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.

Heya all AoS fans,

I didn't see a thread for this so thought I would share the SCGT pack (largest AoS tournament to date) with everyone to use in your own games. I would compare this to being somewhere in the middle of Clash Comp and the SDK system in terms of points/rules/missions. Hopefully, this will give new players more options to balance and play there games. The pool choices are now also on scroll builder: http://www.scrollbuilder.com so you can enjoy building lists in days past. I would highly recommend checking it out!


BATTLE PLANS AND MISSIONS:
http://www.heelanhammer.com/SCGTdownloads/SCGT16BatPlanV1.01.pdf

HOUSE RULES AND FAQ:
http://www.heelanhammer.com/SCGTdownloads/SCGT16RulesFAQV1.01.pdf

POOL CHOICES: http://www.heelanhammer.com/SCGTdownloads/SCGT16PoolV1.pdf


All feedback and error reporting should be sent to:
SCGT@Heelanhammer.com

I like this system, but its missing a few things for me. Scrollbuilder doesn't have an option for Skaven Warpfire Throwers or Warp-grinders, even though the pool shows they cost 3. Also Skaven slaves and BSB appear to have ceased existing, since they don't appear in the pool (but these are also missing from the Grand Alliance: Chaos book, so maybe they are being done away with). I also wish it was possible to bring scenery warscrolls for formations that include them, like Clan Pestilens "Bringers of the Rotsmog" or the Sylvaneth "Guardians of the Deepwood".

Yea not sure about the missing Warscrolls or scroll builder errors. This has only been out for a day or two. You can always play terrain as you like. The pool choices are my favorite part since they are simple yet have the required variation required to achieve better balanced games.

If you hit him up on Twitter @ipaintlittledudes is really fast with his responses and corrections for scroll builder.

I never had a problem with the AOS rules but couldn't get motivated to play because of the game balance missing.
Read about http://www.scrollbuilder.com and this is exactly what I wanted. Why couldn't GW do this rolling out the game, simple system and gets the job done.

There are about 4-5 popular comp systems out now and about 7 or 8 more on top of that.

auticus wrote:
There are about 4-5 popular comp systems out now and about 7 or 8 more on top of that.

Yea which is a good thing IMHO and let's you play as you like. For my personal taste I really like the least comp possible and to keep things simple with few special "comp created rules". I like to have a pack only change what is required to keep things balanced. I really like this pack because I think it does all of these very well and has some very interesting missions. I think after 3 days this AoS tournament already has 127+ people signed up for it making it the largest I am aware of to date.

Yeah the day that a GT decided to use it was the day the other comps basically died.

The only reason I keep mine going is that it was designed for my resource campaign.

Died and died... We use PPC in our club. Pool choices are cool, but I think in the long run, PPC has more promise, because it's more detailed. The pool choices are very rough, and that's fine. But there is no way I'm taking a Gryph Hound for .5 pool choices . And a Celestant-Prime 1 more than Dracoth lord, that's a steal! The minute you use it for tournament play, you will see many choices unused.

For a rough estimate in a one off game, pool choices are fine.


Grimbok


Automatically Appended Next Post:
By the way. I think it's great that there are many different comps. I hope there is no "winner" and that becomes more or less the only one. I could easily see our club try other comps, to check them out.

I also prefer PPC because I can post direcly in this forum, and can influence the system somewhat with feedback etc.


Grimbok

The day GW ever releases a point system will render our work pretty moot.

The facebook groups are all about the clash and sdk comps because the big tournaments use them and there are regular posts about trying to get the community to dump the other comps to just use one so that everyone is using the same set of rules.

It is cool that there are several options out there yes. I am and have always been of the opinion that "there can be only one" gaming is bad.

auticus wrote:
The day GW ever releases a point system will render our work pretty moot.

The facebook groups are all about the clash and sdk comps because the big tournaments use them and there are regular posts about trying to get the community to dump the other comps to just use one so that everyone is using the same set of rules.

