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

Remake 2.0 for Age of Sigmar Tactics meaningful?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Kramer said:

My main point. While it sounds logical what you are saying at a base level your argument skips that being a top tactical teacher/coach is a different thing than a top tactical player. There might be overlap but you're shooting yourself in the foot if you would only listen to the top tactical players. 

You missed my actual point then which is:

Why would I listen to someone who says the game can be played like MtG and has no tactics if that person isn't demonstrating a high level of performance at the game? There is no reason for me to do so because that is an uninformed opinion. I then used a wealth of available information to prove otherwise. 

I am making 2 separate points in this thread (as I have pointed out several times). Anyone who'd like can contribute to tactical discussion because there is always value in at least discussing new ideas (even if they're eventually proven to be ineffective). However I'm not going to listen to (or sit quietly while) someone with little top table experience describes AoS as a game with little to no tactical skill involved when it is demonstrably false

Again I want to be clear - I am not saying people who don't have top table experience don't have valid insight on tactics. I am saying that I won't listen to someone's over simplification of the nature of AoS if that person doesn't have podiums under their belt. 

Edited by SwampHeart
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SwampHeart

Maybe my statement I made before was because of a missinterpretation of the same sentence @Kramer mentioned. I mean, in worst case it could be interpreted as "why should I listen to you, you are not important enough."

 

27 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

However I'm not going to listen to (or sit quietly while) someone with little top table experience describes AoS as a game with little to no tactical skill involved when it is demonstrably false

That's a point that is baffling me, too. Most of the time its a statement of outsiders (WHFB/9th Age Players) to understate AoS. But this is also a point why a current tactics guide could be a good thing. Sometimes I have the feeling that in case of WHFB, for some part the tactics were basicly hardcoded into the rules.

Edited by EMMachine
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s like arguing with the choir who is agreeing with you @Kramer 

This could be a fun collaborative effort to revamp things and try to create a new Tactica resource. I say collaborative because depending on how people want to break it down it probably be too much for one person.

Is this just a general rules idea or getting into the nitty-gritty of each individual army? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, King Taloren said:

Is this just a general rules idea or getting into the nitty-gritty of each individual army? 

I think it'd be nice to have both eventually. But I'd start with big picture rules stuff (basics like screening, good pile ins, how to deal with hordes by minimizing their pile ins, etc.) There are I think a lot of big concepts that are valuable to understand regardless of if you'll try to use them or if you want to know how someone would try to counter you. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah a big one I think needs to be covered: Don’t charge your units into the big buffed up super unit you opponent placed in front of you. 

Followed by: Don’t spread your army out in a single line on deployment. 

Seen way too much of those even at tournaments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, King Taloren said:

Don’t spread your army out in a single line on deployment. 

Counter point - this can be a very effective screen depending on your opponents various movement/charge/pile-in options. 

Share this post


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

Counter point - this can be a very effective screen depending on your opponents various movement/charge/pile-in options. 

True though I would say very situational. And if you are just putting a couple of units up front not every single model aside maybe a hero or two.

And it takes a durable unit/army to use such a tactic unless you are trying to stall a turn or two.

I guess a better way to say it: Don’t put everything in range of being charged by Bloodletter Ball or Wytch hordes turn one. You will die.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not very good at this game and tactics articles are helpful to me in distinguishing good models from bad models. 

As much as I want to use Chaos Warriors, somehow they’re apparently a better anvil (tank?) than hammer (DPS?) and I’m not exactly sure why. Because they have the potential to shrug off mortal wounds? 

Basically I play Khorne Mortals (mostly I have 2 Bloodthirsters but no other demons) and I have trouble finding roles in this game. 

40k is easier to understand because 99.9% of the time the weapons define the roll. High strength, high AP and high damage are great for taking out big tanky multi-wound models with high toughness and bad for killing individual models with 1 wound because damage does not spill over. 

Meanwhile lots of attack middle to no AP sheer numbers with small attacks is great for dealing with large numbers of low toughness and low wound models. 

Designations like “Heavy Support”, “Fast Attack”, “Elites” and “Troops” make it easy to figure out what a units intended role is.... at least for a sort of rock, paper, scissors level.... why Terminators are “bad” I’ll never know but people say they are and I believe them but I use them because they look cool. 

AoS is a lot muddier in this regard with “battleline” and “other” being the categories and everything being roughly equal between 6-3 to hit, 6-3 to wound almost always with rare exception and -1 to -3 rend in the most extreme situations and the highest damage I’ve ever seen is 1D6. So what kills monsters? What is fast attack? What’s good? When everything is flat and chaos warrior HAVE an option for like 4/3/-1/1 damage why do they suck at attacking? Why are they an anvil? 

How do people figure out what’s good and what role units are supposed to have? 

Then you know there’s the actual tactics. Anyway I like tactics pages because I don’t really understand math or mathhammer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can learn things from anyone at any level in anything. In any field, the best are universally the best because they’re always looking to improve their mastery of their craft. 

And if someone else is repeatedly placing higher than you in tournaments etc they patently understand the game better than you do, or there is something faulty in your understanding of how it is played or how armies work which is keeping you from reaching their level, but the result is the same and you should listen to them if you want to improve.

Edited by Nos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Nos said:

Geez some remarkable delusions of grandeur on here.

”If it’s not from the best, it’s not good enough for me!”

I'm pretty sure the fellow explained above how that was not what they meant. 

So we're all in agreement ;)

 

1 hour ago, Ravinsild said:

How do people figure out what’s good and what role units are supposed to have? 

It depends, but for me things like rend, damage, base size, unit size/wounds/save, movement,  access to buffs, hit/woundrate (prioritized in that order) all come together to give a somewhat overall impression of role. 

If in doubt, look at base sizes in relation to weapon range and volume of attacks, and you should get an idea of how that unit would operate. 

Taking chaos warriors as an example, they're on 32mm bases with 1 inch reach on their weapons, meaning they will never fight in two ranks, while also covering a much larger area. They lack the buffs to drastically improve their (burst) combat ability, and are instead looking to grind their enemies down through their superior tanky state (due to 4+ save ontop of a big chunk of wounds) --- they're comparable to Ardboyz, in that their stats are mostly the same, but Ardboyz are capable of bursting under the right circumstances (stacking waagh), but can't do much beyond tanking and fighting, while chaos warriors are more flexible in how they go about it due to their chaos marks. Neither of the two are inherently strong in combat (because they can't fight in two ranks, and don't compensate for it on the damage output per individual warrior, as opposed to say.. Brutes or Ogors) but can stick around for a long time without losing any of their combat strength. Under similarly grindy conditions, most units would slowly decline due to buffs per x models, or the actual application of multiple ranks, but not for chaos warriors who are already bringing their full strength to bear, regardless of how many models they remove from their own backline.

Over-analyzing it, but maybe it helps as an example of how to determine the role of a unit. Also mind that a lot of units are able to deviate entirely from their expected role, such as Squig Bounderz, who read as Shock Cavalry/Hero hunters/Counter chargers, but can morph into hit&run objective grabbing skirmishers on the game table. 

Hope that helps :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1. Pick 160 Skaven

2. Move Skaven up the board

3. Hope you have enough Skaven left to win at the end of the game

 

Subscribe to my Skaven Tactical blog pls

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


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

 

1. Pick 160 Skaven

2. Move Skaven up the board

3. Hope you have enough Skaven left to win at the end of the game

 

Subscribe to my Skaven Tactical blog pls

 

Your tactics sounds familiar🤔.

Very familiar.

Very very familiar.

 

 

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

×