MitGas Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Personally I‘m not sold on AoS receiving new editions so fast which is not to be interpreted as me throwing shade at 4th as I‘m glad 3rd is over. I think it would‘ve been better to create really good rules that have more longevity as these constant changes make it more difficult for new players to keep up and stay motivated. But since GW prefers shorter editions, I guess that means this tactic sells more kits. I‘m just thinking of rts video games, where the basics stay the same overall and they only introduce adjustments and new units sporadically. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcvs Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 anecdotal (as every one else participating in the conversation) but all the casual players at my club are happy with everything they are seeing for AoS4 (mostly because they feel it's simpler), whereas all the competitive players groups I am in are complaining about the loss of flavour, the barren warscrolls and the bland allegiance abilities. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragest Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: I can't speak for everyone, but for me personally the anti-competitive crowd in both AoS and TOW are the ones killing my hype the most at the moment. They certainly pushed me out of WHFB when I was a teen, too. I respect non competitive players, but the problem with them is that everyone wants his own agenda to be pushed and It's impossible to make everyone happy. Someone wants just to charge in the middle with any objectives, just killing, but we have another one who likes to have something in the game that is not just killing minis. One guy hates magic, the other hates shooting, another one hates mortal wounds, but there's a guy that loves to make 12 mortal wounds in a charge. And there is the guy that love tons of rules, because that is flavourful, but his friend thinks that there are so many rules for a casual match in a month. Or the guy that loves to mix factions and make coallitions against the dude that just want to play a full faction without any addon. What you wanna do as a rule dev? Well, you will go for the easiest route, the competitive route. Is not as fun? Maybe. Is not as flavourful? Maybe. But, at least, is the most fair. And with tha baseline you can make what you want, I know a TO that makes one narrative tournament every month, sometimes with no shooting, sometimes with no magic, sometimes with no unique heroes etc. 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliman Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Well, I'm not a competitive player and I avoid playing tournaments, and I feel that 4th edition is building to be the best edition. I don't care if the metrics used to balance 4th ed. numbers are taken from competitive circuits, I care that I have fun with the game, and with just a glimpse of 4th, I feel that it's miles away from other editions. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Kroak Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Everyone should just relax. Games Workshop said this is the best edition of AoS ever. Therefore there is nothing to worry about. 1 1 18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragest Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, Beliman said: Well, I'm not a competitive player and I avoid playing tournaments, and I feel that 4th edition is building to be the best edition. I don't care if the metrics used to balance 4th ed. numbers are taken from competitive circuits, I care that I have fun with the game, and with just a glimpse of 4th, I feel that it's miles away from other editions. They claimed in the metawatches that they use every possible data in BCP, that includes 2v2, escalation leagues, path to glorys, one dayers and GTs, and those GTs have a separate database from the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 13 minutes ago, Lord Kroak said: Everyone should just relax. Games Workshop said this is the best edition of AoS ever. Therefore there is nothing to worry about. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolf Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 hour ago, Sonnenspeer said: Oh no, again not my dudes 😭🤣🤣 You will have a GREAT last week though 😂 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, Beliman said: Well, I'm not a competitive player and I avoid playing tournaments, and I feel that 4th edition is building to be the best edition. I don't care if the metrics used to balance 4th ed. numbers are taken from competitive circuits, I care that I have fun with the game, and with just a glimpse of 4th, I feel that it's miles away from other editions. Same for me. And I don't play in tournaments, like most of the player base. In general I think the online discussion criminally overlooks the largest demographic of Warhammer players: People who don't play with either a narrative or competitive focus, but rather have roughly balanced low-stakes matched play games. People who build their list by weighing a bunch of considerations, including how good the units are, how fun they are to play and play against, how cool the models look and how much they like their lore, without having one of these aspects 100% trump any of the others. Most people want a reasonable balance, as well as thematic rules and a visually appealing game. 11 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarakUrbaz Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 One must also consider that "competition" isn't necessarily linked to balance. There's a lot of fighting games out there that have thriving competitive scenes despite half of the playable characters being competively unviable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarff Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 7 minutes ago, BarakUrbaz said: One must also consider that "competition" isn't necessarily linked to balance. There's a lot of fighting games out there that have thriving competitive scenes despite half of the playable characters being competively unviable. Key difference is you don't pay separately for each fighting game character (ignoring DLC), while each army is a huge investment. Of course people won't be happy if their entire army is unbalanced. Edited May 31 by Snarff 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sahrial Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 54 minutes ago, MitGas said: Personally I‘m not sold on AoS receiving new editions so fast which is not to be interpreted as me throwing shade at 4th as I‘m glad 3rd is over. I think it would‘ve been better to create really good rules that have more longevity as these constant changes make it more difficult for new players to keep up and stay motivated. But since GW prefers shorter editions, I guess that means this tactic sells more kits. I‘m just thinking of rts video games, where the basics stay the same overall and they only introduce adjustments and new units sporadically. Agreed. We need a longer edition timeline, and (especially if they want to stick with a three year edition cycle) they need to massively increase battletome releases and focus on supplement and model releases the rest of the edition instead of spreading them out right up to the end. The friend who got me into AoS ended up quitting for almost two years because the army they started with felt stale and power creep with the newer tomes felt bad. I just barely got them back into it with the new FEC wave they loved the aesthetic of, they bought the box, and then found out their book was going to be obsolete almost immediately. They only got to play one game before finding out the army could be completely changing again. FEC is currently on a shelf pending new edition releases while they play other games. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MitGas Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 50 minutes ago, Lord Kroak said: Everyone should just relax. Games Workshop said this is the best edition of AoS ever. Therefore there is nothing to worry about. It's official then! 🫡 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarakUrbaz Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 1 minute ago, Sahrial said: Agreed. We need a longer edition timeline, and (especially if they want to stick with a three year edition cycle) they need to massively increase battletome releases and focus on supplement and model releases the rest of the edition instead of spreading them out right up to the end. The thing is, having to get a supplement in order to play all the new units your army gets is exactly the sort of thing everyone was complaining about and saying bloated the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 5 minutes ago, BarakUrbaz said: The thing is, having to get a supplement in order to play all the new units your army gets is exactly the sort of thing everyone was complaining about and saying bloated the game. It's not as much of a problem now that they are putting the rules for army expansions from campaign books up for download for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 Will we get today another Dawnbringers short story? Maybe the very last one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorri Nelriksson Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 So...the skull in a box Re Is a cities reliquiarium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 3 minutes ago, Snorri Nelriksson said: So...the skull in a box Re Is a cities reliquiarium? Where did you get this info from? So far the consensus seems to be 40k Inquisitors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bethebee Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 i'll sum up my thoughts on ogres with this: 1 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 2 minutes ago, bethebee said: i'll sum up my thoughts on ogres with this: I want to say, even with how unimpressive the Ogor allegiance abilites are, their basic stats are actually pretty BIG. Ogor Gluttons are certainly the best basic infantry we have seen so far. 4/2/1/2 is just miles better than the new standard of 4/4/-/1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AquaRegis Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 36 minutes ago, Sahrial said: Agreed. We need a longer edition timeline, and (especially if they want to stick with a three year edition cycle) they need to massively increase battletome releases and focus on supplement and model releases the rest of the edition instead of spreading them out right up to the end. The friend who got me into AoS ended up quitting for almost two years because the army they started with felt stale and power creep with the newer tomes felt bad. I just barely got them back into it with the new FEC wave they loved the aesthetic of, they bought the box, and then found out their book was going to be obsolete almost immediately. They only got to play one game before finding out the army could be completely changing again. FEC is currently on a shelf pending new edition releases while they play other games. GW is a business first and a miniatures game second. The cycle of a new edition every 3 years and a slow drip release of battle tomes/codexes, generates hype so people might start a new army and guarantees a steady flow of sales over a few years. They have probably calculated that releasing them all at once would hamper Thier sales. Because of that you end up with DB6 being valid for 2 weeks, or World Eaters releaseing and then 10th edition releasing a few months later, invalidating the rules and changing Thier meta. It was pretty funny seeing the sudden influx of Eight bound on the 2nd hand market right after 10th edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragest Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 6 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: I want to say, even with how unimpressive the Ogor allegiance abilites are, their basic stats are actually pretty BIG. Ogor Gluttons are certainly the best basic infantry we have seen so far. 4/2/1/2 is just miles better than the new standard of 4/4/-/1 Gorgers are damm crazy with that attack density, 2 rend against infantry and damage 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStreicher Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 (edited) 1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: Same for me. And I don't play in tournaments, like most of the player base. In general I think the online discussion criminally overlooks the largest demographic of Warhammer players: People who don't play with either a narrative or competitive focus, but rather have roughly balanced low-stakes matched play games. People who build their list by weighing a bunch of considerations, including how good the units are, how fun they are to play and play against, how cool the models look and how much they like their lore, without having one of these aspects 100% trump any of the others. Most people want a reasonable balance, as well as thematic rules and a visually appealing game. I wholeheartedly agree. Yet people trying to mute us with comments like „git gud“, or „the game isn’t for you“ because they think their way is the only way to play and ofc that they’re extremely good at an irrelevant Toy GAME. 🤣 concerning the BT cycles (and the tons of trash paper): I‘d rather pay 12,99€/month to get digital access to all new rules instead of buying a single book (I haven’t bought a single book since 2022). Using rules to drive sales has always been dirty imo. Edited May 31 by JackStreicher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliman Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 12 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: I want to say, even w⁸ith how unimpressive the Ogor allegiance abilites are, their basic stats are actually pretty BIG. Ogor Gluttons are certainly the best basic infantry we have seen so far. 4/2/1/2 is just miles better than the new standard of 4/4/-/1 Part of the flavour of each army is going to be tied to stats. Maybe not as flashy as an ability, but that's another positive feature of 4th Ed. Unpopular opinion: next step, remove All-Out-Attack and Defende. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flippy Posted May 31 Share Posted May 31 55 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: Same for me. And I don't play in tournaments, like most of the player base. In general I think the online discussion criminally overlooks the largest demographic of Warhammer players: People who don't play with either a narrative or competitive focus, but rather have roughly balanced low-stakes matched play games. People who build their list by weighing a bunch of considerations, including how good the units are, how fun they are to play and play against, how cool the models look and how much they like their lore, without having one of these aspects 100% trump any of the others. Most people want a reasonable balance, as well as thematic rules and a visually appealing game. Very true. Some people here have a very strong opinion on what kills the game in the long run - but my experience is that casual players yearn for balance just as much as competitive ones. Nobody likes the feeling of (involuntarily) playing with one hand tied behind his back. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.