Unpopular opinion thread

[Reinholt]

Triangular bases would be superior to both squares and circles.

[dirkdragonslayer]

More units need to have negative abilities, like the Giants' dying and potentially crushing allies, skaven misfiring, or the fanatics killing themselves. They are fun and underutilised in the game. Most of the ones we have are legacy abilities from WHFB since back then there were those sorts of mishaps. If Ratling Guns were a brand new unit they wouldn't have a misfire property, but they keep it because of the history.

More controversially, more armies need to be designed like Gloomspite Gitz, Beastmen, or Skaven. Fluffy unit composition and soft restrictions that make them less competitively focused. Newer armies like Soulblight, OBR or Lumineth seem like they were released with competition in mind when it comes to their rules. May be good for sales, but it can cause factions to lose some flavor. Like Gloomspite have armies able to do a full roster with lower synergy, or a focused roster (like maybe Aralith units only for Lumineth) that makes those units better for restricting your list. Infinity does this with it's Vanilla and Sectorial armies and it's pretty neat.

Edited October 15, 2021 by dirkdragonslayer
Expanding words.

[WarLadle]

Alright, I'll put myself out there.

1. I don't especially like dwarves, nor elves.

2. I would much prefer an actual focused and standalone 'normal people' army instead of Cities of Sigmar just being a dumping ground for old models. I want some normal people just trying to make their way in the crazy world that is the Realms, in a force that is thematically and mechanically coherent (and has it's own book instead of being balanced alongside every  old model that has ever existed).

3. I don't like that there isn't an Order faction that is mostly independent of the gods (again, other than the random mishmash that is Cities) the closest thing we've got is probably Kharadrons, but even that is looking less likely with the probable imminent return of Grungi. My favourite Order armies are the ones the least concerned with serving a god: KO (until Grungi shows up), DoK (sort of, until Morathi became Khaine-Morathi). Now that I think about it, Idoneth actually almost fit the bill, I should look into them more.

It's why I'm more drawn to BoC and Destruction armies I think. Those factions have separate identities (to a point) rather than just "extension of __insert god here__"

[willange]

1) I actively want more Lumineth. GIVE. ME. MOAR. (everyone around me seems to think they're annoying)
2) I enjoy playing against hyper competitive meta-lists, but everyone in my group checks to make sure their army isn't too powerful before bringing it to our casual nights.  I find that extremely annoying and then winning feels cheap (I don't usually run meta-lists for the record, I mostly play Khorne, CoS, and BoC)
3) Store terrain is mostly super annoying.  Anything with a slope is just the worst.  I get that it looks nice, but bases weren't made for slopes!!!

[PJetski]

Games should focus on fun first and balance second. I would much rather play a fun game than a balanced game.

That said, clear and tight rules are essential to a fun game because nobody likes to argue about rules. Games Workshop and their employees should feel embarrassed for constantly releasing products with unclear rules and invalidating physical rulebooks to fix issues that wouldn't make it past a basic QA check at a company with a fraction of their resources.

Kragnos is awful and everything about his role in the story is forced. 

Morathi never getting a comeuppance for her constant stream of objectively evil actions is tiresome

Lumineth are better thematically and aesthetically than high elves

Aelves are the cause of all problems in the mortal realms

They should have squatted Wanderers or made them into some kind of slave caste for the Sylvaneth

[Abstract_duck]

2 hours ago, Chikout said:

Ok here goes. 

1- most of the opinions listed here aren't unpopular and just represent what most of the community thinks. 

How DARE you?!

[RuneBrush]

I don't like named characters in normal sized games

[JackStreicher]

56 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

I don't like named characters in normal sized games

Same!

 

 

Another one from me: Creating one-use artefacts that can fail on a 1 should be punishable with 30 hits from a pool-noodle.
And Another: Battletomes are becoming more and more bland with less fun abilities that make the faction's playstyle sterile and unthematic (Soulblight, Stormcast)
And Another: Creating a Rule that needs no roll to add +1 to damage should be punishable by 36 hits with a pool noodle.

[Kadeton]

Controversial ones, huh?

