Topic: How on earth do you pick an army in AOS?

[Darknight]

Yeah, on the "who can have fun with this?" kind of thing (and Chumley's "Age of Wankmar" rant-thread) ... bear in mind a lot of people would say the same sort of thing about 8th ed, or wargaming in general, or roleplaying, or watching "fandom" TV-shows etc.

I was talking with a colleague about AoS today (he hadn't seen it, and he was very excited). Another colleague happened by and he was dismissive of GW games because "they have no idea how infantry combat works". He's a military historian.

Ultimately, these games ARE childish in many ways - they are make-believe. Are they less or more childish than following professional sports? I don't know - but the fact remains it's easy to mock any hobby, or a sub-set of a hobby. Everyone is watching Marvel movies these days ... but "comic-book nerds" are still looked down on.

[Padre]

I am not calling people children, my lord Baron, but rather calling AoS a children's game. Take cards as a good example. In my 20s I had a great time with two very different groups of friends playing two very different card games. With my gaming buddies we played a Chinese game called Gang of Four - most excellent, addictively so. With my (then) lady I played Canasta, teaming with her against another couple, and great evenings were had. AoS is, in comparison to WFB, what the card game 'Snap' is to 'Gang of Four' or Canasta. Worse, as it stands (and I do know this has to change) it is snap where you can bring as many cards as you like so that you need never lose.

As the honourable Chumley put it:

It (i.e. WFB) was detailed, tactical, addictive, moreish, hordeish and lovely

My attempts to describe how I feel about what GW has created in lieu of WFB are heartfelt, and not meant to be condescending. I have immersed myself in the 'childish' experience of a campaign - with made up characters, stories, and lots of lovely toys. I have fashioned a little corner of the Warhammer World to set it in, basing my creations and interpretations on the reading of several history books concerning Condottiere, Savonarola, the Borgias, Florence, Machiavelli, etc etc. Reading, margin notes, leading onto background and history to set the campaign in, whilst ensuring that the region still feels like part of the wonderful warhammer world. I've been immersing myself on and off into Warhammer Fantasy since I was 15 (1983), adapting and adding all along the way.

And then GW throw this at us. Not as another game, but as the 'new' fantasy that beginners will play. That has an effect - campaigns in years time are going to be harder to populate. But these are minor complaints. More to the point, and pictures say this better, here is my work-table right this very moment...





It pretty much always looks like this. (I field only fully painted armies, and now I need figures galore for the photos in my campaigns). Like I said, I'm fully immersed. I am allowed to be at least disappointed at GW's recent choices and actions. Now I am even worried my current players might drift away if this is the only WFB they get to do (it's not exactly a fast moving campaign). We were enjoying our childish pursuit - no one is playing spammed lists, but roleplaying their characters (the lords and generals) and using themed armies (or my armies). Any audience I have for my campaign threads will diminish too.

I know I could ignore it and just keep 'oldhammering on', and yeah, that'll probably work for a long while. But I also know I am allowed to voice my dislike of AoS as a 'replacement' for WFB. I'm not saying people are children, but that this new game is very weak in comparison to the old, in a way that Snap isn't something Bridge or Poker players want to play.

[Darknight]

You say you aren't calling people "children", but that is only purely technically correct. When you write;

I have been struggling so hard to find a way in which adults can use AoS. I just don't see it. I wouldn't expect them to want to play a let's pretend and make silly noises game with playmobile toys or He Man dolls, and this game seems to be created on exactly that level.

it's hard not to interpret that as some kind of dismissal of people.

[iatroblast]

I was attracted to Warhammer Fantasy concept because i always thought to  be an inspiring set with nations enduring terrible fates, fighting desperate battles. What am i getting now, is a fabulous golden army full of Buzz Lightyears. With me  growing a moustache
Well excuse me, but i'll be bitching 

[Padre]

Darknight: I refer you to iatroblast's statement above. He's quite succinct and very much to the point.

As to your point about my point, I'll explain  my point again: There are children's games and toys out there, labelled as such, played by children. Maybe grown-up carers and family join in, but I think they're most likely to be doing so for the children, and they probably enjoy joining their children in the game. I doubt, however, those same adults would join other adult to play those same games. Those are the toys and games I am talking about. Not the people, the toys and games. Well, AoS looks like one of those games to me.

[Darknight]

Read Shav's post in the "AoS Experiences" thread.

He had fun, it seems. He didn't write it up as if he was playing a game ironically, or in a childish manner, or with children. He played it with a fellow adult in an adult manner.

AoS is not, in my view, a childrens' game ... any more than Warhammer itself is a children's game.

[Padre]

I read Shav's post. I also read the AoS rules & wasn't convinced at all. I've also seen the models and really don't like them. I haven't the energy or time just now to go over again why not, but I don't suppose you want to read me doing so either.

I never got into computer games, not because they were childish, but because they seemed a lonely sort of pursuit. I wanted a social game, real people around a table. Also they was no modelling or painting involved in pc games. Over the years it has taken more and more to keep me interested in WFB, until now my campaign experience involves not just modelling, painting, roleplaying and wargaming, but also photographs, reports, short fiction, campaign strategy. I had to move forwards and add more and more aspects to keep me in the Warhammer World. AoS, however, seems to be a massive step backwards and kind of sideways too.

Play the game, please, it's no skin off my back. If you like it, go for it.

[Darknight]

I haven't the energy or time just now to go over again why not, but I don't suppose you want to read me doing so either.

Nor do you need to - you've said why before.

And, yes - you do have a right to express your views. Of course you do. And you don't need to like it, or approve, or whatever. But I think it is appropriate for your to recognize in your posts (in the underlying implication) that other people might have a different view, and will enjoy the game. And, to dismiss people as "childish" (yes, I know you are saying the GAME, not the people, are childish - but when you say you can't see any reason an adult would play the game, and liken it to smashing figures together etc. that is what people hear) isn't necessary.

[Padre]

You're selectively quoting. It's fun, like politicians arguing. I'll select a bit ...

And, to dismiss people as "childish" (yes, I know you are saying the GAME, not the people, are childish - but when you say you can't see any reason an adult would play the game, and liken it to smashing figures together etc. that is what people hear) isn't necessary.

If you're worried about what people think I am saying rather than what I am saying, then yeah, that would be worrying. I have tried several times over to make it clear what I am saying so they won't make such mistakes.

My position, put as concisely as possible, is that AoS is radically different to the Warhammer world I love, and seems simpler in the way that children's games are simpler, both in appearance and rules. I have no desire to have anything to do with it. This is all my opinion, it can't really be anything else. Don't let it bother you.

[Darknight]

 

I guess I'd just want everyone to be happy

Sorry the game you loved has kind of got shafted.

[Syn Ace]

The fact of the matter is they have______ [streamlined, dumbed down, gutted, simplified, made more accessible--pick the word you like] the GW fantasy tabletop game experience. Is it designed to be more inclusive and get kids in? Maybe. If so, this would be the way to do it. Don't worry about points and complicated rules and just throw models down. So yeah, you could argue it is designed with children in mind--not exclusively though.

[Darknight]

See, I would replace your blank with "changed".

Shav's experience (and I would urge everyone to read it - it is a very thoughtful post) shows the game isn't JUST "childish" (either merely appealing to children, or dumbed down, or whatever).

The three issues you raise;

* Don't worry about points
* No complex rules
* Just throw models down

I think are kinda legitimate - but the need to be looked at differently. Or, rather, the designers intend you to look at differently.

The point of AoS, so far as it appears to me, is a game where precise balance isn't even striven for - because such a thing has consistently failed. Tournaments often use comp, precisely because the community thinks GW can't get it right. The commonest complaint about GW's rules are that the balance is off. So, yes - there are no points. Don't worry about them.

But you don't just throw down models any old how. Yes, if the goal is merely to "win" then one would do that - the "tactic" would be to simply field more models (of course, one needs to factor in the issue of putting down models until you run out of space - someone likened the army to a deck of cards and you play with SOME of those). But that would be a dick move - seriously; who would say "I AM A WIN!" based on the fact they just took more models than their opponent? It's not cheating per se - but it's also not something played within the clearly implied spirit of the game.

You talk to your opponent and settle on something. Shav and his opponent did that very easily, it seems.

As for "no complex rules" ... again, Shav's post shows that isn't necessarily the case. And, of course ... why do we need "complex" rules? The rules for Warhammer are already a HUGE simplification - not a game of simulation at all. The AoS rules work, I think, as game mechanics. They allow you to, well, move models around and pretend it's a battle.

And that is what Warhammer allows you to do, too.

[Gneisenau]

I've never understood the "simple rules for kids" approach.

No kid with the dedication to glue a whole army together will have trouble learning complex rules.

[shavixmir]

Chess has simple rules.

I don't see any problem in simple rules, nor do I see anything childish about simple rules.
Are they good? Are they balanced? Do they help the game flow?

These are the sort of questions you'd be better off asking.

And as with any game and cunnilingus, best try it a couple of times before judging it. Reading never does these sorts of acitivities justice.

[Syn Ace]

I read Shav's report, but there are plenty of other reports online where people found things too simplified for their tastes and they had some serious concerns about long-term playability once the shine wears off. There were also concerns about overpowered shooting and imbalanced armies (one report, the guy tabled his opponent by turn 2) and long term playability and balance issues. The actual game using AoS units and not WHFB units could be a different kettle of fish depending on the warscroll rules--I'll be interested to see what kind of war machine rules pop up.

