on wargaming communities and the hobby would be better off without it.
Am I a hater? Or is my opinion acceptable?
If you type that here and now, then of course not (as in there is no grounds to be suspicious of your motives)... if you type that again tomorrow in another thread, then of course not.
If in 6 months time you are still typing this on every AoS discussion thread then one can be suspicious.
Buddy Bear
Suspicious of what? That your opinion is a well developed one and is further bolstered with time with new evidence to support that position?
The first time I read through this, I read it as poking fun at my using the word suspicious while after 6 months all suspicions should be out of the way by that point.
The second time I realised your post made no such implications and therefore was not so humorous. Sadly.
The thing is that if an opinion is well developed and supported by good examples it should not take 6 months to convince reasonable people of its merits.
If someone is still posting consistently on AoS threads that it crap game for an extended period of time (like 6 months) then I think it is perfectly valid for the rest of us who are neutral to AoS or pro AoS to be suspicious of that posters motives.
How does an argument cease having any merit if it's repeated? Moreover, you act as if they come out of nowhere, when in fact they're in response to the same arguments made six months ago that AOS would be a success, when time is quickly proving that statement false.
If someone claims the Earth is flat, don't be surprised when someone pops up and argues that it's round and explains why. If someone claims the moon landing was faked, don't be surprised when someone pops out and argues why it happened. Repeating the arguments that the Earth is round and the Moon landing happened doesn't make them less true just because they're repeated. Likewise, if someone is going to be making the claim that AOS is going to be a success, don't be surprised when someone points out the reasons why that doesn't seem to be the case, and ask the person who made the initial claim to back up that claim of success.
Here's a motive: I think it's a terrible game and I feel like talking about that in a forum dedicated to talking about the game. That certainly beats the last page-and-a-half of this thread, where rather than talking about the game, all we've seen is personal attacks against other posters. This is the Warhammer General Discussion forum. Not the Fan of Warhammer General Discussion Forum. If you want to claim the moral high ground, start by debating the arguments, rather than impugning the character of the people making the arguments.
NoobLord
Safest bet? Tell that to the Knights players who had the codex replaced in less than a year. kerr-ching suckers!
Tell that to the Tyranid players who bought their shiny new codex only to find out a few weeks later that there was a new book to buy with all the missing units. kerr-ching suckers!
Not sure what history you are looking at. The wargame I play the most has been going 30 years and is having more quality stuff released for it than ever before. If I could go back in time 3 years I would have snapped up all the latest modules and would have doubled to tripled my money no problem - that is a good investment. Are you yet another person for whom 'wargame' = GW (or GW inspired) tabletop toy soldiers game, because the hobby is a lot, lot broader than that?
Tyranno1
GW are the least safe of any wargaming company.
They announce nothing until a week before it hits. Just bought any rulebook? Haha, it is invalid now.
They scrap entire games at the drop of a hat. Hell, they were selling End-Times books and Island of Blood sets right before AoS was announced.
They have mastered the art of pulling the rug out from under their customers.
I look to my left, see my Emisarius on my bookshelf (Exillis). I look a little lower and see my Master of Carnage (Rackam), a small glance to the right and I see my Imortals (Helldorado) and look next to them some Blackblood caravan guard (Chronopia). Next to them some Naga (Clan War) and a small distance from them some Cursed Legion (Ring of Rule).
You know, right up until the day AOS was released, I thought for sure that I'd be able to use my End Times books and Empire army book. I was utterly convinced that, while the setting had just been torched, the rules would just be an evolution of the 8th edition rules set and I could keep playing as-is, and that I'd be playing the "9th edition" rules set.
Boy, was I wrong. Had I known that the rules set would be utterly thrown out I would have never purchased a single End Times book, much less all five (of course I bought three before I had any inkling that the setting would be thrown out, and when I learned that I decided to keep buying the books to complete the set and because, again, I thought the rules would carry over).
rmeister0
You know, right up until the day AOS was released, I thought for sure that I'd be able to use my End Times books and Empire army book.
Clearly the reason they kept AoS a secret for as long as they did.
A sensible position from GW's point of view, but has clearly fostered much of the unfavorable opinion AoS has created.
Well this has certainly piqued my interest. My opinion is acceptable but my persistence is not?
If I changed my position back and forth this would be ok but if I remain consistent I become a hater?
And what do you mean about reason to suspect my motives? What motive could I have which would be suspicious? Is it wrong if someone wants the current design and sales paradigm to prove unsucvessful so another alternative might surface?
Would that scenario be a bad one?
Dosiere
Well at least we've moved on from the battered minority narrative, that was quite the steaming pile of myth.
Well considering I asked where he/she was, no, you writing "hello" doesn't cover it.
I'm not asking for in-depth analysis or official figures, I asked where he/she is based. It shouldn't be a difficult question to answer and yet the people who claim to have a thriving AOS community seem unable or unwilling to answer it.
Philhelm
I remember when Darnok confirmed the rumors of round bases, and some of the big changes coming up, right after Christmas. I had just purchased about $300 worth of Dark Elves and was excited to start assembling and painting them. After the big reveal, the wind totally left my sails, and I didn't touch my Warhammer miniatures for almost a year, nor did I purchase any Warhammer miniatures. This whole shakeup has been a real bummer. We really did have the rug pulled from beneath our feet in a hardcore way, and people wonder why a lot of us are less than pleased.
The thing is, the board says this part of the forum is for discussion of anything from Kislev to Lustria so, technically, there shouldn't be any discussion of AOS as that is happening in the Mortal Realms which are not between Kislev and Lustria. :p
Yeah, we seem to have moved on to "Vast Miniature Gaming Competitor Conspiracy." I'm Ronnie Renton, you're Matt Wilson, and I think Zywus is Christian Petersen.
I started assembling my first GW models in months only a few days ago, some Devastators and Assault Marines I'd bought before AOS hit, but which I lost all interest in afterwards.
Ayin
I think this is it exactly, AoS has become the focus for the latest GW hate campaign, just like finecast was before it, but then expressing hate is apparently one of the things the Internet was invented for so I guess we shouldn't be surprised.
Ah, the classic "hate campaign".
Comparing AoS to GW's launch of their "Finecast" line. Interesting. So, the finecast thing was a wreck as far as customer experience went. One of the biggest mis-steps that GW made in recent memory as far as Fantasy was concerned. So, are you implying that the majority of the communities vocal criticism of the Finecast experience was technically unfounded and simply used as a convenient outlet to continue the "hate" of GW?
If GW hadn't dumped WHFB, I would be defending them right now. In fact, I am still buying WHFB stuff even now (I just got a box of chaos warriors and Screamers, and last week got a box of dwarfs...all at a nice discount I would add...).
I never purchased any of the new models but the ones I have seen looked fine from a technical perspective. The same material. The same usually good cast quality.
However, I would consider the model design to be part of the product quality since I am buying miniatures because of their design and material and cast are just a necessary evil to make that possible.
In my opinion, the model design quality drastically declined with the release of AOS. No character. No soul. Just the most heroic looking generic guy and the most evil looking guy. GW used to be so much better than that.
I thought it might be due to my age that makes me less creative so I don't come up with stories as easily as before and the old GW products benefit from some kind of nostalgia. But that theory was recently proven wrong:
I got a box of Imperial Assault for christmas from my wife. (I know its too early for christmas presents :) ) The models in there are way below the technical quality that you get from GW. But nevertheless, each of the hero models has character. As soon as I looked at them together with their corresponding artwork I could imagine their adventures, their struggle against the Empire, everything that makes a good story. Even without reading about them. AOS gives me none of that.
I know these things are subjective but since a lot of people also think of AOS as blant and generic, I am rather confident that there might be some truth to that beyond personal taste.
Yeah, the implication seems to be that people are irate towards GW "just because", and are using whatever excuse is at hand to justify that anger. It can't be that GW consistently does things to earn the ire of their customers. They're wholly innocent. People are just unreasoningly biased against GW for no reason whatsoever, and it's only a coincidence that that anger coincides with GW putting out shoddy and overpriced product, or blows up a beloved 30-year-old setting, or releases a mediocre rules set. GW is apparently wholly blameless in how people perceive them.
There's another myth to throw on the pile, that people are just unreasoningly irate towards GW for no good reason and just use GW's latest actions to justify that viewpoint, when the reality is that GW's shoddy behavior is what fosters the ire in a good chunk of their customer base, and their consistent habit of coming up with new ways of ticking off their customers is what perpetuates the displeasure towards them. People aren't finding excuses to be angry at GW. GW is giving people reason to be angry with them.
With all avenues of communication closed, unlike many other companies that value customer feedback, we are limited to fan forums.
If you reward bad corporate behavior (and I cannot believe anyone is so big a fan that they cannot find fault in gw business practices) then you tell them to keep going the same way.
I do not believe people post put of maliciousness. They care about the hobby. They are invested. People want a change of direction. I have not counted but I can say with certainty that I own over 1000 games workshop miniatures.
Am I a hater?
The "Because" is generally chalked up to "popularity", in that people "hate" on GW because they somehow resent it's popularity/success, kind of like a reverse Brand Loyalty (an effect that I personally feel ACTUALLY greatly impacts discussions on anything GW related)
Seems to be dependent on your opinion of the quality of Finecast.
Hmm well. I only have a few finecast models. I only bought those at the end of the finecast ruckus after they'd ironed out the worst problems.
The bloodthirster is fine I think, though he's deep in the painting backlog behind a metal bloodthirster and two lords of change... and I would need to get paint on him to really see if there's bubbles.
The finecast warpsmith was without fault, feels a bit brittle but I am careful with my minis so no injuries yet.
My finecast mutilators (yes you read that right I have finecast mutilators) aren't assembled yet. Strange isn't it.
I guess I'm not wet with hatred. Although its hard to know. It did rain today.
Scribe of Khorne
This is a comical thread.
People dont 'hate' GW because they are successful. Sure you have the hipster idiot types 'oh GW sold out man, I'm all about mantic' or whatever, but anyone who played 40K and WHFB pre or during End Times, you where invested. You may be angry with GW choices, but you didnt hate them because you 'liked them before they where cool'.
There are legit reasons to be disgusted with GW, and AoS is the peak, the final straw, and WELL worth our collective ire.
Lets not trivialize just how brutal AoS was on release, what it did to WHFB, and 40K players as well on the back of just how **** it is.
GW hate/disgust/apathy, is well justified.
Hmm, while I have always been fascinated by Twilight Imperium, I didn't think I had disclosed it on this forum:shifty:
My finecast mutilators (yes you read that right I have finecast mutilators)
My condolences. I'm truly sorry for you...:cries:
If you don't like something you are either neutral in opinion or hate that thing. If your opinion is the exact opposite of like, then yes, you are a hater! Is your hate opinion acceptable? Sure, it's your opinion. When you say you hate something, because of "X" and "X" is false or based on illogical reasoning...then I would say the hate opinion is made with ignorance but I can accept that still. Forums would be a good place to make us less ignorant. When you repeatedly say you hate something, because of "X," and "X" is based on false/illogical reasoning, then it becomes unacceptable for me.
If you consistently change your mind, the basis for how you came up to the opinion is pretty shoddy! Even if you have change your position back and forth...to at one point being the opposite of not liking, you have indeed at one point became a hater!
And as with finecast, the situation with AoS is being blown out of proportion by some folks because it suits them. Sure finecast was a failed experiment, they derped in a big way and way too many poor castings got through the QC process, but by no means was every finecast model a complete train wreck.
IMO AoS is being treated somewhat unfairly largely because wfb got canned, not on its merits as a game system. If they'd only thought to slap points values on the Warscrolls it'd be fine.
That's hilarious.
In truth, with the exception of a few designs that didn't seem to be able to hold their shape because of weight/material (the Orc and Goblin Mangler Squig being the first example that pops to mind), the majority of the problems seemed to be pretty early on. When GW released their Liquid Green Stuff for purchase by customers to fill holes in models I admit I did laugh. I also told everyone at the stores i went to who opined on buying it (or noted flaws in their model) that the better option was just to return the model and request another (and in my experience, a fair few did).
By Nurgle's slimy discharge!
"If you don't like something you are either neutral in opinion or hate that thing"
Uh. Is dislike a word? I think it is...
Also you seem to imply that my position is based on false or illogical reasoning and that makes me an unacceptable hater.
You say this without defining the false or illogical reasoning you imply I have made...
And finally conclude that I am indeed a hater.
I seem to smell something foul that followed the discharge.
Could THAT be hate? It might just...
Scribe of Khorne, fueled with rage...
2015 is the worst scenario ever for Fantasy and the community.
End of Times, Old World blowing up
Months with nothing official, only crazy rumors
Age of Sigmar is out, 4 pages of rules, insane prices, sigmarine, gold spray paint, sigmarine statue painted with gold spray
Month with nothing official, only crazy rumors
The new Chaos Fortress costing more than my car
Seraphon lazy release... at that point nobody care anymore, KoW and 9th Age are here
Everchosen, a codex and 5 miniatures for 300$
Oh god... wonderful year indeed.
