Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Gareth 🍄

The Big Community Survey 2019

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Vextol said:

@Mayple

Still assumptious? 😉

Yes. Nothing has changed. 

 

Also I quite liked your previous "presumptious" correction counter :( It was nice. Now we're using assumptious. 

----

Anyway, gonna stop discussing the doubleturn in this thread :) Got pulled back in, but its not going anywhere. 

Edited by Mayple

Share this post


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

Also, are hidden agendas a real thing now or just a "beta test"?

Pretty sure we'll see them and a few other things like that finalised and made 100% official in the new Tournament Rules section when GHB'19 drops.

I've also been thinking about the regularity of updates to points (3/6 months etc) and probably as much, if not more than that, I'd like to see them use these reviews to not just look at points but review new mechanics that have been introduced since the last update and whether they need to add them into any older scrolls.

for example there's a new thread today about the 'who fights first' mechanic. Its something that's been there for a while but obviously it's something that they're putting a bit more emphasis on now, and every new BT seems to have either individual unit abilities or battle traits to activate that mechanic.

with relatively simple things like that (cf. 'Wholly Within') I'd much rather see them quickly look through factions and add it into 1 or 2 warscrolls where it makes sense, with maybe a slight points change to reflect that, than have to wait for that faction to get a major new push which could be years away.

Unlike something like terrain or endless spells, where there's an understandable delay in getting models designed and out for each faction, I feel like that's something that could easily be looked at whilst doing the points review.

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mayple said:

Yes. Nothing has changed. 

Also I quite liked your previous "presumptious" correction counter :( It was nice. Now we're using assumptious. 

----

Anyway, gonna stop discussing the doubleturn in this thread :) Got pulled back in, but its not going anywhere. 

Twas a joke (both times actually, either word works).  Plus, the quoted statement was funny because it was almost a direct quote of my previous 'presumption' (my easy evidence) 😉

And discussing the double turn in a thread based on a survey that brought it up isn't really a huge surprise. 

I just hope we can agree both apparent options, double turn or alternating activation, are flawed and that the adoption of one over the other is not a solution itself without at least one or two other factors falling under consideration. 

Saying "There aren't any problems with system xxx!!!!" is a pretty ridiculous statement.  Both sides make legitimate arguments.  Whatever system is chosen CAN work, but neither will work well if they are implemented  straight up.  We have history to show this. 

5 minutes ago, JPjr said:

Pretty sure we'll see them and a few other things like that finalised and made 100% official in the new Tournament Rules section when GHB'19 drops... 

with relatively simple things like that I'd much rather see them quickly look through factions and add it into 1 or 2 warscrolls where it makes sense, with maybe a slight points change to reflect that, than have to wait for that faction to get a major new push which could be years away.

Good to know!  I really hope so. 

I agree with the update thing.  How much discussion was there on how to deal with reroll and modifiers?  Khorne and Fyreslayers battletomes both have statements like "reroll hits" instead of "failed hits".  Obviously this is a way to battle the confusion about modifiers and reroll.  A universal remove 'failed term' update would be fine with me and helps battle an unintentional but very real power creep that's really just a rules clarification. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Vextol said:

Twas a joke (both times actually, either word works).  Plus, the quoted statement was funny because it was almost a direct quote of my previous 'presumption' (my easy evidence) 😉

Yeah, I got that it was a joke ;) no worries.

(Edit: I won't be replying to the rest of your post. I'm out of that discussion.)

Edited by Mayple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Vextol said:

  How much discussion was there on how to deal with reroll and modifiers?  Khorne and Fyreslayers battletomes both have statements like "reroll hits" instead of "failed hits".  Obviously this is a way to battle the confusion about modifiers and reroll.  A universal remove 'failed term' update would be fine with me and helps battle an unintentional but very real power creep that's really just a rules clarification

No it just makes the reroll much stronger and removes for army’s with a -1 hit protection part of the protection that reroll before modifications have them. All those 3+ to hits now can reroll all the 1, 2, 3 and even 4s if someone stacked a -2 on those units with reroll hits instead of reroll failed. Someone in Rules just asked if he could reroll all his hits for a chance at getting more 6+s for mortal wounds which RAW is legit.

Imagine if they applied the same to saves. Sequitors would go from a tough to destroy unit to a nigh impossible to remove if they could reroll all saves not just failed saves before modifications. You rend means almost nothing anymore.

Edited by King Taloren
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

No it just makes the reroll much stronger and removes for army’s with a -1 hit protection part of the protection that reroll before modifications have them. All those 3+ to hits now can reroll all the 1, 2, 3 and even 4s if someone stacked a -2 on those units with reroll hits instead of reroll failed. Someone in Rules just asked if he could reroll all his hits for a chance at getting more 6+s for mortal wounds which RAW is legit.

Imagine if they applied the same to saves. Sequitors would go from a tough to destroy unit to a nigh impossible to remove if they could reroll all saves not just failed saves before modifications. You rend means almost nothing anymore.

It's a buff, given.  But I don't believe that this was a choice to make the rerolls "stronger".  It just happened. 

I find it hard to believe that every "buff" that makes units stronger seems to be a "buff" that carries through conveniently to every new battletome just like I find it hard to believe that every "debuff" is a choice that happens to conveniently carry through to every new battletome. 

All 6+s are becoming "unmodified" and command abilities that are used in the combat phase always seem to kick off "at the start of the combat phase" with new battletomes.  I would imagine that the Era of  "reroll failed" is at its end just like new abilities getting off on 6+ are likely at their end.

Its a natural evolution as the game continues to get fleshed out.  When this year's storm cast book comes out I wouldn't be surprised if sequitors were either modified to account for the buff or their save was worsened or something.  But I doubt there will be "failed" terminology going forward.  

And it does weaken rend, but I'd hardly say it's "removed".  You still modify the save by 1 or more.  It just weakens it a little.  Honestly though, as mortal wounds become more prevalent (for better or worse) armies are more able to deal with these high save monsters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do believe it was a buff given to a unit that was kind of trash without it. I am ok with them having it because it fits the theme of Skullreapers being a murderous bunch of crazed elites. They also cost enough to warrant getting to reroll everything against  hordes because that is what they are supposed to be taken against. 

We just got out of the reroll everything from 1.0 it’s a backstep to the power creep that was just being lamented. A -1 rend does nothing to a squad of Sequitors, especially if played right and either in cover or the lantern is pointed at them. And if they aren’t in cover. with reroll saves they go from rerolling 50% of their possible save rolls to 66% or even 75% at -2 rend. They go from having -2 rend giving 33% saved roll average  to 48.6%. 

Sure there are mortal wounds but now it’s just turning into an argument of “Well this can be broken because this is broken too so it balances it all out” This makes Hag Naar Witches reroll 50% of their hit ills on -1 and they now output 75% conversion of rolls to damage. A squad of 30 now consistently deal around 90 wounds a combat even if you debuff them.

Its nice to see a reroll that isn’t 1s or failed but throwing it out for everything is stepping into 40k level damages.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked them to stop breaking the combat system. 1 of the things I really liked was that you always got to fight back in the combat phase. But with always fight first and pile in from outside 3" its starting to be anoying. 

I had a game today against a melee army, my Bloodthirster with always strike just deleted unit after unit. Its just stupid unless opponent has ranged or a strong list.  I'm not going to play it again in casual games. Its adding gotcha moments which was some of the things from Fantasy I was most happy to be rid off.

Make things stronger if you want them to be great, don't have them break the basics of the game. Keep doing that and we will need a Fantasy to AoS reset in a few years.

Also voted for the double turn. I almost stopped playing 40k, to many games you know 1 hour in who is going to win and either stop way early or just play to see how big the win is going to be. In AoS if behind I always think I have a shot at winning if I just get the double turn at the right time. Sure it can go the other way, if you are already behind and the other person gets it, but then at least the game is likely to be over soon. Sometimes you can't do anything, but after playing for a while you learn to play so a double turn will mostly not decide the game. Its a skill and I find some of the people who don't like it just try to avoid it instead of handling it.

Maybe its only the people in my area, but here I find the people who actually play a lot of AoS like it, while people not that into AoS don't like it. I would really hate if a ton of people not really into AoS got the rules changed and then ,most likely still not play it much.

Edited by Silchas_Ruin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I'm following.  Since SCE last year would you say more or less of the battletomes include the phrase "6+" or "Unmodified 6s"?

Since the introduction of phase specific command abilities, would you say there are more or less abilities that are phase specific that that trigger in the hero phase? 

Are there more or less examples of "reroll XXX" instead of "reroll failed XXX" in old battalions than there are in these most recent battletomes? 

I'm not sure evidence would be against me on this and I'm not taking a stand on my preference.  The game definitely evolves and terminology changes definitely stick.  The "reroll" change seems to be apparent.  It definitely clears up confusion but I think rend is too rare and too valuable to begin with so hurting it at all is very dangerous.

Edit: With the new khorne and fyreslayers books, the reroll wording is universal.  This isn't a unit buff, it's a terminological change.   It's a huge, questionably outlandish buff, especially for fyreslayers. 

