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.
2015/07/02 12:49:46
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Point values aren't needed because of the scaling nature of the battle shock phase and not knowing what your opponent is going to field.
With sudden death victories of one model being alive on turn 6, hold a point on the table by turn 4, kill a powerful single model,or a decent sized unit of your choosing even one sided games are more fair. Especially if you DON'T have to tell your opponent what your objective is. That makes them think about unit placement and board control. That in itself forces tactical decision making. I'm excited, this may get me into fantasy..m
This post makes no sense. Absolute rubbish.
Scaling nature of the battle shock phase? It doesn't scale at all. It's very linear:
Did you lose 1 or more models?
No -> Do nothing
Yes -> (d6 + Dead models) - (Bravery + Models/10). That's not scaling. For every 10 models in your unit you (possibly) save 1 dude. *finger twirl* woohoo
No points needed? With Warscrolls having no limitations beyond "only 1" or "1 to your deployment zone", how do you even begin to make a balanced game? Oh wait, we don't need a balanced game because reasons and Sudden Death!
Except you clearly didn't read Sudden Death. Because your opponent DOES know what your choice was, because in a full half the options HE HAS TO PICK YOUR TARGET!
"You pick assassination? Cool, you have to kill my ubernaught hero back here. I've put him in the back corner, with my deployment zone being nothing but literal shoulder to shoulder dragons and a unit of 100 Warriors of Chaos. Good luck!"
"You pick blunt? Cool, you have to wipe out that unit of 100 Warriors of Chaose. Good luck!"
"You want to get to terrain in my deployment zone? Cool, you will have to kill a model to even take one step. Good luck!"
"Your dude just has to live six turns? Awesome, I'm already outnumbering you 20 to 1 or more, so... Good luck!"
Sudden death is not a balancing factor. Sudden death is a band-aid over a gaping wound of crap tier writing.
You're right, I read the instant death rules wrong. But for scaling of the battle shock, if your unit has a huge pile of models, and I whipe out a significant chunk of them, the unit will drop people like crazy. Bigger units equals better ability to focus, the more damage they take the easier it is to make them run. seems pretty scalable to me.
Let's also not forget that you can always tell your opponent to stop putting models down on the table. Let them outnumber you, sure. But if I'm playing 150 orruks (or whatever they decided to call them) and the guy across the table from me brought 500 sigmarites, I can certainly ask he not put them all on the table because as a decent human being they should see that that would be unnecessary.
We have to look our opponent in the eye at some point folks, they are people too and deserve at least a modicum of respect.
For the Battle Shock, really only your kills on the opponent's units matter. It doesn't scale because even if you would "kill more" (you won't, you'll kill slightly less), those same kills on a smaller unit would wipe it out:
I have 15 models in my unit and bravery 7. You kill 8 models. I'm losing (1-to-6 + 8) - (7 + 7/10) = 2 to 7 models.
I have 150 models in my unit and bravery 7. You kill 8 models. I'm losing (1-to-6 + 8 - (7 + 143/10) = 0 models.
I have 15 models in my unit and bravery 7. You kill 15 models. I don't even take a test, I'm dead.
I have 150 models in my unit and bravery 7. You kill 15 models. I'm losing (1-to-6 + 15) - (7 + 135/10) = 0 to 1 model.
It's not "scaling" at all. It's basically like everyone just got the Strength in Numbers rule that Skaven used to have.
And while I agree that our opponents are people, this isn't A Streetcar Named Desire. We should not have to rely on the kindness of strangers to get a fair and even game. I would say "especially when we're paying for rules", but I suspect GW realized that the rules were so bad that no one would pay for them.
2015/07/02 12:53:32
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Wait.. are those skulls poking out of his guts, too? This is getting just silly.
Yes, I believe you're correct. WT actual F? Well, if nothing else, you can say there's a unifying theme....
Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century: Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others; Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected; Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it; Refusing to set aside trivial preferences; Neglecting development and refinement of the mind; Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do
2015/07/02 12:55:47
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Why is it so hard to fathom that the STARTER box doesn't come with unit point costs(or whatever their new equivalent may be). If the box gives you 10 dudes in unit A and a unit card for unit A, then you already know exactly how many effin dudes are in the unit.
The expansions or "rule additions" they are planning after the starter box will most likely include the unit points/worth or whatever balancing aspect to each unit. Not for a moment did I see this as a game breaking "gap" like the rest of the web is crying about.
I cant recall a single starter box for fantasy or 40k that I have ever purchased that included the units or wargear points costs. Not to say there wasn't one, just not one that I ever purchased.
