Flippy

A temporary solution, which leaves you watching other factions receive one update after another, while your guys are slowly drifting towards obsolescence. Sometimes a clean cut is better.

I agree. And there is really no "proper" way to communicate such message. I really feel for the BoC players - especially those who do not follow the news closely and have every right to be extremely confused now. Same for Bonesplitterz, even if they were (for a long time now) just a tiny faction and an obviously neglected one. Regarding Stormcast... I would naturally assume that you can still use everything (almost everything?) as proxy and the purge is therefore less impactful than it may seem. Truth be told, I find it difficult to tell their units apart.

The idea is fine. The keywords distribution will be crucial, as it will actually determine the army composition. I hope that, for all this advertised flexibility, they can actually heavily discourage spam builds. The CP as a scarce resource is a welcome change. Just let the game flow without constant interrupts. Some topics are still open - can you buy artefacts and traits for points (hopefully)? Can heroes join units (please)? Are we done with multiple within / wholly within auras to rely on what's actually written in the scroll?

Have you ever seen this in real life? Neither have I.

Yet here we are, discussing Games Workshop game on the AoS-only forum, with our perception shaped by Games Workshop, which is also true for the majority of tabletop wargames players around the world. And yes, the underlying problem with the double turn (and some other mechanics) is that they go against an assumption from some players about what tabletop wargames "should be". The difference between us is that I think this is actually a valid critique.

I would not. But, again, only humans united (CoS) and good wise elves (LRL) have the gravitas to pull this off.

This greatly depends on the kind of game we're talking about. Some games are inherently abstract (chess), some are mostly abstract with some fluff that is obviously pretextual (the "eurogames"). I have no problem with this when playing, let's say, Azul. But tabletop wargames are usually different and they do not draw people in with their smart internal engines - instead they use: - huge amount of lore / fluff; - the models and hobby elements related to the models (painting). This is why seasoned players usually emphasise the rule of cool - actual game rules can change many times while you invest a lot of time / money / emotions in the lore and the models. So, what you would usually expect from the game such as AoS is that the mechanic supports the recreation of epic fantasy battle, i.e. encourages the engagement, dramatic moments and actually "killing" the opposing toy soldiers with your toy soldiers. If you take the more "gamey" approach (e.g. abstract scoring system) you might as well, at one point, ask yourself why even bother with the whole illusion of battle (painting tiny toy soldiers, crafting artificial terrain, naming your characters and units, writing a backstory). Maybe just use tokens and enjoy the smooth and balanced game engine without the whole hassle?

It is interesting, but it's also "gamey". I agree. My issue with this is that (at least based on the AoS Metawatch) the designers are more on the "gamey" side and they apparently think they are doing a great "balancing" job by working with stuff like battle tactics, point values and double turn ramifications.

Couldn't care less. I don't really get the universal appeal of these starter boxes - they only make sense if you want to actually start a new army. As for the good guys that could potentially replace SCE in a box... for now it would have to be either CoS or Lumineth (if GW would decide to push the Vanari vibe more and sideline the nonsense Aelementiri).

So much better. Good job.

Your approach seems to be mainly on the game as a mechanism, i.e. the internal gears, how they work and how the result (scoring) is determined. Nothing wrong with this per se, but this approach can easily lead to a disconnection between what's happening on the table and how you should act to win the game (or how the winner is determined). Wrapping the game around the priority roll (as you said, it must be considered in the listbuilding stage already) and then using abstract points to balance everything out makes the experience.... weird, I guess? Like, my army got slaughtered but I still won on points. Hooray? I don't know how to explain this properly, but when we play AoS and the kids come to check who's winning they examine the table, not a scoring sheet - a very intuitive approach in a wargame but not very accurate for AoS.

I will finish the Akhelian King. Then I will push with Aeldari Combat Patrol; a Guardian squad seems like a reasonable target for April - and I’ve already made a test model.

I’ve ultimately failed and the last model for the Idoneth warband will be finished in April. But some work was done.

Let’s wait and see the Spearhead rules. If GW is aware of the „double turn impact on smaller games” issue, they should propose a solution at least for this game mode.

This would be a valid point, but it also underlines the profound impact of double turn. You need to build your list with double turn on your mind (how many drops? do I have sufficient number of screens?) and position units planning for double turn potential. There is also a very problematic issue with smaller games - I played most of my AoS (and WHFB, half a century ago) games using 750 - 1500 points and I would very much like GW to treat smaller games as equally valid game modes, with active support. Is that possible with double turn? Maybe…

It seems that there is some misunderstanding here regarding this modular build. From what GW says, you may theoretically plug out one "module" (e.g. magic or terrain) but the game is not meant to be played like this. This is how the game should be played and what they design the rules for: The real idea here is that you can plug out the "magic" module and plug in the "seasonal magic" module instead - and same goes for any other module. Any discussion on how the game will function without "commands" or "command models" is probably irrelevant - the game will simply not function as intended without them, unless you use the proper "replacement module". The "battle tactics" are the only truly optional module.

Additional "resource pool" with new rules attached which can also affect other elements of the game (Command Points) and interact with terrain? Interesting. 100% will not happen.

It's still the best way to somewhat balance the Spearhead without adjusting the core rules or affecting the normal mode of the game. Moreover, it should be enough if GW simply alters some abilities, not the stats themselves. This is the 40k approach from what I see. You simply choose between regular index / codex rules and Combat Patrol rules in the app and use the appropriate datasheets.

You can just create a different Soulreaper warscroll for the Spearhead mode - and add some ability instead of magic. The easy solution is the most likely one.

Of course they will. People are overanalysing the wording of this article way too much.

I'm also in favour of this modular approach, but not how they advertise. From the pictures, you can choose between: - very basic mode (Spearhead); - full rules without BTs (PtG); - full rules with BTs (Matched); - full rules with BTs and whatever the most recent craze is. It does seem rather obvious to me that common approach will be from Spearhad straight to Matched. I am also very interested in how (or if) they will support and balance smaller games (750, 1000, 1500).

Some good points here. The problem (at least for the majority of gamers) is that this mould-driven business logic is not communicated to the audience and this will not change. They keep some factions and sub-factions in the game because the moulds are still good and the models are selling. The moment you inform your customers on your plans (once the moulds are spent we drop the faction) the sales plummets, so you can as well squat the line immediately.

Thanks. Doesn't look that bad to me.

What does this mean? Like, seriously, balance? Flavour? Gameplay? I've very recently checked 40k rules (I haven't played this before) and everything looks rather elegant. Where's the mess?

Is it? I’ve recently checked the Combat Patrol mode and it looks really good. Maybe I will try 40k for the first time.