Zappgrot
-
Posts
216 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Zappgrot
-
-
3 minutes ago, Malakree said:
With my Ardboys I think I could get about 80-90% in combat with proper placement, it's going to slow the game right down though just due to how precise it will need to be.
Brutes I can abuse the special weapons 2" range to get a unit of 10 in range.
For goregruntas the best I could get to was this before I ran out of space with frontage and adjacency.
So in a sad twist, adding the 6th goregrunta actually causes you to have 1 less in melee..? It's mad.
I am verry intrested in how you would get your ardboys in. I think this rule is going to waste at least 30% of their attacks cause you need to have some dudes standing in the back. This rule is just flat out a terrible idea and will slow the game the hell down. If they wanted ranks they should have stuck whit fantasy. I also hate how this is again a melee nerf. Aos is starting to lean towards 40k fantasy edittion if you ask me.
-
3 hours ago, RuneBrush said:
I could see that all ignore damage rolls will now become ward saves - and you'll only be able to make a single save roll for each point of damage.
Smaller board size is so that it fits on a dining table more easily. It also makes manoeuvring more important rather than less. You've less square inches to play in so a mis-measure here or there will be a lot more devastating! Armies are likely to shrink in composition too - no horde discounts and smaller max sized units. Lastly, shaving off a few inches overall also helps armies like Khorne that used to spend 2 or 3 turns trying to get into melee.
Yes that last line is exactly the problem. It is going to lead to big piles of punch ups for the entire game. And those are basically stat checks. Whit a large board you need to think about where you need to go and how long it will take to get there. On a small board where every unit can get to half the board in 2 turns it doesn't matter. (also i don't know about how ppl you know play khorne but i don't need no 3 turns to get into melee not even 2 most of the time mortals ftw.)
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Verminlord said:
I think it is all but confirmed that army sizes are going down. 40k 9th all point values went up around 25% to make up for smaller board.
I don't know i can cram more models into my admech army then ever before. So in my experience that's only true in 40k for the elite armies. I do hope they shrink the armies down to mach the board. But i doubt it tough. They want to sell models afther all
-
18 minutes ago, Verminlord said:
It was a necessary change with the shrinking board size and I'm glad to see it. Hordes already had a big advantage on a 4x6 with how much space they could control and the obvious advantage of more bodies on an objective.
I do wish the minimum was 6 models instead of 5 for those elite cav.
They should not have made the boards smaller. AOS armies already take up a 6X4 board whit ease. Smaller boards will mean manoeuvring becomes a lot less importent.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:
This rule is awful. It was ripped out of 40k, where there is less focus on melee and smaller units generally, but this will be a disaster here. I'll run through some scenarios.
- 10 infantry with 1" reach. you basically need to be 5*2 or maybe 7 & 3 so you lose combat effectiveness. There's plenty of units this hurts, any 32mm infantry with 1" range thats useful in a unit of 10 just got hurt.
- larger models with 1" reach that come in 3s, stuff like Bullgors who'll need to have bodies in the back just to keep coherency or dragon ogors
- IT DOES NOTHING TO 25MM BASES AT ALL because 25mm is less than an inch you can line up a unit of 25mm models base-to-base and it's still in coherency.
- It benefits hordes and units under 5 models, units under 5 aren't changed, hordes are also relatively unchanged because you always have plenty of bodies in the back, so this just hurts mid-sized units
- Units are going to look weird. Cavalry will have crabwalking models in the back to maximize useful models, you'll have guys standing in the back doing nothing constantly
This rule needed to be for units of 11+ for AoS but instead we're needlessly punishing a lot of units.
Holy ****** this rule will make target removal insanely powerful.
-
2 hours ago, PJetski said:
I'm not sure how or why you constructed such an absurd strawman from my post.
It's easy. When you dont't want them to design a game that rewards system mastery. Then what you are left whit is luck. But I think you want them to stop designing the game whit a evolving meta and in balance. Cause that is the kind of design that makes ppl buy new armies. But it's also the kind of design that keeps the game moving. If they did not do that . They would not only sell less .But the game would also become less interesting. And to be honest the meta aspect of the game only mattes if you are invested in winning the game. If you are invested in doing other stuff whit it and don't mind the balance so much then it really doesn't matter.
-
9 hours ago, Magnus The Blue said:
Terrain also only goes so far when LRL shooting is mainly about moral wounds and can shoot out of LoS, so basically ignores terrain (unless they change the rules).
Yea the lumineth realm lords shooting is just plain stupid games design. Who makes rule in a game whit a lot of melee armies. Where having terrain is a downside for the person whit the melee army. That's nuts
-
Not a fan of how letting units command themselves removes counterplay from the game. Since you now can't prevent basic abilities by lureing units or zoneing out charaters. This makes the basic command abilities more like 40k stratagems and that's bad. We don't want things to just be able to buff themselves a couple of times whit no counterplay to prevent it.
-
On 6/4/2021 at 5:06 PM, PJetski said:
"Rewarding system mastery" is a fine design goal for a board game like Silver Tower where you get every model you need to play the game in the box.
It's not a good design goal when designing armies for a tabletop game like Warhammer with huge time/money investments in switching to a new army, or even just a new list within the same army.
If that is how they design the game they need to stop doing that because it really sucks for everyone except the powergamers who dont care about how much time/money they spend on the hobby and just jump from one army to the next while chasing the metagame. These big-spender "whales" certainly exist, and they do spend a lot of money, but it's not likely that their impact is so significant that the entire business model is designed to cater to them at the expense of all other types of customers.
So then what you want your tactical game to be mostly based on luck? Just paint the numbers 1/20 on the bases of a unit and then pair them off, lowest number loses.1 wins over 20. Keep going till only one side is left.
-
On 6/3/2021 at 10:19 AM, Feii said:
the thing is the spread of good and bad elements in this game even within one army has no right to be the same as somewhere in mtg. I fully understand that if you have over 20 000 cards and the limited environment you will have a lot of bad cards but then you look at let's say on release IDK and how can you achieve 1 good warscroll 1 mediocre warscroll and another 10ish trash tier scrolls and call it the way of life.
It is not the way of life it is what it looks like if you writers are incompetent. In mtg you have intentionally pushed or trash cards but there is no room for such a huge spread in AoS if you have competent designers.No you have to understand that it is an basic building block of reality. Things can not be valued equal. No matter how competent a writer game designer you are as soon as you introduce any difference you introduce a difference in value. Since it's unavoidable . It's better for the company to do it by design. So they can manage it better. Now Gw fails at that on a daily basis i gues. But as a whole the whole some warscrolls are good and others are bad. Is unavoidable .
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Feii said:
don't think that is true. This is not MTG.
About the good and bad units? Cause that is not a magic thing. That's a logic thing. It's a fact of life. Values like good or bad are relative. They exist as pairs.
-
8 minutes ago, stratigo said:
That's the point
For GW obviusly yes. For me not so much
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:
I think we do both agree that there are good and bad units as well as that too many are quick to point to the bad as evidence of incompetence. Agree we disagree on the intent behind good and bad units.
As regards the rules themselves I am actually happy that Lake Wobegon (where all the factions are strong, all the models are good looking, and all the war scrolls are above average) is NOT one of the Mortal Realms (guessing it would be tucked in somewhere between Hysh and Ghyran?). I get a lot of pleasure riding up and down the unit and faction quality curves.
The positive for me is that I think this spectrum is a feature of a complex dynamic system, not a bug. At the same time I recognize how easily this could spin out of control until the whole system breaks down. Happily for me it does seem there are enough competent mechanics working at GW burning the midnight oil to keep this from happening.
The changing meta is a lot of fun. It always is in games. Better a living game then a dead game that never chances. But it is kinda expensive to keep up whit it.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, stratigo said:
They provably have in the past.
And they probably still do? Why wouldn't they? GW isn't stupid, you push a model, people buy it. They need to not make it too obvious. But, like, they don't have to hide it too hard either. 40k right now has this the most obvious with dramatic power boosts every codex, but each new cycle being better than before (drukhari and admech stronger than before). Albeit I think the rules writers of 40k are just writing with a more coherent vision then the writers of AoS.
Also, Gav thorpe might burst into the writing room and shout "MORE ELVES!"
AoS and 40k ping pong on who is actually worse based on actual statistics. Usually down to a god codex. Old Slaanesh had win rates that only drukhari are putting up right now (beyond old ironhands even). And put them up for something like a year, so we'll see where drukhari end up in a month.
Actually the GW only thing I see most pushed is models, and this is the most damaging to consumers. But, like, obvious why GW pushes it so hard.
People actually play it :D.
Samer with 40k really.
Especially as we tease out of covid era.