The rules seem overly simple. Once again, probably due to being a starter box and they want something easy and quick to learn in order to draw in new people. I have no doubt that they will enhance the rules complexity as new content rolls out. A tard could see this coming a mile away.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/02 12:57:18
"It's like the 12 days of Christmas...except its the 12 days of Death" Ian Christe
2015/07/02 12:56:14
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Six mistakes mankind keeps making century after century: Believing that personal gain is made by crushing others; Worrying about things that cannot be changed or corrected; Insisting that a thing is impossible because we cannot accomplish it; Refusing to set aside trivial preferences; Neglecting development and refinement of the mind; Attempting to compel others to believe and live as we do
2015/07/02 13:02:17
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I read the 4 page rulebook last night, this game looks pretty awesome to me! I never, EVER wanted to play fantasy due to the stupid movement rules and the way combat worked in general. Point values aren't needed because of the scaling nature of the battle shock phase and not knowing what your opponent is going to field. With sudden death victories of one model being alive on turn 6, hold a point on the table by turn 4, kill a powerful single model,or a decent sized unit of your choosing even one sided games are more fair. Especially if you DON'T have to tell your opponent what your objective is. That makes them think about unit placement and board control. That in itself forces tactical decision making. I'm excited, this may get me into fantasy..m
You realize that removing characteristics is just dumbing down?
Oh no I can't add up to 36 it's the end of the world
Oh no if I outnumber the enemy because he lost x amount of figures it means he runs away and I can follow and finish him off
It's not stupid it just requires learning a little addition. Or you know I'm sure you have a smart phone with a calculator.
What's next no dice because it hurts your hand. My figues cost 35 pounds I win yay go home poor person?
Yeah this came of more harsh than I meant it but still. Fantasy had more depth and a harder but more rewarding learning curve. Now it's just here you go little Timmy you win yay...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/02 13:03:55
2015/07/02 13:05:21
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Rezyn wrote:Why is it so hard to fathom that the STARTER box doesn't come with unit point costs(or whatever their new equivalent may be).
it's not that there are no point costs in the book. It's that multiple retailers on these boards have ALSO been told that there are no additional rules coming; this is it. Notice that the rules don't even mention points, just "put your models on the table".
agnosto wrote:Your truescale marine prayers have been answered.
But agnosto, they don't look anything like Space Marines!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/02 13:06:18
2015/07/02 13:06:55
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Laughing Man wrote: So GW will really do anything to keep from having to update Brettonians, huh?
GW destroyed the entire WHFB universe to avoid updating Bretonnians.
The whole "Money" thing is just an elaborate scapegoat
Kinda feels like it doesn't it.
Sir Isaac Newton may be the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space, but John von Neumann is the logistics officer that eats your problems and turns them into kit.
2015/07/02 13:13:33
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I read the 4 page rulebook last night, this game looks pretty awesome to me! I never, EVER wanted to play fantasy due to the stupid movement rules and the way combat worked in general. Point values aren't needed because of the scaling nature of the battle shock phase and not knowing what your opponent is going to field. With sudden death victories of one model being alive on turn 6, hold a point on the table by turn 4, kill a powerful single model,or a decent sized unit of your choosing even one sided games are more fair. Especially if you DON'T have to tell your opponent what your objective is. That makes them think about unit placement and board control. That in itself forces tactical decision making. I'm excited, this may get me into fantasy..m
You realize that removing characteristics is just dumbing down?
Oh no I can't add up to 36 it's the end of the world
Oh no if I outnumber the enemy because he lost x amount of figures it means he runs away and I can follow and finish him off
It's not stupid it just requires learning a little addition. Or you know I'm sure you have a smart phone with a calculator.
What's next no dice because it hurts your hand. My figues cost 35 pounds I win yay go home poor person?
Yeah this came of more harsh than I meant it but still. Fantasy had more depth and a harder but more rewarding learning curve. Now it's just here you go little Timmy you win yay...
Not that I agree with the sentiment behind Lythrandire Biehrellian's post... but where you see dumbing down I see a simple way to remove the necessity for charts. Which drastically reduces the page count needed to describe the game and potentially speeds up combat enormously. And, at the end of the day, 9 times out of 10 it ends up with the same sort of numbers anyway.
Yeah, Fantasy had a little more depth than 40k - but that really isn't hard.
Besides the characteristics thing and the points thing, perhaps you could point out what else you think it is now missing that would make it a deeper game? Because, honestly, I'm not seeing a whole lot.
