Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

[TheOtherJosh]

7 minutes ago, Burf said:

Those don't add depth, they add book-keeping and RNG.[...]

They add additional variables that, as a general, you need to compensate for in your path towards victory.

However, they can make substantial changes in how to get your victory. And what threats you need to address first as a priority.

People don’t play them because it changes the game to a much more chaotic scenario where the variables aren’t just “place terrain, place objectives, place miniatures, win” ...

And because people don’t play them, they don’t know them. And we’re back to quotes like “they’re too random.”

In some scenarios, I could see the addition of the variables making it harder for some armies to win ... but those same variables may make it better for non-top tier armies.

Using the full breadth of the rules could make you much more tactically aware.

And when/if you loose, just blame the terrain and Realm.  

[Infeston]

2 hours ago, PJetski said:

Now GW is expanding those features and people are saying they still won't use them? None of this makes any sense to me. It's like playing Smash Bros 1v1 on final destination with no items and complaining that the game doesn't have enough variety.

You forgot "Fox only!"

No items, Fox only, Final Destination!

I think what counts for Smash also counts in parts for the competitive community of AoS. But different to Smash Bros, AoS is even worse designed balance-wise. 

I really don't understand why the tournament-meta really tries to eliminate all randomness and wants to predict everything in a game which is clearly build around randomness etc. 

I think the tournament meta should adapt and add some of the rules to their tournaments. It wouldn't be such a big problem if more players wouldn't see the tournament or matched play as the way the game should be played regulary.

[AthlorianStoners]

Kinda feel like as we’ve gone on most changes people weren’t happy with have been contextualised and worked out ok. Think the same thing will happen here. 

[Infeston]

10 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

Kinda feel like as we’ve gone on most changes people weren’t happy with have been contextualised and worked out ok. Think the same thing will happen here. 

I really hope that they still include the "realm selection" in the core rules but different to AoS 1.0, they should add a table of the different realms directly into the core rules.

At the moment the realm descriptions in the GHB2017 are weirdly disconnected from the core rules, because they are seperated in two different books (or PDFs). I think if you would add a "realm table" to the core rules it would become a lot more common (also in matched play) to roll or select different realms to fight in and then to adjust to the circumstances and magic in the realms.

I think the direct integration of the realms in the core rules would solve that problem. 

I really hope they don't seperate the "select a realm to fight in" and the rules for the different realms from each other.

[AlphaKennyThing]

9 hours ago, Infeston said:

You forgot "Fox only!"

No items, Fox only, Final Destination!

I think what counts for Smash also counts in parts for the competitive community of AoS. But different to Smash Bros, AoS is even worse designed balance-wise. 

I really don't understand why the tournament-meta really tries to eliminate all randomness and wants to predict everything in a game which is clearly build around randomness etc. 

I think the tournament meta should adapt and add some of the rules to their tournaments. It wouldn't be such a big problem if more players wouldn't see the tournament or matched play as the way the game should be played regulary.

For some reason, the word 'meta' when used to describe wargaming makes me really sad. Absolutely not a reflection on your post, Infeston - I happen to whole heartedly agree with you - it'd be good to mix things up in Matched Play for sure!

[Sleboda]

7 hours ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

For some reason, the word 'meta' when used to describe wargaming makes me want to cause grievous bodily harm to anything within arm's reach. The only people who I've ever heard use it in person were the type to drop the cheesiest, most poorly painted netlist on the table and start fast-rolling. I think that's probably what it stems from. Either way it makes me cringe inwardly.

 

May I have your baby? Lol.

Seriously. Meta. People are overly misusing it soooo much that I fear it will probably become ok, like "ain't."

If I rubbed a lamp and got three wishes, one would be to annihilate all the Kool Kids who misuse "meta."

[BURF1]

6 hours ago, Sleboda said:

May I have your baby? Lol.

Seriously. Meta. People are overly misusing it soooo much that I fear it will probably become ok, like "ain't."

If I rubbed a lamp and got three wishes, one would be to annihilate all the Kool Kids who misuse "meta."

