Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

[AthlorianStoners]

@Infeston it makes sense though that they’d want to encourage people to play the factions they’re actively supporting. 

Most people are gonna just run one Batallion anyways, so anything with a Battletome isn’t disadvantaged. I’d hazard a guess and say those factions with GHB allegiance abilities will also get batallions added. 

[Nikobot]

They haven't said how many command points you start with, could be 0, could be 3 or 5?

They haven't said if the General gets a free use of his command ability, what else could be the point of having someone as the General?

They haven't said what else command points can be used for either, if anything.

Still a bit to find out...

[tolstedt]

I am excited.

[CaptainNippon]

46 minutes ago, Infeston said:

The thing is that we get a cool new mechanic with the new game system (to use multiple command abilities) which most of the players won't even use or only have the ability to use the old way (Only one command ability at a time) whereas many people (me included) had hoped the new mechanic won't be so restricted. 

In the end it is just an unfair rule, which could have been avoided and just seems like it is there to bust sales. 

Finding ways to use it is part of the game now. For example, you can save your first command point in turn one to use two in your next turn.

Now I can bring a Vampire Lord and a Wight King at the same time and save up for that one turn where I can combo both of their command abilities on my Skellies.  Before, there was little point to bring a Wight King with my Vampire being the General.

This mechanic opens up another layer of complexity in finding new combos with units that possibly didn't work too well in concert before.

As far as batallions are concerned, I agree.

 

[Burf]

I think this is all missing a core fundamental point about list contruction:

Battalions suck.

Battalions are almost universally terrible, with a couple of obvious OP exceptions.

Think about it, out of more than 150 battalions in the game, how many do you actually ever see? 20 MAYBE?  That's 13%.  And out of those 13% only Vanguard Wing, Changehost, The nurgle one, and the make Nagash invincible one get any traction.

Battalions as a whole are bad and needed a boost. If they hit the ones that are clearly too good, then this becomes a 0 sum thing. Yes it gives armies with battletomes more flexibility than armies that don't, but let's be real; if you're taking a non-battletome army to any kind of event where the overall power of your list matters you were taking some mixed faction super cheese (which wouldn't use a battalion anyway) OR you're accepting that you probably aren't going to do well regardless of whether or not people took battalions.

 

(I'm going to add that I doubt Vanguard wing will survive the next SCE battletome and Changehost is almost certainly going to get wrecked in the next GHB)

[adreal]

So im just starting with aos, and picked wanderers, because i like woodelves.

 

We have one battalion and its really expensive, is one extra cp worth it? I feel like i have a strong army without using it, but i cant do the nomad prince and the waywatchers command ability in one turn.....so yeah i dunno.

 

On the whole, im happy with what i have read, 8th ed 40k, while not perfect, it way better than what it was, and i hope AOS can still be a awesome game in 2nd ed.

 

On another point, how cool is it that we are getting a 2nd ed, when AOS launched alot of people were dismissive of it, and didnt think it would survive, and now, AOS has led the way in games workshop activly caring about balance, world wide narrative events.....i cant wait for what the future holdz

[Gotrek]

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

I can understand the pain of using an army without even the option to trade off, but that's about it.

I don't agree that not taking an incentive is the same as being punished.

If the incentive came with no down side (lack of flexibility in this case) then maaaaybe I would sort of agree.

It depends on how good the incentive is. Now, objectively you are correct. However, we are dealing with emotions and they don't care about objectivity. If someone *feels* that they need a battalion to be competitive the not taking a battalion is putting yourself at a disadvantage, which in terms of gaming, is a punishment.

[Chikout]

OK. Two cents time. 

In current edition battalions have the following advantages and disadvantages. 

Advantages 

1- they give you a special ability

2- they let you take an extra artifact

3- they let you minimise drops in order to gain priority on the first turn.

Disadvantages 

1- they cost points

2- they enforce a limited list construction 

In second edition:

1- unchanged

2- maybe gone

3- maybe gone or reduced.

4- they gain one command point.

Disadvantages 

Unchanged.

In 1000 point games the disadvantages are even more pronounced as the battalion points don't change with fewer units. 

I really don't think the new system will make battalions a must buy as the disadvantages are too great but it might make them a more interesting option. 

Also a few points raised on Facebook. 

Everyone has to pay to use abilities, even the general.

Some abilities, as seen in recent books will only work if the hero is the general.

Each hero can only use one ability at a time. 

Any hero can use the generic abilities even those that don't currently have command abilities. 

