Karol

I would agree with you, if all armies gave the same amount of fun when playing with them. Unless they happen to have special rules like the stormcast one. Someone makes a conga line of 40 skins, an ability is used, like lets say a new spell, that kills specific models and now there is a 3-4" gap between the skins, for each 1" they are not in coherancy they lose a dude. Or something like that.

I do think the new factions are more balanced against each other. At least from the way talks about subfactions look like in different alliance forums. They seem to be doing that good, on the other hand their FAQ either do not do enough or just create more problems, instead of fixing stuff. Plus they seem to be really random with their errata. Tzeench seems to be a problem, but its lists are hardly touched by FAQs. I didn't even knew there were actuall GW sponsored tournaments till last month. Plus I am more interested in non tournament games, entry fee is not worth paying, when your coming in last. I think that if they removed most of the options from units and armies, the game would be easier to balance. When some armies stack a ton of rules, and cross grand alliance interactions it is hard to balance stuff, if that was taken away it would be easier to balance stuff with just changing the point costs of units or battalions. It would be also easier for new players to get in to the game, because they could just scan through units and their points costs and pick up the best ones, without having to worry if some strange interaction doesn't affect their army or possibly gets it nerfed.

Too stupid what the graph actually says. Those the 2 mean that with 2 extra boxs you can make the deck, or does it mean it has 2 overlapings, and you need more expansion sets for more cards for the deck type?

Ok thanks. Actually a good thing, because I kind of already cut up the reavers.

Which of the two basic starter deck is better without any expansions, the reavers or the stormcasts?

Is the salary in your country for an avarge citizent around 700$?

This works only if the avarge income of the avarge local player is high enough to stomach accidenly buying a bad unit or army. Plus I wasn't talking just about tournaments. I understand that tournaments are there to play the best of the best army possible, and where cash is a secondary thing. People here that are casuals, start armies by checking what armies are being played, and for you that probablly means tournaments while for me it means just other people around the stores, and they buy those armies. No on starts by buying bad units unless two things happen, they have even less money then the avarge player and they have no other way to play. Those people quit very fast. And the other moment is when they are someone returning after years of not playing, and it is all they have right now. Techniclly there is also a super small minority of people who were unlucky enough to get bad stuff as gifts from parents etc, but in my expiriance everyone just asks for money.

Not in the city I live in, there is only one store where I live that has tables to play and everyone goes there. But it is the same in all other parts of Poland, the polish forums are AoS unfriendly to say the least, but those that do deal with AoS have lists and stuff on sale listed as everyone was preparing for a GT. I know this is a meme, and they don't count to much, but it gives you a small insight what counts as funny in Poland. This is the "Welcome new player thing" on of polish facebook groups

if it looks at the viewer, it isn't a lion in heraldy, but a leopard. So someone doing it must have not know much about heraldy. Am not sure, people around here still call stormcast, stormchads. And the slyers are called strippers etc. Some names are picked up, but very often if a things gets named it sticks. I mean how many people call their dwarfs steamhead duradins? The stormcast stuff seems to look very stormcast, maybe the quad arbalist looks a bit w40k. But am not a stormcast player, so I don't know. Any army of mages/priests, or even just units of those can be very powerful. Or at least that is my expirance from poaying against tzeench a few times. I hope GW is going to make khorn stuff too. Maybe some range units or a behemoth like the ones marines have in w40k.

three is 3 worth playing, and am talking AoS only here. For me that is most.

the small ship and the gun dudes from the Kharadron starter. Retributors in the Stormcast box, the entire orc, beastclaw and striders box as they give an illusion that those armies are valid or can be bought for cheap. The Runesmitter in the Slyer box. It is even worse for w40k, where boxs drip with dreadnoughts, termintors etc I never been there, but from what I have been told there is 0 gaming going on in the Warsaw GW store. All other games are done at tournaments or stores that sell table top stuff. And from the list I have seen being played the only save ones are the tzeench, nurgle, lizard people ones. In every other one ther is either bad stuff, or the faction is too bad to play. Like beastclaws have a box that can make the whole army with 2-3 boxs, but the faction is unplayable.

I said most of the time. They are most often a trap, give you stuff for "cheap" techniclly, but those stuff you get for "free" you will never use. That is very nice. I think we only have one GW store in warsaw. 5-6 hour games would not happen here, unless those were the store owners closest friends.

Maybe it is those new amalgam bodies dudes. I wonder if there wil be any new khorn stuff.

