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.
Eldarain wrote: They've been expanded on though. The flying unit, snake units, Morathi are all AoS additions. FEC is still WHFB kits other than a small hero and Underworlds warband and non unit 2.0 terrain/spells
Oh true FEC got only 1 new model since AoS started. Granted that's the same story for Skaven too (though they didn't do too badly out of End Times) and has Seraphon had anything? Suffice it to say AoS is full of tiny armies that need lots and big armies with lots of legacy models that need an overhaul (heck Skaven still has metals)
Skaven and Seraphon where already full armies in fantasy, so they don't need new units(granded some models are in need of replacement). Where FEC was a small portion of a fantasy army, same goes for dok
yukishiro1 wrote: AOS seems to usually have a bunch of round or square blobby useless terrain pieces that mostly just sit there not doing anything except maybe making you roll every turn to see if you get a 6 and they do D3 something to nearby units. It feels vastly underutilized rule-wise compared to 40k, where terrain is much more important and consequential.
Interestingly enough my games of AoS 1st ed (the game without terrain rules) had better and actually meaningful terrain than my games of 40k 8th ed (the game with quasi-terrain rules that basically equated to no terrain rules) even though my local store had a noticeably better selection of 40k than fantasy terrain.
I don't think GW does terrain rules very well these days, but at least in AoS (at the time, in my games at least) had the advantage that you needed to move around and couldn't just obliterate the enemy army out of your deployment zone. Which made even the crudest movement blockers feel like a meaningful addition to the table compared to what 40k had to offer.
In general I'd like to see more and more meaningful and diverse terrain rules for GW games, though, to facilitate interaction between the board and the armies on it. That aspect felt sorely lacking to me in the recent past, even compared to the more empty battlefields of Warhammer Fantasy.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
AOS also naturally just needs less terrain. When guns with greater than 24" range are rare, terrain primarily dictates where your models can move, which means smaller, scenic pieces tend to be just as good as big giant blocks and rocks.
In 40k you're required to fight every battle in a massive shipping crate yard in order to have any semblance of gameplay.
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
The fact that terrain in AOS does nothing to stop ranged attacks is the fundamental problem with it, honestly. Nothing blocks LOS effectively*, so ranged armies have a field day. It's no coincidence that right now in AOS the strongest lists are almost all ranged. The terrain might as well not be there when it comes to protecting you from the incredible lethality of ranged attacks in AOS at the moment.
*Yes, in theory entangling blocks LOS, but in practice it doesn't because of the fly exclusion and because it's just so rare in the first place anyway.
The same issue that we have with most GW rules - GW tends to have very casual style writers who tend to play more fluffy than strict and who aim for more cinematic than functiona/strict rules. Esp since they worked on stripping the rules down. It's clear that at some point the idea was to have almost no universal terrain rules and to instead replace it with dozens of "warscroll" terrain each with its own unique rules card to try and encourage sales of terrain. I think they might have pulled back from that a little, but its still got a legacy in AoS.
40K seems to have improved a bit and GW seems to be doing a hop-skip game with the two main leaders in that what works in one seems to get ported to the other.
The same issue that we have with most GW rules - GW tends to have very casual style writers who tend to play more fluffy than strict and who aim for more cinematic than functiona/strict rules. Esp since they worked on stripping the rules down. It's clear that at some point the idea was to have almost no universal terrain rules and to instead replace it with dozens of "warscroll" terrain each with its own unique rules card to try and encourage sales of terrain. I think they might have pulled back from that a little, but its still got a legacy in AoS.
40K seems to have improved a bit and GW seems to be doing a hop-skip game with the two main leaders in that what works in one seems to get ported to the other.
