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.

Thread locked to merge into main thread here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/655877.page

Thanks!

You know i still haven't played 'Age of Sigmar' yet but i take it back. In fact i take most of it back.

GW hasn't taken competitive nature out of the game they merely changed it. You can still restrict units of types if you want, restrict model counts and restrict a lot of things. GW basically gave up trying to make restrictions but that doesn't mean we can't if we so choose. Also they've allowed us the chance to become more flexible in case of different rules per person if we so wish.

In my mind they've actually helped the game. No more will there be death stars, impossible gun-lines, stupid magic phases that never end or people relying on broken character after broken character.

This game will rely on skill from flexible players that can be good all around regardless of restrictions and that will show the true good players from the Net-listers.

They still have restrictions ; those of the models they sell.

I'm expecting there will be much less "customization" than before in the future warscrolls.

But honestly, from what I can read here and there, I would rather believe the focus will be more on campaigns, scenarios with set models/forces and what I like to call "story mode" than true competition in tournaments.

It's better to accept AoS was not made for competition, I think.

Yep! There's lots of really quick ways to add balance and restrictions. Wounds and what wounds can be allocated to being the quickest.

Still not great for leagues and tournaments perhaps, but some more complex restrictions can iron out any kinks imo

 Bottle wrote:
Yep! There's lots of really quick ways to add balance and restrictions. Wounds and what wounds can be allocated to being the quickest.

Still not great for leagues and tournaments perhaps, but some more complex restrictions can iron out any kinks imo

If the restrictions are longer than the rules themselves, then maybe it's better to say that the rules weren't made in that spirit and it would be a good idea to use another ruleset.

Do you try to make tournaments with Monopoly? No. Why? Because the game was not made for that kind of thing and the rules aren't worth the work you put into this.

 Sarouan wrote:
Do you try to make tournaments with Monopoly? No.

http://www.monopolydocumentary.com/tournaments.htm



You underestimate people.

 Sarouan wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
Yep! There's lots of really quick ways to add balance and restrictions. Wounds and what wounds can be allocated to being the quickest.

Still not great for leagues and tournaments perhaps, but some more complex restrictions can iron out any kinks imo

If the restrictions are longer than the rules themselves, then maybe it's better to say that the rules weren't made in that spirit and it would be a good idea to use another ruleset.

Do you try to make tournaments with Monopoly? No. Why? Because the game was not made for that kind of thing and the rules aren't worth the work you put into this.

Show me a list of restrictions with a longer word count than the core rules please.

Most I have seen have been a paragraph.

You know you give GW too much credit, they're not some kind of genius games designers who purposely made the rules a certain way.
They simply made some bare bones rules and expected players to edit all the holes in them. Its pretty clear from the rules they basically aimed at really casual gaming and stuck with it. They certainly didn't spend ages designing the new rules as some freedom to the player idea. Mentality wise we're just filling in the gaps ourselves and giving the credit to GW.

Oh i know i think of it as more of an unintended side effect. GW tried to eliminate competitive play but they merely changed it.

A good example of a list might be.

0-2 Heroes

0-1 Wizards

0-1 Named Characters

A model that is a wizard is also a hero and takes up both slots and same goes for named characters. Monsters that are wizards or named are also taken into account. A named hero takes up the hero and named hero slot.

0-1 Monsters, each monster takes the place of 15 models from max models per army.

0-2 War machines or weapons teams, each war machine takes away 10 models from rank and file limit.

No more than 60 models per army from normal rank-and-file.

Units of models of normal rank-and-file have wounds count against model limit. For instance 15 ogres (4 wounds per model) are the max in model count.

Why exactly would you come up with necessary parts of the rules on your own, as a TO, if you can just use a superior system?

Even WHFB 8th, which was a robust system on its own, required quite a few adjustments to work on a competitive level. Rules councils spend hours and certainly accumulated days or weeks on coming up with solutions for glaring problems.

AoS brings nothing to the table. Literally. You'd have to balance each and every single unit in the game in accordance with others. You know, the job GW usually is due but is too lazy to. That's an enormous amount of work. We're talking of a giant effort. For what?

AoS isn't a competitive ruleset and it flat out doesn't work on a competitive level. It's a ruleset that's aimed at young players with little to no tabletop experience - at this state. The rules are still incomplete and we don't know what the future may bring.

As of now, however, balancing AoS is be a task that no TO would even consider given the time and effort it takes. There are vastly superior games out there (e.g. WHFB, KoW) and just transitioning to these is easier and has a lot more value than trying to fit a square in a circle cut-out.

impossible gun-lines,

the best dwarf army is artilery park and a gyrocopter. guns and throwers kill heros and fast moving stuff in the other army and the gyrocopter flees for 6 turn. With the option to go after assasination, if opposing army has only one or two characters.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Oh i know i think of it as more of an unintended side effect. GW tried to eliminate competitive play but they merely changed it.

A good example of a list might be.
>snip<

Which effectively kills off skaven armies. There are plenty of "hero" models that aren't uber death machines. Warlock Engineers have both the Hero and Wizard keyword. Pack Masters are Heros.

Going by wounds doesn't work any better, when you have two units identical in wounds but completely disparate in every other characteristic (see: Stormvermin and Clan Rats).

Balance was not written into AoS. Balance will not be found in AoS.

I know i'm just trying to make the best of a bad situation.

How about for 1 wound models that make up units we have a system? Each number will represent 1/2 a model against model count.

1-(1/2 a model) horde-units such as skavenslaves will be in this slot

2-(1 model) trained-units such as clanrats will be in this slot

3-(1 and 1/2 models) veteran-units such as stormvermin will be in this slot

4-(2 models) elite-units such as censer bearers and gutter runners will be in this slot

----------

Elves for instance will usually run in the 3 and 4 category. All units like swordmasters, white lions, phoenix guard, sisters of averlorn are in the 4 category (2 models per). Slaves, zombies, peasants and maybe skinks are in the 1 category. Crappy rank and file such as skeletons, clanrats, marauders and most basic empire soldiers are in the 2 category (basically trained but not well). 3 is for usually the elite of horde armies and the core units of elite armies so basically bog standard elves, dwarfs and saurus and for horde armies you have stormvermin, greatswords and other such things. 4 is basically for the best 1 wound models elite armies can bring. Basically think of chaos chosen and elite elf and dwarf units.