Logo
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Jul 21, 2019 2:16 pm



Reply to topic  [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Welcome to the Age of Sigmar 
Author Message
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:32 am
Posts: 682
Also, I've taken some medication. I'm back off the cliff. I've spent a week depressed but and starting to come out of it. I still believe everything that I said earlier, but I am hopeful of the living rules set and the chance for more in-depth rules coming out.
Living rules is a huge boon for the hobby. I just hope it brings more players into my area. As of now it has reduced it to nobody, but maybe it can boost it back up...

_________________
"With hate, all things are possible." - Malus Darkblade


Fri Jul 10, 2015 5:42 am
Profile
Shade

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 10:50 am
Posts: 102
Is that the first known instance of an internet troll?

Surely he's got to be patient zero?

Edit. The guy in the video that is, in case the poor person above me thought that was aimed at them!

!lol!

_________________
For us, there is no longer the druchii, the asur and the asrai; now there are only the Asdra; The Laughing Ones.

For us The Season of Doom is ended, now The Season of Opportunity is begun.


Fri Jul 10, 2015 10:29 am
Profile
Highborn
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 6:32 am
Posts: 682
XD

_________________
"With hate, all things are possible." - Malus Darkblade


Fri Jul 10, 2015 8:32 pm
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 9:56 pm
Posts: 1065
Location: Poland
Wow this is awsom, if i have a large enough force of TK, I can never loose a game. Priceless.

_________________
Also known as Kanadian
Image
Image


Fri Jul 10, 2015 11:12 pm
Profile
Slave (off the Altar)

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2014 6:21 am
Posts: 13
Wrathbaby wrote:
Also, how are people planning on working around the whole lack of a points limit?

Amboadine wrote:
Plenty to digest. Still no balancing mechanism though which is the biggest shame.

direweasel wrote:
Maybe there will be another expansion that goes into trying to make a balancing factor. A thought that a guy had on a battle report I just watched was by expanding on the "wounds" characteristic. Both sides start with the same number of "wounds" on the table, but maybe some models will say that their "wounds" cost 2 wounds each for the purposes of "cost" to field. I think we can all agree that a "wound" on a skavenslave is not equal to a "wound" on a chaos warrior.

Barking Agatha wrote:
Look at it as taking the training wheels off your bicycle. :)

Barking Agatha gets it; the previous points costs were a sham. Age of Sigmar needs neither posts costs nor pre-made army lists due to its deployment system. You make armies the same way professional Dota, League of Legends, and Heroes of the Storm players make teams of 5 characters against opposing teams of 5 characters: dynamic counterbuild. To do that effectively, you need to know exactly what each unit is capable of accomplishing, then not only take into account into account the current positions of all deployed models, but also consider the *potential* additional models that could hit the table following your own unit selection. It's a simple idea with a steep learning curve, filled with opportunities for strategic and tactical nuance.
Coop wrote:
It seems like mostly everything special a unit has is just named for the unit and then involves - rerolling 1s, to hit, or save rolls.
...
Or will there be rulebooks with extra things to add into the game like fleeing or templates or more magic spells?
...
What was the motivation on their part for making all of the rules free?

1) Everything special about units has almost always involved tweaks to existing game mechanics.
2a) Fleeing exists, you just don't do it as a charge reaction.
2b) Templates and additional spells just clutter up books. There's never been much more to the magic and items than "inflict wounds", prevents wounds", "moves models", and "makes models". Bringing the clutter closer to its functional level is a good thing, especially for people who don't like math. (Personally, I'm cool with the calculations, but the number of common errors in unit evaluation people make is astonishing, and most of those can be avoiding simply by multiplying a couple of fractions together.)
3) I hope the decision to make the rules free was motivated by the realizations that A) information piracy is nigh-unpreventable, and B) centralized electronic rules allow rapid revision at minimal cost.

Killerk wrote:
Wow this is awsom, if i have a large enough force of TK, I can never loose a game. Priceless.

Regardless of summoning, you still lose when # killed models >= # starting models.


Sat Jul 11, 2015 3:47 am
Profile
Miscast into the Warp
Miscast into the Warp
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 3510
Location: Investigating Mantica
Are you sure you haven't come straight from the GW marketing school the way you are trying to convince everyone this is the best game ever? :)

It really is not. There are huge fundamental issue inherent within the game. Is it a bit of fun to be had on an evening? Yes I believe it is, I have played a few games and it is a bit of a laugh.

Is it in my mind a suitable replacement for 8th? Absolutely not.

_________________
My Kings of War Plog - Forces of Nature

My Kings of War Plog - Twilight Kin / Nightstalkers


Sat Jul 11, 2015 7:34 am
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 9:56 pm
Posts: 1065
Location: Poland
The mattler, WTF? Dude I want some of whatever your taking OO.
a. There are no tactics worth mentioning in this game, it's just who can bring more elite models to the table with shooting. Game mechanics favor who ever can roll more dice.
Now look at shooting, you can shoot in the shooting phase with double or quadriple numbers and then hit them in cc. Totally ducking stupid.

