Something I've noticed... Second opinions wanted...

[HandofOdin37]

Okay, I'm not quite sure how I want to feel about this, but hear me out: some of you will know that recently GW ditched Warhammer Fantasy and released a new thing called Age of Sigmar. Why is this relevant to Open Combat? Well, that's the thing...

Obviously, the big turnons in OC's favour versus a game like Warhammer include the small but effective ruleset, the "no limits" system and the high level of model/unit specific customisation and storytelling. Well, I'd heard about the new GW release and so was reading up on it, and it struck me as odd... as thoroughly un-GW-like. The entire ruleset fits onto 4 pages, there are no limits to what you can bring to the table (either in quantity or build), the game is built to be quick, and a lot of other things harder to put into words, but just the whole shebang reminds me of Open Combat. I'm not an experienced wargamer, never will I claim to be, but this is a massive (and somewhat coincidental) deviation from the standard GW setup of endless huge rulebooks and codeces. I just want to know what other people think about it (those who know more about wargaming as a whole, and whether this is such a spectacular change, or if I'm just overreacting), and particularly what Carl thinks about it (I'm not saying you should sue them or anything, but they seem to be (for lack of a better term) stealing your thunder (and getting panned for it, it seems, but still)).

A couple of links if people want to read up:
http://www.talkwargaming.com/2015/07/ed ... eview.htmlhttp://www.nerdhammer.net/2015/07/05/ag ... st-review/

Apologies for the solemn post, I'm still so so so hyped for OC2E! (are we calling it 2nd Edition? 1.5nd Edition? help me out here Carl!)

[Yuma]

i followed the release of aos and had a look at the warscrolls and the rules. not very deep, but so that i might categorize it better.

without doing an endless comparison, there are a few very distinct things, i'd like to point to, which seem important to me.
- if i get it right, AoS does not take into account against what opponent you battle. this makes it fast to play and easy to learn, but imho an important part is missing here. the pigboy with his stick should have a very hard time hitting a swordmaster but should be able to hit his fellow pigboys much easier.
- and to be honest, i feel very uncomfortable without the points. on one side, i love the thinkering to build a figure, then a fighting force out of the diffrent figures. on the other hand, a victory does not feel good if you used the elitestuff and your opponent the taverndregs.
- the number of dice.. e.g. attacks, seem to be in a diffrent league again. i had a look at some of the battlereports on youtube and was a bit shocked sometimes. those moments that where strange to me included a rather big unit of archers which rolled 21 dice and in the end not a single wound was lost by the targetunit.. i like dice, really, but i'd rather roll just one to three and get a result with a meaning.

those are the three main points, that make it not so attractive to me. i cant say how it works in a skirmish sized game but in the bigger encounters i saw, there, sooner or later, was one big blob where everyone was bashing each others head. i dont like those clusterfuqs where tactics are meaningless and "rolling good" is key.

i'm very curious for the new minis though

[ST_Carl]

This is purely my personal opinion as an old tabletop gamer (like the millions of others that play the bajillions of games out there)...

GW's new angle is something they must have been brewing for years (2-3 at least) - the scale of production and product release schedules they're working to take a long time to both set in motion and implement. So I'm absolutely sure that the open nature of the initial AoS release and free downloads for the old armies is purely coincidental to anything else happening online at the moment. (I've seen several different game fan bases saying that they were copying such and such for offering free downloads etc).

I've played AoS - it's a fun game in many ways but it's not what any long time players of it's predecessor would recognise as their old favourite and I can totally understand how some may feel about it. (I don't understand the really extreme reactions though - the old figures and books haven't magically disappeared - they're still usable).

I think what has caused the huge divide in opinions is that the setting and the mechanical system for the game has been totally reinvented. With a player base as huge as GWs it was bound to have a huge impact on a lot of people. Our hobby is where we go to relax, escape or enjoy a bit of creative work. If part of the enjoyment of it for some is a regular feed of 'new stuff' in a stable, comfortable environment then having that taken away probably does hit those people hard. If competition was a big part of their hobby it'll hit even harder as the 'official' environment has totally altered.

