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.
Overread wrote: This means hordes aren't going away, but it means that options outside of putting all your models into fewer units, is now an option.
It was always an option. And one each player should've been evaluating based upon what they intended to be doing with the unit.
The thing was if you took two units of 20 you paid more in points than one unit of 40. So you were generally either going for minimum units for the battleline requirements for the least cost because then you had to have at least X number for the value of the game. Or you were aiming for full units as much as you could because you paid less in points which means you have more to spend on other things.
Removing the point saving feature means that you can take two units of 20 or one unit of 40 and they cost the same. Thus you can make your choice based on the units stats, your situation and the play style you are going for. Basically it removes a cost choice from the equation and makes it more of a tactical choice.
Of course functionality of 2x20 and 1x40 isn't same. In many ways 2x20 is superior choice. Funny enough superior choice usually tends to cost more.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/18 09:52:02
I am actually surprised you would be critical of this point anyway as a proponent of alt activation, because that very much favors min-and-max size units.
I've been doing alt activation games and versions of AOS using alt activatoin for many years and haven't gone the min or max route very often.
I'm not super critical over it. I dont think AOS lends itself to being a very good large model-count game.
It is to me best at a slightly higher than kill team level - a marvel superhero style game if you will.
Moving 40 models in a unit individually both sucks for the person moving them and sucks for the person standing there watching them move them.
I am actually surprised you would be critical of this point anyway as a proponent of alt activation, because that very much favors min-and-max size units.
I've been doing alt activation games and versions of AOS using alt activatoin for many years and haven't gone the min or max route very often.
I'm not super critical over it. I dont think AOS lends itself to being a very good large model-count game.
It is to me best at a slightly higher than kill team level - a marvel superhero style game if you will.
Moving 40 models in a unit individually both sucks for the person moving them and sucks for the person standing there watching them move them.
AoS doesn't function at all at less than 1000 points. It's not even a game really, it's pushing models to the center of the table and making pew pew noises. There's a reason they keep making new rulesets for less than 1000 points.
Overread wrote: This means hordes aren't going away, but it means that options outside of putting all your models into fewer units, is now an option.
It was always an option. And one each player should've been evaluating based upon what they intended to be doing with the unit.
The thing was if you took two units of 20 you paid more in points than one unit of 40. So you were generally either going for minimum units for the battleline requirements for the least cost because then you had to have at least X number for the value of the game. Or you were aiming for full units as much as you could because you paid less in points which means you have more to spend on other things.
Removing the point saving feature means that you can take two units of 20 or one unit of 40 and they cost the same. Thus you can make your choice based on the units stats, your situation and the play style you are going for. Basically it removes a cost choice from the equation and makes it more of a tactical choice.
Of course functionality of 2x20 and 1x40 isn't same. In many ways 2x20 is superior choice. Funny enough superior choice usually tends to cost more.
2x20 is almost never the superior choice. With AoS's generous coherency rules and emphasis on overlapping buffs, singular large units are almost always better than multiple medium sized units.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
auticus wrote: I think its still a false choice that makes itself for you.
Given 1 unit of 40 or 2 units of 20, if there are no mechanical benefits to having 40 models in a unit, it is almost always going to be better to have the ability to split the unit into two so that it can operate independently.
This mostly shows that you don't really play sigmar. There are massive benefits to running a single large unit over 2 smaller units.
I used to run 20 blood sisters all the time pre nerf and people who didn't know the game would say things like 'oh you'll never get them all in combat with the same unit!' Why would I want to? What unit in the entire game could have survived 20 fully buffed pre-nerf blood sisters? I used that 20 girl unit to kill 2 or 3 units across at least 2 objectives while maintaining range on my buff auras.
I was always confused about the horde bonus because if you know what you're doing, a single large 7nit can do the work of an equal number of MSU models while saving on drops and fighting in a single acfivation.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/18 22:41:13
AoS doesn't function at all at less than 1000 points. It's not even a game really, it's pushing models to the center of the table and making pew pew noises.
Which is the same as with 2000 points, just takes less time. None of the rules interactions change, you just see better how simple they really are.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/19 16:35:55
A bit of a taste of the new rules in the 'The Best Ruleset Ever' video in the 'Unboxing Dominion' article on Warhammer Community. Most interesting are that Monsters have abilities to use in the Charge phase and Reactive Command Abilities in every phase of the game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/31 16:38:40
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
Reactive command abilities have my hopes up. Even if the execution is faulty for now it exists means it can be improved on, and it is a good facet to have in the game.
auticus wrote: Well that and also I wasn't referring to point sizes either.
You can make 2000 point armies in AOS that are very small model count. And I've lived in two cities now where the local groups love that.
Also most of the 2000 point games I played were rushing to meet in the middle line making pew pew noises.
Thats the allure of the game.
It really is amazing how much I disagree with this post. AoS is an objective based game. I’ve played many games and watched hundreds more online and it almost never involves what you describe. Are you ignoring the battleplans? They are fundamental to the way the game plays. This is something that I thought was obvious by this point.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/30 15:31:52
Auticus has a local community stuffed with TFGs, so his personal Warhammer experience is the thin end of the bell curve. Given the natural human tendency to project one's personal experience out as representative, that is where he gets his notions of AoS as a whole.
We've tried to explain that the broader community isn't really like that but I think his local WH community is so relentlessly TFG it is hard to get through. On a lighter note, some of the quotes he has from those guys are absolutely hysterical.
I'm curious if the new Thunderstrike Stormcast Eternals will have rules to reflect their new armor and their ability to return to Azyr to be reforged or if they will just leave that in the background and not reflect it mechanically.
I guess I am just wondering how strong of a distinction they will draw between the new Thunderstrike Stormcast Eternals and the previous Warrior, Vanguard, Extremis, and Sacrosanct chambers.
I'm wondering if it might be that the fallout from Be'lakor and his shenanigans leaves the "old" Stormcast more vulnerable to morale while the new ones don't have the same issues?
Kanluwen wrote: I'm wondering if it might be that the fallout from Be'lakor and his shenanigans leaves the "old" Stormcast more vulnerable to morale while the new ones don't have the same issues?
That would make sense. Knowing I'm going to be tortured for the foreseeable eternity if I snuff it would put a damper on my willingness to run out and die. I still think they'll get pumped up alongside the others though, unless GW really wants to push you buying the new stuff and pretend Old Marines are a thing of the past.
Battleshock doesn't just represent models running away (despite the blurb in the core rules) but also includes crumbling or just being overwhelmed by the tides of battle. It isn't like zombies are turning and running off after all!