Compendium Scrolls - The Great Debate

[Sleboda]

Keeping old stuff is actually a long term semi-subtle customer retention and confidence strategy aimed at newer players.

The fact that the term "squatted" exists points to the idea that GW is known for rendering thousands of dollars of customer purchases useless (or so it is perceived).

The new direction of GW has several examples of them making choices that are clear "my bad, I'll do better this time" efforts meant to directly change customer perception.

Showing that they won't "squat" armies lets new players spend without having to listen to veteran warnings advising them to beware the axe of squatting.

 

[amysrevenge]

Yeah I go after this line of thought over and over and over.

The day GW "squats" something in AoS I'll have to post a big apology, I suppose, but I'm pretty confident that something that's never happened yet, despite AMPLE opportunity to happen, is going to continue to not happen.  There won't be any squatting. 

However they handle the GNB2, there will be some way to keep playing Tomb Kings in Matched Play.  It might be that they don't get re-pointed, but there is a printed reference to the older GHB - I can imagine not wanting to spend resources over and over on them.  But I think they are going to force US to do any squatting, and not do it themselves.  If there's going to be an a-hole sending someone home with their old army, make it one of us.

[mmimzie]

46 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Keeping old stuff is actually a long term semi-subtle customer retention and confidence strategy aimed at newer players.

The fact that the term "squatted" exists points to the idea that GW is known for rendering thousands of dollars of customer purchases useless (or so it is perceived).

The new direction of GW has several examples of them making choices that are clear "my bad, I'll do better this time" efforts meant to directly change customer perception.

Showing that they won't "squat" armies lets new players spend without having to listen to veteran warnings advising them to beware the axe of squatting.

 

does it retain folks magic the gathering has been going strong for a while and definitly renders thousands of dollars of cards useless. I remember i think 2 or 3 times i'd spend 300 or 400 dollars getting a few good decks under my belt and then only for them to disappear two years later. Which would be more interesting as some cards disappear would make some of my other cards not owrk playing so those would sorta disappear too. That didn't matter though as the fresh play environment was awesome. Also i could play legacy and did play legacy with friends and even play cool for maps like EDH/commaner. 

As warhammer is MUCH slower in turn around maybe like 3 or 4 years turns around time.  It really comparatively doesn't seem like that big a deal. It lets stuff come out and be new and fresh, but not limited or needing more power because compendium stuff makes new stuff feel weak. 

Again my stance is that i think compendiums  should exist, but they should be viewed as a legacy format. Meant for Legacy tournaments and games.  Even if i'm practising for some modern style tournament with no compendium stuff i'd still play against legacy folks as it lets me practise and test my army no problem.  I'd also think it would be cool is warhammer world had legacy VS modern tournaments with comendium or with out it so show they support both ways of play. Heck they should even have narrative events too to show those are legit forms of play. 

[wayniac]

I was listening to a video yesterday (I forget by whom, sorry) that was talking about how if they don't put points into GHB2 it won't change anything because the points exist in GHB1.  I didn't get how that matters, since GHB1 will be obsolete, in the same way you can't, for example, use a 5th edition 40k codex in 7th edition if there's a new one; it still exists, still has points, but it doesn't matter, and I doubt many people will be like "ok sure use the old points".

I maintain the best way, in line with how a lot of people are saying the solution is to have "formats" like Magic, is to have those formats be the 3 ways to play concept.  Not everything needs to have points for Matched Play; if the players are unwilling to play anything that doesn't only use points, that's on them, not on GW.  The army may still be available to use in default AoS, it's on you if you're only interested in points only play and find out you can't use the army there.

[Sleboda]

@mmimzie M:TG is not only a completely different business and experiential model, its players know going in that they are flushing money.   Not comparable in the slightest.

[mmimzie]

32 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

@mmimzie M:TG is not only a completely different business and experiential model, its players know going in that they are flushing money.   Not comparable in the slightest.

Sure they do now, but they dodnt when the game forst started before the type system came down.  People were fussy and mad but then got over it. 

Also if you assume its flushing cash than the models to you as model armt really worth it to you are they?? Specially knowing that if they went the legacy route you could dtill play with the things. 

[Squirrelmaster]

46 minutes ago, wayniac said:

Not everything needs to have points for Matched Play; if the players are unwilling to play anything that doesn't only use points, that's on them, not on GW.  The army may still be available to use in default AoS, it's on you if you're only interested in points only play and find out you can't use the army there.

To me, that's like saying “it doesn't matter if GW discontinue TK, because you can still use them in Kings of War and 9th Age”.

