Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

The place for all game discussions on Age of Sigmar.

Moderator: The Dread Knights

Post Reply
User avatar
Red...
Generalissimo
Posts: 3750
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Baltimore

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Red... »

Arquinsiel wrote:I can post screenshots if people really want.

Yes please, I'm intrigued ;)
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman
User avatar
Killerk
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1065
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 9:56 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Other fantasy games?

Post by Killerk »

Cultofkhaine wrote:It's hard to come up with an original idea though GW have captured all the good ideas.


GW took ideas from other companies.

Mod's note:
Moved from topic where it could have been considered trolling.
Calisson
Also known as Kanadian
Image
Image
User avatar
Omnichron
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1378
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:10 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Omnichron »

The Mattler wrote:If it's a deal-breaker for you, stop playing GW games, since dice rolling a player off the table is the central feature of their game mechanics. It may or may not play as central a role in tabletop games from other companies, but it's ubiquitous in GW products.


"Stop playing it"... it's weird how often that comes when someone complains about something that is screwed up in games. When someone invests a lot in a hobby/game, they want to have fun and get something out of it. When GW then comes around with a set of rules that is utterly crap and ruins the experience, you can't expect the veteran players to just accept it and move along, or just pack everything down and leave without a word.

Also, the dice rolling wasn't as critical for success in the past as it is in this new game. Where you could win outright by manouvers and tactics in WHFB, AoS is more about picking choices that will win you the game and just roll a lot of dice to make it happen. The one that has the most and/or best GW toys will win in the end, just like children playing with dolls/toys by smashing them together until something breaks.

In the previous editions, the changes of the rules were minor even though it meant a lot of differences in the actualy playstyle as well as meta. Now we have a completely different game which isn't even closely related to the original. It is now a simplified 40k rule set... or should I say a slightly more advanced game of Risk? That is not what the core of the WHFB gamers want.

GW have alienated the game to such a degree that a lot of the original players actually will quit playing and go to other miniature games (like warmachines/hordes) instead. So yeah, I would actually also give the advice to just quit the game and do something else. Personally I have picked up X-Wing (which is a better simplified game with a proper ruleset than AoS), and Warmahordes (which is a better competative set of more advanced gaming).

As for the strategy from GW which is all about getting new players in so that they can sell more miniatures... how are they going to do that when the players of old don't find it any fun and probably wouldn't recruit new players? How can they make up for the cost of new miniatures when there are so many other great games to play that has better rules and thriving communities? I actually hope GW will lose a lot of money on this project, because they don't give a single **** about me and their core gamers with this ruleset. I will return the same favour and won't buy anything GW related anymore, even though I thought about playing with my 40k armies for a while.

Finally I will say this about AoS: shiz can get all kinds of makeup to cover it and improve the looks of it, but in the end it is just shiz.
Personal quote: "It's better to do little damage and lose nothing than to do lots of damage and lose everything."
Final tournament score for 7th DE book in 8th edition - W/D/L: 25/5/10
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Arquinsiel »

Red... wrote:
Arquinsiel wrote:I can post screenshots if people really want.

Yes please, I'm intrigued ;)
I hope you really really wanted it, because it's not really all that interesting. Names edited to protect identities etc etc.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Red...
Generalissimo
Posts: 3750
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Location: Baltimore

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Red... »

I hope you really really wanted it, because it's not really all that interesting. Names edited to protect identities etc etc.

Thanks for sharing. I guess that's why many older players have been refusing to go into their stores for years now. It's a real shame, because I remember GW stores being a wonderful place to go when I was aged 8-12 (back in those heedy days of the very early 1990s). The staff were friendly and passionate. In recent years, it changed for the worse - and your experience sounds depressingly about what you would expect. It's a shame really.

"Stop playing it"... it's weird how often that comes when someone complains about something that is screwed up in games. When someone invests a lot in a hobby/game, they want to have fun and get something out of it. When GW then comes around with a set of rules that is utterly crap and ruins the experience, you can't expect the veteran players to just accept it and move along, or just pack everything down and leave without a word.

