Free Cities Abilities - What's the beef?

[Double Misfire]

11 hours ago, PlasticCraic said:

The fact that Steam Tanks sold out as soon as the Lord Ordinator warscroll leaked tells me that a lot of people have their eye on Greywater Fastness.  Sitting on the backline and nuking your opponent with artillery is certainly a specific playstyle, but again whether it's a good thing for the game and gives people good experiences is debatable.  I wouldn't want to do that to someone at an event.

I had no idea Steam Tanks sold out when the Lord-Ordiantor first leaked (in one territory?). Unfortunately if you've ever read the Steam Tank's rules (it's a really terrible hybrid unit, I'm the guy who has to politely tell anyone asking how to use one in the Ironweld Arsenal thread to go out and buy a box of Fulminators and an Organ Gun instead), that'd probably be an indicator that the people assumed to be rushing to buy one probably came from the 90% of AoS players who aren't competitive regular  tournament attendees. 

If Helstorm Rocket Batteries had sold out then I'd be worried!  

I can also safely say from experience that with the current rules separating 4 wound warmachines from their 3 man crews that even with careful planning Ironweld Artillery is not remotely competitive, no matter how much damage it gives out it will always be shot out from under you; building a "competitive" list you're probably much better off with Stormcast or Kharadron shooting doing almost equivalent damage for the points you pay, and having much greater survivability and an equivalent threat range once you've taken movement into account.

When someone podiums at a major event with an Ironweld artillery focused list you then have all right to start kicking off! 

 

1 hour ago, Killax said:

Thanks for your insight! While I do think the third reason is a great one, I also think that FAQ/Errata allready are worthy of a small book on their own and I think that one Battalion page from the Firestorm book really covers all there is allready. But yes, it can cause some confustion.

Battalion page? There aren't any battalions in Firestorm. 

Quote

Especially the mentioned Lord Ordinator. However one thing to thake from that (in my opinion) is the crux to the game that remains the Shooting phase. Which is a totally different discussion but comes up almost every time, be it directly or indirect. The Warmachine combo is so good beause it virtually deletes any Hero that presents itself in LoS. Not even the Monsters are save anymore soon.

Making artillery different from Skyfires or whatever ridiculous combination of Kharadron guns how? Oh wait, your opponent only needs to do three wounds to disable a cannon and it can't zip around the battlefield or deepstrike.

Quote

1. The first question assumes that every piece of content made for Age of Sigmar should be useful for competitive play/matched play. In quite a lot of cases specific pieces cannot be used. Be it older models, Galrauch's Warscroll... You name it. It is also not exclusive to Order to not have acces to stuff like this. It applies for all. What was ever so slightly odd about Firestorm however is that I believe there where 4 relevant Battalions for Order in that book and 1 for each other Grand Allegiance. This in itself isn't how ideally balanced design works. It leaves Order with another advantage that really isn't needed...

The compendium Chaos Dragon warscroll might not be very good (dunno, never used it), but it does have matched play points and can be used in an army if you choose to. Taking an army from the Phoenecium or Hallowheart is also gives pretty terrible bonuses (and hamstrings you with the limited amount of factions you're allowed to pick units from, but you can't do it at the aforementioned events.

Quote

2. The issue I have with many of these "But why then Tzeentch has this?"-topics is that it works on the policy of X is so so Y must also have this. 
While I agree that Destiny Dice are very strong I cannot say we see competitive events being completely taken over by Tzeentch. What I see is that consistantly one of the Grand Allegiance Order Armies thake the number 1 spot on these competitive events with a multitude of different Allegiances... Be it Stormcast, Seraphon, Fyreslayers or mixed Order, no matter how you look at the standings Order does objectively better as all other Grand Allegiances. 

So different armies take the top spots at different events, they just all happen to come from the most populated Grand Alliance. That would be like complaining that 40k events are reguarly won by Blood Angel, Catachan, Ordo Xenos and Sister of Silence armies. Of course Order armies are going to be prevalent, the Grand Alliances have never been equally represented, nor has GW made any effort to try and make them. Would you have kicked off at Warriors of Chaos, Deamon and Skaven armies placing highly at WFB tournaments if keywords had been a thing back then?   