I'm not “unwilling” to play Open or Narrative; I'm uninterested. I'm not being “stubborn”, or “narrow-minded”, or “clinging to WFB”, it's just that “default” AoS has no appeal to me. For me, these variations might as well be completely different games — I don't even consider them relevant to this discussion.

Heck, even if I was interested in these other game variants, I doubt I'd be able to find anyone at my local store who was also interested in them.

[wayniac]

Just now, Squirrelmaster said:

To me, that's like saying “it doesn't matter if GW discontinue TK, because you can still use them in Kings of War and 9th Age”.

I'm not “unwilling” to play Open or Narrative; I'm uninterested. I'm not being “stubborn”, or “narrow-minded”, or “clinging to WFB”, it's just that “default” AoS has no appeal to me. For me, these variations might as well be completely different games — I don't even consider them relevant to this discussion.

Heck, even if I was interested in these other game variants, I doubt I'd be able to find anyone at my local store who was also interested in them.

I don't disagree, but that seems to be the only logical way short of either caving in and allowing everything (the problem now) or removing them outright.  The common suggestion seems to be formats, but I still think the styles of AOS are formats themselves.  Open, Narrative, Matched are basically formats in that they add extra rules to limit what can and cannot be used (same as MtG formats).  Also note I'm specifically talking about the legacy compendiums, not anything that doesn't have a battletome.  So for example, "The Empire" would be disallowed in Matched Play for this format, but "Freeguild" are perfectly fine.

Tomb Kings and potentially Bretonnia seem to be the only real point of contention here because they did not get ported over to AOS naming, so if legacy scrolls were disallowed you would not see Tomb Kings armies in tournaments anymore.  That seems to be the only ones really affected.

[amysrevenge]

The MTG analogy only applies here in the loosest and most general sort of way. 

The competitive gameplay aspect of the two games sort of lines up, in that you can take lessons from one and apply them to the other without it being too much of a stretch.  The way you organize tournaments, that sort of thing.

The collectibility, casual gameplay and individual hobby aspects of the two don't really line up at all, in any meaningful way.

Cards are, in addition to being game pieces, also collectibles outside of any gameplay context.  This can apply to some devoted AoS gamers, but is not the expected norm.  Can't compare MTG and AoS.

A casual game of MTG takes a couple chairs, a small table, and half an hour.  A casual game of AoS takes an enormous table, lots of terrain, and a couple of hours.  The level of investment of time and extraneous equipment cannot be compared.

There are some individual hobby aspects that line up between the two - deck design and list building are very similar pursuits, and social media and forums are the same.  However, that's pretty much were it stops for MTG, and just where it starts with AoS.  There is nothing remotely analogous in MTG to vast amounts of time and energy put into assembling and painting AoS models.

Any "But in MTG they do..." analogy that fails to take into account the differences, especially the individual hobby aspect, is a failed analogy.  "You can't use this card you paid money for 3 years ago" is a VASTLY different ruling from "You can't use this model you paid money for 3 years ago and spent hours assembling and painting yourself".

[SuperKick]

@Sleboda

Just thought I'd address your long reply to my simple string of thoughts on the matter. Wouldn't want to get a 'virtual slap' over some plastic toys. 

Firstly this is simply my opinion, I'm sorry if you see this as some kind of personal attack! I thought this topic was to discuss your thoughts on the matter. 

A lot of what you said makes sense, fair enough. i probably didn't think about people who only play at tournaments. 

I think you've went way too deep into what you think my opinions are here however. I don't have an issue with compendium stuff at all i'd be more than happy to play them any time even at a tournament. Stripping this all back i simply think AOS is a new game, as such one of its biggest showcases should show the game in the best way and I (me personally) see this as the new stuff - the new models, the new heroes, the lore, the factions and the overall look and feel. With Warhammer live and the podcasts etc covering tournaments  I simply think this is what i'd like to see - the stuff that is in the world of AOS. Again the point about the kid i feel is totally valid, you're new to the game and see an army you think is cool but turns out its a nightmare to get hold off and is very expensive. 

Yes they're fully legal armies i totally agree but my opinion is about the direction I i'd like to see for tournaments not the game in general, I don't want them gone overall - i just think its cooler for a game of AOS to be the new stuff for the new game. Yes for some people as you stated who only play at tournaments it will mean its gone for them to that i say you're never gonna please everyone. 

Again this is just my opinion on the direction i would like and would never turn down someone for a game. They could be using WW2 figures as count as goblins and i wouldn't care. 

its just about what i think is cooler and will get more people in the hobby. 

