They did WHAT to Warhammer Fantasy? Jesus Christ. Did was there

Yeah 90% of GW's customer base hated this and it backfired on them horrifically.

The Sigmar Defence Force will be here momentarily to claim they're correcting me.

>>48973369
>was there even a wake? A viking funeral?
Couple armies got burned, yes.
Kirby's mad rule set in motion things that couldn't be stopped. Roundtree does his best to save the sinking boat, but it's a herculean task.

>>48973369
There was massive amounts of anger and hatred towards it. No points, stupid rules and broken mechanics (e.g. Summoning) only added more fuel to the fire.

But with all that, im fucking amazed that over time GW managed to pull it round from widley hated to divisive.

>>48973369
Everyone was just stunned by the special rules they included. And then, after a moment of stunned silence, the impotent nerdrage began.

File: 1471519712414.png (165KB, 705x847px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 705x847px

>>48973369
> Did was there even?

I know it made me half retarded thinking about it as well.

Game needed a shake up, maybe have an option for skirmish...

Instead the proverbial griffon is jumped and we get a steaming pile of shit that most people hated.

Games Workshop is now starting to clean their act up and listening to the fans, WHFB 9th edition could have been so fucking glories if it could have only held out.

>>48975194

>WHFB 9th edition could have been so fucking glories if it could have only held out.

It's funny seeing shit like this because you KNEW they did not play WHFB at all.

WHFB was a dead setting where nothing moved for fear of ruining another races story and the game itself was full of WAAC faggotry and the Ironic ideas like "Why don't they make Araby or Cathay an army" when the Empire made a pittance.

Let me put this into perspective. Dice sales accounted for more than Bretonnian sales.

It simply was not salvageable from a wargaming perspective.

Something that's always confused me about the situation, Nobody played fantasy anywhere near my area, the two game shops I went to had zero regular players, It's my understanding that this was similar everywhere, so how was there such a shit storm. Cuz the AoS hate was/is absolutely everywhere. Was the player base not as small as people where saying or is this just one of those things the community gets into as a whole?

>>48975387
>WHFB was a dead setting where nothing moved for fear of ruining another races story

>Hey guys! We can't progress the story without ruining some factions!
>So lets ruin the game, ruin all the factions and start a new story entirely!

Warhammer definitely needed a shakeup and could have been improved if they put a little of the fearlessness they approached AoS with into their approach of 9th Ed.

But we'll never know what GW would have done with it.

>>48976664
It's a clique thing.

Warhammer has been around for around 30 years - shit, parents have passed on their armies to their kids for fucks sake.

Gaming groups developed in that time, people get their own tables and terrain. I've been playing Warhammer for my entire adult life and I've only gone into a GW for gear twice, and I only go to my FLGS for board games.

>>48973369
>They did WHAT to Warhammer Fantasy?
Check out the 9th age. It's basically what I'm doing.

>>48976664
The people I knew who had warhammer fantasy armies never went to game shops to play.
They played at home.

>>48973369

Everyone i know ignores it, there is a small amount of people who plays it on the local club but everyone else still sticks to regular fantasy.

Reminder that 9th age is badly written fan fiction.

>>48977029
Reminder you couldn't do any better

>>48977333
That's why you don't write any. Nice trips.

>>48977369
>That's why *I* don't write any
Fify ;•}

They decided that marketing towards children is better than pleasing their existing fan base. Maybe they will or are making a good profit off of it, but that doesn't change the fact that the game is bad. I don't think that anything will really get fixed.

If you actually play WHFB with buddies and want to move to something actively supported, try a clone like 9th Age or Kings of War. If you are looking into the game from a newbies perspective, don't. It has no future.

>>48977029
It's still better than AoS

>>48977480
>no future
Constant releases and updates
>9th age
Played by nobody outside scattered groups of neckbeards that last purchased a miniature when GW releases their first plastic kit.

>>48973369
age of sigmar is more fun than whfb imo

whfb was dying, this was a merciful death

>>48977583
Even if the game gets new content, that doesn't mean that all of that content isn't utter shit, specifically in the case of Age of Sigmar.

>>48977681
9th age is just a "fixed" version of 8th. Polishing a turd.

File: Harry the Hammer.png (3MB, 1043x1432px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1043x1432px

>>48975387
I love seeing funny shit like this because we had ZERO sales number for WHFB. Yes, it did not sell well, I did say though that it needed a shake up. The End Times could have provided that but instead of moving the story forward and maybe trampling on a few toes they just decided to cut everybody's toes off and crash the setting.

>>48978214
With no survivors

File: Imperial_Guard_Bane.jpg (129KB, 620x756px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 620x756px

>>48979390
Thank you.

>>48976734

And you'd still have a shitstorm if they shook things up.

Knocking army sizes back to when they were smaller or making them even smaller than that alone would have frustrated all the people who stuck around and spent both the time and money to paint ookabooka number of Spearmen or Skeleton Warriors because the rules demanded that in the average 2500-3000 point games you spend at least 25% of those points on the aforementioned.

What I think is kind of funny is that for everyone heaping praises on 8th Edition, it supposedly caused a lot of people to leave meaning that all that remained where the diehards.

>>48977480

Just curious, what exactly is bad about it?

I've seen some people bring up legitimate points that I can agree with, but then also see or have the feeling people are saying bad when they really mean that they don't like that the game is no longer rank and file.

>>48977725
How do you fix 8th then?

>>48979831

Honestly sometimes you can't fix things and should just just start over from scratch.

Even 40k is supposedly starting to lose players and I think that may be because the game aspect of it is no longer satisfying compared to the competition available. To my knowledge both 40k and Fantasy basically just built on the same existing structures they've had since the beginning, just removing or adding things.

>>48980003
Why do people still cling to a broken system? How did it get supporters in the first place if it was a broken system?

>>48980094

Lore and models have done a lot to prop up the ailing rules and the competition may fail in one or both of those areas.

As for how 40k and Fantasy even got attention in the first place, besides what I said above there may not really have been any competition, in fantasy and space fantasy/science fiction at least.

>>48978214
Fait say they have sources that says that Fantasy solid less than paint.

>>48980172
And there is also public sources that WHFB were 30% of GW revenue before ET.

>>48973418
>Roundtree does his best
He is the same kind of people as Kirby.

Reminder that with the ghb it's actually a good game.

File: Ork Shooting.jpg (43KB, 620x496px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 620x496px

>>48973369
Does slamming the moon into the planet count as a wake?
Part of the issue is that Games Workshop killed the old setting how THEY wanted to.
Chaos won, damn the results.

>>48981650
Nope it's still bad skirmish.

>>48973403
>The Sigmar Defence Force will be here momentarily to claim they're correcting me.

Well, if it 'backfired on them horrifically', why does the playerbase seem to be growing rather than shrinking?

>>48983422
because it's not growing as fast as it could have.

GW is staying afloat only thanks to videogame licenses if you didn't notice.

>>48980172
>a notorious clickbait is saying someone close to someone else has assumed a certain set of percentages came from inside GW, despite not being actually told so and the percentages lacking context.

>>48983475
>GW is staying afloat only thanks to videogame licenses if you didn't notice.

Proof?

>>48981545
No, there wasn't.

File: 1423353097249.jpg (133KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1024x768px

>>48983561
>My frustration starts with page 1, which summarises Games Workshop's performance in the year to April 2016. The table reveals that revenue has fallen marginally. Profit derived from that revenue has fallen 27%. Games Workshop sells fantasy miniatures, collectibles and models for its Warhammer universes, which people assemble, paint, collect, and use to play wargames.