Quote

Now with the Order Herald comming up, it should be clear to see that from the Malign Portents Heralds nothing really comes close to the Order Herald. We see a Grot Wizard working with some charge options for Grots and Orks, we see a Darkoath Warqueen working with some additional movement for Slaves to Darkness and the Knight of Shrouds has something for Nighthaunt... If we want to talk about unbalanced design going in favour of Order this is just another example...

Ok, competitive herald breakdown we've got:

• The Fungoid Cave-Shaman, who's got a funky, probably subjective  command ability, but for all intents and purposes is the allied grot shaman you see in so many Ironjawz list for exactly the same amount of points and a solid improvement to survivablity.
• The Knight of Shrouds, who provides an amazing buff to nighthaunt units if you choose to run him as your general.
• The Darkoath Warqueen, who I'll grant you is pretty rubbish  as a five wound 5+ save combat hero with a rubbish command ability that only affects units from an already rubbish faction. Could maybe be made interesting combined with a Fatesworn Warband, but there are better things to build your list around.
• The Lord-Ordinator, providing an amazing couple of buffs for maybe four usable, but very niche units (Cannons, Helstorm Rocket Batteries, Organ Guns and legacy Reaper Bolt Throwers). Having to take him as your general to use his Regin of Fire command ability denies you inspiring presence, which is huge in an Ironweld focused list (once you've dropped almost 860 points on guns and engineers you haven't got many points left over to put bodies on the floor with).

I might be biased, but I'd say the three who aren't the Warqueen are probably pretty level as far as direct competitive application goes.

51 minutes ago, Killax said:

On top of that your creating some sort of strawman argument that Chaos has acces to Desitiny Dice. Tzeentch has that, nobody else in Chaos. Likewise using Kunning Rukk doesn't even remotely compair to what the Order options are capable to do. Funnily enough the Order Herald surpasses Kunning Rukk effects for just being a single model.

The arrer boyz in a Kunnin' Rukk need 60 wounds put into them to take them down if you can't get to the Warboss (they're even pretty good without him). An artitllery piece needs 3 to silence it. 

 

47 minutes ago, CyderPirate said:

I understand your frustration, Jasper, but not all players have your restraint and many will look to maximise the potential from the rules made available to them. So whilst you might feel hamstrung by TOs' decisions to exclude the Free Cities rules because it stops you playing your army in the way you want, when those rules are allowed, it opens the floodgates for some very un-fun armies to appear. 

I don't reguarly attended big tournaments, could you please run me through what these potential very un-fun armies. I can understand Anvilgard could probably be exploited a bit, but if anything Free Cities are make mixed Order more fun to play against by denying them Skink battleline and the Celestant-Prime.  

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, Killax said:

It's adding rules to the game.

Silly comment. Everything outside of the 4 page rules sheet is 'adding rules to the game'. You don't seem to have an issue with adding allegiance ability rules to the game for every other faction.

 

31 minutes ago, Killax said:

I can't play my Chaos Dreadhold in Matched play. Therefor I can't play Chaos Castle. I can't, that doesn't make it discriminatory.

You're comparing apples to oranges. A Dreadhold isn't an allegiance ability.

 

31 minutes ago, Killax said:

It makes it a piece that simply isn't included for Matched Play. 

Free Cities abilities are approved by GW for matched play.

 

31 minutes ago, Killax said:

If you think this is an anti-Order policy, again don't even bother making a topic on TGA. Ask Tournament Organizers, ask the AoS Facebook community page, you can even mail the AoS FAQ part for this.

Why are you so eager to shut down this conversation and send me elsewhere? This is a topic worth discussing in a public forum. Also, the AoS FAQ team have already dealt with this - they FAQed the Firestorm rules and reconfirmed that they are intended for Matched Play.

