|
Post by inso on Jul 2, 2015 14:41:29 GMT
Has anyone seen all the leaked images/information about this new game 'Age of Sigmar' from GW? There is plenty of discussion about it, however the big thing that I have noticed is that not only do many of the miniatures look like stylised Space Marines but they are also a bit bigger than standard 28mm miniatures and would make good 'true scale' marines. If you don't know what the hell I'm talking about... I'll post some links when I fifnish work
|
|
|
Post by Lord Draconiroth on Jul 2, 2015 19:56:27 GMT
Yeah the Sigmarites do have a bit of fantasy marine about them. But the game itself I'm kinda excited about...
|
|
|
Post by inso on Jul 3, 2015 11:27:57 GMT
Game wise, I'll leave that up to people who play games to decide... but here is a Blood Angel looming over Dark Angel:
|
|
|
Post by Max_Dammit on Jul 3, 2015 11:33:51 GMT
We might see true scale marines in the future if I look at this, the bigger base and these mini's
|
|
|
Post by Lord Draconiroth on Jul 3, 2015 19:40:05 GMT
Wow he's huge! Also how come you've got one already?
|
|
|
Post by inso on Jul 3, 2015 23:11:56 GMT
I haven't got one... I'll be getting one tomorrow with White Dwarf
|
|
|
Post by inso on Jul 4, 2015 12:25:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sw1 on Jul 6, 2015 18:04:02 GMT
Has anyone had a go with the new game. Currently sifting through the PDFs GWS has provided free for all the races.
Some really amusing things like night goblins getting bonuses if the player playin them turns up in a hoody. Want you black ork boss to give you a bonus ... Shout something at your opponent in a menacing manner. My favourite yet is manfreds ... Talk to him during a certain faze and get a reroll but if he replies get an even better reroll. Think they've gone a little OTT with bringing the fun back into WHFB but got to give them some kudos for trying.
|
|
|
Post by inso on Jul 6, 2015 18:59:40 GMT
With the addition of such amusing little rules as comparing moustaches, shouting out 'WAAGGHH' and talking to your miniatures to get bonuses, it is getting to a point where I may actually start gaming again just for the fun of it! I haven't gamed for many years so can't comment on the game but I have been reading the battle scrolls without having a cup of tea handy because some of the rules are so funny that I can't be trusted to drink tea without snorting it out of my nose . I am sure that there will be MANY people who are horrified by the new direction the game has taken... but I think it has the potential to be extremely good fun... like a game should be The 'points value' issue will rumble on, I think...
|
|
|
Post by Lord Draconiroth on Jul 6, 2015 19:13:46 GMT
It's just that I think. They've abandoned points costs and brought in these rules to make people realise it's about the fun, not the winning!
|
|
|
Post by Geifer on Sept 30, 2015 8:56:43 GMT
People around here think it's fun to have a fair chance of winning for both players, which is why (among other things) nobody bothers with GW. I've been playing GW games for twenty years and I can't read through the rules of a new game and look at two armies and go, yep, these seem about equal, or nope, that one will beat this one hands down. I like the idea behind the streamlined rules, and even most of the execution of the core rules, and getting rid of regimental formation based rules is totally what I like, but without an inbuilt balancing system the game is worthless to me. It's not like I'm worried about jerks who abuse the system. I play with some good folks who are disappointed if they win big because their opponent never had a chance. It's not fun for either player, unlike a close game that could have gone either way. That's something Age of Sigmar can't provide, and honestly, letting the players fix such glaring and work intensive issues? Why wouldn't we just pick up any other functional game system? There are plenty around. Shame, really. Mechanically, Age of Sigmar very much went in the direction I wanted. Took a wrong turn somewhere, though. I am sure that there will be MANY people who are horrified by the new direction the game has taken... but I think it has the potential to be extremely good fun... like a game should be Personally that's the thing that I find most off putting. I will happily do the very things those rules describe because I am excited and having fun, but if I am told to do these things, rarely will you have seen more stone faced a man than me. "Have fun already, damn it!" is by far my least favorite design method. If you have to force fun, you've already failed as a game designer.
|
|
|
Post by Max_Dammit on Oct 2, 2015 15:30:40 GMT
I think its a matter of just trying out, start with a small core game, let the loser ad 2 units and the winner one ore non, depending on how he won.
