Double turns and why I think they´re bad

[Kosmion]

Hail fellow generals!

Now I really don´t mean to be whining or hating on this game in anyway, because I really love it! And although I´m fairly new to AOS, but not to Warhammer, I´ve encountered something I really don't quite get - double turns.

I think they are bad game design in the sense that you cannot really plan anything that will span over more than the turn that you're currently in. In-depth masterfully perfected plans are just not reliable because of the simple fact that you might not get to play when you expect to. I think it´s and unecesary RNG factor of randomness in a game that already has a lot of it, which IMO trades traditional war strategies for random luck. I get that the game is actually a lot about lucky dice rolls, but I believe in a strategy game there need to be some fundamental rules which you can always work from and play your best around.

Also the threat range of things with any sort of range is potentially doubled, which severely decreases the number of options you have especially regarding movement and charging. Not to mention the ridiculous ability to just annihilate something with ranged firepower. It does´t really affect close combat that much, but it´s the CRAZY damage and rends that could potentially stack up on unit X IF you make that run/move/charge (or not, who knows). In my experience, a double turn almost always gives the receiving player such an enormous advantage that it will completely turn the game around and he/she eventually wins thanks to that. It´s like both players just plays around this double turn that might not even come, and it just feels like a stressful experience in which you're just waiting for that green flag to go. I honestly don't think this is an extra layer of depth, it´s just a messy mechanic that makes the game feel chaotic and unfair in certain situations, favoring some armies more than others.

I don´t wanna feel like I´m going gambling when I play Warhammer, I wanna play a deep strategic war-game, in which I defeat my opponents using good tactics for the right situation. Not roll one dice and boom I get to go again, because my enemies apparently just stands there now for no reason taking cannonballs to the face..

 

Anyway, as I said before, I truly love Warhammer and this game, and I think it´s great! Maybe I´m just doing something wrong or just need more practice, but I just can't seem to get my head around this one rule, because playing without it in my experience just seems more fun. 

Thanks for reading! What do you guys think?

[Undead4Life]

I have mixed feelings on it. For one, it gives weaker lists a fighting chance. If you're going to get annihilated anyway then your opponent getting a double turn is moot, but it may give you the option to gain some ground.

On the other hand, it IS too much random for something like a tournament setting. If I were to TO I would definitely house rule that turn order is not randomized, for all the reasons you've given. Also, it's so easy to forget to roll initiative for me as I'm so used to fixed turn order, but that's a personal problem haha.

[MightyQwan]

It all balances out in the wash. You each have a 50% chance of getting the 2 turns. I think there is a lot of strategy in either gambling for the 2 turn scenario or playing it safe. It helps you survive or counteract alpha strike armies and give combat armies a shot vs gun lines and vice versa. As for your perfect plan, well in  a real engagement (what we are all imitating) your nice plan rarely survives contact with the enemy. A commander must be able to adapt to the situation he is presented. War is chaotic, not choreographed and in that sense adding this element of randomness enhances the game. Not to mention the suspense it creates. I for one love it and all events that I run will have the random initiative roll. 

[Criti]

7 minutes ago, MightyQwan said:

 As for your perfect plan, well in  a real engagement (what we are all imitating) your nice plan rarely survives contact with the enemy. A commander must be able to adapt to the situation he is presented.

This, 100 times over. 

The truly good general is ready for both contingencies.  If the grand plan falls apart when the unexpected happens, it probably want that good of a plan to begin with.  And now the general is tested instead of his plan. 

And, if knowing in advance that the double turn can, and sometimes does happen, and an opponent's double turn ends your game - then you forgot to plan for something. 

The double turn possibility also, as mentioned, adds a hint of realism to a fantasy setting.  There are HUNDREDS of stories about actual battles turning because one side grabbed the initiative with a charge that couldn't be anticipated.  Or a breakdown in communications (war is a loud affair) prevents soldiers from repositioning on the battlefield.  Or a dozen other things that are all well represented by a double turn.

Not to mention that the random Initiative adds an element that simply doesn't exist in any other miniature game right now.  Which is always a cool factor. 

