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.

I have never really joined in with the local scene, they mostly played 40k and I am not that interested in sci-fi most of the time (though Infinity is a bit of an exception). They recently started to get more into WM/H which is great, but now I've heard their feelings of AoS.

Apparently they absolutely LOVE it. Calling it the most fun they've had playing mini wargames in years. I wasn't even going to bother giving it a shot, but I just might show up with my Dark Elves sometime now. Still don't have high hopes though.

I'd say reserve judgement until you play it. Some people love the rules, others loathe them, and everything in-between. The real result will be how popular it is 2-4 years from now.

Played another game yesterday that wasn't as fun as previous games. 2v2 and with so many models we didn't finish in 3 hours.

It has really reinforced to me that games should be under 50 models. Otherwise they take too long.

And I am desperate for the compendiums to be released as card decks. Flicking through warscrolls on my iPad is a pain.

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes but saying the terrain works well and adds strategy to the game is incorrect when it means nothing in many situations. Like charging.

In short, more people trying to pay this crap off as good without any good reason.

I would have to agree with the above poster regarding terrain. Judging by your comments, it seems to me you have not actually played several games yourself. In my experience (WHFB 5th to 8th editions) I am now having much more fun and interaction with terrain than ever before. While, your example of terrain not blocking LoS for charging is correct (thank god, its now much smother play), terrain does(can) block LoS for shooting, magic, command abilities, and even melee combat (depending on model arrangement). Further, each terrain piece now has different buffs and/or debuffs which are rolled for at the start of a game. In my 3 dozen or so games of AoS, these have made a significant impact in almost all games when used correctly. Especially if compounding with other buffs given by heroes etc. If not used, or in some cases ignored, they can cripple your sides potential.

Please, before crying, go out and gain some real experience of this game for yourself. Try playing several games, change the terrain up every time. Try the scenarios (arguably the best and most fun way to play AoS) where terrain is often critical. But coming on here and saying things like "terrain don't anything" is just embarrassing yourself and makes it clear to anyone who is actively learning the game realise how much crap your talking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Bottle wrote:
Played another game yesterday that wasn't as fun as previous games. 2v2 and with so many models we didn't finish in 3 hours.

It has really reinforced to me that games should be under 50 models. Otherwise they take too long.

And I am desperate for the compendiums to be released as card decks. Flicking through warscrolls on my iPad is a pain.

Yeah I agree! I don't know ifs planned for the future but being able to buy Warscroll cards would be awesome. Atm I have printed them off to fit an A5 sheet and then laminated them. Not as professional but they look nice (in colour) and pretty durable.

TRIGSTEN wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Yes but saying the terrain works well and adds strategy to the game is incorrect when it means nothing in many situations. Like charging.

In short, more people trying to pay this crap off as good without any good reason.

I would have to agree with the above poster regarding terrain. Judging by your comments, it seems to me you have not actually played several games yourself. In my experience (WHFB 5th to 8th editions) I am now having much more fun and interaction with terrain than ever before. While, your example of terrain not blocking LoS for charging is correct (thank god, its now much smother play), terrain does(can) block LoS for shooting, magic, command abilities, and even melee combat (depending on model arrangement). Further, each terrain piece now has different buffs and/or debuffs which are rolled for at the start of a game. In my 3 dozen or so games of AoS, these have made a significant impact in almost all games when used correctly. Especially if compounding with other buffs given by heroes etc. If not used, or in some cases ignored, they can cripple your sides potential.

Please, before crying, go out and gain some real experience of this game for yourself. Try playing several games, change the terrain up every time. Try the scenarios (arguably the best and most fun way to play AoS) where terrain is often critical. But coming on here and saying things like "terrain don't anything" is just embarrassing yourself and makes it clear to anyone who is actively learning the game realise how much crap your talking.

Yea I played with a few models. Terrain does less in this game than ever. Partly covered by terrain? Who cares needs to be in it (why have walls again? oh thats right so we can stand on them and gain benefits because that makes sense). All they did for this game was make terrain less decent and made it ALL pre game mysterious terrain. It is a terrible system. Why should I stand on a wall to gain its benefits? Why should I be allowed to charge units I can't see but I cannot do other things through bits I can't see?

Also my point was Terrain does nothing to make this game more strategic, it just makes it more random... because we need more random in AOS. Heck if I have lances pointing upwards on my knights then most terrain means nothing since people can shoot the lance tips. That alone should tell you how bad it is... Hills need to be very tall hills in this game to stop my unfortunately armed knights from being shot through the hill.