Edited by Vextol
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Silchas_Ruin said:

Maybe its only the people in my area, but here I find the people who actually play a lot of AoS like it, while people not that into AoS don't like it. I would really hate if a ton of people not really into AoS got the rules changed and then ,most likely still not play it much.

Gonna have to address this one.

Yes, that is only the people in your area. Competitive (and non-competitive) people who are really into Age of Sigmar are also amongst the people who aren't a fan of the doubleturn. Not to say all of them are, but to say that generally few of them aren't, or none of them are/aren't, is massively misrepresenting it. 

--

Carry on with the rest of the discussion ;) I'm still outside of it. Just can't handle misconceptions like that. 

Edited by Mayple
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mayple said:

Yes, that is only the people in your area. Competitive (and non-competitive) people who are really into Age of Sigmar are also amongst the people who aren't a fan of the doubleturn. Not to say all of them are, but to say that generally few of them aren't, or none of them are/aren't, is massively misrepresenting it. 

--

Carry on with the rest of the discussion ;) I'm still outside of it. Just can't handle misconceptions like that. 

And my area. 😉

We all only have our own interactions and the views of the vocal "online posters" to lean on.  That will never represent a "majority" of the player base.  I think it's alright to express these opinions, especially if the opinion is pretty universal within your pocket of experience. 

I really hope they release the survey results (I don't know if they do).  Then we can all shut up about what the "majority" of people think because we'll finally know in a much more real way. I hope a zillion people actually manage to fill it out😂

Edited by Vextol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It can also be that a lot of people "not really into AOS" that are voting they don't like double turn are "not really into AOS" because of the double turn and would be more into it if the double turn went away.  

But my anecdotal story is that we are all pretty into AOS and most of my group also really does not like the double turn.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

And my area. 😉

We all only have our own interactions and the views of the vocal "online posters" to lean on. I think it's alright to express these opinions, especially if the opinion is pretty universal within your pocket of experience. 

I really hope they release the survey results (I don't know if they do).  Then we can all shut up about what the "majority" of people think because we'll finally know in a much more real way. I hope a zillion people actually manage to fill it out😂

Sweet. That's no impact on what I corrected though.

It's completely fine to express any opinion. If it is misrepresenting something, it will be corrected. If it is misrepresenting something and not corrected, it paints an incorrect picture for others reading that very opinion who don't know that it is not correct, who then in turn starts using that as a basis of their own understanding of what is correct. That is not to say it should be -silenced-, as there's a pretty big difference, but an acccurate representation of what is, and what isn't is incredibly important.  

Share this post


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

If it is misrepresenting something, it will be corrected. If it is misrepresenting something and not corrected, it paints an incorrect picture for others reading that very opinion who don't know that it is not correct, who then in turn starts using that as a basis of their own understanding of what is correct. 

It wasn't misrepresenting anything.  The statement was prefaced by "In my area" followed by a completely legitimate concern that fundamental game concepts could be changed by people who "aren't that into the game. "

No misrepresentation. 

3 hours ago, Mayple said:

Yes, that is only the people in your area.  Competitive(and non-competitive) people who are really into Age of Sigmar are also amongst the people who aren't a fan of the doubleturn. Not to say all of them are, but to saythat generally few of them aren't, or none of themare/aren't, is massively misrepresenting it. 

You, and I, don't really know the complete feeling of the double turn so who knows... generally all people may be a fan of it.  Saying otherwise is dangerously close to misrepresentation 😉

If the results of the survey are released, we can make these statements concretely, or at least more concretely.  Until then, all we know is what we know. 

Thus, my comment and it's relevant impact on your response.  Train of thought explained.  

I'm off to push the survey again, this time I'm forcing my brother in law, an adamat player, to take it. 

If I could recommend one thing, it would be that the surveys are more frequent, more targeted, and WAY shorter 😂

Edit:  Sad.  And I'm out.

Edited by Vextol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Vextol said:

You, and I, don't really know the complete feeling of the double turn so who knows... generally all people may be a fan of it.  Saying otherwise is dangerously close to misrepresentation 😉

You may continue to twist words for whatever goal you're going for here, I'm not going to engage with it. Sheeeshush. Way to be unpleasant. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Someone in Rules just asked if he could reroll all his hits for a chance at getting more 6+s for mortal wounds which RAW is legit.

They had to ask? It seems like purposeful design to me. It makes borderline bad units like Bloodletters viable. If you are willing to trade your hits back in for an attempt to fish sixes and accept they might miss even more, that's your choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...