Command Points And Stratagems in AoS?

[Arkanaut Admiral]

This is an idea I've had kicking around for a while.  Ever since 8th edition 40k touched down, in fact.  Obviously. 

What if we could create some sort of hybrid of AoS and 40k's system of pitched battle game types, stratagems and command points?  Here's my outline:

Playing at the vanguard level gives both players 3 command points.  Battlehost gives 6, and a Warhost gives 9.  I'm definitely open to adjusting those numbers though.  Stratagems would be the effects that you normally get from battalions, just like what 40k did. 

For example, the Overlords could have the "Opening Salvo" Stratagem.  "In the first battle round, add 1 to the attacks characteristics of all missile weapons of all Arkanauht Ironclads and Arkanauht Frigates" in your army.  One use only.  I don't know how many command points that should use up but it's a good example of that I had in mind.

However, this leaves the question of what to do with battalions themselves.  My idea was to let them grant additional command points along with the additional artifacts.  And to make them still worth taking, maybe they could still retain a unique ability? 

I'm aware that there's already something similar to this (firestorm?) but it doesn't hurt to play around with the rules. 

I'd love to hear opinions and suggestions on this. 

[Killax]

I think that IF all Battalion effects want to be integrated into the game then Stratagems are a better way to allow for those abilities. I am not opposed to the ideas of using Stratagems. For me there are no points required to pay in order to obtain Command Points instead I would link X Command Points to Y Army size.

What I do think is currently a flaw within 40K is that Command Points are generated through Detachments and therefor still linked to the costs of individual units. If every army in 40K would have the same ammount of Stratagems then cheap characters and cheap units become less relevant in army construction as they do now. Whilst the option should remain to have these be a functional part in the game (and they are).

[PJetski]

Command Points are a reward from building your list in specific ways that can be used on Stratagems to gain different kinds of bonus abilities on specific kinds of units. I think this is the role that Battalions are supposed to fill, but currently the Battalion system in Matched Play leaves a lot to be desired.

Currently you spend too many points to make it worth fielding most Battalions in the game, and the Battalions worth using become even more useful since they also give you less drops and more artifacts.

I would like to see Battalions and Artifacts cost an alternate kind of point system, separate from the regular points.

For the sake of discussion let's call them "Battalion Points" and let's say each player gets 200 to start.
Weak battalions may cost only 60 to 100 Battalion Points, while stronger battalions like Aetherstrike and Thunderquake could cost 160-200.
In this system Artifacts would no longer be tied to Battalions. Instead, your army has to buy Artifacts using Battalion points. Most artifacts would cost 40 points. Let's say each artifact would cost 40 Battalion Points, so you could bring  up to 5 Artifacts (if you didn't take any Battalions).

Each army would choose between making their units better through Battalions, making their heroes better through Artifacts, or a combination of the two.

I think this kind of system would increase the number of options available in building lists for Matched Play for all armies, and it would also help prop up the legacy armies that don't have any Battalions. I also think it would open the door to balancing artifacts better, since right now it's a merely an opportunity cost and that hamstrings the design of cool artifacts.

[heywoah_twitch]

I like @PJetski idea more. 

[someone2040]

Personally I think both systems leave a lot to be desired.

But I don't think Command Points and Stratagems would be suitable for AoS. Mainly because from what I've read, those armies without them in 40k get left behind pretty easily as they basically don't have a full 'tactical toolbox' at their disposal.

And we all know the state of AoS is that many of the old migrated factions are unlikely to see a proper update anytime soon. This is in stark contrast to 40k where they're churning out codexes really rapidly to cover the old factions (Where they're all complete armies anyway) before moving onto truly new things. So in 40k you wouldn't mind it so much, because you know sooner or later your Necron or Space Wolf codex is going to pop up. Consider that as opposed to wondering if Swifthawk Agents or Greenskinz are ever going to see life in a battletome.

 

Battalions IMO have a similar problem, in that you don't have a full tactical toolbox without them but they truly are an optional thing in the game. What you're really missing out on at the moment is the ability to "1 drop", but it's not a huge thing if you don't have them. There are still armies around that do well without battalions in them. The only thing I think is a little disappointing is that they linked Artefacts to battalions.

I think this is mainly because it fits for both Open and Matched Play, but I would prefer just assigning an arbitrary cost or you get X artefacts per X000 points. It's just sad that you might have interesting artefacts that will never see play because your faction doesn't have access to any battalions (Take Free Peoples for example, plenty of good artefacts but the only battalion is expensive and takes up most of your army).

[hellalugosi]

After playing a lot of path to glory I can't help but think it's a perfect vehicle to getting 8th edition style detachments, which would lead into stratagems and command points, personally it'd work as a good alternative to playing with battalions. I think battalions have become too specialized and dont support a variety of choice for the reward. Paying for stratagems lets you further customize a detachment so it FEELS like a battalion should.

So for example, they've split each type of unit into simple categories. Overall i see this as:

• Retinue (1Glory)
• Elite  (2Glory)
• Hero  (1Glory)
• Behemoth (3-4Glory)
• Mighty Hero (2-3Glory)
• Legendary Hero (4Glory, usually mounted and/or behemoth heroes)

So lets say that a detachment is all of one faction and your army must be all from one grand allianceand we will ignore battleline requirements and whatnot. And lets play around with detachment types similar to 8th edition 40k.

Warband = CP 3. May all be deployed at once.

• 2-3 Any Hero Type
• 3-6 Retinue
• 0-6 Elites
• 0-2 Behemoth

Now lets take that and fill it out at minimum for example:
Khorne Warband Detachment

• Aspiring Deathbringer (Hero)(General)(1Glory)
• Bloodstoker (Hero)(1Glory)
• 20 Bloodreavers (Retinue)(1Glory)
• 1 Khorgorath (Retinue)(1Gloy)
• 5 Blood Warriors (Retinue)(1Glory)

Now what do we do for strategems? In the same book you have access to follower and hero rewards. 1CP for follower rewards and 2CP for Hero rewards. Ignore any negative only, or roll for more rewards slots.

So now the game is pretty different in structure, and all it took was the path to glory booklet! What do you guys think?

[Killax]

I think CP will work just fine. But it shouldnt be related to unit costs. The prime reason for this is the future unbalance it generates. Better put cheap units suddenly are spammed to obtain the most CP we see this in 40k too.

Instead Id simply attach CP to points played. Keep it balanced. Dont have one army have acces to 9+ CP because they have cheap units and the other max 6 CP because they have expensive units. This flaw in 40k is also highlighted in AM. 

- If we simply attach 1 CP to 500 points played and start with 2 CP you have 2K armies with 6 CP, 1.5K with 5 etc.

- As before have Stratagems at 1 CP for good effect, 2 CP for great, 3 CP for incredible. 

- In terms of effects indeed look into the Battalions. E.g. I think movement boost for example found in Murderhost should be 2 CP to push all specific Khorne Daemon units. 

With this in mind I believe Command Points and Artefacts can remain free. I think 1 Artefact per 1000 points would be a wonderful standard to adopt. You get two choices, for General, second in command etc.

[Carnelian]

Strategies are probably coming to AoS with Malign Portents if you read the between the lines

[HorticulusTGA]

2 hours ago, Carnelian said:

Strategies are probably coming to AoS with Malign Portents if you read the between the lines

Yeah as someone say in the MP thread (maybe you @Carnelian) the way Phil Kelly describes the "boon and prophecies" rules we'll get in the MP campaign book, there is probably a similar systems to command points and stratagem coming.

[Carnelian]

They had something similar in Firestorm too

[Arkanaut Admiral]

Thanks for the great responses everyone! 

I didn't realize until now that MP is bringing in Strategies of a sort (something to do with the Heralds?) so this should be interesting.  It's good to see that there's multiple ways to approach this. 

Me, I would like points to be directly tied to the size of the game and the same for all players, to avoid abuse.  Just like unit points costs, for the same reasons.  Like I said before, in a pitched battle,  I'd say 3 points each for vanguard level, 6 points each for a battle host level and 9 points each for war host level.  In narrative and open play it can be up to the players themselves to decide how many points to take.

Since there's fewer points going around it might mean that the stratagems might need beefing up though.  I mean, here's some examples of how I would do it for the Blades Of Khorne:

Brass Stampede: 1CP.  Play this strategy immediately after deploying a unit of Mighty Skullcrushers.  For the rest of the game, roll a D6 for each model in this unit in the Hero phase.  Add 1 to the result if this unit is within 3" of a friendly Lord Of Khorne on Juggernaut.  For each score of 6 or more, this unit inflicts 1 mortal wound on each enemy unit within 3".  

Dark Feast:  1CP.  Play this strategy immediately after deploying a unit of Bloodreavers,  For the rest of the game, this unit adds 1 to the attacks characteristics of its melee weapons whilst a friendly Slaughterpriest is on the board.  In addition, if this unit is within 12" of a friendly Bloodstoker, it does not have to take battleshock tests.

Skulltake:  2CP.  Play this strategy immediately after deploying a unit of Skullreapers.  For the rest of the game, each time a model in this unit scores a 6 or more when rolling to wound, add 1 to the damage characteristic of the weapon they're using.  In addition, any friendly Khorgoraths within 6" of this unit make 8 attacks with their Claws And Fangs instead of 5.

The first two cost less because they require extra units (and thus points) to reach their full potential whilst the other one one makes the unit buff others and thus is more useful overall.  This might be a little boring or OP though. 

 

 

[Killax]

It seems cool but the point would be to NOT have it as a rest of the game effect. Instead they are a tactical choice paid with limited resources.

As before I love the Stratagems in 40k and happy they arnt rest of the game buffs but instead another tactical choice option.

