State of the Game Inquiry

[Mr. White]

yeah with friends and family we play casual AoS using only the 4page ruleset and the open war cards. it'sperfect. any collection of models of any size is good to go.

heck, you could play small AoS battles using only shadespire warband models. that's great value right there. only collect shadespire and grab a box of open war cards (AoS rules are free).

AoS is one of the most affordable minis games on the market.

I'm sorry to hear the GHB killed interest in some areas, but why not just ignore it in that case? Stick with the original Open Play.

[chord]

Well the community is so small that some want to use GHB and others don't so it makes games almost impossible to schedule. 

[Clan's Cynic]

I feel like Age of Sigmar's more glaring issues suffer in large part from severe growing pains, coupled with being a test bed for 40k 8th.

The game was either rushed out without Matched Play, or what we got was something whipped up for a game that wasn't designed with it in mind. For obvious reasons, this hurt the early Battletomes severely. Speaking of which, it's also suffered in Games Workshop obviously testing out how armies would actually work. The WHFB armies were split into different mini-factions of which some barely have more than five models and similarly early Battletome armies (Ironjawz, Clan Pestilence, Fyreslayers, Draconis, etc) suffered from this same strategy of releasing tiny mini-factions with barely anything to them. On both fronts, GW have realised their screwup and newer armies are largely padded out quite well (Deepkin, Kharadrons, LoNagash for the WHFB VC range, etc). 

That's both a good and a bad thing. It shows GW is willing to try out new things with AoS but aren't gripping the wheel so tightly they refuse to change (anymore), however it's also resulted in a game clogged up with so many pieces of prototype wreckage that things are quickly becoming clogged up and in some cases overwhelming, which is very much what most people want to avoid I imagine. I don't want to turn this into a 'AoS 2nd Edition' discussion, but I do feel like it is an inevitability just to cut off some of the extra limbs that have sprouted and are just getting in the way. 

[Kyriakin]

I have to say, I have been looking at 40K recently for the first time in 20 years (I prefer historical/fantasy to future/sci-fi in general, but I am unsure about the future of certain AoS factions and have chosen to wait).

Compared to 40K, AoS is far easier IMHO.

I literally don't know where to start with 40K, and this is the streamlined version (i.e. compared to 7th Edition 40K).

[MacDuff]

40K is really catering to competitive play right now, and I can't keep up with the FAQs and Codex deluge. I play casual and AOS lets me focus on the tabletop, not the trends.

[Mcthew]

It isn’t all doom and gloom around AoS because essentially GW have created a brilliant system that can be played simply or with varying levels of complexity too. And the use of battleplans and Time of War is the best idea since “since the manager of the Roman Coliseum thought of putting the Christians and the Lions on the same bill.”

For me also, the most fun to be had gaming is those small battles, or using skirmish rules. (But then I wish the skirmish units were more varied.) There’s a lot of opportunity for battleplans/adventures for Skirmish that GW hasn’t exploited enough.

And that criticism of AoS’ cinematic-PlayStation aesthetic, (that I’ve read in various blogs), I reckon can be a great strength. A Skirmish campaign in the spirit of D&D or those fantasy movies we grew up with and love would have me running to the nearest store, wallet in hand.

(Despite my moaning), really the possibilities for AoS feel quite limitless and exciting, it’s just a little frustrating at the moment with all that ‘test and learning’ going on. 

However, the deal breaker will be the relegation of factions that collectors have spent good money on. If say Iron Jawz or Kharadron etc are neglected or relegated by GW, gamers faith in the system will be tested too far.

I think that’s happened already, hence the decline. GW really need to concentrate on stabilising the game rather than coming up with more factions or “trends” they think will keep people interested, or this over-reaching might end AoS.

[karch]

On 1/5/2018 at 4:18 PM, chord said:

I've got a small local group but its a mix of competitive and casual which has led to AOS slowly dying off.  I think in larger cities this works, but in smaller ones its really difficult.  AOS was doing great prior to the GHB v1.  after matched play got introduced things went downhill locally.

Not dying per se but we had a similar rift. Very slow pickup at the beginning, we built a small group focusing on small, narrative games (1.000-ish, if we counted points)

Then GHB came and it brought new, mostly ex-40K players that more or less steered the community towards competitive 2.000pt games.

For the most part all those people are back in 40K now, and we're stuck with the original group, still playing 4-page AoS with mostly square bases. The only nod to modern releases have been the open war cards, and one bloke who has made a small kharadron contingent.

 

[chord]

40 minutes ago, karch said:

Not dying per se but we had a similar rift. Very slow pickup at the beginning, we built a small group focusing on small, narrative games (1.000-ish, if we counted points)

Then GHB came and it brought new, mostly ex-40K players that more or less steered the community towards competitive 2.000pt games.

For the most part all those people are back in 40K now, and we're stuck with the original group, still playing 4-page AoS with mostly square bases. The only nod to modern releases have been the open war cards, and one bloke who has made a small kharadron contingent.

 

interesting, as I thought my situation was unique.. 

[bonzai]

At one time my local shop had about a dozen AOS players. Now we are down to about 4ish. The first blow to the group was 8th edition 40k. There were many 40k players who had switched over because of 7th edition burn out, and most of them switched back with 8th edition. The second blow was the death of 9th Age at our shop. Lord Tremendous and the other players jumped ship and universally joined the Kings of War players. This caused KoW to be the 2nd most played game in our shop after 40k. When that happened several AoS players crossed over just because there were more games to be had. Its ok though, AoS will come back. Non GW games tend to come and go pretty regularly here, but few have any real staying power. 

As for the game it's self, its in a state of flux right now. We just had 4 releases in quick succession and it's going to take a while for them to get their feet wet and see where they land. 

Right now Tzeentch is the top army without question. Top notch ranged attacks and mortal wound output, great board control with cheap screener units like Horrors, and mobility through flying units, summoning, and other shenanigans. On top of that you get destiny dice that take luck out of the equation and it starts to really stack the deck in Tzeentch's favor. They are not unbeatable though, as the GHB17 clipped their wings some what, and boosted others.

Seraphon and Fyreslayers have risen up, and have begun to nip at Tzeentches heels. Seraphon gained their teleportation ability which added top tier mobility to their bag of tricks. Fyreslayers got a points drop that changed them into a horde of tanky, choppy, naked dwarfs that can pop up in your grill. Then you have Stormcasts that have pretty much every tool you could wish for at their disposal. Combined with battalions that let them alpha strike and the durability to survive the counter attack they are consistently placing well.

Those are the top tier armies right now. Below them in the mid tier you have a lot of the other armies. Sylvaneth were toned down in the GHB17, but are still decently strong. KO and Bonesplitterz are still mono build spoiler armies. They win a lot, but also hit a brick wall when they run into a hard counter. Thats why you see them win RTs but few GTs. 

In the lower tier you have some armies that need help.  Ironjaws had a lateral move on the GHB17. They got point reductions and some new abilities, but the loss of the destruction move made it a wash. They also lack options and are forced to play one style of play. They have no choice but to come at you, and that doesnt always work. Khorne and Flesh Eaters rely on Hero synergies to work properly and in a meta where range is king, those Heroes can get sniped out quick. Beastclaws got nerfed to the ground, and never recovered. Hopefully they get some points reductions this year and bounce back. Lastly you have everchosen and Pestilens who were never really a thing.

So far the new armys seem to be fairly strong. Daughters of khaine may be top tier. They are fast, hit hard, have excellent acess to mortal wounds, and Morathi has been haxed so that she cant be sniped out. Maggotkin seems solid upper mid tier to me. It doesn't quite pack the punch of top tier armies, but it is durable, has great board control, and can almost casually throw mortal wounds around. I am not sure how strong Legions of Nagash are in practice, but they seem solid mid tier to me. The deepkin seem to be a spoiler army designed to counter supremacy of ranged armies. It will be interesting to see how they do.

[Travis Baumann]

I got into AoS just after the first General's Handbook landed after a near 20 year break from the hobby.  It took me a bit to figure out what was going on with the setting, the available forces, and what to do with all my legacy lead figures.  

I feel the game has been steadily climbing from that point with better updates, better lore, and way better Battltomes.  Where I had picked up an odd tome prior to this new year, I have bought every one of the four tomes out so far in 2018 and I have to say they are really top notch, especially DoK and Deepkin as they advance overall story in little droplets, have an exciting and tragic origin story and kick ass models.

I have honestly wanted to collect a force based on each Battletome as I read it and have started forming a decent Nurgle force and so far bought the Eidolon Aspect of the Storm and an Akhellan King (and Lotarn which is a cool model with the octopod familiar but I don't think I will field him in battle).

I am really looking forward to what is yet to come and painting up my Deepkin forces.   I am a little scared of the Magic Supplement however as I recently pulled my Winds of Magic box supplement for 3rd/4th edition WHFB out and looked at the many decks of spell lore  and accompaniments and remembered how bogged down the magic phase would get in our games (especially the Tzeentch and High Elf players).  I hope they have good mechanics and ideas for what they are introducing here or it could really spiral out of control.

[chord]

I wonder if there is a difference in perception of the state of game for those who started pre-ghb and those who started post-ghb.

[Richelieu]

25 minutes ago, chord said:

I wonder if there is a difference in perception of the state of game for those who started pre-ghb and those who started post-ghb.

I started post GHB.  I'm very happy with the state of the game and it continues to grow in my community.  There is a 24 man local tournament in June that sold out in April.

[bonzai]

34 minutes ago, chord said:

I wonder if there is a difference in perception of the state of game for those who started pre-ghb and those who started post-ghb.

It didn't exist in my area pre GHB if that tells you anything. It was all 9th age and 8th edition hold outs.

[Gecktron]

45 minutes ago, chord said:

I wonder if there is a difference in perception of the state of game for those who started pre-ghb and those who started post-ghb.

