GeneralZero Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, Tittliewinks22 said: Can't unbind if you are in a ship... Sure? BTW, are the frigate and ironclad the only ships able to transport, even a single (normal size) char? About transport, can you transport an allied wizzard for example or only KO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheriff Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 50 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said: I’d also point out GW has Firstorm allegiances at their events. Most events allow it. Easier to count the one that didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOtherJosh Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, Sheriff said: 1 hour ago, Ollie Grimwood said: I’d also point out GW has Firstorm allegiances at their events. Most events allow it. Easier to count the one that didn't. The firestorm Allegiances were faq’d to only be usable if taking the Grand Alliance Allegiance Abilities. So they are much less over the top than when stacked on the faction specific Allegiance Abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemondish Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 37 minutes ago, Deadkitten said: This stuff doesn't drop in a vacuum. Some of it we can look at objectively and know how it plays out. There are a lot of similarities in 40K. No, it isn't a straight analog, but again, it isn't necessarily a stretch to predict some of the impact. If you have limited gaming time, it's perfectly reasonable to say "you know what, that looks unfun. Let's just skip it. " There are going to be plenty of groups that will slug through the 2 dozen games necessary to gauge any particular thing it's fair shake. I'd say looking at 40k as inspiration is yet another reason to hold off on the choice of providing feedback and outright banning new aspects of the game before trying them. It's not a perfect analog, as you said, but when the big FAQ dropped for 8th everyone lit themselves on fire about how the sky is falling and gunline armies would dominate. Many in the community felt that the changes would be unfun for them. After all, it's only natural for folks to feel like fun is zero sum in a competitive game like 40k. Lo and behold, the London GT showed that the usual suspects were still extremely viable, that the fears were mostly unwarranted, and that the changes did not uproot as much as they predicted. Nothing like a 400 person tournament to put fears to rest. Turns out that changes that make some armies better and increase the challenge doesn't have to mean you lose out on the fun either. Changes can be fun for both! And when one takes a single change in a vacuum, without taking into account other factors, it becomes easy to miss the forest for the trees. There's a pattern that stats to form once you see more and more of this happen in 40k. Folks are fearful, predictions fly around, but the change comes and the results aren't quite what was predicted. At that point everybody either forgets exactly how hysterical they got. It's easy to downplay the hysteria after the results don't live up to the fears because nobody really likes to be reminded they were wrong about something, but I see enough of this pattern with every change in, well, pretty much any game tabletop or otherwise, that it starts to be easy to pick up on it even if you're new to a whole new game system. But ultimately what I was trying to get at wasn't to imply it's foolish to ban. It's your games, do as you wish. But I gather AoS, like 40k, wasn't exactly designed to be balanced around what how a small gaming group plays. It may be helpful for the group to ban predatory endless spells or summoning if nobody wants to play with them, but that's not quite the scenario in which GW balances their games, right? That type of feedback is from an extremely limited perspective and doesn't apply to everybody, so I imagine it probably isn't going to help GW very much. In fact, I'd be surprised if they found much value in feedback provided well before games have even been played in 2e, whether the predictions turn out to be true or false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daedalus81 Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 47 minutes ago, Jamopower said: In other words, if ability is such, that it changes the game into a competition who can pull it trough first and it's not a core mechanism of the game, it is not perhaps a good for the game as whole. Now we don't know how it'll turn out, but the Banishment (or summoning) sure looks like that kind of ability. We're talking about 12" and that wizard doesn't get to move before casting so you literally need to move directly into it. Banishment will be from Azyr. Do all the other spells from Azyr stack up? Is it worth not having purple sun or other items? Sure you could snag it on a double turn, but that means you previously went second and have to win priority with lower odds and not have an endless spell you need to move asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karol Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Ollie Grimwood said: For serious Matched play however, wizards are available in one way or another for all factions, it’s up to players to build their Amries accordingly. I’d be against suggestions to ban a section of the game based on a situation that comes down to player choice. One wouldnt arrive at a matchedplay tournament with one hero and expect them to alter Duality of Death because you put yourself at a disadvantage I don't understand this argument, what is "serious matched play" something else then normal matched play? If you go the way of the argument that everyone can play wizards, you may as well tell people to not play the armies they want or can play, and just get the best what is at the moment. Also adding a single mage doesn't help much vs the magic/summoning faction, who can run 3 or more. 58 minutes ago, daedalus81 said: And all those spells and artifacts are equal opportunity. They're not bound to one faction. I don't know who gets more buff from magic/realm stuff. Factions who already have mages as part of their normal lists, or armies that don't have them, and at best have to ally them in? But what worries me the most is the summoning change to blades of khorn, before if you didn't own models to summon you still could do stuff with fief points, if the buffs get removed and only summoning is left, then all people who don't buy more models get another thing to be sad about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie Grimwood Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, TheOtherJosh said: The firestorm Allegiances were faq’d to only be usable if taking the Grand Alliance Allegiance Abilities. So they are much less over the top than when stacked on the faction specific Allegiance Abilities. And FaQ’d in record time as well. Another example of some quality two way community interaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 3 minutes ago, TheOtherJosh said: The firestorm Allegiances I didn't even know that they existed It is annoying to find some (old) new stuff that are scatered in several spots, discover some tricks mostly undocumented. When will GW CENTRALIZE everything in a PRINCIPAL AND UNIQUE document stating all the actual right rules? We are in 2018!!! a simple PDF should do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 BTW, Faction Focus: The Beasts of Chaos https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/05/31/31st-may-faction-focus-the-beasts-of-chaosgw-homepage-post-3/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daedalus81 Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 Oh, baby! Point drops for Dragon Ogors! All aboard the hype train! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie Grimwood Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 15 minutes ago, Karol said: I don't understand this argument, what is "serious matched play" something else then normal matched play? If you go the way of the argument that everyone can play wizards, you may as well tell people to not play the armies they want or can play, and just get the best what is at the moment. Also adding a single mage doesn't help much vs the magic/summoning faction, who can run 3 or more. There’s all levels of play some take the competitive aspect of the game more seriously than others and army construction is part of that. Your army composition is your choice and an important part of your preparation for any tournament you’ve got to and try to balance your choice for what you feel will be most successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamopower Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 9 minutes ago, daedalus81 said: We're talking about 12" and that wizard doesn't get to move before casting so you literally need to move directly into it. Banishment will be from Azyr. Do all the other spells from Azyr stack up? Is it worth not having purple sun or other items? That's why I said that it looks like an ability that has a possibility of creating its own subgame. You don't actually have to even cast cast the spell if it's fearful enough that the opponents need to always stay 12" away from the caster, for it to have a massive impact to the game. Area denial and control is after all usually how you win the game. But again, I don't believe the realm spells are big of a problem. I'm very surprised if they aren't narrative content as they are currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheriff Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 More non-summoning stuff getting points reductions. The drops will be hefty i reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsharitt Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 Hmm, "Beasts of Chaos" would be a nice name for a new combined faction along the same lines as Legions of Nagash..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaKennyThing Posted May 31, 2018 Author Share Posted May 31, 2018 I don't think Banishment will be particularly overwhelming. The spell portals are a double edged sword at the best of times, and there's bound to be something else in the rules that I am sure will make it remarkably underwhelming, if not useful at times. I don't know why, I'm just not concerned! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie Grimwood Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 12 minutes ago, GeneralZero said: I didn't even know that they existed It is annoying to find some (old) new stuff that are scatered in several spots, discover some tricks mostly undocumented. When will GW CENTRALIZE everything in a PRINCIPAL AND UNIQUE document stating all the actual right rules? We are in 2018!!! a simple PDF should do. Ah but then people wouldn’t have bought Firestorm?. They give nice flavour to some mixed faction forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsharitt Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 1 minute ago, Sheriff said: More non-summoning stuff getting points reductions. The drops will be hefty i reckon. Yeah, people are preemptively complaining that summoning is going to be too powerful, but I'm thinking that summoning armies will have to summon just to keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VoodooChileIRL Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 Edit: I'm an idiot, I didn't scroll up far enough. Ignore me. Faction Focus: Beasts of Chaos is up. Looks like Brayherd, Warherd and Thunderscorn combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadkitten Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 22 minutes ago, Lemondish said: SNIP But ultimately what I was trying to get at wasn't to imply it's foolish to ban. It's your games, do as you wish. But I gather AoS, like 40k, wasn't exactly designed to be balanced around what how a small gaming group plays. It may be helpful for the group to ban predatory endless spells or summoning if nobody wants to play with them, but that's not quite the scenario in which GW balances their games, right? That type of feedback is from an extremely limited perspective and doesn't apply to everybody, so I imagine it probably isn't going to help GW very much. In fact, I'd be surprised if they found much value in feedback provided well before games have even been played in 2e, whether the predictions turn out to be true or false. I don't think the OP was suggesting feedback now. I most assuredly agree that considered feedback coming from playing a few games will be the best sort of feedback. As far as how GW balances? Oh man, that's a whole new thread! I know Dan Heelan and crowd has had a heavy hand and I trust their judgement. I just hope GW listens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 I'm worrying about those points drops: GW changed so many entries that they can't had the time to test everything in the new context of AoS 2!!! This is mathematically impossible with 24h/day event with a 1 year back preparation. How many factions do we have? something like 40? How many units? And that, BEFORE adding: - magic - endless spells - summoning - new artefacts - twicks of rules per faction - new whole rules So, I guess there will be a period (short I hope) of time where many thing have to be adjusted. BTW: I'm super happy for the upcomming AoS 2. (but what a mess) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanger Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 I always liked the idea of Beastmen/Beasts of Chaos, but the models... they never spoke to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amysrevenge Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, VoodooChileIRL said: Looks like Brayherd, Warherd and Thunderscorn combined. Combined into one Faction Focus article, but from the wording of it, still 3 separate Allegiances (who have each other on their ally lists). Sad panda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 Just now, Vanger said: I always liked the idea of Beastmen/Beasts of Chaos, but the models... they never spoke to me. yep, they feel like (really) old school, not on par with recent AoS productions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daedalus81 Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 Just now, GeneralZero said: BTW: I'm super happy for the upcomming AoS 2. (but what a mess) Yes, it will be incredibly messy for a while, but mostly from the new stuff, I think. Thankfully we have regular touch points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daedalus81 Posted May 31, 2018 Share Posted May 31, 2018 1 minute ago, Vanger said: I always liked the idea of Beastmen/Beasts of Chaos, but the models... they never spoke to me. I will forever love my Shaggoth and I constantly hope they make a properly sized on in plastic. It would be glorious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.