2016 can only be better than 2015 :D
"And as with finecast, the situation with AoS is being blown out of proportion" followed by "finecast was a failed experiment, they derped in a big way and way too many poor castings got through the QC process but by no means was every finecast model a complete train wreck."
IMO AoS is being treated somewhat unfairly largely because wfb got canned, not on its merits as a game system.
This is true. Likely it would be getting much less attention had Fantasy continued on seperately.
If they'd only thought to slap points values on the Warscrolls it'd be fine.
True, if the game was only built differently, it would be treated differently.
I think the Wood Elf Dryads got released with round bases somewhere in there.
Malagor
This is GW, things can always get worse with them.
I know it's sarcasm but still.
Who knows what insane plan they got lined up.
Likely a full re-launch of two AoS factions to coincide with a book detailing them (so, something about the Tyrion and Malekith, which involves how the new Elves will be), and two terrain pieces.
SuperHappyTime
Agree. When your product line switches to a weekly release structure, and you ignore a line for two-three months, that's bad.
Did a double take, and then laughed.
Do yourself a favor and don't take an estimate on what you've spent on the hobby; You'll realize you could afford to live in a house by now.
You missed the massive 2-3 month period of lame AoS releases. 40K players were literally committing suicide from a lack of content/attention.
My apologies. Replace the "you" or "your" to "someone" or "they" in my post you quoted. I thought you were writing about "haters of AoS in general" since you wrote "if, I say." I did not knew you were actually wanting people to focus just on your posting history. Which for me, you have not posted enough for me to remember what you have posted consistently or inconsistently.
Dislike is indeed a word. It is also a synonym for hate :P. Mmhmm
Sure, if AOS was developed completely independently from Warhammer Fantasy, it would have had a much warmer reception, despite some of its glaring flaws. The problem is that AOS is the replacement for Warhammer Fantasy, even using the same lore and miniatures (at least for now). In fact, 99% of the current miniature range for AOS is built upon the slain carcass of Warhammer Fantasy. Unfortunately, that is the context in which AOS exists, and it is absolutely not unfair to judge it within that context.
What makes people who invested time and money into Warhammer Fantasy angry is:
1. Destruction of the setting (it wasn't necessary to destroy the Old World and still have the new worlds);
2. Invalidation of core factions (Empire and Bretonnia; probably High/Dark/Wood Elves, etc.);
3. Round bases;
4. Complete lack of communication from GW;
5. Complete change of the gaming system, from rank-and-file to a much simpler skirmish game (it's like I purchased an Xbox and now GW is releasing nothing but 8-bit games).
Oh they can do worse, like AoSing 40k.
Dislike is not the same as hate. Legitimate criticism is also not hate. Have you a concept of what that word implies? What baggage it brings with it?
You propose that there are 3 positions: like, neutral and hate.
I am certainly not neutral nor do I lay on the side of like.
So you have indeed answered my question.
I would put it to you that I am not the hater in this exchange.
Had AoS been released alongside WHFB instead of replacing it I'm sure it would've been met with almost no vitriol. It would have been mostly been met with indifference and ridicule.
Few people seem to care about AoS itself, People care about WHFB and it's due to the connection to WHFB that people care about AoS.
2DSick
on it's merits as a game system, in a vacuum, it's a dull system. I roll and hit regardless... Models interact with a save and a rend... maybe.
It's a bland skirmaish styke game in a crowded market with some top notch, stand out games.
Indeed, and if you are posting reasonable dislike you are not one of the people I am referring to when I talk about haters. It's perfectly reasonable to dislike a game for *reasons*, but inferring that your opinion is the unassailable truth and anyone who disagrees with you is mentally deficient in some way is taking it to another level.
Haters are the ones who read a positive opinion on AoS and dig out their vitriol for another round of battling, people who simply dislike the game should have a certain tolerance for contrary view points.
And as with finecast, the situation with AoS is be ing blown out of proportion by some folks because it suits them . . .
There I'd disagree. The merits of AoS are lacking and they go far beyond a lack of points. It's not simplified WFB, it plays fundamentally different points or not. Mainly because it's a fundamentally different game, irrespective of points costs being absent.
I think were it released as a sub game of WFB it would've never been played because it's just not a game with tactical depth in any way WFB was.
Some of us just don't like AoS because it's a bad game. Not for the many presumed reasons one must dislike AoS.
Dislike is not the same as hate.
Since you did not wrote enough details on your definition of hate, it is very reasonable to use hate or dislike interchangeably. They are synonyms. That is a fact. Wikipedia - a synonym is a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same as another word or phrase in the same language. I assume you want to say hate is an "extreme dislike?" So if you want to go into discussion on semantics and synonyms that strays from AoS/Warhammer discussion, PM me about it.
I agree legitimate criticism is not hate.
Saying that hate and dislike are not comparable and interchangeable is not a semantics question.
Do you realize how extreme the word hate is? How much enmity you generate when you at first call me hater?
You are doing the discussion a great disservice by lumping all non like and non neutral into Haters.
It polarizes and antagonizes in a very unfortunate way.
Vulgarsty
Philhelm. I was going to post and then I read that you had stolen every word I was going to write. The cigarette paper between us is the ranking of their moronic actions.
This is not like any company, like a supermarket with next to no brand loyalty (any Asda"fans" out there please correct me) but more like the Glazers taking over Man U, loaded it with debt then milking it into the dirt. Gw are , like a football club custodians of a hobby, and, like a football club want fans, but then - (continuing the football metaphor) like some of the megalomaniac arrogant quarterwits running football treat those fans like dirt. (cardiff fans buying blue/red shirts or whatever they are now also had their "investments" trashed for example) So dont be surprised that people "hate" gw. In fact I absolutely ******* mortally despise the ***** who run the show. It will take several years of anger management courses before I can dial back to merely "hating" them.
Kahadras
Ridicule is probably a bit strong but I agree with the rest. People would have taken a look at AoS, thought it was rather basic and gone back to playing Warhammer. There might have been people who decided to tinker with the system to try to improve things but, overall, I think that interest in AoS would have probably tailed off pretty quickly. The biggest problem of AoS is the fact that it 'replaced' Warhammer when it really wasn't up to the task. The entire design philosophy behind the game is totally at odds with that of Warhammer. Why did GW expect it to be such a success?
By the same logic it would be acceptable to interchange someone who likes AOS with AOS-worshipper. Same number of clicks on thesaurus.com
The process of that would likely take years still. If Fantasy could get a 5 book set to end the world, 40k would likely be able to do double that.
If you are so sensitive for someone answering a question you yourself asked other forum users to addressed....I recommend http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?414638-Problems-with-AOS-GW-and-the-result-in-your-area-life-%96-people-that-dislike-AO-only :P
Provide the link where like is a synonym for worshipper please?
I asked if the statement I wrote made me a hater. To explore the use of this in a derogatory manner on this forum. And you answered that I am a hater.
I am not being sensitive.
I do not need to go away somewhere else because this thread is wrong for me. Quite telling that you suggested I do.
I am saying you said something stupid.
Which drags down the conversation on this forum and contributes to making it a slogging match of personal attacks.
Why did GW expect it to be such a success?
Lower overhead + increased profit/model/box sold likely had a lot to do with it, along with bringing in a "good-guy" faction to the game based off of their most popular property and borrowing from modern trends and establishing a tighter control of their IP.
Sure, that is your opinion and I am fine with that :D.
Oh yeah, totally. Language is without nuance or scale. Dislike = detest = hate = loathe in all senses and you are entirely trying to continue this discussion in good-will.
Keep up the good work, you're making a fantastic contribution.
thesaurus.com:
dislike - > detest -> hate
like -> adore -> worship
Language does have nuance or scale, I admitted that above already. I also am not going to continue this discussion whether hate is a synonym of dislike in good-will either in this thread. I will report myself to the moderators and let them decide on the matter of these posts about hate and dislike.
Which is pretty much...
1. Fantasy Marines!
2. ???
Sorry no straws here and I just read this since I have been busy painting a new AoS army. Tomorrow I have a game and I need to get ready for a few upcoming tournaments. Sorry your so bitter.....
In the UK. However, honestly dude your kind of creepy. Your the reason no AoS players would go to a forum and instead use Facebook and Twitter. Sadly you are likely proud of this. You remind me of a kid who is putting on a temper tantrum about his toys being taken away by GW.
There's probably more steps in there, and I can see many of the selling points of an AoS style game (which isn't, as some like to claim, a significantly lower buy-in cost or total cost than Fantasy, but instead has the potential to have a much lesser initial requirement of hobbying effort as it's key selling point), but yeah, that's the end result, you nailed it.
-Fantasy isn't doing as well as 40k
-40k does well because it has Space Marines
-Make Fantasy Space Marines
The majority of the other changes coincide with events impacting the company (re-branding to gain better control of IP, loosening restrictions on gaming to allow increased sales of larger plastic kits that are now able to be produced cheaply and have a great cost/profit ration, ect), but it's all about introducing that most popular property into their less succesful line.
I'm not sure giving short notice for releases is a bad thing for a company. A perfect example for this is companies like Fantasy Flight Games and Battlefront who announce new releases early. However they are always never released on time and usually delayed months. This tends to make people more angry.
In regards to pricing, GW should be smart like all other companies and not manufacture their models in the US/UK. They could easily produce them in China for a fraction of the cost and pass those savings on to consumers. Of course then they would likely never hear the end of that decision also.
No way, if they outsourced their stuff to China then instead of Resin copies of their product there would be HIPP plastic copies of their product on ebay.
Plus by outsourcing to low wage economies they would also be eroding the buying power of their 1st world markets.
Sorry I couldn't write in my sarcasm.
Understood, it did seem a bit out of character with you previous posts.
At least it gives people something to look forward to and talk about. I was counting down the days until the second wave of Armarda shipped. I'd read all of the previews twice. Squinted at the pictures of the ships/cards to try to glean more information. Chatted about it with my mates. Did the happy dance when it was released in America and when I knew my order had shipped. GW miss out on all of that excitement. OK there's frustration but it's often positive frustration i.e 'this looks so cool I want it now!'. There are threads over on the FFG site talking about wanting to see previews for the next wave. That's how keen people are to see new stuff.
Please, lets not try and justify anything GW proper (and since a year or so now Black Library) do for 'marketting' or sales strategy, or anything. They are the poster child for doing it wrong, short term over anything long term, and make a buck while they can, before people wise up, which many have.
GW as a corporate entity SUCKS.
ntw3001
I wouldn't say that having attempted it repeatedly and with incredible clumsiness qualifies as 'mastery of the art'. ;)
Regarding 'hatred': I've read quite a lot over the years about the simmering hate that has always seethed below Warseer's surface, and I'm still waiting to see some. I'm dismayed, though, to note that these observations come almost exclusively from posters who appear to be struggling to hold up their side of whatever debate they're involved in. I'm beginning to wonder whether the hate is there at all. Is studying Google Search data the act of a snarling savage? As a neutral, it has the appearance of a poster presenting yet more data for the pile. This data is seldom met with opposing data, but usually with the claim that inference, with any amount of supporting evidence, is inherently and universally impossible. This claim isn't convincing because it isn't correct, but it's presented very frequently in situations where conflicting data would be more effective.
Myself, I'm neutral. I never played Fantasy and haven't played 40k in years. I still play SGs, so the recent SG news is potentially good. On AoS, I have no reason to take a side, but I've read quite a lot of discussion and have been convinced that it's a poor game: A weak ruleset in an obnoxious setting, replacing a ruleset of questionable quality in an excellent and popular setting. Again, I have no prior motive to hold that opinion; I'd be as content (more content, in fact) to suppose that GW had put out the right product at the right time, shown their development chops and poised themselves for a triumphant reclamation of ground with a good product people like. But the people who disagree with that appraisal have presented actual information from which I can make an inference and the people in favour of AoS have favoured an utterly transparent blend of whingeing and intellectual dishonesty (and, I rather suspect, Dishonesty Classic). Consequently, I believe AoS is a half-baked release, a commercial failure and a sign of GW management's grave incompetence (although subsequent moves by GW make it appear to me that it may have served the purpose of teaching them an expensive lesson).
For the confused, I reiterate that I am not motivated by some preexisting hatred of AoS or GW. I have been convinced by discussions in which the arguments that AoS has been in any way positive have been weak. Supporters could present stronger evidence (which will be entirely possible if they are not wrong), concede, or continue bitching about how everyone is sick of their bitching. The last option is an excellent way to keep this whole debate going, so I expect it to be the most popular option. Given the laughable accusations of 'hatred' going around, I expect the temptation to maintain the exciting delusion of being 'under siege' to be a greater motivator than the prospect of arguing well or being right.
I also observe that some posters appear frustrated that their persistence in presenting weak arguments has still not exceeded the patience of the people refuting said arguments. Perhaps this attritional strategy, whereby one repeatedly makes the same case until one's opponents become bored and drop out one by one, is ultimately going nowhere. I strongly advise those who consider AoS a good and successful product to deploy the information which convinces them that their position is the correct one. Again, this doesn't apply to anyone whose motivation is to seek a feeling of matryrdom by perpetuating this boring online feud.