As for the argument that this system is designed to make people buy more models, I don't buy it. An army with two or three battalions will have fewer models so If you are building an army from scratch to take advantage of this it will be cheaper. 

This will probably roughly balance those people who will buy a couple of extra units to fill out a battalion.

 

 

[chord]

3 hours ago, Infeston said:

In the end the only people liking this change are people who are really into theorycrafting and list building

I think this is true.  But given the majority of play testers are list builders it's not surprising

[silentdeathz]

2 minutes ago, Chikout said:

OK. Two cents time. 

In current edition battalions have the following advantages and disadvantages. 

Advantages 

1- they give you a special ability

2- they let you take an extra artifact

3- they let you minimise drops in order to gain priority on the first turn.

Disadvantages 

1- they cost points

2- they enforce a limited list construction 

In second edition:

1- unchanged

2- maybe gone

3- maybe gone or reduced.

4- they gain one command point.

Disadvantages 

Unchanged.

In 1000 point games the disadvantages are even more pronounced as the battalion points don't change with fewer units. 

I really don't think the new system will make battalions a must buy as the disadvantages are too great but it might make them a more interesting option. 

Also a few points raised on Facebook. 

Everyone has to pay to use abilities, even the general.

Some abilities, as seen in recent books will only work if the hero is the general.

Each hero can only use one ability at a time. 

Any hero can use the generic abilities even those that don't currently have command abilities. 

As for the argument that this system is designed to make people buy more models, I don't buy it. An army with two or three battalions will have fewer models so If you are building an army from scratch to take advantage of this it will be cheaper. 

This will probably roughly balance those people who will buy a couple of extra units to fill out a battalion.

Just a minor add (not to dismiss your post) - but regarding the whole "buy more models" thing - I think people mean more that they can steer sales toward certain models or better ensure a more even sales spread.

 

Just a minor add (not to dismiss your post) - but regarding the whole "buy more models" thing - I think people mean more that they can steer sales toward certain models or better ensure a more even sales spread.

f.e - If you release a new line with 5 different kits, and have 2 competitive battalions that cover all of the kits then you can better ensure all kits as purchased.

As opposed to say - stormcast currently where people generally dont rush to buy vanguard hunters, for example. 

Another aspect being if they continue to add battalions etc at a later date they could steer people toward kits that weren't selling well in future.

But this is just speculation on my part and not really so relevant to the main topic ? 

[Sleboda]

57 minutes ago, Gotrek said:

It depends on how good the incentive is. Now, objectively you are correct. However, we are dealing with emotions and they don't care about objectivity. If someone *feels* that they need a battalion to be competitive the not taking a battalion is putting yourself at a disadvantage, which in terms of gaming, is a punishment.

We'll, I can't control how people feel, just the data/facts/things we know. 

I certainly understand feelings, I have plenty myself. It's just that using a feeling to say you're being punished by something is, well, really just self-inflicted punishment, not something anyone (or any company) is doing to you.

I guess I just try (try!) to not let feelings over ride hard info.

[Gotrek]

15 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

We'll, I can't control how people feel, just the data/facts/things we know. 

I certainly understand feelings, I have plenty myself. It's just that using a feeling to say you're being punished by something is, well, really just self-inflicted punishment, not something anyone (or any company) is doing to you.

I guess I just try (try!) to not let feelings over ride hard info.

And what we know isn't a hell of a lot, which is why I'm not getting worked up over it.

[AverageBoss]

5 hours ago, CaptainNippon said:

Finding ways to use it is part of the game now. For example, you can save your first command point in turn one to use two in your next turn.

Now I can bring a Vampire Lord and a Wight King at the same time and save up for that one turn where I can combo both of their command abilities on my Skellies.  Before, there was little point to bring a Wight King with my Vampire being the General.

This mechanic opens up another layer of complexity in finding new combos with units that possibly didn't work too well in concert before.

As far as batallions are concerned, I agree.

 

Unfortunately, there is still no point to the WK in this situation. You are better off taking 2 VLs, as their CAs can stack on the same unit and are not limited to just skeletons.

[michu]

1 hour ago, AverageBoss said:

Unfortunately, there is still no point to the WK in this situation. You are better off taking 2 VLs, as their CAs can stack on the same unit and are not limited to just skeletons.

We still don't know if Wight King CA won't change.

