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.

Well these been one of things I was never fan when i heard and in practice opinion hasn't changed. It's basically same ones all the time. Hold the line vast majority, gargants always take beast master which is basically "don't get tabled". Hold the line almost same but beast master also covers kragnos. For lumineth prized sorcery is nearly don't get tabled. Then there's plenty of hard ones. Generally ones that require interacting with enemy like vendetta or even worse kill off all the heroes(face flying fox hero with melee army and this one is automatic failure). Then on some have hard restrictions. Stormcast one. Have 2+ cities of sigmar unit survive. Woo. 1/4 units can be(and it's not like 9 units, you have 1/4 rounding up aka 3) COS so...if you have 2(most common way to fit) opponent needs to kill just 1 unit to deny 3vp. And COs aren't generally tough. Getting 4+ units is hard. Basically this is hold the line but LOT harder...

Or the pillars of victory. Only battleline on field is friendly redemeer. Yours and enemy. So not only at least 1 redeemer model needs to survive you need to wipe out enemy battleline AND if you have non-redeemer battleline you need to get your own units get killed! Yesterday I tried this for lolz and it actually literally was decided on do I get my lone fulminator killed or not...

My solution to this: Rate each grand strategy as normal/hard(3 layers might be even better) and give extra vp's on harder ones. Like 5 vp for hard one. I doubt this gets many be used more but at least it gives SOME incentive to use the harder ones...Even better if points would also be dependant on army. Beast master on gargants is way easier than same on say gloomspite, stormcast etc.

You know that if they give rankings to them they'll make the keyworded strats hard, boosting SoB and LR further haha.

Do agree overall though, but i think it's a part due to having generic strategies anyone can use.

Once everyone one gets a 3rd Ed battletome with faction specific strategies then they could probably drop the core ones. But that'll take like half an edition to get to that point

Keep x alive would be easy as rule of thumb(not the stormcast keep 2+ cos units though since keeping 1 isn"' enough and you struggle to fit even 3 into list).

Yea if gw screws things up not much you can do. One has to propose on assumption it's done at least semi-sensibly.

Problem with dropping generics is though the 2 books now out have generally hard ones. Basically then assumption will be you fail gs. And heaven forbid when 1 books gets viable one...

As is the pillars of victory is probably easiest of sce ones!

I actually do not feel Grand Stratagems need to be around at all. KISS is a big deal, grand stratagems are a mechanic that adds more complexity where it isn't necessary. Better to devote that design effort to refining battle tactics.

Assuming they are around I think grand strategies should move to army-specific. There is no way to write a generic set that will not be vastly uneven in application. One of AoS' strengths is the wide diversity in ways to build an army, but it does come back to bite in this instance.

Wouldn't mind seeing them killed but i'm assuming that's not happening so was trying to think a way to improve lousy system.

On topic of hard ones if you play by the book the kruelboy one is flat out impossible half the time on 6 scenarios if opponent chooses. 2 is probably impossible though haven"t measured. 4 scenarios at least you can score

I've said since they were announced that GSes are actively bad and do nothing but reward skew list-building and tabling your opponent, the exact opposite of what a good game objective should reward.

There is a way you could do GSes that wouldn't be bad, but the way they are set up now, they add nothing and actively make the game worse. It's the biggest flop mechanic in 3.0 IMO, bigger even than save stacking, because that's just a simple mechanical fix. GSes need to be either removed completely or totally reworked from the ground up on a very different design philosophy.