[GuitaRasmus]

I've been messing with some of the same ideas - just calling them Fate Points. I've also been working on letting them be generated during the battle. 

My ideas can be found in the skirmish rules on page 9 and 10 here - http://aos28warband.blogspot.dk

Feel free to mess around with it, if you can use anything from it.

[RuneBrush]

I can see something being done, but it'll be kept pretty simple.  AoS was always intended to be the "introduction" to the Games Workshop brand of games, so to add in complex building mechanics wouldn't lend itself to that thought (though this may change).

I'm looking forward to seeing what MP does, in the way of it's strategy style mechanic and could easily see this happening as a more permanent thing.  I can't see the way battalions working change very much though.  It'd just be a logistical nightmare for GW to nullify every battalion out there and implement a strategy driven mechanic.

[Killax]

1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

I can see something being done, but it'll be kept pretty simple.  AoS was always intended to be the "introduction" to the Games Workshop brand of games, so to add in complex building mechanics wouldn't lend itself to that thought (though this may change).

I'm looking forward to seeing what MP does, in the way of it's strategy style mechanic and could easily see this happening as a more permanent thing.  I can't see the way battalions working change very much though.  It'd just be a logistical nightmare for GW to nullify every battalion out there and implement a strategy driven mechanic.

I'm a huge fan of simplicity in this aswell. As it becomes very cumbersome to indeed include costs for weapons available to models with a different cost. What my issue with this is that a weapon that adds +1 damage should have a higher cost on models that have a higher damage output allready. For example the Immense Strenght Warlord Trait is currently free and this is no issue. But it can become an issue if it suddenly randomly costed 20 points. Now a Heralds can still easily use it but every Bloodthirster basically needs/want it. One free to two free choices should be more then allright per 2K army. Works wonders in 40K too, where they only have acces to one Artefact. 

I agree with you that GW will not alter Battalions soon but what I can see is 2018 cranking up/removing costs for Battalions even more so we logically will not see them anymore in that very likely 2nd edition of Age of Sigmar somewhere around 2020. Because I fully agree, GH shouldn't completely redesign AoS at this point. This is where edition changes are for. 

Simplicity of design is actually what really sells me on GW. It's a good thing to have because for both players and designers it means that changes to particular designs through for example Errata/FAQ are impactful but not to the extend of removing/including particular armies. 

[RuneBrush]

2 minutes ago, Killax said:

I'm a huge fan of simplicity in this aswell. As it becomes very cumbersome to indeed include costs for weapons available to models with a different cost. What my issue with this is that a weapon that adds +1 damage should have a higher cost on models that have a higher damage output allready. For example the Immense Strenght Warlord Trait is currently free and this is no issue. But it can become an issue if it suddenly randomly costed 20 points. Now a Heralds can still easily use it but every Bloodthirster basically needs/want it. One free to two free choices should be more then allright per 2K army. Works wonders in 40K too, where they only have acces to one Artefact. 

I'd say that the easy way round this is to limit it like they do something already - +1 Damage to a maximum of 3 or similar.  Would mean you could pop it onto a D3 damage model, as it would increase the base range but mean you won't do 4 damage.  Completely agree that some artefacts are massively more useful for some models than others!

4 minutes ago, Killax said:

I agree with you that GW will not alter Battalions soon but what I can see is 2018 cranking up/removing costs for Battalions even more so we logically will not see them anymore in that very likely 2nd edition of Age of Sigmar somewhere around 2020.

My "crystal ball"/made up entirely opinion is that we'll see roll off for first turn and a reduction in the battalions.  Free force organisations in 40k were one of the biggest killers of the game when they were added and I think GW learned a valuable lesson from that   Would love to see a reduction to bring the battalions somewhere between where they are now and used to be.

[Killax]

1 minute ago, RuneBrush said:

My "crystal ball"/made up entirely opinion is that we'll see roll off for first turn and a reduction in the battalions.  Free force organisations in 40k were one of the biggest killers of the game when they were added and I think GW learned a valuable lesson from that   Would love to see a reduction to bring the battalions somewhere between where they are now and used to be.

We will see, I really can see it going either way.
One of the assumptions I have with CP still being tied to unit costs in 40K might be because it keeps the insentive there to actually get more models as opposed to less. E.g. currently in 40k your army could be 3 of those Knight-robot-things, you fill your points and get some CP but not nearly as much as a full fleshed out infantry army. Who's CP range from 6 to 9 most of the time.

With this in mind the Battalions are actually hindering Games Workshop to sell more models, as X points per army are not spend on models but additional rules. It's also because of this that I believe it's in GW's interest to actually stop attaching costs to abilities. Something we've come to accept for Command Traits and Artefacts. 

When I thake a peek at the Battalions costs for Maggotkin of Nurgle their costs seem to have creeped up some more as I expected... But yeah a lot of this is just 'feelings'.