Sometimes a plan executes perfectly.  Sometimes you just have to say damn the torpedoes... full speed ahead.

[Bjarni St.]

I can put up with double turns, but I don't like them. My main gripes are twofold: Firstly a lot of the time initiative rolls completely decide the game. This is especially true when it involves armies with a lot of ranged firepower and/or a lot of powerful buffs/synergies.

Secondly, a lot of the time it just sucks having dice rolled at you for two turns in a row. It's not fun.

[WSDdeloach]

49 minutes ago, Bjarni St. said:

I can put up with double turns, but I don't like them. My main gripes are twofold: Firstly a lot of the time initiative rolls completely decide the game. This is especially true when it involves armies with a lot of ranged firepower and/or a lot of powerful buffs/synergies.

Secondly, a lot of the time it just sucks having dice rolled at you for two turns in a row. It's not fun.

If you're having issues with the double turn... So is everyone else. It effects both players, positively and negatively. As for the initiative roll deciding games? Re-think your list. Use units that help control that if its that important for your army to get off first... Or maybe rethink strategy. Play defensive? Play heavy on on side then defensive down the middle to draw in.. 

It's a fundamental game mechanic. Complaints about it... Are irrelevant. It's the player

[MacDuff]

I've played using various home brewed home rules since the mid-70s, and the initiative roll per turn was always the most exciting moment in the games I played. Face it, war is unpredictable, as are your leaders, troops, and your opponents. ACW battles underscore how iffy control of battle initiative really was - read Lee's Lieutanants - intent and execution were never a given, because human factors were always involved. People often complain in 40k how the I go-you go turn sequence creates inherent inbalance, so we need to embrace this new dynamic and realize we're not modeling chess but instead squishy human(istic) interactions on a battlefield,

[The Jabber Tzeentch]

If your prime decider for winning a game is the initiative roll, you're not playing right!

I remember when AoS was released and it took most people a while to come to grips with it, mostly because they were playing like it was still 8th edition!

Once you open your mind to the mechanics of AoS and accept the double turn you will be able to make the most of it.

[Nico]

Quote

In my experience, a double turn almost always gives the receiving player such an enormous advantage that it will completely turn the game around and he/she eventually wins thanks to that. It´s like both players just plays around this double turn that might not even come, and it just feels like a stressful experience in which you're just waiting for that green flag to go. 

One thing to remember is that if you win the double turn, you cannot win the next one and your opponent has a 50% chance to win that one. I've sometimes found that the most important initiative roll is actually the second one in the game - after a player has already had a double turn, but at the point when lots of units are locked in combat.

There are loads of strategies for mitigating the double turn - play Nurgle, get Shield of Thorns, get Temple Guard, get Blood Warriors, get Wrathbros, get Mournguls, get a Forest Dragon, keep your army (or part of it) off the table entirely until afterwards.

[Iradekhorne]

26 minutes ago, Nico said:

One thing to remember is that if you win the double turn, you cannot win the next one and your opponent has a 50% chance to win that one. I've sometimes found that the most important initiative roll is actually the second one in the game - after a player has already had a double turn, but at the point when lots of units are locked in combat.

There are loads of strategies for mitigating the double turn - play Nurgle, get Shield of Thorns, get Temple Guard, get Blood Warriors, get Wrathbros, get Mournguls, get a Forest Dragon, keep your army (or part of it) off the table entirely until afterwards.

Thats totally truth.

When I play khorne I usually give him the initiative bcause after his turn I have chance of doubleturn, and he lost it. He can do the same, u need play with this chance or give the doubleturn tí the enemy when u think is faborable do it, bcause the enemy can waste one turn or do less dmg than you if u think well.

The bloodsecrator have a bubble buff and put and that buff expires on my next hero phase. I use usually it in "defensive mode" when i give him doubleturn and allow me to don't do battleshocks, is pretty useful... But I have other techniques too. I think doubleturn as another strategy component, and you need think on that when you build ur army.

Some "useless" units on combat bcause they have low offensive power allow you to protect your shooting or important units of theese doubleturns cause they be good at defense (or numbers).

