Sagittarii Orientalis Posted August 22, 2019 Share Posted August 22, 2019 (edited) I must first confess that I have been exclusively playing Stormcast Eternals since the match play was launched in 2016.I view the missions in the general's handbook rather positively, as many of them seem to emphasise manouevres and board controls to a fair degree.The missions themselves seem to be improving for better gameplay. For example, the change to the movement route of objective in Relocation Orb. There is however, one mission I am struggling to find worth in terms of gameplay - Total Commitment. Now, many of you might instantly point out I am not feeling pleasant with this mission because I play Stormcast, and all that is needed is for me to "get good". However I always expect to play this specific mission, and hence prepare my list and tactic to adapt to it. So far playing Total Commitment and actually winning was far from impossible, at least in my local club where the meta is rather "casual". This however does not stop the mission from leaving sour taste in my mouth, regardless of the outcome. The mission invalidates nearly half the allegiance ability of the Stormcast, which already suffer from general lack of mobility even with the Scions of the Storm. Meanwhile, the mission gives almost no disadvantage to the opposing player unless the game is a mirror match between stormcasts. And stormcasts are not the only faction that is seriously penalised in the mission. Nighthaunt is another faction which allegiance ability imbues army-wide reserve deployment. Thus in my view, Total Commitment heavily punishes very few specific factions without actually providing tactical challenge to the other opposing factions. The fact that most of the large-scale tournaments almost always include Total Commitment in the rulepack exacerbates my frustration, which stems from feeling that my faction is being unfairly penalised. I cannot stop thinking that this mission is devised under the notion that army-wide reserve rule is extremely lethal to the gaming environment, thus requiring an extreme form of limitation via mission rules. If this is true at all, then I believe it is an oversight. Most of the reserve rules have "more-than-9 inches" restrictions, and in many cases units in reserve must be set up on the board by battle round 3. With relatively cheap "screening" units and careful deployment, denying enemy reserves from being set up on ideal position is far from difficult. Crucial charges from big unit of evocators can be denied with a fodder unit of grots, or prevent ballista batteries from shooting 4 shots per model at my important unit. However if army-wide reserve rule is still deemed terrifyingly strong so that a special mission is required to rein it back, I believe forcing reserve units to be set up until the end of battle round 2 would have sufficed. I believe an outright prohibition of core allegiance ability is a limitation too extreme. Imagine a mission where summoning is strictly forbidden, or where units with fly can no longer do so. I see Total Commitment no less harsh and unfair than these examples. Initially, I attempted to send the feedback to the games workshop via AoS facebook. However, I thought it would be better to listen to how other players with different factions view the mission before sending the feedback. Perhaps there might be more to the mission than I am aware of. So if you still believe this is only a tantrum thrown by an immature stormcast player, then please feel free to enlighten me on the value of the mission I might have missed. Thank you. Edited August 22, 2019 by Sagittarii Orientalis 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.