Ok I have to say, that excuse only works for so long. Decades of " but they are so relaxed when they write rules bruh ! " At what point do they decide perhaps they are out of touch with most who play their games and should tighten stuff down more ? Even now they take two steps forward and one back many times. I mean their relaxed approach to rules design works great if they are the only ones buying it but they are selling it to us so they should perhaps knuckle down with the rules a bit to help them actually work, like with their terrain kits which feel pretty lame at the moment. Not trying to really bash them let me point that out but you do a company no favors by just giving them excuses when they fall short.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/06 01:56:56
The same issue that we have with most GW rules - GW tends to have very casual style writers who tend to play more fluffy than strict and who aim for more cinematic than functiona/strict rules. Esp since they worked on stripping the rules down. It's clear that at some point the idea was to have almost no universal terrain rules and to instead replace it with dozens of "warscroll" terrain each with its own unique rules card to try and encourage sales of terrain. I think they might have pulled back from that a little, but its still got a legacy in AoS.
40K seems to have improved a bit and GW seems to be doing a hop-skip game with the two main leaders in that what works in one seems to get ported to the other.
Ok I have to say, that excuse only works for so long. Decades of " but they are so relaxed when they write rules bruh ! " At what point do they decide perhaps they are out of touch with most who play their games and should tighten stuff down more ? Even now they take two steps forward and one back many times. I mean their relaxed approach to rules design works great if they are the only ones buying it but they are selling it to us so they should perhaps knuckle down with the rules a bit to help them actually work, like with their terrain kits which feel pretty lame at the moment. Not trying to really bash them let me point that out but you do a company no favors by just giving them excuses when they fall short.
I won't deny that GW could do more and that history has shown whenever they've tightened things up its generally been very positively received. Heck one of the biggest shifts has been to speed up codex/battletome release, FAQ and Errata updates and such. Time once was you could wait a whole edition and still never get a new book; I even recall Tyranids getting their edition FAQ for their new codex on the same week they ended that whole edition and launched a new one. The result of this change (And others) was the explosion of sales that saw GW top the UK stockmarket for a time.
Thing is GW has staff who have worked on these games for decades and, like or not, they ARE the biggest name in the business by far. Yes they can do better, but historically their method has kinda, well, its worked to some degree. though one can argue that other factors come into play, but its likely a nightmare to tease out which factors affected it the "most".
It's chapterhouseism. GW only makes rules for terrain pieces *they* sell. These pieces naturally need bespoke special rules, because they are (for the most part) not generic but rather 'Verbnoun Nouncopywrite' terrain pieces. Which predisposes GW to not be thinking about what generic normal stuff is, which is what the vast majority of us are actually interacting with the majority of the time. Surely you have noticed that GW does not write rules for water features anymore? Because they don't sell any.
AoS doesn't even have rules for forests. Just Awakened Wyldwoods, because they sell those. We have to extrapolate out from that what generic forest rules are supposed to be.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/06 07:13:42
It's chapterhouseism. GW only makes rules for terrain pieces *they* sell. These pieces naturally need bespoke special rules, because they are (for the most part) not generic but rather 'Verbnoun Nouncopywrite' terrain pieces. Which predisposes GW to not be thinking about what generic normal stuff is, which is what the vast majority of us are actually interacting with the majority of the time. Surely you have noticed that GW does not write rules for water features anymore? Because they don't sell any.
AoS doesn't even have rules for forests. Just Awakened Wyldwoods, because they sell those. We have to extrapolate out from that what generic forest rules are supposed to be.
You mean the Citadel Wood? There’s still a Warscroll for that in addition to the Awakened one in the app.
It's just annoying to find the terrain rules on their warscrolls instead of having more generic rules in the core rules.
And yep, GW write rules for the kits they sell. Shocking.
Since moves in AoS around terrain is pretty much litteral (every inch you have to move vertically AND horizontally are counted), it solves itself just by the size of the said terrain. Abstract terrains rarely count (biggest exception are woods), especially since it's always related to the terrain GW sells. So wanna climb the Badmoon Loonshrine instead of moving around it ? Hope you have the Fly keyword. And the Loonshrine is big enough to block true LoS to a lot of things, anyway.