[Arkiham]

1 hour ago, Nico said:

One thing to remember is that if you win the double turn, you cannot win the next one and your opponent has a 50% chance to win that one. I've sometimes found that the most important initiative roll is actually the second one in the game - after a player has already had a double turn, but at the point when lots of units are locked in combat.

There are loads of strategies for mitigating the double turn - play Nurgle, get Shield of Thorns, get Temple Guard, get Blood Warriors, get Wrathbros, get Mournguls, get a Forest Dragon, keep your army (or part of it) off the table entirely until afterwards.

Where does it say you cannot win the one afterwards? Isn't the turn order decided like this.

Who ever deployed first chooses. Then the opponent. So player 1 then 2.

Roll  winner chooses, so let's say player 2 then 1.

Roll. Winner chooses. player 2 then 1

Roll winner chooses.  player 1 then 2 

Etc.

That's how I've been playing it, if I've been doing it wrong be nice to know.

[Nico]

I literally mean a "double turn", not just winning the initiative again.

After the first double turn:

A, B, B

PLayer A gets a turn:

A, B, B, A

At this point, either player A gets a double turn or player B gets a turn:

A, B, B, A, A, B or

A, B, B, A, B, A

So player B cannot get a double turn again until after player A gets one back.

 

 

[Arkiham]

Ah yeah, misunderstood the "double turn " thing.

[Josh Meads]

Along with the terrain rules, it's easily my favourite part of the game. Keeps it fresh not just game to game, but turn to turn.

[Ollie Grimwood]

I like them. It means you need to plan for the unexpected. Playing for a double turn and not getting it can be devastatingly bad, do you go all in or play it safe? There's also an element of a player over stretching themselves on a double turn and allowing themselves to be out manoeuvred by a clever opponent. I wouldn't be so keen if the combat phase wasn't as it is though 

[Kosmion]

I would like to add to this topic: yes, war IS indeed unpredictable. Warriors fight better one day than the other etc. and this is represented by the dice rolls, which can completely turn the tide of games aswell. This is what I mean, the unpredictable part is always there, because this isn't starcraft or something, you roll dice, and therefore the result is always random. Adding random double turns ontop of this creates scenarios that simply aren't believable in some cases (Nagash getting too close to the enemy, gets pummelled by artillery and magics, and aren't smart enough to retreat back before he dies, because he...uhm..wasn´t wise enough there and then) it just doesn't make sense lore wise. An army that consists of hardened warriors and veterans that completely fails to react all of a sudden doesn't quite add up IMO. 

[daedalus81]

Steps to mitigate the impact of your opponent having a double turn.

1) Cast the "right" spells 

Too often there is a thought like "I won't be in combat for another turn so mystic shield isn't needed.  Choosing buffs that stay active through your next hero phase is a defensive measure even if the buff is offensive.

2) Move your units properly

Over committing in movement in the hopes of rolling into combat is a risky proposition.  If you do so then don't leave flanks vulnerable as your opponent will push in hard and wrap around.  Interlock units to prevent key positions from being stranded.  The risk then becomes under-committing and losing the chance to get into melee sooner.

3) Don't over-stack ranged units

Melee units still fight during your opponents phase.  Having a solid amount of front line fighters will keep you doing damage throughout.

[DarkBlack]

17 hours ago, Kosmion said:

I wanna play a deep strategic war-game, in which I defeat my opponents using good tactics for the right situation.

If you want this from a wargame then AoS is not the best choice.

I really enjoy AoS, it's EPIC (like the new fluff). AoS is designed to be fun and exciting, a chance to have you models take part in heroic battles. AoS is not, however, designed to be a test of you mind vs your opponent's. Fate has a large say in who wins a game.

Before someone has a fit; I'm not saying that there is no skill or tactics involved, there certainly is (better players will still win more often), it's just not what AoS is focused on.

The random inititative mechanic serves this design goal very well. It makes the game more exciting by adding unpredictability and prevents gaming the system by adding a much larger margin of error to every plan.

[Ratamaplata]

5 hours ago, Kosmion said:

Adding random double turns ontop of this creates scenarios that simply aren't believable in some cases (Nagash getting too close to the enemy, gets pummelled by artillery and magics, and aren't smart enough to retreat back before he dies, because he...uhm..wasn´t wise enough there and then) it just doesn't make sense lore wise. An army that consists of hardened warriors and veterans that completely fails to react all of a sudden doesn't quite add up IMO. 

Why look at it that way?

Couldn't you see it as the opposing general getting his s**t together and saying "Oh man, it's Nagash!! Look sharp guys let's nail him" and getting his troops super organised?

[daedalus81]

2 hours ago, DarkBlack said:

AoS is not, however, designed to be a test of you mind vs your opponent's. Fate has a large say in who wins a game.

....

The random initiative mechanic serves this design goal very well. It makes the game more exciting by adding unpredictability and prevents gaming the system by adding a much larger margin of error to every plan.

A double turn is one extra round of shooting/abilities and advantageous positioning.  If you can't work around that then you're not planning well enough either in list or execution.

In my opinion anyway.

In either case it is not a matter of fate.

[someone2040]

So my thoughts are. It seems like a lot of my games tend to hinge on one specific turn where the initiative roll is really crucial to both players. The player who wins this roll gets to dictate how the game will flow (And it's not always about getting a double turn, sometimes it can be beneficial not to take a double turn).

Because of this, and it just being a dice off. I find it's really frustrating when you can't manage to win the roll and you're somewhat helpless to how your opponent decides he wants the game to flow.

 

Personally for reasons like the above, I think the LOTR system does it better for two reasons. The lesser reason, ties go to the player who didn't gain initiative last turn. Bigger reason, LOTR has the ability to interrupt with heroic actions. So even if your side doesn't have the initiative, a heroic move by a hero can turn the tide in a particular area of the battlefield which means you're not helpless to losing the roll if you want to utilise some of your heroes ability to ensure your plan goes a bit better.

 

They are different systems, but from my brief experience with LOTR at least you're not completely at the whims of the initiative roll if you want to utilise some of your resources (might in this case) in the game. So I don't particularly see double turns as being the big huge criminal, but the fact you don't have many options to mitigate it other than try plan for either case happening.

 

[Sadysaneto]

I dont like it, i dont play with it. 

[Ollie Grimwood]

8 hours ago, Sadysaneto said:

I dont like it, i dont play with it. 

Very much this. It's a game that encourages house rules. Don't like it change it.

(and then post them so we can all have a look) 

[Kramer]

15 hours ago, DarkBlack said:

If you want this from a wargame then AoS is not the best choice.

I really enjoy AoS, it's EPIC (like the new fluff). AoS is designed to be fun and exciting, a chance to have you models take part in heroic battles. AoS is not, however, designed to be a test of you mind vs your opponent's. Fate has a large say in who wins a game.

Before someone has a fit; I'm not saying that there is no skill or tactics involved, there certainly is (better players will still win more often), it's just not what AoS is focused on.

The random inititative mechanic serves this design goal very well. It makes the game more exciting by adding unpredictability and prevents gaming the system by adding a much larger margin of error to every plan.

In another post someone suggested that AoS feels very balanced because of the big impact of the initiative roll. You don't lose because your army isn't good enough but because you lost that one all important dice roll. 

So I agree when you say if that level of strategy is what you want AoS might not be for you.. 

 

11 hours ago, Sadysaneto said:

I dont like it, i dont play with it. 

But I would like to add this to the list as well. Especially in open play. House rule it. If you don;t like it. Test the game without it. It's what I did in the beginning. But after 4 games I realised  I missed it. 

[RuneBrush]

I'm actually a big fan of the random initiative - especially as if you win you can pass the turn to your opponent (which opens up possibilities especially for the last turn).  Do you play cautiously fearing your opponent will get a double turn or push forward hoping to get it yourself?  For me it's one of the things that makes AoS different to Warhammer, 40k and the plethora of other miniatures games out there.  Oddly I'm less keen on the alternative where the initiative is decided on turn one and one player may be constantly on the back foot.

But completely agree - if you don't like it, don't play with it