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.

 Kriswall wrote:

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
How about being able to buy models in a unit, not blocks?? Sure the minimum is a block, but being able to buy individual
Models would be a help so I'm not 20-40 points short every match.

Pretty much everyone is 20-40 points short every match unless you happen to get lucky with your point values. Having said that, if you're consistently losing, it's not because you're 20 points shy of your opponent. Anyways, having the smaller army gives you a free roll on the Triumph table. That seems worthwhile and can be game changing if used at the right time. I'd prefer being 20 points shy of my opponent pretty much every time. I'd much rather have a Triumph Table roll than an extra Ardboy any day.

ok.. then make your list short on your own then. I want to be able to buy 5 bloodletters if I want. I dont like being short points. try filling 60 points in a demon army. 1 chaos spawn?? oh wow that'll help.../s

being forced to Buying in blocks is lazy.

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
How about being able to buy models in a unit, not blocks?? Sure the minimum is a block, but being able to buy individual
Models would be a help so I'm not 20-40 points short every match.

Pretty much everyone is 20-40 points short every match unless you happen to get lucky with your point values. Having said that, if you're consistently losing, it's not because you're 20 points shy of your opponent. Anyways, having the smaller army gives you a free roll on the Triumph table. That seems worthwhile and can be game changing if used at the right time. I'd prefer being 20 points shy of my opponent pretty much every time. I'd much rather have a Triumph Table roll than an extra Ardboy any day.

ok.. then make your list short on your own then. I want to be able to buy 5 bloodletters if I want. I dont like being short points. try filling 60 points in a demon army. 1 chaos spawn?? oh wow that'll help.../s

being forced to Buying in blocks is lazy.

I can see both sides. I like the block system because it's straightforward. For most kits (there are some exceptions), you buy one box and that's a set amount of points. Done and done, AoS is all about straightforward. And from a tactical level, it also means that during list building finding a way to end up near the point limit without having garbage filler adds some puzzle solving.

But, I would like being able to fiddle with extra models in the cases you're talking about. It (for the most part) wouldn't be hard to split it out into single model buy in, and I'd be fine either way.

The PPC comp system points everything out on a granular level, and GW may have considered this. The GHB points are more or less 20x the SDK ones, a number which specifically puts matched play on the second scale as PPC. I don't think 20 was an arbitrary multiplier, especially when there is some incentive to use smaller numbers so that big battles seem smaller on paper.

[shameless advertising]FWIW it's completely viable to use PPC and GHB armies in the same game, I mostly use PPC lists against my friends' GHB lists all time and have no problems.[/shameless advertising]

The block purchasing thing is only ever an issue for triggering OCD. The games balance is loose enough(not broken or unfair or random like some unpleasant people like to spout) that 40-60 points is unlikely to ever make a significant difference, especially with triumphs existing. In fact I'd like to see 40k go to the same system. There's no reason to buy units model buy model, when was the last time you saw someone with 7 tactical marines? People either buy the minimum size or the maximum size, it's silly to keep by model pricing.

That said 40k does have upgrades you can buy and if they wanted to make it so that every army hit exact points you could have an upgrade you could buy, so for 20 pts you get to reroll one dice in 1 combat phase, 40 points you get that+1 dice in the hero phase 60 you get both of the previous 2 + 1dice in the charge phase.

Basically keep buying in blocks the same but add a cheap upgrade you can buy for some additional help like bloodbowl has.

I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

Not to mention Nurgle units in multiples of six, Slaanesh units in multiples of seven, Khorne units in multiples of eight and Tzeentch units in multiples of nine...

 Ghaz wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

Not to mention Nurgle units in multiples of six, Slaanesh units in multiples of seven, Khorne units in multiples of eight and Tzeentch units in multiples of nine...

Not to nitpick, but Slaanesh as youngest is 6, Nurgle is 7.

 arinnoor wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

Not to mention Nurgle units in multiples of six, Slaanesh units in multiples of seven, Khorne units in multiples of eight and Tzeentch units in multiples of nine...

Not to nitpick, but Slaanesh as youngest is 6, Nurgle is 7.