I did the same thing for wave 2 in armada for the first few months. Then delay after delay I just stopped caring and moved on (to AoS oddly). I never did bother to buy it and now my armada stuff collects dust.
The great part about AoS is the constant releases of stuff to keep me interested. I really wish other companies especially Fantasy Flights could be remotely consistent with their release schedules. I still like Warhammer 40k conquest, but my interest is waning due to slow releases.
Intrest keeps me buying stuff. My 3 new AoS armies and over $1,500 in purchases over the last few months are proof of this. However, I must just be sleep typing or something, because according to this thread no one new playing AoS and its dead :sarcasm
Less people are playing, and without weekly buy in from good folks like you broxus, it will be dead.
Open FB groups I am on, with a myriad of requests for any number of systems BURST into activity when AoS is mentioned. 'Boycott it' 'I cannot stand GW now' 'Why would I play that' etc etc.
This is what burning the bridge that was WHFB did. Enjoy your game, I mean it, but dont pretend AoS is a successful venture. The numbers will not prove that out.
Summary of Myths and Realities pertaining to AoS in this thread.
Disclaimer: I enjoy playing Age of Sigmar. There is no agenda on my part to persuade those that don't like AoS to like AoS. I just want people on the forum that state their opinions and/or discussions to be based less on ignorance and to stop talking about myths as if they are the truth in future posts in this forum.
Real Myths (no disagreement given with explanations to discredit)-
AoS is about toning WH down and making it more kid friendly (Post #1)
AoS was made to make a game too complex and expensive more accessible (Post #1)
AoS is a simple skirmish game, which is meant to induct people to 40K and HH (Post #1)
AoS is intentionally meant to be played with a small number of models (Post #15)
The removal / simplification of rules are active attempts to focus Age of Sigmar into a "narrative game" (Post #28/ Post #30)
My Bretonnian or Empire Army collection is obsolete in AoS (#69)
Fan-made comps are required to play AoS (#70)
The acrimony over the way 8th ended and the AOS ruleset will eventually fade (Post #90)
People are writing up comps that are "X" times larger than the AoS rules (Post #152)
We don't know what most of the races/factions in AoS look like (Post #216).
Fake Myths (written as myths for whatever reason or typos) -
AoS is a tabletop game (Post #48) - trollish
Anything but a fraction of the general wargaming player base are interested in a game with no balancing mechanism. Most people want a fair fight, that in some way is quantifiably so (Post #71) - More a reality rather than a myth.
AOS is playable out of the box (Post #72) - illogical reasoning
Realities (discussions about AoS that were not postulated with a myth) -
There are people that do not like playing AoS. There are people that do like playing AoS. If you are to quantify how many people like playing AoS versus those that do not, majority of evidence provided suggest more people dislike than like AoS.
AoS release have fracture the Warhammer community.
Many people agree that pick-up games in AoS is more difficult / not as fun to play due to lack of a official structure or guideline compared to other wargame products.
There are many anecdotal evidence indicating AoS is less popular and that sales of AoS products is below expectation. To many users this indicates AoS is a failure as a product.
Age of Sigmar compare to Warhammer is cheaper to start playing games as written in the rules and the required publications; however, the actual cost to play either games, as you like, are very similar as they both used the same models.
As stated in the books, AoS provides a framework for players to play games of their own devising (whether they want to focus on competition, narrative, or what else that is only limited by your own imagination.)
Agree or disagree? Did I forgot something already posted in this thread?
Ntw3001, a very well constructed post.
Regarding your later paragraphs, from a position of being more positive about AoS I have the same feelings as you, but a different perspective.
A number of the arguments being made are flawed, but are being repeatedly posted in the attritional manner you state.
Small store in Sputnemberg has a sale at Christmas, so AoS is failing. (All stores have sales, even GW did)
40k and Fantasy sold out special editions, AoS did not, so AoS is failing. (Direct comparison not necessarily valid)
As you say, more data for the pile, but only if it is presented in a balanced way, with some caveats. When all are presented as myth-busters, then it will be provocative, as Zywus (I believe) said, unsupported claims will be challenged.
Lol! I think that's the guy who runs Fantasy Flight games, while the other two run Mantic and Privateer Press. The comments about "questioning people's motives", like there's some dark, anti-GW conspiracy, are pretty funny. I can't help but picture a scene like this, with poor defenseless GW, wanting nothing more than to traipse around in its gold spray paint armor, being ambushed and dealt a death by their treacherous competitors, Mantic, Privateer Press, and Fantasy Flight, courtesy of their agent provocateurs on Warseer.
After all, it can't be that people are upset that A) a beloved 30-year-old setting was destroyed, B) a mediocre setting replaced it, C) that setting was accompanied by a horrendous rules set, and D) that the models released with it are ridiculously over costed. Nope, there has to be some kind of Vast Anti-GW Conspiracy afoot.
Oh, and apologies for using a Blood Angels Captain rather than a Sigmarine, but that's the closest I had to a Sigmarine. ;)
You must have missed where the AoS stuff is also on the 40% off clearance rack too...
Or how online retailers like Frontline Gaming had 25% Black Friday sales off GW product... except for AOS, which was 40% off, and admittedly for the reason that it wasn't selling and they wanted to get rid of it permanently. Or the number of retailers who're selling it for even more than 40% off, and some even at a loss.
Ugh. The online fervor when AoS first dropped was brutal all the way across the spectrum. I was actually banned from a Warhammer Facebook group for asking whether they had considered any other comp systems than the one they decided on for their first event. The reaction from the Anti-"Anti-AoS" group was just as vitriolic as from the actual Anti-AoS group, and it was extremely unfortunate seeing what community had been built up come to that.
Thankfully it seems like some of the online community is coming back now, but it's a lot different.
And those old figures had sold.
Stores overstocked on AoS, well documented that GW were extremely pushy, so there will be excess stock.
Frontline seems a better example BB, but as they do not have an online store for GW items it is difficult to imagine how much stock they actually held, they seem to order on demand?
All data for pile, just a matter of scale and nuance.
I'm sorry you find someone asking for information on a contentious claim to be creepy. Thank you for answering my question (with a personal attack but, hey, it's the Pro-AOS way) but it now begs another one. Where in the UK does someone pay a dollar amount for their purchases?
In fairness you were either asking a rhetorical question or setting an impossible challenge, I can no more furnish you with the address of every AOS player in the world than you can conclusively prove to me that they don't exist. We have eight people regularly playing AoS at our games club, out of around 50 members in total, now I could give you their addresses, but I don't think they'd appreciate it. Round here AoS is about as widely played as Malifaux and x-wing.
Wfb 8th, 40k and MtG are still the most played games around here.
Clearly there are some people out there that play Age of Sigmar and enjoy doing so, speculating on exactly how many of those people exist is completely pointless because neither side can offer anything other that local anecdotes.
It's more "there has to be some kind of vast amount of people overreacting". I understand however that the level of emotional investment some people have on WHFB is not really so different from the investment fans have on their favourite soccer teams, F1 pilots and so on...I don't like such excesses, honestly, but apparently they're socially acceptable.
I think you know I wasn't asking for addresses, I just wanted to verify where AOS fans are so plentiful that it's easy to get a pick up game as broxus seemed to be suggesting. I know you play and I appreciate their are others who do too, I'm not making ridiculous claims that NOBODY plays, just that it's fair to say less people are playing AOS than were playing WFB and so it may not be as easy to get a game as he claimed.
I can't disagree that arguing on Wareer over AoS isn't exactly the most productive use of my time:p
I also won't disagree that you personally are happy with AoS. The fact that you like it don't unfortunately make it true that a sufficient number of other people does as well, which was what I was objecting to.
I recommend getting those AoS (?) tournaments in while you can. There's a significant risk of them not being around for much longer.
Quality post and interesting observations ntw3001.
I guess it must be frustrating trying to argue a position one knows deep inside has no (or at least very sparse) factual support compared to the opposite position. Perhaps so frustrating that one perceives some narrative of hate and persecution in order to cope with having ones statements challenged by better supported ones?
ElOrso
It's a shame that without this pro vs anti-AOS discussions this Warhammer forum has nothing more to offer anymore. It's a graveyard.
For me this reflects also the Warhammer scene in my area and as shown in a previous poll, most of the gaming scenes.
This opposition has no value for anybody as we are discussing personal taste at this point.
So I guess it's time to move on folks, stop caring and let the happy few, who enjoy AOS, have their fun. It's clearly not for us.
We won't bring back WHFB or improve AoS to a playable level by repeating the same things over and over again.
It will be months, probably years, before GW will give some honest feedback about AoS. I hope you all manage to turn your negativity into something positive by that time. :p
Pretty easy an American living in the UK. I guess I could have put £1,000 if that would have made you happy.
Everyone agrees people play less AoS, KoW, 9th Age, ect than WHFB. As I have said multiple times you must look at it as a 5 month old game it's new. Does that mean it's a flop? Of course not, it is to be expected. This was a long term decision to build a new player base and improve long term sales.
The rules are very good for their length and serve their purpose well. It has been so refreshing showing new people the game and only having to explain 4 pages of rules for the core mechanics. All the people I have shown really like the gsme and plan to purchase armies. Many of those people were past WHFB like me who have come back.
My son absolutely loves it also and I found it fascinating that when he has friends stay the night he now asks to play AoS instead of playing video games. He can actually play the game instead having to make up rules because it's to complex to understand. I have had parents call me and ask me about the game their kids played and talked about so much. Now it's on Christmas lists.
My wife even enjoys it so much she asked me to buy her an army for Christmas. This is amazing because she has never wanted to play any wargame because of the huge 300 page rules tomes. It is a hobby I can do with my family, friends, and competitions. It's honestly the best of all worlds.
I have seen a huge spark of enthusiasm, especially with newer and younger players that never existed in any previous games I have played. If people want to keep hating AoS then it is their own loss. I am living the wargamers dream right now.
The same could be said for anyone playing KoW or 9th age tournaments. Enjoy it while you can they are far more likely to die a slow death than AoS.
Like BloodBowl ?
You could say that. But you would have no indications of it being true.
(Or actually, you may be right. KoW is more likely to die a slow death than AoS since the death of AoS has a high risk of being a very fast one indeed:p)
AoS had it's best conditions it'll ever get at launch. They had the attention of the whole WHFB community, they had game stores buying masses of startersets. Despite this, it has quite clearly failed to grab the attention of a great part of WHFB players (probably the majority). It's now facing an uphill climb.
BWT. You can use the button to the right of the quote-button to create a multiquote, when you wish to respond to more than one post.
That's a shame because Armarda is a good game and was there really delay after delay? I recall that FFG said pretty early on to expect it in the 3rd quarter of 2015 (later revised to 4th quarter)
Constant releases keep you interested? Well I suppose if FFG dropped everything but X-wing, Armarda and Imperial Assault they could speed up their minature game release schedual. All that other successful stuff like Netrunner, Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, Eldrich Horror, Decent etc would have to stop. Even with GW's 'constant releases' they still haven't produced much beyond Stormcast, Bloodbound and Seraphon in terms of armies over the past 6/7 months. I suppose constant releases keep people 'engaged' but if you don't collect a Chaos army would you be that interested in the Doomfort or Archeon? How short an attention span do we have? I can only assume your interest in Stormcast is waning because there haven't been any releases for them in the last month or two.
That sounds great. I am genuinly happy for you.
Unfortunatly, the reaction to AOS was very very different in my meta and it is my impression that your experience is more likely to be the exception than the rule.
Well there is christmas aswell and time will tell if AoS got a boost from christmas.
But it is true, the easiest time for AoS was at the launch and from all that hype surrounding it and yet it didn't do that well.
And now GW will have alot more trouble to make AoS gain some momentum and GW will not succeed since they don't know how to do so.
And really Broxus, you shouldn't be the one talking about slow deaths. As other have said, it's good that you are enjoying the game along with your family.
But KoW got a big boost thanks to GW dumb move and since KoW was slowly gaining momentum even before the End Times, AoS gave it even more so. So thanks to GW, KoW isn't going anywhere for a while and it's death spiral is getting further away.
9th Age is a new "mod" but it too is growing and it's death spiral is probably far away as well(you never know with a community based game). I'm looking forward to them adding more armies in like the Stormcast.
AoS however started already in it's death spiral due to a overall poor launch and nothing has changed with that.
With all the evidence, AoS will be gone long before KoW or 9th Age dies.
What Hype about AoS at its launch?
What I remember of the hype at launch was that AoS would fail in spectacular fashion, that prediction is still waiting for confirmation.
There were pretty much 2 camps at the time, the 'wait and see' crowd and the 'it's all over' crowd. I think there was a 3rd optimistic crowd somewhere in there?
It was hyped by GW. Naturally; as it was the game to replace their 30 year old mainstay game.
I imagine that people predicted failure once they saw the rules. We have waited and seen for about 6 months now. The more time passes and the more thing's get released, that prediction looks more and more true. To 'wait and see' isn't a position that's impossible to combine with the assertion that AoS seems to be failing (or thriving for that matter) economically. It just mean that one doesn't claim that all is said and done yet.
