Jump to content

Dead Scribe

Members
  • Posts

    1,024
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dead Scribe

  1. There was a poll in one of the facebook groups I follow for AOS a few months ago and it came out to be like 85% of the respondants did not use or did not want to use realm rules, so I dont think thats abberant at all.
  2. 3 out of 4 tournaments I go to don't use those rules at all. The other times we have to use them typically its just one realm and everyone knows in advance what it will be so it doesn't ****** over list building. Matched play outside of tournaments is basically practice for tournaments so we use the same rules as tournaments do for our games outside of tournaments to keep everything standard and get proper practice in.
  3. That and a lot of people I know only buy enough models to cover a 2000 point tournament legal army. So trying to get us to change parameters doesn't work, because a lot of people don't have this extra model bag somewhere where they can gimp their list and play weaker 2000 point lists with. We expect the rules of the game to cover what is legal and what is not legal and we buy whatever covers that.
  4. Thats funny I don't recall really ARGUING or how my opinions fall apart lol. I'm not ARGUING that other ways to play dont exist. I'm ARGUING that the game isn't really built for those and that you need to go into the game knowing what the game is built around to avoid setting someone up to fail horribly after spending a lot of money on the game if their expectations were not met. If wayniac's local area promotes the type of happy casual narrative games that you guys are saying is so common then he shouldn't have an issue. However through his own words, he has acknowledged his area is probably a lot more similar to mine and he may not has as much fun trying the happy casual narrative game approach if everyone around him is bringing the adepticon approach. Its not like a video game that costs $20 where you can download it from steam, figure out its not for you, and then delete it with minimal loss. If you're going to invest the fairly considerable amount of money, and most of you invest the hours painting, then I'd think you better make sure you know what you're walking into from day one before dropping that currency down.
  5. What happens when you discuss with your opponent about toning down and they refuse? Or what happens when you discuss toning down and their idea of toning down is not really toning down? See thats a huge slippery slope to me. Couple things. I'm not missing the point. If you have two people agreeing to do something like that then thats great. The second part of your statement there is where all my issues lie. Because who are you to tell me what is and is not "toning down"? You are saying if your opponent doesn't tone down to *how you want them to* then they are not people WORTH playing against. Thats grossly unfair. What if I want you to "tone up" and if you don't I should just consider you to be someone not worth playing against? Thats where the rules imbalances cause hostility and why I always tune my list. Because everyone understands what tune the list means. Most everyone I have ever met has differing value system on what "tone down" means however. That will depend on your area. In my area, you would be the person struggling to find a different gaming group because almost exclusively the entire region is competitive. That works both ways. They do some casual friendly funsies games too but no one complains about tuned lists because thats the default expectation. The people that complain about tuned lists usually disappear after a short time and find a different game to play. Which is why I will always say bad balance affects casuals and narrative players far more than competitive players, and competitive players seem to me to be the majority of players. At least fortunately in my region.
  6. I think thats great, except that it only takes one player blowing all that up by bringing a tuned list. For me its not fun to lose a game because I took a handicapped list and my opponent didnt. The game rules enforce tuning lists as being the easy path to winning and while the rules are in that format, thats how I will play.
  7. I'm sure it can be more challenging. The key to your statement is "of course both players have to use them". Which is why it hurts casual and narrative players more to have bad balance. It requires both players to be playing at the same level, when the points values of the game do not really indicate actual power level of the armies. That is why I would never try to tone down, because you don't know really if its enough, or if it was too much. Better instead to just tune up as much as possible. In my opinion.
  8. Sounds about right, just go into it knowing that after any update or GHB you may have to rethink what you are playing. Even if you love the models.
  9. Badly balanced rules don't hurt competitive players. We take advantage of that. Badly balanced players hurt narrative and casual players.
  10. I can counter that by saying at my flgs most of us don't give a fig about the models, we are there because we enjoy miniature wargaming as a whole and the fantasy genre specifically and require a large player base to enjoy tournaments with.
  11. I don't know why you are trying to tell me that AOS is not suited for me. Its been suitable for me for a few years now. There is actual skill in AOS. Its how well you can craft your list and then how you use it.
  12. The size of the community and the tournaments are my primary draw yes. The reality is in the fantasy genre there are no other games anywhere in the world that remotely come close to AOS. I'd have to drive 100 miles to play Kings of War with a group that had more than four people in it and I know no other group within driving distance of any other game, so I'd have to just be ok with never playing except for like Adepticon if I played a different game. So yeah no thanks. Thats why I play AOS. I'd say even if that wasn't my primary interest, if who wins or loses is something you care about, then playing "narrative style" is going to be a big disappointment to you because you're going to find you HAVE to tune your list because once just ONE person does, your whole group will begin following suit since no one likes getting beaten as badly as you will get beaten if you dont have a tuned list against someone that does.
  13. Because I don't really care about the models. I get someone to paint them for me. I'd be just as happy playing with cardboard pogs if that were allowed. My main draw to AOS is the large competitive community, not the models or the art or lore or anything like that.
  14. Because I'm invested in competition and winning and doing as well as I can. You can't do those things very well if you are worried about some arbitrary piece of fiction that says you shouldn't do that.
  15. Well yes. Thats exactly what we do here. Its a game. We want to make sure we have the best team possible.
  16. I don't think so. A narrative player like stories and stuff from what I'm told. I dont care about the story, nor do I care about "reality" or "how armies would look in the story". I care about winning and doing my best and competition. I like the fantasy genre over sci fi genre. I tried 40k but I find that game to be pretty broken at the moment to enjoy it, moreso than AOS is currently.
  17. White dwarf is a commercial. Its not indicative of the reality. They can say all they want in white dwarf. The reality is they create imbalanced game that kind of enforces what you should take and you have to be ok with that.
  18. Its three ways to play, but I almost never see the other two ever, and when you see someone trying to do narrative gaming they have to convince the other person to do it, and then there are arguments that the other person brought a too-powerful list. All seems very dramatic if you ask me. This whole modes to play sounds great on paper but hardly anyone follows it and it often just results in angry feelings. I've watched the narrative gamer group post about their games, and the lists I see are often just tuned lists playing non standard scenarios. I mean if thats the definition of narrative wargaming thats fine, I'd like to see people stop complaining about people tuning their lists though and acting like narrative gaming means take non tuned lists, because it clearly doesn't mean that. I think if you want to do narrative wargaming you better have the right group. And I think that a proper narrative AOS group is as hard to find as a "better game" group to not be worth the bother IMO. There's always that tabletop simulator thing that people were posting about here though that lets you play anyone anywhere in the world. That may help you.
  19. Follow that to its logical conclusion though. 90% of most books aren't good and you should never use them if you care about the outcome of your matches. The designers have done this for years, this is obviously their intent. We can either accept that and do it, or not accept it and find different games to play. I play because I like fantasy and the community is huge. I don't have to struggle to find games anywhere else even if I find other games to be "better" from a competitive standpoint, because a "better" game is not better to me if there are only a couple people playing in some basement somewhere 200 miles from me, whereas Adepticon has 200 people world championships.
  20. The history of wargaming has no relevance on Age of Sigmar. Age of Sigmar is driven by competitive play. They can certainly be story driven, just like I can play a game of football with a round ball (or play a game of european football with an american football) - it doesn't mean that its really going to work as well. I think you're right. You can't be both storytelling and competitive in AOS. If you are storytelling you are going to get hammered, unless your story is about how your army gets hammered. Then I suppose that makes sense. tSport mindset is the future of wargaming. The Honest Wargamer is already pushing that into the next realm and others are following him. If you want to do story telling, you'll need a group that lets you play like that. Otherwise I wouldn't understand why you'd want to do "narrative wargaming" when the narrative you're going to be telling is how you watch your army get massacred in a couple turns by a tuned list. "Narrative Wargaming" requires everyone to be doing "Narrative Wargaming" and there you will find your biggest problems. If you're new to AOS, the balance is not very good at all, and so to me if you aren't tuning your list as best as you can, there isn't really a point in playing if you care about match outcomes.
  21. To me its pretty easy. Wargames are competitive. Story driven games should be where you go with RPGs.
  22. I was always told GW cracked down on things like this and would send cease and desists to people using their model images in games like this. Has that changed?
  23. I don't hobby, I pay others to hobby for me. Right now I had some items out for painting but they are going to be held back because the guy doing it for me lost his job due to this coronavirus so he's doing other things and doesn't have time for my stuff which is understandable. Fortunately for me I don't have to work, so I have been inside mostly playing video games and watching movies.
  24. This is a major bummer. I was looking forward to doing well at the tournament.
×
×
  • Create New...