Garrac Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Um, for 4th theres also this fear that GW may shrink the points value like in 40k. After 10th dropped, many tau, votann, and even marine players suddenly realised their armies were aproximately 20% cheaper and they needed to buy more stuff in order to cover that gap and have a full army again. They're probably planning to do the same thing with AoS now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baron Klatz Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) It’s possible, though AoS3 took the opposite route and shrunk the armies way down to go with smaller table sizes and more skirmish focus which so far has remained solid even for Skaven armies healing instead of swarming. If the Stormcast Spearhead is anything to go by for an average near-1000 point set then it’s looking likely to remain similar to now. Edit: I can’t imagine this knocked down much. Edited February 7 by Baron Klatz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerekKruger Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 16 hours ago, RetconnedLegion said: I feel like they over estimated demand for the measuring gauges. Surprised they didn't include 5 Doomfire Warlock in there too 😄 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Taylor Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 35 minutes ago, JackStreicher said: It's become so generic (rules-wise). The moment it started down this path was when Jervis Johnson retired. Yes he made some really out of whack rules, but at least he made some memorable and cool rules at the same time. I think it's because what people were saying they wanted and they shifted design to that way for this edition. I think 4th will be more something for everybody but lets wait and see. 25 minutes ago, Garrac said: Um, for 4th theres also this fear that GW may shrink the points value like in 40k. After 10th dropped, many tau, votann, and even marine players suddenly realised their armies were aproximately 20% cheaper and they needed to buy more stuff in order to cover that gap and have a full army again. They're probably planning to do the same thing with AoS now. They do it with any new edition! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luperci Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 38 minutes ago, Garrac said: Um, for 4th theres also this fear that GW may shrink the points value like in 40k. After 10th dropped, many tau, votann, and even marine players suddenly realised their armies were aproximately 20% cheaper and they needed to buy more stuff in order to cover that gap and have a full army again. They're probably planning to do the same thing with AoS now. I really hope not, but then the solution to that is just to play cheaper point games. A lot of that is just shoddy balancing though too, after the first balance update instead of actually making certain faction and unit rules work, they just made bad units cost less points. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gitzdee Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Luperci said: I really hope not, but then the solution to that is just to play cheaper point games. A lot of that is just shoddy balancing though too, after the first balance update instead of actually making certain faction and unit rules work, they just made bad units cost less points. Then we all go back to the weird 1850 point standard we used to have a long time ago haha XD. Edited February 7 by Gitzdee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcvs Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 5 minutes ago, Luperci said: I really hope not, but then the solution to that is just to play cheaper point games. which, if it goes like this edition, will be entirely unsupported and basically require you to write rules and battleplans 😅 plus, as all "solutions" which imply a deviation from what is proposed as the "standard" from GW, this will only work if you play repeatedly with a small group of like-minded players, because otherwise, at least in my experience, good luck posting in the forum/discord of a club looking for a game at 1000 points. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliman Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) 2 hours ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: Still better designed than 40k 10th and HH (can’t speak for TOW). TO be honest, I play HH and 40k, and I think that they are better written (that doens't mean better balanced). 2 hours ago, Baron Klatz said: It’s just how it is. At least there’s way more alternatives now if you’re not on-board with the Sigmar grindset me and the others are. Yes, but take in mind that I'm not asking for a 300p of rules or anything like that. I mean, you can have lorefriendly rules, unique roles based on the form of the miniatures and simple ruleset, as we have seen before multiple times in other games. Edited February 7 by Beliman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nezzhil Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 1 hour ago, Garrac said: Um, for 4th theres also this fear that GW may shrink the points value like in 40k. After 10th dropped, many tau, votann, and even marine players suddenly realised their armies were aproximately 20% cheaper and they needed to buy more stuff in order to cover that gap and have a full army again. They're probably planning to do the same thing with AoS now. That's because a bad balance during the release. After the few rules updates Votann points are almost the same points that the initial Index draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Someravella Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 I guess meta, competitive players are the ones that invest more money in models, because they can be easily nudged by a new metawatch warscroll, and GW *has to* appeal to that player base. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luperci Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 44 minutes ago, Marcvs said: good luck posting in the forum/discord of a club looking for a game at 1000 points. In my experience most people will be happy just to play a game, a lot of the time people will just match what you have unless they have sticks up their behind about competitive play and fairness. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Taylor Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 11 minutes ago, Someravella said: I guess meta, competitive players are the ones that invest more money in models, because they can be easily nudged by a new metawatch warscroll, and GW *has to* appeal to that player base. It's a smaller percentage of the player base but tend to be the loudest. I think the steer towards competitive style rules is partially down to members of the studio liking competitive gaming. I suspect we will see more of a balance with the next edition as I think this is something they want to address. Competitive gaming is fun personally but it's not for everybody. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcvs Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 6 minutes ago, Luperci said: In my experience most people will be happy just to play a game, a lot of the time people will just match what you have unless they have sticks up their behind about competitive play and fairness. I am the only player in my club who plays Aos "competitively" and yet 90% of the (casual, relaxed, beer and pretzels) games happening at the club are 2000pts standard matched play rules. It's a bit unfair to immediately jump to negative connotations for players who just prefer to play what they perceive as "the way it's meant to be played" 4 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lost Sigmarite Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 53 minutes ago, Marcvs said: at least in my experience, good luck posting in the forum/discord of a club looking for a game at 1000 points. At least in my experience, people on my club's discord have no problem finding someone to play a game at 1000 points. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pitzok Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 53 minutes ago, Marcvs said: which, if it goes like this edition, will be entirely unsupported and basically require you to write rules and battleplans 😅 plus, as all "solutions" which imply a deviation from what is proposed as the "standard" from GW, this will only work if you play repeatedly with a small group of like-minded players, because otherwise, at least in my experience, good luck posting in the forum/discord of a club looking for a game at 1000 points. Tbh it's not really an issue at my store, where often there are events taking place at 1000-1500 or even 750 points to boost community engagement. But maybe it's an exception to the rule. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcvs Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Just now, The Lost Sigmarite said: At least in my experience, people on my club's discord have no problem finding someone to play a game at 1000 points. Just now, pitzok said: Tbh it's not really an issue at my store, where often there are events taking place at 1000-1500 or even 750 points to boost community engagement. But maybe it's an exception to the rule. No, it seems my community is the exception 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chikout Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) I think AoS is in a pretty solid place aside from the battle tactics. The idea of secondaries is good but the execution needs a complete rework. They need to be much more difficult to achieve and they should require engaging with the enemy. I wouldn't object to gw making the grand strategy the only secondary so long as they actually require you to play the game. I definitely think a spearhead format needs to be a thing. It's the one good idea from 10th edition. When it comes to heroes, I'm not so sure. I worry about AoS becoming too similar to TOW. Quite a few users here have found that they prefer the old world, which is fine. If you want to tinker with your heroes GW made a fantasy game for you. I'd like to see AoS head more towards 1st edition with a simpler easy to play rule set. A crazy suggestion would be to follow warcry and drop the wound roll. That would speed the game up!! ( Not actually sure that's a good idea) Edited February 7 by Chikout It's annoying to only notice your mistakes when someone quotes you. 