The Big Community Survey 2019

[Travis Baumann]

I have really been loving all the attention and direction lately so I will fill the sections as well:

1) NEUTRAL (WISHLIST)  

Really excited about the concept of Warcry if it ends up being an AoS Killteam type thing.  I want to paint so many different miniatures but I already started four different armies (not even counting the Stormcasts that I have accumulated through three box sets - and yes I do want to paint them someday) and I am only finishing up the final model on the FIRST.   I would love to be able to buy 6-12 miniatures and paint them up and have that be enough for a given army/faction.  I do love Skirmish in concept and the new rules in WD definitely make it easier now that renown is no longer as abstract, but at the same time, it is not the same as Killteam/Mordheim/Necromunda type specific-written rules with pre-packaged warbands and scenery available.

The suspense is killing me already... just the lay the year out on the table so to speak so I know how little time/money I have left and I can break it to my wife now.

I told myself I would not get back into Skaven but I am super excited to see the new Tome and hope for more new models in the near future so hoping for that and that actually goes for all the older factions.  Updated Battletomes, at least a few heroes and one new troop and/or monster for each army would be awesome.

I bought in to the Idoneth bigtime, also fell in love with the Daugthers of Khain as well.  I decided to spice up the army with some 3rd party mini's from cool Kickstarters just to paint something different but absolutely love both lines.  I would like more of this type of crazy brilliant army ideas that AoS allows for.  So many realms and even variations of worlds/environments within those realms... there is no limit to what we could see.

 

2) DISLIKE (NEGATIVE)

I am not super negative about anything right now actually.  My biggest gripes have been mentioned but for clarification:

Their paint pots suck.  They tip over easily, I feel that I am wasting paint getting it on to my wet pallet, etc.  I have moved 95% to Vallejo dropper bottles however still love their washes/shades/technical paints but damn, I have dumped both the ecto green and ghost grey three times each already while finishing my Nighthaunts (well almost - Black Coach is the final piece!).

1000% agree with physical purchase needing to unlock the stuff in Azyr.  I pay for the books and the subscription but do not want to double pay for the books.

Endless spells while a cool idea feel repetitive and gimmicky.  Every army does not need their own version of a spell that goes 8" forward and on 6's does mortal wounds.  The flying dais/balewind are cool because they do something different.  Ethereal mounts, scenery pieces, etc. are cool.  Also spells that can not be taken over by the other player as it seems so many of them are such high risk of coming right back at you that they are not worth it.

My last negative is as someone mentioned above, the box sets do not have legal units in them.  I have four Reapers that I don't know what to do with so one of them got converted into a Chaingheist (also no way to just buy Chaingeists, they come packaged with yet another Lockmaster guy).  I have the original box, the Blightwar and Soulwars.  Part of the reason I never went ahead with the Stormcasts as of yet is that pretty much every box has one or more incomplete units if decking out for a matched play/pick up game.

3) LIKE (POSITIVE)

And finally what I am liking.  Pretty much everything I have not stated above.

Miniatures are absolutely amazing.  Every one that is released I want to paint.  I have to exercise extreme self control anytime I am in a store or online to not buy anything until I have more painted.  The new Skaven/FEC box set has me chomping at the bit.  I really really want it, especially at the value for what is in there but I cannot start another army until at least my second out of four (five) is complete.

The quality of the Battletomes since Nurge has been stellar.  I buy every single one now whether I am going to play with or against the army in question just for the read and the awesome artwork.  Really happy with them (although I have found several grammatical/spelling errors in the Gloomspite Gitz  - one more pass at proofreading, spellcheck can mess you up too!)

The expansion of the world(s).  I really am starting to love the setting.  I am getting super into the different realms and have built narrative themes around armies as I even start to collect and paint.  Super excited about the Idoneth I am working on. They will be from Ghur and in the subtext of the lore there are all kinds of animals beyond eels that they use as mounts.  I picked up the Stingray and Worm riders from Raging Heroes to use instead and I do not put the eye shields on the animals as they have become so adept at taming beasts they do not need to blind theirs.  It is really fun stuff!

Warcry teaser was so vague but I really want to paint up some Sylvaneth, Orruks, Goblins, non-Nurgle Chaos, and whatever else is on the horizon but cannot commit to massive armies with the speed of my painting or my pocket book so this will be perfect if it comes to be as I imagine it.

 

Ok that was pretty long but needless to say, I am really passionate and excited about the place of the game right now.  

