Jump to content

New AoS app now available


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

The in app army builder doesn't seem to be very good. It doesn't seem to understand "battleline if" and reinforcement. 

Otherwise the rules and stuff are fine, I'm not going to pay for it unless they just make all the rules included as part of the sub. 

I will happily pay money for access to rules if it's done fairly, I'm not willing to buy every book that comes out at £30 rrp just to be able to check my opponent's rules. 

This exactly. I would pay a reasonable price to unlock all of the rules, though I truly believe it would be a better business practice to provide free rules. However, I expect ALL of the rules for that price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I think this is exactly what many are worried about, that we will ultimately get the same treatment as 40k. We already had warscrolls for free up until now, and we have a free army builder, too.

The only way I see in which the app could actually improve my AoS experience is by letting me look at all faction rules, not just the ones for armies I already have the battletome for. I'd be prepared to pay the warhammer+ subscription fee for that. But if I am supposed to pay a subscription fee for warscrolls and a list builder, then that's objectively worse than the status quo.

Ah yeah I agree. But I strongly suspect the BEST we can hope for is free access to all warscrolls for reference, access to the core rules, and access to faction specific rules unlocked via battletome code. Everything else will likely be locked behind the sub

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, acr0ssth3p0nd said:

Yeah, this whole thing might be what pushes me into OnePageRules. I'm just hoping the dev comes out with a few extra special rules per faction - after that, it'd be the perfect game for me.

Just wanna say thanks for bringing OnePageRules to my attention! Looks fantastic, gonna try to get a game in this weekend with Grimdark Future rules

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I am wrong but it should be that if I pay for the app, I don't pay for the battletomes.  If I buy the battletomes, I technically don't need to get the app.  When you no longer pay for the subscription, you lose access to the battletome information...I don't see the issue here nor the need to double gouge.  I am trying to be optimistic here, but as a new player I feel like GW is charging me left, right, and centre for things that should be free.  You are charging for miniatures; charging for rules seems so...backwards?

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Red King said:

Can you clarify what you mean by (abilities not included). You mean like army rules and spells and stuff yeah?

 

Can you subscribe to the app separately from subscribing to W+ and if so do you know if that has changed since the launch of W+

 

If they make the warscrolls free and lock the book rules behind purchase of books and the army builder behind a subscription that would be fine with me. Still a step backwards since the battletome rules aren't really equal to a digital battletome but it's also "free" if you buy the 50 dollar book that just went up in cost... this got less fine as I typed. All at what I assume (no proof one way or the other) will be an increased cost.

Abilities not included meaning stuff like the Evocators lightning rule is locked (at least this is how the 40K app does things)

40k, you could subscribe without Warhammer+ unsure if that’s still an option and unsure for the AoS app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me get this straight.

W+ comes with:

Really nice, regular animated content.

High quality battle reports.

Next-level painting videos many have asked for for decades.

A free model, with option to get another.

Digital versions of out of print magazines and other material.

The 40K app.

All for $60/ year (or, just over the cost of a single physical Battletome).

 

Then, today, they add what pretty much everyone here is saying looks to be a really well done AoS app. They add this for all to try for free, giving us all a chance to 'try before you buy.'

 

And lots of you are moaning about it.

Man, I love this community a ton, but I can't recall a more entitled-feeling group.

Yes, Netflix and Disney+ have more video content, but they offer nothing else and cost more. It's not a valid comparison.

W+ is its own thing, and for the price the offering is really good. I can't believe how much some here feel like they are entitled to free stuff - stuff that cost a business to create, but somehow they are supposed to just give away. Give me a break.

 

To rephrase what I've read here:

"Wow, this is really good! It better be free or that will negate its goodness completely."

Sheesh.

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I am pleasantly surprised so far. Couple of obvious improvements jumped out at me:

- on a tablet you just get an ugly enlarged version of the phone version (iOS)

- don’t seem to be able to adjust youarmy name after it is created.

Good points:

- Warscrolls look great on phone

- gesture support

- overall layout and presentation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

And lots of you are moaning about it.

Man, I love this community a ton, but I can't recall a more entitled-feeling group.

