So how does this work? I can just field whatever?Do I need

>>43453621

Field whatever your opponent will agree to play against.

Yeah you need round bases now.

Enjoy your shit.

>>43453621
You don't need round bases. In fact, the bases don't even matter at all as it's model to model contact, so you're encouraged to make your own if you want.

Yes you can field whatever, be weary of the "Sudden Death" rule however, as it will punish you for bringing unreasonable numbers.

>>43453621
>So how does this work?
Get some minis, get a total bro to play with, and have fun.
I can just field whatever?
Yes.
Do I need round bases now?
No.

>>43453645
>leshitposterface!

>>43453621
I know this is a shitpost stealth thread, but.

1. Field what you want. Most people go by Wound Totals (So a 10 Wound Monster vs 10 1 Wound Guys) or by Unit Type (So, 20 Basic Troops, 2 Monsters per force). Everything is viable now, there are no terrible 0/10 do not use models. Troglodon, for example, is usable now, where before it was a glorified (and expensive) Conduit for a Slann for Hero sniping at best.

Round bases are not needed no. GW has specifically said you no not need to rebase models. It's base-to-base contact for melee (though SOME models have 2" max range melee weapons, such as Halberds and Spears, so there is an actual advantage for having them now in 'reality').

It's for fun and for smaller games. So you don't need 60 Clan Rats in Hordes to be able to win as Skaven. Or have hordes of Goblins to do any damage. You CAN take hordes and you get bonuses for taking them in AoS, but they are no longer "you have to do this or you'll lose". The only problem is that every unit has unique skills and you need to remember them. Shields do different things for different races. Example, Saurus/Skink shields are made from Stardrake Scales, they ignore -1 Rend from weapons (so they don't lose an armour value), however, Grail Knights have a shield which adds 1 to their armour save (which is miles better than the Saurus ones, so Lizardmen got really screwed over). So on, so forth. Armies are more 'unique' now in this regard.

If you want to do WHFB style battles, simply download WHFB 1st-8th and go for it.

>>43453669
I know it's been said to death already, but...
>10 goblins vs one monster
>Monster gains bonuses to help it win, despite 10 goblins being shit compared to it

This is not ok.

>>43453909
I think you meant to reply to me. It isn't perfect, but it'll do.

I wouldn't be surprised if GW release a version of the game with points or a way to organise fair games which is optional.

WHFB was expensive to get into and difficult for new players to learn. AoS has fixed that. But, the old guard hate it, that's why they're the old guard. I personally don't mind as I don't really play thegame and I'm interested in the fluff... but 1st and 2nd edition were similar to AoS remember... So I wouldn't be surprised if 2nd edition AoS had a form of points system or "organising system".

Or you could just email GW and ask.

I've been out of gaming for awhile and got back in with 40k recently. I want hordes of skeletons and a sweet lich/vamp/skele-wizard. Is this doable?

>>43454218
Anything is "doable" in aos

Prepare to have ogres always get sudden death on you then remove 30+ skeletons a turn with The Maw and completely wreck the fuck out of you because one ogre is as good as 10 skeletons

>>43454218
Yes. There is no limit. It's "do what you want". There are scenarios and stuff designed to make interesting games if you want to do that, but otherwise you can do what you want.

>>43454393
One Ogre is good as 10 skellys isn't unrealistic. In WHFB the same would usually happen. WS2 isn't great. Grave Guard and Tomb Guard would #rekt you thou.

Obviously 1v10 would rarely happen....

Is there any AoS sales records?

>>43455937
There would have to be sales first.

>>43455950
Well yes, but still we knew that Hobbit sales was pretty shitty, any info about AoS?

>>43455950
>>43455973

Oh. Random MBA here (not kidding). There won't be sales records publicly released for AoS; 4 times a year, a public company will release an earnings report which will outline their sales, expenses, profits and losses.

AoS takes the idea of a points system and says, screw that, just go and have fun. GW invented insane and stupid rules because it is supposed to be a beer and pretzels game, not a serious game (tourneyfags can go fuck themselves).
Unfortunately, it makes power gaming infinitely worse if you go by just straight rules. The only balancing is by # of models and not quality, which other anons have mentioned needs to be balanced better.
For example, your 20 elven bowmen vs my 20 greater demons, man of which can summon any other troops is NOT fair.
Also, beware of doing "nice basing" because bases are NOT supposed to do anything except hold the model upright. If you have detailed basing on a big model, it's allowed for them to move their 20 elven bowmen into close combat and have them on top of your base.
Also, movement gets reeeeally weird when you cannot pivot but can charge and shoot behind and to the sides. No more front and back, just 360 degrees of everything (so you end up moving guys diagnoally to get the largest reach out of them).

>>43455937
They don't do specific numbers. At best you'll get info on April 2016.

>>43455950
Fuck off, Jesus Christ.

>>43455973
See above.

>>43457818
But Greater Daemons have like 15 wounds. So that's 300 wounds vs 20 wounds. That wouldn't be fair. If it was 15 Elven Bowmen vs 1 Greater Daemon. Then that would be more balanced.

>>43457767
April 2016 will be the yearly finance report which will be given to investors (April obviously being start of new financial year) and any information bout AoS will be there.

>>43458491
And seeing their previous financial reports, what we will most likely not see are specific numbers for each game range, only the numbers that show overall of the company as a whole. They will, however, mention games specifically how they are doing. It is very likely we will see them praise AoS as being a reason for the financial 'success' they had since last report.

>>43458827
Correct. I'm just sick of the anecdotal evidence being spread that it isn't selling. The shitposting. Everything. It fucks up this board even more.

Investors have already said GW are committed to AoS and it's going to be a "Long game" product. People would lose their fucking minds if 1st and 2nd edition were released today. They had no fluff and crap rules. People think 34 years of fluff just appeared. What is 100% fact is: WHFB wasn't selling well enough.

Didn't the Chapter House legal case have a run down on %'s and stuff?

>>43453621
It's basically a shitty warmahordes

>>43458856
>vestors have already said GW are committed to AoS and it's going to be a "Long game" product.
Pretty strange, according to AoS release, but may be GW didn't have a lot of hope about large success of AoS.

>>43459012
Not really. GW just basically said "AoS is going to be supported for awhile". The only thing mentioned was that "sales were up", but it didn't specify AoS in that.

Kirby really fucked this company over desu.

>>43459083
I mean, it's pretty hard to belive that GW really have a long plans about AoS, they released non-starter faction only after few months, and now remember how fast they updated almost all codexes in 6th edition.
Any insiders info?

Freeform Tabletop Wargaming... So it's historical now.

>>43453621
Badly

Everything takes ages to do. It's long and uneventful.