Meta, as it has become used in gaming comes from the original MMO use of it, which is actually an acronym meaning 'Most Effective Tactic Available'. (From Urban dictionary). Just as relevant, words mean what people agree they mean. Gaming communities in general have decided that the 'Meta' refers to those things that are most common and/or powerful within a game.  Since 95% of everyone in gaming agree on that definition of meta, and even those that don't understand it in that context, Meta inherits that meaning.

We could say 'smurble Dooofs' instead of 'meta' and as long as it was always used in the same context, it would mean the same thing.

[Thostos]

  Been fielding Nagash(finally) since the LoN book dropped,,im currently 4w and 2L in ITC tournament play with him.This new dispel range is a huge boon for Nagash,,especially against tzeench and army the Nagash struggles against(dont we all).

  The new Mystic shield is a nice change overall,,but as has been pointed out,is redundant in a LoN list.No biggie though as I usually used it on my VLoZD anyway.

 Not going to go to far into wether Nagash is worth his points or not,but I will say that Im having a blast running him and I personally think the points are spot on for him,even if he never wins a title,I would say it puts him on the top tables consistantly.

 The new realm magic spells will certainly be used in our ITC events locally,we are always looking for ways to add some fluff to our rounds and events,these will be a nice addition.

 

[tgi_shaun]

1 hour ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

For some reason, the word 'meta' when used to describe wargaming makes me want to cause grievous bodily harm to anything within arm's reach. The only people who I've ever heard use it in person were the type to drop the cheesiest, most poorly painted netlist on the table and start fast-rolling. I think that's probably what it stems from. Either way it makes me cringe inwardly.

That said, I whole heartedly agree with you - it'd be good to mix things up in Matched Play for sure!

While most people I know buy the models they like and play the armies they like, there shouldn't be this kind of behaviour in the community. 

With AoS rapidly growing, people are going to look towards the most effective tactic available for some guidance on what is going to work. Trying to shame people like this isn't going to help the wargaming community grow, and if anything makes it less inviting to newcomers.

Consider what you say before spouting nonsense like this. 

 

[BURF1]

3 hours ago, Infeston said:

You forgot "Fox only!"

No items, Fox only, Final Destination!

I think what counts for Smash also counts in parts for the competitive community of AoS. But different to Smash Bros, AoS is even worse designed balance-wise. 

I really don't understand why the tournament-meta really tries to eliminate all randomness and wants to predict everything in a game which is clearly build around randomness etc. 

I think the tournament meta should adapt and add some of the rules to their tournaments. It wouldn't be such a big problem if more players wouldn't see the tournament or matched play as the way the game should be played regulary.

They try to eliminate the randomness because GW is really bad at balancing stuff already, we don't have the wiggle room a game like smash does for random things to happen.

I once watched two guys, casual players playing casual 'this is what I had in my case' lists play eleven 2000pt games in forty-five minutes using the 'deployment, twist, objective(no sudden death)' open play deck. It was just 'deployment, turn one, I win' 11 times in a row.

If you're playing hammerstrike or any other list that depends on large, expensive, slow units, and you draw Hysh against an army that can make good use of banishment, that game's over. If you're playing against death and you draw Shyish, chances are, that game's over.

It's not 'oh I got the fire flower tee-hee' it's 'I got a super death explosion ball that kills you 3 times from anywhere on the stage and can't be defended against.'

Controlled randomness in an otherwise fairly well-balanced game is fine. GW doesn't do that. GW does 'lose instantly' randomness in a game that's sort  of okayish balanced (like 4th place through-32nd are all fairly even...ish).

[chord]

Realm specific rules add too much book keeping and rules,  but yet allegiance abilities and artifacts don't?  ?

 

[BURF1]

2 minutes ago, chord said:

Realm specific rules add too much book keeping and rules,  but yet allegiance abilities and artifacts don't?  ?

 

Yep. 

[Orange]

1 hour ago, BURF1 said:

Meta, as it has become used in gaming comes from the original MMO use of it, which is actually an acronym meaning 'Most Effective Tactic Available'. (From Urban dictionary).

