Hypothetical scenario; tomorrow you go to the store and...

(i) GW supports WFB

or

(ii) GW supports Age of Sigmar

-> What is your preference.

Well. I expected it to be lopsided in that direction, but not THAT lopsided...

(i) Awesome epic scale game that has been around for over a quarter of a century, filled with rich lore and captivating background stories.

or

(ii) Obscure skirmish game with hardly any rules (and weird special rules for some of its miniatures), supported by a bizarre a story line involving disconnected realms and Sigmarines.

It's not a tough choice really... Fun and informative poll though

A) Fantastic regiment driven game them fell into a net-list driven, unkillable hero/deathstar filled game where you were 'forced' to take models you may not want but might 'need' (for me a lvl 4 Sorcerous/ Grey Seer over Dreadlord/Warlord).

B) Brand new game system where far more units have a purpose instead of just working out the best bargain for the points. Interactive army list design, watching what your opponents place and upping the ante with your own units.

And most importantly for me, as a writer who was rarely inspired by the World That Was, we're in a brand new setting with what looks like some cool stories to come.

This is the tip of the iceberg and I'm excited for what's to come. I get that not everyone is, but at the moment those who don't like it are shouting louder online than those who do.

That's one interpetation, another is that there are just far more people who don't like the new system than those who do, and so the cheerleaders for the new game get drowned out by sheer numbers of voices.

For me the interesting thing is that a lot of the pro game support on here seems to be coming from relatively or entirely new accounts. That could mean two things: i) GW is pushing its reps and telling its store regulars to go onto the gaming boards and plug their new *ahem* masterpiece (that's the conspiracy theory angle), or that ii) the game is bringing new blood or reactivating lapsed players (which is the optimistic view). Either way, I doubt that the new bloods will maintain their interest for long, and then will drift back to 40k, video games, or whatever else they were doing before, while the old and disenchanted fanbase will have long ago quit for other systems such as Kings of War, Armies of Arcana, Warmachine, and Malifaux. In a couple of years, there will be no more Warhammer Fantasy or Age of Sigmar at all:

IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY 40K

IF you never learned how to beat a deathstar, that's your problem not the game's. Beating a deathstar is part of Druchii tactics 101... and Skaven are even BETTER equipped for it (four rat darts and two blocks of 50 slaves are less than 300 points, and tie up the deathstar all game).

For people who don't understand what tactics are, and who just rather roll dice then think, AoS is perfect. But soon they will realize that fielding models you want is even a bigger NO NO then in was WFB.

But it might take them some time,. especially if they didn't figure out a way to deal with deathstars all through out 8th ed.

Wonder what will be their reaction when they figure out that a big enough TK is undefinable under age of shitmar rules .

In my club we have 3 players showing renewed interest to play for every 1 player refusing to play AoS.
One of my regular opponent is also a forum lurker and poster on the boards. He decided to take some time off from the boards because he knew the complaining that follows any small change and didn't feel like bothering with a storm of negativity on his screen.

Why indeed, would somebody who is interested or liking the game bother with facing the storm of negativity?

I feel it's costing me some effort to talk about the game's mechanics here, simply because most threads get swamped into a AoS is good or bad discussion. Apparently one can not be critical nor positive about the game without inviting people to rise to the defense of the game and others to showcase negatives as proof that AoS is bad. I haven't made up my mind yet so I'd like to continue trying things out and discuss the mechanics constructively.

The negavity may have some truth to it, but I think most sensible arguments against AoS were stated roughly... 4-6 days ago. Since, I have seen only reiteration of the same arguments, worded a little differently. It will be difficult for that to turn around: content lies in the hands of people that make it, not people who criticize it. Usually.

And since AoS is out, I have seen people express their refusal of the new game and support of the old game. What I have seen very little of, less than for AoS, is actual content. Let's make that a challenge to the oldhammer supporters. If you want WFB to survive, then make it alive and make the content for it.

That is interesting, I personally have been playing the game for 11 years and joined this forum last year to reinvigorate my playing of Warhammer Fantasy - which I had bot touched for almost all of 8th edition - I was going to do a blog concerning my Dark Elf Slaaneshii cult before the mechanics of 8th bored me, the need to take certain units just so you could have a fun game let alone win (which I don't really care about, which might inform you more about how and why I play and why I looove AoS) really killed it for me. As well as the fact that I couldn't get the army to look the way I wanted it too because everyone was far too close together ranked in their units.

Instead of just stating what I didn't like about 8th edition and what I do like (love) about Age of Sigmar I will simply bow out here. You don't need my dissenting opinion to make your own mind up.

What I would say however is maybe wait to make your mind up for another ~6 months, see what else is coming. Play more games of it and work out why you don't believe its strategic enough or difficult to master. Play it differently than Warhammer Fantasy Battles, as this is a whole new game, play it with secret armies you reveal one at a time, use bluffs and red herrings during your deployments. Try out some different scenarios (maelstrom of war in AoS?).