 Swastakowey wrote:

Yea I played with a few models. Terrain does less in this game than ever. Partly covered by terrain? Who cares needs to be in it (why have walls again? oh thats right so we can stand on them and gain benefits because that makes sense). All they did for this game was make terrain less decent and made it ALL pre game mysterious terrain. It is a terrible system. Why should I stand on a wall to gain its benefits? Why should I be allowed to charge units I can't see but I cannot do other things through bits I can't see?

Also my point was Terrain does nothing to make this game more strategic, it just makes it more random... because we need more random in AOS. Heck if I have lances pointing upwards on my knights then most terrain means nothing since people can shoot the lance tips. That alone should tell you how bad it is... Hills need to be very tall hills in this game to stop my unfortunately armed knights from being shot through the hill.

/facepalm

Why should you stand on a wall to gain benefits? Which benefits? LoS benefits? Thats always been the case. Mysterious terrain buffs/debuffs? Its usually within 3" at the start of the hero phase to buff your unit until your next hero phase (don't forget this may be awhile if you loose the roll or choose for your opponent to take initiative). Lots to consider (tactical).

Why should I be allowed to charge units I can't see but I cannot do other things through bits I can't see?: Because it makes good game play and actually makes some real life sense, if your that way inclined. You can't shoot through what you can't see through but you can certainly be told to charge an unseen enemy which are around a corner (think about a general given orders to a unit). But regardless, its game mechanics, which work well if you bothered to play more.

The terrain types setup at the start are random (thank goodness) but you get to roll of and choose which side to take (tactical), where to deploy each unit (tactical) in relation to terrain. The start is random. How you choose to use that to your advantage is your decision (tactical).

Heck if I have lances pointing upwards on my knights then most terrain means nothing since people can shoot the lance tips: If you know this, why did you decide to stop moving your knights so they could be seen and be shot at? Your not being tactical.

Hills need to be very tall hills in this game to stop my unfortunately armed knights from being shot through the hill: Hill or mound? This has always been the case. If your knights could be seen (get down over the table top) then they could be shot. Nothing has changed. Use your terrain better (tactical).

I would love for you to be my opponent. Perhaps one day I suggest you play and practice more.

TRIGSTEN wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

Yea I played with a few models. Terrain does less in this game than ever. Partly covered by terrain? Who cares needs to be in it (why have walls again? oh thats right so we can stand on them and gain benefits because that makes sense). All they did for this game was make terrain less decent and made it ALL pre game mysterious terrain. It is a terrible system. Why should I stand on a wall to gain its benefits? Why should I be allowed to charge units I can't see but I cannot do other things through bits I can't see?

Also my point was Terrain does nothing to make this game more strategic, it just makes it more random... because we need more random in AOS. Heck if I have lances pointing upwards on my knights then most terrain means nothing since people can shoot the lance tips. That alone should tell you how bad it is... Hills need to be very tall hills in this game to stop my unfortunately armed knights from being shot through the hill.

/facepalm

I would love for you to be my opponent. Perhaps one day

Face palm? Why because I happen to love pikes and Lances on my models? I mean unless you want to make my terrain bigger to help them out...

Ultimately if I was forced to play this (and didn't take one goblin to auto lose and leave) I would have to house rule stupidity like this out of the rules or it would be a waste of time. Unless you think being able to shoot my pike formation with black powder weapons because you can see their pikes is a good rule?

I would be surprised if many people play this in a few years time. Unless the rules change for the better.

Next time im in OZ ill hit you up though, I think you will find playing me is like playing most people... pretty normal

I decided to edit my post to expand and reply to some of your questions. This happened while you were replying. Apologies.

The house rules I play are measuring base to base and no targeting weapons.

Regarding walls, agree with your opponent that touching the wall confers the +1 save and gives the buff.

Or not. Seems you don't want to play AoS.

For me there are lots of great things about it, and a few tweaks as above make it even better. But if you don't like it fair game, no point house ruling it in that case. :-)

 Bottle wrote:
The house rules I play are measuring base to base and no targeting weapons.

Regarding walls, agree with your opponent that touching the wall confers the +1 save and gives the buff.

Or not. Seems you don't want to play AoS.

For me there are lots of great things about it, and a few tweaks as above make it even better. But if you don't like it fair game, no point house ruling it in that case. :-)

I feel I can see the reasoning, after a few good games, for most of the new rules. However, I don't see why they changed the base rules. If I was to speculate, it was put in to stop situations where certain troop types (lets say human spearmen) from getting a larger than normal amount of attacks in with their 2" spears. Since they are on a 20mm bases. Im sure there are other better examples. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the model-to-model rule was put in temporarily, with a future errata to revert, once all the new models are converted to standardised round bases. However, I could be wrong and their might be another reason for the change.

We have been playing model to model and to be honest, its been fine so far. No issues and always keeps things simple. Can he reach me for that charge? Yes? Bugger, perhaps I should have not positioned him facing that angle when I piled in for the previous combat. Stuff like that has added a nice layer of strategy I never expected.