I love the starterbox, its easy to play with my son, and if I keep losing with chaos or sigmar, ill just add one more unit to the loser until its more even.
I see where people want a point system to make it easy, but how is the Ork codex points balanced to the eldar codex?
|
|
|
Post by Geifer on Oct 6, 2015 8:32:11 GMT
I'm asking for a working points system, not a GW points system. It's cool if that's how the game works for you. That's a very simple situation, however. Buff gold dudes with hammers versus buff red dudes with axes played only by two people is much less work to figure out than twenty people, some of which bought in new, others with legacy armies and vast selection of units. Say I feel what I brought against Orcs last game may have been too little? Next time I bring more, only to find I'm playing against someone else with Empire. Now any thoughts of balance I had are out of the window and I have to start anew. And that goes on and on for a long time until everyone in the group has either become an expert or people have been excluded or driven away, thereby whittling down the variety that has to be accounted for. Yes, as a slowly building up project in a small circle it may work, but I'm less than enthusiastic about GW's focus on very specific customers. I miss the days when they went with a broader, more inclusive approach. Is there not enough room for all of us in this hobby anymore? That used to be the one, big appeal of GW. It was played everywhere, in large numbers that you don't have to wonder whether the trip to the local store is worth it. These days mine has, basically, only a third of its people left (you can pin that directly on GW) and because of GW's further antics, those that are left are much happier playing non-GW games (another one you can pin on GW). Even a year ago, it was unthinkable that you had to ask for a game of 40k a week in advance to make sure there was a 40k player present at all, to say nothing of the glory days further back in time. Ultimately, to me, it just goes beyond the actual game. There merits and flaws of a game mean nothing if no one is left to play it.
|
|
|
Post by Max_Dammit on Oct 7, 2015 7:32:52 GMT
Did you look in to the scenario's, I have no idea if those limit ons army?
And as far as I've seen age of sigmar cant be balanced, just like 40K is beyond balance, there are skaven army's that table people on turn 2.
I think GW has to change its way of thinking fast.
|
|
|
Post by Geifer on Oct 7, 2015 9:29:12 GMT
I never got to the scenarios may balance stage. If the universal reaction to Age of Sigmar is "I read the rules, I laughed, I moved on", it's not just about my motivation to play the game, but also the ability to get others to play. As I said above, my biggest issue with modern GW is they eroded the player base to a point where it becomes hard to even get a 40k game anymore without pre-arranging. A game of Age of Sigmar's quality, which is not established, doesn't stand a chance were I play.
I guess I'm just too optimistic when I ask for balance. That would require a complete rework of 40k. It used to be about the regular soldiers with the reset of 3rd ed, and got blown up from there. Ever bigger guns and monsters destroyed the relevance of the at the time superb Marine statline. You can't achieve balance unless the core of the army, and that is still the basic infantry for most armies, is in fact a most relevant part of the army. GW wasn't very good at establishing it at the time, and got worse from there. Sadly, we see with Age of Sigmar how a complete rework of a GW game looks these days. So I guess it's a bit futile to ask for balance when it's clear GW is incapable of producing it. But, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, it ties in with what I said earlier. GW isn't alone in the market and people aren't married to it. Other games get so many things right and can use that to their advantage to appeal to future ex-GW players. That's good neither for GW nor the remaining players, until of course, the latter expand their gaming as well. Which still doesn't fix the GW situation.
Yeah, would be good for GW to change. I wouldn't bet on it, though. Change hasn't come easy to them in the past, nor has it been good change for the most part.
|
|