Who Likes Initiative rolls?

[the_prophecy]

13 hours ago, LLV said:

Well, It seems that first turn will dictated by a dice roll rather than drops in AoS 2 - just not heard if priority is going away. I know combat priority I changing to be like 40k, as in charging units get to go first.

that would be horrible and would gave  the double Turn even more impact on the game. The close combat initiative change balances nicely with the ini roll but when the attacker gets twice an attacks with most of his troops before the opponent can even react in close combat that would be devastating for the game. I dont believe this will happen maybe with 2 or more other changes that balance this out. I think with the new magic set that will come we will see things like perils of the warp for double 1s wich will make magic a little more unreliable and dangerous

[SirPergrin]

I see it as an integral aspect of Age of Sigmar. To me, it signifies the momentum of battle that can even destroy the best laid out plans. I love it!

[BarrowLord]

When I first started playing Age of Sigmar I hated the double turn (mainly because I didn't know how to properly prepare for it).  Now that I have some experience under my belt I find that I quite like it.  It is exciting and, far more often than not, not the boogeyman it is made out to be.  Oftentimes it causes games to swing back and fourth in dynamic and unexpected ways.

That said, if they changed combat priority to be more like 40K they would need to get rid of it.  Not only would that be too strong mechanically, but it would also make sitting through the double turn a nightmare.  Two turns of getting hit by your opponent's best and not being able to do anything in return would be awful.

 

[PJetski]

I really like rolling for turn order. I find 40k to be a much less interesting game because you can predict how every unit is going to act turn after turn... you can predict the game from deployment.

[PlasticCraic]

I love it!  A couple of the tweaks suggested on here aren't terrible ideas, such as tie breakers going to whoever lost the previous priority roll.

But the core mechanic is awesome and I would hate to see it go.

Some people complain that the double turn is unfair.  But you know what I think is unfair?  Going second all the way through and not having an opportunity to turn the tables.

I've heard (but can't verify) that something like 75% of games in 40K are won by the player going first?  Certainly ties in with what I've witnessed in 40K games at our club. 

****** that.

[Ollie Grimwood]

Slightly off topic I’d be very disappointed to see AoS  take on the chargers go first mechanic from 40K.  In addition to overwatch most 40K units aren’t a effective in Close combat as AoS ones for a number of reasons, damage alocation, number of attacks and things. It would make things very powerful on the charge indeed and would be very exploitable.  As mentioned it would be a bit much on a double turn as well. 

[Charles]

7 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Slightly off topic I’d be very disappointed to see AoS  take on the chargers go first mechanic from 40K.  In addition to overwatch most 40K units aren’t a effective in Close combat as AoS ones for a number of reasons, damage alocation, number of attacks and things. It would make things very powerful on the charge indeed and would be very exploitable.  As mentioned it would be a bit much on a double turn as well. 

The games do not need to be the same, please keep AoS unique GW.

It would also have the unintended consequence of being a free 2D6 + retreat movement for Skinks every turn. 

[Blood&skulls]

One of the reasons I started playing AOS is that that I didn’t like 40k as a game. If the chargers always go first and I go, you go mechanics appear that may well mean I rapidly lose interest. They are two of the best mechanics for me. 

[Zfreie]

I started out with other war games with some form of alternate activation and not much randomness. At first glance I thought it was an awful idea, but after trying it and seeing how much it really changed tactics and game play made me love the system. So much that its now my main game I paint, collect and play.  It wouldn't be AoS with out it.

On a very side note, I  hope they dont stray to far from the core mechanics of AoS. I'm afraid it will start to cause a rift in the player base much like past editions of whfb and 40k seem to have( *note* I have never played either but from lurking seems to be a thing). I dont want to the strange player sticking to his ghb17 10 years from now because the newer editions play like a totally different game. Some things could be tweaked but to stray to far will result in a new game dynamic.

 

 

[Roark]

Hated it at first, as did my gaming group. In fact, we didn't play Triumphs or Mysterious Terrain either. Then a couple of guys went to a tournament and played "proper AoS" and now we love it and play the full ruleset every time. Priority roll is one of my favourite aspects of the game now, and I really dig that it forces you think about the game on that broad/macro level.

[Redmanphill]

I’d like to see chargers going first, though they’d have to introduce an interruption mechanic then. I hope they clarify the system with the new edition (if it’s a new edition).

[MrCharisma]

I love the priority mechanic, and would prefer if we rolled it on Turn 1 as well (first to deploy gets +1 to their roll instead). 

While I enjoyed WHFB it became predictable at times. This shakes games up and can easily swing the balance of power with a single double turn. 

[NurglesFirstChosen]

The idea of taking it in turns without an initiative roll sounds so dull. The drama of double turns adds to the games (and often decides them.... but not always).

? I must say though, I’m not a fan of double turns when it goes against me ??? but even then I wouldn’t want to change the mechanic. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.