2015/07/02 13:14:37
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Laughing Man wrote: So GW will really do anything to keep from having to update Brettonians, huh?
GW destroyed the entire WHFB universe to avoid updating Bretonnians.
The whole "Money" thing is just an elaborate scapegoat
Hmm, 40k may be in trouble as well with the Sisters of Battle...
Really this again?? Dark eldar a very low selling army got a revamp and it paid off. The amount of people who would jump at a SoB army is quite large it has nothing to do with the fact that it wouldn't be profitable because it would.
Some body powerful possibly Kirby or one of his hatchet men has a hatred for female forces that's it.
That's why and nobody at GW has the nerve to admit.
2015/07/02 13:14:42
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Laughing Man wrote: So GW will really do anything to keep from having to update Brettonians, huh?
GW destroyed the entire WHFB universe to avoid updating Bretonnians.
The whole "Money" thing is just an elaborate scapegoat
Hmm, 40k may be in trouble as well with the Sisters of Battle...
Really this again?? Dark eldar a very low selling army got a revamp and it paid off. The amount of people who would jump at a SoB army is quite large it has nothing to do with the fact that it wouldn't be profitable because it would.
Some body powerful possibly Kirby or one of his hatchet men has a hatred for female forces that's it.
That's why and nobody at GW has the nerve to admit.
Whoa there, migoo. It was just a silly joke going off the effective canning of the other fleur-de-lis-laden faction GW produces. No need to analyze the post, because it didn't really have a point
EDIT: added a smiley to that last post, less people not take it in jest
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/02 13:20:52
I get people want to make this work, they are invested in fantasy and are trying to make the best out of what is becoming a bit of a bad situation.
But here's the thing about house ruling point style restrictions and so on. It will work for those in groups, it will work for those who are experienced in wargaming and just want a friendly game with a stranger sometimes, it wont work for those waac guys, and most importantly, it is useless for new players who wont have the knowledge to do come up with such things in the first place.
If the idea here is to recue fantasy by attracting new players, the need to house rule it to make the game viable and enjoyable is itself an indication that this is just a failure in its intended purpose from day one. Something this broken will not attract new blood, indeed, casual game players are used to tight rules, that makes things easy. That is why settlers of catan, ticket to ride, munchkin and so on sell by the bucket load to a broad demographic, they are simply to play, but understandable, well written games. This is not.
It is a mess, and that is why I doubt there will be a GW fantasy game in 3 years time.
2015/07/02 13:22:37
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
D6Damager wrote: My only problem with it so far is the "bring as many models as you like" army construction. With no model count restrictions and war scroll restrictions, I don't see how you can have a fair game with this even with the sudden death objectives for an outnumbered opponent. With the leaked war scrolls we have already seen, you can have unlimited models with a single scroll.
Well you can agree the number of models in each army with your opponent can't you?
Then you are already house ruling the game and number of models still doesn't necessarily = balance.
For example, because there is no points system; there is no guarantee that if we agree to say a "20 model limit game" that my army of greater daemons, daemon princes, soulgrinders and daemon heralds will utterly smash your starter box Stormcast Eternals army. From what we have seen of the single "hero" war scrolls this would seem to be true as the hero models have multiple attacks and can cause mortal wounds.
Opposite side of the coin: we agree to a small 4 war scroll game...well I just happen to have 80 Skaven Clan Rats for one of my scrolls...etc. etc.
Or simply going all WAAC and spamming the models that cause the most amount of mortal wounds (which allow no saves). For example, Munchkin walks into the store and plunks down his 20 wizard army which has a 50% chance to cause 20-60 mortal wounds each turn from range which he can continue to do since now you can now run away from close combat before it begins......
I predict this is what any type of tournament play will look like. Spamming fast or ranged mortal wound causing units with TO's placing some sort of warscroll and model count limit. Which again is not rules as written or rules as intended by GW.
If all were are getting is this 4 page ruleset, then I can't help but think it's future is doomed to exploitation unless house ruled. It's already happening to 40K which arguably has a tighter ruleset in regards to army construction.
At the end of the day, I don't have to consult/house rule/argue/compromise with my opponent on how to set up an army list for any other miniature game system I play other than "How many points would you like to play?". Army construction for Age of Sigmar is just too open ended to have any semblance of fair play.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/07/02 13:26:56
I play:
40K: Daemons, Tau
AoS: Blades of Khorne, Disciples of Tzeentch
Warmachine: Convergence of Cyriss
Infinity: Haqqislam, Tohaa
Malifaux: Bayou
Star Wars Legion: Republic & Separatists
MESBG: Far Harad, Misty Mountains
2015/07/02 13:26:03
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
agnosto wrote: Your truescale marine prayers have been answered.