 

31 minutes ago, Killax said:

The choice of what a Tournament Organizer adds to the Tournament rulespack is the choice of that TO. Is it discriminatory if I want to meassure from bases instead of models? Is it discriminatory that costs changed from GH2016 to GH2017?

It's their choice, but there should be consistency in how that choice is applies. Measuring from bases isn't discriminatory because it applies to all players. It's not at all like denying one group of players access to their allegiance abilities whilst allowing them for other players. Again, you're comparing apples with oranges.

 

31 minutes ago, Killax said:

All that is applied for the event is that what is wished for. You want an event where it's used? Don't waste your time on the forums, go and make that event yourself. It isn't that hard to do if you want it to be available.

This is just a childish deflection tactic intended to shut down debate. It's an unhelpful suggestion that addresses or resolves nothing.

[CyderPirate]

11 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

I don't reguarly attended big tournaments, could you please run me through what these potential very un-fun armies. I can understand Anvilgard could probably be exploited a bit, but if anything Free Cities are make mixed Order more fun to play against by denying them Skink battleline and the Celestant-Prime.  

Oh, neither do I. I was referring to the Anvilguard army mentioned earlier in the thread (and reference by GW on the Community page that was linked to), and speaking more generally.  I'm afraid I wouldn't know a competitive allegiance ability if it hit me over the head!

[CyderPirate]

16 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

All that is applied for the event is that what is wished for. You want an event where it's used? Don't waste your time on the forums, go and make that event yourself. It isn't that hard to do if you want it to be available.

This is just a childish deflection tactic intended to shut down debate. It's an unhelpful suggestion that addresses or resolves nothing.

It might not have come across that way, but I think Killax is trying to help and offer some practical advice, not just shut down the debate (not to put words in their mouth). If you talk to local TOs and let them know there's a demand for the Free Cities to be included, you're likely to have a better outcome.

Look at it this way: If you talk to a local TO about this, you let them know there's demand in their area for Free Cities to be allowed and encourage them to include them in their next pack. If they decide not to, they'll at least know to consider it in future.

And if you don't like what local TOs are offering, you can always host your own event and build some momentum and enthusiasm for using the Free Cities rules - show the community in your area that it's not as bad as they think.

Just discussing it here might convince other TOs to change their policy, but that won't necessarily impact you. If you're in the US, say, and this thread encourages a slew of Aussies to allow Free Cities, you haven't really got the outcome you wanted. 

[BURF1]

4 hours ago, Killax said:

Thanks for your insight! While I do think the third reason is a great one, I also think that FAQ/Errata allready are worthy of a small book on their own and I think that one Battalion page from the Firestorm book really covers all there is allready. But yes, it can cause some confustion.

For your first point and second point I completely agree, but it's also a subjective standpoint offcourse.
What might be the larger issue here is that Order in itself is allready in a great place, call it mixed or one of the other Allegiances. So from my perspective it doesn't really need this on top of it either. However indeed, some of the Order allegiances would love it. Typically those who do not have a newer Battletome yet. The fact that indeed is presenting itself more and more is that the focus is going to Allegiances rather than Grand Allegiances. This isn't ****** better or worse but does have to account for a lot of things. Especially the mentioned Lord Ordinator. However one thing to thake from that (in my opinion) is the crux to the game that remains the Shooting phase. Which is a totally different discussion but comes up almost every time, be it directly or indirect. The Warmachine combo is so good beause it virtually deletes any Hero that presents itself in LoS. Not even the Monsters are save anymore soon.

As above though, I think every TO is very happy to awnser questions too, so @Jamie the Jasper if you want to know what the beef is I'd again say contat the TO's. I think it's very likely that the awnser will be a mix of the above quoted points. 

My problem with the opening post at hand is the following:

1. The first question assumes that every piece of content made for Age of Sigmar should be useful for competitive play/matched play. In quite a lot of cases specific pieces cannot be used. Be it older models, Galrauch's Warscroll... You name it. It is also not exclusive to Order to not have acces to stuff like this. It applies for all. What was ever so slightly odd about Firestorm however is that I believe there where 4 relevant Battalions for Order in that book and 1 for each other Grand Allegiance. This in itself isn't how ideally balanced design works. It leaves Order with another advantage that really isn't needed...

