Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The first is table size, primarily because of deployment zone restrictions and space available on the surface area. You can't have more models on the table to start than can fit without being closer than one foot from the center line. Summoned units and ones that can come in from reserves have a minimum distance requirement from opposing models, so pushing froward limits the ability to use these tactics.

Next is model size. Everything is measured from the models themselves, and you can shoot into and out of melee. The larger the model, the easier it is to shoot down with focused fire.

Another is the deployment of your armies. You DO NOT make an army list for AoS, you bring a collection. Then you deploy one unit at a time. What this does is allow you to directly counter each others unit decisions on the fly. You bring a monster, I bring a cannon. You bring a cannon, I bring cavalry. You bring cavalry, I bring spearmen to bubblewrap. You do this until the deployment zone iis filled to satisfaction (again, limited by table size)

Lastly, is price. I was in a discussion with someone yesterday and we were speaking on the balance between storm vermin and clan rats. Storm vermin are better until clan rats and storm vermin are at 30 models each, then clan rats are better. But iif storm vermin out number their opponent they become better still! So, how are these balanced against one another? For the price of 30 storm vermin you can get 40 clan rats. Now, when slamming into one another head to head the clan rats are able to hold their own for the same cost in $ as storm vermin. If they were the exact same capability, no one would ever buy storm vermin. So they made the clan rats weaker individually but more potent in larger groups.

So, when deciding a game of age of sigmar, don't decide on wounds or war scrolls. Your only discussion should be on table size. A 3x3 table will give you a solid couple hours of gameplay. 4x4 almost all evening. And remember that without trays you can terrain the hell out of your tables now to improve tactical mobility and target choices. The days of two stands of trees and an old ruin nobody can climb into are over!

I disagree with most of your post, but this bit...

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
You DO NOT make an army list for AoS, you bring a collection.

...does seems to be one of GW's main intentions with AoS. The RAW are structured in such a way as to encourage people to bring their whole collection so they have access to as many models as possible when deploying their army.

So you are telling me... GW is expecting everyone to have a "collection" of models?

I might be just whining here but sounds like another NOT-SO-OBVIOUS move of GW to sell more models.

 Zaki66 wrote:
So you are telling me... GW is expecting everyone to have a "collection" of models?

I might be just whining here but sounds like another NOT-SO-OBVIOUS move of GW to sell more models.

In case you weren't aware, they are a company that sells models.

If you have more options, you have ALWAYS been better off than your opponent. If you have access to more models now, you'll be better off than the person who spent their time simply buying piles of the strongest units. They are actually rewarding collectors as a game mechanic!

I enjoyed seeing a demo game being played on a smaller square of space already laid out on a table. like a 2'x2' battle square on a larger 4'x8' table or something....I liked seeing a game being played on a very intimate battlefield.

EDIT: Found the video that the game was in. Check it out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDmz0P8WX8g

 Zaki66 wrote:
So you are telling me... GW is expecting everyone to have a "collection" of models?

I might be just whining here but sounds like another NOT-SO-OBVIOUS move of GW to sell more models.

its "not so obvious" its blatant attempt to sell more models using the rules

 namiel wrote:
its blatant attempt to sell more models using the rules

This is true of every game GW has ever published.

 namiel wrote:

 Zaki66 wrote:
So you are telling me... GW is expecting everyone to have a "collection" of models?

I might be just whining here but sounds like another NOT-SO-OBVIOUS move of GW to sell more models.

its "not so obvious" its blatant attempt to sell more models using the rules

Which makes perfect sense, being that they exist off selling models.

I think the comments in this thread just made me dumber! Like are you guys GW employees making propaganda threads? The balance of the game and summoning is that you can only fit so many models on the board? Like all units in the game are equal right? Games need to have structure and RULES to work guys. Like would Monopoly be better if everyone got infinite money and could never go bankrupt? And now we're talking about playing on a 2x2 board so that you can fit your game in sometime TODAY! This game will not work on an "honor system" where both players are the dungeon master. Because both players want to win and will naturally try to get any advantage they can get. Dungeons and Dragons is the only sandbox loosy-goosy game I can think of atm and it works because ALL parties have the proper motivation for a balanced game. The dungeon master wants to create a good experience, and the players want to try their best to survive and help their team. AOS is like pitting 2 dungeon masters against each-other....take as many monsters as you want or have in your collection and beat the other guy!

