Jump to content

Roll off for turn start - questions, nuances?


Recommended Posts

Hello all,

I’m trying to convince my local gaming group to start an AoS campaign/slow grow. Being 40k players they are very opposed to the roll off to determine who gets the turn, so we might omit that rule.

I argued that there are likely nuances that we are missing in which a double turn has less of an impact. As of now the few games we’ve played resulted in a huge swing in whoever received the double turn.

As a new player, I’m asking if the vets can provide some insight as to why it might not be a big deal, playstyle, strategy, spells, etc that help mitigate this.

An example as to why they dislike:

”I set up my cavalry for a charge, for the next turn, but then infantry charge them instead” 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never seen the double turn as severely detrimental as other players. I am not particularly competitive so it is possible that I am missing some of the nuances as well. Personally I see it as an additional part of the strategy,  I would argue that positioning your cavalry in a position in which they might get charged is a fundamental misunderstanding of a core game mechanic. I personally feel it also makes the game more dynamic as it is not purely one person than the other taking turns. In fantasy, and the few 40k games I have played, I feel I can almost walk away for the opponents turn but in AOS I have to be mindful of all the choices both players make during their turn as an unlucky dice roll can drastically alter tactics.

There are also rules that effect endless spells and one of Archaon's special rules is premised on predicting player turns. 

Edited by Neverchosen
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the insight, man.

I agree, I provided similar points.  It’s about the AoS mechanics that we’re not quite familiar with. Positioning is key, as is adapting strategy etc. 

Curious to hear what insights other players have! 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The priority roll is central to the game. Do you play cautiously and leave yourself resistant to your opponent's charges but sacrifice board control/objective control? Do you play aggressively but leave yourself to the mercy of the roll? What do you risk and what do you conserve? These are the sorts of questions you have to answer.

To remove it from the game would be to irrevocably change the game. Grappling with it is central to strategy and tactical play. It means you can't just rely on predictable, list-built combos.

That said, one or two armies mess around with it in ways I dislike. Hearthguard are too resilient and damaging and fast. Overly shooty armies can be a bit abusive on double turns.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the priority roll and would be very disappointed to see it go. When you are first learning to play with it, yes, there are often some big swings with people who get the double turn. With people who are more familiar with the game though, you'll often find that double turns can be nice, but very rarely decide the game. Once you're familiar with it, double turns can often be accounted for.

Ive been teaching a lot of my local group aos, and this is what I see happen regularly. Most of those players are entering aos from 40k, and they play aos like its 40k, in that they are setting up and moving as if the turn order is set. Then when they don't get the next turn, their army gets rolled over. These players complain, saying they hate the game or the priority roll is garbage. But once they stop playing "fantasy 40k" and start really taking the different mechanics (the priority roll being among them), they start seeing a lot more success and enjoy the game as its own system. 

The turn priority allows an out for people to always stay relevant in the game. While a strong player can help mitigate a double turn, sometimes a gamble for a double will keep the player in the losing position in the game and keep an otherwise one-sided game even. But as that suggests, its a gamble. And it can be turned against you as well.

One of the strongest power plays you can make is get yourself set up in a strong position against someone who played too conservatively (often in fear of a double turn), winning the turn priority roll, and making your opponent go first in the next round (giving up the double turn) because they are so out of position that they cannot effectively threaten you or the objectives. 

I guess what I'm getting at, is there are many nuances to the priority roll that you have to account for. It can absolutely be swingy, particularly for new players. This is most pronounced in people transitioning from 40k to aos (in my experience). However, once people get familiar with it and learn to play with/around it, it's actually pretty engaging. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the feedback and insights! 
 

All very good points. I will play the game as intended, and keep chipping away at the walls.

 

I haven’t fully introduced myself either, I have several 7th edition armies that I am currently using in a CoS list:

Empire, dwarves, wood elves and dark elves. I am also very tempted by a soulblight army.
 