>The overall result is no disaster, though. A dramatic surge from an additional source of income, royalty payments, came to Games Workshop's rescue. Computer game designers license the Warhammer characters and mythology to use in games they design and market.

http://www.iii.co.uk/articles/344389/can-we-trust-board-healthy-games-workshop

>>48983568
Denial

>>48983822
Then provide proof.

>>48983851
Google Chapter House materials.

>>48983860
Already did months back. Can't find the 30% figure.

>>48980151
>>48980003

But one of the best features of warhammer is the stat-line, throwing that away was a mistake..

>>48983475
Bearing in mind, you need to remember to include the money GW spent creating and marketing the new game. AoS made more than Fantasy did the year prior (granted, that wasn't that hard, and things like panic buying, people getting last prints etc would have contributed to that)

>>48983901
>AoS made more than Fantasy did the year prior
Proofs?

>>48973369
>> tfw just found out about this

not you fucking didnt
you've been peddling this shit every day, 'pisskicker'

>>48983915
The same report that said >>48983475
The percentage of profit from AoS was about the same as Fantasy, but AoS had more money spent on it, since it was it's opening year.

The latest report said it accounts for 35% of their earnings this year apparently

>>48973403
>Yeah 90% of GW's customer base hated this
Of the small subset that gave a shit about WHFB.

Also do you count as a customer if you bought all of your minis a decade ago and refuse to buy any more?

>>48983945
>The same report that said >>48983475 #
Link please. Because if we are talking about summer report there is no real numbers of AoS sales.

>>48983987
>Of the small subset that gave a shit about WHFB
Yeah that's why 40k general was so glad about ET-perspective.

>>48973369
>Protested? Appealed? Wished to complain in the Strongest Possible terms?

Kinda?

Everyone just left GW. Only a tiny fraction of WHFB's players remained to play AoS and the game isn't growing in terms of player base.

File: gaha.jpg (134KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 413x395px

>>48983595
>The table reveals that revenue has fallen marginally. Profit derived from that revenue has fallen 27%.

>Revenue, on the other hand, is dependent on Games Workshop, and it fell in the previous two financial years as well.

>Page 10 contains a little more detail. Games Workshop opened 48 new stores and closed 13, lifting the total number by 10%, yet retail sales fell 1.3%. Excluding sales from the new stores, retail sales fell 4.4%. Trade sales to independent hobby stores increased 0.1% and mail order sales fell 1.8%. A note on page 42 shows that retail sales are most significant, closely followed by trade sales, with mail order contributing just over 20%.

AoS is totes doing fine guys.

>>48983945
What the report says is 'we finished the year with sales of Warhammer: Age of Sigmar at a higher rate than Warhammer has enjoyed for several years'.

This is massively ambiguous financial speak though. They do not specifically state whether they are referring to revenue, profit, number of boxes sold, and exactly which time periods they are comparing. It certainly suggests that things may be looking up for AoS, but we can't judge much from that statement.

Overall GW have suffered a serious decline in profit from actual model sales, but have been propped up by licensing (Warhammer Total War likely being a big part of that). I don't believe they have any debts, and they're still making profit, so they're hardly circling the drain. What they describe as their core business continues the decline seen over many years however.

>>48984264
>and they're still making profit,
They still didn't recovered from 30% drop in 2013

>>48984198
>Excluding sales from the new stores, retail sales fell 4.4%.

Wait, so they ignore the 48 new stores, so they are looking at a loss of 13 stores less revenue. If 48 new stores- 13 less stores, so adding 35 stores, is an increase of 10% then the 4.4% fall in retail sales is pretty much explained away by the 13 less stores.

Its not supporting or conflicting anything else, I just thought that that was a dumb statement as only taking account of the sales with LESS stores will of course yield a negative number.


Besides, the argument that GW's decline is ONLY on the shoulders of AoS is stupid, Warhammer 40k has been doing worse as well ever since they gave up tournaments and game balance entirely.

I would say that the first year of AoS was a complete failure, but with the General's Handbook, points and GW's new commitment to community interaction we really need to see their numbers a year or two after this summer for the most part.

Its anecdotal, but there was no scene for that game before the Handbook, now most of my hobby stores have game groups easily as large as their warmachine and infinity crowds. The Handbook seems to have mattered to players, whether they are new players who actually BUY the new stuff or are merely just old Warhammerfags brought back to play their models I don't fully know.

>>48984745

>Besides, the argument that GW's decline is ONLY on the shoulders of AoS is stupid, Warhammer 40k has been doing worse as well ever since they gave up tournaments and game balance entirely.

It´s possible but as GW never releases their actual sales data we can only speculate how AOS is doing compared to 40K. But historically 40K has done better then fantasy according to rumors and I doubt that has changed in any dramatic way.

File: breto.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>48983595
>tfw mike simpson, lusty jack and the old TWCenter guard are keeping warhammer fantasy alive.
>tfw one of their community guys said during a stream that bretonnia would live forever.

>>48984745
>and GW's new commitment to community interaction
The moment AoS has become stable it will be dropped like a hot potato.

>>48984794
Either AoS has been a massive flop so far, 40K has been doing considerably worse, or a combination of the two.

Even if AoS has been doing ok, and 40K poorly, this may be due in part to AoS however.

AoS may cannabilise 40k sales if 40k gamers move to AoS.

GW have focused heavily on AoS releases, and as most sales are made close to the release of a box, producing AoS releases at the expense of 40k may have lowered profits from 40k.

As ever, we have so little data and can't tell much from the report except that GW are still profitable, but that profits are flat or in decline, and supported increasingly by licensing rather than their core business of selling models.

>Everyone saying AoS is a flop that sucks balls and is going to kill GW
>Meanwhile at the GW near me and every other LGS around they can't keep the models on the shelves and more people play it than 40k now.
Where the fuck are you people getting your information from?

>>48984854
>AoS may cannibalize 40k sales if 40k gamers move to AoS.
As long as players are purchasing the relative same amount of product that shouldn't effect overall revenue.

>GW have focused heavily on AoS releases, and as most sales are made close to the release of a box, producing AoS releases at the expense of 40k may have lowered profits from 40k.

I would argue that both systems have been receiving the same amount of support. Both 40k and AoS have moved to a new system of releasing faction based forces with smaller model sets and single rulebooks for them.

AoS has had:
Sylvanneth
IronJaws
Flesheaters
Stormcast Extremis

40K has had:
Harlequins
Mechanicum
Deamonkin
Imperial Knights
Deathwatch

These are a new business strategy. Instead of just releasing a new Codex Space Marines with Deathwatch rules they flat out add the entire army into the game, same with Harlequins and Deamonkin. To buyers these are smaller army ranges for purchase and thus seems designed to encourage buyers to get the models, then, as there is no more to buy, look to other releases and ranges for their purchases.

Whether is works or not remains to be seen. We already can assume the Supplement system didn't generate much in terms of sales as they are for the most part gone, so this is the new tactic.

>>48984933
No where but a financial report. Anything you say will be called anecdotal, anything they retort back will also be. Its all irrelevant because no one really has the facts except GW, and they are not sharing.

In my area its doing perfectly fine, but to people that disagree they will simply call it an exception to the norm, which they hold is that the game is a complete failure.

Granted I've never played old WHF or AoS so maybe I'm just less bias to one way or the other.

>>48985151
What are IronJews and what is their burning temp ?

>>48981613
Roundtree is accountant. Sure, he has zero attachment to the product / lore / history. He might as well be running shoe company and it would make no difference to him. But he knows basic principles of running business.
Kirby was delusional egomaniac. He might have had attachment to the product, but zero connection with reality.

