Jump to content

3.0 Actual Games Conversation


Sleboda

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, AaronWilson said:



Buddies turn one he moved up, I used re deploy on 30 skinks and rolled 4, kept them safe from any threats. blood warriors charged skink screen in the centre, I spiked horrendously on unleash hell from 30 skinks and killed the unit, 10 wrathmongers + blood thirster charged and killed the skink screen in the centre. Buddy was a bit triggered from unleash hell, he only read it as the unit charged can shoot not a unit just within 9" of the charging unit.

 

Just curious did you use redeploy on the same unit that had unleash hell applied on it (in a single turn)? If so that can't be done. Redeploy stops all further shooting for the turn (unleash hell is defined as shooting). If you did your buddy still has a right to be upset...

 

 

Edited by BigNStinky
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I had my first battle on Monday, (Nurgle v. Idoneth, Idoneth won) and I felt like the new coherency rules were almost unplayably obnoxious.  Any tips on dealing with them besides of course running units of 5 or fewer models?  I'm not so worried about achieving perfect efficiency as I am about how to realistically play the game without having to be super nitpicky about it (especially in melee).  Sorry to start off negative, I did enjoy the Heroic/Monstrous actions and extra Commands for what that's worth.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, AaronWilson said:

I had my first game of AoS 3 last night, I took Slann, Starpriest, Astrolith, Oldblood on Carno, 4 x 10 skinks, 1 x 30 skinks, 2 razordons, 2 salamanders, 2 x 5 chamos, opponent had Blades of Khorne with 5 heroes, 1 a bloodthirster, 10 bloodreavers, 10 blood warriors, 6 skull crushers, 2 x 5 flesh hounds, 10 wrath mongers. 

Dude, you were playing a great Lizardman list against the worst BoK list I've ever seen. There was nothing the guy could have done against anyone regardless of edition so long as they didn't rely on the path to glory tables to roll up an army.
I'm going to play some Khorne to kick off the new edition soon. I'll try to post my games.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Nacnudllah said:

So, I had my first battle on Monday, (Nurgle v. Idoneth, Idoneth won) and I felt like the new coherency rules were almost unplayably obnoxious.  Any tips on dealing with them besides of course running units of 5 or fewer models?  I'm not so worried about achieving perfect efficiency as I am about how to realistically play the game without having to be super nitpicky about it (especially in melee).  Sorry to start off negative, I did enjoy the Heroic/Monstrous actions and extra Commands for what that's worth.

I mean, the easy thing if you don't care about optimization is just to run everything in two ranks. Then you can just mush models around the table however you want. The issue of course is that is super sub-optimal when it comes to fighting and positioning. For 32mm models, you can do them in base-to-base staggered rows and the second rank can still fight even if it only has 1" range. For anything that's a 6-man, do two triangles of 3 next to one another, and as soon as one dies you can pull one of the back models forming a triangle and you're down to 5 and don't have to worry about it any more. 

There's no great answer, it's the problem with GW's super clunky system, and why cloud coherency is the system most other games use, because it's much less clunky. But GW never wants to do what everyone else is doing, so we get this w/in X of two other models thing that works out to be a massive pain if you want to play well. 

Edited by yukishiro1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First proper game of AoS 3.0 last night, Soulblight (Legion of Night) vs Daughters (Hagg Narr) on Tectonic Interference.

My musings:

Definitely notice the smaller board size, doesn't feel like you need to spread out as much and you are on the objectives and on top of each other very quickly.

Battle Tactics are great, generally quite easy to score but balanced by the fact that you can't pull ahead so quickly on objective scoring.

Priests being able to unbind is quite strong, was crazy to see DoK be able to have attempts to unbind all of my 5 spell casts.

Heroic Actions, Redeploys and Monstrous Rampages add flavour to the game and keep things interesting. We did not have Unleash Hell come in to play based on our armies.

Save stacking and Mortal Wounds are a problem. Save stacking meant my Vengorian Lord tanked a Hero Phase and Combat Phase activation from a unit of Sisters of Slaughter with his 2+ save with Finest Hour, and my Wight King on Steed was sitting pretty on a 2+ save in cover. The level of tankiness has definitely gone up and units with no/low rend are struggling to put out the same level of damage as before. On the flip side, this has made Mortal Wounds way more valuable, and I am concerned over how much is getting "Mortal Wounds on X to hit", which is likely GW's rules writers' response to the tankiness of this edition, I don't think it bodes well and I wouldn't be surprised if we see MW's on 4+ or 5+ to hit become prevalent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Liquidsteel said:

First proper game of AoS 3.0 last night, Soulblight (Legion of Night) vs Daughters (Hagg Narr) on Tectonic Interference.