Of course there is the theoretical possibility that the next AoS release will bring in millions of new players. It's just that from what we know now; the future of AoS doesn't look too bright.
There was no hype because GW didn't bother to generate any.
I was firmly in the 'there must be more than this' crowd. Then the physical rulebook dropped and my group realised that this was all we were going to get.
GW did actually try.
There were pamphlets at stores, they had cryptic messages on the website, a really annoying video with a really loud thunder sound that was very loud.
Granted it was a poor job at building hype but this is GW we are talking about.
Herzlos
This is how I'm feeling now; there's nothing really going on here now and whilst I keep an eye on it out of morbid curiousity (I'm quite interested in how AoS goes - I hope it'll pick up so I can play it) I'm spending less time and posting less. Not that that's a problem, I don't have enough time for everything else anyway :)
Yeah I'm the same way. Nothing new is being said, or has been said, for a few months now.
I no longer have any fantasy or 40k army. I did get my Dragon Rampant book in the mail yesterday and flipped through it. Seems like a fun fantasy wargame. Tried to see if there would be interest - and no. The historical guys sometimes play Lion Rampant but are not interested in fantasy and the fantasy guys are all interested in tournaments and Osprey doesn't have a tournament circuit so Kings of War or nothing basically.
Exactly. There was no hype because GW didn't bother to generate any.
I still remember that moment vividly. :eek: Utter disappointment... .
@Broxus, i can understand that your kid and wife love the game for it's simplicity. That's the best thing about AoS in my opinion.
I just didn't think it would be enough for new people to spend so much money. There are a lot of alternatives out there that cost a lot less and have the same simplicity.
But I assume in this case both your son & wife are playing with your existing model collection at this moment? In my eyes they are not new players generating revenue and contributing to the success of AoS.
They might buy the new models , but i would look for a second hand army for your wife. My wife wouldn't want to be forced to assemble and paint before being able to game. Probably the same with the kids in your neighborhood. In that way GW would ofcourse also not get any new sales... .
In the end I hope your gaming scene grows further and you have lot of fun! The more the merrier in our little wargaming world! ;)
I think there was 3 initial camps; the ragequitters and the optimists and the disbelievers.
The ragequitters were lost anyway,
The optimists were looking forward to the changes.
The disbelievers heard the rumours but didn't believe GW could do that to their game.
Then the rules came out, the disbelievers stil don't believe it, and a lot of the optimists gave up (I was an optimist, then I saw the rules).
Nope we have bought 3 armies. My friend is buying a dwarf army and my sons friends really love nurgle/high elfs. We are all new players to the game (well I did play WHFB 10 years ago). Other people in the area are similar to me and the tournament scene is looking pretty good for AoS. The cool part is my son and I are both going to the same tournaments. Something that could have never happened in WHFB, 40k or Flames of War.
This for me as well.
tournament scene.... AoS.... Same sentence? 8-|
Not pointless at all! In fact, you just added another anecdote in favour of AoS struggling! Malifaux is a great game making huge progress, but AoS being about as popular as Malifaux constitute a failure as a product fir GW. Granted, matching X-Wing is better, but there being less players for AoS than 8th indicates that it's struggling. Not proof og anything, but another anecdote, and, like Hellokitty's regrettable story, from a pro-AoS poster. This adds to the impression that AoS sis indeed selling in some locations, but significantly less than Fantasy was. Not hard evidence, but interesting as it backs up the anecdotal and non-anecdotal evidence we already have.
No it's not to be expected from a successful launch. GW products sell most during the first 3 months following launch, though much of the game hasn't been launched yet, low sales for one of the two highest selling Chaos factions as well as the new protagonist faction (fantasy Space Marines!) is pretty damning indeed.
This is awesome, I'm truly happy for you. It seems this is a genuine case of a location where AoS is a success, which is pretty interesting to hear. Not tha same as "thousands of new players flocking to the game", but the first anecdote I've heard that they actually manage to draw in new blood! I hope for all your sakes that this happens enough places to keep the momentum going, not that it'll run out of steam like HK's group (or because GW drop the game). This doesn't seem to be the case most places, in fact we have dozens of anecdotes from both pro and con AoS posters that it's failing commercially in their location, and several big stores and distributors have gone on record it's a disaster. So far none, afaik, have stated it's a success. Even GW, when talking to an investment reporter, seem to indicate it's a non-starter. Great you and your family are enjoying the game, I do hope it'll last, but all available evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, indicate you are in a tiny minority...
This again is great, keep living the dream! Please don't label others who's been living the nightmare the last six months. They're suffering enough as it is! This goes for Fantasy fans who's had their hobby blown up as well as AoS fans who cannot find a game because the game is dying in their location...
All evidence available, including past behaviour and sales record for KoW, indicates this is false. KoW managed fine before AoS, and has had en explosive growth after Fantasy was canned. This growth is probably not sustainable in the long run, but not necessary to keep the company afloat (as evidenced by Mantic surviving before fantasy was canned). 9th is more questionable, and KoW and 9th will probably struggle to both succeed. There's nothing however indicating it'll fail, and being a well-supported fan initiative it doesn't need to sell anything to stay afloat...
There was quite a bit of hype, just not any meaningful promotion by GW. They created a bit of fuss about the release beforehand with the flyers they handed out prior to launch, and astonished everyone by sending copies to websites for review. In the paid reviews it faired reasonable well, and this was more hype than any GW release I can remember since the original LotR release way back when. More hype than most GW releases at any rate.
The reception after the rules was released was something else altogether, the community in general did NOT accept it with open arms. That's not a lack of hype though, but a lack of enthusiasm for a new product. That is something else entirely...
ihavetoomuchminis
I rarely post now, but i want to say something in that regard.
I see it the other way around. I think it's being given too many fairness and credit only because it's made by GW, and as many people were heavily invested in their products, somehow they have gone through a rationalisation progress, as it is now what the company offers.
Call it brand loyalty or whatever, but i'm convinced that AoS on kickstarter won't have gone through the very first step of development due to not enough funds.
GrandmasterWang
If someone is still posting consistently on AoS threads that it great game for an extended period of time (like 6 months) then I think it is perfectly valid for the rest of us who are neutral to AoS or anti AoS to be suspicious of that posters motives.
See what i did there?
Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
It wouldn't have.
It seems like AoS was developed in a sub unit with total secrecy, as retail, forgeworld and others had no idea what was in it. There are massive downsides to this, as you have to wonder about the internal playtesting, if there was any, and given there are no points values or balancing mechanism, why would they have done it, and a lack of anyone going 'Do you guys think this is a good idea?'
It still staggers me that an actual business put out a product of the quality of Age of Sigmar.
The Nigmos rumour mega troll made it sound quite good. However the optimism and enthusiasm I had for a Warhammer World skirmish game died when I read the rules, and I went from being about to pre-order the game to not touching it at all.
Very true. The amount of effort put in by people trying to get the game to work. The amount of people at least giving it a test game despite not liking the rules. The amount of people at least reading the rules of the game before dismissing it. Other games would kill for those opportunities.
That initial interest was WHFB's last gift to AoS; It's bastard son, before being taken away to the gallows.
Wow, spot on, that's pretty much laid out the way I experienced it back home:) There was a smaller optimistic crowd for our group but they kept quiet mostly. The angry = more vocal online, blah blah and all that. Of course, that's only one local scene, but what really surprised me was the rift/rage at the perceived community break up. That really had nothing to do w/GW but after raging many articulated that it was upset at the community breaking since not everyone would see each other at events anymore. Not so much about which activity brings us together but that we gather and have a great weekend since it's a year or more before many of us gather again. In the Midwest USA there's a mammoth wargaming scene and it's completely normal to pack up the car and road trip 5-12 hours to go to an event. Obviously there are other options to play but that fracture had already done its damage. Local reports say it is sort of on the mend, with new blood coming in from gamers NOT recently playing WFB 8th ed.)
Yeah, ramble ramble:) I suppose I'm in the "wait and see" crowd and look forward to community discussion after Adepticon. At least in the midwest US that's one of the last 8th ed tournaments on the books right now. I'm weathering the storm right now being overseas so I can avoid the drama much easier but I will have to play whatever games I can get opponents for regular weekly games when I get back. I know it won't be WFB 8th ed but hopefully at least one mass battle game, be it KoW (I'm ever more a fan) or the WFB versions I haven't tried yet--8.5 or 9th Age.
I think Broxus' anecdotes about his son and his mates do a good job at shutting down the Topic Creators first two 'Myth-busts' albeit inadvertently.
AOS has some positives and it's simplicity and kid-friendlier nature are 2 of them. Both imo make it easier for new blood to enter the hobby.
Now if GW had just done the smart thing and not shut down Warhammer Fantasy in order to launch AOS and instead used AOS as a starter/feeder game they would be in a better spot....... and Warseer would be in a MUCH better spot.
*starts a slow clap* Yes, well said:)
I'll agree that the AOS rules are more kid friendly than the Warhammer Fantasy rules, but I don't think that the game in its totality is all that kid friendly. I started playing Warhammer Fantasy when I was 14, and was more than able to memorize rules, stats, etc. Of course, the simpler AOS rules can more readily be learned by even younger children, but then comes the other aspect of the game - the miniatures. The overly complex, expensive miniatures are more geared to older gamers. In addition, it seems that GW's most recent models are literally designed to break (Nagash, Archaon, Spirit Hosts, Stormcast wings, etc. - so many delicate pieces, tiny connection points, or awkward basing). There is no way that I'd let a ten-year-old kid even touch such expensive models like that.
Unlikely. Unless, as Zywus suggests, you mean in comparison to AOS, which will probably die a quick death. ;)
Kings of War was able to survive even when Warhammer Fantasy was the fantasy gaming juggernaut, and its position has only gotten stronger after recent events. Unlike AOS, KOW has sold out all its rulebooks, from gamer's editions to limited editions, with a 7000+ print run, from what I understand. That all sold out within a week. They did up a second print run and that sold out. Last I heard they're on their third print run. The US tournament scene also switched over from Warhammer Fantasy to Kings of War. In short, that's a game which is gaining players.
Meanwhile, Age of Sigmar hasn't been able to sell out of a single limited edition after being available for weeks and months. Not. One. They're up to six limited editions put out for them and none of them have sold out. And that includes the Seraphon book, when only a handful of years ago the Lizardmen limited edition, also 1,000 copies, sold out within days, indicating that the Seraphon player base is much smaller than the Lizardmen player base. Major tournament circuits all over never even considered switching to Age of Sigmar, and have instead picked up Kings of War or 9th Age. And independent retailers all over have been flogging AOS sets for massive discounts in a bid to get rid of it. We're not talking one or two or three retailers, but many. And that includes retailers who have even sold it for a $20 loss, resulting in a $400 loss after selling 20 boxes of AOS starter sets. Think about that: In trying to sell his AOS stock, one retailer LOST $400! Now, maybe you might want to believe that the reason for that is that he's such a big believer in AOS that he's willing to lose hundreds of dollars to spread the AOS gospel far and wide, but the more likely reason for that is that it wasn't moving at all, and it was preferable to get some of his money back rather than lose it all.
All of that doesn't point to a game with a growing player base, but one with next to no player base and which isn't growing. AOS has no future, neither short term nor longterm. And if you think GW will stick to a game which is seemingly making less money than Warhammer Fantasy, well, I have a Dreadfleet box I'd like to sell you.
It seems like AoS was developed in a sub unit with total secrecy, as retail, forgeworld and others had no idea what was in it. There are massive downsides to this, as you have to wonder about the internal playtesting, if there was any, and given there are no points values or balancing mechanism, why would they have done it, and a lack of anyone going 'Do you guys think this is a good idea?
Not really a fan of hyperboles...no, chances are AoS was not developed in a hurry and most certaintly was not developed secretly by a rogue cabal of GW employees without other division knowing. GW works in nonsensical ways, but there are things that even they are not goingo to do.
AoS is a skirmish game (what GW needed) with low model count (what GW needed) and easy to learn rules (what GW needed)...on paper, it could have been a decent addition to GW games. Sadly, they made several glaring mistakes - decommissioning WHFB without first building an AoS customer base was probably the most stupid one, but even trying to market a fantasy wargame without presenting first a general picture of the setting is nothing to be proud of.
IMHO the idea of AoS is sound...its realization and the timing of its commercialization are lacking common and business sense.
It still staggers me that an actual business put out a product of the quality of Age of Sigmar
People repeat that line with the latest WHFB/WH40K edition and/or Army Book in place of "Age of Sigmar" since time immemorial. While I agree that AoS is rather unispired (it's basically the same old GW ruleset slightly repurposed on a different scale and in a different setting) it's hardly the ghastly horror so many people are disgusted of: its quality is consistent with the last 10-15 years of GW games development after all. It shows all its flaws when compared to more innovative and streamlined products like Frostgrave...but then, every GW produc when compared with solid competition show all its flaws.
I agree with the above. The streamlining of the game makes it easier for kids to play, but the cost and assembly of the models make it very much an adult-required supervision for young children, imo.