>>48985592
>Kirby was delusional egomaniac. He might have had attachment to the product, but zero connection with reality.

Kirby´s only attachment was to his already fat wallet.

>>48983422
because their all new players
most of the old players left and/or just play 7th ed.

>>48984198
RAISE THE PRICES

>>48977663
>>48977663
>oh boy another mediocre skirmish game

You are entitled to your opinion but nobody other than GW stockholders asked for this or wanted another skirmish game with bad rules in a bad setting with even less stakes and life than warhammer or 40k universes.

At least whfb had a niche as the king of rank and file fantasy. AoS is generic aside from how many people is losses off.

The best thing about AoS was it caused a lot of people who don't even play the game to jump ship to x-wing/warmachine/infinity at my LCS. It was so offensive and bad it turned people off of GW in general. That is fucking impressive

>>48985881
While I question how true this claim is, even if it is this is not necessarily a bad thing in the long run is it? New players mean a healthier GW community, since no new blood means an inevitable player decline as the old guard slowly moves away from the game.

>>48986034
>At least whfb had a niche as the king of rank and file fantasy. AoS is generic aside from how many people is losses off.

Here is the core thing that limits AoS' reach: if I am going to do battle with fantasy armies, I want it to be more or less standard fantasy armies. There is a point where it is too removed from Tolkien for me to care about. AoS has crossed that line. WFB has managed to stay inside.

>>48986034
>bad rules
Amusingly, while this is constantly parroted, AoS as it is now is more balanced that where Fantasy left of. Certainly far more balanced than 40K right now, which is why a lot of my local tournament communities are jumping from 40K to AoS.

>>48986195
Not a grand feat, seeing that Fantasy was a victim of over a decade of mismanagement in rules department. 40k has been on the same road pretty much as long.

>>48986195
>the rules are good because they're better than any other gw rules!

Play some stuff outside of the GW bubble. The best smelling turd is still a turd.

I don't even mean that as a snide thing. Really, go get a demo of anything else on the market right now. Warmahordes is super fair, Malifaux has a cool card system, x-wing is fast and tactical, it's kind of almost your turn in Infinity, Frostgrave is like a balanced version of mordheim. Shit, give Mordheim a go. It's rules aren't balanced but it's fun as fuck. Try gorkamorka and necromunda too. Try anything other than the current GW staple. I know it's a matter of taste but I almost guarantee you that you'll find the AoS has nothing of value in its rules.

>>48986478
>Warmahordes is super fair
kekMemeAtBest

The rest is spot on

>>48986174
>New players mean a healthier GW community
Nope. Look at 40k community.

>>48985592
>But he knows basic principles of running business.
Nope, he still don't realise that wargames are niche industry and he really afraid video games.

>>48986478
Like what - what should i play - name 3 good games

File: 15.png (628KB, 1055x808px) Image search: [Google]

628KB, 1055x808px

>>48980172
> Fait

>>48987146
I just named like 8 but okay. What do you want out of a game? Cause they can all give you the basics dice rolling and modeling.

>>48977333

Our group is very happy using Kings of War.

>>48983869

AoS has shown that you can throw away and do fine.

The only good thing the stat line does is stroke simulation a little bit, but being limited to the numbers 1-10 means there is little that can really be done and every starts feeling the same. The charts for rolling to hit and rolling to wound are so limited that you're better off just giving a unit concrete numbers and having modifiers.

The stat system in game like Warmachine, Hordes, and Infinity is better because those games go up to number 20 and above, meaning that the stats actually play something of a role. They don't rely on charts either. Warmachine and Hordes is rolling equal to or above a certain number and in Infinity you're trying to roll under a number, if I recall correctly.

>>48984161

Because they are chicken littles who think GW is seriously going to radically change their best selling IP's lore when it's still doing relatively well.

Fantasy would have stuck around if hadn't been doing piss poorly and possibly wasn't as obviously derivative as it was.

>>48985817

False, by various accounts he was actually a gamer.

This possibly lends credence to the idea that gamers can make terrible business people because they're set on doing things in a certain way.

>>48986034

Given the fact that smaller sized games are seemingly everything that is out there nowadays, I'd call that a demand.

The problem with catering to a niche is that you actually have to make a return to warrant your investment. There is no point in investing a lot of time and money into something that doesn't even break even for you. I'm guessing that is what happened with Fantasy and possibly why in the years leading up to the end the releases for it were sporadic while 40k got the most attention as the golden goose.

>>48980172
>Faeit

Remember the Nigmos, brotha?

>>48975387
And...isn't it a good thing when a setting isn't moving? It's good to have stories within the setting, the hinting of more, but it's supposed to be a place for your story to take place in.

Imagine if another game had a setting that people liked as it was, but then they suddenly destroyed it in a relatively short time and replaced it with something that felt vague and unsubstantial with little tie to your old setting that you liked, beyond carrying over a lot of the same units.

>>48990431

No, it's not always good when a setting remains stagnant because it has an arbitrary stopping point because that means nothing of any real merit can occur. Thus if you're trying to remain in the present you have to hope that what you're currently writing is enjoyable and not just passable. So far this has seemingly been the case with GW's campaigns where the writing isn't anything outstanding and people are only looking for little snippets or major changes.

The only people who like settings remaining stagnant are those fear that any change will be for the worse and those who have fun writing their own little stories. Both fail to realize that the setting officially advancing doesn't stop them from fucking off and doing their own thing.

I think the latter also don't realize that there are a lot of people who don't give a damn about original and creating their own stuff. They take an interest in certain characters or even stuff like a SM Chapter or Craftworld and are perfectly fine devouring anything new written about them, only pitching a fit when they feel like the new material isn't as good as the old or completely retcons it. See people getting mad when the Clan Raukaan supplement seemingly changed the Chapter structure of the Iron Hands from what it apparently was as laid out in the Index Astartes article about them.

>>48992246
But I like having a lot of room for original things. It's half of the appeal of both 40k and WFB, since so much is left not fleshed out.

Might not be the appropriate thread to ask, so redirect me if I'm wrong. But as a new player is it frowned upon to go to an lgs and ask to watch or run through a practice game with someone army? So I can get a game or two under my belt before I decide if I like the game under my belt, watching videos is interesting enough but I'd like to be sure before I spend cash. I'm no stranger to collectibles and I know better than to manhandle people's stuff obviously .

>>48983901

>granted, that wasn't that hard, and things like panic buying, people getting last prints etc would have contributed to that)

Not really

Atia, who is pretty much the best current rumor source for GW as a whole, has said that the so called panic buying didn't really amount to much because there wasn't much product in the first place.

There were plastic kits among the Fantasy stuff that was discontinued, but quite a bit of it was also clampacks.

>>48992881

Advancing a setting does not mean every nook and cranny getting filled in. A stagnant setting is actually more of a threat to that since eventually you're going to run out of the present time to do things in and thus possibly have to look to the past.

GW has already begun doing this with the Horus Heresy and The Beast Arises. Once the Horus Heresy is finished they will probably move on to the Scouring which followed.

>>48994563
The Scouring came after the Heresy, but I get your point. Though I imagine GW would move on to the Age of Apostasy instead.

>>48994825

I meant to say that the Scouring followed the Heresy, which is why they'd wait for the aforementioned to finish.

I don't recall GW proper saying anything about it, but I recall it being said that FW stated they were going to do the Scouring. Really no reason for them not to considering it's sort of just a continuation of Space Marines versus Space Marines present in the Heresy. Big difference being that the Loyalists now have the upper hand while the Traitors are on the back foot, warped by Chaos, and possibly fighting each just as much as they do the Imperium.