 Manchu wrote:

 namiel wrote:
its blatant attempt to sell more models using the rules

This is true of every game GW has ever published.

To this extent? No. Not only does owning more models give you the ability to better counter-deploy to match what your opponent has just put down, but the lack of points values allowing you to literally field you entire collections means that more models means more chance of winning. Keep losing your games? No problem! Pick up another box of models on your way out and field them as well next time!

Except you can't fit more into your army if they have to start in their deployment zone. The summoning can be stopped and the distance between the new unit and any enemy unit is 9 inches while they still have to be within 18" of he summoner. Just get within 10" of a summoner like negash and he can no longer create new units. Not hard to do with things like cavalry.

A decent board should be about 4" square. That gives you a max footprint of 1'x4' not including any terrain there. You don't need an honor system, the person who stops deploying first decides first turn guaranteed. If you keep piling on models, I will choose to go first and destroy whatever unit you choose as my sudden death victory point with a single round of cannon fire. So don't be an jerk, and I won't win this game with a single die roll.

Also, in regards to balance, I thought there was rumors of some GW ruleset for more tournament-like games in mind? Like you balance based on Warscrolls and wounds or something?

I mean, the game was just released and has been marketed as a more "loosey-goosey" and less competitive game to begin with. Maybe AoS is just not fit for people who want to be competitive?

 clamclaw wrote:
Also, in regards to balance, I thought there was rumors of some GW ruleset for more tournament-like games in mind? Like you balance based on Warscrolls and wounds or something?

I mean, the game was just released and has been marketed as a more "loosey-goosey" and less competitive game to begin with. Maybe AoS is just not fit for people who want to be competitive?

The idea is meant to be you can play the battleplans competitively. They'll be out this Saturday so we'll get to see then. :-)

The problem with collection vs collection is it requires the person with the larger collection to have an intimate knowledge of:
a) The game in general
b) Their own army
c) Their opponents army
In order to be a "nice guy".

This makes it hard to play with new players that have a slimmer collection.

It also makes it easier for TFG to prey on those new players, they have a larger reserve to pull from and can throw out more "counter-units" by simply spending a bunch of money.

Thanks for bringing my attention to this, never would have thought about it otherwise.

 The Shadow wrote:
To this extent? No.

Only in one key way: now you can use whatever you buy. I think this will encourage more purchases. Previously, I could say "oh man I love those new Neferata model but there is no way I am going to collect a whole VC army." Now I don't have that failsafe!

You do know you dont HAVE to have a lot of models right?

You can totally stop at the starter box...

If you can...

DUN DUN DUNNN

*stares at bookshelf full of malifaux, the game where all you need is 1x crew box to play*

LOL that is a very good point. But on Dakka we're all tsundere!

S-stupid GW ... I-it's not like I want those models or anything ...

 SilverDevilfish wrote:
The problem with collection vs collection is it requires the person with the larger collection to have an intimate knowledge of:
a) The game in general
b) Their own army
c) Their opponents army
In order to be a "nice guy".

This makes it hard to play with new players that have a slimmer collection.

It also makes it easier for TFG to prey on those new players, they have a larger reserve to pull from and can throw out more "counter-units" by simply spending a bunch of money.

Thanks for bringing my attention to this, never would have thought about it otherwise.

You don't need to know their army, the unit types lend themselves to a certain style of play. Light, medium, and heavy versions of infantry and cavalry. Archers, artillery and monsters you can kind of tell what they do by looking at the model. You don't have to be a nice guy, just don't expect to get a rematch.

Or ... if things go unexpectedly one-sided, talk it out with your opponent. As usual, communication solves a lot of problems.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:

 SilverDevilfish wrote:
The problem with collection vs collection is it requires the person with the larger collection to have an intimate knowledge of:
a) The game in general
b) Their own army
c) Their opponents army
In order to be a "nice guy".

This makes it hard to play with new players that have a slimmer collection.

It also makes it easier for TFG to prey on those new players, they have a larger reserve to pull from and can throw out more "counter-units" by simply spending a bunch of money.

Thanks for bringing my attention to this, never would have thought about it otherwise.

You don't need to know their army, the unit types lend themselves to a certain style of play. Light, medium, and heavy versions of infantry and cavalry. Archers, artillery and monsters you can kind of tell what they do by looking at the model. You don't have to be a nice guy, just don't expect to get a rematch.