 

[Dead Scribe]

 Part of the reason I never went ahead with the Stormcasts as of yet is that pretty much every box has one or more incomplete units if decking out for a matched play/pick up game.

I agree.  GW should just accept that for the vast majority of us, matched play is the only way we're going to play and providing boxes that don't create legal matched play units will stumble.

[Televiper11]

2 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

 

 

I agree.  GW should just accept that for the vast majority of us, matched play is the only way we're going to play and providing boxes that don't create legal matched play units will stumble.

I don't think that's a safe assumption. I participate in two large groups in NYC and both are Open Play.

[Sedraxis]

2 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

I agree.  GW should just accept that for the vast majority of us, matched play is the only way we're going to play and providing boxes that don't create legal matched play units will stumble.

This is very narrow since you don't know how many people play narrative or open play, nor do you understand it's potential.

I hope GW keeps pushing open and narrative play mainly because it promotes a less stress- and hateful playstyle and it promotes creativity and freedom instead of forcing you in a corner.

Matched play and competition are great too and I wouldn't want to miss it, but sometimes they sure bring out the worst in people (not aimed at you in any way Dead Scribe, just in general).

[Sleboda]

5 minutes ago, Sedraxis said:

This is very narrow since you don't know how many people play narrative or open play, nor do you understand it's potential.

I hope GW keeps pushing open and narrative play mainly because it promotes a less stress- and hateful playstyle and it promotes creativity and freedom instead of forcing you in a corner.

Matched play and competition are great too and I wouldn't want to miss it, but sometimes they sure bring out the worst in people (not aimed at you in any way Dead Scribe, just in general).

I get what you are saying (especially about bringing out the worst in people), and, to be fair, I often disagree with @Dead Scribe (including the bit to which you are replying), but I think it's unfair to refer to Matched Play as a "hateful" play style.

For many, Matched Play pushes our competitive buttons more strongly in a tournament environment, and it certainly can be stressful in the hall, but competition exists even in Open and Narrative, and jerks exist in all three modes. Hatefulness is not linked to Matched Play in any significant way, in my opinion.

[Dead Scribe]

Yeah, there's no hate in matched play.  Its all about maximizing efficiency of your numbers and then seeing who did the better job on the table.  There is no emotion in that really, at least for me.

[robinlvalentine]

47 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Yeah, there's no hate in matched play.  Its all about maximizing efficiency of your numbers and then seeing who did the better job on the table.  There is no emotion in that really, at least for me.

You sure know how to make this hobby sound fun! 

[Fairbanks]

Negatives:

I hate how when a new army comes out, I have to wait until the end of the year before a price-efficient product for the army comes out, and there's usually no SC box until a year later.

I hate how overpriced everything is. Online retailers are giving a 15% discount and free shipping, multiple products show up later in larger sets at steep discounts, and the extra cost for non-GB people. Everything from FW is expensive and at this point they should have realized people would be into HH if it was cheaper.

Speed of releases needs to be curtailed. I dread saying this because I fear they will read it as "We need to stop all AoS releases", and I just want it to slow a little. I've made this my hobby, I want to buy, build, and paint everything that comes out for this hobby, but I'm going to back out of this hobby if a budget of $200/month won't keep pace. I used to play GSC for 40K. It was a decent army, it deserves a month in the spotlight, it got rushed for a trifecta of Carrion Empire, Skaven, and FEC that didn't need a rush.

Don't give me a new book just to add spells and a terrain piece when the last book was released last year. Give me a slick handout in the box and put it in the General's Handbook in June/July.

Permanently sidelining old armies. Understand why, don't like to see it, rather a lot of the models be updated and brought into the AoS Universe.

Wishlist:

Fix or make progress on relieving the negatives

Positives:

All the new armies, and updated twists on old armies.

That we have lore now. It took three years to start fleshing out the Mortal Realms, but they finally started putting this world together and I love it.

We got the points when we needed them years ago, I like how we both get updates and they usually fix the biggest issues.

The four page rules received the update to the rules and they're fantastic.

I have so little to complain about.

[Sedraxis]

Hate is the wrong word to describe it, but the amount of negative emotions and side effects the competitive side this game brings into life is saddening.

It is a hobby, a game and whatever else we make it. So why do so many people make it a miserable experience for themselves and others?

Competitiveness in itself isn't negative, the problem is that many people lack the ability to deal with it without it.

