Switch Theme:

PPC - Comp rules discussion thread  [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 us
Regular Dakkanaut




Once again , a lot of great stuff!! Looking forward to logging in some hours at my LGS so I can get some new recruits!
   
Made in us
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant





Illinois

Trying to comp this game is nearly impossible and I thought today that limiting the size of the case you bring your minis in would help. So lets say we want a small game we decide that you can only bring what you can fit in a small gw case. Gobblins can go 2-3 per slot but warriors of chaos only 1. Looking at that things like skaven you will get lots of but if you want a bell you are taking up the space of about 40 clanrats or so. Its a trade off. My ogres will fit significantly less then other things but power wise its similar

RoperPG wrote:
Blimey, it's very salty in here...
Any more vegans want to put forth their opinions on bacon?
 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




namiel wrote:limiting the size of the case

Thanks for the post, namiel...but not entirely sure I can fit it into the PPC

Haldir wrote:Looking forward to logging in some hours at my LGS


Haldir, please take some photos and post, it would be awesome!

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






I just want to say I have had nothing but balanced games with PPC thus far. I have had some rather crushing victories and losses, but these have been clearly related to tactics/dice rather than blatant imbalance. One game even came down to my opponent's general (his last model in play) killing my general (GUO, my last model in play) and dying in the process, leaving both of us tabled on the 7th turn of the game. Not sure if it gets more balanced than that. PPC has taken off with others at the FLGS too, who seem to be getting good results as well. So thank you and great job Attilla, keep up the good work!

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




NinthMusketeer wrote:One game even came down to my opponent's general (his last model in play) killing my general (GUO, my last model in play) and dying in the process, leaving both of us tabled on the 7th turn of the game.

Haha what an awesome sight!

NinthMusketeer wrote:
PPC has taken off with others at the FLGS too, who seem to be getting good results as well.

That's really cool! Be sure to point this way if they find anything they feel is odd!

NinthMusketeer wrote:
So thank you and great job Attilla, keep up the good work!


Thanks for the thanks, and thank you for contributing, mate!

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine






I want to understand why Chaos sorcerers can only summon Death units and Chaos Lords have a crushing limiter to their ability. Why would I bother with a chaos lord only to give me a 10 man unit of marauders? According to your PPC units can daemons can summon 150 points worth of a unit with slightly better odds and possibility of dispel. This in my opinion is not balanced.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






 thejughead wrote:
I want to understand why Chaos sorcerers can only summon Death units and Chaos Lords have a crushing limiter to their ability. Why would I bother with a chaos lord only to give me a 10 man unit of marauders? According to your PPC units can daemons can summon 150 points worth of a unit with slightly better odds and possibility of dispel. This in my opinion is not balanced.
I'm assumingthat the death unit thing is a typo and its supposed to be daemon. As for the chaos lord, that's 10 marauders which come in on a 4+ within 5" of any table edge, any distance from the enemy (as opposed to 9" minimum from summoning spells), and it cannot be dispelled. And as a command ability, he can do this every one of your turns. For a 185 point model that is hardly a slouch in melee it seems balanced (IMO), but I have no actual experience with the model in play.

On a separate note, I've gotten a lot more games in with a number of different models and I am noticing that Ironguts still seem to be outperforming their points. The thing is, 6 Ironguts is much more likely to get all its attacks in melee than its equivalent of normal infantry; between less models and a 2" melee range they have no trouble putting out their average of 18 wounds (not counting saves), and since an individual model can take 3 wounds before the unit loses its attack power they tend to keep their edge a bit more than most units as they take damage. I think a slight increase of 3-5 ppm would do the trick.

Also been noticing Putrid Blightkings over-performing for similar reasons, but mainly because every 6 to hit becomes d6 automatic hits. If these were attacks rather than auto-hits it would be one thing, but as-is they are quite potent right out the gate and respond very well to any sort of buff/re-roll. I'd say again that 3-5 ppm more would be ideal (adjusting the base unit cost appropriately).

In both these examples, perhaps the most telling thing for me is how local players' armies have contained progressively more of these models over time, in favor of everything else. Something else I am looking at is the generic Giant as it seems a bit undercosted for a high and consistent damage output, but I'm not incredibly sure. Chaos chariots might need a reduced points cost, but again I'm not very sure.