I will however be posting more and more on this site, as AoS has finally made me want to compile an army again. And to me that cannot be a bad thing.

My dissent with AoS is simple.

There are plenty of other skirmish games out there. If I wanted to play a skirmish game, I'd be playing one of THEM (probably Warmahordes, because that's what's easiest to find an opponent for). I play WFB to maneuver UNITS, not individual models, and WFB is the easiest game of that type to find an opponent for.

So to remove the ONE THING I PLAY WARGAMES FOR out of your game also removes my interest from the game, 100%, totally, no negotiations involved, no trial runs needed. AoS could be the greatest skirmish game ever, and I'd STILL have no interest in it.

I'm waiting patiently for the Swedhammer rules to come out. You may go play your skirmishes. I'm going to be over here fighting BATTLES.

+1



Which were those in a Dark Elf army? All of our units were competitive:

Core
RxBs: competitive
Bleakswords: competitive
Dark Riders: competitive
Dreadspears: competitive (probably the weakest of the bunch, but massed spears have their place)
Witch elves: competitive
Corsairs: competitive (also arguably a weak choice, but more because most dark elf players prefer extremes and corsairs are the middle of the road, all rounder choice (good at everything, excellent at nothing). They definitely had a place and to lack a middle of the road, all rounder choice, would have been a shame, even if they didn't see as much table use as some of their peers.

Special
Cold one Knights: competitive
Blackguard: competitive
Executioners: competitive
Harpies: competitive (probably the weakest of the bunch, but only because they were costed at maybe 1 or 2 points too high)
Hydra: competitive
Shades: competitive
Reaper Bolt Throwers: competitive
Cold one chariots: competitive

Rare
K-Beast: competitive
Warlocks: competitive
Sisters of Slaughter: competitive
Medusae: competitive (probably the weakest of the bunch, but only because most players never really got their head around using them - of course, now the trick to playing them well in AoS is to chase your opponent around the room trying to get them to look into your eyes, which he/she may be able to cover by tugging their specially grown beard over their eyes (you know, the one they grew to try to gain or deny that thane a crucial re-roll) - strategy at its finest, apparently)

Lords and heroes
Dreadlord: competitive
Supreme sorceress: competitive
Beastmaster: competitive
Fleetmaster: I'll give you that one: uncompetitive. But one mistake in an entire book. That's nothing really.
Master: competitive
Sorceress: competitive
Deathhag: competitive
Assassin: competitive
Hellebron: competitive
Malekith: competitive
Morathi: competitive
Malus: competitive
Lokhir: competitive (a bit overpriced perhaps, but in the right combination, he could be powerful)
Shadowblade: competitive (again, a bit overpriced, but used appropriatedly, he could be powerful)

Mounts
Black Dragons: pricey, but a lot of fun. Dragons should not be auto-includes, I liked that they were made for bigger games only really.
Manticores: competitive
Dark pegasi: competitive
Cold one: competitive
Dark Steed: competitive
Cauldron of blood: competitive
Bloodwrack shrine: competitive

An entire book where the overwhelming majority of units and characters were competitive. That's a pretty impressive feat. Yes, there was one cock up (the fleetmaster) and black dragons are a bit pricey, but other than that, it's a good range and all saw use. In fact, I regularly found myself using different units and characters in my army lists, which was a testament to the way that they made every unit different, yet balanced and very selectable.

Compare that with AoS, where core infantry is pointless: why take RxBs when you can take Shades? why take Bleakswords when you can take Blackguard? Why take a Master when you can take a Dreadlord? And so on. That's scarcely a case of all models being useful, in fact it's the opposite. Moreover, we know from GW's own discourse, that they wrote a ton of silly unit rules because want us to feel ashamed into abandoning our old models and pick up playing with the news one exclusively: how's that for encouraging you to play with any model you want and not compelling you into choosing specific ones!


If you're genuinely here and still posting actively in 6 months, that will indeed be a good thing. I hope to see you then. But forgive me, I'm not yet convinced that you - or any of the suddenly active accounts with previously very low or non-existent post counts - will be. I look forward to being proven wrong.

Age of sigmar or not, we still have the hobby aspect which trancends the rules. So many of us will still be intrigued if you post some pics of your dark elves.
As for rules, well the forum does have different sections for all you gaming needs.

Welcome aboard.

This - I took almost 10 years off from the game for a while when our local game store closed. But I never got rid of my minis, and while my painting speed slowed, it never stopped.

If my opponents dry up, and my actual playing of the game goes back into hibernation, I'll still have the minis, and I'll still post pics of them here (although admittedly, I am far overdue for another installment of pics too! Give me another month, after GenCon I'll wrap up a few projects and get them on here)

This forum is varied enough in its content, that it's uses transcend editions of the game.

Agreed. And as for the poll I voted for WFB, even though AOS is the reason I'm back on this site, back playing and back hobbying. GW could have had a version of AOS without the Stormcast Eternals and without nuking the oldworld.