Unpopular opinion thread

[lare2]

OK, I'll have a go. 

I sometimes feel that AoS' model range doesn't have a unifying theme. What I mean is that sometimes I feel that particular armies look like they're from a different game to others. Might just be my uneducated eyes...

[PrimeElectrid]

The double turn wouldn’t have nearly as bad a reputation as it does if the people insisting that good players can play around it actually took the time to explain how this is done.

Personally I don’t mind it now, it’s just a fact of the game, and I don’t doubt that good players do know how to play around it; but I don’t think that I’ve ever seen a thoughtful and comprehensive guide to so this, so the argument rings hollow. 

[Deepkin]

To round out my terrible opinions: Alternate activation is more fun than IGOUGO, and we should change AOS and the The Old World thusly.

Edited October 19, 2021 by Deepkin

[Clan's Cynic]

4 minutes ago, Deepkin said:

To round out my terrible opinions: Alternate activation is more fun than IGOUGO, and we should change AOS and the The Old World thusly.

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion so much that people are resistant to change and neither 40k/Fantasy/AoS have had AA, meaning the vast majority of wargamers have never played a game with AA - people simply don't know any better.

I'd say it's telling that you pretty much never, ever see a new IGOUGO system these days. Even GW's newer systems are all some form of AA at their core. It feels like some part of GW's designers do want to make a move to AA, but they're also mortified at doing such a massive uplifting of their game. I think we'd see it in AoS before 40k for that reason.

[PJetski]

1 hour ago, Orbei said:

In a fantasy setting where humans represent maybe 10% of the population they seem to represent 99% of death models. I've never noticed any skaven skeletons or zombies and they're supposed to be the most populous race. Almost seems as if Death goes out of its way not to raise any skaven! Or dwarves, lizardmen, ogres... hmmm...

Death MOST racist alliance, perhaps?

Specist, surely

[Orbei]

Games Workshop should sell painted models.

Not every model or most models, but some models. The most significant barriers to entry for this hobby are the high cost and the need to paint. Some people don't want to paint, don't like painting, or are intimidated by painting. While the core of GW's products line should remain unpainted, unassembled plastic my suggestion would be a limited range of 'battle ready' minis. Start with maybe 2 factions (say stormcast and orcs but whatever) where a small selection of the range are sold in a basic tabletop acceptable color scheme. There should be enough available that one could field a full army of battle ready figs if they want. They could then sell a little painting pack with everything needed to paint more figs in the same scheme, so people who start with the painted ones can gradually expand into painting. 

Edit: Not sure how I managed to turn half of my post red. Lol

Edited October 19, 2021 by Orbei

[Dogmantra]

Not so much an unpopular opinion as a hot take but I have a feeling that the next Big Bad will be a Stormcast Eternals splinter faction who decides that the only way to keep order is to exterminate basically everyone else. It feels very hinted at in the new tome, a lot of mentions of the reforging flaw getting worse, the art looking a bit darker, the emphasis on how inhuman the Stormcasts really are. Plus it makes a nice pattern in the editions' antagonists: 1e had the Realmgate Wars which had Chaos as the antagonist 2e had the Soul Wars which was Death as the antagonist, now in 3e season 1 we've got Kragnos who is Destruction. It feels like they're going to complete the set and have Order be the next evil folks. Stormcasts make the most sense to me, and I think narratively would be neat given that SCE are the poster boys for the game.

 

Also, a real unpopular opinion: the community seems to run tournaments as the main type of event, but I think that the majority of the playerbase seems to actively dislike competitive play and would be better served by just running for fun games days instead.

[Deepkin]

44 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion so much that people are resistant to change and neither 40k/Fantasy/AoS have had AA, meaning the vast majority of wargamers have never played a game with AA - people simply don't know any better.

I'd say it's telling that you pretty much never, ever see a new IGOUGO system these days. Even GW's newer systems are all some form of AA at their core. It feels like some part of GW's designers do want to make a move to AA, but they're also mortified at doing such a massive uplifting of their game. I think we'd see it in AoS before 40k for that reason.

True. Loved alternating activation in Warcry. It does contribute to balance favoring lots of chaff though. Have played with alternate activation in mordheim and liked that a lot too. 

[chosen_of_khaine]

19 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Extra unpopular opinion: you have it backwards. It isn't that unskilled players can't beat a double, it is that skilled players don't lose with one. If one loses after a double, then broudly speaking the game was already decided, some crazy luck happened, or they screwed up. The opponent only has a chance to come back from a double if the door was left open for them. I can say from ample experience that taking a round 1-2 double and doing it right, it doesn't matter if the opponent is a newbie or tourney veteran they will not have the tools to win.

I don't think that's a particularly unpopular opinion, but I do think it is completely untrue - have you been to any tournaments, or watched competitive battle reports? The claim that "skilled players don't lose with a double turn and if they do, the game was largely already decided" just doesn't bear out in reality among skilled players. This is not to say that there aren't games decided by priority rolls, but this idea just goes back the Venn circle, in addition to some bias about what games we *do* remember. (As it happens, I had a competitive match just this past weekend that I won after getting doubled on turns 1 into 2 that was far from being decided beforehand)

 

 

19 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:

What's said here in this quote, that's what unskilled players tell themselves after losing with a double. They say 'oh my opponent outplayed me because skilled players can overcome' instead of admitting they were the ones who screwed up to create that opening in the first place.

Maybe it's the morning caffeine not kicking in, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. That a skilled player always ought to win with a double turn, and the player on the receiving end effectively has no input into the outcome of the game? That seems patently untrue to me.
 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

32 minutes ago, Dogmantra said:

Not so much an unpopular opinion as a hot take but I have a feeling that the next Big Bad will be a Stormcast Eternals splinter faction who decides that the only way to keep order is to exterminate basically everyone else.

If we end up with Chaos Sigmarines instead of expanding the narrative focus on all the cool potential antagonists we already have, I swear on me mum...

Stormcast are cool, but that's largely because they are not like Space Marines, where they are both the most represented army on the "good" and "bad" side.

[Dogmantra]

7 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

If we end up with Chaos Sigmarines instead of expanding the narrative focus on all the cool potential antagonists we already have, I swear on me mum...

Stormcast are cool, but that's largely because they are not like Space Marines, where they are both the most represented army on the "good" and "bad" side.

FWIW I think doing Chaos Sigmarines would be the absolute worst way of handling this.

I think that there is room for an extremist Stormcast splinter faction to exist in the narrative alongside Chaos. Canonically, at least one Stormhost (Hallwoed Knights?) has already done some major purges that went just a little bit too far. I think you could definitely get a contrast between ideologies that would make it interesting.

[Deepkin]

Chaos Sigmarines are surely just Chaos Warriors at that point, aren't they?

Indeed, wasn't the idea the other way around? Sigmarines are chaos warriors, but for sigmar.

[Beliman]

1 minute ago, Deepkin said:

Chaos Sigmarines are surely just Chaos Warriors at that point, aren't they?

Indeed, wasn't the idea the other way around? Sigmarines are chaos warriors, but for sigmar.

That's my interpretation too. Btw, as a Horus Heresy fun, I prefer that AoS doesn't follow the same pattern.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

9 minutes ago, Deepkin said:

Chaos Sigmarines are surely just Chaos Warriors at that point, aren't they?

Chaos Warriors are just Chaos Warriors. They are cool.

What I am talking about is spcifically corrupted Stormcast, which I would absolutely hate to see. We seriously do not need that in the canon of AoS. And I say that as someone trying to work out a 1000 point Stormcast list to start right at this moment.

[Scurvydog]

1. Playing Dadhammer is not a higher state of being and not caring about the game or rules is simply disrespectful unless otherwise agreed with your opponent.

2. Hating on new stuff does not make you cool. If only it was so easy...

3. Competitive AoS has many similarities to MTG, building a list is like a deck, you should not be able to win with whatever you want.

4. Adding on 3, TO's could look at MTG formats to spice up list building and play, while still in a competitive setting

 

[EccentricCircle]

2 hours ago, Orbei said:

Games Workshop should sell painted models.