It doesn't seem to have anything to do with good or bad, for it to work you would just have to be 100% sure that most opponents are not going to overpower you with their better collections day one of you starting to play, because even if it was only a 50/50 chance it would still better to got for a power list. I dont understand the start collecting argument , most of the time people here avoid the starter sets, because most of them are really bad value for money. wouldn't you just be kicked out of the store, if the game took that long, we have an hour to play at there is always a line waiting for a free table. Even when tables are reserved. Cool. I don't know anyone who would like to play orcs, or destruction for that matter. But it would be nice if they gave people the option to actually use their models.

I don't think that is possible, and I don't mean the polite stuff, I mean the longer stuff. I remember standing in a line to buy what would eventually be a carpet for 2 weeks, you often stood in line to buy anything, just to get rid of the money. I didn't go school for that time it was 4 hours every day, and that my grandmother would come and stand the other 4 hours. The store would close, the line order would be checked and marked on collective list. And the next day it would be the same. But you shouldn't bait me, see the normal thing for us when we meet is to list all the bad things, that happened to use since we last seen each other, and how our stuff was much worse then the other persons. Yeah I get this, and from short time at an english school, my expiriance is that if two people from different groups meet at a school or club or bathroom, you get an instant "I will stab you if you turn your back on me" situation. Or at least that was my expiriance going for a year and a half to St Gregories School, and it is not like I was the only Pole there or something. I understand that people in general in Poland are in it for themselfs, maybe for the closest family, and that is all, but I have never seen anything close to the divivde between people that I saw in London. The only thing close to it is Krakow, and it is an oddity in Poland, because it is divided between two groups of hooligans. Do you think GW is going to do the same with dwarfs or orcs, of the non bonespliter or ironjaws type? The dispossed and the free people have AoS styled boxs, and even AoS fluff. No idea, if they are "safe" armies to pick up.

I understand that post WWII Britain was not a american 50s type of heaven, but unless you had to stand in a line for toilet paper for 2-3 hours, every day, you don't really know what queuing is. But I agree with you that people are different and may have different views on most basic of stuff. I mean lets say an avarge, and again we thought playing here, person in one place can buy a box a week and in another place the avarge dude can buy one small box of week every month and one big kit every 4-5 months, your going to get drasticly different communities. And technicly both could be playing the same game be it narrative or not.

It is not a question of making me or someone else play the game this or that way. I would be the last one to say that matched play is some sort of super balanced, fun for everyone way to play. I just don't get it, to not be off topic. Why GW did this thing with the rules. Why make rules for a small part of how people play the game, when it really doesn't take much time of effort to just add point costs. If they want to phase the model line out, then why troll with pretending your making rules to play with those models. Why not just legends a place where are fantasy styled models, you can buy. If GW does not care about dark elf players, and it is not like they have to or anything, why do something like that. It just makes people angrier. I just look at this topic, we are on the 6th page of it. If this was just, GW is selling old dark elfs for a week, no rules no nothing, it would probablly be like 2 pages long. Not to mention the fact that now all people that play other legacy armies, are going to wonder, if GW is going to seraphon their army or are they going the elf way with them.

I don't know what WAAC is, but am assuming it is the opposit of narrative/open play. If am wrong, I sorry. I don't really understand what would be good about such a scenario. You could just check both players collections, build the most "not die" for one and the most "kill" army for the other, out of the models they have, then simulate the rolls,and you would get who wins on avarge. Seems ultra boring, not to mention how this is suppose to be played when one player is a new one. A veteran with a big collection will always be able to maximise and build a good list of either sort, but a new player with a normal army would just get crushed by something that is optimised for the scenario being played.

I do get the enjoy part, the only other way someone would play any other table top game is if it was his job of some sorts. I just can't imagine how anyone could get in to any game, and not think two or three times what others are going to do, specially when they play longer and have bigger collections. I don't have the words for it in english, and I don't want to insult one. So I will use an example from life, it is a bit like going to another villages or towns fair to dance and drink,doing it alone and expecting that everything is going to be just fine. Techniclly it is possible, but the life practic says you will end up beat up. I get it, but this is low level taunting. On the ha ha you spend a ton of cash on models, and now you can't resell it and with techniclly give you rules, but because the number of narrative players is low and you probablly don't play narrative either, we aren't actually giving you anything. Ah and now thanks us for giving you stuff. Another example from my countries history. In the deepest times of communism, food was running low, the goverment rose the price for food even more, but informed everyone that they should be happy, because the cost of trains, tanks and bridges went down. 2 days later they had to use military to quell the riots. To make it even more fun, they did the prize hike just before christmas. I understand that. I just don't get it how you can be sure that the other person doesn't try to one up you durning the pre game talk. And you have to be damn sure that he doesn't try to do it, before you spend money on the army, because this isn't street football, where if you don't like a rule you just go home and waste maybe 20-30 min of your time. Where in the case of table top armies, you maybe spending 1-2 summers of working and a year of saving up. Well then this is must be a culture thing then, because I have seen people of all ages act exactly the opposit, and not just in table top gaming or games, people do it in everyday life. If they have an edge, they use it. If they can force people to do something and they know the oppossing party will hate it, they will do it 100% of time, even if it makes little sense from an economic point of view. Just to spite them, and they do it on a daily basis in most small things imaginable. Am assuming there were leaked rules, and the testers and they friends and close groups, had to test day in and day out, for the new game. That is what people around here do. Those that know tournament orgenisers, know the scenarios etc before others and they always test those sometimes months in advance, some even buy specific models or armies, or drop armies, just because they know a rules pack is going to change how the game is played. And while I understand that this is doesn't have to be a thing everywhere, but it is impossible to not happen to some degree. I do not know who tests GW games, but I doubt they invest in to armies they know are going to get nerfed, or not build at least a core list of an army they know has an above avarge win ratio. Well given the fact you can never be sure if the other guy wants you to have fun, but you do, aside for maybe masochists, want to have fun yourself. It is IMO a logical assumption to expect everyone doing everyone to have fun themselfs first. And this means that any deviation from a strickt rules system and opening doors to ways of removing those limits would just kill any form of interaction. No new players would buy new armies, and all the players already with armies would have to play each other over and over again. And this means either a constant arms race between people, or some armies being better no matter what you buy. Now am not saying that two people can't have fun playing a game, I just don't think that the chance of both of them having fun at the same time is much lower, if one adds the social aspect in to the game.

No one here starts the game by buying models and then trying to find games. And by here I mean my country, not my store. First they come to a store and ask how much stuff costs, and a lot of leave. Those that stay, have to play the game the way everyone else plays and this is 2000pts, latest FAQ legal and tournament pack scenarios. If they don't get an army like that, and aren't the brother or child of someone who is a player, they have 0 chance to find a game.

Yeah I get that, but if you have a bigger collection then you would always try to steer the game in to a such a way, that no matter on what limits you agree on you will have an edge over your opponent. And for a new player it would be impossible to achive, even if they play against another new player, because one list can hard counter the other one or be just plain better within a given set of rules. I don't, as I am rather new, but I did notice the best armies seem to cost more then the ones that win less, at least in matched play. Plus that is what I have been saying no one wants to lose and waste money on an army that loses most of the time, or even every time. And if both players do everything to have fun, the one with more options and a bigger collection has the edge. Same like doing sports, no one wants to pick a sport where everyone is bigger then you and will just stomp you over and over again. But what communication do you need. Both people want to spend the least money right now, to get the most out of your money in form of fun. This gives long time players the edge. Also people who are liked or have a lot of friends, because those can enforce the type of game, table set up or scenario, and maximise their fun. But if someone is not liked or has no friends will be twice as punished without a points system.

Cool. Wouldn't it create the problem though that everyone would want to play their games in a different way, so to actually play the game a new player would have to start with a vast collection. Am not saying that 2000pts is not a lot, specially for the armies with legions of models. But at least they just have to buy one list. Don't people worry that one opponent says 3 Heros, 1 warmachine, no monsters and another one goes 2-3 monsters, 0 machines and 1-2 hero, and a third wants 3 machines or 3 monsters and no more then 1 hero. So to have just 3 opponents willing to play they would have to buy 3 heros, 3 machines and 3 monsters, and that is assuming their armies have valid machines and monsters. Because I have no idea what a new player would suppose to do when his opponent has 0 monsters and 3 machines, and the new players army only has valid monsters and no machines. But if most games are played as matched play games, getting no rules for matched play, means the rules don't really exist, but are only there for small group playing narrative games. And, am assuming stuff here, as narrative games seem to require a ton of pre game talking, the narrative rules could be just created by the players without Games Workshop help.

But those aren't official, and you would more or less have to force the other person to accept to play the game the way you want. But never mind I don't want to derail the topic. See I come from a country where play the narrative is used as an insult, or when you want to make fun of someone playing bad or with a bad army.

How do people actually play narrative, without points it would be just the guy with the biggest wallet dominates everyone else, even more then in matched played? Or better yet how do they start it, if someone starts narrative this means other people have to had already been playing it, this means they are late to the arms race and would be facing people who have 3-4 times the size of collections. They would have to be constanlly be buying more and more stuff to keep up with others, while in matched played they just have to have one good 2000pts army and be done with buying stuff.

I am a very new player, but aren't 99,99% games matched played? So being good in narrative games or not having points cost, is as good as not existing at all. It's a bit like saying that a card is still ok post nerf in MtG, because it rocks in Vintage, that no one sane plays.