My musings:

Definitely notice the smaller board size, doesn't feel like you need to spread out as much and you are on the objectives and on top of each other very quickly.

Battle Tactics are great, generally quite easy to score but balanced by the fact that you can't pull ahead so quickly on objective scoring.

Priests being able to unbind is quite strong, was crazy to see DoK be able to have attempts to unbind all of my 5 spell casts.

Heroic Actions, Redeploys and Monstrous Rampages add flavour to the game and keep things interesting. We did not have Unleash Hell come in to play based on our armies.

Save stacking and Mortal Wounds are a problem. Save stacking meant my Vengorian Lord tanked a Hero Phase and Combat Phase activation from a unit of Sisters of Slaughter with his 2+ save with Finest Hour, and my Wight King on Steed was sitting pretty on a 2+ save in cover. The level of tankiness has definitely gone up and units with no/low rend are struggling to put out the same level of damage as before. On the flip side, this has made Mortal Wounds way more valuable, and I am concerned over how much is getting "Mortal Wounds on X to hit", which is likely GW's rules writers' response to the tankiness of this edition, I don't think it bodes well and I wouldn't be surprised if we see MW's on 4+ or 5+ to hit become prevalent.

I don't like this direction either. Had the same thought in my games. Too much MWs flooding in the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same as you guys, there is too much MW around. I faced a Ghoul King that killed in one combat phase my mawkrusha with a 5+ ward. Mortal wounds dealt by spells are okay because you can dispell. But MW dealt by shooting or fighting are an issue because there is no counter measure.

But overall I love this edition. We will see with the two new books if GW keep it simple (I hope).

A bit sad that kruelboyz don't have their MW rules on their warscrolls because without that they seem underwhelming in Big Waaagh or as allies.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Backbreaker said:

Same as you guys, there is too much MW around. I faced a Ghoul King that killed in one combat phase my mawkrusha with a 5+ ward. Mortal wounds dealt by spells are okay because you can dispell. But MW dealt by shooting or fighting are an issue because there is no counter measure.

But overall I love this edition. We will see with the two new books if GW keep it simple (I hope).

A bit sad that kruelboyz don't have their MW rules on their warscrolls because without that they seem underwhelming in Big Waaagh or as allies.

I might be a bit (a lot) biased as I have a big FEC collection, but the Ghoul King on Terrorgheist has always had this potential output. It's not very reliable (3 attacks without buffs) but when it hits, it HITS. 

FEC took some nerfs in the form of not being able to use multiple command abilities on the same unit (can't fight on death then feeding frenzy to fight twice, or get All out Attack then Feeding Frenzy) or duplicating command abilities (can only Feeding Frenzy one unit per turn, no more going 4 times before your opponent), as well as only allowing one trigger on 6s (no more Mortals plus Exploding Hits).

My main concern is the MW's that are being given left, right and centre to your basic troops as well as archers. Lumineth, Kruleboyz, New Stormcast. It won't end here. And then what will be next, will an army come out that has a blanket "ignore mortal wounds on a 2+" ability, but poor regular saves, and flip everything on its head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chiming in with my experience; the new rules are great. Literally everyone I've talked to at my flgs thinks they are fun and an upgrade from 2nd edition. Though there are of course problems. To break it down to major points:

 

Cons

-Heroic recovery becomes extremely oppressive quite easily. Monster heroes healing 2d3 wounds a round are a problem. Especially when combined with...

-The amulet of destiny core artifact is ludicrously overpowered. Consider that it is, in practice, 50% extra wounds (it takes 3 damage to deal 2 wounds). And worse still it combines exceedingly well with heroic recovery.

-Overabundance of MWs has not only been unaddressed but doubled-down on. And in a way that feels less thematic than before. Poison being something that ignores armour entirely? Zombies ripping through plate with ease? These things aren't even fun in a narrative sense let alone gameplay.

-1 extra CP does nothing to mitigate the strength of a double turn, and getting a round 1-2 double still means one must ****** up hard to not seal the victory right off. Combined with unleash hell it makes shooting armies even more stifling than they already were.

