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.
2016/04/25 18:37:37
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
That is hilariously wrong. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in.
just try to play without points in a world dominated by the paradigm of "balanced list building".
It's honestly even hard with historicals that then have points values. One plays Hail Caesar without points values just fine; but once you get a copy of the "army lists" with "points", it becomes your mental framework - despite the fact that Hail Caesar is a system not designed for points values, just like Age of Sigmar, so the points values are - as admitted - totally tacked on.
However, GW exists to make money, and I agree with their absolutely correct best amazing decision to have a non-GW entity do the work for them. Then they'll attract a new playerbase who absolutely cannot play without a number being assigned to models - who will then buy said models, thus sending them lots and lots of dollars, but the torrent of complains about "balance" are directed to another non-GW entity. Let the great wallet-milking begin.
AOS was losing ground to KOW, so GW tore a page right out of Mantic's playbook. That's some competition that isn't balanced.
Manchu wrote: It's not an extra step - it's a different game.
Let's go back to the chess example: "Instead of taking a 9-point Queen, I'll just take nine more 1-point pawns." This is just by way of showing the problem with points-based balancing. Chess has an extremely fine-tuned system of points values for pieces but that point value of each pieces is strongly based on a static set up. Nine more pawns will always be worth more than the sum of their points. The same thing is true in miniatures games. Designers mitigate this by incorporating force organization systems. So right there you can see how using points is a basic mechanic that implies/evokes other derivative ones because the primary goal of the design was balance.
Now let's leave the world of games design upon a points cost mechanic. Having a balanced game was never the primary intention. That in turn qualifies the player base. The players do not have the same expectations as they would if they were playing a points-based pick-up game.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I'm sorry but you've lost me. What is the point you are making here?
(1) a points system is a basic mechanic that affects the rest of the game's design
(2) players enjoy (and even agree to try) a game in large part based on what they expect out of the game
(3) player expectations are heavily influenced by the basic elements of the game's design
End of the day, players who feel AoS is fine without points have nothing to fear because you will have no issues continuing to play as such. Again, you should be neutral at the worst towards this decision because it will not affect you at all. If other players somewhere else enjoy playing with points, who cares?.
That is hilariously wrong. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in.
just try to play without points in a world dominated by the paradigm of "balanced list building".
It sounds like you are unhappy because you feel players prefer having a points structure. So then, you admit that AoS has a better majority appeal with points?
You can either say AoS is fine without points and not be afraid of the fallout from this, or accept that most people prefer points and thus have a legitimate concern for how you play. You can't have both.
Sort of. I think the majority of players want a game with a points structure and tight, competitve play. I think AOS was never that game and never will be. In marketing it towards them, GW will kill it for its intended market. Then exposure will breed disdain for the "real" players, and AOS will be abandoned to die, cold, broken and alone.
I just hope that the points structure doesn't subsume everything.
I completely get why it's needed, but without careful handling over time I can see the ToW, scenarios etc. becoming sidelined by players because they introduce 'imbalance', and the game slowly becomes homogenised again.
As someone above said, once the genie is out of the bottle it can be difficult to get back in.
I'm optimistic, but waiting to see how this is handled.
2016/04/25 18:43:39
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
Manchu wrote: It's not an extra step - it's a different game.
Let's go back to the chess example: "Instead of taking a 9-point Queen, I'll just take nine more 1-point pawns." This is just by way of showing the problem with points-based balancing. Chess has an extremely fine-tuned system of points values for pieces but that point value of each pieces is strongly based on a static set up. Nine more pawns will always be worth more than the sum of their points. The same thing is true in miniatures games. Designers mitigate this by incorporating force organization systems. So right there you can see how using points is a basic mechanic that implies/evokes other derivative ones because the primary goal of the design was balance.
Now let's leave the world of games design upon a points cost mechanic. Having a balanced game was never the primary intention. That in turn qualifies the player base. The players do not have the same expectations as they would if they were playing a points-based pick-up game.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I'm sorry but you've lost me. What is the point you are making here?
(1) a points system is a basic mechanic that affects the rest of the game's design
(2) players enjoy (and even agree to try) a game in large part based on what they expect out of the game
(3) player expectations are heavily influenced by the basic elements of the game's design
(4) ..and by the prize..
(5) ..and their local availability.