That's interesting, but I thought it came from metagaming, which means looking at factors outside the game to make decisions.

Like if the trend was that everyone was taking magic-heavy armies and little else, making a list that is very anti-magic.

The word 'meta' where I live has come to mean 'current trends in gaming community' as well as 'gaming community.'

I think it's dumb, but language changes, what can you do!

[Christopher Rowe]

1 hour ago, BURF1 said:

Meta, as it has become used in gaming comes from the original MMO use of it, which is actually an acronym meaning 'Most Effective Tactic Available'. (From Urban dictionary). Just as relevant, words mean what people agree they mean. Gaming communities in general have decided that the 'Meta' refers to those things that are most common and/or powerful within a game.  Since 95% of everyone in gaming agree on that definition of meta, and even those that don't understand it in that context, Meta inherits that meaning.

We could say 'smurble Dooofs' instead of 'meta' and as long as it was always used in the same context, it would mean the same thing.

That...is very interesting and useful. My background, as both a writer and a scholar, taught me that "meta" means something quite different, and something quite specific, rooted in French literary theory. So I've spent these last few weeks since I joined these boards kind of crossing my eyes at a lot of posts that used the term!

That said, yes, words mean what people agree they mean, but I'm afraid that in this case, as in all cases, the OED trumps the Urban Dictionary. "Meta" as used in this community is a little "squishy," and also, as far as I've been able to determine, is a little lockstep. Yes, vive la différence, but in this case, the most important difference--which is to say the most fun difference, given that we're talking about a game we all play--is in subverting and transforming the "meta," not in embracing it.

[stratigo]

5 hours ago, Balloon Dwarf said:

Let's be fair, everything is an abomination unto Nuggan. 

I'm in the midst of building my KO army and I think it'll be nice to see the rise of the navigator. Most lists seem to exclude him in favour of the Khemist so I'm interested. I did get royally murdered by a Tzeentch army the other day so some unbinds might be a help. 

the khemist isn't going to reliably dispell anything tzeentch unless they make him more capable. And he is drastically overcosted.

 

That said, this is the first set of changes that feel good for KO, so that's nice

5 hours ago, TheOtherJosh said:

They add additional variables that, as a general, you need to compensate for in your path towards victory.

However, they can make substantial changes in how to get your victory. And what threats you need to address first as a priority.

People don’t play them because it changes the game to a much more chaotic scenario where the variables aren’t just “place terrain, place objectives, place miniatures, win” ...

And because people don’t play them, they don’t know them. And we’re back to quotes like “they’re too random.”

In some scenarios, I could see the addition of the variables making it harder for some armies to win ... but those same variables may make it better for non-top tier armies.

Using the full breadth of the rules could make you much more tactically aware.

And when/if you loose, just blame the terrain and Realm.  

Any game that comes down to one or two dice rolls over everything else is not competitive. Realm gaming is fun (well, malign portents in shyish wasn't for KO, but eh), but it isn't the best way to find who's playing the better made army with more skill, which is ultimately the heart of competitive gaming.

 

 

 

[Nick907]

AoS has been a great game so far, and I'm excited to see it grow and improve. I'm happy about the magic changes and curious about the Command points and abilities. I hope the don't change anything that alters my army composition too much, I'm still putting together my Wanderers since the Compendium removed some units (ie Wardancers, Glade Lord/dragon).  

[Sleboda]

2 hours ago, BURF1 said:

We could say 'smurble Dooofs' instead of 'meta' and as long as it was always used in the same context, it would mean the same thing.

We could, and it would be tragic. Common acceptance of a horrible behavior makes it no less horrible.

[ZaelART]

This is relevant to AOS 2.0:

The meta-game is the game that players play against each other before they play the game.

This “meta-game” in games where you have deck or army construction mostly involves strategic choices during construction with the intention of providing advantages when you start playing the real game.

If you were meta-gaming, you would find out what your opponent was playing, and bring a list to beat it.

