Switch Theme:

Do you play with Random Turns?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Do you play with the random turn rule?
Yes
No
Sometimes
I don't play AoS, I'm just here to see what people are talking about

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Clousseau




 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Technically building a list to take advantage IS a strategy you know


You're not wrong. Its just that with what we are talking about, we are really playing very expensive farkle as opposed to a war game.
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




 auticus wrote:
Right - the problem is that it doesn't even really help that because the strong armies ALSO take advantage of low drops to get the double turn as well.

Double turn isn't something that always goes to the weaker list. It can just as easily and often go to the stronger list as well.

Making the game pointless to play. If you're looking for a game won on strategy and tactics, this is a huge disappointment.


Right, but randomness is put into games to make worse player not FEEL hopeless. So that after a game they can think (or fool themselves ) "I could have won if I had had a bit more luck" instead of "I had no chance whatsoever from the beginning".

Having said this, I don't think GW puts randomness in their games with specific design goals in mind. They seem to have the game design mindset firmly back in the 70's or 80's at best. I'm sure they have some motto like this: "Players want to be passengers of the game when it plays itself, not the drivers. Their hands are needed to throw dice, the rest is irrelevant"

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/14 18:40:16


 
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps






That sounds like their design philosophy pre AoS, maybe. Back when close combat was a flowchart that players didn't interact with at all, before command abilities, etc.
Modern GW definitely wants players to drive.

I'm on a podcast about (video) game design:
https://anchor.fm/makethatgame

And I also stream tabletop painting/playing Mon&Thurs 8PM EST
https://twitch.tv/tableitgaming
And make YouTube videos for that sometimes!
https://www.youtube.com/@tableitgaming 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




What a world we'd all live in if balance was the most important factor
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






Fun should be the most important factor. Balance is only a concern when it gets in the way of that, which ties into why it doesn't need to be 'perfect'. What perfect balance actually is, is balance good enough to not disrupt entertainment.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Clousseau




Not asking for perfect balance.

Asking for a game that isn't decided on a double turn die roll off of a d6, or a game where the list building is so off the rails that you can determine winner before deployment many times.

A game where the winner is decided by meaningful choices in the game.

A game where there are no garbage choices, especially when models cost so much money and time to paint.
   
 
Forum Index » Warhammer: Age of Sigmar
Go to: