Jump to content

The Mortal Wound Pandemic, and Dealing With It


Recommended Posts

Lumineth is my favorite faction and they often feel way too dependent on ward saves or mortal wounds with Protection/Power of Hysh. Sort of sucks that you can guess how the turn will go based off of getting a spell off................... and you be surprised how many times they stop rolls of 9 and 10 lol.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Popisdead said:

The #1 sign someone needs introspection is when the come to the Age of Sigmar discussions sub-forum to complain about the state of the game.

Am I the only one who reads this like it's an attempt to take a stab at someone without alerting the mods? Come on, this doesn't even make sense. The #1 sign? Introspection? It's all just vaguely derogatory.

As to your comments about rose-tinted goggles, I think you're just misattributing people's diverse warhammer opinions to the haze of memory. A lot of people still play WHFB 5&6, 9th age - it's not just misremembering a lot of people genuinely prefer elements of that time. There are something like 10 regular WHFB players in my club to the 20 Sigmar ones. A couple are too young to have been playing when the game was alive! I actually don't think most people's warhammer opinions change just because they get confused and forget, most of the people I've known who hated all the issues with WHFB abandoned it wll before the end and don't remember it so fondly. 

To use a contemporary example, surely everyone here has seen players violently bounce off Sigmar because of core design failures like the double turn that really have no excuse to linger beyond being some kind of sacred cow. In ten years are we going to say "early Sigmar actually always sucked, rose-tinted glasses, double turn" or can we sanely acknowledge that there are things we like AND things we dislike about these games.

Be generous, is what I'm saying. If someone wants to vent about their problems with where things are this seems like precisely the venue to do so.

Edited by NauticalSoup
Deleted a distracting line that weaknened the core thrust
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:

In the 40k world everyone says all our Sigmar mechanics are garbage yet here we are

Really? 80% of the game is a copy of AoS... that says a lot about them. And a lot of 40k "influencers" are already saying that 9th is a bit too much for them... 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Really? 80% of the game is a copy of AoS... that says a lot about them. And a lot of 40k "influencers" are already saying that 9th is a bit too much for them... 

You can definitely see the influences everywhere but one common complaint and fear I hear constantly about upcoming 10th is that even MORE Sigmar will get injected into 40k. Many clearly believe it's got too much Sigmar in its DNA already.

Edit: I should give a specific example. One of the rumours for 10th was that toughness would be removed which got a pretty negative reaction and was strongly associated with this idea that 40k is being Sigmared piecemeal (and implicitly that this is a bad thing).

I'm not a huge fan of 9th these days so I don't really have an opinion on this but nevertheless, had this convo like four times in the last few weeks with various folks at our club.

Edited by NauticalSoup
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/1/2023 at 4:59 PM, NauticalSoup said:

You can definitely see the influences everywhere but one common complaint and fear I hear constantly about upcoming 10th is that even MORE Sigmar will get injected into 40k. Many clearly believe it's got too much Sigmar in its DNA already.

Edit: I should give a specific example. One of the rumours for 10th was that toughness would be removed which got a pretty negative reaction and was strongly associated with this idea that 40k is being Sigmared piecemeal (and implicitly that this is a bad thing).

I'm not a huge fan of 9th these days so I don't really have an opinion on this but nevertheless, had this convo like four times in the last few weeks with various folks at our club.

Yeah, but they are a bunch of people that don't know what they are saying.

I mean, AoS has To Wound rolls, and 40k Hit rolls are a copy&paste from AoS.
8th edition was basic AoS mechanics with some 40k flavour, and people loved it (at least early Index books). And loot at Valrak, he don't know anything about Sigmar but every time that he talks about 40k gameplay, he says that wants more simplifcation with less stratagems, less bloated battle traits, less one-turn kills, etc... without realising that's what AoS 3.0 is.

What I'm trying to say is that people that don't know anything about AoS since 2015, probably don't know what AoS 3.0 is about... so don't give them any credit because a Cactus probably has better arguments than them (appart from the usual "dOuBlE-TuRn").

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

2 hours ago, Beliman said:

Yeah, but they were just a bunch of people that don't know what they are saying.

I mean, AoS has To Wound rolls, and their Hit rolls are a copy&paste from AoS.
8th edition was a base AoS mechanics with some 40k flavour, and people loved it (at least in early Index books). And loot at Valrak, he don't know anything about Sigmar but every time that hetalks about 40k gameplay, he says that wants more simplifcation with less stratagems, less bloated battle traits, less one-turn killss, etc... without realising that's what AoS 3.0 is.