No, the secrecy was literally the case. Forgeworld had no idea what Age of Sigmar was, retail had no idea what Age of Sigmar was, and when store managers were told there was a number of critical voices about the quality.
It wasn't a rogue cabal, just a small project division who didn't communicate with anyone else to maintain secrecy and avoid leaks.
This isn't some conspiracy theory, but how a lot of companies work and specifically how GW did this, in contrast to how the old studio worked. If they did it the old studio way then everyone and their dog would have been playtesting, but in return there would have been some leaks. The problem with this is a lack of focus on what the customer actually wants because the creative process is so divorced from the end user.
Have you ever had a piece of software that doesn't do what you actually want to use it for, but get told it'll do x, y and z that you don't need it to and there is existing cheaper or free software out there that already does it? The sort of process that gives you that.
It wasn't a rogue cabal, just a small project division who didn't communicate with anyone else to maintain secrecy and avoid leaks
Well, to be honest store managers are not exactly known to be "in the loop". They get info on new products shortly after the customers, as far as I know that was and still is standard procedure for GW. Not sure if Forgeworld was updated or not on AoS development: even if they were kept in the dark we have to remember they're on a full-40K since the closure of their Fantasy side projects. Sales not knowing what AoS was...I don't think so. Do we have confirmed info about that?
This isn't some conspiracy theory, but how a lot of companies work and specifically how GW did this, in contrast to how the old studio worked. If they did it the old studio way then everyone and their dog would have been playtesting, but in return there would have been some leaks. The problem with this is a lack of focus on what the customer actually wants because the creative process is so divorced from the end user
The creative process of any GW products in the last 10/15 years have always been divorced by the end user. A lot of people are going on murderous rampages over the WHFB/AoS affaire, but I start to wonder where they were during the sub-par flood of codices, army books and editions of the last years. GW hardly released well-developed (or even sufficiently playtested!) rules in the last decade. Everyone on this forum partecipated in those threads: WHFB (or WH40K) is broken, there is no balance anymore, this army book (or this codex) is cheesy, what the hell were they thinking introducing that unit or that charachter...AoS is the last link of a long chain of badly developed, poorly playtested games. WHFB wasn't so different. WH40K isn't really different either.
Is the failure or success a myth that needs to be busted?
They DID (almost, I guess Kirby knew what was going on...) everyone in the dark, this is way they operate. The "dark cabal" is called the Studio, and more often than not everyone else is being kept in the dark. People have complained about this for years, and ex-employees have confirmed this. Not a sound way to develop a new product line, especially not when at the same time cancelling a much-loved 30 year old franchise, but consistent with how GW have been operating the last couple of years...
Yeah, I can't imagine Forge World were happy about it, what with their developing the Chaos Dwarf line.
Well, to be fair, FW had halted Warhammer Forge for 30k work focus instead. Too bad, would have liked to have seen Blackfire Pass. I got use out of my dwarf command set. And at least FW eventually posted AoS rules for CD and have a sale bundle. But I am curious to see if the CD come back in this new world and how that would look. Models and design fluff.
They have a sale bundle? Let me check that out. I've always wanted a Chaos Dwarf army, and at the very least they'd look good in my planned Abyssal Dwarf army.
It's down to only two bundles at the moment and you save around £18-21 but, hey, shipping free voucher to use through January;)
For GW there was a HUGE amount of hype. From a general perspective, it was poorly executed and relied to heavily on the 'all eyes on the surprise!' style reveal.
This is 100% correct and it IS Brand Loyalty. From someone who works in Marketing and whose wife also works in Marketing (actually at a much higher level than me) AoS is a classic case of Brand Loyalty after a weak product (or a product perceived as weak, whatever you like). The staunchest supporters, the Brand Defenders (which is a real thing, and is visible across industries) have personal and emotional investment that is (at least) equal to the detractors (who were once supporters themselves, but of the product line, rather than the brand itself, the cancelling of "their" line by the company generates a lot of ill will).
It's an interesting phenomenon, but the easiest way to judge is just to look at the New Market the company was hoping to open up (why else risk losing your current customer base if there was not a better market to reach?) and look for their opinions. Search Engine data is huge here (and also shows the spike in interest AoS generated prior to release), but reviews by important community members (people with broad reach) are often critical (thus GW distributing starter boxes, a good move by them), unless the company feels they have the ability to draw eyes to the product outside of the current community system (which they don't, and I think it reasonable to say never thought they did).
I'll agree that the AOS rules are more kid friendly than the Warhammer Fantasy rules, but I don't think that the game in its totality is all that kid friendly. I started playing Warhammer Fantasy when I was 14, and was more than able to memorize rules, stats, etc.
This is true for me as well. 13-14 learned to play with a half dozen friends, then in the next year or so taught people 2-4 years bellow me how to play, the vast majority of which continued to play right up to 8th.
Of course, the simpler AOS rules can more readily be learned by even younger children, but then comes the other aspect of the game - the miniatures. The overly complex, expensive miniatures are more geared to older gamers.
This is actually an interesting point, and one that I'd run across talking to people at NYCC (New York Comic Con) at the AoS booth. Although they didn't have any Archaeon and his three $40 a piece knights, the fact that the "models" (which were obviously being marketed in the same way as other booths statues) came un-painted and assembled made it difficult for many passer-by's to swallow the price. Is a single 1'5" miniature REALLY worth $40 if you can't put on a professional level paintjob? Compared to the statues around the area (and this comparison is extremely important by how GW had chosen to market), a $100 14" pre-painted statue would not be worth that much for collectors if it had to be assembled and painted at home.
This would of course be a somewhat different situation had they chosen to promote a hobby and a game, but for their own reasons, they chose the approach they went with.
Except that warhammer forge has been pretty much on hold since they realised what a gold mine the Horus heresy was, plus their chaos dwarf line is a good way for KoW players to build an abyssal dwarf army that doesn't look ****
It depends what's you're after really, if you don't like painting models then prepainted models are a massive plus, for me painting is the whole reason why I hobby, buying prepainted models would totally defeat the object of my hobby whatever price they were being sold for. The only game I play that comes with prepainted models I repaint myself.
that's a cool bit of insight, thanks for sharing. I never knew GW would attend as a vendor. Wonder where else they go.
To add, I previously played HeroQuest and Battle Masters, but my first experience with a bona fide GW game was with Warhammer Fantasy 4th edition (I think - it was the one with High Elves vs. Goblins). My father played the game with me, but we were both completely clueless about the hobby; we eventually painted the High Elves and Goblins with Testor's model paint before learning better. Regardless, we were able to take the models off the sprues, snap them into the slottabases, and start learning the rules and playing. Even as we branched out from the core set, we were able to put miniatures on the table easily enough by plopping/gluing a metal figure onto its base, or perhaps gluing a horse together. It was pretty simple.
The new kits, while higher quality, come disassembled in a hundred parts. Even the core AOS set, while simplified, has some added assembly complexity. A novice player can't simply take them off the sprues and start playing.
The crux of it is, that GW are selling their product nearly as collector level pieces, in line with statues and figures, and totally divorced from vendors selling games or game pieces (several vendors were selling un-painted models for various games and systems). This is fine for a VERY small market segment, but for the much wider market segment who they were directed towards, this is simply silly. For comparable prices, larger or more well known products or properties are available, with the level of deatail/quality entirely in they eye of the beholder (what's better made, a well detailed Sigmarite, or a generally smooth but true to source anime figure?). The one single thing that gaming miniatures have on their side as a selling point is that they are miniatures that are part of a game, they have additional use beyond their physical existence, and this was not the selling point.
Without that, it's one $30 1" piece of plastic that needs to be assembled and painted (and the purchaser needs to feel they can paint to the quality of the purchase to receive the worth of the collector piece) and does not come with the emotional attachment of a known property/character, compared to a larger, fully finished statue.
They have been to at least one Toronto Con (though I don't remember which). It should be noted that it wasn't "GW" there as the booth, it was "Warhammer: Age of Sigmar". The branding was entirely AoS and the product was entirely AoS (which led to a very sparse produce line on display in New York), there was no mention of 40k or other specialist games, and there was nothing to actually tell passer-bys that what was being sold were pieces to a GAME. The product was being marketed entirely on it's own merits as a physical item (which fits along with GW's early re-branding as a "miniature company, not a game company" and all that), devoid of source.
I realize this isn't going to be so surreal for others reading this thread, but for me it was crazy to see. A booth set up not so far down the hall selling a variety of RPGS, board games and miniatures for them did brisk trade in discounted 40k boxes (and other miniatures for Pathfinder/D&D that needed to be painted by the buyer) and had vastly more walk-through interest. It was set up the way a "GW" booth would have been. The GW booth was entirely an AoS booth. that makes sense as the goal is to create interest in the community for the launch of the new product line, but that interest WASN'T generated because people walking by came away with nothing (or, almost nothing, as with many vendors GW was handing out pins). No hype about the game, no handouts of free rules to see, no laminated rule set to examine, and absolutely no ability to interact with the models in any way connecting them to the game.
I should also note that, the few times I did see someone who had already connected the booth's product with the game line, it was generally a dismissive or negative interaction. That's just personal anecdote though.
To add, I previously played HeroQuest and Battle Masters, but my first experience with a bona fide GW game was with Warhammer Fantasy 4th edition (I think - it was the one with High Elves vs. Goblins).
It's funny, but myself and several of my friends played and LOVED Heroquest for years as kids, but didn't realize it was connected to GW until well after we had started into 40k and Fantasy.
The new kits are likely better able to be assembled to the box-cover standard though than the previous generation of truly multi-pose models due to limitations on how they fit, but I agree. Starter box sets see a great bonus in being plug-and-play, the old 40k starter (Black Reach I believe) with it's entirely easy to assemble sets, modified Dreadnoughts and what not was absolute genius by GW.
Inquisitor Gideon
This thread is embarassing to read through. At the end of the day, these are games using toy soldiers. And to be honest, fantasy was never a particualrly tactical game. I'd say a good 90% of games i played and witnessed ended up as a punchup in the middle of the field, same as Age of Sigmar does now. The only difference is it's on round bases now instead of movement trays.
The other issue i have is about this 30 year history people keep talking about. True, it does. But it's irrelevant to new players. The target audience and the audience that keep the company alive. And i know people will argue this, but fantasy's setting is now generic as hell. 30 years ago, perhaps not. But now there is nothing unique to catch anyones attention. Stereotypical elves, dwarves, humans, orcs etc. Even Chaos is just evil gods and henchmen. Curiously enough, the only really unique race is the Skaven. Not the generic ratmen bit, but the suicidal engineer part. I know for the moment the races are the same for Age of Sigmar (sans names), but i'm genuinely curious to see how they evolve.
But at the end of the day, we have no solid facts about how much it's being played, or not as the case may be. Just supposition and speculation based on forums (and we know the negatives are always damn louder than the positives. Thank you whineseer) and peoples gaming clubs. Which is a tiny minority. So unless someone can pull out a physical document saying "this many are sold" and we have "this many players", it's all speculative crap.
Ah sod it, i'm going back to playing Lord of the Rings. It may not be as popular, but the community is strong and people don't argue the toss over such meaningless things. And the forums are quiet..because people are actually playing and having fun rather than arguing all the damn time.
Nice, condescension and insult as the base of an argument. That will people make believe you...
As far as I know, AOS and WFB are both games that cannot be played by one player alone. Therefore everyone who plays either of the games has to be in some kind of gaming group. This tiny minority should be the whole player base of WFB/AOS.
The other issue i have is about this 30 year history people keep talking about. True, it does. But it's irrelevant to new players. The target audience and the audience that keep the company alive.
Interesting statement, let's see if it holds true through some simple theoretical scenarios.
A new player wants to play a Wargame,and they want to play, say, Elves. They have seen the Elf models in the boxes that say Warhammer, and want to know about them.
Which Age of Sigmar book do they purchase to learn about this group? What part of the games history should they be referred to?
There is of course no solid history supporting the Elves, or Aelfs as that new player will be told they are. No book to buy or novel to read that explains their history, unless of course they want to go and read buy the book and read the history of another game.
Obviously established background is important in bringing in new players. If it was not, then GW wouldn't have chosen to focus so heavily on launching the background of the new faction which the entire product was launched around. The loss of sources to understand other factions hurts the chances of brand new players picking up product. It seems you're rather upset, but this hopefully now you have a slightly better understanding of how established product history can encourage purchase.
You could of course go deeper into it and look at things such as search engine hits and click-through and compare Fantasy, Warhammer, and Age of Sigmar over the last, say, two years. Search trends closely mimic market trends and upswings in interest generally translate to upswings in popularity (or potential popularity among new customers).
You're of course not going to. That information is even readily available here (perhaps earlier in this thread?). As is information about the decisions of major community groups such as well known tournament organizers. But, regardless of that, feel free to continue believing that a "tiny minority" on "whineseer" is somehow embarassing for a full and lengthy discussion on the state of a hobby that said community exists to discuss.
Indeed. The Lord of the Rings forums are quite because people are so busy playing. Just like the Dogs of War forums were quiet because there were just too many games being played with them.