Shooting is retaredely op, and combat is Fking boring.

_________________
Also known as Kanadian
Image
Image


Last edited by Killerk on Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:32 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:21 am
Profile
Slave (off the Altar)

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2014 6:21 am
Posts: 13
Amboadine wrote:
Are you sure you haven't come straight from the GW marketing school the way you are trying to convince everyone this is the best game ever? :)
It really is not. There are huge fundamental issue inherent within the game. Is it a bit of fun to be had on an evening? Yes I believe it is, I have played a few games and it is a bit of a laugh.
Is it in my mind a suitable replacement for 8th? Absolutely not.

Now, I understand that my recent pile of comments make me look like I've parachuted in from some GW-sponsored recruitment program, so I'll give you some background. I used to frequent this forum under a different user name 11 years ago, almost exclusively lurking. Back then, the Dark Elves were a crappy army, but I loved them to bits anyway, and this was a community of players who got very good at taking substandard tools and sharpening them into katanas. Since then the Dark Elves got a massive boost, so now all that tactical acumen has a formidable arsenal at its disposal.

I'm also not trying to convince anyone that Age of Sigmar is "the best game ever". Rather, I'm trying to breathe some optimism into a bunch of bitter veterans and confused novices who don't like the fact that their plastic soldiers now operate under a different official narrative, and who apparently would rather complain the unfamiliar territory than explore it. Unfortunately, your remark about Age of Sigmar not being a suitable replacement for 8th edition is along those lines. What I'd like to see is a resurgence of the old Druchii.net mentality of exploration and tactical development instead of the pointless, butthurt bitching going on right now. When life gives you lemons, sacrifice them to Khaine! :twisted:

The only fundamental issue I see with Age of Sigmar is that GW didn't take the merits of the deployment system far enough. The smart thing to do would be to minimize the alpha strike problem inherent to turn-based games; it wasn't as bad in WHFB as it is in 40k, but it was there. For example, every single phase could have had alternating unit activation, just like deployment and combat. Now that would open up some wicked tactical considerations. Instead, you can get into the nasty scenario where one player has 2 magic phases and 2 shooting phases before their opponent has had their second of either. Not cool! This afternoon I emailed a critique of the rules to GW's design team, but it contained almost none of the common complaints I'm seeing (which I think are invalid) on various forums.

Please feel free to list the fundamental flaws you've found in Age of Sigmar. I'm sure more exist, but I usually approach these situations by solving problems instead of looking for them, so maybe we can help each other out. :)


Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:23 am
Profile
Miscast into the Warp
Miscast into the Warp
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 3510
Location: Investigating Mantica
It was a tongue in cheek comment. Hopefully taken in the right light.

I do agree with you that there is a game in there, that game needs cooperation between the two players to work it all out.
I am also very sure that D.net will be back to its best very soon, it takes time to process the change and where else can people biatch and moan other than forum boards. Especially as people are still processing the new rules. The tactical knowledge on this board will rise to the top soon once some games have been played.

Perhaps you could post the mail you sent to GW as an example of the changes and improvements you feel would help the game.

_________________
My Kings of War Plog - Forces of Nature

My Kings of War Plog - Twilight Kin / Nightstalkers


Sat Jul 11, 2015 8:58 am
Profile
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 8:38 am
Posts: 96
The Mattler wrote:
Barking Agatha gets it; the previous points costs were a sham. Age of Sigmar needs neither posts costs nor pre-made army lists due to its deployment system. You make armies the same way professional Dota, League of Legends, and Heroes of the Storm players make teams of 5 characters against opposing teams of 5 characters: dynamic counterbuild. To do that effectively, you need to know exactly what each unit is capable of accomplishing, then not only take into account into account the current positions of all deployed models, but also consider the *potential* additional models that could hit the table following your own unit selection. It's a simple idea with a steep learning curve, filled with opportunities for strategic and tactical nuance.
Coop wrote:
It seems like mostly everything special a unit has is just named for the unit and then involves - rerolling 1s, to hit, or save rolls.


Wow, I... got all that? Yeah! That's what I meant, goes without saying! Well, to be honest, I agree with you, but I wouldn't have thought of all that in a million years. My side of it is that I play a lot of games, and it is my opinion that games are meant to be fun. If I'm not having any fun, then it's a waste of time, and if my opponent isn't having any fun, then I'm not having fun either. Regardless of any points system, I find it very easy to tone down my army if my opponent doesn't have as much as I have, and if someone came up with a dozen Nagashes, or whatever, I'd simply say, 'You know what? You win. I'm going to go do anything else with my time instead.' I find that most people are reasonable, though. Then again, I've never met the kind of adult who would burn their rulebook or their miniatures and throw a public tantrum on Youtube. I can only imagine that such people must have other issues in their lives.