This goes back to a point I made earlier. Let's say that you are GW and you want to terminate Fantasy. The only way that you can do so while avoiding a true mass lynching (and even possible legal consequences) is to get your customers to stop wanting to play the game voluntarily. How do you do that? Well, you release a "new edition" that is so absolutely jaw-droppingly bad that no one wants to play it. Then your player base decides to punish you by leaving the game. You achieve the outcome you want, without anywhere near as much bad press or contamination of your broader player base (primarily 40k players) than you would have done had you simply closed the game unilaterally. Now, of course they have to go through the charade of supporting the new game, which is what a lot of their PR is doing at the moment, but have you noticed how much of what they are selling is unrelated to actually playing the game? T-shirts, hoodies, drink containers, dice shakers, and so on. The number of new model releases has been shockingly low, while the rules themselves and all of the warscrolls for existing models have been provided for free. None of this seems to suggest a serious attempt to create a long term game that generates money from the gaming system itself - and I think (given what we know about GW's standard practice of milking every drop of cash it can from its customers) that speaks volumes about their longer term intentions for the game.

So, the irony is, as outraged players we say "I'm quitting" and GW thinks to itself "good, that was what we wanted to start with". But then what is the other option? To join up and play this travesty of a 'game'? That way GW makes money off of us from its joke of a product, and we are still stuck with a terrible game.

Say what you will about GW's ethics or morals, but this Death Star has no thermal exhaust ports, its shields are fully operational, and all of the nearby Ewoks have been rounded up and shot.

Abandon all hope, ye who venture here.
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Arquinsiel »

Red... wrote:Thanks for sharing. I guess that's why many older players have been refusing to go into their stores for years now. It's a real shame, because I remember GW stores being a wonderful place to go when I was aged 8-12 (back in those heedy days of the very early 1990s). The staff were friendly and passionate. In recent years, it changed for the worse - and your experience sounds depressingly about what you would expect. It's a shame really.
The sad thing is, a decent portion of my friends these days are ex GW staffers too. The guy I was in to meet up with, who had just ended things with his cheating fiancé, was also an ex staffer. These were known facts, and the manager still decided to be a dick.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Killerk
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1065
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 9:56 pm
Location: Poland

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Killerk »

There is a IMHO better option. Something that I proposed for the ETC, but it every one could benefit form it.

Original topic
http://warhammer.org.uk/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=129959

I thought of this today (was driving for 8 hours, had time for it), as TO I was thinking what could be done for my next tournament cycle). Its a hard thing to do but I think it can be done.

Now the idea is based around the ETC structure, a game will be designed for the ETC, and the rules will be subjective to change by a body in the ETC (yet to be created), all erratas would be issued by the ETC FAQ team. Basically it would have what WFB lacked, direct influence of the community. Also things like point values could be changed, special rules exc. (there would have to be a system in place, so this doesn't happen to often, and with a good prior notice, much like the AR.com drafts)

and how to do this:
There is a possibility for rule write up, of a miniature system lets call it "9th ed" for now. It plays virtually like warhammer, uses all the discontinued warhammer units (later counter parts would be added to avoid law suits), fluff off course. I have also thought of a way to get miniatures released for the "9th ed" so the product is supported, and does not die off. As a rule of thumb, the miniatures would have to be good quality, but below GW prices.

The game will include:
- Tactical movement
- Characters you can customize
- Point system
- Ranked up units
- Magic
- ect. just like in Warhammer

The rules of the game would be free of course.

The thing I'm not certain about is Army books, should there be one, with supplements like they did in Warzone a decade ago, or continue with an army book for each race.

Never the less this idea can only be set in motion, if the ETC and all who support it are on board. We have built a gigantic community, it is well organized, we can capitalize it if we want to.
Also known as Kanadian
Image
Image
User avatar
Asgoth
Corsair
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:07 pm

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Asgoth »

Hello fellow druchii crooks!
Thank u for insightful posts, its great that gaming community is breathing, all alive and kicking in this corner of dö internetz.
Since i own 5 fantasy armies and have rule books from 5th edition onwards i have all the rules i would ever want :) I mean if u use 8th as a base rule set and toss in few house rules and/or rule flashes from past like scouts allowed to move how the ever u want and not as a block etc. :D. I rarely play tournaments these days but just with friends so why not make the game our own? Miniatures look cool and conversion possibilities are almost endless already.