After ranting on about baseless assertions and making vast generalizations, this conclusion to your post should be, as you put it, "embarassing" to you.
Double post.
Alright, gaming "club" if we're going to be pedantic. Most people i know, have never been to a club and play around each others houses. Gaming clubs are non-existant around here. And it's not condscending and insulting. Don't be absurd. This whole thread is nothing but specualtion with no facts. This is why the whole argument is pointless.
There are a variety of "facts" available. The drawing of conclusions off of them is speculation. Increases and decreases in searches and click-throughs is indicative of greater market trends, as is reaction through organized sections of the community. If the reaction of the "tournament scene" represents the hard core, minority voice that GW is attempting to move away from (according to some, but not GW themselves, who in no way want to lose any customers, as they are a business), then search engine trends represent the brand new, green-as-can-be uninformed potential "new player" that GW very much wants.
Although there aren't any definite answers to many questions, there is available data of varying types (and of varying importance when drawing conclusions) and this shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.
Businesses' always lose customers when they change something. Being products or services. GW knew damn well that such a shift into something like Sigmar would alienate a chunk of the fanbase. It's a risk they obviously felt worth taking. It was either that or can fantasy all together if we're drawing conclusions over the "facts" that fantasy was selling so badly. But in regards to your previous point about me not searching the net for facts (i have thanks, and who's being condescending there?), all i see is the same discussion over and over again but no physical numbers. And numbers are what i want before discussing anything.
Have you considered searching for the number of tournament organizers and tournaments, both North American and European who plan on continuing on with AoS from 8th as a representational group of the established player base? Or perhaps searching for online trends and click throughs as representational of initial interest of launch vs previous product launches and continued interest by metric of the product line compared to previous product lines?
Your assertion that the only other choice for GW was to "can fantasy all together" (based solely on sales metrics and in this conversation disregarding their desire to re-brand their product line to gain greater control over their IP) is based on...significantly less than anything put forward in this thread. If the evidence you have of Fantasy sales being so bad that GW would be better off to discontinue the line entirely is legitimate, i would speculate that using the same level of requirement for proof would find that GW would be better off to discontinue their NEW line as well using the exact same metrics.
I said facts in regards to fantasy's sales number in quotation marks. Sarcasm. ok fine, that probably doesn't translate well online. My mistake. I was referring to the word of mouth that fantasy's sales we're less than the paint range. I was using it as an example to match these age of sigmar "facts". But no, tournament numbers are pointless in regards to this, as Sigmar was obviously never designed for it. The loose rules and the need for indepedent tournament comps confirm that. So people won't play tournaments, but they may well play locally or at home. and that can't be measured in any sense in a reliable way.
Does it matter what label you put on 'group of people playing a game'?
That part is of course not insulting. But calling people's discussion 'whiny' and 'embarrassing' is.
People posted a lot of facts:
- Search history data.
- Links to retailers.
You might disagree with the conclusions drawn from that data but data is there nevertheless.
So people won't play tournaments, but they may well play locally or at home. and that can't be measured in any sense in a reliable way.
Indeed. If information regarding organized play within the community is out, then information involving individual opinion forming and pursuit of interest should be highly interesting, no? In that regard, online data from independent searches and click throughs is a solid gauge of general interest.
If you start at "all discussion is meaningless because we don't have sales data", continue with "Fantasy was going to be scrapped regardless" and end with personal attacks, you're not doing a good job approaching the topic reasonably. if you instead take in available forms of data and consider them reasonably, you'll have likely a more neutral, better position to discuss the topic from.
I didn't put the label on. I was being more specific when replying to Aylin. And this whole thread is embarassing. The whole amount of bile and vitriol would make Nurgle nauseous. The fact there has to be a seperate thread just for people who actually enjoy the game and try to keep the arguments away is testament to that. But yes, those link are supposition. But again, there are no numbers. Yes, some retailers have it on a deeper discount, but is it the majority? I'm trying to make the point of establishing numbers.
Then do the work and search the Search Engine information. Then you will have some numbers to compare the current product to the previous product, the amount of interest generated by release vs previous releases, interest in launch of additional products for that line, ect.
If you want some numbers to discuss, they are out there. If you don't want to discuss them and won't go searching for them, then you should probably stop posting as if it's everyone else who is making baseless claims fueled only by negative emotional reactions.
Let me help you:
-Search data;
-Retailers selling AOS inventory at a loss;
-AOS limited edition books not being sold out (compare to previous, WFB limited edition books);
-GW reporting that AOS is "a long-term investment" (as opposed to stating that it met/exceeded expectations, etc. - this one is pretty damning, in my opinion);
-Tournaments switching to other games, such as KOW;
-Mantic Games, a competitor, mocking GW's newly erected Eternal Stormcast statue with a statue of their own (it's pretty damning when competitors laughed at the AOS release);
-Warseer polls overwhelmingly disapproving of AOS (seriously, it's not like a soccer forum was polled);
Anecdotal:
-I'm playing Frostgrave;
-My local hobby store significantly reduced the section devoted to WFB/AOS, and seems to be letting the inventory dwindle, aside from the new AOS releases;
-I haven't seen anyone play AOS at the hobby store, whereas I used to see people playing WFB.
This is probably the most important point. If AoS was a success then GW would be telling everybody (well its shareholders at least) how well it was doing. Even 'met expectations' only means 'did OK' in business speak.
Precisely. They weren't talking to just anyone off the street. It was an investment reporter, so they'd want to put on their best face to encourage further investing in the company. They would never have mentioned anything about AOS being in "a closed period", talked about "other metrics" like White Dwarf sales and number of free downloads, or claimed that AOS was a long term investment if actual AOS sales data backed up its being a success. If it were a success, or even moderate seller, they would've said as much, because saying that would make them look like a better investment. Saying otherwise makes them look like a less sure investment, so why would they say otherwise unless they couldn't? Nobody downplays success, only failure.
Nobody downplays success, only failure.
With profits being down over the last couple of years if AoS had been a success I'm pretty sure GW would have let us know.
Weren't they trumpeting Betrayal at Calth's success within days? I very much doubt there'll be any talk about its being in a closed sales period three months from now.
It's already quite certain that AoS isn't a big success - GW's reported that their sales are showing another modest drop this half. That means AoS isn't a huge failure out of the gate, at least obviously, but I imagine a lot of that is due to GW's reportedly pushy sales requirements for initial ordering. Between that, BaC and the Space Marine splash, this was a fairly huge release period for GW, but they're still not able to move their sales numbers. Since first half of next year will apparently be AoS-heavy, I think it'll be a good indicator for how the game is actually doing.
I think that does point to AOS being a huge failure, because the period also includes Betrayal at Calth, which appears to be a huge success, and yet we're looking at a drop in sales. AOS had to have cratered their sales pretty badly if, after the successful introduction of Betrayal at Calth, GW is still looking at a drop in sales.
Models like Nagash and Archaon etc are clearly not aimed at kids but models like the Stormcast Eternals and the overpriced blister character packs are relatively easy to assemble and kid friendly. AOS is no doubt more easily accessible than 8th was.
The hobby by it's nature is not super kid friendly what with its use of superglue and super sharp knives etc.
I wouldn't even want to touch the Celestant-Prime, even with fully developed motor skills.
The Celestant prime is clearly aimed at more advanced modellers due to its size, complexity and fragility. Of the Stormcast range it is the most 'advanced' (and expensive) kit.
Cheh. You're being too generous. Given the attitudes involved, 'met expectations' can literally mean 'we expected any fantasy-based product line to do poorly, since only 40K has proven to produce the sales results we desire'
'Met expectations' is the height of weasel-speak, since they aren't going to tell you what those expectations were.
So.... Was the success of AoS a commonly stated 'myth'?
Or are we just repeatedly stating our interpretation of reality?
Well, at least you accept it is based on a reality. It's a first step.
First step to what? People are claiming victory in an argument that was never there. Unless I have missed something, there was no claim/myth that AoS was a success. It is just crowing over the failure something they don't like.
The evidence is not as cut and dry as it is presented of course, but that is understandable in an Internet discussion which has deviated from the original point.
GW also didn't tell investors AoS met expectations, but that it was a long term investment. You have to be very careful talking to investors, you can't directly lie them.
However GW financials for May-November will show another reduction in sales, and GW have said this already but blamed currency corrections, just like they blamed decreasing numbers of trade accounts in Europe on their warehouse system.
No one at GW has said Age of Sigmar is a success in terms of sales. But they will also never release raw sales data breaking things down by product line.
Because the half year ended November 29th it may mean stock write offs for Age of Sigmar (where GW don't get the stuff sent back to them, but write it off as credit on trade accounts) will be counted against figures for the 2nd half of the year and Christmas and more BaC and sales of other lines can mitigate that. However stores being told to just keep it when they try sending things back is apparently the reason for so many US stores, who had sale or return arrangements with their reps, discounting AoS to below wholesale cost.
I know I shouldn't do this but it's Xmas and my horoscope told me to go be an adventurist today:) Even though the online forums suck for expressing intent, there are more smileys to clarify that there's no sarcasm or instigation here. :)<-- see, smiley :)
I've tried to follow this thread but I'm still not clear on what, for individuals or majority, the conditions for "fail" or "succeed" mean in regards to AoS. There's a lot of declaring or speculation of failure either on behalf of the poster or speaking for some parts of the GW company, even though none of us have any access to sales meetings or internal documents or whatever. We've established the data is pulled from anecdotes or searches or whatever. I'm NOT in any way challenging that, I'm just genuinely curious in how folks here at defining success. It can't be sales since none of us have the GW books for global sales.:)
Also, happy end-of-December holidays to everyone and may you get all the plastic/resin/metal crack you wished for:)
AoS failing (short-term) would IMO be, if after it's release GW pulls in less money from it's fantasy line than it did did with WHFB.
In the long term it also seem to have dealt a heavy blow to the previous fanbase of WHFB and further tanked any remaining goodwill and trust the company had.
Most evidence (anecdotal or not) points to this being the case.
If we need sales meetings or internal documents to draw a conclusion in these cases; then we cannot say whether Dreadfleet was a failure or a roaring succes. We haven't seen the internal GW numbers concerning dreadfleet after all.
I'd say less profit, not money. AoS must have been cheaper to throw out than a 9th Ed WHFB. So if costs are down, then revenue can be down a bit and they can still make more profit.
Yea, perhaps.
But I'm not so sure. The sigmarines is a lot of new molds that could have been used to revamp some much needed core troops. And they've put out enough books that it couldn't have cost much more to release a new proper rulebook for the same price. (It would probably have sold better too)
Yeah, I imagine a 9th edition would've been cheaper than Age of Sigmar. A 9th edition wouldn't have required five expensive End Times books, nor would it likely have produced seven books so quickly. Plus the cost of developing the new Sigmarines and AOS specific terrain.
As for what it should be making, I expect it should be making more than Warhammer Fantasy, which doesn't appear to be the case. For example, I've never seen Island of Blood discounted down as much or as often as I've seen the Age of Sigmar boxed set discounted. That implies that the AOS starter set is selling less than IOB, when GW more than likely wanted and needed it to sell better than IoB (Remember, 8th Edition didn't sell enough for them, so AOS would have to sell better than 8th Edition, not just to meet the revenue they wanted to get from Warhammer Fantasy but more to cover the cost of developing Age of Sigmar). Likewise, not a single limited edition book has sold out. GW likely expected to make $1,030,000 off those books, which is reasonable to expect because every single Warhammer Fantasy limited edition sold out within days, and yet none of those books sold out. Odds are, GW's looking at a half-a-million dollar or more shortfall courtesy of those books alone.
And I have seen people claim AOS was a success. I don't recall a specific instance here, but on other websites? Sure. There're people in the Natfka comments section who claim it's a success all the time, and while trying to refresh my memory on how much the Realmgate Wars Limited Edition cost, I came across this gem:
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/08/age-of-sigmar-quest-of-ghal-maraz-overview.html#comment-2198243352
You didn't include any facts either. AoS has outsold Infinity, Wrath of Kings, and Warmachine in the last two months. Warhammer products that sat, gathering dust on shelves in FLGS locations is now moving. "All the devout, 25 year + GW WHFB players" weren't playing WHFB anymore (as evidenced by record low turnouts for leagues, campaigns, and tournaments), so they aren't missed by not playing AoS. Stores allegedly not stocking AoS were not stocking WHFB either. AoS is turning a profit, where WHFB hadn't done that for GW in 7+ years.
GW's "flat-line stock" doesn't reflect AoS yet, as it hasn't been out for even a quarter.
Fact: It's selling.
Fact: It's attracting new players, players from other skirmish games, and 40k players.
Fact: You're wrong, as usual.
That is some unsubstantiated nonsense, even by BoLS' standards. So is that the myth you've been putting all this time into?
You really didn't need to go so far! :)
I still think you're reading too much into the special editions, but hey ho.
No, didn't go "that far." It's just what I stumbled upon while looking for the price of the Realmgate Wars limited edition, which I knew wasn't $140, but I couldn't remember exactly what the price was. I see regular comments in the Natfka comments section that AOS is a great seller, and I'm sure I've seen people post the same here, though it's been a while and I don't recall exactly where.