On plaguebearers I have some tiny things (on account of a ton of play time with them); Icons could possibly use an increased point cost (20?), and I have found pipers to not be worth 8 points; I think 5 might be better.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in us
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine






I'm sorry if you have no practical experience with the models then how can this "feel" right. I'm sorry but I'm going to stick with simpler comp methods. This feels like trying to make AoS into eighth which it ain't.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Um... Alright. Given your counterarguments it seems like you don't like PPC on an emotional level rather than a rational one, so I'm not going to bother taking it further.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in us
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine






Lol...how can you draw emotion in a forum?
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




thejughead wrote:I want to understand why Chaos sorcerers can only summon Death units and Chaos Lords have a crushing limiter to their ability. Why would I bother with a chaos lord only to give me a 10 man unit of marauders? According to your PPC units can daemons can summon 150 points worth of a unit with slightly better odds and possibility of dispel. This in my opinion is not balanced.


Good to have someone point out stuff with the WoC, now that it has become their turn to become v0.5!

The death unit is indeed a typo.

I will take a look at Chaos Lord again now that it has become WoC's turn to become v0.5, even though he does have a very tactically flexible Command Ability - recieving 40p of troops every other turn could be very vital in objective points based games! But when comparing the ability to any other summoning spell, you have to keep in mind that the others need to pay a large amount of points to even get the spell in the first place.
Once all lists are v0.5, I will turn my eyes towards summoning and tweak the points of all such spells. Depending on the result, the Chaos Lord will have his ability tweaked as well.

NinthMusketeer wrote:On a separate note, I've gotten a lot more games in with a number of different models and I am noticing that Ironguts still seem to be outperforming their points. The thing is, 6 Ironguts is much more likely to get all its attacks in melee than its equivalent of normal infantry; between less models and a 2" melee range they have no trouble putting out their average of 18 wounds (not counting saves), and since an individual model can take 3 wounds before the unit loses its attack power they tend to keep their edge a bit more than most units as they take damage. I think a slight increase of 3-5 ppm would do the trick.

Also been noticing Putrid Blightkings over-performing for similar reasons, but mainly because every 6 to hit becomes d6 automatic hits. If these were attacks rather than auto-hits it would be one thing, but as-is they are quite potent right out the gate and respond very well to any sort of buff/re-roll. I'd say again that 3-5 ppm more would be ideal (adjusting the base unit cost appropriately).


Funny you should mention that - I came to the exact same conclusion when I finished the Lizardmen yesterday and found out that the Kroxigor costs exactly as much as the Ironguts. I could not lower the cost of Kroxigor, which instead lead me to raise the Ironguts to 64 pts! So nice catch there

I will soon play WoC Nurgle myself, so I have looked at units such as the Blight Kings and to my own dismay I know they must raise in cost for this next update. As will the Stormcast Decimators/Retributors/Protectors once their turn arrives. I would very much appreciate if your group could take a look at the WoC after they turn v0.5 and see if the balance feels better.

Once v0.5 is done, and summoning costs tweaked, I will begin working on v0.6 which focuses on monsters. I will save your feedback on Giants until then

thejughead wrote:I'm sorry but I'm going to stick with simpler comp methods. This feels like trying to make AoS into eighth which it ain't.

No need to be sorry for that. In my opinion that is the beauty of AoS - there is a comp for everyone. Some want list building like in 8th, others prefer other ways. However, you could just as easily say that other comps try to make AoS into Warmahordes which it aint, or a third comp tries to make it into Wrath of Kings which it aint. That is as untrue as it is true depending on your view

I will take your comments on Warriors of Chaos into consideration, and I thank you for letting us know instead of just abandoning PPC before telling us - that way others will benefit from your findings!

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Something I'm considering doing for the PPC, that you might be interested in:

Age of Sigmar PPC Unit Cards

Let me know if you think this could be a good idea.

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






I'd be really interested, but only after the lists had been (relatively) finalized, otherwise the points value listed might change.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'd be really interested, but only after the lists had been (relatively) finalized, otherwise the points value listed might change.

Yeah, before v0.8-v1.0 somewhere it just wouldn't be any ... point ...in doing this project

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




That's neat, would be very useful =)
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




I have been using your system now for 3 weeks, and every game seems balanced, amazing. My hope is that you can keep up with the new warscrolls as they come out. Next week we should see the new Stormcast warscrolls. I'm hoping you can get them done ASAP. I apologize for seeming to be pushing you but as a retailer I feel that this system is the best choice available for running competitive events. Maybe you could detail your system for determining points in case the warscrolls start pouring out and you are unable to keep up. Thanks again for your selfless work, it is helping a lot of people!
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Thanks Smellingsalts, always nice to hear the work we do is appreciated

I think that as soon as the current lists have become stable enough, it will be very easy to keep up with future releases as well. All new Stormcast that has been released will be added for the v0.6 release in a few days. and any released after that will swiftly be added in semi-updates (v0.6b,c,d etc).