Points costs in Warhammer have always been a sham. A long, long time ago, they were actually based on something, as was revealed in a White Dwarf once. One point of Strength, so many points, one point of Weapon Skill, so many points, and so on. Did they balance the game then? No, because five Chaos Knights could wipe out an entire 2000 points Empire army. Since then they've meant even less, as they've been tweaked up or down in a haphazard 'sounds about right' way. Sometimes models got a new special rule and their points cost went down, so that you could take more of them. Sometimes the rules writer meant them to win, and sometimes it was Jervis ;) (I love Jervis, not speaking a word against him!). Usually they were tweaked up or down from whatever they were in the previous Army Book, regardless of how the rules changed. Points were nothing but a holdover from an old system that never really worked in the first place.

Instead of limiting you with points costs to what you can and cannot play, GW is now saying that it's up to us, reasonable and mature people that we all are, to play our games in such a way that we enjoy it. Scenarios are forthcoming and those will have some guidelines, but why play only that way? Make up your own scenarios too! Play with people you like. Have fun. I really don't see any problem with that :)


Sat Jul 11, 2015 9:15 am
Profile
Slave (off the Altar)

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2014 6:21 am
Posts: 13
Barking Agatha wrote:
A long, long time ago, they were actually based on something, as was revealed in a White Dwarf once. One point of Strength, so many points, one point of Weapon Skill, so many points, and so on. Did they balance the game then? No, because five Chaos Knights could wipe out an entire 2000 points Empire army.

Boy, did they ever! More seriously, though, the reason the old points you mentioned didn't work is because it didn't take the unit's actual performance into account, i.e. the synergistic interactions between stats purchased at flat rates. Paying X pts for +1A on a 4S model is worth much more than +1S on a 3S model, but the system didn't account for that properly. They did try to create diminishing returns, though, as a crude workaround, but that was another failure. For example, from 4th edition; each step is cumulative with the previous ones.

59pts Sorcerer - base statline, one magic item slot
121pts Champion Sorcerer - +1W, +1 magic level, +1 magic item slot
219pts Master Sorcerer - +1W, +1A, +1I, +1 magic level, +1 magic item slot
328pts Sorcerer Lord - +1W, +1A, +1I, +1Ld, +1 magic level, +1 magic item slot

These were the points costs of all Elven casters, and virtually all wizards scaled up the same way, but it got worse. Those magic item slots could be filled by any item ranging from 5pts to 150pts, killing off the last pretense that the points system was balanced. Since then, the ad hoc tweaking you mentioned took over.


Sat Jul 11, 2015 3:26 pm
Profile
Druchii Anointed
Druchii Anointed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 5:09 pm
Posts: 2350
Location: Ohio
Yes, points never balanced things, they just got you close - usually, though there were always opportunities for abuse.

I'm quite excited about the new rules. Haven't played a game of WH in years, literally, but this is all fresh and new. What really brings me back, more so than anything I think, is the elimination of army creep. And stupidity is gone. I get to field DE's with dependable heavy cavalry. :D

_________________
.
.
Wishing everyone the very best, to the end of your days.


Tue Jul 14, 2015 3:02 am
Profile WWW
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 9:56 pm
Posts: 1065
Location: Poland
only if you and your opponent don want to win, as soon as that kicks in then your in trouble. Also playing by the short rules will make you sick of the game in no time. Like when you wizard is behind an obelisk or building and he gets double shot by a single cannon, that makes for a fun game, st there is no rule to say you cant see through terrain, or that they block anything. At firs glance the system didn't seem all that bad, after playing by the rules, you realize that its a hole bunch of stupid under more lairs of stupid.

_________________
Also known as Kanadian
Image
Image


Tue Jul 14, 2015 5:00 am
Profile
Executioner
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 10:03 am
Posts: 189
Location: Albion
Killerk wrote:
Like when you wizard is behind an obelisk or building and he gets double shot by a single cannon, that makes for a fun game, st there is no rule to say you cant see through terrain, or that they block anything. At firs glance the system didn't seem all that bad, after playing by the rules, you realize that its a hole bunch of stupid under more lairs of stupid.


Well actually cover adds +1 to saves. But TBH a canon firing at a building will crush the walls. Canon fire should go through terrain, to a degree. After playing by the rules I found it's only as stupid as one makes it. As The Mattler and Barking Agatha pointed out it's about how you play and thinking strategically while you play not grinding out mathhammer permutations which in my experience both 7th and 8th ed WFB became.