>>48994922
There's also the fact that you can more legitimately fluff out Imperials vs Imperials - zealous Frateris Templars versus rebellious regiments of Imperial Guard, the Sisters of Battle taking the fight to Space Marines with Vandire himself watching the proceeding battle, the armies of Forge Worlds being cowed into submission by Stormtrooper raids and Knight Houses more loyal to the Ecclisearchy than the Mechancius.

>>48984832
It became stable a year ago.

File: oh-wait-youre-serious-let-me-laugh-even-harder.jpg (40KB, 479x356px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 479x356px

>>48995214

>>48995214
I'm not sure if you can consider a wargame 'stable' after only a year or two, and that's true of any wargame, not just bias against AoS. Most anything made in the last few years is pretty young still, even after an edition or two.

>>48983869
>sometimes you roll 2d6 below stat, sometimes 1d6 abpve, sometimes 1d6 below, sometimes 1d6 and consult a chart

The statline was not a good feature. It was a holdover from the days when everything needed its own mechanic.

>>48988792
>their best selling IP's lore when it's still doing relatively well.
It's still dying since FFG stealing casual market from 40k.

>>48994563
>Atia
Into the thrash.

>>48995147

The Apostasy is one of the big events I could see them covering.

>>48995697

X-Wing may not be necessarily stealing and the movies may be playing a role.

Even still, X-Wing should be a wake up call that GW has to try and improve in other areas if they're vehemently opposed to going the prepainted and minimal assembly route.

>>48995712

She's a consistently reliable source.

>>48995992
>X-Wing may not be necessarily stealing
You mean what? They aren't straight competitors (like TF2 and Overwatch for example), but X-wing mistly focusing on the same market as GW and doing better.
>Even still, X-Wing should be a wake up call that GW has to try and improve in other areas
But they cannot afford this because it will increase their efforts on game and model design if they want to return gamers and hobbyists
>She's a consistently reliable source.
She isn't GW. If we are talking about numbers only GW could be really reliable.

>>48994508
Anyone?

>>48997024
Not at all - most players should be happy to let you watch. Playing might be tougher, but a few players might be interested in showing a newbie the ropes.

I recommend asking if you can control a portion of their army - that way you can learn things from a small starting spot instead of a full army, and they get to provide overall control and tactics. Just make sure they aren't just telling you what to do, but that they're advising you on what to do with your section.

>>48997305
I see, I come from yugioh and MTg, so it's not uncommon for us to let new players use our decks or a fun deck we carry around, so long as its not considered rude by the wargame community (like riffle shuffling is in yugioh) I'll ask of someone wouldn't mind a friendly skirmish or a portion as you suggested.

>>48995992
if you fix the game system
they will come

im willing to be the majority of 40k/fantasy players have their stuff in a box waiting for something to peak their interest. my eldar are still in that box, my goblins have been taken out for a 1k point game with my buddy tomorrow

>>48975387
The funny thing when I see a post like yours is I know that you didn't play WHFB either, and that you are a mere AoS shitter lashing out.

>>48973369
Nothing. GW killed fantasy by taking bad decisions upon bad decisions during the last 10 years so there is no wonder it died. Lots of people just left during 7th edition powercreep or 8th hordehammer.

AoS sells barely as much as WHFB was doing in its dead throes, so there's that.

>>48998561
>tfw i will never get to play a common goblin horde with 2for1 heroes

>>48994508
No. Id gladly lend you one of my armies if you wanted to test a ruleset.

>>48983568
Fantasy was the majority of GW sales before 2007.

>>48994508
depends who you ask and what you look like

if you look like a sticky sausage fingered slob you can stay awy from my toy soldiers

>>48996124

I don't see how GW can't afford to increase efforts on game design.

Models aren't the problem, the only people who really complain about the models are grognards who make mountains out of molehills. There was a thread the other day where a few people were complaining about the new Kharn despite the fact that it's pretty much the same damn model as now looks wise.

She is a reliable and consistent rumor source, meaning she has access to somebody or multiple people within GW who know what is coming down the plate. I guess you can doubt her, but it kind of smells of being upset that she shit all over the people trying to claim that GW shoving their discontinued Fantasy stock out the door and marking it under AoS was the reason for the sales of the aforementioned.

>>48998761
>I don't see how GW can't afford to increase efforts on game design.
They need to spend more resources on rule design and play-tests.
>Models aren't the problem,
They are overprived and ugly, to redone them GW should hire better (more expensive) designers and sculptors.
>She is a reliable and consistent rumor source
But we are talking not about new releases or anything like this, we talking concrete numbers of sales.
>but it kind of smells of being upset
Because you say it?

>>48973403
Found the kid who burned his army

>>48976983
Funny, because everyone I know hasn't played Fantasy in 9 years and now more and more of my friends have taken up Warhammer thanks to AoS being FAR more accessible and less toxic by far.

>>48973403
>Yeah 90% of GW's customer base

Yeah 90% of, what, three people? Fantasy was looong dead mate.

AoS has brought waves of new players to the hobby (something you hipsters should be pleased about). Just look at how many AoS Tournaments and Events took place in the UK this year to get an idea and then maybe you should be fucking grateful that GW is still even bothering to make fantasy miniatures.

>>48984288
They lost the LotR momentum that year

>>48998902
>I know hasn't played Fantasy in 9 years
But you never played Fantasy.
Also
>all these anecdotal evediences from both sides

>>48983987
>Also do you count as a customer if you bought all of your minis a decade ago and refuse to buy any more?

Shots fired!

>>48998931
>Just look at how many AoS Tournaments and Events took place in the UK
And how many outside GW-stores?
>maybe you should be fucking grateful that GW is still even bothering to make fantasy miniatures.
Remind me, why I should be grateful?

>>48998931
This, I'm in Nottingham and even with WW you barely saw warhammer players. The old guys barely bought models and take pleasure in beating basically kids in a game too complicated to transition to- fantasy was bullshit and this is coming from a player with 4000pts of brets

>>48977583
>that last purchased a miniature when GW releases their first plastic kit.
Thats oldhammer friendo, which is still using 3rd ed WHFB.

>>48977583
>Constant releases and updates
My defecation has reliably regular releases, but that doesn't mean you should play with it.

>>48998935
>But you never played Fantasy.

...

correct, and your point is?


Who the fuck did play Fantasy? Except for the same three ragefags who make these daily threads

>>48999000
>correct, and your point is?
Just question. Another one, how many non-GW games you played?

>>48986478
You say this as if these games have perfect balance, but Warmahordes has just as clear a "play this army if you want to win, the others if you're lucky and have a nice community" as 40K does. X-wing had units so unbalanced they were virtually unplayable, which is why FFG is running around with all these 'veteran' packs trying to fix things. Which is admirable, but that doesn't change that balance was a clear issue. Hell, the Phantom alone exploded the meta so hard they had to nerf the entire cloaking mechanic. It's interesting that you note infinity, since with the way combat works in AoS there actually is something to do outside your turn every combat phase. Target priority is a big deal in AoS.

Don't know much about malifaux or frostgrave, but given how you've touted balance about games that really aren't as balanced as you claim, I'm sceptical. From those you mentioned that I play myself, AoS actually falls in line in terms of balance. Issues here and there, but overall pretty good.

Hell, it's made Beastmen good. Fucking Beastmen.>>48986925

>>48999180
>other games unplayable too
Source your ass?
>Hell, it's made Beastmen good. Fucking Beastmen.
It's not so hard when all what you should do in game is throwing 3+.

>>48999020
Infinity, Malifaux and X-Wing...