The sheer amount of topics and discussions on balance and fairness show this and the fact that people don't play armies and models they love because they aren't viable sucks

[Dead Scribe]

I think a lot of those negative emotions are simply side effects of people with different expectations.

If my expectation is that my opponent is doing his best and building as strong a list possible and I show up with my list and destroy him, there is some negative emotions on both ends, because I had no challenge, and he got destroyed.

If my expectation is that I am playing a casual game with a narrative, and my opponent brings a competitive powerful list, then I will have negative emotions because my expectation was not met and I did not have any fun.

For many people that I know we are in my group all competitive, so no one has negative emotions when we play and outlist each other.  However for people new or outside of our group they would not like that and have negative emotions, are not having fun, and complain that we suck the fun out of the hobby by playing to the extreme top end (professional AOS as I call it).

But I think thats really two different groups of people that want two completely different things out of the game trying to coexist, which I really don't think is possible.  Like it or not though the vast majority of the forums in my experience are always around matched play and fine tuning lists and optimization.  Other sub forums exist but those always get less traffic.  To me, thats why I think its the standard way to play, because its literally in our face everywhere we look.

Quote

The sheer amount of topics and discussions on balance and fairness show this and the fact that people don't play armies and models they love because they aren't viable sucks

Yeah I agree, because its human nature that people don't want to play a game that they get crushed at because they have a weak list.  If the models they love are weak, you wont see them on the table very often.  AOS apparently is not a game system where fair and balanced is really a consideration and you have to go into that eyes wide open and accept that and be ok with that, or you will be miserable like some of those guys that complain about the game all the time that end up getting blocked or ignored.

[JPjr]

6 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

To me, thats why I think its the standard way to play, because its literally in our face everywhere we look.

Without wanting to unduly flatter the egos of 'professional' Warhammer players, isn't that like saying that because people only ever talk about or televise premier league or World Cup football matches* that the vast overwhelming percentage of football players in the world must therefore be premier league players?

Maybe I'm wrong, it happens at least once an hour even if I'm doing well, but it just seems to me that's a bit of a leap. The tournament, no holds barred, netlist, whatever you want to call it scene is obviously an important part of this hobby and, for sure, it's growing and long may it do so but by its very nature it's always going to have a visibility well out of proportion to its size and lends itself to the sort of discussions people have online.

But anyway each to their own. 

 

*insert culturally/geographically relevant sport

[Dead Scribe]

Maybe.  But I have a feeling that in regards to soccer that there are forums talking about soccer at all levels of play, whereas in AOS there really is no traffic to that style of play, which accurately or not paints the picture that very few people engage with that playstyle.

[Luke82]

It’s easier to discuss matched play on the internet as it’s a very narrow, defined style of play that has common rules and language that everyone shares.

I could discuss / ask questions about the narrative league i’m In here or elsewhere, but no one would have any frame of reference for it unless they were also involved in it. 

 

[Dead Scribe]

What sets your narrative league apart from standard tournament/league play mechanically?

[Sleboda]

42 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

Maybe.  But I have a feeling that in regards to soccer that there are forums talking about soccer at all levels of play, whereas in AOS there really is no traffic to that style of play, which accurately or not paints the picture that very few people engage with that playstyle.

Just a thought.

Maybe it's possible that Matched Play itself lends itself far, far more to the sort of back and forth idea swapping and opinion gathering that forums are so good at providing. 

I make a scenario for Narrative with my buddies.  They come over and we play it.  Fun was had by all. Ala D&D adventure written by a DM. No real need to pen hundreds of posts to tweak it with players from around the world who are doing the same 'adventure.' In other words, a Narrative game does not really benefit much from online discussion, at least not as much as list tweaking.

Open Play. Yep.  We put on the table the things that make us happy that night. Not much need to discuss there either.

Matched? There will be identical (or near) lists and scenarios, upcoming shared events, and so on for which forums are pretty much built.

 

I guess I'm saying that forums are self-selecting for MP players and discussion and may be painting a highly exaggerated picture of MP's importance or dominance over other styles.

[Luke82]

Dead Scribe;

We don’t (necessarily) use allegiance abilities, and don’t pick spells or artefacts or build armies to match play rules. We track units from game to game and they have a chance to earn upgrades, spells, or artefacts, and also be wiped out and lose these bonuses.