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliman Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) 5 hours ago, Chikout said: When it comes to heroes, I'm not so sure. I worry about AoS becoming to similar. Quite a few users here have found that they prefer the old world, which is fine. If you want to tinker with your heroes GW made a fantasy game for you. I'd like to see AoS head more towards 1st edition with a simpler easy to play rule set. A crazy suggestion would be to follow warcry and drop the wound roll. That would speed the game up!! ( Not actually sure that's a good idea) I'm with you in that there is no need to allow AoS to buy 3 items for each hero, and a few ones for each unit's champion, plus other addons (magic, special abilities, etc...). I understand that AoS is not that type of a game, but I was talking about something a bit more like AoS, but still allowing us to build our characters. We already had realm tables full of weapons and artefacts, mount traits, spells, prayers and a bunch of stackable bonus. Maybe just redo the whole concept, put some points cost to it, and allow each Hero to "buy" one Trait and/or Artefact. And if we talk about Heroes, let's bring back Challenge. We already had Cado Ezechiar duel mechanic, easy to addapt for the whole game (and yes, I love this type of cinematic actions): Edited February 7 by Beliman 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucentia Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Perhaps I'm the minority, but I don't know that that sort of bespoke hero customisation would really add much to my AoS games. I have four armies, they all have their own backgrounds and stories and characters, I have sketchbooks and pages of background bits, but I don't think that being able to points buy a few extra artefacts/heroic traits/etc. would make it feel more compelling when my vengeance-driven Slaughter Queen gets eaten by squigs, or whatever. Tables of extra options are all well and good, but for me they don't really add much to an army game beyond some extra busy-work in the list building. If I want to go deep on character stuff, I'll happily stick to a more ttrpg space. That said, I do think it's a little silly that all AoS heroes have more or less the same melee stats, and I wouldn't hate to see some work put into making 'combat hero guy' a real thing in the game, but I don't think addressing either of those points would need huge, ground up changes. I'm generally with Chikout on this, battle tactics are the major standout flaw in the 3.0 rules, adjust how secondaries work, tighten up some of the sloppier rules, and I don't see any huge need to trash the core mechanics for a new edition, I think the base of the game is quite solid at this point. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 39 minutes ago, Chikout said: When it comes to heroes, I'm not so sure. I worry about AoS becoming to similar. Quite a few users here have found that they prefer the old world, which is fine. If you want to tinker with your heroes GW made a fantasy game for you. I'd like to see AoS head more towards 1st edition with a simpler easy to play rule set Throwing out the path to glory rules nobody uses and replacing them with non matched play legal character building rules would be a good way to get hero customization back into AoS, IMO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Taylor Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Lets get things back to rumours... Okay, checking details about shipping manifests was all the rage a few years ago but GW cottoned on a got all that info excluded from publicly viewable information (I'm guessing you can read privately). Anyway, could this be part of the puzzle about 4th edition Age of Sigmar or is it just general shipping stuff? I'm not an expert and all this says to me is a lot of stuff has been shipped to the US. Anyway, rumour away folks! 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said: Lets get things back to rumours... Okay, checking details about shipping manifests was all the rage a few years ago but GW cottoned on a got all that info excluded from publicly viewable information (I'm guessing you can read privately). Anyway, could this be part of the puzzle about 4th edition Age of Sigmar or is it just general shipping stuff? I'm not an expert and all this says to me is a lot of stuff has been shipped to the US. Anyway, rumour away folks! With the image quality reduction from the site it is almost unreadable 😅 Edited February 7 by Ejecutor 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStreicher Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 1 hour ago, Marcvs said: I am the only player in my club who plays Aos "competitively" and yet 90% of the (casual, relaxed, beer and pretzels) games happening at the club are 2000pts standard matched play rules. It's a bit unfair to immediately jump to negative connotations for players who just prefer to play what they perceive as "the way it's meant to be played" The actual issue is that matched play uses the same ruleset as tournament-play. imo there should be a seperation. Matched play as fairly balanced but with a less competetive focused playstyle for standard games. And Tournament play for the best possible balance and skill. having both combined in matched play makes the tournament side of things influence the way the game is played too much imo 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chikout Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 30 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said: Lets get things back to rumours... Okay, checking details about shipping manifests was all the rage a few years ago but GW cottoned on a got all that info excluded from publicly viewable information (I'm guessing you can read privately). Anyway, could this be part of the puzzle about 4th edition Age of Sigmar or is it just general shipping stuff? I'm not an expert and all this says to me is a lot of stuff has been shipped to the US. Anyway, rumour away folks! I'd forgotten about that. We got some pretty decent rumours from shipping manifests back in the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz Taylor Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 26 minutes ago, Ejecutor said: With the image quality reduction from the site it is almost unreadable 😅 It's fine on my big monitor 3 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.