Maybe that'll change with next edition, just like 40k terrain rules became a bit more abstract than before (mostly for ruins).
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/06 08:26:56
The same issue that we have with most GW rules - GW tends to have very casual style writers who tend to play more fluffy than strict and who aim for more cinematic than functiona/strict rules. Esp since they worked on stripping the rules down. It's clear that at some point the idea was to have almost no universal terrain rules and to instead replace it with dozens of "warscroll" terrain each with its own unique rules card to try and encourage sales of terrain. I think they might have pulled back from that a little, but its still got a legacy in AoS.
40K seems to have improved a bit and GW seems to be doing a hop-skip game with the two main leaders in that what works in one seems to get ported to the other.
Ok I have to say, that excuse only works for so long. Decades of " but they are so relaxed when they write rules bruh ! " At what point do they decide perhaps they are out of touch with most who play their games and should tighten stuff down more ? Even now they take two steps forward and one back many times. I mean their relaxed approach to rules design works great if they are the only ones buying it but they are selling it to us so they should perhaps knuckle down with the rules a bit to help them actually work, like with their terrain kits which feel pretty lame at the moment. Not trying to really bash them let me point that out but you do a company no favors by just giving them excuses when they fall short.
I won't deny that GW could do more and that history has shown whenever they've tightened things up its generally been very positively received. Heck one of the biggest shifts has been to speed up codex/battletome release, FAQ and Errata updates and such. Time once was you could wait a whole edition and still never get a new book; I even recall Tyranids getting their edition FAQ for their new codex on the same week they ended that whole edition and launched a new one. The result of this change (And others) was the explosion of sales that saw GW top the UK stockmarket for a time.
Thing is GW has staff who have worked on these games for decades and, like or not, they ARE the biggest name in the business by far. Yes they can do better, but historically their method has kinda, well, its worked to some degree. though one can argue that other factors come into play, but its likely a nightmare to tease out which factors affected it the "most".
Their method has worked so far only really based on weight rolling down hill. Any gamer will tell you if a game isn't close to perfect, but you can always find a game that does wonders to inspire people to play it. They are in a good place currently and doing well nothing lasts forever however and I think gaming in person and those products may suffer a hit in the long run if all the current events keep up as you have little reason to keep up with things with no expectation to play the game any time soon. Games, and getting together with friends was what really drove my purchases so they can't just keep riding being the top dog forever which is probably why they changed direction to at least pay lip service to balance finally from the mess of 7th. If another game really starts to threaten it then we'd see I think some better stuff. As is no real pretenders to the throne have really arrived yet.
I'd just wish they'd work a bit harder on the rule front and realize for once everyone who picks up their game isn't just them and they need to design with that in mind, who they sell to and not " Well, we understand it. " Which doesn't help us out at all. Sorry for the de-railing all just wanted to shoot the breeze in response to this.
It's chapterhouseism. GW only makes rules for terrain pieces *they* sell. These pieces naturally need bespoke special rules, because they are (for the most part) not generic but rather 'Verbnoun Nouncopywrite' terrain pieces. Which predisposes GW to not be thinking about what generic normal stuff is, which is what the vast majority of us are actually interacting with the majority of the time. Surely you have noticed that GW does not write rules for water features anymore? Because they don't sell any.
AoS doesn't even have rules for forests. Just Awakened Wyldwoods, because they sell those. We have to extrapolate out from that what generic forest rules are supposed to be.
You mean the Citadel Wood? There’s still a Warscroll for that in addition to the Awakened one in the app.
Oh it's in the app? I stand corrected.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarouan wrote: Yep, and GW woods do block line of sight.
It's just annoying to find the terrain rules on their warscrolls instead of having more generic rules in the core rules.
And yep, GW write rules for the kits they sell. Shocking.
Since moves in AoS around terrain is pretty much litteral (every inch you have to move vertically AND horizontally are counted), it solves itself just by the size of the said terrain. Abstract terrains rarely count (biggest exception are woods), especially since it's always related to the terrain GW sells. So wanna climb the Badmoon Loonshrine instead of moving around it ? Hope you have the Fly keyword. And the Loonshrine is big enough to block true LoS to a lot of things, anyway.
Maybe that'll change with next edition, just like 40k terrain rules became a bit more abstract than before (mostly for ruins).
The point is we don't have rules for a wide variety of terrain people normally use in either Warhammer because they aren't kits GW sells. Any sort of water feature, for example.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/01/06 08:44:42
After watching the TTS video (found here) on how to properly set up terrain and experimenting a bit myself, I have found that you can make really great tables out of 9th edition 40k terrain rules with the right mix of ruins, dense terrain and barricades. However, it took quite some effort to learn how to do so.
A table set up without paying attention to how terrain is going to play (classic diorama setups often suffer from this), it's also very easy to end up with a game where you either can't see jack and melee reigns superior, or vehicles and monsters get blocked out of large parts of the table, or that are one-sided shooting galleries.
If you set up tables regularly, make sure to watch the video and then experiment with the right mix of ruins, dense terrain (forest/industrial/ruined walls), containers/rocks and barricades/pipes, because each of those types favors different types of units and makes playing much more tactical and rewarding. Also make sure to put interesting gameplay opportunities around your objectives, just having obscuring terrain everywhere isn't as interesting as having objectives obscured from one side and protected by barricades to the other side.
IMHO 9th edition's terrain rules have lots of potential, but it's hard to learn how to unlock it.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
AngryAngel80 wrote: GW, when will you sell us GW issue water for our battles, just a small bottle of water for 25$, anything else would be uncivilized.
Well, years ago, I used three boxes of this stuff to create a small lake with a sunk chimera in it. 25€ for modelled water isn't as expensive as it sounds
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
NinthMusketeer wrote: The point is we don't have rules for a wide variety of terrain people normally use in either Warhammer because they aren't kits GW sells. Any sort of water feature, for example.
Not specifically water terrains, that's true...but you forget there are still generic terrain rules in the AoS core rules.
A water stream can still provide cover and have, let's say, the Deadly keyword in the scenery table. And there you have, your water stream terrain rules. Good enough for me, to be honest.
In the end, terrain warscrolls are just specific rules for specific kits GW sells. Which is why they are included with the boxes they sell. Still sucks for customized terrains, I agree.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/01/06 11:25:36
AngryAngel80 wrote: GW, when will you sell us GW issue water for our battles, just a small bottle of water for 25$, anything else would be uncivilized.
The same issue that we have with most GW rules - GW tends to have very casual style writers who tend to play more fluffy than strict and who aim for more cinematic than functiona/strict rules. Esp since they worked on stripping the rules down. It's clear that at some point the idea was to have almost no universal terrain rules and to instead replace it with dozens of "warscroll" terrain each with its own unique rules card to try and encourage sales of terrain. I think they might have pulled back from that a little, but its still got a legacy in AoS.
40K seems to have improved a bit and GW seems to be doing a hop-skip game with the two main leaders in that what works in one seems to get ported to the other.
Ok I have to say, that excuse only works for so long. Decades of " but they are so relaxed when they write rules bruh ! " At what point do they decide perhaps they are out of touch with most who play their games and should tighten stuff down more ? Even now they take two steps forward and one back many times. I mean their relaxed approach to rules design works great if they are the only ones buying it but they are selling it to us so they should perhaps knuckle down with the rules a bit to help them actually work, like with their terrain kits which feel pretty lame at the moment. Not trying to really bash them let me point that out but you do a company no favors by just giving them excuses when they fall short.
Well, why would they? You keep buying the stuff and playing the game, so why would they want to completely change their focus if it's working?