I assume some spectacular imminent ad-hominem is going to somehow make AoS vanish now?

>>48999201
>Infinity, Malifaux and X-Wing...
Post your armies please.

>>48998945
>>Just look at how many AoS Tournaments and Events took place in the UK
>And how many outside GW-stores?

Sigh...

Ok.

Fine:

Elements of Sigmar: 27th August in Stockport
Forgotten Heroes: September 10th in Stirling
Angels of Sigmar: London 17th-18th September
Brothers of Sigmar: Bristol 20th - 21st August
Fast & Furious: Leeds - 23rd October
Warfare AoS Event: Reading - 19th, 20th November
Facehammer GT: Stockport - 24th - 25th September
Clash of Swords: Cardiff - 29th - 30th October
Honour & Glory: Portsmouth - 8th October
A Gathering of Might XVII: Cumbria, 8th-9th October
The Crucible: Cumbria - 14th August
BIG tournament: Bristol - 13th August
Tempest Crusade Aqshy: Stirling - 23rd January
Fall of the Old World 2: Stirling - 26th March
Storm Over Stirling: Stirling - 17th April
Caledonian Carnage: Stirling - 21st May
Cry Havoc: Dunfermline - 18th June
Northern Invasion: Stirling - 16th July
Winter War: Dunfermline - 12th November
Rain of Stars Charity Event : Weymouth - 6th August
New Dawn Charity Event: March
Bad Dice Alliance: Derby - 7th August
Call to War : Bristol - 1st, 2nd, 3rd July
Pork Chop-Up : Bath - 30th July
Realms at War : Cambridge - 19th - 20th November
Last Stand : Leeds - 20th March
2nd Last Stand : Leeds - 26th June
SCGT comp : Cheltenham - 12th June
Bristol Smash : Bristol - 4th, 5th June
WWG AoS : Worcester - 22nd May
SELWG Smash : London - 19th March
Firestorm Fours : Cardiff - 20th, 21st Feb
Sheffield Slaughter : Sheffield - 5th, 7th Feb
Sigmas - Bristol : 20th December
AGOM ; March of the Sky Titans 2 : Cumbria - 12th, 13th December
WTF trading event : Stockport - 27th December
Blood and Glory : Derby - 20th, 22nd November
I cannot be bothered to waste anymore time on silly little autists like you. Research the rest, that's just the recent and upcoming "non-GW" ones which don't count things like Warlords in September.

>>48999225
I said outside GW-stores, And you keep postings United Caliphate.

>>48999206
>armies
nigga please, they're all skirmish games. I don't know what comparison you're trying to make here.

-also, why should I bother listing all that? You trying to catch me out or something? Whatever I say you're only going to say I'm lying anyway. What are you trying to prove here anon?

The one thing i did not get is why they sold out the license for TW Warhammer to be made and scrapped the setting beforehand instead of seeing it as a last chance. Apparently there even is advertisement in the game to get into Warhammer and buy figures, but the link takes you to an empty store.

>>48999236
>I said outside GW-stores,
They all are. What's your point? Gonna make that list invalid somehow? I don't understand where this is going...

>And you keep postings United Caliphate.
sorry, what? Do you even English well?

>>48999273
You are talking to the Slav shitposter.

>>48999247
>nigga please, they're all skirmish games.
Yet still post your models, please.

>>48999273
>They all are.
It's all UK places. UK is the centre of GW stores net, which means it's pretty obviously, that actual GW products will be popular in zone of their promotion.

>>48998876
>we talking concrete numbers of sales.
Unless the contact is someone pretty high on the ladder there is no reason to trust it.

>>48999180
>Warmahordes has just as clear a "play this army if you want to win, the others if you're lucky and have a nice community" as 40K does
Oh come on. WMH balance is in a pretty bad shape right now, but it's not nearly at 40k levels. And the gameplay is a LOT better. Though that is of course not saying much.

But yes. All in all I would recommend the other games that anon mentioned over WMH right now. Also, I'd recommend chopping off your arms over 40k/AoS.

>>48998931
Here there has been 0 (zero) national AoS events. In the meantime there is KoW tournaments every month.

>>48999293
Thats total bollocks. GW barely has a "Zone of promotion" in the UK or anywhere otherwise. All of those listed events are outside of Games Workshop stores and have no official input from Games Workshop. Most have sponsorship from independent retail outlets or podcasts. Do your own fucking research, your're not making any clear or valid arguments here and you're wasting my time.

In my first post I said:

>Just look at how many AoS Tournaments and Events took place in the UK this year to get an idea and then maybe you should be fucking grateful that GW is still even bothering to make fantasy miniatures

Some chump asked me how many, so I posted a quick and barely exhaustive list from about 5 minutes research. During that time looking for UK events, in reference to my post about UK events, I avoided US and Australian events, obviously.

>>48999357
>Thats total bollocks.
It's how marketing works.
>GW barely has a "Zone of promotion" in the UK or anywhere otherwise.
Most of GW stores placed in UK, and GW stores their main intrument to rpomote their stuff. While outside such zones all GW games slowly dying because they cannot compete with FFG for casual market and with other games for gamers and hobbysts market.

>>48999357
>you should be fucking grateful that GW is still even bothering to make fantasy miniatures
I already asked, but why we or someone should be grateful?

>>48999414
>Most of GW stores placed in UK, and GW stores their main intrument to rpomote their stuff

I have never set foot in a GW store in my life and I know many people who are the same. You never buy directly from them.

Yet I still somehow miraculously manage to play the game at 3 local clubs, buy the miniatures from local independent sellers and online stores and manage to keep up to date with the hobby using THE INTERNET.

>It's how marketing works.
Well someone better tell GW then because they don't know how to do this magical psychic marketing purely by proximity.

You say that as if there are giant GW billboards that people drive past every day and receive leaflets posted through their letterbox. The only marketing I see is their email newsletter.

Some people do happen to live close enough to a Games Workshop store which happens to not have been closed down and happen to have the time to go down when they happen to have a painting session on- yes. Good for them.

For the majority of employed UK players, this is not the norm. We play at local clubs, discuss on forums etc...

>>48999418
>but why we or someone should be grateful?

I didn't really think you needed it spelling out but OK, fine. I understand, you clearly have special needs:

AoS attracts more players = more customers = more demand for miniatures = GW continues manufacturing fantasy miniatures = you can keep buying miniatures = you angry little manchildren can continue stubbornly playing whatever you want, using community rules like 9th age (just like AoS had MoComp, SCGT etc before the GH).


Nothing either of you two chimps has said so far invalidates the fact that AoS is a roaring success, attracting droves of new players and customers to Warhammer and reviving the long dead (and evidently toxic) playerbase.

I honestly don't know where any of this is going, it sounds like you two have both completely lost the plot and neither of you have even a basic grasp of the English language.

>>48999556
>I have never set foot in a GW store in my life and I know many people who are the same. You never buy directly from them.
So another anecdotal evedience?
>You say that as if there are giant GW billboards
1) I never said this, or anything like this.
2) There is no need of "giant billboards", just usual signboards near their stores.
>For the majority of employed UK players, this is not the norm.
So you had the satatistic data about how many players in UK playing in GW stores?
>AoS attracts more players
Proofs?
>AoS attracts more players = more customers = more demand for miniatures = GW continues manufacturing fantasy miniatures = you can keep buying miniatures = you angry little manchildren can continue stubbornly playing whatever you want, using
I also can use non-GW models. Why I should be grateful?

File: cyka.jpg (94KB, 898x701px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 898x701px

>>48999589

>>48999556
I actyally laughing out loud at this level of delusion.