For tournaments, you analyse what is the most commonly played deck/army. You then need to think, do I bring an army that beats the most popular army? Or do I bring an army that beats the army that beats the most popular army? That’s meta. When playing the meta-game, reviewing what is popular in your local community, is often referred to as reviewing or analysing the local meta. The meta being... what is happening with the game - outside of the game. You need to be aware of this in order to play the meta.

If you’ve analysed your local meta, within the context of the wider meta, and have constructed a list that you think will put you at an advantage within the current meta. Then congrats, you’re now playing the “meta-game”.

The reason people refer to strong lists as meta, is because this is an abbreviation of “meta-defining”. These lists are so strong, that the majority of people will decide to either play that list, or a list that beats that list, and any list that is weak to it becomes less common. Therefore that powerful list has now changed the face of the meta, it has defined it. Everyone who is playing the meta-game, in the context of the local and wider meta, has to react to a meta-defining list. That powerful meta-defining list has now been shortened to be known as simply meta. 

Thanks for reading a brief history of meta, which in gaming, stems from the notion of playing the players, before playing the game.

Now back to AOS 2.0 reveals, and where this post actually becomes relevant. Randomness is the bane of meta-gamers. It makes every decision made outside the game, that much harder to make. Then you when you actually sit down and play, all your painstaking preparation can become worthless. If you spend a lot of time worrying about your lists, you probably enjoy the meta-game and won’t like having more random factors. When you need to run complicated simulations... more than once for each realm, army, scenario and scenery/board combination. You are over complicating the meta-game.

[AlphaKennyThing]

31 minutes ago, ZaelART said:

This is relevant to AOS 2.0:

The meta-game is the game that players play against each other before they play the game.

This “meta-game” in games where you have deck or army construction mostly involves strategic choices during construction with the intention of providing advantages when you start playing the real game.

If you were meta-gaming, you would find out what your opponent was playing, and bring a list to beat it.

For tournaments, you analyse what is the most commonly played deck/army. You then need to think, do I bring an army that beats the most popular army? Or do I bring an army that beats the army that beats the most popular army? That’s meta. When playing the meta-game, reviewing what is popular in your local community, is often referred to as reviewing or analysing the local meta. The meta being... what is happening with the game - outside of the game. You need to be aware of this in order to play the meta.

If you’ve analysed your local meta, within the context of the wider meta, and have constructed a list that you think will put you at an advantage within the current meta. Then congrats, you’re now playing the “meta-game”.

The reason people refer to strong lists as meta, is because this is an abbreviation of “meta-defining”. These lists are so strong, that the majority of people will decide to either play that list, or a list that beats that list, and any list that is weak to it becomes less common. Therefore that powerful list has now changed the face of the meta, it has defined it. Everyone who is playing the meta-game, in the context of the local and wider meta, has to react to a meta-defining list. That powerful meta-defining list has now been shortened to be known as simply meta. 

Thanks for reading a brief history of meta, which in gaming, stems from the notion of playing the players, before playing the game.

Well, colour me thoroughly educated! Had no idea where it came from. I thought it was a new word people were just banding around like confetti and it made me sad.

Every day is a school day. Have a like for your efforts, sah!

[Mcthew]

22 minutes ago, ZaelART said:

Now back to AOS 2.0 reveals, and where this post actually becomes relevant. Randomness is the bane of meta-gamers. It makes every decision made outside the game, that much harder to make. Then you when you actually sit down and play, all your painstaking preparation can become worthless. If you spend a lot of time worrying about your lists, you probably enjoy the meta-game and won’t like having more random factors. When you need to run complicated simulations... more than once for each realm, army, scenario and scenery/board combination. You are over complicating the meta-game.

As a relative newcomer, thank you muchly for the explanation. I was a little confused by the use too if I’m honest (coming from a non-gaming community and using it as a general or business term ?).

I prefer the randomness if I’m honest - we use the Open War card deck for most games.

 Although you can kind of prepare for Time of War if it’s agreed up front - which should then be less random.  It makes more sense that an army finds itself in a place of its choosing rather than a random realm. Otherwise why have it there other than use as a variable?