2016/04/25 18:44:53
Subject: Re:Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
End of the day, players who feel AoS is fine without points have nothing to fear because you will have no issues continuing to play as such. Again, you should be neutral at the worst towards this decision because it will not affect you at all. If other players somewhere else enjoy playing with points, who cares?.
That is hilariously wrong. Once the genie is out of the bottle, you can't put it back in.
just try to play without points in a world dominated by the paradigm of "balanced list building".
It sounds like you are unhappy because you feel players prefer having a points structure. So then, you admit that AoS has a better majority appeal with points?
You can either say AoS is fine without points and not be afraid of the fallout from this, or accept that most people prefer points and thus have a legitimate concern for how you play. You can't have both.
Sort of. I think the majority of players want a game with a points structure and tight, competitve play. I think AOS was never that game and never will be. In marketing it towards them, GW will kill it for its intended market. Then exposure will breed disdain for the "real" players, and AOS will be abandoned to die, cold, broken and alone.
I can see that, but the community as it stands looks like the majority of AoS players took the game and made it into a structured one, and are enjoying it. Certainly I do, more than WHFB even. So the disagreement comes down to "AoS was never that game and never will be" from what I see it already is that game.
A newly minted "official" points system sends the wrong message to gamers: "you should expect a balanced pick-up game experience." Then this happens:
ziggurattt wrote: Player A: Let's play Free Play. I'm taking Unit X. Player B: But Unit X costs 750 points. Player A: But we're not playing with points. It doesn't matter. Player B: But obviously Unit X is an expensive, good unit, and my army cannot compete. I don't want to play anymore.
As opposed to:
Player A: I want to use Nagash. Player B: Cool, this could be a crazy ride for me!
Player A: I want to use Nagash. Player B: Can we play something more grounded this time?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ziggurattt wrote: What if there are more "complex" rules in the Matched Play version?
I expect there might be. Remember, points costs are almost always accompanied by force organization requirements/restrictions.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/25 18:49:47
Yeah, I think points are the way to go personally but this absolutely will effect players who like and play with the current system. Players aren't forced to play no-points with you if they would prefer otherwise.
Personally I really dislike the current unbalancedness of the 40k points system. Just because points are introduced into AoS doesn't mean the game will improve because of it. I can definitely understand the motivation for abandoning it all together in favor of a narrative only system where players decide what to play against each other - even if I don't agree with it. Its kind of ironic but I think 40K is only playable with a similar attitude - where players work together to have fun games against each other without relying on the illusion of balance based on points values.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 18:58:17
I guess this is a good thing for the competitive players.
Personally I've been wanting to try the no points stuff out, and have been plugging away at finishing some of my boxes of Fantasy stuff to give it a spin.
I'm certainly one of those players who would happily try fighting some crazy one- sided battle as well, especially if points aren't involved.
Poorly lit photos of my ever- growing collection of completely unrelated models!
NinthMusketeer wrote: but the community as it stands looks like the majority of AoS players took the game and made it into a structured one
You have to look at what your evidence is for this kind of claim. Generally, it tends to be pretty heavily biased. "Most people on a forum dedicated to pick-up game rulesets have tried to turn AoS into a pick-up game." Well, sure.
Sort of? Absent other major changes, the points system will probably leave nobody satisfied. Most likely result is, players who want points check back in long enough to have an even worse opinion about their attempt to play a game that is not designed for pick-up gaming as if it was a game designed for pick-up gaming.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 18:57:51
A newly minted "official" points system sends the wrong message to gamers: "you should expect a balanced pick-up game experience." Then this happens:
ziggurattt wrote: Player A: Let's play Free Play. I'm taking Unit X.
Player B: But Unit X costs 750 points.
Player A: But we're not playing with points. It doesn't matter.
Player B: But obviously Unit X is an expensive, good unit, and my army cannot compete. I don't want to play anymore.
As opposed to:
Player A: I want to use Nagash.
Player B: Cool, this could be a crazy ride for me!
Player A: I want to use Nagash.
Player B: Can we play something more grounded this time?
The result didn't change. We went from this:
Player A: I want to use Nagash.
Player B: Cool, this could be a crazy ride for me!
*game ensues, player B gets slaughtered and doesn't have much fun*
Player A: I want to use Nagash.
Player B: Can we play something more grounded this time?
To this:
Player A: I want to use Nagash.
Player B: That's a 750 point model which isn't balanced with what I brought, can we even this out?
The bit where the player throws his hands up and leaves is just a strawman.