>>48999616
So, for some reason you posts Putin instead of answer?

>>48999616
I don't think Mr. Putin will pay you extra for shilling some British game, Sasha.

>>48999556
>the fact that AoS is a roaring success,
Then why GW still losing revenue?

>>48999192
>other games unplayable too
Not the games, units. nobody took TIE-advanced before the raider expansion. Too expensive for the firepower and defence you got. The Raider expansion fixed that and made them awesome (albeit by forcing you to buy a $100 expansion pack) but before that they were terrible.

>It's not so hard when all what you should do in game is throwing 3+.
Yes? So does X-wing. No weapon skill versus weapon skill, just roll a dice to see whether you get the hit icons and the other guy rolls the dice to see whether he saves against your hits. Game's still fun though.

You almost make it sound like a game where armies are actually balanced towards one another is a bad thing.

>>48999676
>Not the games, units. nobody took TIE-advanced before the raider expansion.
So they make them playable.
>So does X-wing.
Not exactly, manuvering and unpgrades still important.
>You almost make it sound like a game where armies are actually balanced towards one another is a bad thing.
No, I said it's unimportant how balanced game ifgameplay primitive.

>>48999665
Oh it must be AoS then, yep definitely. You've cracked it. Genius.

Lucky GW doesn't make boardgames, video games, books, 40k, 30k etc........

Quickly lads, fetch the lighters- we have to burn our armies again

>>48999626
>delusion

Which bit exactly was "delusion"? Please google the definition of the English word before replying.

I'll wait.

>>48999589
>So another anecdotal evedience?
>proofs?

Oh sorry, I forgot it was OK for only you and nobody else to use sweeping generalizations with broad assumptions backed only by personal opinions:

>90% of GW's customer base hated this
>most people hated
>WHFB 9th edition could have been so fucking glories
>The people I knew who had warhammer fantasy armies never went to game shops to play.
>Everyone i know ignores it
>They decided that marketing towards children is better than pleasing their existing fan base
>It has no future.
>because it's not growing as fast as it could have

----------------------------------------------------
You know what? I'm tired of this. All you're doing is typing "proofs" over and over again all through the thread, then ignoring masses of listed evidence. Maybe this is fun for you, I don't know, but this is boring for me.

>>48999709
>You've cracked it. Genius.
Nope, my point was about that since both sides of WHFB-AoS shitstorm have only anecdotal evediences we only can trust their reports and specualting about what game sales worse than others.
>Lucky GW doesn't make boardgames
And if we are going to use rumormongers we also can remember the rumors that kalth outsold the whole AoS.
>video games,
GW make video games? I thought they only sold license to developers and publishers.
>books, 40k, 30k
Well yes, but it's more unlikely, because 40k more popular as franchise and AoS isn't great ruleset.

>>48999737
>All you're doing is typing "proofs" over and over again all through the thread, then ignoring masses of listed evidence.
Such as numbers of AoS sales? If you had them please, post it.

>>48999737
>backed only by personal opinions:
>>They decided that marketing towards children is better than pleasing their existing fan base
How it's personal opinion if it's pretty clear that AoS targeting on casuals with 8+ rating?
>>It has no future.
Yes, but it's kind of truth since there is no reason to play AoS instead of better games.

>>48999717
Somebody being grateful for the opportunity to buy AoS models

>>48999225
is there any sort of list for whfb events the years before?
I can probably tell you whe^n the number of events have decreased

>>48979824
>everyone heaping praises on 8th Edition
People praise 8th? It was my understanding almost no one liked 8th better than previous editions and people wanted 9th to be 7th with a handful of rules from 8th carried over

File: face comf.gif (999KB, 500x268px) Image search: [Google]

999KB, 500x268px

>>48973369
It got better.

>>48995992
>She's a consistently reliable source.

She isn't really a source, she just gathers all the shit she hears and posts it, without revealing the real source. There was that turmoil on B&C when she just posted what one of the members sent him in PM without citing him as a source, acting like it was her information.

She's just a distributor who gets news a bit earlier than others, a few days in advance. nothing more. She's got no inside connection to GW like the old, really reliable rumormongers, like panda or hastings.

>>48999289

The Kremlin is in flames!

>>48999709
>Lucky GW doesn't make boardgames, video games, books, 40k, 30k etc........

They do, well at least lend out loyalties. If you take a look at the report, you will notice that this is the only thing keeping them afloat right now, so if you want to insist that they are losing on that, you are an even bigger retard than I first thought. Compare the pure sales and merch numbers to 2013 sales numbers, around 40% loss.

>>48999180
>Hell, it's made Beastmen good. Fucking Beastmen.
as a Beastmen player i cannot be more agree

>>48999180
>From those you mentioned that I play myself, AoS actually falls in line in terms of balance. Issues here and there, but overall pretty good.
>Hell, it's made Beastmen good. Fucking Beastmen

That must be the reason while the biggest AoS tournament to this date, SCGT had zero, I repeat ZERO beastmen lists, and a whopping 4 total beastmen units in Chaos lists.

Good joke lol, beastmen are worse than they ever were. I just sold them instead of rebasing like I did with Skaven and Undead, I've had enough, GW just wants to fuck Beastmen players whenever they can.

>>49000302
dude use google for fuck sake

>>49000726
nobody play beastmen in a tournament to begin with in 8th

they where so shity that only masochist play them and no one in his right mind would use them on a tournament

and i know this i have a Beastmen army

>>49000759

Filthy lie, beastmen routinely made top8-16s in GT's. Hell, they almost won Buckeye Battles in 2012:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=buckeye%20battles%20results

So go back to your moscow cave slav.

>>49000878
ok dude you win the internets

also if you are going to link the results of the tournament post the damn results instead of the google query
see http://buckeyebattles.com/results/ not that hard

also
number of beastmen players on that tournament for years
2015 3/111
2014 3/125
2013 4/107
2012 1/96
2011 7/80
fun fact the beastmen players are not the same every year

>>49000727
to make my own list?
Fuck that noise. I'm not that eager to prove anything

>>48984829

Shamb is watching you.

File: 1458275444652.jpg (68KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 700x700px

>all they had to do was release a new bretonnia book with new models and that would have saved them.

>>49002625
No way; 8th was already too shit.

>>48999717
Aos models are utter shit, gw hasn't made good things in years, which I'm grateful for because it means stores are dropping gw products in favor of superior models and games

File: 154054-004-975CBF7D.jpg (36KB, 351x450px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 351x450px

>>49002898
More bolt action, more infinity, more team yankee more etcetera etcetera etcetera

>>49002898
>gw hasn't made good things in years
kek

> Harlequins aren't good
> New treemen aren't good
> Forgeworld Warlord Titan isn't good
>Bloodbound wasn't good
>Adeptus Mechanicus wasn't good
>HH line of marines wasn't good
>Imperial Knight wasn't good
>Being so butt-hurt you have to try to convince yourself of this

Man, you must have awful taste...

The models look fine, fantastic even. Its just that the games suck dick.

>>48999180
>You say this as if these games have perfect balance

No. But better balance is better than worse balance, right?

>but Warmahordes has just as clear a "play this army if you want to win, the others if you're lucky and have a nice community

Let's look at the recent tournaments on discount games

August 12th, Cygnar. No surprise
August 7th, Legion, which has been called lower mid tier by the community
August 6th, Cryx even though its allegedly the worst faction
August 6th, Khador, No surprise again
July 24th, Circle, considered pretty good
July 23rd, Low mid tier trolls win
July 23rd again, Khador

There is definite trend toward the power factions (Khador, Cygnar, Ret) in terms of tournament attendance, but actual winners are pretty varied, and this is the worst balance warmahordes has had in a long time.

I don't know of a similar place for 40k, but googling around it seems like Tau and Eldar dominate with the occasional Space Wolves or Necrons.


>>49003558
Not the guy you're talking to, but using buzzwods and quibbling over subjective aesthetics isn't making me want to play 40k

File: 1471034326220.gif (428KB, 200x183px) Image search: [Google]

428KB, 200x183px

>>48999556
>this post
My sides are in orbit holy shit you're a clown.

File: image.jpg (60KB, 429x530px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 429x530px

>>48973369
WHFB was already circling the drain. Almost all new fluff written in the last 10 years has been inferior to previous fluff. I'm okay with the fact that they ended it before it got even worse. I'm not okay with how they did it and that they decided to go out it a blaze of blunder with some of the worst fluff ever written for WHFB.

AoS could never have been anything else than what it is under the current writers. The problem is that GW's beat days are behind them since all good writer either lost interest in the fluff or left the company.

>>49003558
>New treemen aren't good
Well, yeah?

>>49003558
>muh feelings: The Post

>>49003993
This.

Most of the talented sculptors, game designers and writers left GW a while ago. Internet helped killing their absolute monopoly because they didn't take advantage of it. And last but no least they are killing their communities by lowering the quality of the WD and the stores.

There's 0 reason to be a gw enthusiast nowadays.

>>49004075
Most of their talented businessmen left as well it seems.

>>49004075
I mean... I know I want to agree but they are releasing a new WD and implementing new store events and season leagues since this summer. It looks like they are trying to make up lost ground at least.

>>49004488
They have been improving their PR, the community presence is becoming a thing again and their bundles are actually not insults anymore, but I don't see the fluff ever being good again.

>>49002625
Models that would have looked like overdesigned baroque shit. I might as well go gay for historical minis.

You don't have to play AoS

...there's always hordes

>>49005079
Disgusting.

>>48977583
I just started playing warhammer this year and I have tried both AoS and 9th age. I find that 9th age appeals to me far more than AoS due to its higher complexity and depth.

>>48999252

Because they still get the royalties from the game and Total War came to them, not the other way around.

Total Warhammer was supposed to be this great success that would prove GW wrong. It was a success, but it seemingly did nothing to make players give a damn about actually wanting to play the tabletop game when they already had the equivalent or better at home.

GW's attempt to sell figures was more akin to selling merchandise than it was a game. Figures for games have become something of a more popular thing in the West.

>>48999665

Isn't it possible that GW losing money is just them gradually returning to perhaps where they should be as a wargames company?

It's hard to really compare because very little of their competition are publicly traded and some like FFG produce more than just wargames.

>>49000357

I've heard people say it was the best edition of Fantasy, though considering that it also supposedly caused numbers of people to leave maybe it's not surprising that those left behind would have good things to say about it.

>>49000547

That kind of sounds like a source to me, basically someone who gets information from the inside and shares it with everyone else.

>>48976664
I don't know what it's like where you live but where I am the one store had just as many WHFB players as 40K players from what I saw

WFRPG 4e when?

>>49005014
Fireforge games make better brets than GW. Really amazing kits.

>>49006267
I've always played in areas with more FB players than 40k but that's good old yurop for you. Now it's all Kings of War.

>>49006140
>but it seemingly did nothing to make players give a damn about actually wanting to play the tabletop game when they already had the equivalent or better at home.
The tabletop game doesn't exist anymore. How would players want to be interested ?

>>48973369
They burned the 5% of WHFB's active player base and got 35% for AoS.

I know its anecdotal, but my gamer group and I had been sticking our toes in the water with Fantasy and 40k, but as soon as AoS came out, we all went full ham on army building.

>>49006309
Is WHFB really less popular in America?

>>49006462
I don't know, but even at its worse FB was still more popular than 40K here. Granted, at the time I was playing at a near-dead GW anyway. I'd say the GW stores took a massive nosedive in favour of other LFGS in my region. Only the toxic part of the community still plays in GW stores.

File: wvgwyfy.jpg (271KB, 1280x931px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1280x931px

>>49005014

Behold

Lots of these sketches show that Fantasy was supposed to have baroque shit in it. Only those who drank heavily of the realistic and historical koolaid would screech at its presence. No fucking surprise since they were also mostly Empire and Bretonnia players and saw no difference in buying a generic historical model to save some shekels.

>>49003997

They're better looking than every other Treeman model that GW has produced for either Fantasy or LotR.

>>49004075

Who are these so called talented sculptors that left? Diaz and the Perry brothers have, but both of those were in the past few years, hardly a while ago.

>>49006332

Because if you're a new player who knows nothing of Warhammer you'd not know that it was dead.

New players were supposed to flood game stores asking why Fantasy had been discontinued and join in the hair pulling, teeth gnashing, and salt. Instead they didn't care or didn't give a fuck and continued to play the game they spent $60 on.

If modeling and interacting with other people in real life over a game don't interest you then Fantasy has nothing to off over Total Warhammer.

>>49006648
>New players were supposed to flood game stores asking why Fantasy had been discontinued and join in the hair pulling, teeth gnashing, and salt. Instead they didn't care or didn't give a fuck and continued to play the game they spent $60 on.
Nah, they were shown a demo game of AoS, found out it was a shitty skirmish game, and went out with a xwing box.

Happened a few time at my LFGS.

File: am1U8ey.jpg (231KB, 1280x899px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1280x899px

>>49006690

That's the first such anecdote I've heard.

Though in a way it kind of reinforces the idea that it's hard to turn people who are primarily video games into wargamers, especially if the game itself isn't viewed as mind blowing. It's an expensive and time intensive hobby. Easier to just read the lore and play the good games that come out.

Besides having Star Wars slapped on it, how quickly you can begin playing the game is probably part of why X-Wing has taken off. You buy your ships, put the peg into the ship and onto the stand, and you're good to go. No sprue clipping, no mold line removal, no painting, no basing required.

>>49006849
>especially if the game itself isn't viewed as mind blowing.
That's a big understatement when talking about AoS.

It's also a totally different universe, a totally different aesthetic, a totally different style of play. You come to expect Total War and they show you LoL, it's pretty unsettling for a newcomer.

>>49006976

I actually had 40k and Fantasy more in mind than AoS. Neither are really such great games that override both the cost and time needed to play them.

Like I said earlier in the thread, GW has pretty much been coasting for who knows how long now using both their lore and models.

AoS I view as an improvement in some respects on the surface. It's not bogged down in minutia, units within the same army interact with each other beyond unit X casting a psychic power/spell to buff unit Y, and using the points system GW offers three different points levels to play at instead of balancing the game around a high number and basically telling you to go fuck yourself outside of some halfhearted attempts at smaller points level games within the same system.

Still haven't really felt the urge to play AoS.

>>49007100
>Neither are really such great games that override both the cost and time needed to play them.
Oh they both were, at one point. There wouldn't be so many grognards laying around if it wasn't the case.

>It's not bogged down in minutia
It really is, however. Every unit page is filled to the brim in special rules, weapon you can use separately, impromptu dice rolls for added randomness.

>using the points system GW offers three different points levels to play at instead
Neither of them being actually balanced up to the industry standard.

>>49006648
>Lots of these sketches show that Fantasy was supposed to have baroque shit in it. Only those who drank heavily of the realistic and historical koolaid would screech at its presence. No fucking surprise since they were also mostly Empire and Bretonnia players and saw no difference in buying a generic historical model to save some shekels.