You kind of do. How similar are Orc Cavalry to Elven Cavalry? How many Orc Cavalry models is similar in strength to 20 Elven Cavalry models?

You have 3 choices. While deploying study their stats and compare them and hope you have an ok number.
Know the game well enough via play testing for GW to know how equal they are roughly.
Play it per rules and put down as many as you want.

Neither of those are ideal and it gets worse when you realize there are potentially 10+ different types of models on the table, many with different rules or different entirely from anything else on the board.

This game is not friendly to people who dont want to put in the effort to study the units in this game to make them work.

Your logic doesnt work because you cannot size up the equality of a battle force by merely looking at the models. You have toi know the game, your opponent, their collection and the rules to play a fair game with this.

 Manchu wrote:

 The Shadow wrote:
To this extent? No.

Only in one key way: now you can use whatever you buy. I think this will encourage more purchases. Previously, I could say "oh man I love those new Neferata model but there is no way I am going to collect a whole VC army." Now I don't have that failsafe!

Yep, now that all my droogs and me have switched to KoW, I actually bought some discounted VC zombies to fill out my undead. So congrats GW, you actually got me to buy something from you, by alienating your entire fantasy base in my area, thereby giving Mantic buckets of new players. Congrats?

I dunno. I can't help feeling there's an element of...


GW: "We're done trying to write the social contract for you beardy rules-lawyering jackasses - you guys can just figure it out for yourselves!"

 Micky wrote:
I dunno. I can't help feeling there's an element of...


GW: "We're done trying to write the social contract for you beardy rules-lawyering jackasses - you guys can just figure it out for yourselves!"

Could be true but they never have tried.

Better to say "Why expect anything worthwhile from GW" really haha.

Also thanks for calling me a jackass... I am incredibly casual when it comes to GW games. I would go as far to say you are the jackass for assuming people who like rules that make sense or are easy to follow (how does summoning work in AOS again?) for a quick and fun game are jackasses. If I am a jackass than you are a wargames bottom feeder for liking GW rules so much. Content with toe jam of Wargaming creativeness today (AOS) /s (Not nice is it).

You can like something and admit its terribly flawed. Kind of like how people watch Sharknado and love it. Except they dont usually hail it as great in the movie world.

 Micky wrote:
"We're done trying to write the social contract for you beardy rules-lawyering jackasses - you guys can just figure it out for yourselves!"

Well of course a lot of us already do. Take a look at any tournament, for example.

 Swastakowey wrote:
I would go as far to say you are the jackass

I think that was posted in the spirit of comedy ...

 Manchu wrote:

 Micky wrote:
"We're done trying to write the social contract for you beardy rules-lawyering jackasses - you guys can just figure it out for yourselves!"

Well of course a lot of us already do. Take a look at any tournament, for example.

 Swastakowey wrote:
I would go as far to say you are the jackass

I think that was posted in the spirit of comedy ...

Yes I was making a point about how silly it is to call people a jackass for thinking differently etc. I will remove if requested etc.

I have to laugh at the first restriction. Only all the models we can fit into a 12" x72" space? Just 12 square feet? You're going to limit me to only a thousand models?

I don't see that as a "restriction".

 mikhaila wrote:
I have to laugh at the first restriction. Only all the models we can fit into a 12" x72" space? Just 12 square feet? You're going to limit me to only a thousand models?

I don't see that as a "restriction".

Sorry to chime in, Mik... 12" is 12 inches. 12' is 12 feet. So...12 inches by 72 inches was your example.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 mikhaila wrote:
I have to laugh at the first restriction. Only all the models we can fit into a 12" x72" space? Just 12 square feet? You're going to limit me to only a thousand models?

I don't see that as a "restriction".

Sorry to chime in, Mik... 12" is 12 inches. 12' is 12 feet. So...12 inches by 72 inches was your example.

Aye it should be 6 square feet, which is still quite a bit of room.

It is, but there should be terrain and you do not want your models too bunched up for things like breath weapons and consolidating melee badasses. If you fill up your whole side, you won't be able to move effectively and your ability to do things like summon will be severely hampered. Not to mention you may be giving up the chance for victory at all if your opponent is positioned on a hill with cannons or ballistae and chooses to take assassinate, or blunt. Very good chance of them crushing the unit under heel with focused fire... Then you setup all that stuff for nothing!