What I'm trying to say is that people that don't know anything about AoS since 2015, probably don't know what AoS 3.0 is about... so don't give them any credit because a Cactus probably has better arguments than them (appart from the usual "dOuBlE-TuRn").

I mean you're reading a lot into it. I only know one guy who plays both competitively and he wants to see 40k become less like Sigmar, not more. As I said previously, the line is too much Sigmar DNA as-is, not 'people are unaware 40k takes cues from Sigmar'.

As someone who has played a lot of both games, if you copied all the 3.0 Sigmar changes onto 40k I'd probably just quit. And the double turn is cancer. So whatever point you're trying to make I disagree.

But I'll say no more on it because this was never the point I wanted to make and this tangent is all inspired by a throwaway line that was meant to convey 'don't mald about other people's salt'. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:

As someone who has played a lot of both games, if you copied all the 3.0 Sigmar changes onto 40k I'd probably just quit. And the double turn is cancer. So whatever point you're trying to make I disagree.

Sorry if my post sounded a bit agressive, it was not my intention.

My point was that a lot of peole talk about being "AoS-ified" but it isn't clear what that means. I'm not a competitive 40k player (I have a Votann army but I don't play a lot) but appart from tournament people that love the game (btw, we are organizing a 250 players tournament in two month), a lot of the main issues that I read online (dakka dakka, Bolter&chainsword, youtubes like CM Valrak) are focused on a need to simplify rules, remove stratagems, reduce army traits, infinite lists of profiles for one unit, etc... and that sounds exactly like AoS (sadly, my Thunderers still have 5 profiles).

Talking about double turn, it seems that it's the only AoS mechanic that people remember (and it's not an AoS feature because all new wargames come with it) and no roll for wounding was never an AoS mechanic.

I must say that I like S vs T, even WS vs WS, but that's another thing to talk in anothet post.

Hope that explains my last post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RyantheFett said:

Lumineth is my favorite faction and they often feel way too dependent on ward saves or mortal wounds with Protection/Power of Hysh. Sort of sucks that you can guess how the turn will go based off of getting a spell off................... and you be surprised how many times they stop rolls of 9 and 10 lol.

This is where I'm at. Lumineth are the faction I wanted, but I wish Power of Hysh functioned more like OBR's Nadarite blades. The mortal wound dependency isn't fun. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear most of these influencers barely play the game if at all.

Valrak literally admitted recently he doesn't play 40k so his opinions on the state of the game can't really be given a ton of weight.

I think there's a consistent issue across AOS and 40K right now where they've had a large influx of new fans who in many cases have spent loads of money on model collections and then found out they don't actually enjoy the games, or they just don't like tabletop wargaming period. So despite having like, 3-5 games under their belts they suddenly become experts in how the games should be changed. It's about simplification, but even then things like OPR exist and are free; they can move over to those systems and play them at any time, and yet they don't. Because even those systems are too much for them, because fundamentally they just cannot get into wargaming. It isn't really something they'll ever enjoy and yet they'll complain endlessly that games should bend over to accommodate them when really no changes could ever actually make them sit down and read and memorize the rules. Because that's what the issue is.

Not to say both AOS and 40K are flawless, far from it, and there are plenty of improvements that could be made to both. Sigmar should've yeeted the double turn, fixed its shooting mechanics and introduced proper terrain rules in 3rd; 40K could legit use some parsing down of stratagems and doctrine-style army rules to simplify the game. But that's the thing; you do all these things and these same people will still not play the games, they'll still have complaints about how they're too complicated.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bosskelot said:

Just to be clear most of these influencers barely play the game if at all.

Valrak literally admitted recently he doesn't play 40k so his opinions on the state of the game can't really be given a ton of weight.

I think there's a consistent issue across AOS and 40K right now where they've had a large influx of new fans who in many cases have spent loads of money on model collections and then found out they don't actually enjoy the games, or they just don't like tabletop wargaming period. So despite having like, 3-5 games under their belts they suddenly become experts in how the games should be changed. It's about simplification, but even then things like OPR exist and are free; they can move over to those systems and play them at any time, and yet they don't. Because even those systems are too much for them, because fundamentally they just cannot get into wargaming. It isn't really something they'll ever enjoy and yet they'll complain endlessly that games should bend over to accommodate them when really no changes could ever actually make them sit down and read and memorize the rules. Because that's what the issue is.

Not to say both AOS and 40K are flawless, far from it, and there are plenty of improvements that could be made to both. Sigmar should've yeeted the double turn, fixed its shooting mechanics and introduced proper terrain rules in 3rd; 40K could legit use some parsing down of stratagems and doctrine-style army rules to simplify the game. But that's the thing; you do all these things and these same people will still not play the games, they'll still have complaints about how they're too complicated.