And given that we're talking about GW making hundreds of thousands of dollars less than they expected to make on those limited edition books, I don't think I'm reading too much into that at all, especially on the subject of whether GW is making the kind of money they expected to make off of AOS.
So after writing a summary thread for the Myths and Realities posted in this thread - http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?415470-AoS-myths-and-reality&p=7583972&viewfull=1#post7583972 here is a rough count on the posts that have been posted afterwards:
8 posts related to these proposed myths - "AoS is about toning WH down and making it more kid friendly and AoS was made to make a game too complex and expensive more accessible"
49 posts related to this stated reality - "There are many anecdotal evidence indicating AoS is less popular and that sales of AoS products is below expectation. To many users this indicates AoS is a failure as a product."
4 posts related to this stated reality - "AoS fracture the community"
23 posts that are Off-Topic focusing mostly about Games Workshop the company
So, no additional "myths or realities" have been added to this thread -_-. A little bit of disagreement with two of the stated myths, and many posts where no one is disagreeing with one of the already stated realities (except to say what you consider to be success or failure is different per person, and to repeat the same information).
So even when people say that AoS will soon be dead or what else, does it really matter? For those enjoying AoS, it really have negligible effect.
A major reality about AoS - is that the game will be supported by Games Workshop in the immediate future. Whenever AoS actually do become a "dead" game, those that actually enjoyed the game can still enjoy playing "dead" games just like any other games that are not officially supported any more.
Happy holidays and have fun playing whatever game you enjoyed!
mdauben
as much as people crow about KoW on these forums I'm not seeing it catch on large-scale which it needs to do to take WFB's place.
I think that's the flaw in your assumptions. IMO *nothing* is ever going to "take WFB's place" if by that you mean being the 900 pound gorilla of fantasy war gaming. Where once GW totally dominated the nonhistorical gaming scene with their two core games, those days are over for GW fantasy and I suspect the same thing is happening on the sci-fi side, too.
Even if AOS survives, it's going to have to share the fantasy market pie with other games like KOW, Frostgrave, and the growing number of miniature/boardgame hybrids appearing every day. The same appears to be happening to 40k and the other sci-fi alternatives like X-Wing, Infinity, Gates of Antares, etc.
Mantic's release schedule is too sparse and[b] their models too poor [\b] to pretend that they can possibly compete for the fantasy wargame crown, they're just too small-time.
That may have been true of their initial releases, but their new Abysal range, for example, is IMO every bit as good as most of GW's stuff. The fact that is is *so* much cheaper has to have an impact, too.
Whether AOS survives or not, I think the nonhistorical war gaming scene is changing and nothing GW can do will stop that.
From a Galaxy far, far away...
AoS lizardmen, yeah, that'd be cheaper. The main AoS release, stormcast, and blood blooders? no. All of that was new, so more expensive. Everything there had to be developed from the ground up.
An interesting question to ponder is this: how much money would GW have made in the past six months if they'd simply left Fantasy alone versus introducing Age of Sigmar? Or maybe replaced all those releases with minor updates to Skaven, Beastmen, and Bretonnia (which would be a smaller investment than creating an entirely new Sigmarine army, making scads of Bloodinators, etc.)? My guess is that, if they'd left 8th edition alone, their revenue stream would be noticeably higher than what it is now. At the very least, Skaven, Lizardmen, and Bretonnia army book limited editions would've likely sold out.
Less than they hoped to make, definitely.
Less than they expected to make, possibly. (And since they have not reached 'last few' I'll agree it is probably).
Given their lack of market research it is difficult to see that they would have sales planning forecasts beyond 'We'll make 1,000 because we did before'. (And doubled for the first one to make a splash). Whether they actually expected to sell them is another matter, and may depend on the printing deal.
If I see anyone claiming AoS is a success on any forum, I'll direct them here. So far I have not run into many who would claim anything more than their immediate group are enjoying it.
I've not seen anyone claim AoS is a success. Even on the positive facebook groups most people acknowledge that the majority around them are toxic to the game and that its hard finding opponents and how we need to get a universal battle setup for the people that like it because its like 2-3 people PER REGION.
Everyone talking about AoS success cracks me up. We have no idea what success for AoS is to GW. They may have anticipated not selling as much in the beginning and allow it it to grow over time with new players. It may be an actual long term decision. As I have said people are playing AoS games, tournaments are buying models. Most new AoS players I have met are new fantasy players that have had nothing to do with WHFB. I am among these.
I would also argue that saying AoS has failed because is smaller than WHFB is silly. This means that then KoW, 9th Age and WoK are also all failures of games. The real question you should ask is which made more profit this year AoS of KoW? My bet is AoS since I have never met a single player who owns a KoW model but instead all proxy GW models. Sadly, my opinion and most others I know think KoW models are meh at best. This isn't a good place to be in for a crowded fantasy model market.
I must admit the more you read these forums the more I realize how toxic the WHFB community must have been. No wonder it died off as a game system.
So how do the people in the positive groups come to the conclusion that AoS isn't a success? Is it just ancetotal evidence, cause I thought that that meant nothing? Do they have access to GW's internal documents?
It seems to me that we all have access to the same information and it points to rough times ahead for AoS. Some just have a hard time to accept the logical conclusion since they really want AoS to have a future.
Um, your 1 example does not make the rule.
If you would like to see what AoS has done to communities world-wide, here:
http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?413974-Has-Age-of-Sigmar-helped-or-hurt-the-Warhammer-community-in-your-area
This will provide evidence to back up peoples claims that AoS is not doing well.
Also, yes it would be a failure if it made less than WHFB, otherwise, why replace it? Why replace a game that was making a profit with one that does not/makes less profit?
And comparing a small companies game selling to a large one is a very different kettle of fish. One has (or had) total market dominance, this makes a massive difference in what both companies are expecting from their products.
And thanks for the insults, love you too ;).
I must admit the more you read these forums the more I realize how toxic the WHFB community must have been. No wonder it died off as a game system.Oh man, I rather hope you are trolling. BtW, as a AoS player; when/if it's discontinued, will you shoulder responsibility of the game failing since you and the rest of the playerbase didn't purchase enough to keep it going and scared away new players with your toxicity?
KoW can be a success while bringing in less revenue than GW's fantasy game since Mantic has vastly lower fixed expenses than GW. (Mantic operates no stores, have less staff etc.). 9th edition don't need any revenue at all since it has no expenses. It's all voluntary contributions.
KoW probably has made a bigger profit than AoS actually, since the latter seems to have netted GW a loss, while WHFB did not.
You should try to realize that the world is bigger than you and your immediate surroundings. I have never seen anyone play Infinity. That has no bearing what so ever on how that game fair in sales world wide.
Oh man, I rather hope you are trolling. BtW, as a AoS player; when/if it's discontinued, will you shoulder responsibility of the game failing since you and the rest of the playerbase didn't purchase enough to keep it going and scared away new players with your toxicity?
don't forget that people are buying up mantic, AoW and reaper bones models for 9th age :D the new salamanders coming out in the new year are freaking awesomsauce :-))
Where are these tournaments? Because all the major tournaments want nothing to do with AOS. And what you fail to grasp is that, for every one story like yours, there're ten or more stating the exact opposite, that AOS destroyed the local fantasy gaming community. If you want to use your own personal anecdotal story to support your argument then you have to be willing to consider the dozens if not hundreds of anecdotal stories stating the exact opposite of what you say.
You think that's silly? So you think that GW went to the trouble of making the End Times, blowing up the setting, designing a wholly new army for the setting from scratch, writing game books and novels for it... all so they could make less money than Warhammer Fantasy, and sit on thousands of limited edition books for months on end when previously they could count on seeing those books sell out within days? That'd be like leaving your $90k a year job to go back to college, spending money on all those classes, just to get a $35k a year job which one gets with that degree. That doesn't make a shred of sense.
As for whether AOS is doing better than KOW, if you think that's the measure, well, an argument could be put forward that even KOW is doing better financially than AOS. Kings of War has sold thousands of books, likely 10,000 or more after multiple printings, while GW is apparently throwing several hundred AOS limited edition books into landfills and will likely be doing the same with the other five currently sitting on their website. Meanwhile, the biggest discount I can get off the Kings of War starter set is 25% off, suggesting it's turning a profit, while it isn't at all hard to find the Age of Sigmar starter set at 50% off, to the point where the retailer is losing money on it, or close enough that the vendor is making next to no profit on it. That doesn't look good for Age of Sigmar by comparison. On top of which, major US tournaments have embraced Kings of War, along with all their players, while no major tournament that I'm aware of has embraced Age of Sigmar. Even the ETC, which didn't take up Kings of War, picked up 9th Age instead. All that makes a far more logical argument for Kings of War being a more financially successful game than Age of Sigmar than the half-dozen people you know.
Who knows what the actual hard numbers are in terms of unit sales, but in any event, the measure isn't how well Kings of War, Wrath of Kings, or 9th Age does (it's ridiculous that you're even throwing that in there, as they're not even making any money off it. It's a fan driven initiative, not a for profit business. It's incomprehensible that you're crowing that AOS makes more money than 9th Age). The measure is Warhammer Fantasy, because again, GW did not go through all the trouble of creating Age of Sigmar and spent more money on it only to make less money. That's a completely illogical argument.
I will be picking up firforge models to make a bretonian army for 9th and mantics undead. I Had never purchased another company's products before the drop of AOS. I can't believe it now that I can build 4 different army's for the price of one GW force. I'm even looking into hail Caesar to do a roman themed empire army.
Most new AoS players I have met are new fantasy players that have had nothing to do with WHFB. I am among these.
Really? You said in another thread that you had previously played Fantasy. How strange.
As for whether AOS is doing better than KOW, if you think that's the measure, well, an argument could be put forward that even KOW is doing better financially than AOS. Kings of War has sold thousands of books, likely 10,000 or more after multiple printings, while GW is apparently throwing several hundred AOS limited edition books into landfills and will likely be doing the same with the other five currently sitting on their website. Meanwhile, the biggest discount I can get off the Kings of War starter set is 25% off, suggesting it's turning a profit, while it isn't at all hard to find the Age of Sigmar starter set at 50% off, to the point where the retailer is losing money on it, or close enough that the vendor is making next to no profit on it. That doesn't look good for Age of Sigmar by comparison. And meanwhile, major US tournaments have embraced Kings of War, along with all their players, while no major tournament that I'm aware of has embraced Age of Sigmar. Even the ETC, which didn't take up Kings of War, picked up 9th Age instead. All that makes a far more logical argument for Kings of War being a more financially successful game than Age of Sigmar than the half-dozen people you know.
Yes well over a decade ago for a brief period. It was fun but impossible to find any games. I wouldn't say that makes me a WHFB player.
@buddy bear Google search for AoS tournaments if you want to find some. The Warhammer forum also lists several if you are interested. No way to know which sells more between AoS or KoW. Trying to compare books to limited edition books that we have no of idea sales numbers for either seems pointless.
I should repost that poll, see what results we get now, after another three months of AOS have passed. Those results certainly weren't positive, though. According to that poll, only 11.76% of the respondents reported positive results for AOS. The other 88.24% were negative for AOS, with 76.9% reporting that AOS was detrimental to their gaming scenes to one degree or another, and over 50% reporting that AOS destroyed the Warhammer community scene entirely.
@buddy bear Google search for AoS tournaments if you want to find some. The Warhammer forum also lists several if you are interested.
Orrr... you could simply tell us which tournament you're referring to and where it is.
No way to know which sells more between AoS or KoW. Trying to compare books to limited edition books that we have no of idea sales numbers for either seems pointless.
We do know quite a bit, however.
AOS had 6,000 limited edition books published, total. If they were for Warhammer Fantasy then all 6,000 would have sold out. They haven't. We don't know how many sold, but the first two certainly didn't sell enough to warrant keeping them up on the website, and one imagines that the remaining books are currently occupying a landfill. We have another three books which have been sitting on their website for months and a fourth which just appeared and which, again, hasn't sold out, whereas its Warhammer Fantasy counterparts would've been gone by this point.
Meanwhile, Kings of War had an initial print run of over 7,000 books and they all sold out within a week. They ordered up a second print run and that sold out. They're now on their third print run. So we know for a fact that the Kings of War rulebooks have outsold the Age of Sigmar limited edition books by at least a few thousand copies, and likely more.
I imagine that poll will show exactly what you want it to. Maybe run it/post it somewhere that people are saying that AoS is a success?
Where once they had people to play against now they dont and everyone moved to infinity or kings of war or any other game but aos would mean to the observer the game has failed.
Where everyone on every forum and every group claims similar problems, the conclusion is drawn.
Maybe run it/post it somewhere that people are saying that AoS is a success?
Where is that?
Yup, he said he used to play it about 10 years ago or so and AoS brought him back into the hobby.
Which is why I do not understand why we are repeatedly going through hypothetical points with the most negative assumptions, in order to disprove an argument that virtually nobody is making.
Even for the minimal amount of people who would say AoS is a success, or even 'potentially not a failure', why the need to make such exaggerated arguments?
Im pretty sure I posted this here a day or so ago but in an interview I had with Mantic Ronnie Renton last week he reported KoW 2nd ed outselling the entirety of 1st Ed in 2-3 months. Of course, that's considering the game has significantly developed since first. Mantic has a staff of 20-25 people and enough flexibility to improve. Beyond
that, Mantic has successfully maneuvered Kickstarter in their favor, albeit presenting a head ache for FLGS trying to sell Mantic models to start or grow the community when everyone has their KS stuff and nothing to buy for the time being.
its not my place to judge any of these companies and give their perspective but from Mantic's community engagement, growth of games, and Ronnie's interview last week I'm feeling pretty confident in a growing Mantic scene. Obviously every area a different but I do know, beyond introducing KoW to some curious Swedes here, when I get back to the U.S. In spring I'll for sure have people to play KoW and Dreadball with...and not just at Adepticon;)
Also, in all sincerity I would actually love to know where I can by this AoS stuff at 50% off, either in Sweden or the U.S. I believe you, and this is no scarcasm, so if I can get those deals I wants me some! :)
mightymconeshot
http://m.ebay.com/itm/Warhammer-Age-of-Sigmar-Starter-Box-Set-/301813491631?nav=SEARCH
That is what I found. Which is just under 50%. There was another auction a week or two ago that was about 55 % off with free shipping but it has since ended. When I last looked they still had 10+ copies they were trying to shift.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Warhammer-Fantasy-Age-of-Sigmar-Starter-Set-Factory-Sealed-/301829704108?hash=item464673c9ac:g:PYAAAOSw7FRWbMe 3
Free shipping, so this is pretty close to 50% off when you take into account standard shipping costs. Although I've seen cheaper. Just a couple weeks ago one retailer was selling 20 boxes for $59 and free shipping, which would have resulted in a net loss of about $20 per box, or around $400 lost for that store.
Assuming various elements of that transaction, yes, that retailer ordered too many copies and has now cut their losses by selling at a discount.
Agreed. Even were I still playing AoS there would be no one to play against any where near me. Now, I haven't tried the local GW - it's far away compared to the other stores and only has ONE table to play on - so it's possible there are a few playing there. It was always 90% 40K there though before, so I see no reason that would have changed. In fact, one of the reasons I chose the club I did as my primary place to play was because it had a great fantasy group, both large and active.
Only if the stock hasn't been written off by GW. GW don't want the AoS starters returned, and the rumour I've heard is that they are crediting some LGSs and that is why they can sell them at below wholesale. You could look at it as a gesture of goodwill to prevent stores closing their trade accounts.
Also these are all American stores, not UK ones. AoS appears to be DoA in the states, and KoW has been supplanting it there.
According to their last annual report they invested huge sums in the studio last fiscal year. We know they didn't develop BAC (FW did), so basically AoS is the only product line that saw a steep increase in products being designed. GW is a business, if they spend a huge amount of money into revamping a product line just to see sales collapsing it really os fair to label it as a failure. Sure, they might keep it around for a while, and AoS might still redeem itself. But it's getting increasingly unlikely.
Remember that all GW kits have the majority of their sales in the first couple of months after release. If AoS is a disaster so far it's unlikely to be picking up anytime soon. All available data, and we do have quite a bit of data, points to AoS being a disaster given the investment behind it...
Even with the AOS rules, if GW had released the box set with, instead of Stormcast Eternals, AOSified Reiksguard Knights that were Sigmar's equivalent of the Varanguard, and some seriously pissed off halberdiers and crossbowmen fueled with the hatred of Sigmar and seeking cruel vengeance, I would have purchased three to four boxes at full price.
That would have been awesome, indeed.
Maybe that is where Slanesh went. He/She influences the GW staff to make bad decisions.
Since we're going all anecdotal here I'll add my thoughts to AoS appearing to be DoA in US. :)
from many players all over the country and especially in the MidWest "wargaming paradise" it went something like this:
June-July 4 : rabble rabble! Oh, some nice models though. But is this a supplement or where's the new edition?
wow! Mixedreactions
thats pricey for a starter set but about inline of where it was expected to be. ....what's that? FLGS is giving 20-25% off I'd we preorder? Well, a couple guys local or our community organizers will get a box so we can wait and see how this game plays.
podcasts got a promo copy? (Lol not mine, nor did we expect one;) )
internet rage, physical gamer rage, this is taking too long to type so, for your sakes and typin on iPad is frustrating
+++++REDACTED+++++
it's been a cautious come back for the U.S. It's only been under six months but now things have settle a of more concerning event and tournament comp and there's cautious interest towards the Box game but not diving full into it like before. Using existing models if not playing Sig or Khorne, but following the excellent and informative hobby of event or league organizers, YouTube batreps, podcasts, bring in days for learning AoS.
TD, DR: it's vitals are slowly on the mend, but he needs the machine to keep breathing;)
I dunno, here in my own, rather significant Midwestern area, it seemed to go like this:
Pre-Release: Excitement! Exultation! A build-up to Warhammer's resurgence!
Post-Release: So, hey, I suddenly have a lot of free gaming time. Tell me about this "Infinity" thing.
And once again, where is this place?
Everyone I know from pretty much all over the US tells a far different story. Closer to
Me - hey guys I heard these rumors of what's going to happen with fantasy.
Everyone else - man you're crazy. GW would never destroy WFB. No way they'll essentially invalidate our collections for play. No way it will be skirmish based. Shut up trying to panic people.
Months later
Me - hey sorry guys about being right. Wish I wasn't.
70% of the folks - I hate GW. This game is garbage. How dare they spit in our face with these crap rules for playing our existing armies. I'm selling all my stuff. I'm gonna stop buying 40K if this is a possibility. I'm gonna play something else with my models.
30% of the folks - wanna at least try the game, it'll get better I'm sure. This is just an intro version of the rules, this isn't the complete rules, wait till the book gets released there will be rules for rank and file. This is a sub game 9th is still on its way. I heard from a friend of a friend that official GW rules with points and fully developed rules are on their way outsourced to possibly FFG. I heard from the GW rep there's more to come. It's super secret what they have planned but it'll improve the game to something you'll really like. Just get in now before its all gone.
98% - we have completely moved on. Playing KoW or 9th Age. Sour on GW altogether. Slowing all buying on GW products. Lost interest in 40K if AoS is a possibility down the road.
2% - it's only a few books in and there's more to come. This can't possibly be it and GW always delivers. I put my faith in GW and will play whatever they put out. I can't wait for the full game to be released.
Yeah, I'll echo those two- in meat space everyone locally just walked away. Very little rage, a lot of derisive laughter and abandonment, with stores following suit.
Certainly nothing like a 'comeback,' which wouldn't be possible as it had few fans to begin with, so no one to come back.
Heck, even here we see people finally admitting that when they claimed it was popular in their local scene, they didn't actually mean people were playing it.
yeah, Infinity seems to be taking off. Does your group connect with the WI or IL gamers at all?
YouTube batreps.
Which youtube Batreps?
Last one was posted nearly 2 weeks ago thats how dead AOS is on there.
I think the same reason there are no bat reps coming out for AoS is the same reason there are no tactics for it really and why that area is so barren. It isn't really a game and more a modeling practice with just some soft rules to use your models should you be able to find like minded people to hash out what the game should be.
From what I've seen, it doesn't make for an interesting viewing experience, either. Sort of like baseball, except baseball is fun when you play it. One I saw had 100 wounds of Empire versus 100 wounds of Lizardmen, and demonstrated pretty well why using wounds isn't a good enough balancing mechanism. The Lizardmen got a turn, followed by the Empire getting two turns back-to-back and nearly tabling the Lizardmen, at which point the Lizardmen player conceded before he even had a second turn. Despite using wounds as a balancing mechanism, the two armies clearly weren't balanced, with the Empire army clearly superior. And the balance disparity was compounded by the Empire being able to get two turns in a row and just mashing the Lizardmen without the Lizardmen being able to offer any answer in return. I have to say, if I were playing that game I would've been beyond angry. You go through the trouble of collecting an army, painting it, assembling it, learning the rules, getting a game together, putting together a list, deploying on the table, only to get a single turn in before having to throw in the towel? For that you may as well stay at home and watch Netflix.
You're just not forging the narrative hard enough.
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
You're kidding right? There are a bunch of YouTube channels that are producing video batreps for AoS, some of them even post links on Warseer. Tabletopminis.com is one of the better ones, you should check them out.
What site was it BB?
Tabletopminis.com is one of the better ones, you should check them out.
These will be the ones that were used as examples of "watching paint dry" in an earlier thread?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLVYCMqmeLRl8VmF7sQju6MjmCXjEfHDlg&v=DTi6K54MI1k
I have watched 2 of their Battle reports in neither of which i thought the battle was particularly interesting (high elves vs skaven and order vs Chaos). Both were very lobsoded and a bit meh imo. That said if one was to look for an AOS report i would still recommend them as i think they are professionally shot and i love the Chaos Dreadhold which they use.
I am sure they have done better/closer reports than the 2 i watched. Which in your opinion Spiney is the best of their reports to watch which best sells the AOS experience?
I hope they continue to do AOS reports and showcase their fantastic table, scenery and minis.
It's not important but just in case I missed something here. GW = FW = BL so the finances would be in one grouping, wouldn't they? I didn't see a breakdown for BL or FW but I might have missed something. Not arguing, just curious:)
And I absolutely agree with the notion of most sales within the release date unless they are staples, like Rhino, drop pod, etc.
Exactly, it's a big country with lots of gaming groups all over the place. And further within are players of all ages and game preference and different play frequency. Like everything else here we share our own experience which doesn't necessarily mean it will align with anyone else's:) But I will admit I can see how the above could be unclear as I was literally fighting the iPad where the text box wants to slow, skip around or give me the finger (I see you, Jobs!). But I fully expect differences in any one posting their observations. When pumping this out yesterday I had in mind WI, IL, OH, IN(kinda), MD, MN (most guys I know there are reluctantly still trying it out, they are from the WFB event/tournament scene, some are on podcasts), CA, I think some in TX...
So sum up: It looks like we actually agree (except for percentages, lol) and for WI, IL, IN have tournaments coming up besides just Adepticon so are still (bless their hearts) working on comp packs to try and make AoS work for events. Perhaps they will, perhaps after the first run of events they may collectively say, "Screw this!" and figure out something else. With the US Masters moving to KoW that's a significant move IMO of leaving 8th ed, and GW fantasy lines) behind. Many (but like everyone else, only select that word based on my experience) gamers all over the globe I believe play more than one game, even collecting. Additionally, I didn't experience the level of hate toward GW specifically except on forums and comments sections. But I absolutely believe it's out there and the overwhelming negativity of some forums turned me off of those sites. Now, I'm giving the forum community thing another go:)
I liked how you broke down the classes. I was part of the "wait, there's no way they would..." which was weird for me because for the first time ever from Jan 2015 I held on purchases from FLGS Fantasy because that doubt had taken root. I just supported them with other games instead. Again, my take on AoS on a larger scale is that hopefully the podcasts cropping up and more tournaments willing to give it a go, that it NEEDS all the help it can to make it appealing. I can only read my own mind so I'll use myself as an example. I'm a miniwargaming fanboy. To NOT buy into a game is unusual if I like the models and have local or regular opponents, but AoS, not playing it while abroad really, just isn't grabbing me. It felt so unnatural to not be playing the new GW fantasy game. The shows like Mortal Realms, Hellanhammer, Garaghammer, the Black Sun returning, Facehammer, are good for me so I can get more informed of the game world then approach playing from that new perspective. Also it was nice at least when the July release came nobody had been playing longer so everyone was starting on the same level at that time. I wish it wasn't true and the complete removal of 8th was a jaw-dropper for me. Boy was I wrong about 8th-9th edition. I'm miffed 8th ed is no longer supported and can see why so many are upset to varying degrees.
We all have different experiences/observations first- or second-hand so that's as far as any of us can go really, unless the powers that be inside GW can influence or support the claims this community comes to. Yet, 750 posts into this thread is a bit jumbled for me so I'm not interested in arguing my own or other's observations. :) There's a lot of intriguing conversation here and I'm enjoying seeing other points of view, just not telling anyone what they did or didn't see.
They do have more battlereports if you go through their homepage or their channel.
The numbers of views is quite interesting.
Their first AoS battlereport on releaseday; 4th of July is up over 50k views so far and the second has gathered almost 12k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zr-M11E8Cg 4 juli 2015 - 56k Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6pCmPgwUOQ 9 juli 2015 - 12k Views
Episode 3 is down to 4,5k views and the more recent episodes seems to stabilized it's numbers of views around around 4-6k; with the later ones currently having 3000 views or less and a report in August for example (three way aelf/duardin/skaven) having almost 8k views .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crMibIvMG0g 14 july 2015 - 4,5k Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5w6aoxWC1M 20 aug 2015 - 7,7k Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqQrXJkAW6k 1 okt. 2015 - 5,5k Views
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfuxAV1Yatw 5 dec 2015 - 3k Views