Therefore i call for fantasy battle revolution and let the tactics, dice gods, sportsmanship and being an extraordinary druchii gentleman be our manifest.

See u on the battlefields
cheers
User avatar
flatworldsedge
Chosen of Khaine
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:35 am
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by flatworldsedge »

It's probably all been said in other threads, but for the sake of personal closure I wanted to make a public statement somewhere. I've tried AOS just for the sake of openmindedness and that'll be my first and last game of it. It is a sham at best. Seeing the issues with rules and balance have already been covered in depth, I won't go over that old ground. Rather -

1 - I like points

Quite aside from balance, I like points. I like the experience of adding up points. I like the odd decisions where you're agonising over the relative value of an extra witch elf vs. an iron curse icon and a lance. I like points qua points. Absent function I like points. I like the desperate manual reviews of a 3,000 pt list to make sure it's legal, optimal, cunning, broken... Points are part of the reason I played the game, because they were fun even when I wasn't playing the game. Points are fun on a long train journey.


2 - I like characters

I've said before I am a D&D player before I am a WFB player. No surprise I like character customization. As GW has gently squeezed customization out of the game, reducing generic magic ten choices, etc. I've lived with it. You can suspend disbelief, steal other stat lines and reskin rules to give a feel of customization, even when there is none. Did I just buy Fencer's Blades, or did I just buy justification for character X having WS10 as a result of their grim pact with a lascivious spirit? There are limits to that suspension of disbelief and this new game is not a game of customization at a character level.

There's often a conflict within games - keen at once to give people like me some customization whilst keeping an eye on the fact they can better market Teclis(TM) and license him in games, sell some mug a tshirt with his stupid face on it, and otherwise monetize the cult of IP. What is bizarre here is that they seem to be limiting choice to the latter strategy, whilst torching all that IP.


3 - I have negative goodwill to GW

Just before ET Khakne was released GW offered a bundle of about ten witch elf boxes with a cauldron at list price. Just a straight offer to buy a ton of models at list price. Given what they knew was coming this is just one example of the small thoughtless actions that speak to their lack of respect to their customers.

In fact, it was their use of the word "otiose" in that annual report quote (see above) where they boasted of doing no research. It was so smug, so pompous, so showboatingly arrogant and so wrong. Sure you're in a niche, but people buy in that niche for a range of reasons - maybe to relive a lost childhood, maybe to lord it over friends, maybe to meet new friends, maybe because witch elves are hot, maybe to drive up the price of lead... To state in such obviously self-conscious terms that these nuances - the drivers of your sales - are irrelevant is offensive.


4 - I won't be associated with incompetence

It's offensive not just because it displays a predatory disregard for your customers. It's offensive because it's incompetent.

I've had skirmishes here before criticising GW's business strategy and suggesting that when WOW, LOTR movies, GOT, etc. can make money, the fact GW cannot sufficiently monetise WFB is an indictment on them. I believe it is. The current discussion often paints WFB vs. AOS as the only choices, and I'm sure that's how it became seen within GW in a Cuban war room group-think environment. @Red's point above - that the game maybe has been designed to fail - at first feels mad, and yet when you apply Ockham's razor to the situation, you see that the simplest explanations fail, because it wasn't just a choice of WFB vs. AOS.

AOS is mad. You have some hundred thousand people that recognise your world, characters and broad rule-set as an asset... So you destroy that asset. That's insane. It shows in their limited view of the world; "we're a miniatures company" is another way of saying "we're too stupid to see we have an asset here we should be making money from". For sure they're not a great licensing company, when you see the success of WOW and GOT. GW had a couple decade headstart on them. Yet despite a base of recognition and goodwill, they could not make a major success of the books, video games, etc. That speaks to incompetence, but doesn't justify torching the asset and abandoning hope of future profits.