It is cool that there are several options out there yes. I am and have always been of the opinion that "there can be only one" gaming is bad.

I really hope they don't, it will never be as good.

I'd personally prefer a single dominant comp system, just so that one can reliably bring a list to a game store and just play it, without first having an extended discussion with the opponent over which comp to use, which imo defeats the point of comp altogether. If I'm going to have to negotiate that with the opponent before even writing my list, then I might as well just negotiate the armies directly, and skip comp systems altogether.

 Malisteen wrote:
I'd personally prefer a single dominant comp system ...

I have a feeling it will* boil down to regional comps based around the prevailing tournament circuit. That's how we did things in 8E, which was virtually always comped one way or another depending on what tournament people were prepping for. Up here in NE USA we were always working towards the fairly similar Crossroads / Carnage / Colonial (until it moved back south) packs, until ETC gained traction in the final years. Uncomped 8E, for those that never played the game, was IMO pretty unpleasant as a tactical or listbuilding experience.

*I say 'will' assuming that enough momentum will build to keep major AOS tournaments alive long enough to affect their regions. Here in the NE the scene has shifted to Malifaux + Kings of War, with a few folks clinging to 9th Age. I know this is not the norm across the US / UK / Earth.

- Salvage

Malifaux and Star Wars are definitely the dominant minis games in my neck of the woods. Even 40k seems to have lost a step after Age of Sigmar's release locally, with several players who used to play both fantasy and 40k dropping GW games altogether.

 Malisteen wrote:
Malifaux and Star Wars are definitely the dominant minis games in my neck of the woods. Even 40k seems to have lost a step after Age of Sigmar's release locally, with several players who used to play both fantasy and 40k dropping GW games altogether.

that happened alot here too. Its not so much that AoS sucks hard, its the manner of its arrival that did it for alot of the folks I know. I tried to love AoS played a buttload of games and tried to get on board, but the more I play it the more I hate it. finally decided to trade off all my armies, its just not worth it anymore, GW i believe will render them all extinct for AoS compliant factions and models(which I am fine with tbh) but AoS just isnt for me, the rules are too shoddy, the art IMO blows goats for milk money and I truly despise the suckmarines and their gawd suckmar. at this point a single comp system wouldnt save it for me.

redacted

Can you please keep this on topic this isn't about how people feel about AoS or Games Workshop. A pool choice update will be published in the 15th according to Twitter.

I wanted to share the really cool missions in this pack and show the simple and easy to calculate pool choices. I also love having summoning rules and a sidebar for games.

Overall, I am liking these pool costs and they seem to show more variance than clash comp. It also keeps monsters and heroes cheap enough to be useful.

I like the pool choice values, yes.

In terms of the 'house rules', I think clash handles summoning better. There's really no reason to give summoning players more total points to work with during the game. If you want to summon 20 pool points worth of stuff during the game, then deploy 20 pool points less at the start. This would also allow them to drop the bonus pool choices for destruction when playing against summoners. Also, just allowing summoning from the undeployed pile rather than designating a specific summoning pile would also be fine and work more quickly.


so yeah, Clash with these pool values, or this with Clash's summoning rules, would be ideal, imo.

I honestly like the summoning best in this pack since it gives some risk vs reward and keeps it from being overpowered.

I disagree. Giving summoning players extra points that non-summoning players don't get MAKES it overpowered. The rules practically admit as much by giving Destruction - the alliance without summoning - extra points when playing against summoning lists, something that wouldn't be necessary if they weren't arbitrarily and unnecessarily giving summoning lists extra points to play with in the first place.

Putting units where you want them, when you want them, with no scatter, and no ability by the opponent to target them before they show up, is already worth the delayed arrival and unreliability of the spell cast in my experience both playing with summoning against non-summoning lists and with non-summoning lists against summoning lists.

EDIT: We may be having this exact same conversation over multiple forums. :p

 Malisteen wrote:
The rules practically admit as much by giving Destruction - the alliance without summoning - extra points when playing against summoning lists

As a Destruction player - and a supporter of army balance - I endorse this rule. Smart stuff.

