As I read comments here and on other forums I see people who take the:

Nope, nope, nope, nope
...position about the AoS rules. And as a result they've gone back to 8th (or 7th, 6th, 5th, etc.) or to Kings of War or Fan-Written rules. I keep wondering if there is a way to fix the AoS rules. It was only four pages. What if we wrote two (or even four) additional pages and added things to improve them to the point that some of the players who said, "nope, nope, nope..." might reconsider.

Any thoughts Milords?

My owns thoughts are that there are four areas where AoS (which I like to call Age of Skirmish) could use some additional thought and simple rules. There may be more but so far I have:


Terrain Effect Rules

Formations / Orderly Movement

Balancing Magical Summoning

Points


The last one has been somewhat addressed in the new GHB but it does not help much if a force does not conform to the pre-selected numbers and unit sizes.

I have only a few scattered thoughts on any of those topics, not yet concrete enough to be worth writing down. Kinda hoping others might have some ideas.

It could be fixed. I just wonder if it's worth it since GW has apparently written us off. I am VERY excited about Frostgrave, Kings of War, and now, even more than those, Dragon Rampant. To say nothing of Oldhammering it. The GHB was such a disappointment with its straight-jacket unit sizes.

I did have an idea for formations, back when it first came out. Basically allowing all models in ranked up units to hit in hand to hand combat, and all to shoot if the champion can draw LOS.

Jon Lackpenny wrote:
I just wonder if it's worth it since GW has apparently written us off.
That sort of makes a bunch of Bretonnian generals pretty close to a disinterested, neutral party. I suppose Chaos Dwarfs might be even more so (did they even get warscrolls?) since they've been OOP longer. So, who better to come up with something?

Jon Lackpenny wrote:
I did have an idea for formations, back when it first came out. Basically allowing all models in ranked up units to hit in hand to hand combat, and all to shoot if the champion can draw LOS.
Shooting first: I think all the shooters in a ragged unit of AoS troops get to shoot? Is a there a difference I am not noticing?

Hand-to-Hand: that's an interesting idea: Let more soldiers attack than normally would be able to. I can picture instances where it could get silly. 50 Goblins in a move tray crunch into 8 Chaos Warriors in loose formation...

I like the idea of being able to use a mix of formations. Or even invent some. 5th edition triangles (with staggered edges), 6th edition Brick Lances, large oval formations filled with guys on circle bases, straight-edged Tertian(tm) Wedge formations (I suppose I will have to draw what I am thinking of), 120 degree wedges made of tightly packed circle bases...

...formations involving ovals I have yet to contemplate but why not?

I guess I am struggling to think of a definition of formation that is more or less any tray someone wants to build [?] that would allow all the old traditional ones to be used but keep some AoS creativity.

Other armies could use some of the new things as well and there could be some army specific ones for other armies just like Brets would have lances.

I think I am rambling.

Magical Summoning

The thought I had on this is to allow any army that cannot summon extra troops magically to respond by trying to bring on reinforcements from the edges.

Lizardmen and Undead can just pop troops up nearly anywhere --- literally with a handwave. This can become an imbalance quickly. If other armies could counter by having 'nearby' troops ride onto the board because they were signaled (horns/drums) or sent for (messengers) that seems like a workable counter.

I was thinking musicians and standard bearers could serve that function somehow.

I think a better solution to magical summoning is to handicap the actual process rather than to add more of it, in the form of reinforcements. Undead could always summon new units and it used to be fine.

Tertius wrote:
Magical Summoning

The thought I had on this is to allow any army that cannot summon extra troops magically to respond by trying to bring on reinforcements from the edges.

Lizardmen and Undead can just pop troops up nearly anywhere --- literally with a handwave. This can become an imbalance quickly. If other armies could counter by having 'nearby' troops ride onto the board because they were signaled (horns/drums) or sent for (messengers) that seems like a workable counter.

I was thinking musicians and standard bearers could serve that function somehow.

The Generals Handbook did a lot to put summoning in check.
For instance, in a 2000 point game, in order to summon you need to have points held in reserve for summoning. Which means, if you are playing undead and I am playing Greenskinz

I would field my 2000 point army,

you would field a 1600 point army (or whatever you want), and hold 400 points in reserve. You can use that 400 points to summon whatever you want, which lets you summon in a hard counter to whatever you are facing, however you can no longer summon above the game size total, which does a lot to bring it in line. Of course they did this because the undead and demon armies were pointed without summoning taken into account. So it still a useful ability to cater your list mid game, but it is far nerfed from what it was.

Tis a shame the Generals Handbook was a minimalist shocker. I thought it would open the door to aos for me.
But only managed to twiddlle the knob.

AoS is GREAT for moving models around & flicking dice about. It just doesn't grab me unfortunately.

Happy to wait till someone comps it to make it a playable game

DiscoKing wrote:
Tis a shame the Generals Handbook was a minimalist shocker. I thought it would open the door to aos for me.
But only managed to twiddlle the knob.

AoS is GREAT for moving models around & flicking dice about. It just doesn't grab me unfortunately.

Happy to wait till someone comps it to make it a playable game

"Minimalist Shocker" is an interesting phrase. Can you explain a bit? You expected bigger and more sweeping changes but ithe GHB delivered much less is what I am getting out of the phrase. If I have that all wrong, do comment further.