In a world where mind control is real, or when you've invested incredible effort to create a jawdroppingly, stunningly amazing new game, maybe you take the risk and move binary style to AOS. Yet absent mind control, when you have an at best mediocre shadow of a game to offer henceforth, one would advise less sweeping action. Launch a skirmish module within the ET umbrella, with easy beer/pretzel pick up rules. See how that goes. Make it clear this is a big part of ET. But keep your options open, keep - however cynically - your core customers' hopes alive, keep your asset of IP, recognition and goodwill alive. Keep it on the balance sheet, maybe mothball it, but keep it on the balance sheet. Or sell it. But don't burn it. It's just bad business.

Every time I see the AOS brand, it reminds me of GW's pathetically myopic, tunnel wise decision making and the actual quality of the new game is otiose, as they might say. It could have been a great game, I'd still hate it to some extent because of this. The fact it isn't makes me wretch with hate and rage.


5 - Who cares if WFB is unsupported

So we're sticking with WFB. Likely 8th as it seems the most used, but maybe dropping back a few editions to something with more choice. And I don't see that as a major issue. I liked playing at GW occasionally, yet it meant I wasn't buying some models I loved from Raging Heroes especially. Now I'll buy them. And the rest from Ebay.

"Unsupported" is maybe a big deal if you look at the whole world of "people I could possible play with", but in the context of "people I am likely to play with" it makes little difference. I don't enjoy AOS, and if I came across someone who genuinely preferred it to WFB, well, I wouldn't want to play with them (see #4 above). If you play tournaments, then I appreciate this might not be an option, but for an enthusiastic casual player "support" of a game is kind of meaningless. We still play 2nd edition D&D, with a few house rules. It works nicely. It's saved us a lot of money. It's not an iOS update - you don't start losing apps or breaking security settings. It's still fun. And AOS is not - for all the reasons others point out in terms of the mechanics, and all the reasons above.
User avatar
cultofkhaine
Chief Cultist
Chief Cultist
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 6:45 am
Location: Being tempted by the Cult of Pleasure!
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by cultofkhaine »

+1 flatworldsedge

Well put and I think sums up many of our thoughts here in a very logical way.
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Barking Agatha »

flatworldsedge wrote:1 - I like points

2 - I like characters

3 - I have negative goodwill to GW

4 - I won't be associated with incompetence

5 - Who cares if WFB is unsupported


Even though I'm pro-AoS, I can't really argue with any of that. It's the best reasoned anti argument I've seen yet (maybe the only reasoned one).

1. Personally I don't like points, as I have felt over the years that they're always there to screw me over for wanting to play with my favourite models instead of the 'best' ones, while rewarding min-maxers who couldn't care less whether they played with imperial knights or skaven clanrats, but only that the numbers were cost-effective. But I do realise that that's a personal preference.

2. I also liked creating and customising (and naming) my own characters, and that is sadly gone from AoS. Of course I can still name my characters and give them backstories and so on, but the truth is that your Dreadlord is now the same as every other Dreadlord.

3. GW has arguably shown much contempt for their own customers over the years, true. But that was true during 8th edition too, and as far back as 5th edition or so. If it didn't stop us from playing Warhammer then, there's really no reason why it should be a factor now. Also, we shouldn't conflate GW with Tom Kirby. Kirby is, as you say, smug, pompous, arrogant, and wrong, and also so out of touch that in a rare newspaper interview he did not know what IOS was (when talking about Warhammer Quest for IOS). But when you say 'GW' is like that, it's as if you thought Jervis Johnson was that kind of person, and you would be very, very wrong.

4. I don't know about 'incompetent'. One fact that no one can deny is that, whatever the reasons, GW is the only big game company from the 80s gaming boom that has managed to survive, and stay big, to this day. All of their contemporaries have fallen by the wayside. Dirty tricks, foolish investors, gouging customers... these are all valid accusations, but whatever it is they're doing, it has kept them alive where others have bust. That fact is what has encouraged them to believe that whatever they're doing is right and everyone else is wrong, and even though I disagree with many of their decisions, they do have a point.

