Rules that should not exist

[Killax]

4 hours ago, Arkiham said:

But where does the cost aspect come into it.

A unforged does 6 attacks, 3+3+ with rerolls 1 to hit and +1against things with more than  1 wound. Cool yeah sounds fair. Basically a 2+2+ for 100 points. Does d3 mortal wounds when he dies. Yeah ok cool. 

 

Free item to make that double the damage. Still 100 points. Ok fair.

So does that models value remain 100 points when against chaos ? Where it's literally double the damage, and with the free item quadruple it?  

That 100 point model doing 6 max damage against order with no item, 1w with item.

12 against chaos no item and 24 with item.

For 100 points...without the item id say that damage output is more the 140 range. Not 100

Or kroak, again doing literally double the damage For the same points, the bastiladons doing 50% more.

 

If it was more prevalent then it would be less of a issue to me, but it's not it's mostly against chaos, which also typically runs alot of multiwound things or monsters as it is so there's already those units who gain bonuses for that.

 

But where is chaos bonuses for key units ?(rather than niche ones no one uses as they're trash)

Got a item for increased ward and to hit, which is slowly being phased out, where's chaos' bonuses for being terrifying to mere mortals (fear/terror in 8th edition ) in comparison chaos is less scary and weaker than it was in 8th. 

There is no cost aspect involved. This applies to all Artefacts actually. As mentioned in another topic revolving around this same principle, you can choose to have Artefacts without cost involved who in some cases will be more powerful as in others. As there are few Artefacts to actually use in general this shouldn't cause any issue.

Values of models stop being relevant after army construction, while this might sound illogical, it is exactly how any game can play out. All point cost allow for in this case is to have a clear restriction per army in terms of how many models you can play that roughly boil down to the same sort of damage output. 

8th edition WFB was likely the prime example of GW being unable to handle balance due to the many factors they had to account for. For WFB had the same issue you present. If you have a Hero with the same magic weapon cost and a Lord with the same magic weapon cost, why is it that the Lord preforms better for the same cost for that additional set of abilities?
- For example; we have a weapon that deals D3 damage for each unsaved wound. Logically this weapon has more damage potential for a character with WS 7, S5, A6+ as it would have in the hands of a WS6 S4 A4+ guy. Yet the cost of the Item remained the same.

The point remains is that it's very difficult to put a correct cost on synergy. So instead of trying to apply it, cover the same sort of synergy in other factions. Mark of the Destroyer (for Khorne) is one of the examples that will always work. This is better as doubling up in some scenarios. 
- In terms of Matched play results I don't even think Chaos needs more, it's allready very capable of dealing with Order, AoS's balance in general is allright.

The only issue I have is the unrestricted Missle Attacks leading to a rule that decides the game's competative army builds. 

[KillagoreFaceslasha]

On 2017-5-5 at 0:29 PM, Killax said:

Rubish units should not excist. Nor will you see them in competative play.

Cheap units are units who lose out vs expensive units. They should if they are balanced.

Exactly. Unless by expensive we are referring to a massed force of bodies like a block of 40 handgunners... then again with that scenario the charger will be torn to shreds by the Uber-Overwatch of doom.

[Arkiham]

2 hours ago, Killax said:

stuff I agree on

While your comment addressed the artefact thing  (which was more a showing of a real example than my main grief) it's the faction bonuses I was trying to concerntrait upon.

The same 100 point model, or 540 point model does a markably better and possible game changing performance against chaos for no additional cost and reason other than chaos.

 

Ok somethings do better against monsters or multiwound things, but that covered every faction,  

But certain things doing 50-100% more damage or 8% more accurate or 16%more chance of saving a wound etc etc. Simply as it's faction x rather than y. With no differentiating cost doesn't seem right, especially when it's so one directional.

[Killax]

1 hour ago, Arkiham said:

The same 100 point model, or 540 point model does a markably better and possible game changing performance against chaos for no additional cost and reason other than chaos.

Ok somethings do better against monsters or multiwound things, but that covered every faction,  

But certain things doing 50-100% more damage or 8% more accurate or 16%more chance of saving a wound etc etc. Simply as it's faction x rather than y. With no differentiating cost doesn't seem right, especially when it's so one directional.

I personally think supporting Narrative with gamerules is more or less what makes a game cool and logic. As with WFB's Hatred example, sometimes O&G faced Dwarfs and that caused for some almost auto-hitting forces. I've never really saw this as a bad thing as it's part a game character that Games Workshop has used for years.

Certain things will do more against others, to me this is adding tactical depth. What I personally see is GW embraces the idea of having a good unbalance, thus one piece might be extremely potent, only to see another piece in another faction exactly countering that.

So with a anti-Chaos weapon example, I like that design, because it means that it's far from great against Death or Destruction forces. To me GW has done this as an attempt to real Chaos fanatics a bit back, we allready see a ton of arguably too strong design in Chaos... So to stop that, we need to make everything too strong  

[kozokus]

Please! don't tempt them re-making goblins afraid of elves!

[Killax]

4 minutes ago, kozokus said:

Please! don't tempt them re-making goblins afraid of elves!

 Nah dont worry about that! Though hate between specific factions to me is cool. To me the prime reason of the game should be to destroy each others forces, so anything that assist to that in my opinion is fair game. We also see that due to how Bravery works GW also seems to like the idea of practically every unit being 'Unbreakable' up until the losses are too massive.  Which is really cool in my opinion!

[kozokus]

That is something that bothers me sometimes. You stack -4 moral debuff but nothing happens until at least one ungor dies and then 11 of them are running away.

[Arkiham]

i agree i liked it, but the rarity of it in aos and it being so one sided makes it feel cheap rather than cool. 

wheres the order bonuses against destruction, surely they'd not be too fond of the orks smashing their stuff up. 

death bonuses against mortal men or some thing against the forces of life and vice versa. 

 

If they're going to do it, do it properly don't half ****** it and just pass it off as cool fluffy rules. 

[Killax]

22 minutes ago, Arkiham said:

If they're going to do it, do it properly don't half ****** it and just pass it off as cool fluffy rules. 

Completely agree, but in general that's the only grudge I can have with AoS.
What we need, ideally, is more in-depth Battletomes so that everyone can compete and throw "hard-ball"  

But time will show us how AoS will eventually gain the depth many seem to love.