Not every model or most models, but some models. The most significant barriers to entry for this hobby are the high cost and the need to paint. Some people don't want to paint, don't like painting, or are intimidated by painting. While the core of GW's products line should remain unpainted, unassembled plastic my suggestion would be a limited range of 'battle ready' minis. Start with maybe 2 factions (say stormcast and orcs but whatever) where a small selection of the range are sold in a basic tabletop acceptable color scheme. There should be enough available that one could field a full army of battle ready figs if they want. They could then sell a little painting pack with everything needed to paint more figs in the same scheme, so people who start with the painted ones can gradually expand into painting. 

Edit: Not sure how I managed to turn half of my post red. Lol

Well you were talking about a gradual shift into painting, so the change to colour as the post goes on is certainly thematic!

[yukishiro1]

So here's the really unpopular opinion on double turns: they are neither an abomination nor a genius design feature that makes AOS great. Sometimes a double turn ruins a game, sometimes a double turn breathes life into a game that otherwise would have been stale and predictable. You cannot plan around them fully, so the people who say that "good players don't lose to a double turn" are wrong. But you can take steps to mitigate their effects in many circumstances even against competitive lists, so the people who say "you just lose if you get doubled, there's nothing you can do" are also wrong. 

They're also needed in the current game not because they're a great mechanic per se, but because the game has become so alpha-strike heavy that without the threat of a double, taking a 1-drop list, going first and alphaing your opponent hard would be the only competitive choice, and competitive games would largely come down to the roll-off to go first between 1-drop lists. If people think 40k has a going-first problem, you can't even imagine how bad the going-first advantage would be in AOS without the double turn. But that's not a great conceptual justification for them, because the game shouldn't be so alpha-strike heavy in the first place; it's like breaking your nose in one direction and then "straightening it" by breaking your nose again in the other direction to try to even it out. 

 

 

Edited October 19, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Grimrock]

1 hour ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Chaos Warriors are just Chaos Warriors. They are cool.

What I am talking about is spcifically corrupted Stormcast, which I would absolutely hate to see. We seriously do not need that in the canon of AoS. And I say that as someone trying to work out a 1000 point Stormcast list to start right at this moment.

Technically they already exist in the lore. Nurgle forces captured and tossed a stormcast in a filth pit for 77 days or something and when he came out he was a fully corrupted follower of Nurgle. The stormcast frantically chased him down, killed him, and gradually purged his soul of corruption afterwards, but the lore had its first? official chaos stormcast. With the Be'lakor thing I think there are large groups of stormcast that can't return to Azyr easily right? I could definitely see GW write them as becoming more and more corrupted the longer they stay in the mortal realms... but yeah I agree we really don't need a chaos stomcast faction. The less comparisons they have to marines the better. 

[amysrevenge]

To elaborate on my "getting better isn't the point" popular/unpopular opinion.

The more you do something, the better at it you get.  That's just how humans work.  However, the *reason* you do the thing doesn't have to be to get better at doing the thing. 

Getting better is a side effect; doing the thing is the main point.  And if getting better doesn't happen fast enough (for whatever value of fast enough you like), that's not a moral failing. 

You're not hobbying "wrong" if you can't manage flawless NMM after 10+ years of painting, or if you go 1-4 at your 15th tournament.

Edited October 19, 2021 by amysrevenge

[NinthMusketeer]

5 hours ago, chosen_of_khaine said:

I don't think that's a particularly unpopular opinion, but I do think it is completely untrue - have you been to any tournaments, or watched competitive battle reports? The claim that "skilled players don't lose with a double turn and if they do, the game was largely already decided" just doesn't bear out in reality among skilled players. This is not to say that there aren't games decided by priority rolls, but this idea just goes back the Venn circle, in addition to some bias about what games we *do* remember. (As it happens, I had a competitive match just this past weekend that I won after getting doubled on turns 1 into 2 that was far from being decided beforehand)

 

 

Maybe it's the morning caffeine not kicking in, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. That a skilled player always ought to win with a double turn, and the player on the receiving end effectively has no input into the outcome of the game? That seems patently untrue to me.
 

I have played in tournaments, won tournaments, and now run them regularly. I can remember every game in which I got a 1-2 double then lost, because all four times I made a critical mistake. My dislike of the double comes not from losing to it, my dislike comes from having a ~40% chance to auto-win because I had less deployment drops than my opponent. If there was skill involved it would be one thing, but all I had to do was not mess up. I'm not the greatest player out there and it's absurd how easy a 1-2 double makes it to win against opponents who are legitimately better than me.

Edited October 19, 2021 by NinthMusketeer

[Phasteon]

My unpopular opinion: 

There is no „competitive“ vs „casual/narrative/fluffy“ List.

There are just competitive vs. casual/narrative/fluffy oriented players.

… at least when playing matched play.

 

Every matched play legal list is a potential tournament list, there are just very effective, mediocre and bad ones.

 

If you want to play matched play 2k points with min. 3 battlelines and all other restriction you‘re „queuing“ for a competitive game. 

If you want to be fluffy or casual go and play open play missions / battleplans from battletomes. 

Don‘t be mad about someone playing a „more effective“ list in a „casual game“ when it‘s your own responsibility. 

 

[yukishiro1]

1 hour ago, NinthMusketeer said:

I have played in tournaments, won tournaments, and now run them regularly. I can remember every game in which I got a 1-2 double then lost, because all four times I made a critical mistake. My dislike of the double comes not from losing to it, my dislike comes from having a ~40% chance to auto-win because I had less deployment drops than my opponent. If there was skill involved it would be one thing, but all I had to do was not mess up. I'm not the greatest player out there and it's absurd how easy a 1-2 double makes it to win against opponents who are legitimately better than me.

This was definitely true in AOS2, but I find it less true in AOS3 - though as noted above, not necessarily for a great reason: it's because T1 alpha strikes are such a thing now. In AOS2 it was a rare army that could go in hard on the top of T1 through most of the edition, but these days pretty much everyone can do it aside from the sad left-behinds. Throughout most of AOS2 T3 was the decisive turn, which slowly transitioned to T2 over the course of the edition; AOS3 feels even more frontloaded, to the point where one person is often firmly on the back foot even by the end of T1. 

Going first T1 is now worth a lot more than it used to be because of the reduced objective counts, smaller map and the fact that screens have largely fallen out of favor, and greater benefit to be gained from alphaing someone before they can get their buffs up. So the old "give them first turn, then double them and win" strategy is not as foolproof as it used to be, because by doing so you'll likely lose a significant amount of your army to your opponent's T1 alpha, and if you don't get the double, you're going to only have half your stuff left when it gets to the bottom of T2. 

I don't think this is great game design - it isn't fun to play a game where a key piece (or even multiple pieces with some of the new alpha lists) of yours get removed T1 before you even have a chance to move, nor is it fun to be doubled on the T1/T2 changeover - but it does feel to me at the moment like alpha strikes and double turns are somewhat keeping one another in check.

Edited October 19, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Stormblood]

3 hours ago, Grimrock said:

Technically they already exist in the lore. Nurgle forces captured and tossed a stormcast in a filth pit for 77 days or something and when he came out he was a fully corrupted follower of Nurgle. The stormcast frantically chased him down, killed him, and gradually purged his soul of corruption afterwards, but the lore had its first? official chaos stormcast. With the Be'lakor thing I think there are large groups of stormcast that can't return to Azyr easily right? I could definitely see GW write them as becoming more and more corrupted the longer they stay in the mortal realms... but yeah I agree we really don't need a chaos stomcast faction. The less comparisons they have to marines the better. 

You mean Torglug?  He wasnt a Stormcast when captured IIRC.  Or are you speaking of someone else?

[ChaosUndivided]

If you're getting deleted top of turn 1 your just a bad player. Its very easy to ask things like how far can that guy move and shoot? Or position your units in a way that makes teleports  ineffective. How badly do you need to cast mystic shield before someone punches you? Im not the most savvy expert on every faction but i play several and not one of them relies on buffing before my opponent hits me to stay alive and in the game.

[Grimrock]

40 minutes ago, Stormblood said:

You mean Torglug?  He wasnt a Stormcast when captured IIRC.  Or are you speaking of someone else?

Oof, yeah you're right sorry. I misinterpreted what it said at the start of the paragraph, thought that was a stormcast position or something but it looks like  I was wrong. No chaos stormcast yet (and hopefully it'll stay that way).