5. You can play whatever you like, with whomever you like, of course. It might have been nice if you hadn't felt the need to add an insult in there, but I understand you're angry.
User avatar
flatworldsedge
Chosen of Khaine
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:35 am
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by flatworldsedge »

@Barking Agatha - thanks for the response! Just a couple of follow ups where I might not have expressed myself personally;

RE#1 - The min-maxing point is fair, though I did enough that aspect too. It would often be fixed within local meta and if one is a fluff player, it tends to be less of an issue. E.g. I don't take RBT as I have a Shade army and can't envisage them lugging RBT's though Naggaroth's swamps/mountains/snows, especially whilst evading the Chaos/B'man invaders of the mid-ET world. So I don't take them, though absent fluff I'd have 4 in an instant. That's a slight tangent, of course - the main is I just love points qua points, and you can see why that's an issue!

RE#2 - The "backstory" I think is worthy of further comment, as it's been a real issue for me over the last year since ET kicked off! Creating one's own backstory functions best when the game world is a broadly stable canvas into which you weave your own character/army/lore, etc. With the switch to ET, the GW paradigm has become one of constant change, where the canvas shifts absent concern for your personal fluff. That has a destablising effect on writing one's own backstories - as you must constantly change them, and now in AOS, live in fear of another change that would precipitate further massive change and retcon. For me, the best response of course is to freeze time. In which case I'll freeze it in my existing lore (mid ET), and that plays to retaining 8th per #5.

RE#3 - The only sub note I'd put here is actually for the GW store staff. I wouldn't want people to read my note as accusing them of anything. They've been great to me recently - keeping stores open late for me, etc. I feel sorry for them that they are at the front line for their management's various abuses of trust.

RE#4 - I take the point about their survival, yet from their early '90's heyday I'd still say that's an incompetent result. With their momentum and custom base at the time, I think it's incompetent to be where there are today. A competent organisation would have made better use of the rise in ecommerce to drive down cost, forums/social networks to drive loyalty and spend, the rise in mainstream online gaming to leverage their (previously significant) WFB IP assets, etc., etc. I feel they missed too many tricks - exploited by new entrants - and can see why they did in their statements about what kind of a company they are, rather than recognising the assets they in fact held. Why isn't WOW instead WOFB, why are we chatting here at druchii.net rather than gw.com/druchii, why are people watching GOT instead of ET on TV? I guess that's the main sub-point I'd make here. Survival is a poor result for them.

RE#5 - Yeah, I guess it comes across as an insult - and I am a complex mix of angry, betrayed, etc. But genuinely, life is too short to play a game I don't like, and so linked to multiple points of betrayal as to leave so bitter a taste. Just as a statement though, not intending insult, I think it's fair to say that if person A wants to play WFB and person B wants to play AOS, they shouldn't hook up for a game together! I't'd be a frustrating mismatch and a waste of time that could be spent on better matches. I'm Buddhist enough to say farewell to those preferring AOS, and to support their right to free speech, but I'm not interested - no insult - in playing with them or arguing the toss.

I respect that's not what you're doing above, and it's a classy response in tone, so hope no offense is taken with this clarification. If you're playing Exiles go take some Sig Marine heads - Khaine speed your blades. That's the best well wishing I can do - just typing Exiles feels like a betrayal though, so I'll leave it at that!
User avatar
Cailil
Executioner
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 10:03 am
Location: Albion

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Cailil »

Barking Agatha wrote:
flatworldsedge wrote:1 - I like points

2 - I like characters

5 - Who cares if WFB is unsupported


Even though I'm pro-AoS, I can't really argue with any of that. It's the best reasoned anti argument I've seen yet (maybe the only reasoned one).


Ditto I stopped playing WFB because of 8th (horde rules encouraged cheesy power gamers in my area) and the game I fell in love with was much smaller (and had things like Dogs of War and Path to Glory etc). While AOS lacks personality (no ability to customize characters - which is insane) it is actually the first time in years that I've felt like playing warhammer fantasy. But these are valid points.
Last edited by Cailil on Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Flam1ng0
Slave on the Altar
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 7:53 am
Location: Australia

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Flam1ng0 »

+1 @flatworldsedge, I completely agree with all the points you make. Especially the second one, as constructing characters to lead my armies was possibly the part of list-building I enjoyed the most. It also inspired me to convert miniatures to accurately represent these 'heroes of the house scene'. They make rules that tell players to measure their beards and have staring contests with each other, but totally obliterate the vast existing options that allowed players to create their 'own' lord or hero. What does GW think will attract a player to a unit more: seeing the Bretonnian Lord the player equipped with the appropriate virtues and magic items wreck stuff on the charge, or said player having to yell "For the Lady" to get some minor in-game benefits?

flatworldsedge wrote:Points are part of the reason I played the game, because they were fun even when I wasn't playing the game. Points are fun on a long train journey.