No it used to be that you had to see certain parts of the model. Most games would have me ignore the lances for LOS because that makes sense. Meaning hills and other terrain sufficiently obscured units and I was not punished for modeling cool things.

Why would I stand on a wall? Because that is the only way to get the benefits of terrain in AOS, being behind it does nothing. This is not always the case, and nor does that make sense.

Commanders would not tell men to run around a tall castle wall and charge whatever is there... because unless they had some kind of foresight or reports etc then they could be sending their men into god knows what. As you say yes in some (not many) situations it makes sense, but I think in most it is obvious it should not happen. I fail to see how this adds to the game.

I mean dude, this game is full of the downright dumbest rules in wargaming hands down. Everything from single models beating 400 models in combat because he is immune to battle shock to shooting crossbows while having your face eaten by dragons while fighting them with your knife and the most recent example of killing men because their pikes are too high. Unless you are advocating my pike men lie down (legal by the rule too) and face backwards as they fight their battles, avoiding enemies charing their spears and avoiding their pikes pointing into the sky? Because that is just getting pedantic over something any good rule set will fix with real rules.

Can I ask you honestly, what do you actually like about this rule set that no other game can offer?

Just so you know what I am talking about this is the base of my Empire Force: (these are not mine but the shop painted ones from the website) and that blob of pikemen suffer in AOS. The knights I have are worse off because the horse adds more height.





Bottle, this whole game needs to be house ruled. From start to finish, but at that point why waste time? May as well play a real game with those cool models. I should not have to house rule in to a game that a wall is good for cover...

 Swastakowey wrote:
No it used to be that you had to see certain parts of the model. Most games would have me ignore the lances for LOS because that makes sense. Meaning hills and other terrain sufficiently obscured units and I was not punished for modeling cool things.

Why would I stand on a wall? Because that is the only way to get the benefits of terrain in AOS, being behind it does nothing. This is not always the case, and nor does that make sense.

Commanders would not tell men to run around a tall castle wall and charge whatever is there... because unless they had some kind of foresight or reports etc then they could be sending their men into god knows what. As you say yes in some (not many) situations it makes sense, but I think in most it is obvious it should not happen. I fail to see how this adds to the game.

I mean dude, this game is full of the downright dumbest rules in wargaming hands down. Everything from single models beating 400 models in combat because he is immune to battle shock to shooting crossbows while having your face eaten by dragons while fighting them with your knife and the most recent example of killing men because their pikes are too high. Unless you are advocating my pike men lie down (legal by the rule too) and face backwards as they fight their battles, avoiding enemies charing their spears and avoiding their pikes pointing into the sky? Because that is just getting pedantic over something any good rule set will fix with real rules.

Can I ask you honestly, what do you actually like about this rule set that no other game can offer?



Bottle, this whole game needs to be house ruled. From start to finish, but at that point why waste time? May as well play a real game with those cool models. I should not have to house rule in to a game that a wall is good for cover...

A lot of your arguments seem to be a disconnect from previous Warhammer abstractions and AoS abstractions. So I won't bother arguing further with examples of trying to make the transition easier for you. I can understand how this can be aggravating though. Everyone who has seen a major overhaul in their favouate war-game (indeed PC game) or even going from one system to the next. However, you will soon get over the "this makes no RL sense". Once you adapt to the new games abstractions, it will seem comfortable. I recommend you to have an open mind and spend the time getting to know these mechanics and game play.

On the question of what I like about this rule set, Id have to say many many things. Is it the best, most perfect game there is atm? Unlikely that answer can ever be a yes with such a high variety of tastes in the world. Do I think they achieved a great game here? Yes! Infact, I would say its a stroke of genius. My favourite thing about AoS rules is the complexity of gameplay it creates from super simple ideas and rules. Much like the game of chess or the complexity of human life from 4 DNA bases. This was not something I appreciated (ateast until my 4+ game) at first. However, at the moment, I am having more fun with AoS than my previous 20 years of wargaming experiences. And isn't that what its all about?

 Swastakowey wrote:

Bottle, this whole game needs to be house ruled. From start to finish, but at that point why waste time? May as well play a real game with those cool models. I should not have to house rule in to a game that a wall is good for cover...

Yep, as I said seems like you'd have more fun playing something else, like KoW etc. no worries. I have loads that I like about this game, such as the freedom in army composition and being able to play in my local GW so I'm happy to add one or two house rules.

@TRIGSTEN I agree and think the model-to-model rules are a placeholder too until everyone is on circle/oval bases. In the meantime I'm happy to play base to base. It doesn't make much difference to infantry, but really does to big monsters (or example the Araknarok Spider has a big open space between its front two legs.