2. The issue I have with many of these "But why then Tzeentch has this?"-topics is that it works on the policy of X is so so Y must also have this. 
While I agree that Destiny Dice are very strong I cannot say we see competitive events being completely taken over by Tzeentch. What I see is that consistantly one of the Grand Allegiance Order Armies thake the number 1 spot on these competitive events with a multitude of different Allegiances... Be it Stormcast, Seraphon, Fyreslayers or mixed Order, no matter how you look at the standings Order does objectively better as all other Grand Allegiances. Now with the Order Herald comming up, it should be clear to see that from the Malign Portents Heralds nothing really comes close to the Order Herald. We see a Grot Wizard working with some charge options for Grots and Orks, we see a Darkoath Warqueen working with some additional movement for Slaves to Darkness and the Knight of Shrouds has something for Nighthaunt... If we want to talk about unbalanced design going in favour of Order this is just another example...

My short vision on this is that realistically speaking Grand Allegiance Order and all Allegiances that fall under it don't need Firestorm content to be top competitive. I expect that somewhere down the lines even Tournament Organizers see how extremely well Order is doing with all it's Allegiances allready and might simply not be interested in giving that another boost while, like the Heralds, the other Grand Allegiances have no competitive use for the Battalion or Heralds.

Lastly, despite Tzeentch being so feared/seen as the boogyman, several Order lists can beat Tzeentch consistantly. Stormcast, Seraphon, Fireslayers and mixed have no massive issue with it because they play a very similar game due to other bonusses aquired. 

 

I'm curious what tournaments you're watching because all the tournaments I see where and order list places first, it's due to either vanguard wing being able to deploy in combat or the Order player dodging Tzeentch outright.

Tzeentch doesn't always take first and it IS beatable but 4-5 out of the top 10 armies at almost every major tournament since DoT dropped have been Tzeentch.

Also btw, except for specifically pre FAQ vanguard wing, Tzeentch is EASILY Stormcasts worst matchup.

[Killax]

1 hour ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Free Cities abilities are approved by GW for matched play.

So ask your TO why you can't use them mate, you want a solution for this non-issue, play where you can play what you want.

19 minutes ago, BURF1 said:

Tzeentch doesn't always take first and it IS beatable but 4-5 out of the top 10 armies at almost every major tournament since DoT dropped have been Tzeentch.

And it doesn't win tournaments consistantly. The moral remains, several larger tournaments do not dodge Tzeentch, they defeat it. 

https://aosshorts.com/cancon-top-10-age-of-sigmar-lists/
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/10/09/the-warhammer-age-of-sigmar-grand-tournament-the-winning-army/
http://facehammer.co.uk/2017/10/02/facehammer-grand-tournament-2017-results/
https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/frontline-gamings-independent-tournament-circuit/aos-itc-event-results/

But hey, this wonderful topic boils down to another one of those 'Tzeentch is too strong, grrrr'. Yet Order wins the mayority of Tournaments and we most certainly should completely ignore that fact.

• You want Tzeentch power play? Play Tzeentch.
• You think that the Erratas/FAQs to come won't focus on Tzeentch? Guess again.

---

@Jamie the Jasper certainly don't mail or contact TO's to find your awnser, that's the best way to go about it for sure.

[stato]

28 minutes ago, Killax said:

 

@Jamie the Jasper certainly don't mail or contact TO's to find your awnser, that's the best way to go about it for sure.

Killax there is no need to be insulting to other members. This forum topic is a discussion to determine if the community thinks Free Cities Abilities are too powerful, not if individual TO think they are too powerful.  You stated a your point early on, no need dismiss other people discussion and throw out sarcastic remarks.

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Killax said:

So ask your TO why you can't use them mate, you want a solution for this non-issue, play where you can play what you want.