Glad to see I'm not the only person who does this!!

http://ftgtgaming.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/a-treatise-on-gaming-points-values-you.html

But in tying in with the whole points argument, the article this link leads to features an old article by Jervis Johnson himself where he pretty much denounces the place of points values in gaming. In hindsight it is foreshadowing stuff, and suggests that he had a major role in the transition from WFB to AoS. He also manages to come off as smug and completely out of touch with the people who play the game he was majorly involved with.

Johnson's mentality accompanied with sightings of AoS terrain as far back as two years ago (Triumph and Treachery) suggests that either:

A) GW were merely holding some of this stuff back for a later release. This is highly likely, as this has happened on a few occasions, for example the plastic Daemon Prince- who knows what MPP wonders lie yet to be released in the depths of GW's warehouses?

B) AoS was in the works for a considerably longer time period than first thought, which not only makes the system's poor design and many holes even more pathetic and insulting from a consumer standpoint, but also ties in with flatworldsedge third point, that it is completely disgusting from GW to gouge customers of their money for products of a system that they had no intentions of continuing, even up to a few months ago. It shows a complete disrespect and lack of communication with their customer base, and the arrogance and pride displayed in their annual report only confirmed this.

It's this attitude displayed in their evaluation of their customers that makes option B) even completely feasible, unfortunately.
Lokhir
-..v_v..Lokhir Fellheart
-..(--)..Conqueror
..U( )U.of Ind
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Barking Agatha »

Thank you! Lovely and honest answer :)

No argument from me. Your reasons are valid and I don't disagree with them. This isn't meant to try to convince you, I'm just chatting because you make some interesting points. Okay? I wouldn't feel the need to say so, but everyone seems a bit on edge.

flatworldsedge wrote:RE#2 - The "backstory" I think is worthy of further comment, as it's been a real issue for me over the last year since ET kicked off! Creating one's own backstory functions best when the game world is a broadly stable canvas into which you weave your own character/army/lore, etc.


Well, evolving storylines aren't really new. D&D does it in Forgotten Realms, and of course White Wolf did it with the old World of Darkness (although that may not be the best example, considering). I've heard people say that the story of Warcraft ended with the Itch King, and they have a point, yet there it is still. A complete re-boot can be hard to take, but I can see the sense in it. The original WHFB world, quite frankly, was Tolkien crossed with Moorcock and filtered through 2000 AD. They've added to it over the years until it became kind of its own thing, but when they try to get possessive about it as an IP they suddenly realise that they nicked most of it off of someone else.

flatworldsedge wrote:RE#4 - I take the point about their survival, yet from their early '90's heyday I'd still say that's an incompetent result. With their momentum and custom base at the time, I think it's incompetent to be where there are today. A competent organisation would have made better use of the rise in ecommerce to drive down cost, forums/social networks to drive loyalty and spend, the rise in mainstream online gaming to leverage their (previously significant) WFB IP assets, etc., etc. I feel they missed too many tricks - exploited by new entrants - and can see why they did in their statements about what kind of a company they are, rather than recognising the assets they in fact held. Why isn't WOW instead WOFB, why are we chatting here at druchii.net rather than gw.com/druchii, why are people watching GOT instead of ET on TV? I guess that's the main sub-point I'd make here. Survival is a poor result for them.