We use points as a rough way to balance but don’t have to have the same points on each side depending on the scenario we cook up, and sometimes units may show up later or be distracted (for instance last battle my leader was performing a ritual and couldn’t get involved until he was disturbed)

We also approach the games differently to matched play filth fests. We’ll quite happily accept handicaps or do bad moves in game if it fits narratively, and make things up on the fly if it sounds like it will make the game more fun.

I also enjoy matched play no holds barred matches like you describe if I’m playing certain people, so I’m not against that, but definitely prefer the narrative style. 

[Mandzak-Miniatures]

If there is one thing I think AoS is lacking, and I think we will all agree is that it has a severe lack, no, it’s completely missing MUMMIES.

They don’t have to be tomb kings, I just want some friggin mummies. Back in the day you could take a unit of mummies. Where are they now? GONE

surely somewhere out there in the realms there are mummies, now let’s bring them out

[Travis Baumann]

1 hour ago, Mandzak-Miniatures said:

If there is one thing I think AoS is lacking, and I think we will all agree is that it has a severe lack, no, it’s completely missing MUMMIES.

They don’t have to be tomb kings, I just want some friggin mummies. Back in the day you could take a unit of mummies. Where are they now? GONE

surely somewhere out there in the realms there are mummies, now let’s bring them out

There is one in the sarcophagus powering the Black Coach!

I know its not what you are looking for but it is an undead wrapped in bandages.

[Travis Baumann]

6 hours ago, Televiper11 said:

I don't think that's a safe assumption. I participate in two large groups in NYC and both are Open Play.

I have nothing against open or narrative play in any way.  I really did not foresee this thread going down that well-trodden wyrm-hole. 

I would love to play all three styles but I would most likely still want to field "legal" unit sizes as that seems the logical way you would encounter these creatures/beings unless in more of a small force/skirmish.

If you had a "legal" unit of 10 reapers wouldn't you field them that way in any form of play?   Why not give box-buyers enough to be usable in all three?

I don't have a gaming group right now so the only way I can envision getting an occasional game in would be pick up games at local stores, GW or independent.  Without knowing who or what I may face, I am buying and building my forces in a vacuum and even though I predominantly collect and paint far more than play, I still like the basis of a "standard" army structure to base my purchases and plans and deck out my troops.

I don't think which style of play you prefer or most indulge in should have any baring of my wish that they put units at the minimum legal size in the boxes.

[EccentricCircle]

29 minutes ago, Travis Baumann said:

There is one in the sarcophagus powering the Black Coach!

I know its not what you are looking for but it is an undead wrapped in bandages.

There's Lord Kroak too!

But yeah, my feedback to this year's survey will probably be that I'm pretty happy with the game as a whole, but that if they fancied making some Tomb Kings or Chaos Dwarves (in plastic) I would be rather happy...

[AaronWilson]

15 hours ago, Sedraxis said:

Hate is the wrong word to describe it, but the amount of negative emotions and side effects the competitive side this game brings into life is saddening.

Every single competitive event I've gone to for any system over the past 8 years has been only a fantastic time. Sharing weekends / days with like minded people, having a laugh, rolling some dice and throwing some banter. Please don't tar the "competitive" side of the game which that sort of brush, everyone I've met a event for AoS has been a absolute pleasure to be around. 

[Sedraxis]

1 minute ago, AaronWIlson said:

Every single competitive event I've gone to for any system over the past 8 years has been only a fantastic time. Sharing weekends / days with like minded people, having a laugh, rolling some dice and throwing some banter. Please don't tar the "competitive" side of the game which that sort of brush, everyone I've met a event for AoS has been a absolute pleasure to be around. 

Again, that's not my intent.

Events are great, competitive games can be great fun. I play matched play games every week.

I'm saying there are negative side effects to a competitive view on this game that isn't inherently designed for it and it is a shame that people try to force that view on others. Read my entire posts if you care to know what I mean.

[AaronWilson]

21 minutes ago, Sedraxis said:

Again, that's not my intent.

Events are great, competitive games can be great fun. I play matched play games every week.

I'm saying there are negative side effects to a competitive view on this game that isn't inherently designed for it and it is a shame that people try to force that view on others. Read my entire posts if you care to know what I mean.

You're arguing a very subjective thing there though Serdraxis. I've not seen anyone trying to force that view on others in here? 

[lord_blackfang]

Can we all please ask for Tomb Kings back?

[JPjr]

I reckon every time someone mentions tomb kings or brets a bell goes off in GW HQ and then they go troop down to the vault, remove the mould for an appropriate model and  then take turns to ritually smash it with a hammer.