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in dk
Regular Dakkanaut






Hi Attilla - and great to see that you're still at it! Very much appreciating the work you're putting into this system, we've had some great and nicely balanced games using it - I hope you've been able to use some of Andreas 2.0 and my ideas?

Anyway, been trying a few games with the Chaos 0.5;

As much as it pains me, the cost of blight kings (of which I use 2 x 5 man units) seems more reasonable set at 200 points - they were too good for their cost before.

Still unsure about the giant - it IS good, but it has a VERY random damage output, and several other random effects (like falling on doubles) - I think it is about right at the moment. Compared to the blight kings (at the same cost), it has fewer attacks, fewer wounds, worse save and is more unreliable.

However; I think the chaos trolls are overcosted, compared to the O&G variants - they all roll a D6 pr. model, and heal d3 wounds pr. model on 2+. The chaos variants roll a d6 pr. unit and heals d3 wounds pr. unit. The mutation rule does not make up for this disadvantage, seeing as it's effectively only a 50% chance for each troll of having an additional attack. The Stone Trolls are costed at 175 pt, the rivers and regulars at 190 - I think the chaos trolls are more reasonably priced at Stone Troll level or a bit lower - they're much less survivable.

Coverted Khorne warband, dread, defiler and more: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/395043.page


 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






TBF healing per model or per unit makes no difference, since only one model in the unit can ever have wounds on it (because of the way they are assigned).

On the topic of the Giant I too am still unsure, but leaning towards a price increase. It'll only fall over on 1 out of 6 charges, and in my experience its damage output is more reliable than blightkings. It IS highly variable, but from what I've seen it always does at least a few wounds (and actually has pretty consistent output at 0-2 wounds for 3d6 club attacks), it has attacks to deal with both elite and swarmy enemies, and ultimately seems to have a high average output especially when factoring in 'stuff into bag'. Having fought against both quite a bit, I can honestly say I am more afraid of one giant than 5 blightkings.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in dk
Regular Dakkanaut






 NinthMusketeer wrote:
TBF healing per model or per unit makes no difference, since only one model in the unit can ever have wounds on it (because of the way they are assigned).

On the topic of the Giant I too am still unsure, but leaning towards a price increase. It'll only fall over on 1 out of 6 charges, and in my experience its damage output is more reliable than blightkings. It IS highly variable, but from what I've seen it always does at least a few wounds (and actually has pretty consistent output at 0-2 wounds for 3d6 club attacks), it has attacks to deal with both elite and swarmy enemies, and ultimately seems to have a high average output especially when factoring in 'stuff into bag'. Having fought against both quite a bit, I can honestly say I am more afraid of one giant than 5 blightkings.


I disagree; According to the math, the Giant deals out 7,79 wounds on average (calculated with stuffing in the bag used on a 1 wound model).

The blightkings deal out a whopping 12,275 wounds on average - granted, without any rend stats, but still.

Coverted Khorne warband, dread, defiler and more: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/395043.page


 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Good idea on the math, lets see...

Spoiler:
5 Blightkings
15 attacks = 7.5 regular hits, 2.5 virulent hits (goes to 8.75) = 16.25 average hits
=10.833 average wounds (no armor)
=9.02 (6+)
=7.22 (5+)
=5.42 (4+)


Now comes the Giant (at 0-2 wounds)
average 10.5 clubs = 7 hits = 4.66 wounds (no armor or 6+)
=3.88 (5+)
=3.11 (4+)

'eadbutt = 1.166 average wounds against any of the armor listed

mighty kick = 0.88 average wounds against 5+ or worse, 0.74 against 4+

bag-stuffing against 1-wound models yields 0.833 against all types, though notable that its 1.0 against 2-wound models

with the totals being (using 1-wound for bag stuffing)...
7.54 (no armor or 6+)
6.76 (5+)
5.85 (4+)


Now to add some damage/models unable to attack...

Spoiler:
4 Blightkings (3-5 wounds taken, or one model unable to attack)
12 attacks = 6.0 regular hits, 2.0 virulent hits (goes to 7.0) = 13.0 average hits
=8.66 average wounds (no armor)
=7.22 (6+)
=5.77 (5+)
=4.33 (4+)


Giant (at 5-7 wounds to account for lower save)
average 7 clubs = 4.66 hits = 3.11 wounds (no armor or 6+)
=2.59 (5+)
=2.07 (4+)

'eadbutt = 0.66 average wounds against any of the armor listed

mighty kick = stays the same at 0.88 average wounds against 5+ or worse, 0.74 against 4+

bag-stuffing stays the same at 0.833 against all

with the totals being (using 1-wound for bag stuffing)...
5.48 (no armor or 6+)
4.96 (5+)
4.3 (4+)


And a bit more...

Spoiler:
3 Blightkings (6-8 wounds taken, or two unable to attack, etc)
9 attacks = 4.5 regular hits, 1.5 virulent hits (goes to 5.25) = 9.75 average hits
=6.5 average wounds (no armor)
=5.42 (6+)
=4.33 (5+)
=3.25 (4+)


Giant (at 8-9 wounds)
average 3.5 clubs = 7 hits = 1.55 wounds (no armor or 6+)
=1.30 (5+)
=1.03 (4+)

'eadbutt = 0.66 average wounds against any of the armor listed

mighty kick = stays the same at 0.88 average wounds against 5+ or worse, 0.74 against 4+

bag-stuffing stays the same at 0.833 against all types

with the totals being (using 1-wound for bag stuffing)...
3.92 (no armor or 6+)
3.67 (5+)
3.26 (4+)


Now all in all we can see the blightkings generally do more damage - but that assumes all of the blightkings are able to attack. Even in an open field, its harder to get all 15 attacks with 5 blightkings than it is with 1 giant. Yes, the giant can fall over on a charge, but its also much faster until it takes damage. The blightkings discharge ability can also add damage/healing, but it can hurt your non-nugle models and heal your enemies' nurgle models (TBF this is a big factor in my local meta - a lot of nurgle players). The giant can also swing its primary weapon 3" and its kick at 2" - the blightkings are stuck at 1" for everything. Also a not-insignificant factor is that anything which gives the blightkings a -1 hit penalty significantly nerfs their damage because they can no longer roll 6's (again TBF this may be local meta). Bravery is largely a wash because blightkings have to take a huge amount of punishment at once to even have a chance of failing, and both have a high degree of variation in output (giant has a lot of random but good rend, blightkings are highly dependent on 6's to hit).

After doing all that reasoning... I would recommend a points increase, but not a -giant- one; at 210 I think the ale guzzling monster would be perfect. But I've also noticed that my local meta may play a bigger part than I thought.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






So I looked at the number-crunching you did for the summon values and I think the newer value you came up with the much closer to the mark. Factoring in the actual chance of getting the spell off is pretty important. It looks like this would give some of the higher casting value spells a points cost below the value of what they summon, which is definitely needed given the chance of spell failure (and even if it succeeds several turns into the game, that's several turns you didn't have with the unit just summoned, as opposed to if it was bought instead of the spell). All in all; good work!

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




I was thinking whether it would be beneficial or not to assign a points cost to the general of an army. That way, different command abilities could be priced for, without affecting the basic price of the character. I think this could go a long way in helping balancing characters.

I'll use the Sea Helm as an example here, because I think he is hard to balance. He has a rather crappy statline, so the basic cost has to be rather low or he's not worth bringing out of the box. However, he has a really strong Totem, and a really strong Command Ability. The Totem is already priced for, but the Command Ability is not. Therefore, the basic price has to be higher for him to be balanced, which makes him rather binary. Either the basic price is low, and then he's OP as a general, or the basic price is high, and he's useless if he's not your general. Adding a price for using him as general would solve this issue.

What do you guys think? Are there any drawbacks to doing this? After all, all other options are priced for, so why not put a price on generals as well?
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






It starts to make the system more complicated than it should be imo. Though I like your idea and would personally play it that way, I know that small things like that on top of other small things can very quickly make the overall comp unattractive for players who just want to put models on the table and have fun. Somewhere we have to draw the line and accept that not every option will be completely viable, and having a Sea Helm be viable as an option, if only as the general, may have to be 'good enough'. If that is a change people want overall, then it might be better to pay for the command ability rather than add an extra cost to the general; "upgrade this hero with X command ability for Y points". People who want to use that model as a general can buy the command ability, without having to have separate costs.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Hey all! Been some days since I've written here now. Since then, Dwarfs and Stormcast have become v0.6 and can be found here.

GuitaRasmus wrote:Hi Attilla - and great to see that you're still at it! Very much appreciating the work you're putting into this system, we've had some great and nicely balanced games using it - I hope you've been able to use some of Andreas 2.0 and my ideas?

Anyway, been trying a few games with the Chaos 0.5;

As much as it pains me, the cost of blight kings (of which I use 2 x 5 man units) seems more reasonable set at 200 points - they were too good for their cost before.

Still unsure about the giant - it IS good, but it has a VERY random damage output, and several other random effects (like falling on doubles) - I think it is about right at the moment. Compared to the blight kings (at the same cost), it has fewer attacks, fewer wounds, worse save and is more unreliable.

However; I think the chaos trolls are overcosted, compared to the O&G variants - they all roll a D6 pr. model, and heal d3 wounds pr. model on 2+. The chaos variants roll a d6 pr. unit and heals d3 wounds pr. unit. The mutation rule does not make up for this disadvantage, seeing as it's effectively only a 50% chance for each troll of having an additional attack. The Stone Trolls are costed at 175 pt, the rivers and regulars at 190 - I think the chaos trolls are more reasonably priced at Stone Troll level or a bit lower - they're much less survivable.

Hi GuitaRasmus! Thanks, and I've sure had some very good use out of your ideas - cheers for that!

I got my own Blight Kings for my Nurgle army just days before I made the update, so it sure pains me as well...but yeah they are very good and 40p seems better.

The Giant will stay at 200p for at least awhile longer, as it's not certain if it should go up or down...it then would seem it's pretty solid at where it is. We would need more reports on units such as the giant to change it now.

The Chaos Trolls, as NinthM says, doesn't really benefit from the strange wordings with their heal since you assign wounds to only one model until it dies. Its damage output is greater than a Orc & Goblins Troll, but it is not that great to even out the abilities of Trolls or River Trolls. I think a small change towards Stone Trolls is indeed in order for that reason. I will put them at 180p/60p for now.


Solaris wrote:I was thinking whether it would be beneficial or not to assign a points cost to the general of an army. That way, different command abilities could be priced for, without affecting the basic price of the character. I think this could go a long way in helping balancing characters.

NinthMusketeer wrote:upgrade this hero with X command ability for Y points


It's very interesting you bring this up, as this is something I've been thinking hard about on my walks home from work the past two weeks. I've yet to discuss it with my group, as I'm still on the fence about it. On one hand, it could be a good choice to have the Command Ability as a purchasable upgrade. That way you can pick and choose which ones you want or not. If you play someone like Archaon, you could use them all, but otherwise you would only pay for the one you can actually use. On the other hand, it does add another layer of complexity to the point cost lists. I'm not sure if it's worth it, but would love to have it discussed further.

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




I would urge that if you make a rule that allows you to buy Command Abilities individually, that you divorce it entirely from the army points cost page and keep it in your rules modifications. The reason is that while I really like your points cost system , I do not like some of your rules changes. For instance, while not firing into a combat and getting negative mods for firing into combat seems reasonable to people who were used to the conventions of other mini games, you can make an argument that firing into combat is perfectly reasonable (Legolas in the LOTR movies, Hawkeye in the Avengers, etc). I would just like to use the points system and my own rules mods. Thanks!
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Smellingsalts wrote:
I would urge that if you make a rule that allows you to buy Command Abilities individually, that you divorce it entirely from the army points cost page and keep it in your rules modifications. The reason is that while I really like your points cost system , I do not like some of your rules changes. For instance, while not firing into a combat and getting negative mods for firing into combat seems reasonable to people who were used to the conventions of other mini games, you can make an argument that firing into combat is perfectly reasonable (Legolas in the LOTR movies, Hawkeye in the Avengers, etc). I would just like to use the points system and my own rules mods. Thanks!


It would be even better if you point out which rules are off in your opinion and why - maybe we can change or remove them then. Like for instance, the -1 to hit into combat, do you think the points are balanced even without that rule? If there's enough that believe that they are, there's no point in keeping that rule at all in the PPC. It's really up to the community, and the community is us all Feel very free to speak your mind in this place, we are all in it to improve the game, not to make unneccessary limits to it.

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Personally, I think that change is rather arbitrary to begin with. Sure, it makes sense from a realistic standpoint, but I don't think it's necessary - in fact it might even be counter productive. I think sticking as close to the original rules as possible is the way to go, and handle balance purely by points costs. I think that even if the points aren't balanced after removing the -1, it is still better to remove it and then fix the points.

Paying for Command Abilities is virtually the same as paying for Generals, with one exception (that I know of, there might be more!): the HE Prince on Dragon. His command ability allows three other characters within 16" to use their own command abilities. If you pay points for this ability, does that automatically grant the other characters the possibility of using their own, or do they have to be bought separately?

I think adding an "Upgrade to General" option to characters would be clearer and more intuitive than adding a Command Ability option. After all, you generally pick your General for its Command Ability (at least I do), so it's essentially the same thing anyway.

Edit: I see now that Archaon has a similar Command Ability, which then gives us the same issue. If you buy his Command Ability, it's not absolutely evident that you get access to the Command Abilities of other warscrolls in your army. On the other hand, if you pay to upgrade him to your General, that becomes a non-issue.

I also think that the cost for upgrading heroes without Command Abilities on their warscrolls should be 0 - there should only be a price if the character gains a Command Ability other than Inspiring Presence.

Dunno though, it would make things slightly more complex, and it might not be worth it. I think it is, but you guys don't seem convinced =)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/10 20:12:27


 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Solaris wrote:
I also think that the cost for upgrading heroes without Command Abilities on their warscrolls should be 0 - there should only be a price if the character gains a Command Ability other than Inspiring Presence.
I think we are saying the same thing as you in a different way - rather than a generic "upgrade to general" option it would be models with command abilities do not come with them by default; rather you pay a bit extra to get it (with their base cost reduced to compensate). While I'm not sure about doing something like that at all, I think the latter would be a better way of putting it for both simplicity and options (say you want the model as your general but don't care about the command ability, or if you want models that aren't the general to have theirs for use with abilities like Archaon's).

As for the actual comp, I am very torn because on one hand I like the shooting changes and people I play with usually like them too, but on the other hand simplicity is good. A decent compromise might be to remove the melee penalty rule and keep the screening rule with a bit of refinement to make it more clear (a model is screened if its is more than 50% obscured by terrain and/or intervening models from other units, a unit gains the benefits of screened if the majority of its models are). This creates tactical options and also affects melee since a unit in melee is much more likely to have cover due to intervening (enemy) models than if it is in the open. If the change was made in this way I would make screened have a -1 penalty to hit rather than granting cover (+1 to saves) since units with a save of - don't benefit from the latter. It also makes things that are screened and in cover harder to wound than either individually.

Consider; Games Workshop rules not so much games but as toolboxes for players to craft an experience from, and open/narrative/matched play just examples of how things can be put together. 
   
Made in se
Regular Dakkanaut




Smellingsalts wrote:
Thanks for the encouragement Attilla. Actually there are only 3 sections I don't use from the Comp. Full disclosure, I own a game store, so most of my issues are geared towards growing the community.The first is the Allies rule. Allowing allies grows the community. I remember when Apocalypse came out for 40K. Most of the entrenched community did not like that you could use any models in your collection, but the community grew. Then 6th edition 40K hit, and it allowed unbound armies. Again people grumbled, and again the community grew. AOS has an unfolding story in which Sigmar is actively seeking out allies. I think the only 2 sides that shouldn't be in the same army are Order and Chaos. The other two rules are Shooting into melee and Screening modifiers. This is purely a game balance decision. I used to play Dark Elves and Wood Elves in 8th Edition WFB. Shooting in AOS is nowhere near what it once was. I know that there are some exceptions, and I guess if you just set up across from one another and run at each other then the shooting army could be effective. But if you play the scenarios from the book, there are so many ways to get to a shooting line. Simply going through a Baleful Gate can get you there. Also, if you allow Allies, the traditional non-shooting armies can match arrow fire with opponents. I am currently playing a Chaos army. The current synergy that I can create lets me charge or run an extra 4 inches (Bloodstoker+musician), re-roll failed charges (General ability), and the Chaos Lord can Pile in 6 inches (mark of Khorne). So I can literally charge at the latest turn 2 most gun lines. Once missile troops are engaged, they really suck. In the old days, Dwarf gun lines would take you apart. now they can't stand and fire. In the old days, when I got to the dwarf gun line, they pulled out axe and shield or two handed weapons and went mano a mano. Now they try to hit me with the butts of their guns (needing 5+). I think if you add the modifiers you then have to decrease the cost of missile troops. At that point you are juggling game mechanics and really for little gain. Anyway, that's my opinion.

Want to play a balanced Age of Sigmar?

The Age of Sigmar Project Points Cost!

Points cost for ALL armies, including unit upgrades and special abilities!

http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.com 
   
 
Forum Index » AoS War Council
Go to: