BoLS Lounge : Wargames, Warhammer & Miniatures Forum
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: WHFB and AoS

  1. #1

    Default WHFB and AoS

    I started collecting a High Elves army at the start of last year, my 1st army for WHFB, as part of a challenge with a gaming friend of mine. Part way through my doing my 1st 1000 point army, Age of Sigmar dropped and bang went our challenge as, like many other gamers, we did not know what was going to happen. In fact he sold his models, after trying AoS as he couldn't get his head round the massive changes to the game rules. Me- I hadn't played WHFB at that point and wasn't throwing my hard work away without trying the game first.

    As a game, I didn't mind AoS at all, the rules weren't too hard to learn (all 4 pages of them...) and to be fair, if someone said to me that they were interested in trying out wargaming, that is probably where I'd start them, as its fairly easy to pick up and thus get people the idea of wargaming.

    However, there are still many people in my gaming area who bemoan the loss of WHFB and have not and refuse try AoS; in fact our local gaming club are going to be trialling the fan written 9th Age rules - which just shows the strength of the following that WHFB has- and I have found it difficult in finding local AoS players (my area has a massive 40K following, never a task to find a fellow 40K player for a game). The Sigmar Marines look of the Stormcast Eternals is just one gripe.

    I personally like the new, blank canvas of AoS, though I also wish that The Old World was still around (I remember WHFB being around and as big as 40K back in the 90s when my brothers and I were at school, before we "moved on" and then later returned to 40K).

    So, could WHFB have been saved? Could Forge World run it as a "Specialist Game" alongside the returning Bloodbowl (which has survived in the wilderness for years on fan written rules, without support from GW)?

    Taking a look at WHFB, is there something that GW could have done to help save it?

    How about changing the way the armies are organised?
    It was (if I remeber rightly from what I was learning when I was doing the callenge) your army selection was split up as...
    25% Max on Lords and Heroes
    25% Min on Core Units
    50% Max on Special Units
    25% Max on Rare Units

    So Tyrion, a model at £23, could not have been used in an army list any less than 2000 points.

    If GW had changed the way the armies were organised, along the lines of the way armies are built in 40K, would that have attracted more people to the flagging system, so players who were used to the 40K way of army building, would not have been as restricted?

    ie

    Min 1 Lords and Heores, 2 Core Units
    Max (additions) 1 or 2 Lords and Heroes, 4 Core Units, 4 Special Units, 3 Rare Units ?

    And an allies chart of

    Min 1 Lords and Heores, 1 Core Units
    Max additions 2 Core Units, 2 Special Units, 1 Rare Unit?

    Also, with all the WHFB novels that I have read, The Empire and High Elves were the 2 most prevailant "Good Guys" in the stories , while Vampire Counts, Skaven and Chaos were the most prevailant "Bad Guys". In fact, I only read one book with Brettonians in "The Red Duke" and Tomb Kings (R.I.P.) were only a mention in 1 book and were in another, a Gotrek and Felix book. Would more books with these armies in have attracted more players?

    Actually would releasing a new army book and new models in 10 years have helped the Bretonnians cause?

    Yes, I find it sad that the old world has gone and that so many lovely models are leaving the GW range and yes, it would be nice if they could be continued with, even as a Forge World game and armies (hasn't done 30K/Horus Heresy any harm).

    Would there be players who would do all 3 games (WHFB, 40K and AoS)?

  2. #2

    Default

    I much preferred the points percentage system of WFB (and 40k 2nd edition) to the FOC method. If nothing else, the FOC method would surely require maximum unit sizes. Being limited to so many Special or Rare units isn't much of an issue if you can field 100 models in each of those units.

  3. #3

    Default

    I'm into my AoS. I'm into 40k. I've got every book for 8th Ed Warhammer, and most of my forces remain on square bases.

    Could the game have been saved? We'll never know. It seems Warhammer's issue wasn't a lack of player base, so much as a lack of new players joining it - which stymies your sales potential. A common issue I've read about it is that you needed quite large blocks of infantry (to most 40k players, 25 or more models is large), but relatively few would actually do anything in the game - 8th Edition tackled that with the Horde mechanic and Steadfast, but sadly some just saw that as an excuse to build unbreakable deathstars, and that the game therefore had to be played at a points level to allow said Deathstars.

    AoS is a more streamlined take on it, removing some of the more fernickity bits (stuff I still enjoy though) to make the game far more accessible, as well as taking away the general opinion that Warhammer had to be played at higher points levels (though to be fair, games under 1,000 just didn't work that well). Some say it has no tactics, but frankly they're being wilfully ignorant. It has very different tactics to Warhammer is all (no more flank charge bonuses etc, but you still need be wary of positioning due to how combat is now worked out).

    As for army selection, I'm happy with the 8th Ed method. Percentages worked, and the attached FoC meant it was far harder for an abusive gamer to make a dull, WAAC list.
    Fed up for Scalpers? https://www.facebook.com/groups/1710575492567307/?ref=bookmarks

  4. #4

    Default

    WFB's sales potential was butchered by GW making the prices so ridiculous that people balked at the idea of signing up. A lot of people still do. They tried to increase the prices and go super-niche and then wondered why they weren't selling.

    WFB could have been salvaged. The problem now is that their excuse for not bringing it back around would be the round bases, which is a convenient excuse to never return to ranked units. But they also wouldn't want anything to potentially undermine AoS, and having WFB sitting there would admit that maybe throwing their original flagship game in the garbage like the game itself was the problem and not their decisions wasn't the best idea.

    By now, they've already removed two entire armies, and gutted others. If (when?) AoS fails to make the splash GW wants, it's more likely we just see the fantasy line vanish, rather than WFB coming back in an updated form.

  5. #5

    Default

    GW's sales direction is what killed WFB. I first started to get into WFB back in '94. Even back then, as a 40K player, the thought of all those rank and file minis being needed was daunting. I entered in with the Wood Elves which was mainly a skirmish army when it was first released.

    However, in just a few years, GW started producing the customizable plastic regiment sets. Imagine getting 20 plastic night goblins that you built and weren't exact copies of each other, they came with a movement tray, and you paid $20 for them. I soon went from a single wood elf army to collecting multiple armies for WFB. 40K was left in the dust. It was the boom of WFB.

    Fast forward to 2010. GW produced arguably the best quality minis of any game company. However, they also stopped providing a value to their player base in favor of high prices. They went from helping people collect an army, to literally out pricing their customers. Fantasy failed because GW went from a game company, to a miniature company. All they care about is selling minis. They don't care about the game anymore, and they definitely don't care about the gamers.

    I think GW could have easily kept the rank and file models for WFB at a lower quality, and thus a lower price point in order to keep army collecting a viable hobby. They could have focused their higher quality designs for characters and other limited units in an army and priced those accordingly.

    But GW got rid of their gamer management long ago. They got rid of everyone who wanted to produce a good game. Now, they just have people that can produce beautiful models, and they charge a premium price for them. What I think they have seemed to have forgotten, is that without a good game, there is no reason to buy the model.

    Companies like Mantic are already getting much better with their model quality. I see KoW dominating the fantasy scene in a few years. I wouldn't be surprised if you see GW abandon fantasy completely within the next five years. I don't see AoS surviving in its current form. It doesn't appear to wargamers, and it is too expensive for casual hobbyists.

  6. #6

    Default

    Of course it could have been saved. It had a very deep setting that only got ditched because they couldn't staple a ® all over it.
    Warhammer Fantasy always suffered from terrible mismanagement, it would go for months without any releases while 40k received updates over updates. It got into a rather vicious cycle where they were making less fantasy because they were selling less fantasy, BECAUSE they were paying no attention to fantasy.