I have looked at other wargames, but the effort to get into and find a community to play them is significantly higher. Warhammer is a huge convenience. I have a place to go filled with, well 50/50 people I rather like and horrible scumbags. But that's life. Other communities require a LOT more effort to break in to. Maybe as I try to get involve more with the people I actually like in my locale I'll find other games to play with em. But, man, lot of these folks have young kids these days, so, it's not exactly easy to get any games.
being fair, while they don't have the lore dominance, elves have been the top power army in 40k for most of that game's history. Right now even it is the evil elf flavor's time to shine. But if you pick any given year of 40k, most of the time it would be an elf army winning top tables.
I just think GW design space has always super graced elves because they have always been the combo specialist faction, and that has usually led to them outperforming.
Kings of War has always done rank and flank better than warhammer fantasy.
And I guess it now wins the default of rank and flank king since GW abrogated it and ninth age was always a meme.
But, as a game, generally Kings of War has more solid balance than AoS.
You are quite wrong.
Space marines tends to rock the power of the early meta by virtue of having the first book out. But this drops precipitously as an edition goes on. 5th had eldar rocking the top far more than the wolves ever did, though GK were, indeed, OP.
No marine combo, from Smashf* to all the free razorbacks to droppod assault could touch eldar or the truly gross taudar in 7th
I mean, for funsies, compare AoS to Middle earth SBG and wonder why the heck a company that makes such a poorly balanced game made such a well balanced one.
I mean the answer is that SBG doesn't churn its meta so massively radically and its writers have historically been just better at competitive gaming.
Fair enough about the slaanesh book (al tough a year is a bit longer then it really wass). But in my experiance and I play both compatatif. There is a lot more pong then ping.
-
59 minutes ago, Scurvydog said:
I can't see how Kragnos fits into a Sons of Behemat army in any way. The only way to run that would be 1 mega gargant, 3 mancrushers, then 1 lonely mancrusher and kragnos. He needs to put in a LOT of work to replace an effective 40 model count for objectives and 60 wounds of gargants with his measly 18 wounds. He basically cuts down the armies board presence and capture potential by half and wound count by a third, while only providing around 50% more dmg than a single gatebreaker...
He will not a LOT of help. I do not think there is any fixing him as is, he is at his core a Gotrek type character, instead of the other big gods who define their books, heck Archaons has a sub faction based entirely on his presence (Like it should be!). I really thought the Broken Realms Kragnos book would actually get the "Kragnos Whaagh" allegiance... but nothing at all for destruction than him. Not only wasted potential and boring rules, but also dramatically overcosted to add insult to injury. If he wa around 600 pts I might have considered him, but now it is just more money in the bank for the new AoS 3.0 stuff or cookies.
Playing him in SOB seems like a really really bad idea, SOB have problems on the dammage and woundcount front. But are great at capturing objectives whit thier rules. He lacks thier objective rules and has even less wounds (specialy in a mortal wounds metta) and his dammage output might be better but it's still not great. So he does not compensate the dammage weakness while introducing even more. Terrible plan from a tactical perspective. Altough if the plan is hey look big dudes i gues it's cool.
-
1 hour ago, novakai said:
list of Developers related to the event
SEGA/CA - TW:W3 (duh)
Frontier Foundry- is a new label under Frontier Interactive that work with Smaller studio to create games (I believe) - AOS RTS that been rumored
Fatshark: Darktide (40K vermintide )
Focus Interactive - most likely more Necromunda hire gun stuff, could be actual promotion for Stormground or a new Warhammer title.
Slitherine - 40k Battlesector
Nacon - they did Warhammer Chaosbane and Inquisitor, maybe they are releasing a new title, AoS Diablo Game maybe?
Oh god Frontier.
The games studio that makes me love and hate thier work at the same time. Playing anny thing by frontier feels like finding a treasure in a pig pen.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, CDM said:
This actually made me laugh. Those characters are just fan service though aren't they. They are in name only a continuation of the WHFB characters. They could easily have been replaced with a new name with the same characteristics and no one would of batted an eyelid.
You say thrown in out of nowhere. There is a large narrative book explaining where he's come from. Read that first.then judge.
He's obviously not been mentioned or alluded to before which obviously would of been better but it almost seems like people only want someone they already know. Can they not introduce new characters?
Well it was intened to be funny. And yes all those chracters could be replaced whit random names and the game would still work. But they aren't and there is real vallue in nostalgia. Nagash is in my oppinion extra cool cause i know he started out as puny wizzard torturing some darkelfs for magic secrets.
But you like Kragnos. I don't that is fine.
But don't ask are ppl pised? Cause well they are. A lot of other ppl are happy. So no problem.
