• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS Age of Sigmar Rumours - Mk II. (Our new name)

Andhe said:
hmmm... I just noticed the new sprues. We have no way of personalising or easily moving things without cutting. Some models are one piece minus the head :(
Click to expand...
This also show that GW is trying to make the entry level easier on AoS, since you need less patience and skill to assemble the models.

On the other side, it is a pain for us that like to customize our models to have a unique looking army to field.
 
The Island of Blood box was like that. Same as Battle for Macragge (sp?). I wouldn't assume that all their models will be so simple.
 
Andhe said:
hmmm... I just noticed the new sprues. We have no way of personalising or easily moving things without cutting. Some models are one piece minus the head :(

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI7sjQ_WcAA7LII.jpg:large
Click to expand...

Out of interest, what exactly were you hoping for with conversions?
Is this for making AOS lizardmen, or something else entirely?


If it's fairly minimal stuff, I'm sure I could offer some sculpting help.
 
Phatmotha-phucka said:
@Pinktaco

If AoS is all we have seen then it is an incomplete game, as no terrain or other things mentioned havent been covered.
Even for new players that dont hold up.
It might not be A LOT more, but we dont know how this actually work on the board.
Me and a friend is trying it out on Sunday.

@Slanputin

I dont think its a bloodthirster.
Its far too "earth elemental" like. Looks like something from shadow of the colossus.

Might be a god or some kind of warp-dweller we haven't heard about.
Click to expand...

I agree it seems odd, but considering the amount of people who have said "this is it" i wouldn't hold my breath for anything, especially considering the amount of fvcks GW give to begin with. :)
 
The models seems okay, I guess, but it isn't Lizardmen, so no credit from me.

I was more hoping for a revamp of 8th, but it seems like that is not going to happen.
I just do not really want to start on a whole new system, it might be refreshing and all, but to basically start over, is not what I am looking forward to, not at the moment anyway, due to how it all looks, might be wrong of course.
 
Pinktaco said:
I agree it seems odd, but considering the amount of people who have said "this is it" i wouldn't hold my breath for anything, especially considering the amount of fvcks GW give to begin with. :)
Click to expand...


I am getting confident that "this is it" means AoS = 9th.
Not that AoS wont evolve.

After I read the White Dwarf leak the thought struck me: GW has been in transition mode ever since the End times begun.


< Theory >

In the End Times they introduced "now you can have more cool models on the table"
Then they introduced: the races are merging
Then they introduced the General rules from AoS through the Incarnate formations: "Units in this formation gets this extra".

Now we are seeing a starter set that introduces a new paradigm for above rules.

If we follow the pattern then AoS will slowly fill in the blanks of rules we might miss now.
I believe we are on a "need to know" basis for this starter set (bare in mind that this is GW's interpretation of "need".)


< /Theory >

GW is stating through the whole WD that "The age of sigmar has just begun" and "this is the first step into a new world".

Let us count on this being the case.....or rather hope that it is.
 
Rikard said:
Out of interest, what exactly were you hoping for with conversions?
Is this for making AOS lizardmen, or something else entirely?


If it's fairly minimal stuff, I'm sure I could offer some sculpting help.
Click to expand...

Just in general Rikard, I guess I am just hoping that GW doesn't go down this route with all new miniatures. I like being able to place arms in different positions etc, giving a more dynamic unit - rather than everyone stuck in the same position, and exactly the same as everyone elses models.
 
Again you're assuming GW is targeting you/us. What if they want to keep Warhammer/AoS strictly narrative/campaign based? What of what we're getting next is a series of campaign books featuring every army against each other? Or something to that extend. It'll be easy for new players to pick up and play without first having to make a list and it'll be "balanced". It follows the plug and play mentality and easily allow for GW to make new campaigns and thus new models for those campaigns.

This way they can regularly update rules and units for each campaign the way they want.

I could see that happening oppose to "OK here you can do whatever you want" and two months later they're like "you know the thing we said before? Forget about that here's your balance :D". Just my opinion of course, but I can very easily see AoS to be a dumped down game where GW dictates what unit you play in terms of scenarios/campaigns.

