chord
-
Posts
1,953 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by chord
-
-
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?
-
5 hours ago, gjnoronh said:
But playtesting is tough see my previous post on the difficulty of getting balance right.
This is where if GW embraces data science and technology they can use that to help provide balance.
-
4 hours ago, mikethefish said:
That and the fact that some game abilities don't work in a count down environment.
EDIT - Understand that this is not some weird logic leap I am making here - this is how it's done. It's been ruled that way lots of times at competitive events. Pretty sure Vince was just talking about this on his Warclans review show.
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.
-
1 hour ago, mikethefish said:
It's just right in the Wounds section. You allocate Wounds to a target model. Once the Wounds taken equals the model's Wounds trait, it dies. There's no subtracting - it's always adding up a total.
This is an important distinction for Ironjawz - especially the Maw Crusha and his ability to increase his Wounds total. It doesn't actually HEAL him, exactly. It just let's him take more wounds before dying - basically making his last wounds bracket longer. A fact that becomes confusing if you follow the "counting down" method.
Pretty sure there was some FAQ follow up on this as well, but I'd have to look that up.
Ah, its not explicitly saying count up, but implies it.
-
3 hours ago, Battlefury said:
Hello ladies & Gentlemen!
I am thinking about an army composition for 1000 points, that would have Gotrek as the core piece.
Technically he can be an ally to any order faction, but he could also be a regular unit in a duardin army, as I see.
Does anyone have an idea how such an army would look like?
Cheers///Seraphon? That way you can start to summon in extra bodies.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, mikethefish said:
You bet!
Where in the core rules does it say which way to denote wounds?
-
17 hours ago, Maturin said:
Yeah it's incredible the rage against SCE. They're not that powerful when compared to other armies. Anvil Longstrikes is really pwoerful, it's true, but except that ....
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.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, mikethefish said:
Pet peeve of mine - players who count damage down from a model, instead of up, like the rulebook says it should be done. This isn't DnD. You are not subtracting from a Hit Point (Wounds) total. You allocate wounds to a model, until the Wounds allocated equals the model's wounds characteristic.
Normally it doesn't matter, but recently we have seen some rules crop up where it does (ie - the new Ironjawz, etc). I'd just like it if we all would get on the same page, lol
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.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Indecisive said:
The battletomes of last year were made with 2.0 in mind, but there is a clear sort of power and design jump that started off in 2019. I mean compare SCE/NH in their disjointed rules design to this year's stuff especially FEC and onward.
I can't blame people for being a bit unhappy with those prior books.
Yeah, the bonereapers sound like a large power jump as well.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, TheCovenLord said:
As some people have mentioned they play AOS to get away from screens but frankly the best solution in my opinion is to transition completely digitally to the app (for all rules/in game interactions) and sell the books more as sources of lore to flesh out backstory and setting (which already seems to be the trend with the change in FAQs and on the app).
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)
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Televiper11 said:
I hope so. One thing I've found that keeps new players away is how many rules are scattered over multiple documents.
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
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, l1censetochill said:
There should be two grandstaves in the box - one that can be held by the female model, and one that's held by one of the male models. It's labelled as an 'aetherstave' on the box, and is held by the alternative assembly Lord-Arcanum on Dracoline model, but it's functionally identical to a grandstave.
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.
-
1 hour ago, Moldek said:
I don’t get how people expect GW to apply a digital model to a physical product. It’s a completely different way to play, a completely different investment. If they changed the rules weekly most people would give up in my opinion.
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
16 minutes ago, Panzer said:The only reason why GW can't and won't do as many updates as a videogame dev is because unlike with videogames GW has no way to collect even close to the same amount of data. All they can get are lists and results from tournaments and the occasional playtests, both which don't happen multiple times a day every day.
They could look into Swarm AI algorithms to help leverage the player base to help the model come up with "right" decisions.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, svnvaldez said:
How is it helpful to make generic statements about how a whole population felt about a topic? I for one was not sore about End Times. I bought the starter set at launch. Sure some people might have liked it. I did not. The game was only enjoyable when I played with a buddy and we played a form of what you would call narrative now.
You mean like the generic statements that AoS was bad before points?
-
2 minutes ago, Greyshadow said:
Age of Sigmar: Skirmish. The rules are (now) in two back-issues of White Dwarf and a warband consists of only around three to nine models. You can focus your time and budget on painting these models as well as you can which is a good way to improve your painting. Will keep you going for ages.
Warcry is another option. It is a more sophisticated game but not all factions are supported unlike in skirmish.
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
47 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:I think you're the first person I've heard say that. Most people that talk about the time before GW had points describe it as a bad time where fan comps were breaking the game even worse than they are today.
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
-
2
-
-
56 minutes ago, michu said:
You know @chord, as much as I like narrative gaming you're not helping its popularity. You sounds like competitive play shouldn't even exist. And GW still creates content for narrative and open play, just because there's no Realmgate Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo doesn't mean non-matched play is dead. Look at the Blanchitsu community. Their games are "story first, rules are distant secon". During Tor Megiddo campaign (I know, it's 40k, but the system doesn't matter) they even had rule that if someone wants to do something rules does not support on 4+ it succeeds because cool story was more important than strict ruleset.
EDIT: But I think that's a topic for different thread.
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 .
-
1 hour ago, Moldek said:
The truth is that wargaming is a social contract. Personal interaction is THE MOST important factor in a fun game of AoS. Being able to have fun and to give your opponent a good time is crucial. I’m sure I could have fun being crushed by a tournament player if he’s nice about it, and I’m certain we could find ways for him to challenge himself : e.g giving me double the points to see if he can still beat me, etc.
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.
-
33 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:
The only group powercreep is a sales-factor To are competitive gamers, which are the minority.
the whole powercreep business has the opposite effect of attracting people in my area, no one wants it because it is unfun and no one wants to play your absurdly strong new toy which leads to people skipping the broken faction/models.
So I assume that powercreep is either very ill adviced or it is caused by sloppy rules-writing and a lack of review and thoroughly testing the product, which makes GW‘s products overall lack in quality (to me) though they charge for a premium product.
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.
-
6 hours ago, CDM said:
I think it was fairly balanced in 40k when they did the indexes. People.demanded more flavour in a codex and all of a sudden it was all over the place.
I'd advocate for a tournament's to use just points from the generals handbook or a future tournament book and leave out all army and unit special rules. You cant balance varied rules through points. You cant create an interesting game without special rules (pre GHB 1 in AoS)
You cant cater to both crowds with the same rules, casual AoS gaming took off with the more structured approach of GHB1 and beyond so indent think there is that mythical gamer who throws down whatever and just plays for fun, some structure is needed but it ain't tournament structure!
There is no balance if they're is a vast array of rules and factions. Why do we kid ourselves otherwise.
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.
AoS 2 - Stormcast Eternals Discussion
in Stormcast Eternals
Posted
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.