 

I never asked for W+. I don't want all that other junk. I just want a good game with easy access to digital rules that you don't get double-dipped for or nudged into buying a lot of stuff you don't want using the old "buy more and save!" pitch. Does that make me "entitled" and a "moaner?" I'm sure GW is happy to see you saying so. But I don't think it's so unreasonable a wish list, and I think it's rather poor of you to look down your nose at people like me who have different interests. 

It's like the used car salesman trying to upsell you to something that costs 5k more because "you get 25k worth of stuff!" accusing you of "moaning" and being "entitled" if you say "no, I'd really just like a car that works, thank you."

 

 

Edited by yukishiro1
  • Like 20
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Man, I love this community a ton, but I can't recall a more entitled-feeling group.

I hate the term shill, but Sleboda's posts all follow the same almost ritualistic pattern concerning anything GW does, and given he's stated on multiple occasions that he's a shareholder, I just find it hard to take his contributions seriously.

Edited by NauticalSoup
spelling
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:

I hate the term shill, but Selboda's posts all follow the same pattern almost ritualistic pattern concerning anything GW does, and given he's stated on multiple occasions that he's a shareholder I just find it hard to take his contributions seriously.

Or, you know, you could do your research, avoid gross hyperbole, and maintain objectivity.

I criticize GW a bunch. I'm just able to not let that taint everything I think about the company.

But go on, keep saying things that are plainly false without bothering to check into them first.

I would very much enjoy reading a reasoned counterpoint to my idea that it's more than a little entitled to complain that we should be getting free stuff ... 'cuz reasons. Got anything along those lines?

Edited by Sleboda
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SugarWaterPurple said:

Correct me if I am wrong but it should be that if I pay for the app, I don't pay for the battletomes.  If I buy the battletomes, I technically don't need to get the app.  When you no longer pay for the subscription, you lose access to the battletome information...I don't see the issue here nor the need to double gouge.  I am trying to be optimistic here, but as a new player I feel like GW is charging me left, right, and centre for things that should be free.  You are charging for miniatures; charging for rules seems so...backwards?

Agreed, I still feel battle tomes should be an optional buy while the base army specific rules and ability are all accessible for free. If you want the extra fluff, P2G, etc. then the book would be for you. I know of various people that haven't started the game, simply because of having to purchase books often. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

Let me get this straight.

W+ comes with:

Really nice, regular animated content.

High quality battle reports.

Next-level painting videos many have asked for for decades.

A free model, with option to get another.

Digital versions of out of print magazines and other material.

The 40K app.

All for $60/ year (or, just over the cost of a single physical Battletome).

 

Then, today, they add what pretty much everyone here is saying looks to be a really well done AoS app. They add this for all to try for free, giving us all a chance to 'try before you buy.'

 

And lots of you are moaning about it.

Man, I love this community a ton, but I can't recall a more entitled-feeling group.

Yes, Netflix and Disney+ have more video content, but they offer nothing else and cost more. It's not a valid comparison.

W+ is its own thing, and for the price the offering is really good. I can't believe how much some here feel like they are entitled to free stuff - stuff that cost a business to create, but somehow they are supposed to just give away. Give me a break.

 

To rephrase what I've read here:

"Wow, this is really good! It better be free or that will negate its goodness completely."

Sheesh.

 

Let me get this straight.

I have to pay more money than ever for a new battletome.

Pay for all kind of content that is available on youtube for free.

Warscrolls that used to be free for years.

Armybuilder that used to be free.

People asking for painting vids? Never heard of youtube?

Compare a few animations to netflix that has maybe thousands movies and series?

Putting new models behind a paywall and feed fomo?

Cant be negative towards this? (Could be forgetting some more reasons)

Edited by Iksdee
  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Iksdee said:

Let me get this straight.

I have to pay more money than ever for a new battletome.

Pay for all kind of content that is available on youtube for free.

Warscrolls that used to be free for years.

Armybuilder that used to be free.

People asking for painting vids? Never heard of youtube?

Compare a few animations to netflix that has maybe thousands movies and series?

Putting new models behind a paywall and feed fomo?

Cant be negative towards this? (Could be forgetting some more reasons)

Happy to respond.