-
11 minutes ago, CDM said:
This isn't WHFB. this is a setting where new forces and characters can come into it. Grimgors dead and I'm so glad thet don't try to shoehorn in old characters now that were hardly known for they're God like stature.
I would much rather they shoehorn new characters like kragnos. He's a force of destruction. I find it believable that they are all rallying around him. Fits in well with what we know of destruction as a grand alliance.
Yes very new. I mean if you look at BR as a whole. All those new characters. Like Morathi, Nagash, Teclis, Ariel, Kroak and Be'Lakor really have shock things up and in no way what so ever relate back to the old world at all. I am so glad that gw has decided to do away whit the old world fluff compleetly. And non of the mover and shackers in the fluff are old world chracters. I mean it would be so ackward. If all the important chractes in the fluff would be old world fan favourites. And then there would be just one faction that never gets anny of their old chracters back. I mean could you imagine what such a game would look like.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Perturbato said:
Do we have the final dimensions for battlemat ?
The same as 40k they said. So look those up.
I hate that tough. aos armies are much much faster than 40k armies. So whit less room positioning becomes a lot less importent. I mean if you can reach anny point on th table in 2 round does it even matter where you deploy?
-
7 hours ago, CDM said:
How are people annoyed? What is it about kragnos that is upsetting everyone? What would you have done differently as I'm genuinely curious?
I actually really like him, his model and his lore. I also feel he fits destruction like a glove. I like the thought of him being an earthquake god and picture him in par with the godbeasts with how they fit in the setting.
Where should destruction go? We have troggoths, gargants, gloomspite, kruleboyz, ironjawz,bonesplittaz, ogres. I feel unless kruleboyz has some more grots there's still room for another goblin faction. More new scults for lots (gorgers, yheteez etc).
But what other factions? Scuttlers are often mentioned but can't see a full faction of them but could see them in a dredfleet style airship game! A firebelly expansion I'm not convinced on although would look great!
Some elemental forces of destruction would be great. Golems, rouge idols etc to fit in with that theme.
Like a glove? Every single race in destruction is humanoid. He isn't He looks compleetly out of place. And was never mentioned in the fluff ever. So he comes right the F out of no where. Like i said i would have brought back Grimgor. Hell i could respect Kragnos if he was Grimogrs mount. But at is. he sticks out in all the wrong reasons.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, AngryPanda said:
What do you guys think are the chances of seeing a more elite version of the Gutrippa battleline? Something more akin to the killaboss in ascetics, but smaller; the Orruk Brute equivalents for the Kruelboyz.
Well it's verry likely that the army will also have non battle line units So i would say HIGH.
-
1
-
-
20 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:
Because someone decided Destruction needed its own archaon regardless of how much sense it makes since only god-level characters are allowed to accomplish anything in the narrative. (I'm not fond of the kragnos character, it really feels like someone made a business decision and now he needs to be forced into the narrative ASAP. The writing around him just feels forced)
I'm certain they're holding back the cool stuff. Kruleboyz use their bright shields to divert attention away from them and to the shield, I imagine the army works the same way, with the gutrippaz diverting attention away from the sneakier units.
I seems to mee like someone made a terrible buisness dission. I mean ppl realy don't like Kragnos. If they had brought back Grimgor on a gain mount (archeon/ aeriale style) Ppl would be shoveling money towards gw. Now they pissed of a big part of the playerbase.
-
36 minutes ago, Ogregut said:
I see the coming of Kragos as being the catalyst for the KB going on the warpath.
They like all orruks, ogors and gargants feel his call like a war drum beating in their souls.
Dont forget most have never seen him, just dream visions or portents in clouds, like the very first broken realms story.
It doesn't mean they don't worship gorkamorka anymore, just they are answering the call to waaaaagh.
Man I envy them. I whish i had never seen Kragnos either.
-
2
-
1
-
8
-
-
3 hours ago, Feii said:
I like the direction but them saying going second is worse than going first got me very worrying.
hint - going second is better right now and they are buffing it wtf?
Yea like i said it's like they don't play thier own game. Or even listen to ppl who do. That is what worries me.
I mean, for funsies, compare AoS to Middle earth SBG and wonder why the heck a company that makes such a poorly balanced game made such a well balanced one.
AoS 3 New Rules Discussion
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Gw wants the games to be alike so ppl wil jump over? I don't know but this rule will indeed have a major impact. I don't think anny of may melee armies wil now function like they used to.