    If you want to see a real indicator of how ridiculously popular Warhammer Fantasy actually was, look no further than the end times. When they finally started releasing Warhammer Fantasy stuff again, books sold out in -minutes-. Like if you were 30 minutes late to your store, the book was gone. Our store sold thousands of euros worth of Glottkins and Nagash's.

    The problem was never a lack of interest, it was a lack of effort to make people buy new stuff.


    On top of that, they were rapidly pricing themselves out of the market. When a game plays best at high point numbers, you should make certain it is easy to reach those numbers. Your mandatory core should be cheap and easy to afford, so somebody can go like "okay, I want to get a few new swordsmen" every other week. Then you look at things like the Witch Elves which is 45 euro for 10 troops which comes down to like 110 points and it's like... wait, I need to buy 5 boxes of those things for a decent sized game? That is ridiculous. They should have focused on making good looking, affordable core troops to tempt people into starting new armies cheap, and THEN pricegouge them on the special/rare choices. You do not want to make somebody look at the minimum core requirement and go "nope, I am not spending 225 euro on nothing but core troops".

  7. #7
    Chaplain
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Warrenton, VA
    Posts
    354

    Default

    They seemed to really encourage large blocks of infantry with the later rules-sets, which was a real cost-barrier to entry for new gamers.

    I'd always played lots of Empire halberdiers in blocks (thank you, Battle Masters!) and even I was finding that I needed more infantry.

  8. #8
    Brother-Captain
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Her Majesty's United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Bubonicus View Post
    They seemed to really encourage large blocks of infantry with the later rules-sets, which was a real cost-barrier to entry for new gamers.

    I'd always played lots of Empire halberdiers in blocks (thank you, Battle Masters!) and even I was finding that I needed more infantry.
    I think infantry regiments did need a boost. Blocks of infantry of a over a certain size were basically worthless which was just wrong. However allowing the Steadfast rule to not be affected by disruption was a mistake (one rectified in 9th age). Not that I found massive blocks of infantry that difficult to deals with, certainly with the way magic went. It did give the game a lazy mode though.
    Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit
    Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.

  9. #9
    Chapter-Master
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Isle of Man
    Posts
    12,045

    Default

    I would like to try age of sigmar, but nobody else round here does. and as I have said elsewhere, I am still waiting to see what they do with my favourite armies like ogres and empire. I don't really want to keep playing 8th because that is over and done with, it wont be added to or changed any more and I don't want to keep playing the same battles. might sell off most of my warhammer and start again with age of sigmar stuff
    Twelve monkeys, eleven hats. One monkey is sad.

  10. #10
    Brother-Sergeant
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    58

    Default

    I just think it would be cool to be using AOS rules in the Old World. I actually really enjoyed End Times right up until they destroyed the planet. I wasn't even upset about cities being destroyed, special characters dying or even out of print armies (Dogs of War) being wiped of the the planet. Because cities can be rebuild or left as ruins to be explored. New generations of characters could be made.

    What they should have done was have the world bared save in the nick of time instead of being destroyed. Set 9th edition a 100 years or so after End Times in a Fantasy post-apocalyptic world. Could have done a cool clean slate reboot of the game without getting ride of it altogether. Almost like a fantasy version of Mad Max. Could have even used AOS rules. But the setting could have a both old and new feeling to it.

    And Warhammer Fantasy did suffer from a lack of new models. During End Time, there really wasn't anything new. Heck, some armies didn't get any new minis at all. Which really sucked and upset a lot of players (me included). Only time will tell how the new AOS setting will do. So far, it's off to a rocky start.

    - - - Updated - - -

    And I notice one of the main reasons why it's better to have larger units in AOS (as someone was mentioning it)....Battle Shock. Holy Sigmar, it's brutal. Even if you win the battle (by getting more hits or killing off the whole enemy unit), still need to roll and could lose more of your guys. Heck, you could wipe out the attacking unit and still have guys left, roll for battle shock, and lose the rest of your guys....during the first turn of combat...
    It's like killing two hobbits with one stone...
    And remember, there is no "I" in team but there is a "ME".

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •