Warhammer Fantasy Battle 9th Age: Same Sad Fate As DBM?

[Luddite]

I really miss DBM.  FoG is a far inferior game.   

[Leftblank]

The inevitable has happened: GW announced 'Matched Play'. Which means that 9th Age has not only KoW and casual AoS as rival, but a tounament AoS as well. Why would new generations of tournament players choose 9th Age if they're happy with AoS?

[Rych]

I prefer Matthias Elisons new Unoffcial 9th  edition , he has been updating all the army books too in a Ravening hordes style . Look for the Warhammer Armies Project

[ZeroTwentythree]

I really miss DBM.  FoG is a far inferior game.   

I thought that DBM had a certain elegence & flow to it. FoG had some great ideas, but in a practical sense I thought they needlessly bogged games down.

For a while -- maybe around 6th ed? -- I thought WFB was distilling its rules into something elegent. But then they also bogged themselves down with piles of disorganized complexity (especially via the special rules sprawling across a bookshelf of army books.) AoS seems like an attempt to simplify things again.... but (unfortunately) without enough refinement.

I have no idea about 9th age, and really don't care about "WFB" as a game mechanic anymore. I still enjoy some of the background, but if there's going to be a break in the continuity of rules, there are better systems out there instead of trying to continue to patch WFB's old mechanics.

[Sir_Theo]

I thought that DBM had a certain elegence & flow to it. FoG had some great ideas, but in a practical sense I thought they needlessly bogged games down.

For a while -- maybe around 6th ed? -- I thought WFB was distilling its rules into something elegent. But then they also bogged themselves down with piles of disorganized complexity (especially via the special rules sprawling across a bookshelf of army books.) AoS seems like an attempt to simplify things again.... but (unfortunately) without enough refinement.

I have no idea about 9th age, and really don't care about "WFB" as a game mechanic anymore. I still enjoy some of the background, but if there's going to be a break in the continuity of rules, there are better systems out there instead of trying to continue to patch WFB's old mechanics.

[/b]

This is my view too.

[Major_Gilbear]

I find it to be the case that predictions of demise (often) become a self-fulfilling prophecy - the more often more people repeat it, the less confidence those who are interested in it will have to continue.

When this is a free project, that actually aims to genuinely rebalance and rethink all aspects of WHFB (whilst still retaining the basic mechanics/appeal of the original game), it is doubly sad that people seem in a rush to draw lines in the sand and proclaim the project's demise.

I mean, it is a free ruleset, that you don't have to join in with if you don't want to, and that lets you play with your existing model collection in the way that you apparently liked (but maybe sometimes wished was better balanced/fairer). The rules tweaks and army changes also let you field those models that have sat on your shelf for too long, or that might encourage you to build some spare models with that pile of leftover weapons that were not super-efficient in the last edition. The final army lists will even have themed subfactions to provide more game variety to your existing model collection.

So why be so quick to dump all over it?

Lack of official support? Lack of tournaments? Lack of the exact GW models to buy from GW? Of all the places on the internet, I have seen many truly remarkable efforts here on LAF which prove that if people want to do it, and have fun doing it, then it should (and can) be done.