So I'll gloss over the fact that you're pretending my point-by-point deconstruction of your irrational arguments didn't just happen. As for this comment, it's obviously escaped your comprehension somehow that this topic is broader than some personal issue I have with any specific event. It's about addressing the general attitude of antipathy and dismissal towards Free Cities abilities within certain sections of the community, and the only reason tournaments are being discussed so heavily is because they're the most visible and influential example of this. You're spending an awful lot of time and energy in this thread for someone who claims that I'm the one wasting my time here. You're also providing a prime example of that antipathy and dismissal right here in this thread by the way, with your completely irrational arguments and increasingly bitter and negative responses in the face of rational counterarguments. Exhibit A.

 

16 minutes ago, Killax said:

But hey, this wonderful topic boils down to another one of those 'Tzeentch is too strong, grrrr'.

I find it absolutely bizarre and frankly hard to believe that you think this thread is just a thinly veiled way of complaining about Tzeentch. I don't know how much more clearly and passionately I can put forward the positive, rational case for Free Cities abilities to be treated equally. That's really what this is all about. If you really think that this is somehow about Tzeentch then you either haven't been reading the posts in this thread carefully, respectfully and thoughtfully enough, or you're coming to this discussion with a load of baggage that just isn't relevant here. Either way you may want to take a deep breath and re-read the posts that you're responding to for what they actually say, not what you think the subtext is.

 

Yet Order wins the mayority of Tournaments and we most certainly should completely ignore that fact.

Again, it's not right to discriminate against one faction or one group of players because their Grand Alliance is winning tournaments. Free Cities armies aren't the ones winning tournaments. Please stop trying to make a connection that doesn't exist just to justify your obvious bias against the use of Free Cities abilities.

 

[Double Misfire]

@Jamie the Jasper

I just saw a load of your Anvilgard stuff after checking out your twitter because of this thread.  

Absolutely amazing stuff, very moody and I love how you've recreated the Anvilgard crest on the Irondrakes. You've reallly inspired me to go the extra mile with my tempest's eye collection. Do you have any more pictures/what do you have planned for the army next?

[Killax]

So bizarre.

29 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Again, it's not right to discriminate against one faction or one group of players because their Grand Alliance is winning tournaments.

29 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I find it absolutely bizarre and frankly hard to believe that you think this thread is just a thinly veiled way of complaining about Tzeentch

On 13-2-2018 at 2:41 PM, Jamie the Jasper said:

Why ban free cities abilities whilst allowing the  game-breaking absurdity that is destiny dice?

[Menkeroth]

The situation with the Free Cities is like it was in 40k back in the day with the FW models, they were practically everywhere banned from using in tournaments. I am not surprised.

[Gaz Taylor]

@Killax ive given you some points for some of your recent posts. You know the rules here about how we interact with each other. Please think before you post

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Killax said:

So bizarre.

I used destiny dice as one example. I've also used others. Either you understand that my case has nothing to do with Tzeentch and you're pretending like you misunderstand in order to troll me, or you genuinely don't understand and are missing the point completely over and over again. Either way, I would respectfully suggest that you have nothing useful to contribute to this discussion and you may want to spend your time elsewhere.

[Double Misfire]

@Killax

I don't think @Jamie the Jasper was hijacking his own thread to complain about Tzeentch, I think that in the post you cited he just wanted to highlight an overpowered allegiance ability to compare to the relatively small benefits offered by the Firestorm allegiances on top of their grand alliances basic allegiance abilities.  

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

@Jamie the Jasper

I just saw a load of your Anvilgard stuff after checking out your twitter because of this thread.  

Absolutely amazing stuff, very moody and I love how you've recreated the Anvilgard crest on the Irondrakes. You've reallly inspired me to go the extra mile with my tempest's eye collection. Do you have any more pictures/what do you have planned for the army next?

Thank you! I've got around 1000 points all in various stages of completion, and another 1000 points still unassembled and unpainted. My philosophy for the army is basically a 3 point plan:

1. Include a good mix of all the races that inhabit Anvilgard to really lean into the theme.
2. Don't rely on a single trick or one powerful unit - make my opponent really scratch their head over target priority.
3. Have every unit have some kind of ranged attack.

At some point when I've got more stuff fully painted I may start a new thread in the painting section of the forum, but here's a taste if people are curious:

[Thostos]

  Firestorm abilities/battalions are for use in the Firestorm campaign.Thats one of the incentives to try the campaign with your group.

 I didnt allow them in the last event I ran a few months back,but our group had a great time playing through the campaign,some of us used them while others went with their standard tourney list allegiance,worked out great.

 My main objection to allowing them in matched play is that Order has 4 while the other GA`s only got one each.Other reasons have already been mentioned above.

   

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Thostos said:

  Firestorm abilities/battalions are for use in the Firestorm campaign.

I hear this comment repeated a lot, but it's important to remember that this is your decision to restrict these abilities to the campaign setting. As far as GW are concerned, these abilities are written and intended for use in matched play. I'm not comfortable with people portraying their personal preference as accepted fact by implying an official distinction between Battletome abilties and Firestorm abilities that doesn't exist.

 

20 minutes ago, Thostos said:

 My main objection to allowing them in matched play is that Order has 4 while the other GA`s only got one each.

This just seems like sour grapes to me. If my Anvilgard army goes up against a Wraith Fleet, we're still only using 1 ability each. My army doesn't get some kind of special advantage just because Order has a choice of 4 abilities and Death has 1. I don't get to use all 4 of those abilities at the same time! It's a totally illogical argument.

Would you ban Stormcast armies because they have access to more unit options than any other faction? Of course you wouldn't, because even though they have more options they don't get to dump all of those options on the table. And yet that's the exact reasoning you're using for sidelining Firestorm allegiance abilities.

[Jamopower]

I guess in a tournament sense the inclusion or banning of firestorm doesn't make too much difference, as I think everyone can agree here that by limiting yourself to a Free city (like I do with my Living city) you end up having a worse army than by just going with the grand alliance order. Thus for tournaments it's only a choice for the players that are more interested in theme than in maximizing the win potential and while you miss the certain "feeling" brought by the allegiance ability, the army can be used as it is in an event where the allegiance is banned by running it as a grand alliance order. That said, the broader sense of the topic is very valid, why they are considered to be somehow so powerful that they are wanted to be banned, while they are actually more of an opposite?

 

And as Jamie the Jasper showed his awesome Anvilguard, here are my inhabitants from the Living city:

 

Order army from the Life Realm by saimaanrannalta, on Flickr

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Jamopower said:

I guess in a tournament sense the inclusion or banning of firestorm doesn't make too much difference, as I think everyone can agree here that by limiting yourself to a Free city (like I do with my Living city) you end up having a worse army than by just going with the grand alliance order. Thus for tournaments it's only a choice for the players that are more interested in theme than in maximizing the win potential and while you miss the certain "feeling" brought by the allegiance ability, the army can be used as it is in an event where the allegiance is banned by running it as a grand alliance order. That said, the broader sense of the topic is very valid, why they are considered to be somehow so powerful that they are wanted to be banned, while they are actually more of an opposite?

 

And as Jamie the Jasper showed his awesome Anvilguard, here are my inhabitants from the Living city:

 

Order army from the Life Realm by saimaanrannalta, on Flickr

 

Excellent points and an excellent army! Beautiful!

[Thostos]

22 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I hear this comment repeated a lot, but it's important to remember that this is your decision to restrict these abilities to the campaign setting. As far as GW are concerned, these abilities are written and intended for use in matched play. I'm not comfortable with people portraying their personal preference as accepted fact by implying an official distinction between Battletome abilties and Firestorm abilities that doesn't exist.

 

This just seems like sour grapes to me. If my Anvilgard army goes up against a Wraith Fleet, we're still only using 1 ability each. My army doesn't get some kind of special advantage just because Order has a choice of 4 abilities and Death has 1. I don't get to use all 4 of those abilities at the same time! It's a totally illogical argument.

Would you ban Stormcast armies because they have access to more unit options than any other faction? Of course you wouldn't, because even though they have more options they don't get to dump all of those options on the table. And yet that's the exact reasoning you're using for sidelining Firestorm allegiance abilities.

  Ok,,well if you want to use the battalions from Firestorm then I want to use the strategy points system..we can use anything we want from the expansion according to GW correct?
 While we are at it lets pull cards and use muster to make our armies up,lets even roll up a Time of War rule for the game,,heck,lets just play Firestorm,its FUN!

    Our next run of FIrestorm will end with a 2k ITC tournament that WILL allow the use of the battalions and ill probably throw in a time of war rule for each round which will likely be based on the GA of the army that won the campaign..also plan to have a strategem system in play for each round as well.So im not totally against using these features,,I just want them to be used in the context they were intended along with the other features of the expansion/campaign.

   

[Killax]

30 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

I hear this comment repeated a lot, but it's important to remember that this is your decision to restrict these abilities to the campaign setting. As far as GW are concerned, these abilities are written and intended for use in matched play. I'm not comfortable with people portraying their personal preference as accepted fact by implying an official distinction between Battletome abilties and Firestorm abilities that doesn't exist.

This just seems like sour grapes to me. If my Anvilgard army goes up against a Wraith Fleet, we're still only using 1 ability each. My army doesn't get some kind of special advantage just because Order has a choice of 4 abilities and Death has 1. I don't get to use all 4 of those abilities at the same time! It's a totally illogical argument.

Would you ban Stormcast armies because they have access to more unit options than any other faction? Of course you wouldn't, because even though they have more options they don't get to dump all of those options on the table. And yet that's the exact reasoning you're using for sidelining Firestorm allegiance abilities.

I am not comfortable with people portraying their personal suggestion as a fact either, because we have no confirmation that the Firestorm Season of War product is 'banned' or left out because of power level reasons whatsoever.

In addition there is a an official disctinction between [Battletomes] and the [Season of War] Firestorm product. What we do also have is Battletome: Chaos Dreadhold, an actual Batteletome, containing no options that are currently available to Matched Play. Again, this isn't some kind of anti-Order consperacy. Better put, Season of War, as the name suggests it is content made for a Campaign, intended for a Campaign and created with this narrative in mind.

You are suggesting there is a beef, Free cities have been shafted and implying content created for a Campaign setting should also always be available to a Tournament event. The reasoning why it isn't used mostly is because of this, it's campaign content. While I think some TO might consider using Malign Portents for their evetns I also think it's very possible a lot of them will not.

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Thostos said:

  Ok,,well if you want to use the battalions from Firestorm then I want to use the strategy points system..we can use anything we want from the expansion according to GW correct?
 While we are at it lets pull cards and use muster to make our armies up,lets even roll up a Time of War rule for the game,,heck,lets just play Firestorm,its FUN!

    Our next run of FIrestorm will end with a 2k ITC tournament that WILL allow the use of the battalions and ill probably through in a time of war rule for each round which will likely be based on the GA of the army that won the campaign..also plan to have a strategem system in play for each round as well.So im not totally against using these features,,I just want them to be used in the context they were intended along with the other features of the expansion/campaign.

   

None of those campaign features you've mentioned have an equivalent outside of the Firestorm campaign. There's no precedent for including them in matched play. The Free Cities abilities are self-evidently different to those other campaign mechanics. They're allegiance abilities, and there's a very strong precedent for allegiance abilities being treated as a standard inclusion for matched play. But Free Cities allegiance abilities are treated differently because of the stigma of being printed in campaign book instead of a battletome.

Out of interest, as you have some experience of the Firestorm allegiance abilities in action, how do you feel those armies performed? Did any of the abilities seem overpowered or broken? Do you think armies that use those abilities would disrupt the competitive meta if they were to be more widely accepted?

[Double Misfire]

Amazing armies @Jamopower@Jamie the Jasper I'd post some of my Tempest's Eye stuff, but right now it's largely generic by comparision, without anything specific suggesting which Free City it might be from. Thanks for the awesome inspiration.

4 minutes ago, Killax said:

In addition there is a an official disctinction between [Battletomes[ and the [Season of War] Firestorm product. What we do also have is Battletome: Chaos Dreadhold, an actual Batteletome, containing no options that are currently available to Matched Play. Again, this isn't some kind of anti-Order consperacy. Better put, Season of War, as the name suggests it is content made for a Campaign, intended for a Campaign and created with this narrative in mind.

Battletome: Chaos Dreadhold contains scenery warscrolls, not new allegiance abilities, something not typically used in matched play games unless the players or the TO have agreed to beforehand (or someone runs the Bloodtoofs battalion! ). Stop grasping at straws to try and score easy points, it undermines the rest of the argument you're putting forth.

At the risk of dragging this thread back into the mud, the four Harbingers recently released to accompany Malign Portents don't appear in a battletome, and debuted in (and so far only see print publication in) a campaign sourcebook. Following the battletome argument you've just put forth, does this make them eligible for not allowing at events?  

[Killax]

7 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

Battletome: Chaos Dreadhold contains scenery warscrolls, not new allegiance abilities, something not typically used in matched play games unless the players or the TO have agreed to beforehand (or someone runs the Bloodtoofs battalion! ). Stop grasping at straws to try and score easy points, it undermines the rest of the argument you're putting forth.

At the risk of dragging this thread back into the mud, the four Harbingers recently released to accompany Malign Portents don't appear in a battletome, and debuted in (and so far only see print publication in) a campaign sourcebook. Following the battletome argument you've just put forth, does this make them eligible for not allowing at events?  

How does it matter? It's content that is called a Battletome that isn't available to Matched play games. As above, Campaign content isn't always used for Matched play games either.
This isn't me grasping at straws and scoring easy points. This is you and Jamie trying to act as if this Campaign content is banned from tournaments because of power, a statement completely based on assumption.

As above, you can expect many of the events not using Malign Portent content because it requires an additional deck, bonusses for Heralds and again is a narrative setting that contains several scenarios and rules that arn't always easy to incorporate for a larger event.

Where does the assumption come from that the Free Cities are banned because of power level come from anyway? 

[Double Misfire]

17 minutes ago, Killax said:

How does it matter? It's content that is called a Battletome that isn't available to Matched play games. 

Because the content you've described is scenery warscrolls, something not typically used for matched play/tournament games without the agreement of the participants as I'd stated in my previous post. The battleplans and Path to Glory tables contained in battletomes aren't used in matched play games either so you don't make a very good point.

Quote

As above, Campaign content isn't always used for Matched play games either.

The Firestorm allegiance abilities aren't specifically stated as campaign content, they just exist in a campaign sourcebook, so it's a bit of a grey area, but the general idea put out by GW on their community website articles covering the various Free Cities and the Warhammer TV streams when Firestorm launched was that players were free to use them in games outside of the Firestorm campaign.

Quote

This isn't me grasping at straws and scoring easy points. This is you and Jamie trying to act as if this Campaign content is banned from tournaments because of power, a statement completely based on assumption.

Killax your entire post history is grasping at straws and trying to score easy points with a tall side of extreme rudeness. I haven't claimed that Firestorm allegiances have been banned from events because of any kind of assumed power level in this thread and only suggested that they could have originally been due to them essentially being "free bonus rules" on top of an existing faction allegiance before they were changed in the errata.

Quote

As above, you can expect many of the events not using Malign Portent content because it requires an additional deck, bonusses for Heralds and again is a narrative setting that contains several scenarios and rules that arn't always easy to incorporate for a larger event.

I'm sure 99% of competitive events won't be using the rules for guiding portents or playing games in the Realm of Death, I was asking if you felt the four Harbinger models should be banned from competitive play, what with their having debuted in a campaign sourcebook without "Battletome" printed on the cover.

Quote

Where does the assumption come from that the Free Cities are banned because of power level come from anyway? 

I really don't think it does at all. The majority of proponents of the Free City rules in this thread have been questioning why they've been banned from so many events at all?