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.

Like many of you, we printed out the Warscroplls this morning, and had a bash this afternoon, Wood Elves vs. Vampire Counts.

You can see the results here;

https://ttgamingdiary.wordpress.com/2015/07/04/age-of-sigmar-battle-report-vampire-counts-vs-wood-elves/

Played a similar game with ogres and orcs, have only good things to say about it.
Did you use front arc line of sight?

Thanks
austin

No, we played the rules 'as is'.

And there were no sideways charging shenanigans?

Thanks
Austin

There really wasn't.

When we started, there were all sorts of concerns - a Necromancer had a staff that jutted out 1 1/2" in front of him, for example, and we thought that might have an effect. It really didn't.

This is just one game (well, two, the Dark Elves game is in full swing now), but we are not seeing any ready issues with the mechanics. Added to that, we actually quite like them, to the extent that if there were points costs and army lists, we would probably be changing systems right now.

In the game that I played, I noticed there is still tactical depth, I found myself doing what I would do in 8th, or hail Caesar etc.

Thanks
Austin

Dumb question.

When you're attacking in close combat, is it simultaneous, or is the person whose turn it is counting as attacking first?

riburn3 wrote:
Dumb question.

When you're attacking in close combat, is it simultaneous, or is the person whose turn it is counting as attacking first?

Person whose turn it is attacls first.

"The player whose turn it is picks a unit to attack with, then the opposing player must attack with a unit, and so on until all eligible units have attacked once each. If one side completes all its attacks first, then the other side completes all of its remaining attacks, one unit after another."

Thanks that's how we played it in our practice game. Just making sure.


As far as lack of points, my friend and I agreed upon a wound total, which worked very well. We played OK versus Britannia, 75 wounds a piece. It was a very balanced game and we got a lot of variety in units.

Wound totals from what me and some friends are talking about isnt balanced at all, its better to eye ball balance than using wounds.

The Mechanics ARE GREAT! but the lack of Easy to balance games with non-friends and new players is something I hate. It doesnt have to be a Point system, some it needs something.

I love the Rules and play style, I just wish it did have a army building system.


PS: Can you do a Large game? And could you do a silly game like All units vs all wizards/Monstrous?

 Amishprn86 wrote:

PS: Can you do a Large game? And could you do a silly game like All units vs all wizards/Monstrous?

Yes, and yes.

Rihgu wrote:

riburn3 wrote:
Dumb question.

When you're attacking in close combat, is it simultaneous, or is the person whose turn it is counting as attacking first?

Person whose turn it is attacls first.

"The player whose turn it is picks a unit to attack with, then the opposing player must attack with a unit, and so on until all eligible units have attacked once each. If one side completes all its attacks first, then the other side completes all of its remaining attacks, one unit after another."

The other thing to note here is that you don't necessarily need to resolve one 'combat' before moving on to the next as far as I can tell. Example:

At the start of a Combat Phase, you have a unit of Spearmen fighting a Skaven Warlord and a unit of Swordmasters in combat with a unit of Clanrats.

For your first attack, you elect to have the Spearmen strike the Warlord, doing a couple of Wounds to him. As there's now nothing else to threaten the Warlord, the Skaven player could actually decide to attack with the Clanrats, trying to put a dent in the SM before they hit. The SM then hit back, and finally the Warlord then hits the Spearmen.

This seems a bit odd at first, but actually means you have to think about what order you attack in; if you don't strike a unit, a clever enemy might take the chance to hit first and at full strength.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, by the way, thanks for the writeup, OP! Are you planning on a report for the second game?

 Paradigm wrote:

Oh, by the way, thanks for the writeup, OP! Are you planning on a report for the second game?

Bit late in the day for that, but we'll likely do another soon!

 Paradigm wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

riburn3 wrote:
Dumb question.

When you're attacking in close combat, is it simultaneous, or is the person whose turn it is counting as attacking first?

Person whose turn it is attacls first.

"The player whose turn it is picks a unit to attack with, then the opposing player must attack with a unit, and so on until all eligible units have attacked once each. If one side completes all its attacks first, then the other side completes all of its remaining attacks, one unit after another."

The other thing to note here is that you don't necessarily need to resolve one 'combat' before moving on to the next as far as I can tell. Example:

At the start of a Combat Phase, you have a unit of Spearmen fighting a Skaven Warlord and a unit of Swordmasters in combat with a unit of Clanrats.

For your first attack, you elect to have the Spearmen strike the Warlord, doing a couple of Wounds to him. As there's now nothing else to threaten the Warlord, the Skaven player could actually decide to attack with the Clanrats, trying to put a dent in the SM before they hit. The SM then hit back, and finally the Warlord then hits the Spearmen.

This seems a bit odd at first, but actually means you have to think about what order you attack in; if you don't strike a unit, a clever enemy might take the chance to hit first and at full strength.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, by the way, thanks for the writeup, OP! Are you planning on a report for the second game?

Yeah i picked up on this too... allowing each "side" to choose the order they resolve fights in could open some layers of melee strategy, and make late game "erruhbuddy's in melee" more interesting than it appears at first glance.