Fear of Points

[deynon]

5 hours ago, rokapoke said:

My issue with this concern is this: if you are playing against jerks, it doesn't matter what style of game you play. If you play against a ****** in open play, you won't have fun. If you play against a ****** in narrative play, you won't have fun. If you play against a ****** in matched play, you won't have fun. Yes, the WAAC players will "justify" their lists by showing you that they have the same total points as you, but it's still no fun.

I have played a good 6-8 matched play games in my play group, and virtually every game has come down to a few rolls (often turn initiative rolls, but not always) at the end. I've enjoyed every game, and (from what I can tell) my opponents have too. I personally had bigger issues with a different playgroup before points were introduced, because my local game shop created a wounds-based "balance" system that certain players went out of their way to exploit.

Bottom line, don't be that guy, and don't play that guy, either, and you'll enjoy whatever style of play you are using.

I agree totally. I know some of this guys. Those are the guys who to give an introduction of the game use every trick to blast out the other one that doesn't even know how to measure and then even bloat out the win...
Sincerly I'm in the middle: i'm competitive but I like characteristic armies. 

I had a talk with a friend of mine that prefers the free battles instead of the points one and simply I demonstrated him that I can break the limits without too much thought when using points I have to use other ways cause those ones doesn't work. But the base is that to do so you have to do it deliberately.

In the years I've seen many limits, many bloating about a "balanced game" but it can't be so even if you think about chess.

Sincerely I prefer the point system cause it gives a sort of "dimension", I have a referring to how much I can bring with me. I'm a veteran in a way, I own a lot of miniatures so I don't have tecnically have limits if I don't put them on myself. I like the AoS even before GH release, and I'm totally sure that the points way is not "THE way"; simply I see it like a way more suitable to my taste to do it versus people I don't know neccessarily.

Moreover I find more suitable the points to see the infantries on the table instead of a small number of strong models. And I like the scenarios and missions associated with the points: they're not perfect (I prefer the variable ones of 40k) but they have a large array of possibilities so I like to play them.
And if someone ask me to play the free battles without points is ok to me. 

But it's so cause I am so. I know a lot of people those are on the same wavelenght, but I also know a lot of competitive guys who have fun to find avery creek in the rules and I can't criticize them cause it cause I like to do it too, but I apply it only with those people that do it too.

If you don't like a certain type of playing you can ask them a different playing or simply avoid them if they are unable to apply different styles.

It's a hobby, it's a fun, no need to be the same one, but if it's a game and so you want to have fun on it...you search for it how you like it.

[Sadysaneto]

My 2 cents?

Its.not about the mode you play it.

Its about who you play with.

 

We have a group of 6 old friends playing. Open, narrative, pitched... its always the same.

 

We actually are using points even for narrative.

[Lucio]

For me, the issue with points is that everyone assumes if you want to use them to balance armies, you also want to play with full Matched Play restrictions, such as Battleline choices, Rule of One etc.

Personally I'm happy with the idea of some balancing factor between army sizes (unless you're playing a specific scenario which requires asymetric forces), but do we really need to assume, as a community, that Matched Play is the only way to use points?

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm happier with the idea of picking an army to a theme, rather than to artificial restrictions. If I wanted to field an Ironjawz army with some Grot Artillery tacked on, I shouldn't need to suddenly find a horde of other "troops" to fill out my list, but at the same time, facing a list of 20 odd behemoths isn't fun. Maybe the compromise option is to allow players not taking part in tournaments to say "right, we'll use points, you can pick any one allegiance for your army, and get battleline choices, Battle Traits, artifacts etc. based on that, but you can pick up to X units (maybe 3/4/6) from within the wider allegiance"

[KhaosZand3r]

"Points only" games. It's a short spot in the GH basically saying you can use the points without the limiters. Again, house rules clause. 

[daedalus81]

1 hour ago, KhaosZand3r said:

"Points only" games. It's a short spot in the GH basically saying you can use the points without the limiters. Again, house rules clause. 

This is fine, but we have to be rigorous about conversations surrounding balance.  Someone using just points may have a vastly different experience than someone using all the additional restrictions, which, in my opinion are crucial to keeping some elements in check.

[MechaBriZilla]

I suppose it really comes down to who you play with.  I mean, it sounds like you can have vastly different experiences with other players, no matter if you use the points or not.  

I just want to see the other elements of this fantastic game explored, rather than just tons of lists, and conversations about what is/isn't OP...

[Gaz Taylor]

7 hours ago, MechaBriZilla said:

I suppose it really comes down to who you play with.  I mean, it sounds like you can have vastly different experiences with other players, no matter if you use the points or not.  

I just want to see the other elements of this fantastic game explored, rather than just tons of lists, and conversations about what is/isn't OP...

Problem you get with Internet Forums is that the people who frequently post things, are very very passionate about what they are posting about. The guys who tend to paint nicely, tend to just put up lots of pictures so use mediums like Twitter or Facebook, but with the freedom of being able to write about what you are thinking about, Internet Forums get pushed towards the competitive angle.

But you tend to find that its all talk. If you find a lot of topics which aren't to your tastes, start up one about something you want to discuss or let us know about a cool game you had.

 

PS - It is really who you play against as well.  

[RuneBrush]

9 hours ago, Lucio said:

For me, the issue with points is that everyone assumes if you want to use them to balance armies, you also want to play with full Matched Play restrictions, such as Battleline choices, Rule of One etc

Funnily enough I've been thinking the same.  Matched play imposes various restrictions - rule of one, battleline etc. Pitched battle simply uses points so you can work out that one army isn't massively more powerful than the other. Personally the group of friends I play with go for pitched battle - although coincidentally we all do comply with the battleline restrictions but more because that's how the armies have turned out than anything else.