 Swastakowey wrote:
No it used to be that you had to see certain parts of the model. Most games would have me ignore the lances for LOS because that makes sense. Meaning hills and other terrain sufficiently obscured units and I was not punished for modeling cool things.

Why would I stand on a wall? Because that is the only way to get the benefits of terrain in AOS, being behind it does nothing. This is not always the case, and nor does that make sense.

Commanders would not tell men to run around a tall castle wall and charge whatever is there... because unless they had some kind of foresight or reports etc then they could be sending their men into god knows what. As you say yes in some (not many) situations it makes sense, but I think in most it is obvious it should not happen. I fail to see how this adds to the game.

I mean dude, this game is full of the downright dumbest rules in wargaming hands down. Everything from single models beating 400 models in combat because he is immune to battle shock to shooting crossbows while having your face eaten by dragons while fighting them with your knife and the most recent example of killing men because their pikes are too high. Unless you are advocating my pike men lie down (legal by the rule too) and face backwards as they fight their battles, avoiding enemies charing their spears and avoiding their pikes pointing into the sky? Because that is just getting pedantic over something any good rule set will fix with real rules.

Can I ask you honestly, what do you actually like about this rule set that no other game can offer?

Just so you know what I am talking about this is the base of my Empire Force: (these are not mine but the shop painted ones from the website) and that blob of pikemen suffer in AOS. The knights I have are worse off because the horse adds more height.





Bottle, this whole game needs to be house ruled. From start to finish, but at that point why waste time? May as well play a real game with those cool models. I should not have to house rule in to a game that a wall is good for cover...

well said

TRIGSTEN wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
No it used to be that you had to see certain parts of the model. Most games would have me ignore the lances for LOS because that makes sense. Meaning hills and other terrain sufficiently obscured units and I was not punished for modeling cool things.

Why would I stand on a wall? Because that is the only way to get the benefits of terrain in AOS, being behind it does nothing. This is not always the case, and nor does that make sense.

Commanders would not tell men to run around a tall castle wall and charge whatever is there... because unless they had some kind of foresight or reports etc then they could be sending their men into god knows what. As you say yes in some (not many) situations it makes sense, but I think in most it is obvious it should not happen. I fail to see how this adds to the game.

I mean dude, this game is full of the downright dumbest rules in wargaming hands down. Everything from single models beating 400 models in combat because he is immune to battle shock to shooting crossbows while having your face eaten by dragons while fighting them with your knife and the most recent example of killing men because their pikes are too high. Unless you are advocating my pike men lie down (legal by the rule too) and face backwards as they fight their battles, avoiding enemies charing their spears and avoiding their pikes pointing into the sky? Because that is just getting pedantic over something any good rule set will fix with real rules.

Can I ask you honestly, what do you actually like about this rule set that no other game can offer?



Bottle, this whole game needs to be house ruled. From start to finish, but at that point why waste time? May as well play a real game with those cool models. I should not have to house rule in to a game that a wall is good for cover...

A lot of your arguments seem to be a disconnect from previous Warhammer abstractions and AoS abstractions. So I won't bother arguing further with examples of trying to make the transition easier for you. I can understand how this can be aggravating though. Everyone who has seen a major overhaul in their favouate war-game (indeed PC game) or even going from one system to the next. However, you will soon get over the "this makes no RL sense". Once you adapt to the new games abstractions, it will seem comfortable. I recommend you to have an open mind and spend the time getting to know these mechanics and game play.

On the question of what I like about this rule set, Id have to say many many things. Is it the best, most perfect game there is atm? Unlikely that answer can ever be a yes with such a high variety of tastes in the world. Do I think they achieved a great game here? Yes! Infact, I would say its a stroke of genius. My favourite thing about AoS rules is the complexity of gameplay it creates from super simple ideas and rules. Much like the game of chess or the complexity of human life from 4 DNA bases. This was not something I appreciated (ateast until my 4+ game) at first. However, at the moment, I am having more fun with AoS than my previous 20 years of wargaming experiences. And isn't that what its all about?

Fair enough. I actually didn't like Fantasy very much (40k is tolerable but I have some cool armies for it so I play it still) I just think AOS is frankly the worst rule set I have seen. Believe me I know that with house rules, ignoring some rules and lots of knowing your opponent and discussing this game may be a little playable (just like 40k), but I also think AOS is a whole new level of terrible rules. I wish I could understand why people like it, but I am not gonna spend more than a few test games to try find some redeemable aspect of this game. I watched battles as I painted stuff (I am watching mission 3 of the starter as I paint some 6mm Lizards right now) and frankly the only thing I can see that is any good is being able to take whatever you want. But then again what ruleset does not allow that with a simple house rule? In my opinion better off playing a real game with one house rule for using whatever units to want, then play a game that allows any units you want but have to house rule everything else.