What two things would you "comp" first?

Well if it were up to me I would have liked to see "points per model" instead of "per unit". Paying for units would be fine if the unit minimums were 5 or so and then you could add on in 1's or 2's as you saw fit. But multiples of 8 and 16? That's a TON of painting. Dragon Rampant uses everything in multiples of 6 and 12, which sounds just as bad, but it isn't. 16 is a big % leap up from 12. Also it needed rules for ranked up units. I know GW is planning it discontinue square bases, but I hate it. If I wanted a game where we all ran around willy-nilly, I'd go to a larp. I want to command an army, and the ranked up units really made the games feel more massive.

But why comp anything? Its a lot of work and as it turns out, there's a ton of great other systems out there, plus 9th age, plus oldhammering. I do find it unique to the WFB/W40k fanbase to want to always be playing a current, updated, official, game. Historical gamers or RPG players are always using oop rules and whatever minis work best for the job. But that gets back to GW blundering on AoS: consistency is what I was really buying from them. I was into being up to date and official too. It meant I was playing as part of something I could rely on finding anywhere. Paint, rules, background, and models were consistent. Now they keep visually rebooting armies (and the archive service is long gone) so there's no more consistency of models, the game background was apparently literally blown up, the rules are unrecognizable, and the paint shades are no longer consistent with the old AND the price of Citadel Colour has drastically outpaced inflation and outpaced the prices of the competition. Which for that matter, so have the models.

Warhammer Fantasy Battles, in any official sense, is a lost cause in my opinion. I don't even play 9th age yet. If I were to get into that much of an uphill battle I'd probably just start an oldhammer 5th edition club.

I will however, still paint armies of Citadel Miniatures for use in KoW, DR, FG, and any other rules that tickle my fancy.

DiscoKing wrote:
Tis a shame the Generals Handbook was a minimalist shocker. I thought it would open the door to aos for me.
But only managed to twiddlle the knob.

AoS is GREAT for moving models around & flicking dice about. It just doesn't grab me unfortunately.

Happy to wait till someone comps it to make it a playable game

Honestly I am quite supprised that they bothered to make entries for Warhammer Fantasy factions in the GHB at all. Can you imagine, if some people will play Tomb Kings or Bretonnia in a GW shop and some little lads will fall in love with the minis.

Then the GW shopkeeper says hey I dont got those, but here are some Sigmarines.

I due get that both range was strugling, but in my opinion both lines where flavourfull even in their limited model count. They just needed more exposure and caretaking. When will GW ever produces such magnificent minis as Queen Khalida or Green Knight.

Were the ranges struggling though? Really? I mean lots of other people can make a profit off similar figures. I tend to think fantasy was suffering from poor stewardship on GW's part rather than some sudden sea change from the customers.

But I agree it is surprising. Maybe it means we'll get real support again. Or maybe its just our version of the Black Codex listing for Squats. There was something like 3 years separating the Ravenous Hordes list from the last Bret. army book. So maybe in 3 years we'll be supported in some way again. GW has given us Bretonnians nothing but fuel for pessimism these last 13 years.

Jon Lackpenny wrote:
Were the ranges struggling though?
Yes.
For a Games Workshoppery definition of struggling.


Jon Lackpenny wrote:
Really?
Indeed. Consider their business model.
See next.


Jon Lackpenny wrote:
I mean lots of other people can make a profit off similar figures...
I think you have answered your own question.

Nefsokar = ReaperMinistures undead & vaguely Egyptian Army.
War Gods of Ægypt = yet another undead & vaguely Egyptian Army.

Lots of other people making a profit is, for The Lords of the Citadel, "struggling". Their business model is to be "the sole source", right? (Recall the obnoxious phrase: "The Games Workshop Hobby" ?) They want to be the monopoly or to not be in that business segment at all.

Jon Lackpenny wrote:
Were the ranges struggling though? Really? I mean lots of other people can make a profit off similar figures. I tend to think fantasy was suffering from poor stewardship on GW's part rather than some sudden sea change from the customers.

But I agree it is surprising. Maybe it means we'll get real support again. Or maybe its just our version of the Black Codex listing for Squats. There was something like 3 years separating the Ravenous Hordes list from the last Bret. army book. So maybe in 3 years we'll be supported in some way again. GW has given us Bretonnians nothing but fuel for pessimism these last 13 years.

The core problem of Games Workshop that they run their business with a very high maintainence cost and thier are compensating with high prices. Just look at their retail chain. They have lost 0.1 million, it not much on GWs budget but clearly shows, that they are loosing money on it. Smaller companies like ShieldWolf, Mantic, Warlords or I guess even Fireforge will always be more competetive due to the fact that they dont carry the baggage of rented shops.

I think this and the LOTR buble burst was the reason why GW cut the amount of models and raised their prices in the same time.

I do think, if GW would build down his retail, push the indy store and online sales ( even at indys stores), lower their prices, maybe raise their model count per box and had the balls to compete with their knights, Undead egyptians, dwarfs and elves would be able to raise their profits.

At the momment as far as I can see GW is person, who only wants to fish in his own pool and dont share it with others.

By the way on dakka I have read that during the great discountiation of models GW decided to destroy already made sprues, so I would think that, if they werent been destroyed some of that stock could have been selled even to Total War players. It was in this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/240/693116.page I just dont have the nerves to find it.