 

 

[Iradekhorne]

OMG the only idea suck.

really some of you think is that an option?
Delete the compendiums of competitive play?
Isn't right exclude from the community the old players, some of this players buy new stuff but if you cut half (or more) of his armys, you really think all of them are going to continue playing to AOS? or they are going to enter in rampage with GW and abandon the hobby?

there is a list of compendium warscrolls, who some of you want kick off from competitive play:

High elf spearmen, ellirian reavers, silver hems, teclis, tyrion, great eagles, high elf archers, goblin warboss, azhag the slaugterer, teclis and tyrion, josef bugman (bro, you want kill bugman!!! we need his beer!  ), slayers, miners, dark elves repeater bolt trower, all bretonia (they are free peoples) and the tomb kings (forgeworld can keep them in future projects in the game....), empire knights, reiskward knights, empire cannon, empire mortar, count manfred!!!(if drácula read this...), hell cannon, sigvald the magnificent!!!, tons of wood elves and a large etc...

A lot of us have the old stuff mixed with the new stuff, you can't just come and say that or give GW the idea, only because you haven't old stuff.

If someone is op (like the necrospynx or some tomb kings stuff), just fix them in the points in the general 2.0. But the compendium need still be playable, this hobby isnt magic the gathering or a online game.... You expend money, space, time and love in this hobby.

I dont want throw my painted miniatures, i spended tons of hours in it.

Whith magic the gattering, for example, you don't spend time mounting and painting the cards, or creating a pj in a "ladder" of a online game.

I have the time just for paint one unit at month, and if GW put ladder im not going to buy old stuff... and if nobody buy his no-ladder miniatures, his warehouses are going to explode with "old stuff"

[nine7six]

miniatures get retired all the time, remember dogs of war? how do you think people will these mini's feel, they didn't evenget a compendium  

[amysrevenge]

Miniatures *used to* get retired all the time.  In AoS there have so far been zero squattings.

[Sleboda]

17 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

Miniatures *used to* get retired all the time.  In AoS there have so far been zero squattings.

Which was my recent point. GW was known for the shittiness of retiring armies, along with a bunch of other customer-hostile practices. 

I like this new GW.

[nine7six]

well how does it further the game if people who want to play competitive compendium armies and aren't buying from GW and using the second hand market or older stock?

AoS revenue will drop because people aren't buying the newer models and they are having to spend money on people balancing and updating the compendium for models that aren't generating income.

[Sleboda]

Why is it up to players to judge, be concerned with, or try to dictate GW's marketing plan? 

Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that compendium ban desires are considered by players for the good of the company.  Can't we at least be honest enough to stick to the real reasons (mainly, "I dunt lahk 'em, and if'n ah dunt lahk 'em, y'all kaint have 'em.")

[Ollie Grimwood]

12 hours ago, amysrevenge said:

Miniatures *used to* get retired all the time.  In AoS there have so far been zero squattings.

I've always thought this was a bit overstated, models get updated sure but the removal of an Army was very rare (in 40K it was just squats) and in the case of the Storm of Chaos and Kislev stuff (arguably just variant lists anyway) all their stuff was usable in using other army books. 

Also as bit of an aside I'm fairly sure Chaos Dwarfs didn't have a Warhammer Armies release it was White Dwarf presents Chaos Dwarfs. But I'd say WFB wise it would be them and Dogs of War who were "Squated". 

Of course as someone who had Dogs of War I could see why they weren't that popular, those Pike models were awful to deal with

 

 

[bottle]

I'm not to sure on the best way forward. I think I am probably in favour of the following:

- Remove them from GHB2 to allow tournaments to just use that book and later battletomes.

- Place them up for free on the website (with tweaked points).

- Perhaps put a bit of dialogue or introduction on the page to introduce the compendium scrolls and points, explain what they are and that they are fine for regular play but that tournaments might not allow them as the miniatures are no longer available.

- I also think they should curate the compendium warscrolls. Cut the joke rules once and for all, make them look nice (a 5 min job) and set up the site ready for wave 2 of the compendium.

This affects me directly as I run some compendium in my lists (last tourney I took 10 Empire Knights and Grim Burlokkson is also a regular in my army). As nice as it would be to keep them in forever, I do agree with Vince's points, and the list is going to get longer and longer and longer (I imagine the next wave of Grand Alliance books will trim the range again). 

I don't think you need to quite push the idea of different "modes of play" - just have a part of the website dedicated to curating the compendium scrolls and points with an explanation that they are 100% official and can be used in your games but they are often disallowed in tournaments and to check the pack. By excluding compendium from the GHB you automatically create the "Type 1" mode because event organisers can just say a tournament uses the GHB2 and any later released battletomes.

[AGPO]

What I don't get is why this needs to be a move by GW. If a TO doesn't want compendium at their event, fine. If another decides they do, also fine. Does it cause anyone any actual material problems to have the scrolls in the book or on the app?

I can remember two major "squatings" in my time in this hobby, and a couple of smaller ones. The first major one was with the release of sixth edition Warhammer. There was a compendium called Ravening Hordes which came with get you by list for all the old models. Eventually each list was replaced by a new book, which cut out several of the units. My Chaos army lost Centaurs, Bloodcrushers, Mounted Daemonettes, Daemon Chariots, Fiends, Beasts of Nurgle, and a whole raft of special characters. Most of these units made a comeback in 7th or 8th edition, but for a long time they were completely unusable, and became so overnight.

The smaller kind were the decision to split Chaos armies into three groups, then recombine them, then split them again. Each time, players got shafted. If you had a large collection, you now had to pay for lots of new rules sets and couldn't use all your stuff together. If your army was say mainly warriors with a handful of daemons and beastmen, the latter were essentially useless.

The last type of squatting was the slow death of Dogs of War and Chaos Dwarfs. Both still had rules from the dawn of 6th ed, both were hypothetically legal and viable even in eighth edition WFB but finding a game where someone would accept them was more of a challenge. That said, many people kept these armies going and it was a real hobbyist's endeavour to convert an entire army or track down those old models to complete your collection. Most people I played thought it was pretty cool to play something different, but I never ran a filthy list and always let my opponent read the rules beforehand.

Having played all three armies at the time, I'd much rather face the latter situation than the former two. Outdated rules may limit you to certain settings and opponents, but no accessible rules or being blacklisted effectively prevents you from playing. Some of my hobbyist friends have very little disposable time or income these days. They've built up their collections over years and to prevent them from using them would close off Age of Sigmar for them. Many hundreds of gamers are doubtless in the same boat. Is that worth it just to save TOs from making a call on something before an event?

 

[Zephyr]

100% correct - any TO can currently exclude WHATEVER they want.

You want to kill this stuff in your local community or your convention tournaments, get yourself a position as TO and do it.

Personally, I really hope to run into a Chaos Mammoth or some beautiful Tomb Kings this weekend.

[DarkBlack]

To add to what @Sleboda said: mini's (especially GW's) are expensive and then need more time and effort after you spend the money. I and probably many other people assume that we'll get use out of them for the rest of our lives or till we sell them when we justify a purchase.

Admittedly my view of this is influenced by my gaming "roots" in ancients (historical before gunpowder) and I play more than one game with all my miniatures.

To add to what @amysrevenge (and others, including myself) said: The disposability of Magic cards is not comparable to wargaming models. There are people who collect them, sure. Magic cards are not, however, as expensive in time to prepare or money. Magic decks are not built up over years with their owners making their own fluff about them and having epic stories of holding against odds of ridiculous failure. Magic cards are, in my experience called whatever name is printed on the card, stories from games are told referring to a card name, not that particular piece of cardboard. My lumps of plastic are not the same to me as other lumps of plastic that look the same, but with different paint. Few players replace their armies regularly, if at all.

You might say: "but competitive players are not like that" they only care about the models as game pieces. Well, they can do as they please at their events, they do not get to tell the rest of us what should be allowed in everyone's game.

This kind of argument is the main reason I liked AoS without points (having points is a good thing overall though).

 

I think everyone should be able to use any of their (GW) models. Change the rules, put them on a list of count as models, but let people use their toys, e.g. forsaken could be counted as warriors with 2 hand weapons. 

[Kosmion]

I think they should all be kept, definately! More units/old heroes to choose from means more options. Also it creates a situation where some models become rare or even "legendary"..sort of. Wich is cool! Also, tournaments have the option to ban whatever stuff they feel like

[amysrevenge]

On 2/2/2017 at 8:21 AM, amysrevenge said:

The day GW "squats" something in AoS I'll have to post a big apology, I suppose, but I'm pretty confident that something that's never happened yet, despite AMPLE opportunity to happen, is going to continue to not happen.  There won't be any squatting.

So, feeling pretty good about the chances of needing to post any big apologies any time soon lol

[CoffeeGrunt]

This thread was dead, couldn't we have just kept it that way?

[amysrevenge]

Hahahaha sorry.  Couldn't help myself.  I'll be good now I promise.