Switch Theme:

Age of Sigmar N & R: AoS v3 and Dominion p.172.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Because it would be nice if units could have multiple options and all of those options be viable.


Perfect balance is an illusion.

Here, the good part is since there's only one profile, that means it doesn't matter how you build your miniatures. You could even convert a mace instead of a sword, because there is no confusion possible while in game.

It's like KoW : it's a good thing for modelism and creativity.

Sometimes, there is no need to give options when they can make it simple with just one weapon profile. That's how Khorne knights on Juggernaut ended with lances instead of the emblematic axes in Warhammer Battle : because the first was way more interesting in terms of rules with their role as a shock heavy cavalry, even though it has a cost - simply, it was negligible for their profile's gain.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/12 07:03:36


 
   
Made in at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

viable options =/= perfect balance

Togusa wrote:

Been playing video games for over 30 years. If they can't manage it there, it's never going to happen on the tabletop. There is always one option above the rest that will dominate, and when you nerf it, the next thing will take its place

Which games are you playing?

I mean one weapons dominating its class is normal, but one weapon dominating over all available types is rare
that there is 1 best Sniper Rifle is one thing, but the Sniper Rifle dominating over everything and being better than the full Auto in all situations would just be a bad game

that there is 1 weapon that is the best for a specific situation is one thing, but that 1 generic weapons is better than the specific weapon in the specific situations is bad balancing

and this is were GW's rules writing comes in, were the anti-horde weapons as better at killing monsters than the anti-monster weapons
and this is not something I have seen in most video games or wargame

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 07:04:13


Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





Putting fake choices just for the sake of it is not a viable option. If the unit works for a specific role, there is no need to try to put options that wouldn't be necessary and imply a very specific build from the kit (especially if the said options can't be done from just one box because of the lack of needed weapons on the sprue - you criticized GW a lot in the past about that specific part, by the way, you want it back now ? ).

 kodos wrote:

I mean one weapons dominating its class is normal, but one weapon dominating over all available types is rare


It's not rare at all in modern video games - especially the "pay to win" kinds.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/12 07:11:15


 
   
Made in at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

well, if AoS also belongs into the P2W category of games we don't need to talk about it any more, or compare it to the other wargames


Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 kodos wrote:
well, if AoS also belongs into the P2W category of games we don't need to talk about it any more, or compare it to the other wargames


Sure, deflect as usual. You just want to complain about GW and nothing else, anyway.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Togusa wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 lord marcus wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Galas wrote:
I like that blades or lances , they have the same rules.

At this point GW has shown that they aren't capable of balancing normal weapons vs charge bonus weapons for cavalry so they just saying "feth it lets they build them as they want" is actually positive. Specially, with how simple weapon profiles are in aos, you always have one option that is mathematically better agaisnt nearly all cases. Most AoS units would benefit for having a single weapon profile and let the options be aesthetic.
Sadly this is very true.


Why is this sad?
Because it would be nice if units could have multiple options and all of those options be viable.


Been playing video games for over 30 years. If they can't manage it there, it's never going to happen on the tabletop. There is always one option above the rest that will dominate, and when you nerf it, the next thing will take its place. Personally, I like this new apporach. One of the big draws so far for AoS for me has been the ability to model without having to sweat what happens if I pick the "wrong" options. I agree with others that this is a very positive step. The farther they move from trying to be "competitive" and cater to the crowd, the more money I want to give them and the more participation in games I want to do.
Yeah, it is a positive development. That's exactly why it's sad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarouan wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Because it would be nice if units could have multiple options and all of those options be viable.


Perfect balance is an illusion.
Hey it's the perfect balance fallacy! Also known as the 'how to tell someone has no validity to their opinion on balance whatsoever' argument. Been a surprisingly long time since I've seen it on Dakka.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 07:17:16


 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Hey it's the perfect balance fallacy! Also known as the 'how to tell someone has no validity to their opinion on balance whatsoever' argument. Been a surprisingly long time since I've seen it on Dakka.


Not really. It was more to say "watch out for what you're asking for". I don't especially regret the days of Khorne knights on juggernauts being pushed into a weapon option that wasn't emblematic for their god just because one weapon profile is better in the rules than the other for their role. Even if its cost was higher than the less performant one, it was still way more worth it.