>Cherry picking a specific period as absolute evidence

File: abcLdZa.jpg (254KB, 1280x922px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1280x922px

>>49007209

>Every unit page is filled to the brim in special rules, weapon you can use separately, impromptu dice rolls for added randomness.

Which are all brief and a lot better to mean than having to remember charts and some of the unique unit rules. Cavalry are different from Monstrous Cavalry which are different from ridden monsters.

Not to mention having all the information available right there on the scroll is much more convenient than needing to flip through a book.

>>49007239

Was under the impression that this was the good period for a decent number of the people who complain.

>>48976664
And personal anecdote are not always true for the world.

>>49007318
It was a good period for artwork, but the style always translated poorly to 28mm.

WHFB already had the worst ruleset on the market short of Relic Knights, so AOS really isn't much of a net difference. If you want rules written by competant people, then look at Warmachine or Malifaux.

>>49006648
>Lots of these sketches show that Fantasy was supposed to have baroque shit in it. Only those who drank heavily of the realistic and historical koolaid would screech at its presence. No fucking surprise since they were also mostly Empire and Bretonnia players and saw no difference in buying a generic historical model to save some shekels.
See this retardation. Has anyone ever NOT praised the grail pilgrims sculpts ? One of the highest points of the bret range, and I am a guy who would buy historicals in a heartbeat should the GW model be shit.

Let me explain why : if you have entire armies of random baroque shit, everything feels cheap. It falls flat. Why should the pilgrims be so unique if every peasant in your army carries bones by the crate anyway ? Why would you make empire state troops barefoot and lugging crates of bones when they are supposed to be a disciplined and well-equipped standing army ? In that last case, they actually even removed the actual iconic baroque aspect : the distinctive clothing - well present in the concept - was scrapped for pyjamas on the minis to a point that a Perry Miniatures mercenaries box was better at building state troops than the state troops boxes.

Nobody ever complained about the mechanical steed - an awesome model by the way. The Greatswords kit was even more true to the original greatsword design than the 6th edition metal ones. Same go for the Steam tank, an awesome classic. But look at a drawing of a battle scene : it's mostly normal dudes in landsknetch attire fighting alongside the baroque shit and the floating castles in the background.

The problem of late edition fantasy design was to put the skulls everywhere rather than on the really uncommon.

>>49001038
>When you get BTFO but want to try and play it off cool

File: 1398465833274.jpg (949KB, 1686x2373px) Image search: [Google]

949KB, 1686x2373px

>>49007591

>and lugging crates of bones when they are supposed to be a disciplined and well-equipped standing army

The bones are little bits here and there, remembrances of comrades who died and sign of man's own mortality. For all people rail against the skulls, I recall reading somewhere that death iconography was somewhat common in period of time in Europe that Fantasy takes inspiration from.

Maybe I went a little far, but that doesn't excuse that a lot of releases got whined about to here and back because they were too baroque, too magical, didn't make sense, etc.

Most of these units weren't the rank and file either but special and rare units, the stuff that stands out and which you'd expect to look somewhat out of the ordinary.

Maybe it was just a vocal minority limited to certain forums, but with the whining I always got the feeling that these people had a very particular view of Fantasy. That magic wasn't a thing and that the armies, particularly the human ones, were supposed to be historically accurate and realistic and shouldn't even have an iota of decoration upon them. They sounded like people who'd be much more happy playing a historical game than one based on a world that draws on both history and fantasy.

Some alternative choices did also look stupid to me. I don't know how someone could look at Brettonian Knights, look at the Teutonic Knights offered by Fireforge, and decide that as is they were perfect replacements. The aforementioned are mostly austere while Bretonnian Knights are known for their bling.

File: 1472246560351-1875214957.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>49007591
Pic related.

File: 1462495710925.jpg (720KB, 908x1353px) Image search: [Google]

720KB, 908x1353px

>>49007837
There's plenty of room for iconography and stuff in the lore, little things that you can use to show off who your troops worship and other bits of culture.

But maybe this is because I came from 40k into WFB, but WFB's disciplined regiments give a stronger feeling of uniformity of the whole rather than wanting to make individuals stand out. You aren't going to have your Space Marine squad, with one guy with a plasma gun and other with a heavy bolter, and have them all have little decorations based on who survived a battle or some awesome foe they took down. So in some ways WFB felt rather plain, because only the special units or heroes stood out.

File: 1472247224967864596049.jpg (3MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3264x2448px

>>49007989
>>49007837
Posting explanation below.

>>49008108
>>49007837
>>49007989
>The bones are little bits here and there, remembrances of comrades who died and sign of man's own mortality. For all people rail against the skulls, I recall reading somewhere that death iconography
But it clashed way too much with the previous minis, and especially wasn't neither subtle (7th from the left has a skull on a cap) nor optional (5th from the left has a skull and other assorted shit on his belt)

>Some alternative choices did also look stupid to me. I don't know how someone could look at Brettonian Knights, look at the Teutonic Knights offered by Fireforge, and decide that as is they were perfect replacements. The aforementioned are mostly austere while Bretonnian Knights are known for their bling.
Easy. Have you ever built a bret force ? Basically, you have one box with the options to swap heads and arms for errant and grail knights, so your dudes en up looking all the same. On the other hand, if you take crusaders for errant knights, teutonic for realm and GW for grail, you end up with a very distinct force where the rank and the social standing of your units can be viewed very easily.

In my pic, it's about the evolution in style. From left to right the commander (lord kit, from 2006-2007 IIRC) is more or less a bulkier and better version of the old state troop design (2nd and 3rd). Then come the new state troop design (4th, 5th and 7th) : no ample clothes, shoddy armors, ridiculous weapons but the proportions were better and some bits were very good (the feathers, and the heads in general). But they didn't fit with state troops to the point that a free company soldier (6th) with halberd arms does a better job at that. The last 4 are what you can do with a perry box and 6th edition bitz - arguably better state troops than the late state troops.

>>49007989
If you look at this pic, you can see clearly that the old minis were way much closer in style than the new ones.

After Robin Williams died, GW couldn't justify keeping the game running for the other three people who played it.

>>49007989

Troops can be uniform and still have personal little bits and bobs.

>>49008250

>But it clashed way too much with the previous minis, and especially wasn't neither subtle (7th from the left has a skull on a cap) nor optional (5th from the left has a skull and other assorted shit on his belt)

I wasn't so much defending how GW did it as I was the idea as a whole.

As for clashing with the previous models, sometimes that happens for one reason or another. You could possibly say that the newer Chaos Space Marine stuff clashes with the older models, but that is because the sculptors decided that the previous CSM aesthetic of being Space Marines with spikes wasn't that great. The technology currently available allows for models which look like they're a fusion of flesh and machine due to the mutating effect of the Warp.

I bought one of Errant/Realm kit when GW was going to stop making them it is nice. The point I was trying to make with the Fireforge models wasn't someone looking for alternatives to mix with their army (Which personally I don't think I would do because of the difference in aesthetics), but to just straight up use Teutonic Knights instead of the kits available from GW.

>>49007837
>Some alternative choices did also look stupid to me. I don't know how someone could look at Brettonian Knights, look at the Teutonic Knights offered by Fireforge, and decide that as is they were perfect replacements. The aforementioned are mostly austere while Bretonnian Knights are known for their bling.

Only in the 6'th edition. Prior to that they looked a whole lot closer to historical minis with tournament decorations on their helmets for "bling".


>>49008299
I agree. The minis that they did with 7'th and 8'th edition for the Empire had the accessories way overblown. It really ended up looking more like a caricature of the artstyle.