Interesting point. In the age of the internet and smart phones, the easiest part of our hobby now is talking and complaining about hobby (including game mechanics). Heck, I'm on my work PC right now reading AoS forums, because I can't do anything else hobby wise from here. Actually getting games in on the tabletop is probably the most challenging part.

Talking about gaming is much easier than gaming, so much of the talk about gaming should be taken with a healthy pinch of salt.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dolomedes said:

Interesting point. In the age of the internet and smart phones, the easiest part of our hobby now is talking and complaining about hobby (including game mechanics). Heck, I'm on my work PC right now reading AoS forums, because I can't do anything else hobby wise from here. Actually getting games in on the tabletop is probably the most challenging part.

Talking about gaming is much easier than gaming, so much of the talk about gaming should be taken with a healthy pinch of salt.

Don’t you worry: The talking and ranting has always been part of the hobby (whf times). Most people were upset with the nonsensical broken rules (untouchable and ethereal mage, that phoenix immortality banner, Death Star Witches + Mindrazor)

looking back whf was an utter mess - we still loved it though (there wasn’t another place to go as well)

 

Edit: Much of the ranting can be avoided by following a simple design principle: Make units and synergies decent.
Not super powerful, just decent. (GW overblows into one direction all the time: Activation Wars, Save stacking, Mortal Wounds, Battle Tactics in Battletomes etc.)

Edited by JackStreicher
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JackStreicher said:

Don’t you worry: The talking and ranting has always been part of the hobby (whf times). Most people were upset with the nonsensical broken rules (untouchable and ethereal mage, that phoenix immortality banner, Death Star Witches + Mindrazor)

looking back whf was an utter mess - we still loved it though (there wasn’t another place to go as well)

 

Edit: Much of the ranting can be avoided by following a simple design principle: Make units and synergies decent.
Not super powerful, just decent. (GW overblows into one direction all the time: Activation Wars, Save stacking, Mortal Wounds, Battle Tactics in Battletomes etc.)

Sure was! I fondly remember my unkillable nurgle Daemon Prince that was -2 to hit and regenerated wounds constantly. I had to stop playing him because it was so obviously broken. Then there were the end times rules, but we don't talk about that.

I agree with you about making stuff decent. Battle tactics are especially busted at the moment I think. As mentioned, I play BoC. We've got a tactic which is roughly 'put 2 units wholly in cover outside of your territory'. Having such an easy tactic to play turn 1, as well as cunning manoeuvre, gives you a massive early game advantage. MWs are one thing, but straight up scoring points by just putting a model somewhere is a whole new level of power creep. That's something that can only be fixed with a new edition or TO comp.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dolomedes said:

I play BoC. We've got a tactic which is roughly 'put 2 units wholly in cover outside of your territory'. Having such an easy tactic to play turn 1, as well as cunning manoeuvre, gives you a massive early game advantage.

That remind me about Nightvault. You could score a lot of stupid cards like "miss a shoot" and win without trying to accomplish anything.

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

Somebody on here had said something about being ok with certain heroes doing mortal wounds, but it got lost in the shuffle.

It isn't something I had considered before, but the tragically underwhelming "melee foot hero" would be an excellent candidate for this, if MWs weren't already too prevevelant. It would give them a unique role and make them more dangerous, but the limited number of attacks would prevent them from going overboard. Of course, GW might still get caught up in power creep if they did that, but MWs being the a feature of hero models exclusively (including wizards with their spells) seems like it would make them feel more exceptional and distinct from standard troops.

That said, we'd probably find ourselves back in a hero-monster meta if that was done.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NinthMusketeer said:

I think it is a solid line of reasoning. The current GHB shows us that when pretty insane buffs are handed out for free, but only to sub-10w heroes without mounts, they go from being a source of exoits to a source of fun (mostly).

The foot hero situation is a discussion of its own. To sum it up: Most are supposed to be melee Assassins, however they can’t assassinate c**p.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

one of my biggest issues with this game ATM is the uninspired way EVERYTHING seemingly causes MWs: spells, effects, abilities etc. its like as soon as anything is supposed to be/do something special, the end result is almost always MWs like they cant come up with any other effect. 
Some stuff could just be for example auto-hits with a very high rend, cause debuffs, carnage wounds etc
Id like mortal wounds to be "truly mortal" again and not seen on every other ability/warscroll, it gets watered down

  • Like 4
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...