[Is it time to rethink 2000 points as the "standard" in AoS?]

5 hours ago, pnkdth said:

1500 or 2000? Why not both?

As for competitive games, it would be very interesting to see two different metas evolve.

I also think players underestimate how much fun it actually is to play armies where you cannot plonk down a super unit + how changing things up will add more to their game.

 

I think this is a really important point, there doesn't need to be a "standard" size, the game can and should have multiple formats. It's really important that the game feels rewarding at different sizes. Keeps new players engaged and gives us more options.  

I think the main reason we tend to view 2000 points as the standard is because of events, both GW and independent. The more local events just follow the big one's lead. I know ITC would poll for game size in earlier editions, but it always seemed to be all or nothing. Personally, I prefer 1500-point games you can still run some big stuff but with objectives you still need to have enough boots on the ground to hold things.

 

[Why do you accept this mess?]

The reason is I put with the negatives is because of the community. GW has a lot more reach than other gaming systems and I like the IPs. That said I think it is really important to look at alternatives, because the negatives you brought up in the OP are legitimate. I think people stay in a toxic relationship with GW because of the sunk cost of the hobby and that just creates a downward spiral. Sometimes it's better to take a break and find something new to be passionate about. Maybe down the road they address some of your concerns and you go back.

For me it's been battletech, I like the alpha strike system, the rules are cheap, and the boxsets are a good value (at least in the US). It plays fast and it's simple enough I can explain it another wargamer pretty quickly. Does it have the same sort of scene that the GW does, absolutely not but that's ok it's cheap enough that I can supply the models for a two person game.  

[What makes a good battletome?]

I feel that the internal balance between units is the key for a good battle tome. It's just not a good a feeling when you're looking through a book and your first impression of several units is disappointment.  I really think this is most important part, because you won't have variety without good internal balance. By the same token units that are too good can take away from a fraction's identity.

I will admit that when it comes to external balance my expectations have changed a bit. With products like the Generals Handbook and Chapter Approved External balance should be the best it's ever been. I explained to GW in the 40k survey why I wouldn't buy products like that anymore if they didn't start making bigger changes (30% win rates shouldn't exist with paid living rule updates). 

[Tournament cost versus pricing (and why players should submit their lists correctly formatted.)]

Just out of curiosity without having that friend would you have any ideal of what the event costed? I've been wargaming for a long time, I've never been to an event that has provided that information. The main argument I can think of not to provide it, is because the event hall may try to take a bigger cut. I think they will anyways, because they are a for profit business. 

 

I think its awesome that you love the hobby enough to put a personal stake in growing the scene. I couldn't afford to do something like that, I just couldn't. That said I don't expect you to lose money on it. I wouldn't want you spending money on catering, prizes, and awards with margins that tight. Ask your players what they want to make sure if they expect some of this stuff, and see if its more important than keeping the ticket prices down. Maybe look at other ways to increase profit and value for the player like bundle in a T-shirt with their entry.

 

IF their expectations are still unreasonable than cut your loses it isn't worth it. Its probably not the advice you want to hear but its clear your frustrated with your current position. Don't stay in it, but send out an email to people you have attended your events and hear from them not just the people on twitter.  

[Tournament cost versus pricing (and why players should submit their lists correctly formatted.)]

I do think part of the issue is transparency. I've been to several events I have no idea what it costs to rent the venues that there in, and why would I? I'm not going to rent out those event halls. People are going to draw conclusions that aren't fair simply by comparing events to each other, because we don't have a lot of information. For example I go to Adepticon every year, and when it was cancelled because of covid they gave us the option to refund our tickets and merch. I choose to donate the money from the tickets and paid for the merch. That said I have no ideal what costs they were on the hook for, it was a decision made in blind faith. Adepticon is basically a holiday for me, so I have no regrets but it wasn't an informed decision.

 

Personally I would've expected TOs were making some money. If for no other reason than I can estimate the initial costs because I have my own table so I know what mats and terrain goes for. I would expect them to be confident they could recoup them fairly quickly because I couldn't afford not too. Granted I live in the US and I do think renting a venue should be cheaper here (we have a lot more land mass, and our population is a lot more spread out). Regardless its interesting to read about your experiences because its a side of the hobby we aren't exposed to.

 

For what its worth as I think an average tournament goer, I don't think most events need to put as big of emphasis on prizes and awards. They're nice but I don't think the majority of the people entering the event have any expectations of getting them.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tournament cost versus pricing (and why players should submit their lists correctly formatted.)]

Out of curiosity have you tried some sort of crowd funding? I'd definitely chip in for storage costs, upgrades, and labor costs for events that I attend as long as everything is transparent.  A higher ticket price wouldn't bother me, but I'd also probably be less willing to try new events the quality of the ones I've attended has varied dramatically. 

[Overwhelming Complexity or Just Old Dude?]

@Sleboda - For me as a more casual AoS player I think its less overwhelming complexity and more adjusting to the structure of the game. Most of the new abilities are simple its just now each one typically has a specific time to use it. As an example I like 2d fighting games, but there are matches when I first start playing a new entry in a franchise where I whiff because they changed how a move worked, or took it out of the game entirely lol. I notice those mistakes way more than the things that I'm doing right. I think you'll get into the rhythm of the game fairly quickly once you start playing it on a regular basis.

[Rumours on low Dominion sales - discussion]

10 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

I think popular is a bit of a subjective term.  By popular do we mean the number of people who own a Stormcast army (in some shape or form), or do we mean the number of people who actively play a Stormcast army?

Stormcast are a good army to start off with.  They can have a fairly straightforward playstyle, the miniatures are easy to assemble and enjoyable to paint, plus they're the poster boys, so we know they're going to get solid support throughout each version of the rules.  As you say they're available in plentiful supply to, having been included in all 3 versions of the boxed game and within the Mortal Realms magazines.

For me I feel Stormcast don't inspire the passion that other forces do.  I know many greenskin generals who are borderline fanatical about their armies, yet can't think of ever encountering this within Stormcast.

I wanted to quote this post because I think RuneBrush makes some great points but I wanted to expand on one of them. Stormcast are a great army to start off with, this is both the strength and weakness of the line. They have access to a little bit of everything, but they don't have the hooks that other armies have. 

This puts them in a really awkward spot because they have a ton of "Filler". I can't put enough emphasis on that point, because quite frankly there has been a ridiculous amount of churn for range. It is a direct result of having an army that has to many units that just fulfill the same role. Hopefully the new subfractions add some depth and purpose to a lot of the older units like the various chapters of space marines do in 40k. 

I really think this is necessary for the range because without those hooks stormcast are just a "starter army". People will avoid them, because the game is too expensive to commit to a force that isn't interesting. 

[Here be Dragons! A Discussion Thread about Dragons in the Mortal Realms.]

7 hours ago, Zappgrot said:

Lets see. I  really don't have manny dragons either. They tent to look down on destruction armies i gues. I did have a few in fanatsy tough but they kind of fell appart by bad storage. ( i was pretty stupid as a teen ager.  I do have 2 mawcrushers tough.  Sort of dragons if you ask me.  For the future i kinda wanna get a stardrake and i am hopeing the kruelboys get soem sort of wyvren whit their range 

MawCrushers definitely count as dragons in my book. I'm not really an Ironjawz fan for whatever reason I can't handle bare foot armies but that kit is amazing.

[Here be Dragons! A Discussion Thread about Dragons in the Mortal Realms.]

I'm pretty excited to see what they do on the dragon front. I've been enjoying 3.0 so far but a dragon that fits in with the new stormcast would be awesome. That said I really like the ideal of a dragon type for each order. No rider just pure allied dragon action that any fraction can take, I think it would be fun.

[The Rumour Thread]

If Crowe doesn't have the primaris keyword I think you'll be relatively safe with Grey Knights. I do think they will be up scaled probably with a new option or two, at some point to the death watch/new chaos size. So if the size difference between marines and deathwatch bothers you its probably a bad ideal to start them, but I don't think there is any danger of them being squatted or primarized.

 

 

 

[The Rumour Thread]

1 hour ago, PrimeElectrid said:

Huh. That’s not a primaris model but looks like it might still have primaris proportions. That’s weird. The old style armour is a good look for grey knights but it leaves me baffled as to the GW marketing strategy. I assumed all old style marines would get updated to the primaris style but this suggests some will retain the old one. 

They've put too much effort in keeping the firstborn relevant, and units like terminators are too iconic to get rid of.  Personally I think they make a lot of money just by updating army books to the point they won't alienate a large section of the player base.  

[AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion]

Yndrasta and Praetors definitely need a FAQ. I could be convinced either way at this point, though I tend to count the bodyguard rule as a ward because it can negate wounds. That said my limited experience with them suggests that its somewhat of a non issue. Your opponent will target the Praetors first, and I don't think keeping them within 3" and out of combat is going to be a easy. Its still a strong setup because she should last long enough to provide a lot of value.

[Rumours on low Dominion sales - discussion]

I really think Dominion has two drawbacks.

1) the new Stormcast aren't really that exciting. Yndrasta and the bodyguard unit are cool, but as a casual AoS player I have no need for more Stormcast battle line, and have support characters for days. I really think this spot should have been used for a different Order army. I can't emphasize this point enough fireslayers, sylvaneth, IDK, or KO all would have been better choices because they have limited ranges. 

2) The Kruleboyz are a pretty basic fraction at the moment. They need to show something that makes fraction feel unique. They have a distinctive LotR look, which appeals to people but you need some substance with that style.