 

Pros

-GW nailed the promised aspect of providing more gameplay during the opponent's turn. Between heroic & monster actions and the new CP dynamic there are almost always significant choices to be made even when it is not your turn.

-Heroic & monster actions are fun. There are a lot of play/counterplay options which arise from them and they really support the above point. Better yet they have a self-balancing element since there is only one hero action to be made regardless of the number of heroes and monster actions cannot be duplicated.

-The new CP dynamic is fun. Those new command abilities have quite an impact but at the same time are prevented from becoming oppressive by the limits on bonuses to hit/wound/save and because of the anti-stacking elements. Losing CP at the end of round means they get spent on things left and right, coupled with choices that we very much do want to spend them on.

-Battle tactics give an extra element to play around, and one that changes from turn to turn. They are also balanced very well against VP from objectives such that one cannot win if they ignore either side of the equation. In a similar vein GW has continued the trend of simply having really good scenario design for AoS matched play. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a distinction between frequency and volume though. Just because many factions can generate MWs doesn't mean there is "a lot" of MW being produced in a standard match. In fact every faction should be able to generate MWs it's important mechanic which allows for the scaling of saves across unit types and factions.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something like flat 6 MWs should not exist. It's no fun when your support heroes can be "click and delete"-ed from the game. Kairos for example does this and on top you aren't likely to be able to deny the spell at all

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd really like them to take a leaf from 40k's book and ramp up rend over mortal wounds. This not only increases the value on ethereal, but also save stacking in general without necessitating MWs. If a terrorghiest's jaws (random example) autowounded and had -4 rend, it's still going through the vast majority of saves, but if you're in cover with mystic shield and all out defence, that -4 becomes a -1 - counterplay! 

People like to be able to roll saves, even if it's just a 6+ - it gives someone the feeling of having a chance, rather than being told to just take their models off the table. It also lets people build a defence without the need of special mitigation like ward saves. Finally, it differentiates between 'piercing power' of mortal wounds - currently 6MWs from Sentinals is the same as 6MWs from a Terrorghiest. If this was changed to Sentinals getting -3 rend on 6s (and 5s) and the Terrorghiest getting -4, that allows differentiation between how enemies interact with them. Very few models can even attempt a save against -4 (without positive modifiers) whereas a decent number of units can save against a -3. 

Also, it'd give Nighthaunt a really nice niche. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enoby said:

I'd really like them to take a leaf from 40k's book and ramp up rend over mortal wounds. This not only increases the value on ethereal, but also save stacking in general without necessitating MWs. If a terrorghiest's jaws (random example) autowounded and had -4 rend, it's still going through the vast majority of saves, but if you're in cover with mystic shield and all out defence, that -4 becomes a -1 - counterplay! 

I'm sorry to be this guy, but I really, really gotta disagree. The Rend/AP bloat in 40K is nuts right now - it's one of the main reasons I stopped playing. At least with AoS, the buffs to saves are situational or can be counter played - you can't cast more than one Mystic Shield or use more than one instance of All-Out Defense, so really only one unit per turn can be mega-boosted like this.

A new universal Command Ability to increase Rend might be a good solution, since that's easier to add in AND remove via FAQ than Warscroll changes are, and has a similar level of usability to the current sources of increased Saves.

Edited by acr0ssth3p0nd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, acr0ssth3p0nd said:

I'm sorry to be this guy, but I really, really gotta disagree. The Rend/AP bloat in 40K is nuts right now - it's one of the main reasons I stopped playing. 

No problem for disagreeing :)

Could you say why rend bloat is an issue in 40k? I've only played a bit (I liked the rules, disliked the lore and models so couldn't find the enthusiasm to play - you likely know more than me when it comes to 9th!) so it'd be good to know why it's an issue :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Enoby said:

No problem for disagreeing :)

Could you say why rend bloat is an issue in 40k? I've only played a bit (I liked the rules, disliked the lore and models so couldn't find the enthusiasm to play - you likely know more than me when it comes to 9th!) so it'd be good to know why it's an issue :)

The problem is Rend hits disproportionately, across match ups. D3 MWs is D3 MWs it's easy to map out the predicted dmg of the model applying it, and less variable when it's scaled on something like a units attacks.