It's too early to make the call on whether this is a game that will receive a lot of play time from players or be a flash in the pan. Right now I'm having trouble getting any of my WHFB friends to give AoS a playtest, though one guy did pre-order it (he buys everything so he's a great guinea pig--and I thought I was compulsive).

[Kernschatten]

See, I would replace your blank with "changed".

How much of a game's rules do you have to change before a game becomes a completely different system? (You can make the argument that 8th Ed has very little resemblance to 1st Ed. But that was a gradual change over decades.)

AoS is not Warhammer Fantasy Battles. It shares the name Warhammer and makes a nod to Sigmar. That's it.
Mordheim was not WHFB. Warmaster (what a fantastic game) was not WHFB.

There are a lot of people who are disappointed in the way GW is handling this. They just pulled the WHFB rules and army books without any announcement. Sure, we have  heard rumors for months, but no one really believed them. They have not officially said that AoS is the new WHFB. They have not officially said that WHFB was being squatted. They posted some rules, started a pre-order for a new game, and pulled the rules for Fantasy. And lots of rumors and someone talked to a guy who knows a guy (it's always a guy, right?).

I've played other game systems. DBA, FoW, Ral Partha's Battlestorm  , Chainmail, and others. I may play some of them again. I might play 40K with my son. I might dabble in AoS. I'll have to see how it goes.
And I'm going to give Kings of War a try. The rules were written by Alessio Cavatore (wrote Warmaster) and the 2nd Ed rules are supposed to have a forward by Rick Priestly.

[Qrab]

Pretty simple question, but noone in my group has a clue!

Looking at the back there are some armies, are we to assume that is what you field?  Nothing limits the size of units!

Also, there are tons of warscrolls you can't use.  Are they for different games?

Nagash appears to be the most brokenest thing, since broken things ever existed.  Game balance?  What is to stop Undead players taking him as a scroll? I can't really work it out!

The answer to your question is that you don't "pick an army" in AoS. Rather, you and your opponent each take turns selecting and deploying models/units from your personal collections until one or both of you 1) decide to stop, 2) run out of models, or 3) run out of space in your deployment zone. Warscrolls simply provide you with rules to accompany your models (both figures and terrain). You are not limited to fielding models/units from one faction (though you will certainly gain synergies from doing so).

I believe a significant part of the game as written revolves around the psychological game that occurs during deployment where each player selects their models in reaction to what their opponent just deployed. (Whether this is a good thing or bad remains to be seen by the success of the game, although I do know how I feel about it).

The best way to think of AoS is as something akin to a collectible card game. A card game where you have to build and paint your cards before you can use them, there is no rarity to worry about, and there are no 'deck construction' limits.

[Kernschatten]

Qrab: Thank you. That is a very interesting summation.

[Syn Ace]

The best way to think of AoS is as something akin to a collectible card game. A card game where you have to build and paint your cards before you can use them, there is no rarity to worry about, and there are no 'deck construction' limits.

I was kind of hoping that's how the game would turn out, but I don't think it will attain that depth. Guess we'll see.

[Dosiere]

I'm not sure plopping down more models isn't in the spirit of the game.  In fact, it's exactly what GW wants you to do.  Since this will invariably result in situations where someone can't hope to defeat an opponents entire army, they gave us the sudden death rules for exactly that reason. 

For those with huge model collections, it's a non issue.  You can either match your opponents deployment escalation by placing more as well until you feel you've made it as even as possible or intentionally place fewer models but enough to give you a fighting chance with the sudden death rules.  For new players the veterans are going to have to be careful as they learn what units are capable of since it's very easy to have unbalanced game even if the model counts are similar. 

[Gneisenau]

Well, one good thing this AoS has done is bringing the old geezers out of the woodwork.

Welcome back, Qrab!

[Kernschatten]

Well, one good thing this AoS has done is bringing the old geezers out of the woodwork.

 

[Qrab]

TY, Gneisenau. As a long time fan of the Warhammer world, I'm sad to see the direction GW has gone. I was also curious to see how others would respond, so a few weeks back I started lurking on various forums lately to see for myself. Not sure how long AoS will hold my interest, but I've begun painting models again after almost a 4 year hiatus.

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykWPyaqbebo

[wissenlander]

I posted this thought elsewhere and will reiterate here why I don't like this change.  I liked WFB because of these three main elements:  maneuver, line combat and fluff.  From what I can gather all three of those have been scrapped or greatly reduced.  It feels like a completely different game and I'm assuming that it is based on what I have read.  It may be fun, I'll concede that it has the potential.  But, it's a different game that they're saying is now supposed to replace a game I already liked (and admittedly haven't played a lot in about three or four years).