chord

I have the same feeling. I think Anvilestrike will be nerfed hard. In the past I would have agreed, but I think its different this time. I think this is our battletome for awhile. Unless the narrative has a huge change pivoting away from Death as the big bad. But with their new army release I dont see it happening soon.

What can we as stormcast players do to convince GW to stop listening to the Stormcast hate crowds and actually gives us more than one list? (and fix some of our internal imbalances as well)?? A petition? Letter campaign? etc?

This is where if GW embraces data science and technology they can use that to help provide balance.

I don't see how those abilities don't work. They still work Don't care about tournaments and have no idea who Vince is. It's not a big deal about counting up/down. But good to know the rule implies it. They should just state it if that's how they want it done.

Ah, its not explicitly saying count up, but implies it.

Seraphon? That way you can start to summon in extra bodies.

Where in the core rules does it say which way to denote wounds?

Yeah people really hate SCE, I'm convinced its why GW makes the SCE units so lousy compared to the newer armies. Hope we get a new book soon that really fixes things and at least gives us internal balance.

I prefer counting down, as I know that one means it only has one wound left, otherwise I have to keep track of how many wounds each of my opponents models has.

Yeah, the bonereapers sound like a large power jump as well.

The app really needs to jump to PC's (without using emulation) so I can use my surface tablet with a larger screen. (old man eyes)

Agreed the FAQ/Errata/Designer notes are terrible since they add to the scattering of rules. I'd rather they expand their test bed (or use some data science) to help get it right the first time

Thanks! I'll double check I thought there was only one really long staff, the others are all "half staff". I'll look again

Building a box of Dracolines and it appears that only one grandstaff is included but the unit can take 2. What did people do for that?

It says up to in the description.

If they define a data model for their rules/stats/abilities/etc they could when they make adjusts run it through some tests to see how balanced it becomes. It would require them embracing data science and technology fully for the way they handle the points systems They could look into Swarm AI algorithms to help leverage the player base to help the model come up with "right" decisions.

You mean like the generic statements that AoS was bad before points?

I agree skirmish is a fun way to start AOS since the models you paint for it can be directly added into your larger army. I've scanned all the Skirmish rules from WD into a PDF for easy use during play. Most battleplans can be adjusted for warband scale play Plus with Skirmish if you are happy with it, you can just buy single models off ebay to build out various warbands.

And a global community can respond faster than GW to "imbalance". Plus if you look into swarm AI with human input, it could really leverage the collective knowledge of the community for a more accurate balancing system. Especially since the data model could take into account artifacts/allegiance abilities/etc Most of them were just sore about the End Times, for those who played AOS pre-points, it was fun and enjoyable. Were the comps perfect? No. But it was a lot more flexible than the points system currently used. I think the most highly regarded was SCGT Comp and it seemed accurate for the time. In fact if set up like most open source projects GW could be in charge of approving the pull requests while the community works together to identity "bugs" with the current balancing. Just brain storming on how we can improve the system

Not at all, I just think the community was doing a good job of it prior to GW introducing points. The pools w/sideboard was a nice way to to handle it, plus with some of the human swarm AI a community led open source system would probably be more "accurate" and "balanced" than anything GW can do. It would have the potential of all AoS players globally to help "balance" the game whereas GW only leverages a small number with some play testers.

Started a few months after the launch of AOS when a store opened in my town. Having never played a GW game I walked in, the store manager showed me the rule book for 40K and the rule book for AOS (the 4 pager). I went with AoS since I dont have a ton of free time .

GW tried the social contract approach and for many it was fine. For others it required having social skills and thinking about others enjoyment. They were a very loud voice and convinced GW to change its ways.

I agree the power creep makes it less fun for casual players who just want a pick up game in a store that is not against a face stomp list.

I agree, once they started introducing allegiance abilities, artifacts, etc the balance really got thrown out of whack. If you play just warscrolls it is much more balanced since the over the top combos tend to be based on all the "extras"

I don't know much about Brexit being from the states but I do know the increase in price of the start collecting has made me hold back on purchasing.