Rend is a utility, meaning how much is beneficial completely changes depending on the specific context. So it's +/- on the game completely changes depending on the local popularity of factions. When combined with the availability of invulnerable saves in 40k AP proliferation creates very drastic haves and havenots. 

Its one of I believe the best designed aspects of LRL. Everyone no matter what faction you play has some idea how much dmg to expect from a LRL unit. And the LRL player knows as well. Which means the decision making can move from a basic reactive mathmatical tactical choice. To a high strategic level choice, where you are weighing up if the dmg is worth it. In exchange LRL give up the any real possibility of effeciently amassing high damage in any one place. So they do about 9-12 dmg for about 150 of combat dmg, and 6-7 for 150 pts of shooting dmg full stop. 

The opposite would be something like a bunch of stabbas with fanatics. It's creates consistency via volume, and the fanatics increase variance which makes the unit a tactical problem. 

If you take a minute to think about it, it makes a game against LRL feel very different from a game against a less elite faction. Now some people would say that feel is NPE. I suggest it's the very variety we want from the game. 

As the game designer what you want to control for is effectiveness. So MWs and Rend can be different, situational better or worse, but you want to keep their ability to effect them game relatively close. So LRL aren't clearing the board in a storm of glowing Pikes, and Chaos Warriors aren't cleaving their way through all unit types with two handed weapons. And, you can push the boundaries of what is already accepted with each and see where it goes. For example if Vanari could get +1 A it would probably be too much. 

  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main thing with Rend bloat is that, while it solves the issue of that one jacked-up unit surviving everything, it creates another issue where everything that isn't situationally jacked-up with spells and CAs (and in a good place regarding how their survivability feels to play) also suffer. And that's far more important, since that's going to be the majority of any army at any time.

Basically, I'm just trying to say that, no matter how many problems increasing Rend will solve, any 40K player will tell you that it just isn't worth the side effects! I miss the days when my Necron Warriors' 4+ save mattered!

Additionally, creeping increases of Rend via Battletomes and Warscrolls are much harder to FAQ than, say, adding a separate Command ability to increase Rend, increasing the casting value of Mystic Shield, or even just saying " a characteristic can only ever be effected by one bonus and one penalty at a time. The penalty inflicted from Rend is excepted from this rule, and can affect a Save characteristic that already has a penalty applied to it," which preserves the spirit of the current rule while eliminating how save bonus stacking can entirely eliminate rend of -2 or more.

Edited by acr0ssth3p0nd
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

The problem is Rend hits disproportionately, across match ups. D3 MWs is D3 MWs it's easy to map out the predicted dmg of the model applying it, and less variable when it's scaled on something like a units attacks.

Thanks for the answer :)

I suppose I don't see this as a negative - I definitely agree that it'd be harder to balance varying rend, but I like the idea that different units are better at shrugging off even the mightiest of blows without need for a ward or mortal wound save. Simply because it can force a greater variety in lists, providing it's done well (and some armies get a rework for some better saves if rend becomes super common place) - if rend became more common and MWs less common, then there would be a greater scope for high save low damage units to try soak attacking units with a high rend. Whereas now you need a mortal wound save or even a 2+ save feels squishy, and Mortal Wound saves aren't common. Then again, I'm a proponent of toughness and strength so I may have unpopular opinions when it comes to stuff like this :P

Also, you mention that MWs will feel the same across all armies, but I don't think this is strictly true. Or at least, no different from a wider variety of rend. For example, Lumineth vs a Chaos Warrior heavy list will do much less damage due to the mortal wound save, compared to vs Skaven, compared to vs Soulblight etc. A player can individually predict how much damage they will take on the basis of their army, but surely this is the same for rend as people know their own saves. 

I quite like the way, in theory, 40k units interact with one another. High rend on big attacks counter single/elite models with a good save, but hordes don't care because they're only losing one of 30. You need high strength to crack high toughness, but too much high strength and you'll be wasting points against hordes. You need high toughness for your murder unit to live, but toughness never goes as high as strength can so you need to be careful not to sink too many points into it otherwise you could lose it all (or just not capture objectives). Too much investment in rend also means invuln saves will ruin your day (though I can imagine these being annoying if too common place).

Mortal wounds, on the other hand, seem much more streamline (take them no matter who you are, except certain specific circumstances), which isn't bad, but I personally prefer the large variety of different interactions and "what ifs" required in list building :)

(note, I'm not saying 40k is balanced and that it doesn't have other issues, this is more a like for the concept over execution) 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Liquidsteel said:

First proper game of AoS 3.0 last night, Soulblight (Legion of Night) vs Daughters (Hagg Narr) on Tectonic Interference.

My musings:

Definitely notice the smaller board size, doesn't feel like you need to spread out as much and you are on the objectives and on top of each other very quickly.

Battle Tactics are great, generally quite easy to score but balanced by the fact that you can't pull ahead so quickly on objective scoring.

Priests being able to unbind is quite strong, was crazy to see DoK be able to have attempts to unbind all of my 5 spell casts.

Heroic Actions, Redeploys and Monstrous Rampages add flavour to the game and keep things interesting. We did not have Unleash Hell come in to play based on our armies.

Save stacking and Mortal Wounds are a problem. Save stacking meant my Vengorian Lord tanked a Hero Phase and Combat Phase activation from a unit of Sisters of Slaughter with his 2+ save with Finest Hour, and my Wight King on Steed was sitting pretty on a 2+ save in cover. The level of tankiness has definitely gone up and units with no/low rend are struggling to put out the same level of damage as before. On the flip side, this has made Mortal Wounds way more valuable, and I am concerned over how much is getting "Mortal Wounds on X to hit", which is likely GW's rules writers' response to the tankiness of this edition, I don't think it bodes well and I wouldn't be surprised if we see MW's on 4+ or 5+ to hit become prevalent.

 

Got to play in my first 3rd edition matched play game yesterday. Broke out my ironjawz with some Kruelboyz, and was paired up against the new stormcast eternals. We each took mediocre lists with a diversity of models just to see how the new edition worked., Used just the core rules new battalions, so no help from old codex battalions. At the end of it all, the two things that stood out the most were the increased saves/tankability of certain units, and the mortal wound prevalence. 

 

The new Stormcast Annhilators were tough to deal with, as they deepstriked 7" away (using a hero ability) and exploded in Mortal wounds to all units within 10". Then proceeded to all out defense for a 2+ save. Playing orruks, most units have none or at most a -1 rend, meaning those Annhilators absorbed a huge amount of attacks before dying. Oh and of course they resurrect on a 5+ and can then lightning deepstrike again. **Shudder*. Now I've got a new Orruk Warclans Codex coming, so I'm expecting some unit buffs (Kruelboys MW generation will be clutch i'm thinking), but I'm not sure how low rend armies without heavy spellcasting or MW generation are going to deal with the prevalence of 2+ saves.

On the flip side, I brought a megaboss on foot for sh*ts and grins, and gave him "Ironclad" command trait for a 2+ base save. His warscroll ability is basically a renamed "all out attack" getting around the whole "a command can only be used once per phase" limitation, and he ROFL-stomped piles of stormcast light infantry. They had the same problem, no good way to overcome the 2+ save. And if they did, I just used the Healing heroic action to regain health.  He felt heroic and scary for the first time ever, carving through units like you'd expect a megaboss should do.

Are we just entering a new era with a different playstyle? One where you have ultra tanky units that dominate the battlefield, and have to be dealt with by shoveling them chaff. I see that playstyle in 40K (hello Mortarion) and I really don't want to see that appear in AoS. 

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

7 hours ago, Liquidsteel said:

Priests being able to unbind is quite strong, was crazy to see DoK be able to have attempts to unbind all of my 5 spell casts.

Small point, but unless I've just missed it reading it over several times, priests can't unbind in 3.0 - they can dispel endless spells, but not unbind. 

I mean, some of them can because they have it on their warscroll - e.g. runepriests - but it's not standard based on the keyword. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gothmaug said:

Oh and of course they resurrect on a 5+ and can then lightning deepstrike again. **Shudder*.

Just an heads up: Annihilators can't resurrect because they don't have the REDEEMER keyword

Edited by Marcvs
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Marcvs said:

Just an heads up: Annihilators can't resurrect because they don't have the REDEEMER keyword

Ooh, well that makes me feel better :)  We missed that. And that's why we were playing an exhibition game to learn the new rules. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hooray, I got my second vaccine and have arranged my first 3.0 game against my friend's Soulblight. It will be a bit of plodding mess as he will be playing his first game with the Soulblight updates and we will both be grappling with the new 3.0 ruleset. I think maybe for those reasons we will make it a smaller 1000-1500 point affair. 😁

  • Like 5
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...