- Salvage

The point is, that rule is only necessary because giving summoning armies free stuff just for summoning things isn't balanced in the first place. Remove that, make all summoned units fully count towards your limit on deployed forces, and extra points playing against summoners is unnecessary.

 Malisteen wrote:
The point is, that rule is only necessary because giving summoning armies free stuff just for summoning things isn't balanced in the first place. Remove that, make all summoned units fully count towards your limit on deployed forces, and extra points playing against summoners is unnecessary.

I mean, ideally this right here is my approach to comping summoning. Followed by removing summoning entirely. But then the Destruction bonus as a third option

- Salvage

The thing is, if destruction get a bonus against summoning, then why not death or order or chaos armies that just happen to not include any summonable units or wizards capable of summoning them?

Consider a casterless, all-deathrattle army of skeltons and wights led by krell. This army is considered even stevens with a destruction army of ogres. So why does the orgre army get bonus points playing against a seraphon list, but my skeleton army doesn't?

 Malisteen wrote:
The thing is, if destruction get a bonus against summoning, then why not death or order or chaos armies that just happen to not include any summonable units or wizards capable of summoning them?

Consider a casterless, all-deathrattle army of skeltons and wights led by krell. This army is considered even stevens with a destruction army of ogres. So why does the orgre army get bonus points playing against a seraphon list, but my skeleton army doesn't?

I had already recommended this idea to to event organizers. This would really balance out the entire summoning thing and honestly doesn't show favoritism towards and particular armies.

But if you give every non-summoning army extra points when playing against summoning armies, in order to balance out the extra points you gave summoning armies just because they're summoning stuff, then wouldn't it make MORE sense to just not give the summoning armies extra points in the first place, so everyone plays with the same in-game pool total regardless of whether or not they're playing with or against any summoning rules?

 Malisteen wrote:
But if you give every non-summoning army extra points when playing against summoning armies, in order to balance out the extra points you gave summoning armies just because they're summoning stuff, then wouldn't it make MORE sense to just not give the summoning armies extra points in the first place, so everyone plays with the same in-game pool total regardless of whether or not they're playing with or against any summoning rules?

No this still would allow a summoning army to potentially summon more units and points than a non summoning army, but at a much greater risk. It also allows each individual player to decide how they want to play/create their army and not feel forced to take wizards. For the player who does want to summon, the more you want to summon the greater this risk becomes that you may not get all your points back. It creates risk vs reward and makes games more interesting and strategic.

Yes, I can see that 20 extra pool points of summonable vs 10 extra pool points of guaranteed is a fun and tactical decision to make.

But those 10 extra pool points should be available for all armies without summoning. If I was playing at this tournament with Order/Death/Chaos I would feel forced to bring summonable units even if I'd rather play without.

There is already a reward to summoning to balance out the risk - the reward of getting your unit where you want it when you need it without your opponent having the chance to respond to you in advance.

That is enough.

This system, as mentioned, practically forces order, chaos, and death armies into summoning or else they're down points against summoning opponents. Even if you gave the 10 points extra to all armies that opted to skip a summoning pool, it still places undo pressure on list construction, in that if you want to summon anything than you'd be practically required to summon the most you possibly can, or else you could end up being the summoning player yet still having fewer points than your opponent total, even after you successfully summon everything in your pool.

The whole thing is more of a mess every way I look at it. Every extra patch stuck on to fix the mess only leads to more patches. The underlying issue isn't going to be fixed with band-aids.


Fully count summons towards your deployed army limit. Treat it as an alternate deployment method, nothing more. It's the only way.

 Malisteen wrote:
Fully count summons towards your total army limit. Treat it as an alternate deployment method, nothing more. It's the only way.

BOOM! Had the same thought last night. Spell is essentially 'Deep Strike', except trading any uncertainty in execution (scatter, mishap) with the potential for enemy wizards to delay your reserve troops if you're trying to forward deploy them (aka within unbinding range).

- Salvage