First, the one I genuinely don't understand, so I'm asking because I'm curious - What do you mean by paying more for a new Battletome?

As to the rest, the only one that I think has legitimacy is paying for warscrolls when the info on them (slight modification to your point, as the warscrolls themselves were never free) used to be free. I can certainly understand, and even agree with, the frustration over losing that free access.

But the other stuff? The stuff they are producing may echo what others make, but they are doing it with much better quality and (I understand this next may not matter to everyone, but there is actual, marketable value to it) from the official source.

I did mention that Netflix has more video content. Did you see where I acknowledged that ... and showed the lack of relevance? Does Netflix deliver anything else?

That brings me to the comment about a model. Thank you for your comment there, as it absolutely mirrors the commentary that prompted my original comment. I can illustrate my exasperated, open mouthed incredulity.

There's a comical phrase used to show that complainers will never be happy:

"Timmy is the negative sort of person who, when you have him a million dollars in quarters, he'd say 'Gee, great, now how am I supposed to carry all this home?'"

Hey Timmy, you just got a million dollars. Maybe don't gripe.

 

That's what I'm getting here.  Most folks in this thread have said the app is quite good, and yet some of the same people (in some cases) then immediately complain that they have to pay the company for a seemingly well-made product. Say whu? It's good, you like it, but you hate it if you have to buy it?

So, to the model. Yep, it's an incentive to join. So what? An Orruk warboss retails for $40 - two thirds the cost of the W+ sub. How is it remotely a negative that you get a $40 model for free? Or slice it differently. If you like one of the models, spend the $40 on it. Now, after that, you get the entirety of W+ for $20. And as a reminder, that includes previously published materials that have a dollar value (or at a minimum, did when published) that you now get included for your $20.

 

Honestly, man, it really feels like the complaints here (other than removing access to the info on warscrolls) are being made just out of habit, not because they've been well reasoned.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People might be saying "I want more free stuff!" but that's not an expression of entitlement. Rather, what a lot of these complaints actually mean is "This game is too expensive for the value I get from it." That's not a sudden change due to the introduction of W+, it comes up every time prices are increased for any reason. It's a sentiment that gets more intense the more GW squeezes its customers.

GW have obviously decided that they can afford to lose the players who are being priced out, by charging those who can still afford it (or who are holding out due to their sunk cost) more. Fair enough, that's a business decision. But the "Give us something for free!" posts are just a symptom of that - it's offering GW a chance to change their policy and improve the value proposition in order to keep those players, rather than lose them to other game systems.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

W+ comes with:

Really nice, regular animated content.

Don't want this, never asked for it

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

High quality battle reports.

Don't want this, never asked for it, and get it for free on Youtube

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Next-level painting videos many have asked for for decades.

Don't want this, never asked for it, and get it for free on Youtube (Duncan Rhodes anyone?)

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

A free model, with option to get another.

The chances of this free model ever being an army I play are slim. If it ever even was, I'd be able to get it online for much cheaper than a 12 month subscription.

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Digital versions of out of print magazines and other material.

Don't want this, never asked for it

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

The 40K app.

Don't play 40k and don't plan on it

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Then, today, they add what pretty much everyone here is saying looks to be a really well done AoS app. They add this for all to try for free, giving us all a chance to 'try before you buy.'

The one thing I actually want, but it's certainly not "well done" (crashes constantly, bugs out the ying yang), especially in comparison to the old app.  Letting us "try" something we've had for years for free, like it's some kind of gift? I can't help but laugh. 

But hey if you're in the business of paying $84 CAD a year for things you don't want I'll send you my bank account info and you can send me $7 a month in return for an envelope of glitter.

The only silver lining is that at this rate the app will be in beta for so long that 4.0 might be on the horizon before they actually get the paywall up.

Edited by relic456
  • Like 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Kadeton said:

People might be saying "I want more free stuff!" but that's not an expression of entitlement. Rather, what a lot of these complaints actually mean is "This game is too expensive for the value I get from it." That's not a sudden change due to the introduction of W+, it comes up every time prices are increased for any reason. It's a sentiment that gets more intense the more GW squeezes its customers.

GW have obviously decided that they can afford to lose the players who are being priced out, by charging those who can still afford it (or who are holding out due to their sunk cost) more. 

Fair point, and one that's been around for over 30 years. The number of times I've heard a variation on "THIS is the time it costs them" or "THIS is the game that takes out 40K" or the like is uncountable. Yet somehow GW and their "bad" business decisions (that we all just know for sure we could do better than) fends off the challengers, makes better and better stuff, and keeps bringing in the cash.

22 minutes ago, relic456 said:

Don't want this, never asked for it

Don't want this, never asked for it, and get it for free on Youtube

Don't want this, never asked for it, and get it for free on Youtube (Duncan Rhodes anyone?)

The chances of this free model ever being an army I play are slim. If it ever even was, I'd be able to get it online for much cheaper than a 12 month subscription.

Don't want this, never asked for it

Don't play 40k and don't plan on it

The one thing I actually want, but it's certainly not "well done" (crashes constantly, bugs out the ying yang), especially in comparison to the old app.  Letting us "try" something we've had for years for free, like it's some kind of gift? I can't help but laugh. 

But hey if you're in the business of paying $84 CAD a year for things you don't want I'll send you my bank account info and you can send me $7 a month in return for an envelope of glitter.

The only silver lining is that at this rate the app will be in beta for so long that 4.0 might be on the horizon before they actually get the paywall up.

Soooo, really you just don't want it. That's fine. That's a you thing, and I certainly won't tell you you are wrong to not want a product. I'm just surprised by the simultaneous praise/condemnation by the same person or peoplefor a thing that they acknowledge is good.

I mean, if the Times reviews a book and says it's great, then my friend says that book is great, and then I am offered a free chapter to try the book myself ... and I think the book is great from what I can tell, wouldn't it be weird of me to go to the bookstore to get it only to say that the book is now trash because it's not free?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This: 

3 hours ago, Sleboda said:

And lots of you are moaning about it.

Man, I love this community a ton, but I can't recall a more entitled-feeling group.

Contradicts this:

5 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Soooo, really you just don't want it. That's fine. That's a you thing, and I certainly won't tell you you are wrong to not want a product.

And I think "I don't want it, it's not what I asked for", is a pretty common perspective among those unhappy with the app / Warhammer+. So I hope that satisfies this:

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

I would very much enjoy reading a reasoned counterpoint to my idea that it's more than a little entitled to complain that we should be getting free stuff ... 'cuz reasons. Got anything along those lines?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Or, you know, you could do your research, avoid gross hyperbole, and maintain objectivity.

I criticize GW a bunch. I'm just able to not let that taint everything I think about the company.

But go on, keep saying things that are plainly false without bothering to check into them first.

I would very much enjoy reading a reasoned counterpoint to my idea that it's more than a little entitled to complain that we should be getting free stuff ... 'cuz reasons. Got anything along those lines?

No one is asking for GW to become a charity and give away "free stuff". The problem is they aren't offering good value, and consumers have a right to call a business out in that.

I do not want their current animated content. It is coming at far too slow a pace to hold my attention compared to alternative offerings. I feel they would have been better off licensing Warhammer to a studio for distribution on one of the many popular streaming studios, allowing them to reach wider audiences and drive interest in the game. In the future, perhaps they would have a content catalog large enough to justify their own streaming service.

I do not want the two models they have offered as I have no interest in either faction represented. 

I have been into Warhammer for 20 some years and have never read a White Dwarf. I'm not particularly interested in the few they have uploaded to +.

I have no interest in their battle reports and would rather support YouTubers who do the same thing. The same goes for painting tutorials. There is an incredible amount of both available already made by passionate content creators /small businesses who I would much rather support. GW has offered free painting tutorials in the past and shouldn't paywall them now. It's terrible business! When I watch a GW video I often end up buying citadel paint. When I watch other tutorials I am more likely to buy the other brands of paints they use.

I spend a lot of money on games workshop products and that isn't going to change any time soon. I am currently working on painting a new army, and we all know how much a new 2000 point army costs (especially when you want ALL the options and buy 3500+ points). What I want is for access to the rules associated with the game those models are for, which includes the army on the other side of the table. The game has an incredible amount of rules which introduce NPE and gotcha moments unless you have a reasonable understanding of them ahead of time. It's ridiculous to paywall them in this day and age in the first place, because they are freely discussed here/YouTube reviews/etc. All they are charging for is convenience at this point, and it's predatory nonsense. 

GW should consider distribution of rules as part of overhead, not a product. The cost of getting the rules to the players in digital format should be built into the sales price of the plastic. Make the army books pure background fluff/modeling guides - the rules portions are worthless about a month after release anyway.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Orbei said:

 The problem is they aren't offering good value, and consumers have a right to call a business out in that.

I'm not skipping the rest of your thoughts as a slight. Much of what you said I think has merit, even if I don't agree with it personally. So, no offense meant for not going through the rest. If there's anything in there you would like to go into and talk about, I'm happy to revisit.

That said, I do want to examine the above thought. While I understand that we all place value on things differently, and may not find personal value in a given thing, I do have a hard time not seeing the objective value of W+. I mean, sure, I may never have any interest in a Harley Davidson motorcycle customized with an official Man U paint job, but I can still acknowledge that for people who like motorcycles and soccer, that's a nice bike that's probably well made and painted.

If a person doesn't place personal value in old White Dawrfs and other content, doesn't get into the well-produced (or at least produced in GW's style) battle report and painting video content, isn't a fan of animation, etc., then W+ may not appeal personally, but it doesn't make it a bad value.

To me, it's a great value. Then again, I subscribe to WD, Hulu, Tidal, Netflix, Amazon Prime/video, Disney+, Audible, and more. W+ gives me several things that none of the others do, and at a cost I consider trivial. For me it is subjectively a good value, and I assert that it is objectively one as well.

But that's wandering from the main point. If folks want to be evaluate the new AoS app (the subject at the top) that's great! Sharing opinions here is great, as well. What flummoxed me, as I've said, is anyone coming here and saying "new app is good!" only to immediately follow that with "but it's not good 'cuz I'd have to pay someone for the good thing they are offering to me."

It just. I mean. I.

I don't get that seeming duality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

I'm not skipping the rest of your thoughts as a slight. Much of what you said I think has merit, even if I don't agree with it personally. So, no offense meant for not going through the rest. If there's anything in there you would like to go into and talk about, I'm happy to revisit.

That said, I do want to examine the above thought. While I understand that we all place value on things differently, and may not find personal value in a given thing, I do have a hard time not seeing the objective value of W+. I mean, sure, I may never have any interest in a Harley Davidson motorcycle customized with an official Man U paint job, but I can still acknowledge that for people who like motorcycles and soccer, that's a nice bike that's probably well made and painted.

If a person doesn't place personal value in old White Dawrfs and other content, doesn't get into the well-produced (or at least produced in GW's style) battle report and painting video content, isn't a fan of animation, etc., then W+ may not appeal personally, but it doesn't make it a bad value.

To me, it's a great value. Then again, I subscribe to WD, Hulu, Tidal, Netflix, Amazon Prime/video, Disney+, Audible, and more. W+ gives me several things that none of the others do, and at a cost I consider trivial. For me it is subjectively a good value, and I assert that it is objectively one as well.

But that's wandering from the main point. If folks want to be evaluate the new AoS app (the subject at the top) that's great! Sharing opinions here is great, as well. What flummoxed me, as I've said, is anyone coming here and saying "new app is good!" only to immediately follow that with "but it's not good 'cuz I'd have to pay someone for the good thing they are offering to me."

It just. I mean. I.

I don't get that seeming duality.

I am sorry but who are u to judge peoples motivation for saying what they say. I also want to point out the timmy reference. I'm ok with defending my stance on what i think about a product and my reasoning behind it. But dont question my personal life. U dont know anything about me or others here. What u think is good value may differ from others. U have a bunch of subscriptions and some people just cant afford things like that. U also have your right to have your opinion.

That being said, this topic is about trying the app and we should get back to that part of the discussion. I think the app now is mediocre at best. So far i like the online army builder the best out of the 3 they made recently and it is by far the most low budget one. While the app shows all some promise it isnt there yet imo.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...