I remember an article, maybe 10 years ago, on the Canadian GW site, I think, about how shocked GW game designers were at the play styles of "competitive" players. That they were playing something close to 40K that wasn't at all in the spirit of the game (that most important rule) and frankly that's been my experience with WFB for years. The only games I've enjoyed are those like Warhammer world's regiments of reknown event, small characterful skirmish games. What annoys me is the almost total lack of personality/customization for your character/general in AOS. It's my 1 big gripe with AOS that the Dreadlords and High Elf Princes (and most shockingly the Chaos Lords) lack flexibility. I don't feel that I can have a character in AOS yet. I hope they'll add a new rule set specifically for that but TBH I'm having fun with these new rules and to me that matters.


Last edited by Cailil on Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:18 pm
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:36 pm
Posts: 3858
Location: Belgium, Brussels
Weird, I think I had commented on that, but perhaps that was another thread. Either way, it's wrong. Shooting at targets hiding behind a tower is not permitted. Line of sight is required, as explained in the chapter on attacking.

As for the maths! I love that! :D It's still possible to use maths in AoS since the game is more about management, I hope we'll see more complex and interesting theories on that aspect than just the kill and shooting performance.

_________________
I love me a bowl of numbers to crunch for breakfast. If you need anything theoryhammered, I gladly take requests.

Furnace of Arcana, a warhammer blog with delusional grandeur.

"I move unseen. I hide in light and shadow. I move faster than a bird. No plate of armour ever stopped me. I strike recruits and veterans with equal ease. And all shiver at my coldest of whispers."
- The stiff breeze


Fri Jul 17, 2015 1:50 pm
Profile WWW
Executioner
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 10:03 am
Posts: 189
Location: Albion
Daeron wrote:
Shooting at targets hiding behind a tower is not permitted. Line of sight is required, as explained in the chapter on attacking.


AFAICS the hellcannon's doomfire rules are that it can fire at "an enemy unit within range, even if it is not visible to the Hellcannon". I read Killerk and though of this but you're absolutely right LOS is required for all other cannons AFAICT. (And TBH Hellcannon should be able to shoot through anything anyway)

Daeron wrote:
As for the maths! I love that! :D It's still possible to use maths in AoS since the game is more about management, I hope we'll see more complex and interesting theories on that aspect than just the kill and shooting performance.

LOL I hope I didn't offend - in my club the WAAC gamers are the kind that want to see your list and your army book and mathhammer out the armies weakness and design their force to prevent you from winning. Rather than what you're talking about :)


Fri Jul 17, 2015 2:28 pm
Profile
Warrior
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:40 am
Posts: 52
I like the game and the setting so far. There are just some troubling issues with the basic rules, but those can be houseruled easily.

My top 3 likes and dislikes:

Top 3 Likes:
1) Flexibility. Always wanted to combine different elf armies. Now I can do that.
2) "Living" Rule set. We will see how often GW actually implement rule changes, but I'm hopeful.
3) All the synergies and bubble-effects which you can stack and overlap. If they expand on this, it could give the game a lot of tactical depth.

Top 3 Dislikes:
1) The shooting rules are too vague at the moment. When warmachines can fire into a melee combat, something is seriously wrong.
2) Measuring from model to model. I get that GW wanted to make the transition from square to round bases smooth. But I don't think that making bases completely irrelevant is the right way to go. This leads to all kinds of annoying things like piling bases on top of each other and other slap-worthy behaviour.
3) Lack of character customization. I always enjoyed giving my heroes and lords specific sets of equipment. I hope a similar mechanic returns. Also that wizards know different spells if they are placed on different mounts is a bit strange. Not a dealbreaker for me, but a bit strange.


Mon Jul 20, 2015 2:07 pm
Profile
Executioner
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 4:11 am
Posts: 173
Location: Hohhot, China
Daeron wrote:
If Warhammer Fantasy Battles is Hamlet, then this is the Age of Sigmar version.

And I would watch the hell out of that movie. :lol:

While I haven't played yet, still building and painting my army. I am excited to play it. I can tell from this thread that I am an outsider looking in, but AoS looks like what happen in D&D when they changed to 4thE and Encounters from 3.5. I used to play the hell out of 3.5 and it was a good game, but all the little rules and little details didn't really make it fun for me. It was nice when it was simplified down and I could get my friends who have never played before into the game and get them talking about it. It seems like GW is wanting the same thing here. I know that in the town i played 3.5 in there was only one group that ever did it. Now they play 4thE 4 different parties 4 nights a week. I think that AoS will spark that new fire as well. As I said I haven't played the other editions before, played 40k like three times, so as a newbie I'm excited, and I want to see where this is going.
This biggest thing I can say is that you can't approach it like the old game. If you do you're not going to have doing it. I know a lot of guys that quit D&D cause it wasn't 3.5 and the way the set up their toon didn't work anymore. I think that is the wrong approach to the game. You have to look at it in a new way and come at it differently. Just my two cents.

_________________
Phox Jorkarzul


Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:44 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software