The Lost Sigmarite Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 8 minutes ago, Gareth 🍄 said: Never liked battleshock so I'm happy to see that go. This. It never felt very impactful to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GloomkingWortwazi Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Just now, The Lost Sigmarite said: This. It never felt very impactful to me. Always felt like an awkward WHFB holdover they didn't quite know what to do with to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grungnisson Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 1 minute ago, Cdance93 said: Because he clearly has a gigantic bone to pick with GW based on prior posts Care to elaborate? Not a big fan of such personal digs, at least be clearer what the accusation is, please, and give me a chance to respond. 2 minutes ago, Ejecutor said: Why? Because this could mean anything. A few, over a couple of weeks? Fine. Half of them, over six months? Not so fine. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagged Red Lines Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 2 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: This. It never felt very impactful to me. Wiped a unit of rockguts thanks to battleshock last week. Dude had no cp left so he lost the last three. That's 170pts on one dice roll. Hugely impactful. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrawlingCleaner Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 7 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said: Everything's gonna be fine People already enjoyed AOS 1 rules with 2016 GHB add-on (the Three Ways To Play concept was introduced there, already "modularity"). I trust the current AOS team, Jervis legacy and 3rd Edition was clean, Simon-from-Warcry (Bottle) too. I agree, (to me) the current AoS team have a track record of making good changes and have a good response time to stuff that's broken (although at times heavy handed). It's always hard to gauge what the changes actually entail with all the marketing speak they use in these articles and is sometimes hard not to jump to "I'm not going to enjoy this" I'm really looking forward to seeing what 4th brings! 😊 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chikout Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Tonhel said: Same here. I currently don't see the point of renaming it. It looks like it will be a complete different game for the better or the worse. It's a much more logical name. If I had 20 wounds, I'd be in pretty bad shape. Think of a sentence like this. 'If this unit has two wounds, half it's move' is that wounds remaining or wounds caused? This is a perfect example of something that will help to makes rules easier to understand and simpler to write. Edited March 27 by Chikout 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdance93 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 (edited) Quote And here come the alarm bells. Quote And I don't, because the five million quid website is not allowing me to chose a delivery option. 🤷♂️ Quote "Here's everything you need to know..." No, mate, it very much isn't. 3 of the latest, if thats not a clear sign of someone who is not a fan of GW I dunno what is. @Grungnisson Edited March 27 by Cdance93 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Togetak Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 17 minutes ago, Grungnisson said: And here come the alarm bells. At least it explicitly confirms Beasts of Chaos are not being squatted/moved to legends/Renamed/souped into Slaves or whatever. Every faction is getting an index 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagged Red Lines Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 21 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said: That's going to feel really weird after all of these years.... it's been wounds for as long as I've been warhammering... So weird: "How many health does this model have?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GloomkingWortwazi Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 3 minutes ago, Chikout said: It's a much more logical name. If I had 20 wounds, I'd be in pretty bad shape. Think of a sentence like this. 'If this unit has two wounds, half it's move' is that wounds remaining or wounds caused? This is a perfect example of something that will help to makes rules easier to understand and simpler to write. Yeah definitely true. It's often had unclear usage in the way it was written to the perspective of a new player. Hopefully my original comment doesn't get misconstrued by everyone. I just meant it takes a place in my lexicon, I play wayyyy too much Mordheim still, so I'm gonna find not saying wound when playing AoS weird now lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 12 minutes ago, Tonhel said: Same here. I currently don't see the point of renaming it. The terminology was confusing before. "This unit has 5 wounds". Intuitively, does that mean it has 5 HP, 5 max HP or taken 5 points of damage? This is the kind of thing that established players don't notice after a while because you just get used to it. But it is a point of friction that is worth removing for newcomers. Also, literally every other game just calls it health. 11 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lost Sigmarite Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 (edited) “These abilities have clear sequencing: a Declare step and an Effect step, and their timing is written out, colour-coded, and uses symbols.” Crazy they took so long to implement such a basic idea. I use colour coding and symbols every time I have to learn or organise something complex at work and at home. Same for trying to divide processes. To think AoS took 9 years to adopt this system… but better late than never. Edited March 27 by The Lost Sigmarite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 1 minute ago, Jagged Red Lines said: So weird: "How many health does this model have?" Closer to videogames as well. Bring all the younglins! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GloomkingWortwazi Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 OK everyone. You're misconstruing what I meant. I'm not saying that. I am saying I've been saying it since 2ED 40K, and play Mordheim very often - and it will be a weird change for me. I also said it's irrelevant and just a word. It bears little real impact. Take your feet off the gas 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grungnisson Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 1 minute ago, Cdance93 said: 3 of the latest, if thats not a clear sign of someone who is not a fan of GW I dunno what is. @Grungnisson Absolutely bizarre. Pointing out nonsensical wording in a marketing video is not an anti GW bias. Pointing out a technical issue with a website is not an anti GW bias. And pointing out that a statement is ambiguous and unclear is no more an anti GW bias than the other two. In other news, I have also in the past repeatedly defended aspects of GW operations, design decisions etc. This makes me neither a lver nor a hater of a company. Please, next time just concentrate on points made and don't get personal. 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdance93 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 1 minute ago, Grungnisson said: Absolutely bizarre. Pointing out nonsensical wording in a marketing video is not an anti GW bias. Pointing out a technical issue with a website is not an anti GW bias. And pointing out that a statement is ambiguous and unclear is no more an anti GW bias than the other two. In other news, I have also in the past repeatedly defended aspects of GW operations, design decisions etc. This makes me neither a lver nor a hater of a company. Please, next time just concentrate on points made and don't get personal. Don't think it was "personal", I was pointing out you've made several back-handed comments in recent times and was using that to explain the most recent one. Not sure why that is bizzare? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Cdance93 said: 3 of the latest, if thats not a clear sign of someone who is not a fan of GW I dunno what is. @Grungnisson It is curious. If I had to pick someone from the forum and say it is a "GW fanboy", from previous talks on the forum, I would pick him 😅 (not pretending to be offensive or something). Edited March 27 by Ejecutor 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 9 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said: Always felt like an awkward WHFB holdover they didn't quite know what to do with to me. Yeah, same with weapon ranges, honestly. WHFB is a game that lives by its complex combat resolution, because the primary way to score is kill points, so combat (both the fighting itself and resolution math), movement and relative positioning of units need to be very detailed and nuanced. AoS is a game of area control (and recently battle tactics), so all these things can be simplified by a lot, since the mayor decisions are not just about taking points-efficient engagements and preventing your opponent from doing so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth 🍄 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Don't really mind the word change from wounds to health, I would explain wounds to newcomers by saying something like "that's how much health they have". 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 This from @Whitefang back me up is looking more solid with confirmation that battleshock is gone. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PraetorDragoon Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 4 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: Yeah, same with weapon ranges, honestly. WHFB is a game that lives by its complex combat resolution, because the primary way to score is kill points, so combat (both the fighting itself and resolution math), movement and relative positioning of units need to be very detailed and nuanced. AoS is a game of area control (and recently battle tactics), so all these things can be simplified by a lot, since the mayor decisions are not just about taking points-efficient engagements and preventing your opponent from doing so. Melee weapon ranges (I assume you mean the reach here) aren't really a holdover from whfb, but more an implementation from skirmish games without rules or additions to make the ranges impactful. (like, for example, the ability to hit enemies without being able to be hit back. The addition of pile in and ending a charge within 0.5" makes this moot) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lost Sigmarite Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Just now, Gareth 🍄 said: Don't really mind the word change from wounds to health, I would explain wounds to newcomers by saying something like "that's how much health they have". In translations of previous editions of 40k and WFB, wounds were translated as “health points”. I still have it in my old 40k 7th edition rulebook. That’s why I don’t see what the fuss is about wounds becoming health. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GloomkingWortwazi Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 1 minute ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: In translations of previous editions of 40k and WFB, wounds were translated as “health points”. I still have it in my old 40k 7th edition rulebook. That’s why I don’t see what the fuss is about wounds becoming health. I don't think there is a real fuss. I was just taken out of my original context and now it's on fire 😔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojojojo101 Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Wounds to Health feels odd at first but I can see the justification. Will just take some getting used to. Battleshock gone is good, it's kind of a wierd appendage that is either irrelevant or strangely devastating. Combat range change is good. Think the objective change, both going to 3" control and an actual physical marker is going to be pretty impactful. Linking everything to a colour and shape is either going to be very helpful or the exact opposite. Can definitely see a situation where it ends up even more confusing. I remain unconvinced by USR's and what is meant by 'everything is an ability' will have to wait till we see more detail. Best thing in that article for me is the idea that they are going to have a look at how different models stack up to one another. Its mad that Stormcast and Goblin heroes have practically the same weapon profiles. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lost Sigmarite Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 22 minutes ago, Jagged Red Lines said: Wiped a unit of rockguts thanks to battleshock last week. Dude had no cp left so he lost the last three. That's 170pts on one dice roll. Hugely impactful. Another argument against it. Would you like to lose that many points on one single dice roll ? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.