Perhaps I will start a personal thread on hobby progress and battle reports :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Talarian said:

 

An example as to why they dislike:

”I set up my cavalry for a charge, for the next turn, but then infantry charge them instead” 

Well, if you didn’t put a screen in front of the cavalry to mitigate the risk of your opponent getting the turn, then you are just gambling. And in this example lost the gamble. It happens. 

it’s just a random element in the game. One that you need to learn to take advantage off. So that takes a bit of trial and error. 

the priority roll and the battleplans together create a game where the outcome can flip in turn 5. That creates Hail Mary plays to rescue running behind. And in the end makes the game into what it is.  
Although combat positioning with the 3” pile in and the myriad subtleties in there come a close third. 

I don’t play 40k myself. But on a recent podcast the honest Wargamer guest who is a tabletop games commentator claimed that most players could rightly predict who was going to win after the first turn. Turn two at the latest. 
don’t know if this is true. But if it is, 40k is the biggest disappointment of a game I ever heard off. All that time and effort and then after 1 maybe 2 turns you already know who’s winning? 
That is what the combination of the priority roll with the battleplan prevents. Games remain unpredictable, fortunes shift, and when you play well at the end the game usually came down to one bad play or unlucky dice roll. 

and that’s why I really like the priority roll and AoS in general. It’s unpredictable and forces you to adjust. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two more things to keep in mind about double turns.

1) By taking a double turn you're also creating the possibility of your opponent getting a double turn next. You should always weigh the risk and benefits of taking a double turn, if you can do enough good to warrant taking the risk of getting doubled next. Sometimes it's better to just let the game flow in the normal controlled way.

2) The army you're fighting against makes a big difference. You really don't want to get doubled by an army with powerful magic or shooting. The combat phase alternates the fighting between players but the hero and shooting phases doesn't, so there you'll be slammed twice without getting to do anything at all about it. A good shooting/magic double turn can certainly nuke an army out of the game.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kramer said:

I don’t play 40k myself. But on a recent podcast the honest Wargamer guest who is a tabletop games commentator claimed that most players could rightly predict who was going to win after the first turn. Turn two at the latest. 
don’t know if this is true. But if it is, 40k is the biggest disappointment of a game I ever heard off. All that time and effort and then after 1 maybe 2 turns you already know who’s winning? 

You, my friend, have nailed exactly why I no longer play 40k. I played 40k for 15 years. I love the narrative and i love the models. I still like to check up on whats happening narratives and ogle pretty new models being released for it. But the gameplay left much to be desired. You can absolutely predict the outcome of games very early, and with decent accuracy. Games got boring whether I won or lost. It got to the point that I was hoping one of us had an insanely good or bad roll, just to have something to get excited about. So I moved to aos, and haven't looked back. Sure there are rules that could be cleaned up and factions that need adjustment, but the game is FUN. There are multiple reasons for this, but mechanics like the priority roll are a major factor in it. 

  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

    I have never seen a game of AOS where initiative roll made the game so much more dynamic and strategic . I feel unfortunately lots of people lie to themselves into liking the mechanic. I would even go so far as to wager that if there never was an inititive roll and they were to introduce one now- these same people would be against such a sudden and harsh change. 
  Here where I live (NYC) there are top players who also swear by it - but they also lose to it no matter how many times they “screen” or “play around”. With the crazy amount of stackable abilities , spells and shooting nowadays it doesn’t really matter- there is a high chance you will be blown off. For instance , one top player who is quite dominant had a close game apparently against this other guy who was virtually undefeated. Long story short : they went to turn 3 or maybe even 4 and the challenger said he lost the initiative and called it there. How anticlimactic is that ?!