That's down to Kirby too. In some ways he's done really well; going public while retaining control was genius. Then again, it has taken him this long to believe that the Internet really isn't a passing fad, and he thinks Apple devices are a niche. Google him sometime, everything that frustrates you about GW is explained by his particular kind of weirdness. Except for people watching GOT on TV, that's just common sense. GoT is an epic drama written by a top-level writer and with broad popular appeal, and Warhammer is not. At best, a Warhammer tv show would end up being like Merlin.


flatworldsedge wrote:I'm Buddhist enough to say farewell to those preferring AOS, and to support their right to free speech, but I'm not interested - no insult - in playing with them or arguing the toss.


I would happily play 8th edition with you, if you wanted to. Or Chaos in the Old World, if you let me pick Slaanesh. Or whatever. It's not either-or for me. :)
User avatar
Diobarach
Black Guard
Posts: 296
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 12:24 am

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Diobarach »

Flam1ng0 wrote:...

Glad to see I'm not the only person who does this!!

http://ftgtgaming.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/a-treatise-on-gaming-points-values-you.html

But in tying in with the whole points argument, the article this link leads to features an old article by Jervis Johnson himself where he pretty much denounces the place of points values in gaming. In hindsight it is foreshadowing stuff, and suggests that he had a major role in the transition from WFB to AoS. He also manages to come off as smug and completely out of touch with the people who play the game he was majorly involved with.

Johnson's mentality accompanied with sightings of AoS terrain as far back as two years ago (Triumph and Treachery) suggests that either:

A) GW were merely holding some of this stuff back for a later release. This is highly likely, as this has happened on a few occasions, for example the plastic Daemon Prince- who knows what MPP wonders lie yet to be released in the depths of GW's warehouses?

B) AoS was in the works for a considerably longer time period than first thought, which not only makes the system's poor design and many holes even more pathetic and insulting from a consumer standpoint, but also ties in with flatworldsedge third point, that it is completely disgusting from GW to gouge customers of their money for products of a system that they had no intentions of continuing, even up to a few months ago. It shows a complete disrespect and lack of communication with their customer base, and the arrogance and pride displayed in their annual report only confirmed this.

It's this attitude displayed in their evaluation of their customers that makes option B) even completely feasible, unfortunately.


Interesting article from Jervis, I didn't find it insulting (as a somewhat competitive player) perhaps a bit bizarre that he phrases it as he does but that's his opinion. I guess it is disappointing that the new direction for warhammer is away from trying to allow players to build armies that should be balanced (and hence a fair game) to more of 'this feels balanced' or asymmetric scenarios since those are more fun (his opinion of course).

I suppose given the fantasy setting and its diverse armies balance is probably difficult to achieve, but discarding points was just an easy thing to do and the easy thing isn't always the best thing.
User avatar
Barking Agatha
Corsair
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Barking Agatha »

Flam1ng0 wrote:He also manages to come off as smug and completely out of touch with the people who play the game he was majorly involved with.

Johnson's mentality...


I take it you've never met Jervis, or you wouldn't say such things about him. He is a lovely, lovely man who will always be friendly and open toward you and never cop an attitude or pull the 'I've been a game designer at GW for almost 40 years with a few classic credits to my name, so maybe I know a thing or two' card. Disagree with him all you like, but to disparage him... it's downright mean.

EDIT: That article appears to be from the Citadel Journal, which ceased publication in 2002, so unless you believe that AoS has been in the works for 13 years I wouldn't call it 'foreshadowing'.
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Arquinsiel »

Honestly Jervis' article seems to me that he realised the problem with the game that led into the death spiral of powercreep way back when, but events show he wasn't able to prevent it. Ah well.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
Flam1ng0
Slave on the Altar
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 7:53 am
Location: Australia

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Flam1ng0 »

I haven't met Jervis, but I was lucky enough to have met a few guys from the design team (Vetock, Cruddace and Ward when he was still there) when I went to Warhammer World when I was over in the UK a few years ago. Also an interesting fact is that a fair amount of the design team past and present (Johnson, Kelly, Ward, Anthony Reynolds, etc.) are/were quite active in D&D, thus when I actually talked to them they didn't come across all GW-ish, which surprised me a bit.

Jeremy Vetock is an awesome guy and he seems genuinely enthused by the game, had a good chat at Bugman's about Savage Orcs. He was mentioning some of the campaigns he played with his group and how much he loved huge battles with the massive Orc and Goblin army he has.