I started pre-GHB. With AoS thats it.
I played 40K/30K and Fantasy before but I lost interest in Fantasy half way into 8th edition and before any of the End Times stuff.

I got into AoS during the Realmgate Wars, even before the GA books and the great purge. Back when it was all about counting wounds…
Anyway, I have 3 armies now (Stormcasts, Kharadrons and Daughters of Khaine) and for me it feels like AoS gets better and better. 

[Mcthew]

1 hour ago, chord said:

I wonder if there is a difference in perception of the state of game for those who started pre-ghb and those who started post-ghb.

For what it’s worth, I’ve bought books from pre and post GHB eras.

We started out with the Thunder and Blood starter set in December last year, complimented by the Skirmish rules, and it was great fun, simple, exciting and short.

Buying GHB17 a month later was ok, but blunted the fun a little by making it more complicated. Most of the time we play narrative games as matched play doesn’t offer more balance vs the time it takes to get your head around the points value. I’m sure of the need to educate ourselves in the finer points of GHB in the future, but for me it’s making it less a chore for my eldest son, and more fun.

However, I’m relieved I didn’t start from the get-go in 2015! Pre GHB feels like a muddle to me.

I mean, where does one start describing the mess that is “Mighty Battles in an Age of Unending War”? It reads like world-building by committee with much of the setting disjointed, and not helped by the anarchic structure of the book as a whole. A trend replicated in some of the earlier fluff where any common sense narrative appears jettisoned for the sake of a good fist-fight!

Age of Sigmar? I reckon that started in the year 2017. 

2015-2016 really was the Age of Chaos!

 

[Scythian]

It’s always the case that certain games are stronger in different areas. You may find that in Jackson, Wyoming there could be a thriving AoS community, but no 40k. If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years it’s that game popularity will always surprise you no matter where you may go. Like I said, you could find the smallest game store in the tinniest town in Montana which could have a huge gaming community. Believe me, I’ve traveled the United States, especially out West and there are  many such communities. I’m sure once you get out of Reno, NV that you’ll find something. 

[Richelieu]

34 minutes ago, Scythian said:

It’s always the case that certain games are stronger in different areas. You may find that in Jackson, Wyoming there could be a thriving AoS community, but no 40k. If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years it’s that game popularity will always surprise you no matter where you may go. Like I said, you could find the smallest game store in the tinniest town in Montana which could have a huge gaming community. Believe me, I’ve traveled the United States, especially out West and there are  many such communities. I’m sure once you get out of Reno, NV that you’ll find something. 

Very true.  AoS has just caught on in my city this year.  We're traditionally very 40k heavy here.  The same tournament I mentioned earlier that has 24 spots for AoS and sold out in April has 64 40k slots that sold out in December.

[karch]

15 hours ago, Scythian said:

It’s always the case that certain games are stronger in different areas. You may find that in Jackson, Wyoming there could be a thriving AoS community, but no 40k. If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the years it’s that game popularity will always surprise you no matter where you may go. Like I said, you could find the smallest game store in the tinniest town in Montana which could have a huge gaming community. Believe me, I’ve traveled the United States, especially out West and there are  many such communities. I’m sure once you get out of Reno, NV that you’ll find something. 

From my very anecdotal PoV (continental Europe) AoS struggles where there was a big fantasy following as those people moved mostly to 9th age, kept playing older editions or transfered to KoW.

AoS has been a big hit with people crossing over from 40K post-GHB (especially those with a small fantasy collection on the side), but also bringing a certain way of playing: mostly playing 2K matched play or go home which just isn't my cup of tea.

That's where the whole 3 ways to play comes, though. Everyone should have fun playing the game and the way they like. 

[RuneBrush]

On 02/05/2018 at 5:38 PM, chord said:

I wonder if there is a difference in perception of the state of game for those who started pre-ghb and those who started post-ghb.

For me one of the biggest changes has been attitude.  Prior to the Generals Handbook most conversations were about cool looking models, custom warscrolls, coming up with fun scenarios etc, now there's a lot more conversations about what units perform/synergise the best, tactics on how to win against certain armies and list building.

I'm not saying if this change is a good or bad thing.  We've increased the number of people involved so it's not that we've lost conversations about cool looking models - just there are comparatively more about list building (for example).  Points (and thus list building) was always going to happen and before the Generals Handbook you had three different list building systems in play so it was certainly a bit messy. 

What I do think is hopeful is that in the last few battletomes, GW have managed to combine excellent models, with excellent rules and given us competitive armies whilst using the rule of cool

[chord]

3 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

For me one of the biggest changes has been attitude.  Prior to the Generals Handbook most conversations were about cool looking models, custom warscrolls, coming up with fun scenarios etc, now there's a lot more conversations about what units perform/synergise the best, tactics on how to win against certain armies and list building.

Agreed there was a lot more diversity of conversation prior to it.  Now even if it's a conversation not about matched play it, people start adding points discussions in.