• The impact of ranged weapons in AoS should be significantly reduced. If 40K has taught us anything, it's that two armies shooting at each other is incredibly dull. Close combat is where the drama and excitement of the game happens, and should always be the main focus.
• Army selection should be severely limited, with each force having ~10 unit choices or less. This would keep them thematic, focused, and visually and mechanically coherent. Instead of having a few armies each with a massive selection of units (most of which are terrible), it would be better to have a massive selection of thematic armies. As a starting point, take every subfaction from an existing battletome and split it into its own thematic list which doesn't share any units with any other subfaction. Allow them to ally or coalition with each other if you must.
• Edit: I had a third opinion here, but it was a bit too controversial.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Kadeton

[Perturbato]

There is no such thing that a "That Guy". Every one i met during game has some aspects of That Guy including me and it hurts me after i realise it.

[Enoby]

I think Strength and Toughness (as it presents itself in current 40k) would be fundamentally good for the game, and the lack of it is the main cause of warscrolls not feeling like their narrative would suggest, and the homogenisation of some warscrolls. 

Currently warscrolls are very static and, except in exceptional circumstances, there tends to be one Warscroll that is just the best at damage for its points and so becomes the default hammer in a competitive setting. With Strength and Toughness, you would need multiple different types of damage dealers (should they balance it correctly) to deal with multiple different types of defences. Having rend VS saves being the only inter-model interaction isn't enough, especially as -1 rend is common regardless of if you're a hulking monster or semi-elite soldier. 

While it is a little more complicated, it's a single extra step that takes a sentence to find out (e.g. "what's the toughness on that unit please?"). 

Yes they could do it badly and muck up everything, but we should give the rules writers some credit. Overall, I think Strength and Toughness is a narrative tool.

[Skreech Verminking]

- I want more randomness in the game.

-I would like a increase in size for stormvermins, plague monks, skryre acolytes, plague censer bearers, night runners and gutter runners.

-I would like to see the combined arms book for many factions to continue.

(I was pretty angry when they chopped up my skaven into different clans unable to be officially played together, unless you were taking grant allegiance chaos, just felt wrong)

-I would like to see armies in need of new models(like skaven seraphon) to take precedence of being updated or getting new models, then any other factions.

-I would like the removal of 90% of the currently rule breaking rules from lumineth. (mostly talking about the war-scroll abilities)

-Any non skavenplayer using a skaventide endless spell (spell in a bottle for example) should be rolling a dice to see if it doesn’t have any negative effects.

on a 1 the model throwing the bottle 
 

Takes d6x13 mortal wounds

and the spell does not go of

Edited October 15, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Perturbato]

yeah as someone said before, this is a lot of popular oppinion

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

5 hours ago, Chikout said:

1- most of the opinions listed here aren't unpopular and just represent what most of the community thinks. 

Especially this one! So meta.

 

4 hours ago, Reinholt said:

Triangular bases would be superior to both squares and circles.

These are the hot takes I came for.

 

Anyway, some unpopular opinions:

The current standard GW basing scheme is the worst it has ever been. Worse than just gluing on sand, or flocking a base and painting the rim Goblin Green. A flat, sandy or grassy plain is at least a place that exists. There is nowhere in the world where you will find a perfectly flat, muddy plain with three grass tuffs, a skull and maybe some snow puddles. Come on, guys, what is this?

In a similar vain, putting a bunch of highlights on a sword in random places looks like nothing that exists in reality, especially not like metal:

 

Finally, the most controversial opinion of all:

I think the current game of AoS is pretty fun, offers good tactical depth, plays well and is actually quite balanced all things considered.

[Dankboss]

Specific army centerpieces such as high leader units should be limited to 1 per army depending on context. It makes no sense that my army can field 2+ Freeguild GENERALS, Frostlords, Megabosses, Abhorrent Ghoul KINGS etc etc. That's not how power structures work in a functional army. It would also curb spamming. At least give sub-commander options like the Drakesworn Templar to his Lord Celestant on Stardrake. I know this is a high fantasy game but please let's just have some reality to bring it together...

GW letting us build armies of all dragons is a mistake and only encourages spam. How many times have we seen a new army drop and the article tell you you can build a whole army of (insert efficient monster/ elite unit here)? The game is better when most army composition actually looks like an 'army' and not 3 Frostlords and the extras tacked on. Armies composed of a couple powerful monsters is infantile and lazy, making it look like I'm smashing my Transformers into your plastic soldiers. I know we're playing a game with models but there is nuance here. Sons of Behemat get a pass. Let's not pretend these armies are the thematic force of a steam tank company and their support, they're pick 3+ of the smashiest monster and throw it at your opponents face overarm. And this isn't even a 3.0 problem.

GW's insistence on complete flexibility and freedom is detrimental to the game as it's open to abuse.

Sorry not sorry.

[Dankboss]

2 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

I don't like named characters in normal sized games

I just wanna run Galen Ven Denst 😢

[Maogrim]

I don't know if anyone cares enough to deem this unpopular, but Alarith Stoneguard hammers should do 2 points of damage. They are elite Aelven warrior monks with two-handed weapons. They should do more damage than your standard Vanari with a spear, not less (taking Sunmrtal weapons and Power of Hysh into account).

And I think Morathi is probably the most awesome and interesting character in AOS. I hope she continues winning for the time being and isn't completely overshadowed by her edgelord son once he appears.

[Clan's Cynic]

I like Fyreslayers.

I think any Freeguild update should keep the Not-Empire aesthetics to a degree. They've become too embedded in AoS artwork and descriptions at this point. Sure, Realmify them up (that's a word now) but I don't want them to be hugely different the way most people seem to want them to be. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by Clan's Cynic

[Dankboss]

7 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:

I like Fyreslayers.

I think any Freeguild update should keep the Not-Empire aesthetics to a degree. They've become too embedded in AoS artwork and descriptions at this point. Sure, Realmify them up (that's a word now) but I don't want them to be hugely different the way most people seem to want them to be. 

I don't understand the want to change Freeguild. Just make a new human faction. Freeguild are a specific military order, and are only prevalent because there isn't anything else to fill that niche at the moment. Furthermore, very few people play/ collect Freeguild specifically (not just as stuff in CoS) yet many seem to have an opinion on how they should be changed to fit their view. I don't want my Freeguild to change by people without a vested interest.

[Sarouan]

Unpopular opinion : complex and detailed rule systems don't make them better ones.

(Very) unpopular opinion : too much focus on balance and points isn't needed to make a good and fun game. It actually has the opposite effect.

(Widely) unpopular opinion : being able to build lists with only optimized units / synergies doesn't mean the game is badly designed : it means the player building the list wants to play an optimized game and should play against someone who has the same mindset than him.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Sarouan

[Noserenda]

Fyreslayers are the worst army GW has ever designed and the only force id happily see slide into Legends.

Its not even a popular opinion with me, im usually super anti wishing other folks toys away but i just have a visceral hatred of everything fyreslayer, from the name, to the fluff, to the minis, just awful.

[Kamose]

6 hours ago, WarLadle said:

I don't especially like dwarves, nor elves.

This isn't really an unpopular opinion so much as the correct one that all right-thinking and decent people have.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Kamose

[AdamR]

2 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

 

The current standard GW basing scheme is the worst it has ever been. Worse than just gluing on sand, or flocking a base and painting the rim Goblin Green. A flat, sandy or grassy plain is at least a place that exists. There is nowhere in the world where you will find a perfectly flat, muddy plain with three grass tuffs, a skull and maybe some snow puddles. Come on, guys, what is this?

 

Looks like every run down industrial estate I've ever been on.

Including the skull!🤣🤣🤣

Edited October 15, 2021 by AdamR

[zilberfrid]

2 minutes ago, AdamR said:

Looks like every run down industrial estate I've ever been on.

Including the skull!🤣🤣🤣

It also mimics lava sands in Iceland.

A tip for traversing industrial estates: If there are an alarming amount of human skulls, go check whether you left a pot on the stove and make an anonymous call.

Alarming amounts are, to me, more than zero.

[Orbei]

No one should ever play using grand strategies. Nice in concept but when SoB have access to beast master and Lumineth/Tzeench can pick prized sorcery the whole thing can be tossed in the bin.

Prayers and magic should be the same thing with the same mechanics. When you pray to Khorne and he answers that's magic. He's a magical god and just doesn't like other people's magic. There's no need for two systems.

The +1 cap to saves is an issue and should be removed. If a unit starts at 5+ and gets +3 somehow, and no rend is applied, it should save on 2+. The current system makes base 3+ save way too good and units aren't pointed appropriately for the difference between save values.

Sub-faction allegiance abilities should go away and be replaced with a "battle force trait" or something that you pick for each battle. It sucks having rules tied to paint schemes, even if many people ignore that anyway. If I want my army to always be the same sub-faction but also experiment with different allegiance abilities that should be encouraged. Picking your sub-faction should be purely narrative/aesthetic with no impact to the tabletop.