Warhammer Underworlds: Shadespire

[BURF1]

 

3 hours ago, Auticus said:

Mmmmm 8-bit Super Mario.... middle school memories.

And I fully agree.  AOS was never a dumpster-fire.  It was only such for those that wanted a competitive tournament-based game that was focused on the game aspect of competition and rankings.  I'm not slamming those things either, I'm just saying that AOS initially was the polar opposite of what a tournament player would ever want, but that does not make it a dumpster fire any more than 9th age of KOW are dumpster fires to those that don't like tournaments.

As a game no, it was never truly bad. It had an ENORMOUS hidden barrier to entry(lack of structure) that frustrated a lot of people into quitting at first but it was never a bad game.

AoS as a product line was absolutely a dumpster fire on release. It tanked or nearly tanked just a ton of different FLGSes, it managed to sell even less kits than when WHFB existed, it sent 75-80% of the WHFB player base into a rage spiral that plenty of people haven't still come out of, if trends had continued like they were then we might actually of been in a situation where GW was legitimately in danger of bankrupting itself. The initial 'oh snap' of how poorly AoS did after launch was at least partially responsible for all the dramatic policy changes we've seen in the last year and a half. The general's handbook was a completely unprecedented thing for Games Workshop to even think about doing and they did it to save a game that was at real risk of being put out to pasture before it could establish itself.

AoS needed matched play, it needed tournament play because, like it or not, A) there was no feasible way in the old system to set up a game with a stranger, especially one with an army you're not familiar with and B) plenty of people, arguably the majority, prefer 'pick up style' or 'organized' play because of a number of different factors ranging from ease of use to competitive spirit. And they managed to implement these systems without doing anything to take away from people who preferred the original narrative/beer and pretzels playground of Sigmar, which was just as important.

So the idea that Shadowspire is GWs way of 'throwing out undesirables' and 'making Sigmar great again'(it's eerie how close the original comment I replied to is to these.) is hugely insulting. 

[rokapoke]

15 minutes ago, BURF1 said:

So the idea that Shadowspire is GWs way of 'throwing out undesirables' and 'making Sigmar great again'(it's eerie how close the original comment I replied to is to these.) is hugely insulting. 

Just as a reminder, the original comment you replied to is:

4 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Maybe GW saw that, despite the increase in sales, matched play was gutting the AoS experience they had envisioned and wanted to direct that customer segment toward something else so that AoS could be more like what they had planned originally again.

Please show me where the aggressive statements of "throwing out undesirables" and "making Sigmar great again" are in @Sleboda's post. I for one am not seeing it.

[chord]

57 minutes ago, BURF1 said:

 

As a game no, it was never truly bad. It had an ENORMOUS hidden barrier to entry(lack of structure) that frustrated a lot of people into quitting at first but it was never a bad game.

AoS as a product line was absolutely a dumpster fire on release. It tanked or nearly tanked just a ton of different FLGSes, it managed to sell even less kits than when WHFB existed, it sent 75-80% of the WHFB player base into a rage spiral that plenty of people haven't still come out of, if trends had continued like they were then we might actually of been in a situation where GW was legitimately in danger of bankrupting itself. The initial 'oh snap' of how poorly AoS did after launch was at least partially responsible for all the dramatic policy changes we've seen in the last year and a half. The general's handbook was a completely unprecedented thing for Games Workshop to even think about doing and they did it to save a game that was at real risk of being put out to pasture before it could establish itself.

AoS needed matched play, it needed tournament play because, like it or not, A) there was no feasible way in the old system to set up a game with a stranger, especially one with an army you're not familiar with and B) plenty of people, arguably the majority, prefer 'pick up style' or 'organized' play because of a number of different factors ranging from ease of use to competitive spirit. And they managed to implement these systems without doing anything to take away from people who preferred the original narrative/beer and pretzels playground of Sigmar, which was just as important.

So the idea that Shadowspire is GWs way of 'throwing out undesirables' and 'making Sigmar great again'(it's eerie how close the original comment I replied to is to these.) is hugely insulting. 

It's insulting to those who were playing before matched play to say it "needed" that.

I think Shadowspire will be a more closed ecosystem than AoS currently is. More predefined armies where it all comes down to strategy during the game and less about who can buy the current meta.

[AGPO]

Is any of this really worth getting insulted over? Personally I think age of sigmar's initial lack of points was the best thing to happen with GW in years, because I grew up on historical wargames and trpgs like Mage and Runequest. Each to their own but I wish people would stop with the notion that their way of playing is 'right.'