In my humble opinion AoS is fun but it's a totally new thing and nothing like what came before so it's not that comfortable, well-known place that many may have used to relax.

For a company the size of GW they look at the attraction of new customers and customer retention in numbers way beyond what I can guess at and I imagine all of those numbers and calculations went into planning for such a huge release. They've got huge market reach which is a massively powerful boon when making such a big change in a market where customers get emotionally attached. You'll lose a proportion of your longstanding followers but will be bringing in a whole new group of customers to build brand loyalty from in your new system.

Open Combat is it's own animal and to answer your question, it's simply Open Combat. I'm not calling it 1.5 or 2nd ed or anything like that as the rules are stable (and have been for a very long time). A minor tweak to how the bonus for attacking the rear is handled is all that is altering rules wise between the current PDF edition and the printed edition (and closely followed updated PDF). Everything else is additional content. The KS has sped up the process to getting it into print and allowed for additional material that would have been split across several supplements to be incorporated into the core book.

Open Combat is a very different play experience to AoS - its all about the individuals and the warband acting in coordination.

I've seen people saying AoS is a skirmish game now but after playing it I really don't see that being the best way to play it. You're much better off playing with huge armies for a good few hours in AoS than with a handful of dudes (which is what a big miniature manufacture would want you to do).

Open Combat is where you can get a hobby gaming fix in a short period of time with the drama performed by the heroes or villains you've invented.

EDIT: Moved to different section on forum.

[HandofOdin37]

Right, fair enough, it's good to hear people's views on it. I am a huge fan of the WHFB universe, and was a fan of the 8E rules, I didn't like the big boom they ended it on (but never got a chance to play End TImes, nor AoS for that matter, as I say, I was reading up on it yesterday). But no, I'm glad to hear that all seems fine in the camp (mine was the panic of the novice ). I think in the end instead of playing AoS I'll turn my Lizards into an OC warband (eventually: I'm working on some more esoteric ones at the moment... so esoteric I'm not sure where I'd find appropriate models...)

[roybatty]

Hi,

As a GW player for 25+ years, the change in AoS was stark to me. The system that I had grown up with was gone, replaced with something I didn't recognise, in a world I didn't know.

Don't get me wrong, this is not necessarily a bad thing, but it was unsettling for me. I don't blame GW for wanting to protect their IP, or income, or anything like that, but some of the changes are so "in the face" of established wargaming practice, for instance: ignoring bases completely (even having to overlap bases), treating the model as THE warrior, rather than a static representation of a model in dynamic action etc etc.

OC, for me, is the system that scratches all my war-games itches. Its familiar (see above) but at the same time so different to whats gone before (no fixed stats, solid enough to take adaptions and changes without breaking it etc). The new incarnation of Warhammer is not for me, its not aimed at me, and I am no longer GWs target audience. I can live with that. I have OC, and I wish them well.

Can't wait for the latest version hardback to land on my mat.

[fransotto]

My opinion;

Myself never been attached to the game (WHFB) in such way i know many hobbyist are/have been. It might be that I came into tabletop gaming rather late in life or that I been playing so many different games that "better" in many ways (but not necessarily in every way).

I do believe though that GW made the right thing; The new golden knights and the artwork I do not really care about, the rules and gameplay I have not tested yet but it looks like an easy and quick game. I use to say that WHFB was one of the few games I actually enjoy losing due to the spirit of creating a epic battlefield story with units/characters winning against all odds and so on... AoS seems to continue that trend and that is good.

Then it comes to OC or AoS vs OC, I see it like this; AoS is a rule set for an ordinary table top game while OC is more like a "law", like a forth law in the "laws of physics". When people asked me about the answer to life the universe and everything I use to tell them "42". Nowadays I tell them "Open combat".

[Yuma]

When people asked me about the answer to life the universe and everything I use to tell them "42". Nowadays I tell them "Open combat".

that, good sir, made me laugh hearty and i'll second that without hesitation

[HandofOdin37]

When people asked me about the answer to life the universe and everything I use to tell them "42". Nowadays I tell them "Open combat".

that, good sir, made me laugh hearty and i'll second that without hesitation

Seconding the laughing, and thirding the sentiment!