Ultimately, if you enjoy that is fine I don't mind (not that it matters if I ming haha). I just hope if anyone new to wargaming reads this they decide to not walk into GW and spend money on this when they can play something decent that will give them a great and balanced tme for their money. Especially at prices GW charges.

Heck if I have lances pointing upwards on my knights then most terrain means nothing since people can shoot the lance tips. That alone should tell you how bad it is... Hills need to be very tall hills in this game to stop my unfortunately armed knights from being shot through the hill.

your gaming friends must be real douchebags if you agreed that lance tips count as the models when hiding behind terrain either way you clearly ignored the most important rule, literally called "the most important rule"(read it up) because you must have agreed that shooting lance tips is ok or let your opponent do so without discussing it either way it seems to me you have no idea how to play the game and/or you play with total douchebags and let them get away with abusing the game...

more or less its your own fault.... and no, having it written in the rules that "lance tips do not count" is not a necessity, if you need your hand held whilst playing this game you should play something else or get people who are not total douchebags to play with you.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ultimately, if you enjoy that is fine I don't mind (not that it matters if I ming haha). I just hope if anyone new to wargaming reads this they decide to not walk into GW and spend money on this when they can play something decent that will give them a great and balanced tme for their money. Especially at prices GW charges.

its a GW game and they can charge what they want, I have never had a problem with their prices (apart from their tools, cheaper ones and better quality elsewhere, particulary the drills) either way why complain about GW if you do not collect or pay for it? surely leave the critique to the actual collectors and players.. or you do buy their stuff in which case begs to question why you complain about their prices... do not buy it :/

bitethythumb wrote:

Heck if I have lances pointing upwards on my knights then most terrain means nothing since people can shoot the lance tips. That alone should tell you how bad it is... Hills need to be very tall hills in this game to stop my unfortunately armed knights from being shot through the hill.

your gaming friends must be real douchebags if you agreed that lance tips count as the models when hiding behind terrain either way you clearly ignored the most important rule, literally called "the most important rule"(read it up) because you must have agreed that shooting lance tips is ok or let your opponent do so without discussing it either way it seems to me you have no idea how to play the game and/or you play with total douchebags and let them get away with abusing the game...

more or less its your own fault.... and no, having it written in the rules that "lance tips do not count" is not a necessity, if you need your hand held whilst playing this game you should play something else or get people who are not total douchebags to play with you.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ultimately, if you enjoy that is fine I don't mind (not that it matters if I ming haha). I just hope if anyone new to wargaming reads this they decide to not walk into GW and spend money on this when they can play something decent that will give them a great and balanced tme for their money. Especially at prices GW charges.

its a GW game and they can charge what they want, I have never had a problem with their prices (apart from their tools, cheaper ones and better quality elsewhere, particulary the drills) either way why complain about GW if you do not collect or pay for it? surely leave the critique to the actual collectors and players.. or you do buy their stuff in which case begs to question why you complain about their prices... do not buy it :/

Oh cool its my friends fault we played the rules as written for some test games. Is this called victim blaming? If not lances where do we draw the line?

I don't know man, sounds like you just told me to change crappy rules writing in defence of crappy rules...

Yea they can charge what they want, I didn't say otherwise. Doesn;t change the fact they are a rip off 99% of the time. I do not buy it unless I can get them at reasonable prices. Chances are here in NZ I have to pay double what you do, so please tell me more about how GW doesn't rip me off.

Also what matters more if you own a business, why people don;t buy or why people who buy still buy? One leads to growth and the other leads to stagnation or decline, guess what's happening to GW... (Hint it's decline, and with rules like AOS it doesn't take a genius to figure out why).

Oh cool its my friends fault we played the rules as written for some test games. Is this called victim blaming?

lol "victim blaming" really? you see yourself as a victim... lol

" If not lances where do we draw the line? "

again, read the "most important rule" or if that is too hard let me copy and paste it for you


THE MOST
IMPORTANT RULE
In a game as detailed and wide-ranging as
Warhammer: Age of Sigmar, there may be
times when you are not sure exactly how to
resolve a situation that has come up during
play. When this happens, have a quick
chat with your opponent, and apply the
solution that makes the most sense to you
both (or seems the most fun!). If no single
solution presents itself, both of you should
roll a dice, and whoever rolls higher gets to
choose what happens. Then you can get on
with the fighting!

bitethythumb wrote:

Oh cool its my friends fault we played the rules as written for some test games. Is this called victim blaming?

lol "victim blaming" really? you see yourself as a victim... lol

" If not lances where do we draw the line? "

again, read the "most important rule" or if that is too hard let me copy and paste it for you


THE MOST
IMPORTANT RULE
In a game as detailed and wide-ranging as
Warhammer: Age of Sigmar, there may be
times when you are not sure exactly how to
resolve a situation that has come up during
play. When this happens, have a quick
chat with your opponent, and apply the
solution that makes the most sense to you
both (or seems the most fun!). If no single
solution presents itself, both of you should
roll a dice, and whoever rolls higher gets to
choose what happens. Then you can get on
with the fighting!

After playing AOS yea I feel a bit violated.

Sorry mate... remind me about the bit that's unclear when it comes to measuring from the model for line of sight purposes? Because that rule is clear in AOS so that rule you quoted, while nice, does not apply here.

After playing AOS yea I feel a bit violated.

Sorry mate... remind me about the bit that's unclear when it comes to measuring from the model for line of sight purposes? Because that rule is clear in AOS so that rule you quoted, while nice, does not apply here.

yea I would not like to play with you in any game settings, you are extremely pedantic in your rules but lets see... here is the rule you think is very clear.#

PICKING TARGETS
First, you must pick the target units for
the attacks. In order to attack an enemy
unit, an enemy model from that unit must
be in range of the attacking weapon (i.e.
within the maximum distance, in inches,
of the Range listed for the weapon making
the attack), and visible to the attacker (if
unsure, stoop down and get a look from
behind the attacking model to see if the
target is visible). For the purposes of
determining visibility, an attacking model
can see through other models in its unit.

you seem to think THAT means "lance tips count"... and that the "most important rule" (even though it clearly does and any sensible player would agree that lance tips do not count) does not apply... yea you are one of "those" players... anyways, good luck, enjoy whatever game you want and all the best

bitethythumb wrote:

After playing AOS yea I feel a bit violated.

Sorry mate... remind me about the bit that's unclear when it comes to measuring from the model for line of sight purposes? Because that rule is clear in AOS so that rule you quoted, while nice, does not apply here.

yea I would not like to play with you in any game settings, you are extremely pedantic in your rules but lets see... here is the rule you think is very clear.#

PICKING TARGETS
First, you must pick the target units for
the attacks. In order to attack an enemy
unit, an enemy model from that unit must
be in range of the attacking weapon (i.e.
within the maximum distance, in inches,
of the Range listed for the weapon making
the attack), and visible to the attacker (if
unsure, stoop down and get a look from
behind the attacking model to see if the
target is visible). For the purposes of
determining visibility, an attacking model
can see through other models in its unit.

you seem to think THAT means "lance tips count"... and that the "most important rule" (even though it clearly does and any sensible player would agree that lance tips do not count) does not apply... yea you are one of "those" players... anyways, good luck, enjoy whatever game you want and all the best

But you measure everything from any point of the model including line of site, where does it say lance tips are not included as they are part of the model?

I mean to everyone who has played this the rules are you measure everything from any part of the model. The rule you just quoted does nothing to change that. The rule is very very clear, you see the model (the lance is apart of the model yes? I believe so...) then you shoot it. Just like I can charge someone's lance tip and kill them.

Feel free to house rule it mate, but that does not change the fact these rules are gak.

Also you have no idea how I play. If I had to play this crappy game I would house rule it. But please insult me for something you don;t know for sure, it just shows you are desperate. If you look at my battle reports for 40k you will find I play just like you... I just think AOS is the worst ruleset in existence and frankly will not put my precious time to house rule the whole ruleset.

Wait so every game I saw online are made up of "those guys" for measuring from the model as per rules... dude I think you need to lay off the insults.

 Swastakowey wrote:
Hahaha ok ok mate...

AoS you have so many options on how units help each other now as well as heroes and the terrain

What wargame does not do this? In fact I will go as far to say all wargames do this better. Name a game where terrain and models don't interact to provide depth, then name a game where AOS beats others here. Tip: There is none. Can't you charge models you can't see? I am very sure there are models that can burrow into the ground and not be interacted with (good luck shifting that objective holder and or killing it) and many more broken shenanigans that make these interactions with the terrain and other models you praise pretty bad dude.

Its fine to like a terrible game dude, just at least admit it is terrible.

Yes it's one of the worst tt wargames ever released, especialy given the context of it being a reboot of a decent system from a big company. Non of the detail and tactics from skirmish games, no or at best little strategy and tactics from regiment games. Initiative roll just because and whole ruleset is like that. Without the gw stamp noone would bother tbh.

Plumbumbarum wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Hahaha ok ok mate...

AoS you have so many options on how units help each other now as well as heroes and the terrain

What wargame does not do this? In fact I will go as far to say all wargames do this better. Name a game where terrain and models don't interact to provide depth, then name a game where AOS beats others here. Tip: There is none. Can't you charge models you can't see? I am very sure there are models that can burrow into the ground and not be interacted with (good luck shifting that objective holder and or killing it) and many more broken shenanigans that make these interactions with the terrain and other models you praise pretty bad dude.

Its fine to like a terrible game dude, just at least admit it is terrible.

Yes it's one of the worst tt wargames ever released, especialy given the context of it being a reboot of a decent system from a big company. Non of the detail and tactics from skirmish games, no or at best little strategy and tactics from regiment games. Initiative roll just because and whole ruleset is like that. Without the gw stamp noone would bother tbh.

Bang on. Had someone released these rules for free and tried to sell the starter set on kickstarter at the GW price (Which is priced differently in each region) then I bet even the people who try defend this "game" will laugh them off the kickstarter. I don't understand why a GW sticker means anything. Funny how that works.

I am struggling to think of a worse wargame to be honest. As you said combined with the fact we have the top (declining thankfully) wargames company in size who created these rules it is frankly worse than if some kid could of written this during his english class. Crazy stuff man.

Hmmm, can we reclassify AoS as a model showcase game instead of a tabletop game.

For a painting and modelling genitals measuring contest the free rules work just fine (don't know why you'd pay from them though).

Played my first game a couple weeks ago- Skaven vs. Orks (or whatever the armies are being called now...). I should add that the Ork player also had 4 Stone Trolls. See my post here.

It's a game that can't be taken too seriously. There were a couple times when my opponent and I would get into these "deep philosophical discussions" about some of the rules (I won't bother to say which ones- it's not worth it), and we would just stop and say "we're reading too much into this, let's just play".

We tried measuring from model to model, and you can see where that both helped me and hindered me with my Skaven Grey Seer and his tail + ragged robe than allowed my opponent's Black Orcs to move into close combat with him. Can't see if measuring base to base is that much better- because you can now overlap basses. Neither myself or my opponent had any significantly large bases with lots of modeling elements, but if I had a hero on a 40mm base all painted up, with some dramatic bits and static grass, skulls, etc. I might say something when my opponent tries to stack 10 15mm bases on it to attack. So some common respect should be used here.

It doesn't feel like a very "deep" game. As in maneuvering your models is not as critical as it once was. There are no flanking bonuses, so trying to run around models or units just delays the combat. Being able to shoot and charge in the same turn makes some units very, very powerful. Multi-charging is a thing, and in some cases, can be very beneficial as we found out in our game.

At the same time we were playing this game, two other people were playing Daemons vs. Skaven, and it was a "here are my 6 Daemon Princesses, a Greater Daemon of Khorne, and a unit of Nurglings." His opponent "Thott and Boneripper, HPA, 2 Warp Lightning Cannons, 4 Storm Fiends, Verminlord". Their game lasted all of one hour and ended when the last Greater Daemon of Khorne was shot off the table on turn 4. My point here is that the game can be very fast and brutal if you go that route. The first player to set something down on the table sets the pace for the entire game. If you set down 10 Skaven Clanrats, I could go over the top and put a Greater Daemon of Khorne on the table. Or i could respond in kind and out out 10 Empire Pistolers. If I go the Daemon Prince route, then it's like opening the flood gates to "Oh, it's going to be one of those games? OK, here is my HPA".

With the Warscrolls in place now, there is no way to play this game in a tournament setting. It can't balance by wounds- 12 wounds of Skaven Clanrats are not equal to a Dark Elf Sorcerer on a black dragon. It can't balance it by Warscrolls either. Some Warscrolls are just way, way over the top, and others are so generic and bland that it's like "Why would I ever take that one?". With no points and the way options are handled in the Warscrolls "Some Vampire Lords use swords, some use Lances, some use big axes, and some just use their strength and teeth. Here are the rules for each option..." (not a direct quote, just used for illustration purposes), it's impossible to adjust/balance each Warscroll against all the other Warscrolls.

There will be house rules aplenty for this game, and going from venue to venue will get frustrating as each one will probably play AoS drastically different. It will be interesting to see the ideas people come up with to play this game competitively or in a tournament.

For me it will be a fun game that doesn't require much "investment" from me to play. Investment as in won't have to think too hard about deployment or movement, or anything else. It's simplicity to play is probably it's biggest advantage, but could become very stale very quickly. Certainly nothing like Warmachine/Hordes or Drop Zone Commander, or even FoW with the far more complex rules system, movement, and attacking. For more "depth" or "meat", I'd play some other game instead of AoS.

Closing thought: As it's such a simple game to play, it could very well become a "gateway" game for a lot of newer players. They will play it, learn the basics of table top gaming, and then move on to a more complex/challenging game system. Or not. It's all about what you want out of a game.

Just gave the warscrolls another read through to realize that 3+ armor saves (without a buff) are a thing, and not only that... dwarfs only have 1 model with a native 3+ save (well, 2 if your Dwarf Lord has a shield). So do Beastmen... But Bretonnia and Chaos are laden with 3+ saves!

What happened to our mighty Gromril, I wonder? Did we start forging our armor with Ur-gold instead?

 Swastakowey wrote:

bitethythumb wrote:

After playing AOS yea I feel a bit violated.

Sorry mate... remind me about the bit that's unclear when it comes to measuring from the model for line of sight purposes? Because that rule is clear in AOS so that rule you quoted, while nice, does not apply here.

yea I would not like to play with you in any game settings, you are extremely pedantic in your rules but lets see... here is the rule you think is very clear.#

PICKING TARGETS
First, you must pick the target units for
the attacks. In order to attack an enemy
unit, an enemy model from that unit must
be in range of the attacking weapon (i.e.
within the maximum distance, in inches,
of the Range listed for the weapon making
the attack), and visible to the attacker (if
unsure, stoop down and get a look from
behind the attacking model to see if the
target is visible). For the purposes of
determining visibility, an attacking model
can see through other models in its unit.

you seem to think THAT means "lance tips count"... and that the "most important rule" (even though it clearly does and any sensible player would agree that lance tips do not count) does not apply... yea you are one of "those" players... anyways, good luck, enjoy whatever game you want and all the best

But you measure everything from any point of the model including line of site, where does it say lance tips are not included as they are part of the model?

I mean to everyone who has played this the rules are you measure everything from any part of the model. The rule you just quoted does nothing to change that. The rule is very very clear, you see the model (the lance is apart of the model yes? I believe so...) then you shoot it. Just like I can charge someone's lance tip and kill them.

Feel free to house rule it mate, but that does not change the fact these rules are gak.

Also you have no idea how I play. If I had to play this crappy game I would house rule it. But please insult me for something you don;t know for sure, it just shows you are desperate. If you look at my battle reports for 40k you will find I play just like you... I just think AOS is the worst ruleset in existence and frankly will not put my precious time to house rule the whole ruleset.

Wait so every game I saw online are made up of "those guys" for measuring from the model as per rules... dude I think you need to lay off the insults.

no insults intended, if you felt insulted I apologise....

I saw the models in person finally a couple of days ago, and they are technically very well executed. The character riding the monster and the Khorne Lord with leashed flesh hound were the two highlights. Unfortunately the scale, style and size of the models does not appeal to me at all and I hate 32mm bases.

I also spent some time reading all the old Mordheim pdfs, and looking at the new background, I guess it just leaves a sour taste in my mouth. I loved the old fluff for beastmen lurking in the woods around isolated empire/bret settlements, and the raids and battles that could happen. That was some serious atmosphere. Not really feeling the new background at all, to be honest.

At the same time we were playing this game, two other people were playing Daemons vs. Skaven, and it was a "here are my 6 Daemon Princesses, a Greater Daemon of Khorne, and a unit of Nurglings." His opponent "Thott and Boneripper, HPA, 2 Warp Lightning Cannons, 4 Storm Fiends, Verminlord". Their game lasted all of one hour and ended when the last Greater Daemon of Khorne was shot off the table on turn 4. My point here is that the game can be very fast and brutal if you go that route. The first player to set something down on the table sets the pace for the entire game. If you set down 10 Skaven Clanrats, I could go over the top and put a Greater Daemon of Khorne on the table. Or i could respond in kind and out out 10 Empire Pistolers. If I go the Daemon Prince route, then it's like opening the flood gates to "Oh, it's going to be one of those games? OK, here is my HPA".

What keeps me from wanting to take the plunge is that I will likely be fielding a pure Skaven force based around the Island of Blood plastics, with some fun additions from the rest of the Skaven menagerie. I don't want to paint up a cool, fluffy force, if I am going to have to face armies like the first two examples all the time. The problem is that without rules to police players, I see 75% of responses to 10 Skaven Clanrats as being a Bloodthirster.

I don't want a game where I feel I have to field "Thott and Boneripper, HPA, 2 Warp Lightning Cannons, 4 Storm Fiends, Verminlord", as a Skaven "army" to keep my head above water. Although at least that army uses all Skaven models, rather than a force made of 3-4 races' most recent giant plastic kits because that player can buy a half-dozen $70 kits to make an army.

I don't want to invest a ton of time just to end up playing WFB: Apocalypse/ WHB Unbound. I just want battles of Warhammer without giant unwieldy blocks of wound markers for the front rank, which is what AoS started out sounding like.

That sounds more like what the local players are into. If you can't find an opponent who can play without going for crazy overkill, time to convert your family or else play KOW instead?

to me, most of these complaints sound like you want the game to police the players because the players are jerks. If they are such jerks, would you really want to play any game with them?