   The best thing they can do is two things for Aos for 3rd edition- take away intiative roll and only start scoring objectives starting from second round . This way it mitigates some of the random craze but also makes 1st turn priority scoring not an issue.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Lich KingI can only speak for myself but I do enjoy the mechanic for the reasons I listed earlier. I will say that you are correct that introducing such an important mechanic in a new edition would of course raise ire as it would rework fundamental strategies. But for that exact same reason, I would not want to see the mechanic abandoned as it would alter a core mechanic of the game and change my own personal strategies. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Lich King said:

    I have never seen a game of AOS where initiative roll made the game so much more dynamic and strategic . I feel unfortunately lots of people lie to themselves into liking the mechanic. I would even go so far as to wager that if there never was an inititive roll and they were to introduce one now- these same people would be against such a sudden and harsh change. 
  Here where I live (NYC) there are top players who also swear by it - but they also lose to it no matter how many times they “screen” or “play around”. With the crazy amount of stackable abilities , spells and shooting nowadays it doesn’t really matter- there is a high chance you will be blown off. For instance , one top player who is quite dominant had a close game apparently against this other guy who was virtually undefeated. Long story short : they went to turn 3 or maybe even 4 and the challenger said he lost the initiative and called it there. How anticlimactic is that ?!

   The best thing they can do is two things for Aos for 3rd edition- take away intiative roll and only start scoring objectives starting from second round . This way it mitigates some of the random craze but also makes 1st turn priority scoring not an issue.

It sounds like the person in your example was a poor sport and likely gave up early. Just because a good player lost to someone who got a double turn doesn't make it a bad mechanic, especially if the players are as close in skill as the ones in your example. Making preparations like screening can help mitigate the damage from a double turn, but it doesn't make you impervious, especially against someone who is a skilled player. I dont think anyone was positing that you can complete negate the effect of a double. 

I'm one of those people who would be sad to see the priority roll go. I enjoy it. I think its presumptuous to assume people who say they like it are pretending to like it or are ignorant. Clearly you don't enjoy it, and thats fine. Last year at NOVA, they had questionnaires from GW, and one of the first questions was how we felt about the priority roll. Id be curious to see the outcome, but everyone I spoke to said they support it. Anecdotal for sure, but something I find interesting.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A decent chunk of people don't play with Double Turn because for every match where it has snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, it's tabled somebody who was already in a bad position at the end of the first or second turn anyway. For all that people say you're to 'plan for it' and it adds 'depth'  all I've seen it do is leave the second player with far less tools to try and scrape a victory, especially in a system where armies like Ironjawz and Vostarg Fyreslayers have little problem bolting across the table and smacking you in the face very early or Hallowheart and Skryre get to blow you away twice. Sure it's nice if the underdog gets it, but a tiebreaker still isn't great odds of that happening.

It also exacerbates the worst of an IGUGO system, wherein you get to spend another turn sat twiddling your thumbs and you removing models. Engaging it ain't.  Bubble wrapping and daisy chaining aren't 'tactics' unique to Double Turns either.

AoS is just too 'kill heavy' for it to really work in my opinion and it feels like a holdover from when AoS was very quickly written and they wanted to put something unique in there without thinking it through. 

If your 40k buddies don't want to play with Double Turn but want to try AoS otherwise? I'd let them. Plenty of people do that already and if it makes it into third edition I'd be very surprised. You're going to have an easier time convincing them to adopt the mechanic when they're already invested in the game than you are keeping them compelled to play AoS - especially with a new 40k edition here - if they're setting themselves up to dislike the Double Turn rule.

Edited by Clan's Cynic
  • Like 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Between them stating from the get-go AoS is a living ruleset they'll keep refining(implying it'll always stay true to the core as it has) and that this current general's handbook actually has missions built around the double play it's guaranteed it's a mechanic they like so they'll keep it in as it is with them still pushing no points play(Open play/White dwarf battles) since the beginning and making realmscapes a requirement.

AoS3 will likely just do what stuff like Blade's Edge does and the earlier double turn penalties with Endless Spells by making the new tactics around it a core standard.

Also  AoS wasn't quickly written. They had rule developers from both in-house and freelancers that worked on Kings of War making the warscrolls and core rules since 2010 under Project Stanley. That's 5 years of development.

