|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|09-22-16 03:07 PM|
I agree about the buffs, they are great.
But honestly, there are some units that are just better. The actual point system is not enough to fill the gaps, imo.
Sinergy has become an important part of the game, but many units just benefits greatly from certain bonuses while other units just are worst even with the same buffs ( i am thinking about the various daemonic buffing that i'v seen with extra saves, bonus attacks etc.).
About summoning: no, we never had a game with full summoning army involved. I will ten rephrase: summoning without going "full summoning" is not worth it. i'd just have my units on the field from the beginning, thanks. Also, when the mages die, what happens? you lose the the rest of your army. the common mage is just a lucky (let's say average) cannon shot away from death and altough i don't like cannons, a free people army WILL have some of those. and guess who will they be shooting... Also, about balancing: don't you really think that sigmarines are a step above the rest? really? i also found mortal chaos to be quite underwhelming without any help from daemonic forces.
then of course, the armies looks more balanced than before...with fixed stats this is the minimum we can expect. but fixed stats generate, in my opinion, a serious problem: 5 imperial militiamen at 5+ will always be better than 1 sigmarine at 3+, if you get what i mean. Seriously, i had 30 arquebusiers hold their ground an entire game VS 15 buffed plaguebearers and 5 big nasty khorne warriors (can't remember the name of the unit). 4 turns of ridiculous rolling, shure, but that is not good balancing. With WHfantasy rules, any edition, those arquebusiers would have melted the second round of combat, as it is only just and legitimate.However that is a different problem.
IMO, you can mixmatch units as you please, but when you find THE right combo, then is a matter of spamming as it always has been. Moreso with the current points system, where points differentiation is not-so-well implemented.
And then again this is clearly represented by the summer campaign results. Order armies are just stronger. period. But then again, that's my grumpy and beardy take at the whole world talking. (i also miss older rules set so i might be slighly critical... )
|09-22-16 01:57 PM|
Originally Posted by neferhet View Post
Summoning is also quite fine and balanced, it's basically deep strike reserves from 40k that can replenish itself if the summoned unit dies, a great compromise to the grossly overpowered summoning in open play. I'm curious if you've ever actually legitimately tested a summoning based daemon army under matched play rules. It's very powerful if you can't take out those wizards.
The armies are also more or less pretty balanced between each other, we do random match pairings every week and no one knows their opponents list prior to the game.
Mind you this is all just my personal experiences, but that experience encompasses close to 50 matched play games and having a large group of local AoS players.
|09-22-16 07:31 AM|
Yes, i did. I played empire and chaos.
Pretty balanced, but only because we avoided spam. If you start spamming good units, all is lost, even with point system.
Even with points i've found out that artilleries are overcosted, big infantry units with some special rules are king, cavalry are ok-ish if buffed, monsters are a big hit or miss. I killed a goblin giant spider with a bunch of light infantry and 5 knights.
All in all, the points GW provides do almost nothing to really alter the game. It's a quick, straightforward game like it was before.
I honestly can't see a game doing well without having a pre-game chat with my opponent. Also, new rules for summoning are total utter shit. i suggest a nice houseruling for it!
|09-22-16 12:29 AM|
|JAMOB||Has anyone played with the General's Handbook at all? Thoughts? Feelings?|
|07-04-16 05:47 PM|
|Deloth||GW's upcoming release of the "General's Handbook" will include a "matched play" section with a full points/comp system for each race. They are coinciding this launch with a summer campaign as well. I'll be honest this has breathed a lot of life back into AoS in my local area|
|05-19-16 06:19 PM|
at my local store we usualy agree on a max number of wounds and an unspoken "don't spam stupidly good units" rule. tho besides that we did end up in a bit of a friendly arms race. it works and there is a reasonable balance.
other then that the group is anxiously awaiting the points systems.
|05-19-16 06:13 PM|
The no point values of AoS has given me mixed results. On one hand if your playing with friends and can trust the other person to not be a jerk, it allows a great deal of freedom to develop themed armies and epic, cinematic style battles.
When it comes to random pick up games that's where this tends to fall apart. This system you've shared is one of the better ones I've seen, but it suffers from internal balance issues (some units are just too overcosted to see play compared to other, simply far better ones). I really hope GW provides us with an official system at some point.
|12-02-15 12:31 PM|
AoS points system
we have just started playing AoS as a lite relief from 40k. the simple rules have just made it a quick and fun game for us without all the rules that we need to keep flipping back to and rechecking when we play.
we treat it as a "beer and peanuts" game and it works like that.
however the armies are always unbalanced so like others (probably) we went looking for some way to balance out the game and found a really good rules set that is well balanced and the best system we have used so far. so i just thought i would share it with you guys to have a look at and maybe try out.
the link is http://ageofwargamers.blogspot.se/p/...r-ppc.html?m=1