They have been... by Forgeworld and their Tartaros terminator kits... but not by the sigmarines. I don't like their look either in fantasy nor kitbashed into 40k.
2015/07/02 13:26:45
Subject: Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I read the 4 page rulebook last night, this game looks pretty awesome to me! I never, EVER wanted to play fantasy due to the stupid movement rules and the way combat worked in general. Point values aren't needed because of the scaling nature of the battle shock phase and not knowing what your opponent is going to field. With sudden death victories of one model being alive on turn 6, hold a point on the table by turn 4, kill a powerful single model,or a decent sized unit of your choosing even one sided games are more fair. Especially if you DON'T have to tell your opponent what your objective is. That makes them think about unit placement and board control. That in itself forces tactical decision making. I'm excited, this may get me into fantasy..m
You realize that removing characteristics is just dumbing down?
Oh no I can't add up to 36 it's the end of the world
Oh no if I outnumber the enemy because he lost x amount of figures it means he runs away and I can follow and finish him off
It's not stupid it just requires learning a little addition. Or you know I'm sure you have a smart phone with a calculator.
What's next no dice because it hurts your hand. My figues cost 35 pounds I win yay go home poor person?
Yeah this came of more harsh than I meant it but still. Fantasy had more depth and a harder but more rewarding learning curve. Now it's just here you go little Timmy you win yay...
Not that I agree with the sentiment behind Lythrandire Biehrellian's post... but where you see dumbing down I see a simple way to remove the necessity for charts. Which drastically reduces the page count needed to describe the game and potentially speeds up combat enormously. And, at the end of the day, 9 times out of 10 it ends up with the same sort of numbers anyway.
Yeah, Fantasy had a little more depth than 40k - but that really isn't hard.
Besides the characteristics thing and the points thing, perhaps you could point out what else you think it is now missing that would make it a deeper game? Because, honestly, I'm not seeing a whole lot.
It certainly can be thought of that way and if you want to play I certainly won't stop you.
Fantasy had a rich dynamic system not only "charts" but the way the game came out on the board, okay fine blocks were sometimes hard to move hence movement trays. Magic now is basically a gun or ranged weapon or maybe a buff. Before a spell could make or break a round and some races were dependant on this now it seems that magic will just be a shooting attack.
Those characteristics were important they defined a wood elf from a bloodletter it was like a little story in itself. It made the figures meaningful now they aren't so much. So if you were never a fan of them I can't really explain. Just don't complain when 40k gets the same treatment and it certainly will.
Maybe I'm old and bitter but it's too far from the original
The background is now some kind of bad fanfiction.net entry and yeah background is a huge part of a games narrative. All those custom armies all those blogs including my Sewer pirate skaven are just gone
I'm a larger fan of the Rock Paper Scissors that PP uses.
2015/07/02 13:26:50
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Laughing Man wrote: So GW will really do anything to keep from having to update Brettonians, huh?
GW destroyed the entire WHFB universe to avoid updating Bretonnians.
The whole "Money" thing is just an elaborate scapegoat
Hmm, 40k may be in trouble as well with the Sisters of Battle...
Really this again?? Dark eldar a very low selling army got a revamp and it paid off. The amount of people who would jump at a SoB army is quite large it has nothing to do with the fact that it wouldn't be profitable because it would.
Some body powerful possibly Kirby or one of his hatchet men has a hatred for female forces that's it.
That's why and nobody at GW has the nerve to admit.
Whoa there, migoo. It was just a silly joke going off the effective canning of the other fleur-de-lis-laden faction GW produces. No need to analyze the post, because it didn't really have a point
EDIT: added a smiley to that last post, less people not take it in jest
Sorry Sisters are my first love in the setting and I tend to defend them very vocally.
2015/07/02 13:28:30
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar 4th July WD leak and new names pg 1
Then you are already house ruling the game and number of models still doesn't necessarily = balance.
It's not really house ruling if the game (company) explicitly asks you to make pre-game arrangements with your opponent to ensure the game is fun. It would be house-ruling not to.
Either way, whatever you call it, even with points, 40K isn't really playable out of the book without some ad-hoc agreements/mutual restrictions/last-minute army-list-changes to ensure both players have fun at the game.
Not saying that is how it should be, just how it is.