It's the same for musicians being generic to all basic units in Warhammer Battle. Sometimes, it just doesn't look good in a unit, yet you put in on your miniature because the rules for musicians in Battle was simply begging you to do so. On the opposite of standard bearers that could cripple you for victory points if you put in on every of your units...so instead of looking cool, your units are pushed in a wrong direction for the sake of rules. That's not good either.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/12 07:24:14


 
   
Made in at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

Sarouan wrote:

Sure, deflect as usual. You just want to complain about GW and nothing else, anyway.

you came up with "this is normal for pay to win games"

so if you think AoS belongs to those games, fine but than don't compare it to other games or come up with this nonsense of "perfect blance is impossible"

you just stated that the bad balance of AoS is intended by the designers to make money
if this is your opinion of the game and your argument for why we don't need to talk about why having viable options would be a good thing, fine we can agree to disagree here

and yes fake choices are a problem and should not be there in the first place
either make it a real choice or remove it as an option
but this does not work with GW's WYSIWYG and "every option on the model must have rules" policy

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 kodos wrote:

you came up with "this is normal for pay to win games"


Nope, just answered your claim it was rare in video games. Told you it's not, and I'm making you remember "pay to win" video games are still video games. You didn't make a distinction in your first post.

Now you try to deflect because you can't counter it, so you go back on complaining on GW's bad choices no matter what they do.

Because, let's be honest here : what they did with Blood Knights is the same that how King of War from Mantic Games works - where it doesn't really matter if you hold an axe or sword in your unit, the profile is generic for the unit, not for each of the miniatures part of it.

But because it's AoS made by GW, suddenly it's a problem ?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/12 07:29:05


 
   
Made in ca
Courageous Beastmaster





I am actually happy to see a more unified weapon profile rather than separate ones. I also hope that the Stormcast Liberators get similar treatment when it comes to their next tome in regards to sword and hammer. They already did something similar to Skullreapers that was a very welcome change.

It also makes the game more enjoyable and accessible. Nobody is going to have fun building 30 Liberators with hammers only for the tome to suddenly make swords good forcing you to buy more units. Not everyone has endless space and money for units. One can forgive it in 40k as usually it is just 1-2 models in a unit that are changing, but for a game that is relatively close to being rank and file it is just too much.

Plus the game's complexity needs to be much larger for changes between weapons to matter, something that Warhammer never really had.

All in all I like it most because it allows me to create the unit I want without worrying about the rules. It gives, me the modeller/painter, the freedom to create.

On the point of balancing it is very hard mainly because you can't balance the unit by itself, but you must balance the entire game around the unit to justify the difference in weapon profiles. It's why we see the endless juggling of "what weapon is best" in 40k. Last edition it used to be Plasma and now it is melta, and before that it was Grav guns, and so on goes the wheel of fortune. So I tend to agree that absolute balance is an illusion. Even video games tend to separate units into explicit differences, like Marines and Firebats in StarCraft and so on.

But because it's AoS made by GW, suddenly it's a problem ?


My experience is the fallacy of many thinking that because GW is big they have absolute power to do things, when the truth is more that GW is still just average humans trying to make their best while also trying to score some money. It would be surprisingly healthy for many to attempt to balance things in homebrew games just to see how large a problem they are trivializing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 09:28:04


-Primary Armies -
Craftworlds | Dark Angels | Death Guard | Sisters of Battle | Chaos Knights | Flesh-Eater Courts | Idoneth Deepkin

- Secondary Armies -
Drukhari | Necrons || Tyranids | Daughters of Khaine | Blades of Khorne | Stormcast Eternals
 
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Broodlord




Lake County, Illinois

 kodos wrote:
viable options =/= perfect balance

Togusa wrote:

Been playing video games for over 30 years. If they can't manage it there, it's never going to happen on the tabletop. There is always one option above the rest that will dominate, and when you nerf it, the next thing will take its place

Which games are you playing?

I mean one weapons dominating its class is normal, but one weapon dominating over all available types is rare
that there is 1 best Sniper Rifle is one thing, but the Sniper Rifle dominating over everything and being better than the full Auto in all situations would just be a bad game

that there is 1 weapon that is the best for a specific situation is one thing, but that 1 generic weapons is better than the specific weapon in the specific situations is bad balancing

and this is were GW's rules writing comes in, were the anti-horde weapons as better at killing monsters than the anti-monster weapons
and this is not something I have seen in most video games or wargame


Well the thing is, in Age of Sigmar it's difficult for weapons to be good in specific situations, because the weapon's effectiveness has very little to do with the situation or the unit you are using it on. The hit and wound roll don't depend on the target unit at all. So the only situation affecting those would be if you or the opponent have an ability that lets you re-roll fails or make you re-roll successes on one of those. Otherwise a 3+ to hit 5+ to wound is the same as a 5+ to hit 3+ to wound.

Because damage carries over between models, the damage characteristic doesn't care about the situation. And rend only matters if the target is something that isn't affected by it at all, or has no save to begin with. So how can you make weapons profiles that are better in certain situations? The core rules don't really make it possible.
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




 kodos wrote:
well, if AoS also belongs into the P2W category of games we don't need to talk about it any more, or compare it to the other wargames


Always have been. Last decade GW decided to follow CCG model of making the players chase the meta.
   
Made in at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

 Albino Squirrel wrote:

Well the thing is, in Age of Sigmar it's difficult for weapons to be good in specific situations, because the weapon's effectiveness has very little to do with the situation or the unit you are using it on. The hit and wound roll don't depend on the target unit at all. So the only situation affecting those would be if you or the opponent have an ability that lets you re-roll fails or make you re-roll successes on one of those. Otherwise a 3+ to hit 5+ to wound is the same as a 5+ to hit 3+ to wound.

Because damage carries over between models, the damage characteristic doesn't care about the situation. And rend only matters if the target is something that isn't affected by it at all, or has no save to begin with. So how can you make weapons profiles that are better in certain situations? The core rules don't really make it possible.

of course the option are limited


but you still can do it, with simple things like +1 Attack VS +1AP, or using the range of the weapon making it even worth using 2 units with different weapons
looking at the early Stormcast Paladin units with 3 different weapons (just messed them up by going with better defence means slower speed which was removed for other similar units coming later)

it is possible to do it, even with the limited options AoS has but it is more work and for sure easier to just leave options behind and make a unit doing 1 thing and nothing more

hence why it is sad that this is happening (neither good not bad, just sad)

Sarouan wrote:
 kodos wrote:

you came up with "this is normal for pay to win games"


Nope, just answered your claim it was rare in video games. Told you it's not, and I'm making you remember "pay to win" video games are still video games. You didn't make a distinction in your first post.


sorry, I did not know that "rare" was not distinction enough
I thought because "rare" does not mean "all of them" it was clear that there are exceptions and because you mentioned Pay To Win as excplicit exception were this is "normal" that you mean AoS is also such an exception were this is "normal"

Sarouan wrote:

Because, let's be honest here : what they did with Blood Knights is the same that how King of War from Mantic Games works - where it doesn't really matter if you hold an axe or sword in your unit, the profile is generic for the unit, not for each of the miniatures part of it.

But because it's AoS made by GW, suddenly it's a problem ?


Well, in KoW units have options that matter as giving up defence to have better offensive power, get stronger shooting at less range etc.

We are not talking about a Sword must be different than an Axe which are both treated as One-Handed Melee weapons with the same profile

But if a Sword has the same rules as a Lance for Cavalry and in Kings of War, they have not
there is even a difference if Cavalry has Two-Handed Swords or Lances, somehting simple like always +1 VS +2 on the charge
Or Infantry havin Sword+Shield can exchange them for two-handed weapons (+1 Strength, -1 Defence) or 2 hand weapons (+1 Attack, -1 Defence) with none of them being mathematically better than others without considering the unit they fight against

but I guess this is already pay to win for you or not perfectly balanced any more but for sure not a viable option worth having and KoW would be better off if all units whould have the same

PS: just to be clear, if we talk about AoS and your only argument is "but Kings of War", this is called whataboutism and not considered a good argument in discussions

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/12 10:13:57


Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

Theres only three real differences in weapons options that AOS ruleset supports:

-Range: You can have options of sword/X and spears in a unit. The only real difference is: take swords in small units spears in big. For such an obvious choice the game would lose nothing for it being removed.
-Elite vs Chaff: One option can have more, weaker attacks, and other less, stronger ones. But even there, with damage spillover and only rend being relevant, most of the time you end up with one option being better all around.
-Meele vs Ranged: This is an obvious difference, not many units can take a choice of weapon between meele and ranged but this is a real option. In reality most units are separated between shooting and meele units.

With ranged weapons, the Range variance is more relevant but with how little impact AoS terrain does and how fast everything is, not even that much.

So in conclusion, most units would benefit from having just one weapon option and as much weapon profiles as needed: A special weapon for X models in a unit for example, meele and ranged profiles for the same weapon, etc...

EDIT: Reading Kodos I forgot about the option of offense vs defense. Thats a good one that AoS support. Taking a second weapon vs taking shields or two handed weapons vs weapon and shield, for example.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 12:49:11


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Infiltrating Broodlord




Lake County, Illinois

So, setting aside ranged option which is often going to be a different unit, I guess you still could have:

2-handed weapon which has low attacks but better rend (situational because it could be slightly better than having many attacks with no rend against a unit with good saves)

weapon in each hand which gives more attacks but without rend (opposite situational benefit from the above)

weapon and shield which has low attacks and rend but gives some kind of defensive benefit, so could make them better at surviving against certain kinds of attaks

spear and shield, which has longer range but maybe less likely to hit, so it's better if the unit is big? I'm not sure it's very "situational", since you control how the the unit is at least to start with, so it might make the choice pretty obvious, but they will degrade more as they lose models, so it is a little different. And a big block of guys with spears looks cool, so I'd hate to lose it.

So really, I guess you could have about the same options with similar benefits/drawbacks to what you would have had in warhammer fantasy. It just doesn't feel like it would make that big of a difference, compared to the special rules and command abilities that seem like they do more.

   
Made in fi
Charging Wild Rider





Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 lord marcus wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Galas wrote:
I like that blades or lances , they have the same rules.

At this point GW has shown that they aren't capable of balancing normal weapons vs charge bonus weapons for cavalry so they just saying "feth it lets they build them as they want" is actually positive. Specially, with how simple weapon profiles are in aos, you always have one option that is mathematically better agaisnt nearly all cases. Most AoS units would benefit for having a single weapon profile and let the options be aesthetic.
Sadly this is very true.


Why is this sad?
Because it would be nice if units could have multiple options and all of those options be viable.


Been playing video games for over 30 years. If they can't manage it there, it's never going to happen on the tabletop.
I certainly wouldn't say they "can't manage it there". One of my favourite sets of weapon profiles is probably in the skirmish game Battle Brothers, where each weapon had such specific and different abilities (stun with clubs, bypass shields with flails, destroy shields with axes, parry with swords, spearwall with, well, spears), that it was actually impossible to really compare them. Some combinations were perhaps worse (why have axes if already having flails?), but all weapons had a role. The same level of detail doesn't always make sense in a larger scale game however, and, as said above, the design space in AoS is overall pretty limited. Fewer but more variable and interesting choices combined with freedom to model figures for aesthetics seems beneficial over marginally different options that are effectively the same or clearly unbalanced.
   
Made in fi
Dakka Veteran




Vihti, Finland

Legion of Night: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/05/12/5-reasons-to-pledge-your-allegiance-to-mannfred-von-carstein/

Legion of Night can take Vargheist as battleline for some reason.

And probably one of the more annoying abilities:


   
Made in us
Lone Wolf Sentinel Pilot





Fly High but only for Mannlet so I don't imagine it'll be that great in practise.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 13:44:35


 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

 Coenus Scaldingus wrote:
Togusa wrote:
Spoiler:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 lord marcus wrote:
 NinthMusketeer wrote:
 Galas wrote:
I like that blades or lances , they have the same rules.

At this point GW has shown that they aren't capable of balancing normal weapons vs charge bonus weapons for cavalry so they just saying "feth it lets they build them as they want" is actually positive. Specially, with how simple weapon profiles are in aos, you always have one option that is mathematically better agaisnt nearly all cases. Most AoS units would benefit for having a single weapon profile and let the options be aesthetic.
Sadly this is very true.


Why is this sad?
Because it would be nice if units could have multiple options and all of those options be viable.


Been playing video games for over 30 years. If they can't manage it there, it's never going to happen on the tabletop.
I certainly wouldn't say they "can't manage it there". One of my favourite sets of weapon profiles is probably in the skirmish game Battle Brothers, where each weapon had such specific and different abilities (stun with clubs, bypass shields with flails, destroy shields with axes, parry with swords, spearwall with, well, spears), that it was actually impossible to really compare them. Some combinations were perhaps worse (why have axes if already having flails?), but all weapons had a role. The same level of detail doesn't always make sense in a larger scale game however, and, as said above, the design space in AoS is overall pretty limited. Fewer but more variable and interesting choices combined with freedom to model figures for aesthetics seems beneficial over marginally different options that are effectively the same or clearly unbalanced.


I just want to say that kudos for mentioning battle brothers. I put 80 hours in the alpha alone before the map rework (Where you could only explore the map and fight undeads , goblins and orcs) . Beautifull game, and I have taken a ton of inspiration in how to make different medieval weapons feel tactically usefull in my homebrew RPG system without making them just different kinds of damage dice.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 Arbitrator wrote:
Fly High but only for Mannlet so I don't imagine it'll be that great in practise.


The ability to leave combat before combat has started is a powerful ability for a keystone unit that might well mobbed. Sure its just him, but he's a huge chunk of power and points in one package. Plus it lets you be a touch reckless and even use him to bait your opponent into moving units to close on him only to leap away.

   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Coenus Scaldingus wrote:
I certainly wouldn't say they "can't manage it there". One of my favourite sets of weapon profiles is probably in the skirmish game Battle Brothers, where each weapon had such specific and different abilities (stun with clubs, bypass shields with flails, destroy shields with axes, parry with swords, spearwall with, well, spears), that it was actually impossible to really compare them.


Well, there's something to be said about rock paper scissor begin the most balanced game ever. It's not a dig against Battle Brothers, it's a great game, but having clear X beats Y beats Z matchups often makes rule sets easy to solve.

Which isn't to say GW rule sets are hard to solve.
   
Made in us
Pulsating Possessed Chaos Marine





America

Sotahullu wrote:
Legion of Night: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/05/12/5-reasons-to-pledge-your-allegiance-to-mannfred-von-carstein/

Legion of Night can take Vargheist as battleline for some reason.

And probably one of the more annoying abilities:




Mannfred is now the most amazing donkey-cave in the game

"I charge Mannfred with my big bad"
"Nope"
"I charge Mannfred with my elites"
"nope"
"I charge Mannfred with my easy to kill chaff"
"Yes now it is time to fight..."

narrative forged...

Age Quod Agis 
   
Made in us
Stern Iron Priest with Thrall Bodyguard





 rayphoton wrote:
Sotahullu wrote:
Legion of Night: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/05/12/5-reasons-to-pledge-your-allegiance-to-mannfred-von-carstein/

Legion of Night can take Vargheist as battleline for some reason.

And probably one of the more annoying abilities:




Mannfred is now the most amazing donkey-cave in the game

"I charge Mannfred with my big bad"
"Nope"
"I charge Mannfred with my elites"
"nope"
"I charge Mannfred with my easy to kill chaff"
"Yes now it is time to fight..."

narrative forged...

Brave sir Mannfred bravely ran away,
Bravely taking to his feet,
He beat a very brave retreat.

“I never!” – Mannfred, probably.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 16:23:38


"Three months? I'm going to go crazy …and I'm taking you with me!"
— Vala Mal Doran
 
   
Made in fi
Ye Lord of The End Times (and a good guy)





 Overread wrote:
 Arbitrator wrote:
Fly High but only for Mannlet so I don't imagine it'll be that great in practise.


The ability to leave combat before combat has started is a powerful ability for a keystone unit that might well mobbed. Sure its just him, but he's a huge chunk of power and points in one package. Plus it lets you be a touch reckless and even use him to bait your opponent into moving units to close on him only to leap away.


Unless they nerf his meiee abilities that's lots of melee power you are giving up though

Edit: oh had misread. Start of combat phase. That's def interesting.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 17:37:57


2021 painted/bought: 506/499 
   
Made in at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

 Galas wrote:

-Range: You can have options of sword/X and spears in a unit. The only real difference is: take swords in small units spears in big. For such an obvious choice the game would lose nothing for it being removed.

just to add something that AoS supports but is kind of lost here, you can take 2 small units, one with long range weapons and one with sword+shield
get the one with shields in the first row, and opponents with short range weapons can only attack the unit with better defense while the other unit is save to attack from behind

if this is removed because it is easier for all weapon options being the same, the game will lose on tactical options (and there are not many to begin with)

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in fi
Dakka Veteran




Vihti, Finland

Well I did say Mannfreds ability is "annoying" and unless it is FAQ it means basically that Manny will not be fighting fights he does not want to do. And it is not one use ability!

As (if I remember this corretly) charge phase preceeds combat phase you could charge Mannfred against a unit (or just get within 3" of one) then you could teleport him somewhere else.

   
Made in gb
Ancient Chaos Terminator






Surfing the Tervigon Wave...on a baby.

Sotahullu wrote:

Legion of Night can take Vargheist as battleline for some reason.


Right, so... seems the dynasties and Legions have different 'alt' Battleline units.

Suspect there's 'core' Battleline in the form of Skeletons and Zombies...and then the alt units...

Legion of Night - Vargheist
Legion of Blood - Black Knights
Kastelai Dynasty - Blood Knights
Avengorii Dynasty - Terrorgheists and Zombie Dragons
Vyrkos - Dire Wolves.


Now only a CSM player. 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 kodos wrote:
[
But if a Sword has the same rules as a Lance for Cavalry and in Kings of War, they have not
there is even a difference if Cavalry has Two-Handed Swords or Lances, somehting simple like always +1 VS +2 on the charge


Thing is, in KoW, cavalry units like Basilean Paladin Knights do have Thunderous Charge (2) rule, but no specific options. When you build their miniatures, that means it doesn't matter if you build / convert them with lances or swords or even maces, because in the end what matters is that they're Paladin Knights. They will all use the same rules in the end.

And that's my point with AoS Blood Knights you don't want to see ; it's the same than KoW on that matter. It doesn't matter if you equip the miniatures with lances or swords, they will attack all just the same because they're simply Blood Knights. And like other people here, I think it's good for modelism and balancing the game - the same way it's good for KoW.


Sotahullu wrote:
Well I did say Mannfreds ability is "annoying" and unless it is FAQ it means basically that Manny will not be fighting fights he does not want to do. And it is not one use ability!


Depends. If the opponent also have abilities triggering at the start of the combat phase (like some units choosed to fight at the start of the combat phase), unless rules change in 3rd edition, when it is your opponent's turn he's the one to decide which ability come first. And he will likely choose one of his own.

Meaning units striking first could damage Mannfred during their turn before he's fleeing.

But I agree it's very specific and unlikely to kill him in one phase in all situations...and that sucks for some armies that don't have these tricks anyway and rely heavily on melee still.

Then, it's also one hero unit and in a game where objectives matter.. Having one model escaping death is useless if you lose the game anyway because the rest of your army is dead. Because if Mannfred uses this ability, that means he can't strike at all during this combat phase - and thus, damage no one.

This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2021/05/12 19:58:53


 
   
Made in ca
Excited Doom Diver






 DarkStarSabre wrote:
Sotahullu wrote:

Legion of Night can take Vargheist as battleline for some reason.


Right, so... seems the dynasties and Legions have different 'alt' Battleline units.

Suspect there's 'core' Battleline in the form of Skeletons and Zombies...and then the alt units...

Legion of Night - Vargheist
Legion of Blood - Black Knights
Kastelai Dynasty - Blood Knights
Avengorii Dynasty - Terrorgheists and Zombie Dragons
Vyrkos - Dire Wolves.


Soulblight armies could take vargheists and blood knights as battleline in legions of nagash, so it's all familiar.

Very similar to flesh eaters where each subfaction has different battleline-if units.

Space Wolves 4k
Harlequins 2k
Chaos Knights 2k
Spiderfangs 2k
Ossiarch Bonereapers 1k 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





So...Mannfred and his friends get vargheists as battleline. But probably not the woman who is a vampire/bat/centaur monster and was shown in artwork surrounded by them, as well as having vampires that are more bestial? >:/

I could say the same about Vykros. Vargheist are better suited for other factions

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/12 19:55:39


 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: