Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

What if you didn't pick your army for the death star lazor thingy, but the realm rules still nerf your army, which already is on the bottom of all tiers. Plus what is played in tournaments is soon played in non tournament games, no one wants to spend X on a list, to have it be not suited to play most of the time. So with realm effects being used, the meta would be limited to the few armies that do well with the rules being in effect, and everyone one else who wants to play them or not, would be forced to do it, by the simple fact that all armies are build with 2000pts matched play in mind. And that fact that something like Hysh becomes "balanced" in narrative or at 4000pts is moot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

No I don't think its a good thing, because if the meta constantly shifts, you have to constantly buy or have a huge collection of models...

Isn't this already the case and generally has been in GW games for a couple decades?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dead Scribe said:

No I don't think its a good thing, because if the meta constantly shifts, you have to constantly buy or have a huge collection of models...

But it'll shift every event, as the realm rules are random, so the 'meta' will never be constant enough to warrant buying new models all the time. If anything, it'd lead to the best armies being the most versatile.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:

Isn't this already the case and generally has been in GW games for a couple decades?

I agree and I think the current spammy lists only emphasis the problem. People buy 2000 points of nearly all the same model because its strong and then it gets nerfed because everyone was using it and then all of a sudden a model you don't own any of rises to the top in your army and suddenly you find yourself having to practically buy another 2000 points to adjust. A shifting meta that encourages balanced lists would ultimately help to keep more units relevant meaning you won't go all in on units hoping they don't get nerfed in the next GHB.

I mean take Stormcast at the moment. All everyone seems to be talking about is 20 blocks of Sequitors and supporting Evocators. What happens if next year they get nerfed to the ground and those Vanguard-Hunters no one is playing with becomes the new hot thing?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, blueshirtman said:

What if you didn't pick your army for the death star lazor thingy, but the realm rules still nerf your army, which already is on the bottom of all tiers. Plus what is played in tournaments is soon played in non tournament games, no one wants to spend X on a list, to have it be not suited to play most of the time. So with realm effects being used, the meta would be limited to the few armies that do well with the rules being in effect, and everyone one else who wants to play them or not, would be forced to do it, by the simple fact that all armies are build with 2000pts matched play in mind. And that fact that something like Hysh becomes "balanced" in narrative or at 4000pts is moot.

Some armies just need an update. My own included. Assuming you're talking about your Beastclaw, there are no more realm rules nerfing you than there are any other army.

You're telling me if you rocked up to a tournament and your first match is against a magic heavy army and the realm roll reduces magic range to 6" that you're not suddenly at quite an advantage?

Or a double combat phase in Ghur?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I‘d not remove the monsters but limit the selection so people won‘t only pick the strongest or have to buy the most expensive. You could also make a table for Factions beforehand:

example Darkling Covens, DoK, Order Serpentis, Anvilguard

1-2 Kharibdis

3 Kharibdis or Hydra

4-5Hydra

6 once per Battle in your own herophase:  choose a friendly unit. That unit might immediately fight as if it was the combat phase

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's kinda telling that we've seen far more written demanding that realmsphere rules should be scrapped than how to overcome them.

To move from e-sports analogies to plain old fashioned sporting analogies, plenty of sports like rugby and cricket where millions are at stake in every game are affected hugely by random external factors they can't control, like the weather. The best teams, the ones that win championships rather than just one off games, adapt to the conditions as they arise. If you sign a team full of players for one type of weather condition and end up playing in the opposite, that's your bad, nobody else's. Nobody claims that one team deserve to be the world champions because they can beat all comers when the conditions suit them, they point out that they're a weak side because they can only win when everything is in their favour. If every once in a while the conditions cause an upset, that's good for the game because predictability is the death of any sport.

The best, most skilled players will come up with lists and strategies that can cope with adverse realmsphere rolls. The vast majority of players who don't play  in highly competitive tournaments will have gained some fun new rules and challenges. A handful of others will continue to complain, just as they always have.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This kind of discussion reminds me a bit of competitive Super Smash Bros. For those who don't know, many competitive events just have people play on a stage called 'Final Destination' which is a flat, featureless stage; they do this in order to minimise distractions and random events that may put one player at a disadvantage not caused by pure fighting skill.  

Realm rules would be equivalent to playing on one of the more colourful stages with items. To many competitive players, playing a serious game like this would be awful - what if the most powerful item ended up in the hands of the opponent by chance? Others may prefer the challenge of playing at a disadvantage and trying to get around the opponent until they find an opening. 

I see it from both ways. I personally prefer playing without extra features which appear during the game, mainly because it's less hassle and I feel bad if my opponent gets screwed over by a rule. However, I definitely think it shows skill as a player to be able to overcome a disadvantage or even turn it into an advantage. That said, it's an understandable position to not like the idea that you have to play a game at a major disadvantage compared to the opponent in a competitive environment - assuming that both opponents are equal skill, then the one at the disadvantage will likely lose. There's something to be said about minimising disadvantages in list building, but you can only do that so much with certain armies.  

Overall, I'm not sure what I think of realm rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i personally like them...change is difficult for people and some just dont want to adapt...some will be in the boat on what if i get a bad match up...well bad match ups happen anyways just now sometimes the realm isnt gonna be all that great for ya...got hit with the realm thats bad for shooting...well just build a more versitile list...yes change hurts but just adapt and overcome...now with the new edition some of the tomes do need to be redone...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Enoby said:

This kind of discussion reminds me a bit of competitive Super Smash Bros. For those who don't know, many competitive events just have people play on a stage called 'Final Destination' which is a flat, featureless stage; they do this in order to minimise distractions and random events that may put one player at a disadvantage not caused by pure fighting skill.  

Realm rules would be equivalent to playing on one of the more colourful stages with items. To many competitive players, playing a serious game like this would be awful - what if the most powerful item ended up in the hands of the opponent by chance? Others may prefer the challenge of playing at a disadvantage and trying to get around the opponent until they find an opening. 

I see it from both ways. I personally prefer playing without extra features which appear during the game, mainly because it's less hassle and I feel bad if my opponent gets screwed over by a rule. However, I definitely think it shows skill as a player to be able to overcome a disadvantage or even turn it into an advantage. That said, it's an understandable position to not like the idea that you have to play a game at a major disadvantage compared to the opponent in a competitive environment - assuming that both opponents are equal skill, then the one at the disadvantage will likely lose. There's something to be said about minimising disadvantages in list building, but you can only do that so much with certain armies.  

Overall, I'm not sure what I think of realm rules. 

I definitely get what you mean, I'd personally feel terrible at a tournament if I found myself against Kharadron Overlords in a game and we rolled 6" range for attacks. I know for certain I'd offer them a re-roll if it was at all possible.

The trouble with AoS is though, to use your own analogy, some armies in particular excel when there is nothing added. It'd be like Jigglypuff (if shes even still in Smash Bros) constantly winning everything on a level terrain. The same armies over and over occupy the top spots in AoS. By adding something in, you give other armies a chance. Of course GW could do more to balance the armies, which would solve the problem too.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AlphaKennyThing said:

I definitely get what you mean, I'd personally feel terrible at a tournament if I found myself against Kharadron Overlords in a game and we rolled 6" range for attacks. I know for certain I'd offer them a re-roll if it was at all possible.

Isn't the answer to this though to pre-determine the realm rules, to avoid the ones that completely ****** over certain armies (or as much as they can)?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, wayniac said:

Isn't the answer to this though to pre-determine the realm rules, to avoid the ones that completely ****** over certain armies (or as much as they can)?

Absolutely! Which is the original idea of this thread, taking us nicely back on topic, good sir!

Which realm rules from each realm would you pick? The original thread post contains my ideas, but I'm interested to know what others would pick for a well rounded tournament with varied games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Chamon, by definition, realm rules should be rolled every round (with the option or not to have a rule used more than once).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off to one side, but...

1) The two guys effectively in charge of Age of Sigmar from both a product and rules perspective have stated the game has been designed to be played in a completely different way to what some are claiming it *should* be. The open-play anti-GHBers from 2016 are proof that if GW goes one way, you *will* follow - even if it's kicking and screaming.

2) You can't have a competitive endeavour - e or otherwise - without a changing meta. It simply cannot work or maintain interest.

3) List building - see point 2.

4) A proper test of skill is one that challenges the player and makes them think, not just offers them an opportunity for learned-by-rote gaming. Super Mario Land speed runs look impressive but it's nothing more than pressing a button at timed intervals.

5) If you happen to be one of those poor individuals who can only get their hunter-alpha rocks off with tabletop games, AoS is not the one for you.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BaldoBeardo said:

5) If you happen to be one of those poor individuals who can only get their hunter-alpha rocks off with tabletop games, AoS is not the one for you.

I concur. There are dozens of different systems by different manufacturers out there, all with active playerbases. If "hobby and fluff" aren't your thing, what's keeping you playing AoS? If it's the game played by similarly minded competitive players in your area, just encourage them to play your new game, if they play for the same reasons as you I'm sure they'll follow suit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on to topic, I love the concept of the IP.  You could do almost anything with your own list, as long as you are open with it and manage those expectations.

What I especially like that about this exact format is that it combines pre-knowledge and adaptability - knowing that these are the only possibilities, but not which one goes where (or which goes with what scenario, more precisely) to me hits that sweet spot of letting someone plan their army in a way that still allows matchups and luck to shake things up. 

In a rock-paper-scissors sort of world, sometimes your opponent's army will be the rock to your scissors, and sometimes the realm and/or battleplan will be a rock that gives your paper opponent a fighting chance (or maybe you're scissors fighting against other scissors, and the whole thing is moot) .  It's still a rock that is out of your control either way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BaldoBeardo said:

Slightly off to one side, but...

1) The two guys effectively in charge of Age of Sigmar from both a product and rules perspective have stated the game has been designed to be played in a completely different way to what some are claiming it *should* be. The open-play anti-GHBers from 2016 are proof that if GW goes one way, you *will* follow - even if it's kicking and screaming.

2) You can't have a competitive endeavour - e or otherwise - without a changing meta. It simply cannot work or maintain interest.

3) List building - see point 2.

4) A proper test of skill is one that challenges the player and makes them think, not just offers them an opportunity for learned-by-rote gaming. Super Mario Land speed runs look impressive but it's nothing more than pressing a button at timed intervals.

5) If you happen to be one of those poor individuals who can only get their hunter-alpha rocks off with tabletop games, AoS is not the one for you.

So a lot of this seems to fundamentally misunderstand what the realm rules, especially the totally random versions, actually do.

1. They can state whatever they want, they're wrong. And that's an example of a GOOD rule being followed. 7thed 40k had reams and reams and reams of non-GW approved changes that were taken as a baseline simply because the game didn't function how it was written. The same is true of totally random realm rules.

2. This is fair, but is not at ALL representative of what the realm rules do when they're allowed to be totally random. The realm rules, when made totally random, have NO affect on the meta at all. There are what, 7 realms with 6 realmscape features each? That's 42 completely different battlefields. That is FAR FAR too many to EVER hope to plan for, so the simple fact of the matter is that you just don't. You're not going to build your army around the realm rules when there's a 1 in 42 chance you'll actually get the one you prepared for. AT BEST it means armies that get super screwed over by specific realm rules, like Slaanesh and any gunline get shelved just to avoid that 1 in 42 chance there's no possible chance to win.

3. See point 2. List building will NOT change as a result of random realm rules except in the cases of armies that auto-lose when faced with things like Fecund Quagmire or 6" shooting range.

4. A proper test of skill is one that challenges both players EQUALLY. This is the thing the 'but muh player skill!' crowd don't seem to understand. One of the two people in any match is always the more skilled player. The more skilled player will usually win the game. The only real way the more skilled player can LOSE a game is if the RNG aspects go AGAINST them enough to actually ECLIPSE the skill gap. If I was playing a mixed order gunline and you were playing Slaanesh and we rolled Fecund Quagmire I could give my 90 year old grandmother, who thinks that 'tabletop gaming' is just another name for canasta, my dice with absolutely no explanation about how the game works and walk away and come back to your army dead and you explaining to her what the 'major victory' she just got means. As more randomness is added, the importance of skill decreases. Compare a game of chess, with no randomness at all, to a game of 'who can roll the highest number on 3d6' which is entirely random, and you get a good idea of the sliding scale randomness vs skill creates.

And by the way, what 'tactical' or 'skill' opportunities do the realm rules actually create? What about 'my opponent got 3 combat phases in two turns before I could even do anything' makes EITHER of you a great strategist? "Oh but it's in how your recover your...pfft." If you got 3 combat phases in a row and your opponent has any units left to recover with, there was never any point in playing that game to begin with.The truth is that these rules DON'T create tactical opportunities. They are a punishment lottery, plain and simple. It will never give more options for tactical play, all it will EVER do is hand the better player an easy, boring victory OR ****** the better player over so much that even their superior skill isn't enough to overcome the level of bulldung present in the game.

5. This is deeply incongruous to your argument that the realm rules increase the value of skill(which again, they don't) because under those(totally imaginary) circumstances, then AoS would be MORE appealing to 'hunter-alpha' types.

 

@AGPO Your argument would make a lot more sense if the analogy had anything to do with how the realm rules worked. With outdoor sports the weather conditions affect both teams relatively equally. The realm rules would be more like if it started raining during a rugby match and one team got 3 free trys while the other teams starting Flanker, Wing, and Prop were all killed in lightning strikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course weather affects one side more than the other, because teams have different skill sets. If you've picked a team based on a quick running and handling game and you end up playing in a quagmire, you're going to get trashed by a team that relies on a huge forward pack. The opposite is true on hard dry grounds playing at altitude.  The analogy applies even more in cricket - if you've got a world class spinner in your team on a turning track it's practically game over. On another day the conditions might make him utterly useless. That's before you get into the vagaries of last minute injury and refereeing decisions which can throw one team's game into total disarray. 

All this means is that you need  team/army capable of playing multiple tactics as the situation demands.

Edited by AGPO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buried away in the realm rules are hard counters for almost any one trick pony list - this sword of Damocles is intended to keep players on their toes. Blast shields down, padawans.

It's incredibly entertaining to read people claiming that planning around 42 possible realms is not possible and/or will have no effect on things, but planning around a virtually infinite phase space of opponent's lists is considered par for the course.

If you don't like realm rules, don't use them. But I can guarantee that in a year's time they will be in use in some form at any big tournament.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Fred1245 said:

So a lot of this seems to fundamentally misunderstand what the realm rules, especially the totally random versions, actually do.

 

The entire point of this thread is about non-random realm rules do. So far as I can tell nobody - at GW or elsewhere -  is actually proposing fully random realm rules for tournament play. What GW in particular are suggesting is not revealing ahead of time which realm rules will be in play - or at least not until after lists are submitted. I snipped the rest of that because you appear to be trying to rebut something that nobody is actually proposing.

In practice I think there are a couple of the realm rules which most TO will steer well clear of and the majority of them might see use in tournaments as they shift things around a bit without having a crippling effect. The set of suggestions at the start of the thread looked very sensible and pragmatic to me, enough variation to cause problems for one-trick-pony hypertuned lists but nothing that should negate the value of a more typical balanced list. They are far from the only such set of realm rules a TO could choose - most of them might have a place in competitive play. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+++MOD HAT+++

This appears to be a topic close to everybodies heart, but can we please try and stay on track.  I've just removed some border line comments to try and keep things pleasant.

@Fred1245 Please have a read of our posting guidelines, some of your posts are coming across as pretty negative.  We also aim to avoid politics on here whenever possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Fred1245 said:

So a lot of this seems to fundamentally misunderstand what the realm rules, especially the totally random versions, actually do.

1. They can state whatever they want, they're wrong. And that's an example of a GOOD rule being followed. 7thed 40k had reams and reams and reams of non-GW approved changes that were taken as a baseline simply because the game didn't function how it was written. The same is true of totally random realm rules.

2. This is fair, but is not at ALL representative of what the realm rules do when they're allowed to be totally random. The realm rules, when made totally random, have NO affect on the meta at all. There are what, 7 realms with 6 realmscape features each? That's 42 completely different battlefields. That is FAR FAR too many to EVER hope to plan for, so the simple fact of the matter is that you just don't. You're not going to build your army around the realm rules when there's a 1 in 42 chance you'll actually get the one you prepared for. AT BEST it means armies that get super screwed over by specific realm rules, like Slaanesh and any gunline get shelved just to avoid that 1 in 42 chance there's no possible chance to win.

3. See point 2. List building will NOT change as a result of random realm rules except in the cases of armies that auto-lose when faced with things like Fecund Quagmire or 6" shooting range.

4. A proper test of skill is one that challenges both players EQUALLY. This is the thing the 'but muh player skill!' crowd don't seem to understand. One of the two people in any match is always the more skilled player. The more skilled player will usually win the game. The only real way the more skilled player can LOSE a game is if the RNG aspects go AGAINST them enough to actually ECLIPSE the skill gap. If I was playing a mixed order gunline and you were playing Slaanesh and we rolled Fecund Quagmire I could give my 90 year old grandmother, who thinks that 'tabletop gaming' is just another name for canasta, my dice with absolutely no explanation about how the game works and walk away and come back to your army dead and you explaining to her what the 'major victory' she just got means. As more randomness is added, the importance of skill decreases. Compare a game of chess, with no randomness at all, to a game of 'who can roll the highest number on 3d6' which is entirely random, and you get a good idea of the sliding scale randomness vs skill creates.

And by the way, what 'tactical' or 'skill' opportunities do the realm rules actually create? What about 'my opponent got 3 combat phases in two turns before I could even do anything' makes EITHER of you a great strategist? "Oh but it's in how your recover your...pfft." If you got 3 combat phases in a row and your opponent has any units left to recover with, there was never any point in playing that game to begin with.The truth is that these rules DON'T create tactical opportunities. They are a punishment lottery, plain and simple. It will never give more options for tactical play, all it will EVER do is hand the better player an easy, boring victory OR ****** the better player over so much that even their superior skill isn't enough to overcome the level of bulldung present in the game.

5. This is deeply incongruous to your argument that the realm rules increase the value of skill(which again, they don't) because under those(totally imaginary) circumstances, then AoS would be MORE appealing to 'hunter-alpha' types.

 

@AGPO Your argument would make a lot more sense if the analogy had anything to do with how the realm rules worked. With outdoor sports the weather conditions affect both teams relatively equally. The realm rules would be more like if it started raining during a rugby match and one team got 3 free trys while the other teams starting Flanker, Wing, and Prop were all killed in lightning strikes.

All received and understood, there's some points I agree with in there and others I don't. My overall counter would be that realm rules were just used in a tournament and it didn't really break the game.

Assuming you had to use them, though, and you had to pick 6 realms to cover 6 games at a tournament, which realms and which realm effects would you pick? As you are what appears to be a highly competitively focused player, I'm genuinely interested to hear how you'd set things up. That was largely the purpose of this thread. It doesn't have to be a lottery, you can pick your realm effects and other limitations.

Pull up a sandbag, educate us all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seems a very simple solution to the whole "some realms are totally unwinnable for some factions" issue that still keeps a lot of randomness

Before the match, each player is allowed to cross off one realm from the list. Then they roll until one of the realms that neither player nixed comes up. 

If your faction is completely crippled by one realm, you can avoid it. But you still play in a variety of realms and have unexpected changes to the battle.

Thoughts? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Lord_Skrolk said:

There seems a very simple solution to the whole "some realms are totally unwinnable for some factions" issue that still keeps a lot of randomness

Before the match, each player is allowed to cross off one realm from the list. Then they roll until one of the realms that neither player nixed comes up. 

If your faction is completely crippled by one realm, you can avoid it. But you still play in a variety of realms and have unexpected changes to the battle.

Thoughts? 

That's a pretty decent idea actually. Certainly one way of doing it!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Lord_Skrolk said:

There seems a very simple solution to the whole "some realms are totally unwinnable for some factions" issue that still keeps a lot of randomness

Before the match, each player is allowed to cross off one realm from the list. Then they roll until one of the realms that neither player nixed comes up. 

If your faction is completely crippled by one realm, you can avoid it. But you still play in a variety of realms and have unexpected changes to the battle.

Thoughts? 

As a thought experiment...  there are 7 realms.  What if each player took it in turn to veto one realm, until 6 had been vetoed and the last one remaining is played upon?

I think this would NOT be good - very quickly we'd all settle for the easiest "no major effect" realm whatever that turns out to be, and there may as well not be any other realms.  Only deliberate sabotage from folks like me (who would veto the "safe" choice first go) would mix it up.

 

But it was a fun idea for a second. hahahahaha 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×