NinthMusketeer wrote: but the community as it stands looks like the majority of AoS players took the game and made it into a structured one
You have to look at what your evidence is for this kind of claim. Generally, it tends to be pretty heavily biased. "Most people on a forum dedicated to pick-up game rulesets have tried to turn AoS into a pick-up game." Well, sure.
True, most of my evidence is internet-based. What's your evidence?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 19:00:34
NinthMusketeer wrote: Player A: I want to use Nagash. Player B: Cool, this could be a crazy ride for me!
*game ensues, player B gets slaughtered and doesn't have much fun
In the words of Bertie Wooster, that is where you make your bloomer.
With AoS, the players did not get together for a test of skill that is wrecked by unbalanced forces. They got together for a crazy fantasy battle where the overwhelming forces of necromancy are challenged by a forlorn hope.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Player A: I want to use Nagash.
Player B: Cool, this could be a crazy ride for me!
*game ensues, player B gets slaughtered and doesn't have much fun
In the words of Bertie Wooster, that is where you make your bloomer.
With AoS, the players did not get together for a test of skill that is wrecked by unbalanced forces. They got together for a crazy fantasy battle where the overwhelming forces of necromancy are challenged by a forlorn hope.
That's a nice narrative, but if you want to argue that the average player is going to enjoy getting slaughtered in a pick up game then I really don't need to give a response.
I haven't made fact claims, I have made arguments. They are derived from reason.
You claimed that people who would previously have played AoS without points wouldn't do so with points. Now, evidence?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 19:05:34
It will be hard for it to be worse than 40k is currently for pickup gaming, at least . If anything, it might be much better, given that the balancing was "outsourced"!
Warmachine was actually terrible for this towards the end of Mk2, too. Points are just part of it - hopefully the SCGT guys did their homework! Has anyone played in one of their events / tried their system and can give an account?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 19:06:46
2016/04/25 19:06:22
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
NinthMusketeer wrote: That's a nice narrative, but if you want to argue that the average player is going to enjoy getting slaughtered in a pick up game then I really don't need to give a response.
You are pitching me some lovely ones today. AoS is not for playing pick-up games. That is why it doesn't have points. This is sort of exactly what we have been discussing.
NinthMusketeer wrote: You claimed that people who would previously have played AoS without points wouldn't do so with points.
Would you mind terribly quoting me on that?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/04/25 19:08:20
NinthMusketeer wrote: That's a nice narrative, but if you want to argue that the average player is going to enjoy getting slaughtered in a pick up game then I really don't need to give a response.
You are pitching me some lovely ones today. AoS is not for playing a pick-up games. That is why it doesn't have points. This is sort of exactly what we have been discussing.
NinthMusketeer wrote: You claimed that people who would previously have played AoS without points wouldn't do so with points.
Would you mind terribly quoting me on that?
No problem:
A: Let's play Free Play. I'm taking Unit X.
Player B: But Unit X costs 750 points.
Player A: But we're not playing with points. It doesn't matter.
Player B: But obviously Unit X is an expensive, good unit, and my army cannot compete. I don't want to play anymore.
AoS is not for playing a pick-up games. That is why it doesn't have points.
RiTides wrote: Has anyone played in one of their events / tried their system and can give an account?
You might find some info from this THREAD covering their South Coast Grand Tournament if you haven't seen it already.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
2016/04/25 19:15:55
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
Well actually ... just the one problem ... that you missed my point. And failed to distinguish between an argument and a fact claim. So just the two problems then. But we will set them aright via reiteration - the argument is that tacking an "official" points system onto AoS will not transform it into a satisfying pick-up game but it will convey that people should expect a pick-up game experience out of AoS, which in turn will prove disappointing.
First, this isn't a move to allow pick-up games. Pick-up games can already be played, however much the players may find them lacking, because any number of systems for balancing the forces by points already exist and it looks like at least one of them will eventually be promoted by GW to official status. But in any case, the actual issue is that the game itself is not designed for pick-up gaming and tacking on whatever points system is not going to change that. This is why I used the chess example: the fact that you can quantify how many points a piece is worth does not make the game suitable for playing pick-up games with list building.
What this comes down is do you believe points will poison the pot or not? GW obviously don't think so, but they could be wrong.
Maybe AoS really has been a bit of a commercial disaster? I always said that GW would give it a year and if it's not doing well, another year after making some changes.