[Sabuz]

3 hours ago, Auticus said:

 (though I would dump them all for a fantasy version of Hail Caesar)

Have a look at this thread, may be what you are looking for.

http://www.warlordgames.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=21150

[Carnelian]

6 hours ago, Thundercake said:

Too bad the guy on the right isn't a stormcast, he is from league of legends.

http://gameinfo.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/champions/garen/

D'oh! I've been had! 

[nicromancer]

www.warhammer-community.com/2017/03/17/more-news-from-the-underworlds/

 

We'll be getting more soon. I need this to be good, I've invested alot of potential excitement here. 

[The Stronghold]

Says there "A fast-paced game of tactical arena combat" - looking forward to the reveal!

[Soulsmith]

I'm predicting a bigger more expanded version of Gorechosen for everyone. Probably comes with some characters, probably not new ones, and rules to fight non-characters too. I imagine you can micro transaction more profiles like WQ. The Shadespire I imagine to be some kind of structure in the realm of shadows, with an arena inside/below it where lost followers of the alliances find themselves and they fight.

[Carnelian]

I see this as maybe a bit like gorechosen but with title models on each side and you somehow customise them

[Gauche]

I'd go all in on this game if it actually is small scale. I love the look of big armies on the tabletop but the amount of time, money, etc. to get those armies up and running is off-putting at times. Also any "living" game, from a competitive perspective, has the risk of lowering your existing army and then you're back to square one. Again, that's only for extremely competitive players which is a small sub-set of a small player base.

If I can buy into this new game for a few hundred bucks or less and it's balanced well, I'm in. Competitive games are also great when you can re-rack and go again, this is one of the few things I miss from being a TCG player. You could go again, again, again and figure out the matchup. Competitive minis are more about theory and list building, it's hard to pile through any matchup as much as you want. You might not even have the requisite army in your meta!

If this game uses existing AoS models, which it may considering the art, that would be an amazing move and I will be all in. For better or worse it's how the genre is moving, smaller games and faster games. You can see this in moves from RTS games to things like MOBAs, TCGs speeding up, it's rampant.

 

Very excited for next week.

[Turragor]

2 hours ago, Gauche said:

to things like MOBAs

What if this basically IS a Moba?

WHQSilverTower style AI for a few 'waves'. Levelling a 3-5 character warband during the game and choosing abilities from a pool. An easy expandable bunch of archetypes to choose from (taken from any AoS models).

You don't retain level based abilities or stat bonuses for the next match so balance is maintained.

Hmm.

I know Riot released a boardgame of League of Legends. I think there's further precedent for it.

Balance is all in the heroes/characters.

It'd be neat. Like:

Quote

I took the Judicator Prime, Grand hammer liberator and Stormcall Prosecutor this game. I boosted wounds for the Judicator and my opponent kept trying to nail him, ignoring the stormcall (who was too fast). I got the Spear of Oniadyas on the Stormcall and started getting experience for any damage I was doing so I levelled the Spear Hammer ability and kept knocking movement off my opponent. The prosecutor was untouchable so became a bit of an unconventional carry.

Etc.

Shadespire - underworld - no true death -respawns?

[Turragor]

I am near certain I am onto something.

Think of best business practises - iterate don't innovate.

Then think of the top competitive (digital or nondigital) gaming experiences you want to emulate: Magic, Hearthstone, League, Dota, Heroes of the Storm, Overwatch etc. Basicaly card game, moba, class based team shooter. Just check twitch for top streaming titles.

Remove those that are least compatible with GWs existing product creation pipeline.

Remove those that cannot compliment other areas of the business (remove anything that has no or can't possibly have models).

Moba stands out (for me).

I'd say shooter with 40k but we know it's AoS...

However! You could abandon all semblance of fluff and put 40k models into the Moba format!

Heroes of the Storm draws on a lot of Blizzard IP.

 

[Gauche]

MOBA seems like a bad fit for a physical game. I can buy the board game thoughts but it would make me unhappy since there are some weird pricing and physical access issues with board games. I could see it being a bit of a hybrid, ala Bloodbowl, where the intro is very much like a board game and they expand from there with teams. The art seems Khorne vs. SCE, that could be Orcs vs. Humans. I'm really hoping for something on a 4x4, maybe 5-15 models per side depending. Those types of games exist but they don't have a big company behind them like GW or PP so they just do okay.

I think going full MOBA with things like XP, Items, stuff like that would get too cumbersome is isn't well fitted to a competitive community as they said they're aiming for. It would work for league play because Blood Bowl does a very similar thing but Blood Bowl isn't competitive in the sense it has awesome balance and rewards skill as much as possible.

I am rooting for some things like you go, I go, and a lot of reactionary choices. Not a lot of book-keeping or a very complex rule set, one of the greatest AoS strengths is how simple the game is. As I play more and more games the simple ones tend to be the most balanced because tweaking things is easier.