On 7/18/2020 at 1:58 PM, Talarian said:

I haven’t fully introduced myself either, I have several 7th edition armies that I am currently using in a CoS list:

Empire, dwarves, wood elves and dark elves. I am also very tempted by a soulblight army.

Well first, welcome to our side of the hobby and the Mortal Realms! :D

Freeguild and Soulblight and very fun armies for teaching this. Just go easy on any gunlines (never fun in any system) and they're good for showing why gambling on slow Duardin to take a position, freeguild to screen a defense for a demigryph counter charge to make the enemy pay for over-extending their lines or just Soulblight filling the gaps with skellies through double turns can be really fun and keep the game tense & fast all session. ;)

Edit: One fellow back in 2018 kept his Demigryphs well screened by infantry to defend or exploit a double turn and got really far in the tourney. And by the God-king can it look cool.

25s3vf3mxi441.jpg

On 7/18/2020 at 1:58 PM, Talarian said:

Perhaps I will start a personal thread on hobby progress and battle reports

That'd be fun. You can rest assured we're more than happy to help you out with advice.

Edited by Baron Klatz
  • Thanks 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lich King said:

I have never seen a game of AOS where initiative roll made the game so much more dynamic and strategic . I feel unfortunately lots of people lie to themselves into liking the mechanic.

Two questions. One, have you ever seen a game of AoS? Because it plays a part in every game I’ve played. 

Two, oh no you’ve caught me!!! I’ve been lying to myself the whole time! About every thing I like and you don’t! The horror. 😱
Or alternatively, tastes and experiences differ and ‘lots of people’ actually enjoy it because they might like different things from their games and have different experiences. Or I’m lying to myself, we’ll never know. ;) 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again for the advice and the kind welcome! 
 

Also, awesome demi pic, that looks glorious.

 

I had trouble determining where I should start my paint/hobby/battle log. Should it be in the armies section, or the paint section?

Edited by Talarian
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll add my thoughts with perhaps a touch less tact than others have:

 

When people want to change a rule - any rule - for a game before even trying it (let alone giving it a fair chance over several games), they can take a flying leap as far as I'm concerned.

Oh? You just know a rule is "obviously" bad? You are so completely amazing that at a glance you know better than the team of professionals who spent (in many cases) years developing a game?

Uh, yeah. Ok. I'll find new opponents who aren't quite so full of themselves and don't mind trying new things instead of trying to make everything conform to their views.

 

Hope that helps! :)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hear hear!

2 hours ago, Talarian said:

I had trouble determining where I should start my paint/hobby/battle log. Should it be in the armies section, or the paint section?

Paint section if you want to show your paint progress and take useful critiques on your painting and models, army section if you want list advice and critique on strategy, battleplans and what additions to your army would be helpful.

So probably army section but no reason it can't be both to better aid you fighting in style. 😎

Also another nice thing about double turns is it helps with narrative writing. Having battles upon the magical realmscapes fits the sudden shifts in fighting and can be an epic spice if you enjoy writing what happened like an account.

(Ironjawz double turn in Aqshy)

"The fierce combatants were evenly matched but upon the burning winds of fire a resounding Waaagh was heard as if echoed down from the gods of the broiling skies. Orruk tempers flared and their eyes alit with soul fire as they pushed beyond their limits and carved deep into enemy lines like a savage wildfire."

( Kharadron going second in Ulgu)

"By the code this skirmish was proving a drain on profits. Foes and foul things alike loomed in the shifting mists on both land and sky while a most vile living spell stalked the outskirts devouring hapless soldiers misplaced by the likewise living shadows. However the time had come. By mixing aethergold with the mists they had bribed the shadows onto their side. Mighty flying ironclads appeared torn and rusted, gleaming guns & aethertight armor disguised to seem dull and spent while the living spell seemed to watch him. The enemy surged on with overconfidence that his cannonades and skypikes would sorely prove misfounded and more costly than his waning stocks."

Fun stuff like that. :D

Edited by Baron Klatz
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...