Here are those changes, coming a year after launch, and already half the people who actually liked AoS think it's going to be terrible. Not a good sign, considering the pig's earGW have made of balance in 40K and how that's been shedding players.
Speaking for myself, I don't care whether it's got points or not. I think it would have been better to implement a basic balancing system right from the start, based on power ratings for each unit, but I'm not going to rush out and play it once it has got points.
Manchu wrote: the argument is that tacking an "official" points system onto AoS will not transform it into a satisfying pick-up game but it will convey that people should expect a pick-up game experience out of AoS, which in turn will prove disappointing.
Can you explain why? Preferably without the passive-aggressive jabs.
[edit] Specifically, why AoS with points will not be a satisfying pick up game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 19:23:31
RiTides wrote: Has anyone played in one of their events / tried their system and can give an account?
You might find some info from this THREAD covering their South Coast Grand Tournament if you haven't seen it already.
Thanks for that, Ghaz - much appreciated!
Also, I didn't realize they had 140 AoS players at the event - that's impressive! Really smart to use their system since that's the biggest event I've heard of, so they've probably got more playtesting than anyone else (and also seem to be really enthusiastic about it and working with GW - all good things ).
2016/04/25 19:21:10
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
Short term it's probably the best decision that GW could make (especially as the balancing has been done externally and they've not had to devote much studio time to it)
it's going to bring back some of the people who depended on points/balanced pickup games in order to play at all and that will give a boost to player numbers (probably not so much to sales as I suspect a fair few who'd bailed on AoS were still buying GW for KoW or ninth age)
but long term I think InquisitorBob & Manchu have it right in that it's going to push out the people who had started to pick up AoS just because it wasn't a balanced game with points (possibly the biggest opportunity for growth in future as it's a category that isn';t well served by any of the big/medium sized gaming companies)
as while it can currently still be played like that it's going to be harder and harder to do as new players will end up expecting points/balance
but we shall do doubt see
2016/04/25 19:28:45
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
AOS was losing ground to KOW, so GW tore a page right out of Mantic's playbook. That's some competition that isn't balanced.
Hah. Well, except KoW was designed from the ground up for tournament/pick up and play/hyperbalance. AoS, at no point during it's creation and execution, had any design goal of a points-based balancing mechanic. It will be amusing to see everyone argue about whatever random slapped on numbers get applied to units. AoS is so inherently random that it is impossible to balance (much like 40k is now)
"...and special thanks to Judgedoug!" - Alessio Cavatore "Now you've gone too far Doug! ... Too far... " - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke
2016/04/25 19:29:32
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
Manchu wrote: the argument is that tacking an "official" points system onto AoS will not transform it into a satisfying pick-up game but it will convey that people should expect a pick-up game experience out of AoS, which in turn will prove disappointing.
Can you explain why?
I honestly have been. But again: The point of AoS is NOT to test the relative skill of the players. It is not designed to do that. Hence there is no substantive mechanic to balance the opposing forces ... which is the heart of pick-up gaming. How do you tell if a game is designed for pick-up play? Points-based balance is a huge tell. So when you add points to AoS, the implication is that now AoS can handle pick-up games. But actually nothing has changed. The units were never designed to be balanced. The game was never designed to pit balanced forces against one another. Tacking on a points system is therefore an empty promise bound to disappoint the unwary.
For me it looks like the new leadership that is trying to right the ship realised that many people want points or just some kind of balancing system, because of the number of people who asked for it in the FAQ question request.
2016/04/25 19:31:18
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
Doug - I think he meant more the fact that it took the Rules Committee to really makes the KoW ruleset more balanced / solid (so Mantic basically outsourced that). Honestly, that part was a really good idea so I wouldn't mind seeing others go that route
It's definitely an open question as to how this will fall out with the playerbase / potential playerbase / etc. Will be interesting to see! I do agree with Orlando that it was the best decision they could make right now - we'll see if it helps or hurts in the long term.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/04/25 19:33:16
2016/04/25 19:31:31
Subject: Age of Sigmar News & Rumours ~ "3 Ways To Play" - Points Coming This Summer
. If anything, it might be much better, given that the balancing was "outsourced"!
).
" - Rick Priestley "I've decided that I'd rather not have you as a member of TMP." - Editor, The Miniatures Page "I'd rather put my testicles through a mangle than spend any time gaming with you." - Richard, TooFatLardies "We need a Doug Craig in every store." - Warlord Games "Thank you for being here, Judge Doug!" - Adam Troke 