The while choose whatever you want could be there for people to be inspired by GW's own scenarios and in the case you want to be completely on your own.

I have absolutely no confidence that GW did it just so we can create our own tournament rules. I don't think for a second they even bother to care about tournaments.

I could, however, be very wrong and I sure as heck hope I am. But GW don't leave me with much confidence. I'm glad others have so people like you can do your best to contradict and persuade people like me :D I'm willing to try something new, but things just need to be proper before I bother. I have other things to spend my time on =]
 
Nothing big but this came through in regards to terrain in different realms:brg.jpg
 
Might give some insight in this, i have the rules with me as i will be giving a demo of this game in my local hobbey store. I have played some games against myself, and this is what i found.

- Balancing is the one big mystery. For the ones saying: ''its impossible to take 5 Nagashes'', saying that this game is just a stand alone, one of the scenarios in the book (the Death Knell scenario) states that ''both players are free to include additional units in their army IF THEY HAVE THE MODELS AVAILABLE''. This is not a stand alone game, it is intended, even suggested in the rules as written that you simply bring ''additional models''. The more i read and play this, i feel like that we will need to make our own point values for all the battle scrolls. The scenario's in the book are balanced, to a certain extent, but i feel like that it seems like a super friendly game, that you cannot play friendly. Even if i want to be nice, i do not know what somebody else is bringing, nor what will be the standard for an army, if i just go to my club to play. This is the biggest and weirdest thing.

- A lot plays a lot faster. No more needing a table to hit or wound does save time. Your move value is just what you move. A run is a D6 more, just can't charge. To cast a spell, just roll 2D6, if you got it, you got the spell.

- It does not feel like a complete set of rules. In the current RAW, you can shoot while you are in CC. The shooting rules just state that a unit shoots its missiles in the shooting face, nothing about not being able to not shoot while in CC. This seems like such an oversight, and it is one you immediatly notice when you are playing, . I expect more rules to come out, also main rules, but balancing remains the weird thing. It seems impossible to do in these set of rules.

- For the rules as written right now, i don't see any mention of bases or models. I thus take it we are just measuring from models. The absurd situation that phat described is not possible in this form of the rules, and i hope it never is.
 
airjamy said:
The shooting rules just state that a unit shoots its missiles in the shooting face, nothing about not being able to not shoot while in CC. This seems like such an oversight, and it is one you immediatly notice when you are playing,
Click to expand...
I hereby dub this the Legolas Rule.

At last shooting models might be worth taking. Some of them might get 6 shots per game!

Where do you get warscrolls for stuff apart from the boxed set? This back-of-white-dwarf link fails: http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/age-of-sgmar-compendiums
 
airjamy said:
we will need to make our own point values for all the battle scrolls.
Click to expand...
...I have been saying this in various ways for weeks.

Do the warscrolls have an organisation section/block that provides any guidance on upper limits? I thought one preview showed something like that.

And where did you find terrain rules?? "...highest roll picks which of 7 realms the terrain is from, etc., etc..."
 
pendrake said:
I hereby dub this the Legolas Rule.

At last shooting models might be worth taking. Some of them might get 6 shots per game!

Where do you get warscrolls for stuff apart from the boxed set? This back-of-white-dwarf link fails: http://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/age-of-sgmar-compendiums
Click to expand...

Every model is Legalos, obv. You can also fire into CC, as there is no rule that actually stops you from doing that. You have to be in range, you have to see the other model (which is totally possible in CC), and you have to shoot in the shooting phase. You can even shoot from CC to another CC, i mean, lolwhut. Making our own point values will not be to much of a problem i think.

I also dissagree that shooting models are bad, Skinks and Dark Riders are extremely good, in meta, models ;)
 
I hate the fact that the community will probably have to fill in the gaps, and GW will probably not even notice and adopt it...
 
Phatmotha-phucka said:
I hate the fact that the community will probably have to fill in the gaps, and GW will probably not even notice and adopt it...
Click to expand...

How it looks like, it might very well be the truth. WIth the current rules, it is inherently completely unblanced, way worse then before. You can't even play a balanced game if you want to, because you don't know points! It's all just completely bizarre.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top