As both a Slaanesh and Nurgle player I believe your correction was not only acceptable, but absolutely nessisary.

I blame it on Tzeentch, the Changer of Posts

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

Would you though? Unless you're going for a specific break point or have leftover points what real incentive is there? The 2 best ways to run units are exceedingly large to get and maintain the unit bonuses or very small to mitigate battleshock and forcing your opponent to overkill and waste wounds.

If you could run 3 squads of 7 liberators or 4 squads of 5 liberators and both would fit equally well into the list there's just never a reason to take the 3 squads.

ERJAK wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

Would you though? Unless you're going for a specific break point or have leftover points what real incentive is there? The 2 best ways to run units are exceedingly large to get and maintain the unit bonuses or very small to mitigate battleshock and forcing your opponent to overkill and waste wounds.

If you could run 3 squads of 7 liberators or 4 squads of 5 liberators and both would fit equally well into the list there's just never a reason to take the 3 squads.

Less activations. With 3 squads you get a higher model count and thus maximize damage, 4 squads and the risk of one of them being wiped out before realiating increases. doubly so because they have less wounds.

Lord Kragan wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if there were model-by-model pricing then we'd see plenty of 15-man daemon units, 50-man goblin units, 4-man ogre units, etc. All of which aren't possible right now.

Would you though? Unless you're going for a specific break point or have leftover points what real incentive is there? The 2 best ways to run units are exceedingly large to get and maintain the unit bonuses or very small to mitigate battleshock and forcing your opponent to overkill and waste wounds.

If you could run 3 squads of 7 liberators or 4 squads of 5 liberators and both would fit equally well into the list there's just never a reason to take the 3 squads.

Less activations. With 3 squads you get a higher model count and thus maximize damage, 4 squads and the risk of one of them being wiped out before realiating increases. doubly so because they have less wounds.

Fewer, larger units are always better when resolving combat in an alternating activations environment. If we had alternating activations overall... as in, if I fully activated (movement, shooting, combat) a unit and then you and then me, etc, etc... it would probably be better to have more smaller units. Then you could activate a few that don't matter to force your opponent to activate his more important ones. Then you could react with your more important ones. That's how Star Wars Armada works.

Left my feedback on the Ironjawz. I love 'em, but they could use some points adjustments, especially for Gordrakk vs. a Megaboss on a Maw-Krusher. He is not worth 700 points vs. 520. The Megaboss on foot is just about perfect for his points. Love his abilities, and he really is a great beatstick, though maybe not as good as some others in the game. I'd like to see the Warchanter get some more utility- like placing totems on the ground with different effects like +1 Bravery, or heals a wound on models... he is great now, but could be a lot better. The Weirdnob Shaman just doesn't work. His spells have too high of a casting cost, are far too random, and he has a 1 in 6 chance of doing d3 Mortal Wounds to a friendly unit within 10". This happens if the spell is successfully cast or not. Basically, he is the worst wizard in the game for 140 points.

The Brutes are perfect, while the Gore Gruntas could probably get bumped up to 200 or 220 points. I'd like to see their Charge ability changed. They are fast enough, and when combined with the right Warscroll and Destruction ability, they never charge more than a couple inches, much less 8".

The 'Ardboyz are a great unit, but a bit over costed. They should be around 150. Also, they should be Battlalion choice in all pitched battles, not just in Ironjawz armies.

The Warscrolls are OK, except the Weirdnob- far too expensive for what you get. Brawl isn't bad, but duplicates the ability of the Megaboss. Ironfist is probably the best as it buffs a boss model, and gives you a free d6" move in the Hero phase, helping to make up for the slow Ironjawz.

For the General's Handbook- Pitched Battles Three Places of Power, the victory conditions don't cover what happens if a player has more Victory Points then his opponent, but the game ends on say, turn 4. As in, what happens if the player with more VP's is wiped off the board before turn 5?

Battle Brew should be changed to once per game, and it should be explicitly stated that only one of each artifact may be taken.

I had a bunch of other, smaller issues, but others brought them up. I'm really excited to see what GW does with AoS and the General's Handbook!