[Redmanphill]

I wonder if we will see a set of generic battalions that everyone can use? It would solve the debate above at least. It would be simple to implementing think and would draw on 40k. A small battalion (detachment) would be two heroes and two battleline units whereas a larger version could add three command points a turn but force you to field six battleline units.

[Sheriff]

1 minute ago, Redmanphill said:

I wonder if we will see a set of generic battalions that everyone can use? It would solve the debate above at least. It would be simple to implementing think and would draw on 40k. A small battalion (detachment) would be two heroes and two battleline units whereas a larger version could add three command points a turn but force you to field six battleline units.

 Yeah that's the solution but i fear the playtesting process completely ignores the sort of army that normal people play. 

[Redmanphill]

Well we have seen generic command abilities now (and probably generic magic lores) so I think they are aware of the challenges that certain armies face due to a lack of options...

[TheMuphinMan]

If command points are tied to battalions, verminus really needs to get the clawpack back

edit: or at least a battalion though pestilens benefit from this pretty well with the multitude of battalions they can take

[Lousy Beatnik]

Bleah. Battalions and list building, even just talking about it, is my least favourite part of the game. Not a big deal, bit I hoped they wouldn't tie anything to battalions.

[Ollie Grimwood]

We’ve only had the tip of the iceberg regarding command abilities, we don’t know that we can stack the same ability (you can’t in 40k in fact you can only use each strategem once per turn), we also don’t know what is going to be in GHB18 and for the keen matcheplayers amongst its going to be the crucial document if the past is anything to go by.  

I’ve not seen anything I don’t like in theory and the prospect of have multiple command abilities has got me really interested could make combat Bonesplitterz a bit more fun with the Big Boss and Prophet combining for some stomping   

Im a narrative player and I love Battalions, it tells me now the Armies of the Realms are organised and they make my life easier I just pick the units in them and bingo I’ve got a thematic core to my army. 

[Jamopower]

11 hours ago, Infeston said:

Oh. Well jeah. I would be really happy if this would mean charging units striking first in combat, because I play Destruction.  I on the other hand don't think that this would ruin the whole game. I think it would make melee armies able to compete in the meta.

But I think many people won't like a change like this, because it would propably mean a big shift in the meta. In the end i would think this to be a good change, because many very shooty armies would have to include more close combat units to protect their archers. 

I think this would mean that many army lists get more diverse, because you cannot play armies which only consist of shooting units anymore.

In a world where the double turn causes so much agony due to players just 'pushing their stuff forward and looking what happens' without planning for it, imagine what will be the effect of chargers always striking first in a similar playstyle means. The games will be decided who gets the charge in, which is decided by a priority roll... 

[Ollie Grimwood]

6 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

In a world where the double turn causes so much agony due to players just 'pushing their stuff forward and looking what happens' without planning for it, imagine what will be the effect of chargers always striking first in a similar playstyle means. The games will be decided who gets the charge in, which is decided by a priority roll... 

It would certainly be a concern. I’d also say there’s a few other factors in 40K which make changers striking first a sensible rule, overwatch, no damage transfer between models and almost everyone having shooting so combat units tend to be less effective due to casualties. Things AoS doesn’t have. 

 

[Jamopower]

Also most of the combat troops are a lot worse in combat. Stuff like assault marines and such. 

Then there is also the double turn. Protecting your army from a full on charge combined to a double turn requires two circles of chaff.

[Captain Marius]

I think command points look fun, theyll certainly make things more tactical, and the reroll charge ability is a huge boon to any army whose key unit has fluffed a 3" charge!

Im not bothered by the link to battalions - theyll either be worth the points or not in matched, while in narrative and open you should be able to balance it yourself.

I expect we'll see other ways to generate command points and other things to spend them on - the fyreslayers preview made it sound like we're going to be inundated with artefacts...

Ive seen a fair bit of "oh my army cant do this its not fair" in this thread, which reminds me of all the hilarious  teeth gnashing when original AoS was previewed, cheers for the nostalgia. Some of the constructive posts looking at the new possibilities have been awesome and insightful however, and are making me very enthusiastic for this edition (even if i think its a year early, any bets on 40k 9th next year?)

[GeneralZero]

AoS 2.0 is well wearing its upgrade number: Magic, CP, few other tweaks in the rules, all of this make a huge change in the possibilities of armies. I just Invested in Death. With the upcoming 2.0 I'll get more SC (my main first army) and same for death. That means that I will be able to make unlimited builds in SC and same in death. Tons of battles in the near futur with only 2 armies.

I couldn't expect more of a game. And those change give me even more of what I already have.