I couldn't fault either Cruddace and Ward either, even if the /tg/ thinks he's the GW equivalent of the Devil. Both were nice guys, and Ward definitely loved talking about Elves, contrary to /tg/'s belief that he can't go a sentence without referring to the Ultramarines or their 'Spiritual Liege'.

So it saddens me that they have design staff that are genuinely enthused about the WFB game and setting, and AoS still managed to be the mess it is. I don't know how much pulling power/creative control they had, and how much was down to the board, but it is still a massive disappointment nonetheless. I just hope it doesn't result in more talent leaving ship due to GW's direction, like with Alessio Cavatore and Rick Priestly.
Lokhir
-..v_v..Lokhir Fellheart
-..(--)..Conqueror
..U( )U.of Ind
User avatar
Gidean
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:47 am

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Gidean »

Barking Agatha wrote:
Flam1ng0 wrote:He also manages to come off as smug and completely out of touch with the people who play the game he was majorly involved with.

Johnson's mentality...


I take it you've never met Jervis, or you wouldn't say such things about him. He is a lovely, lovely man who will always be friendly and open toward you and never cop an attitude or pull the 'I've been a game designer at GW for almost 40 years with a few classic credits to my name, so maybe I know a thing or two' card. Disagree with him all you like, but to disparage him... it's downright mean.

EDIT: That article appears to be from the Citadel Journal, which ceased publication in 2002, so unless you believe that AoS has been in the works for 13 years I wouldn't call it 'foreshadowing'.


+1 I've met Jervis when he visited here in the States and I agree with Barking Ag. A very polite and humble man. But I don't think he ever approached the game from a 'competitive' standpoint.
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Arquinsiel »

Jervis is of the generation of gamers that came up under the wings of people like Donald Featherstone and Peter Young etc. Very much a different sort of environment to today's market-driven thing. You can see it really obviously in how things like that are written, or how nearly anything any ex-GW designer writes after leaving is very much A Gentleman's Game for Gentlemen Who Can Agree On Things Like Adults (by rolling a D6 for it).
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
User avatar
Jvh792
Highborn
Posts: 682
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:32 am

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Jvh792 »

Just played my first game of KoW. It was SO MUCH FUN. Seriously. If you haven't played this game yet and are butthurt over fantasy, give it a shot. Don't let the simple rules fool you. Very complex and strategic game.
"With hate, all things are possible." - Malus Darkblade
User avatar
toots
Beastmaster
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2014 10:25 pm

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by toots »

lol - true dat!!

flatworldsedge wrote:In fact, it was their use of the word "otiose" in that annual report quote (see above) where they boasted of doing no research. It was so smug, so pompous, so showboatingly arrogant and so wrong.
User avatar
direweasel
Malekith's Personal Guard
Posts: 920
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:58 pm
Location: Terre Haute, IN, USA

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by direweasel »

Gidean wrote:+1 I've met Jervis when he visited here in the States and I agree with Barking Ag. A very polite and humble man. But I don't think he ever approached the game from a 'competitive' standpoint.


Will second that wholeheartedly. I've met him on two different occasions at Blood Bowl events, and he always comes across as shocked that people actually like his game, and have clearly put more thought into it than he has in some ways.

I don't mean that in a bad way, I just mean he sees Blood Bowl particularly as more whimsy than serious, and is surprised at how seriously some people take it. But he is a great guy and has a very positive attitude, always very approachable and will discuss his games with anyone to no end.
Chinese Relativity Axiom: No matter how glorious your triumphs, nor how miserable your failures, there will always be at least one billion people in China who don't give a damn.

Apocalypse Drow! Plog: http://druchii.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=75360
User avatar
Arquinsiel
Shadowdancer
Posts: 4987
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:16 pm
Location: The deepest pits in a hell of my own making
Contact:

Re: Un-Welcome to the Age of Sigmar

Post by Arquinsiel »

And those rules are fun, which is a plus.
ImageImageImageImage
faerthurir wrote:Arq kicked me in the gyros.
Post Reply