I think of it as a narrative tool really to put more colour into a game, a game with doesn’t have to rely on strategic calculation to the nth degree before you’ve even put a model on the table. But there are gamers who like that too.

I mean, wfyb!

[Enoby]

I'm a little worried that the 30" dispell will make it so I never get to successfully cast one of the new infinite spells, but I think that comes mostly from having the special talent of rolling very low on casting rolls. I'm like anti-Nagash.

 

For most people I think it'll be a good thing - it keeps the first turn more interactive and let's Khorne bring the pain to cowardly wizards who try hide on the back lines. 

The cog spell also quite exciting; Seekers of Slaanesh can now move a possible 48" (14 from movement + 2 to movement from seekers host + 1 to run from the locus + 2 to run from the cogs + 12 from if you roll a double 6 to run (a little easier with the new command ability) + 12 from a very lucky charge + 1 to charge from the locus + 2 to charge from the host + 2 to charge from the cogs). It's totally excessive and you'll probably never need to run that far, but it's good that they can chase down any shooting unit that's trying to hide and protect the rest of the army for at least a shooting phase. 

[AlphaKennyThing]

7 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I'm a little worried that the 30" dispell will make it so I never get to successfully cast one of the new infinite spells, but I think that comes mostly from having the special talent of rolling very low on casting rolls. I'm like anti-Nagash.

 

For most people I think it'll be a good thing - it keeps the first turn more interactive and let's Khorne bring the pain to cowardly wizards who try hide on the back lines. 

The cog spell also quite exciting; Seekers of Slaanesh can now move a possible 48" (14 from movement + 2 to movement from seekers host + 1 to run from the locus + 2 to run from the cogs + 12 from if you roll a double 6 to run (a little easier with the new command ability) + 12 from a very lucky charge + 1 to charge from the locus + 2 to charge from the host + 2 to charge from the cogs). It's totally excessive and you'll probably never need to run that far, but it's good that they can chase down any shooting unit that's trying to hide and protect the rest of the army for at least a shooting phase. 

48" on a seeker? That's horrendous! ? Some serious screening needed contain that.

[RuneBrush]

+++MOD HAT+++

Discussion of what meta is & isn't stops now.  Comments are becoming personal and not what is acceptable for this forum, I've removed/tidied up a number of posts that crossed the line.

On the subject of the realm spells - we currently do not have any information on how the realm mechanic will work for the new edition, until we do it is impossible to determine how powerful these types of spell will be and the impact on the various ways to play, so let's not panic!

[Mcthew]

15 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I'm a little worried that the 30" dispell will make it so I never get to successfully cast one of the new infinite spells, but I think that comes mostly from having the special talent of rolling very low on casting rolls. I'm like anti-Nagash.

 

For most people I think it'll be a good thing - it keeps the first turn more interactive and let's Khorne bring the pain to cowardly wizards who try hide on the back lines. 

The cog spell also quite exciting; Seekers of Slaanesh can now move a possible 48" (14 from movement + 2 to movement from seekers host + 1 to run from the locus + 2 to run from the cogs + 12 from if you roll a double 6 to run (a little easier with the new command ability) + 12 from a very lucky charge + 1 to charge from the locus + 2 to charge from the host + 2 to charge from the cogs). It's totally excessive and you'll probably never need to run that far, but it's good that they can chase down any shooting unit that's trying to hide and protect the rest of the army for at least a shooting phase. 

Awesome. I don’t even have a Slaanesh army but that is a power you kinda respect! 

If GW are going for variety and cinematic gameplay then they’re heading in the right direction. Sure, some of these spells will throw balance into the bin, but for inventiveness and excitement (even when you’re at the punishing end of this spell in particular) you can’t help but admire it.

[AaronWilson]

Well in regards to the new unbinding range is certainly is a bonus for Tzeentch, with the current rules it makes a LoC even better! Without context of any point / rules changes it's hard to say just how much it will improve Tzeentch.