Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Interesting development

They basically tried to balance the game by designated certain overperforming models as "priority targets" that generate extra VPs (so long as the models destroying them are themselves not also prime targets), and then they designated certain underperforming factions as "prime hunters" which get an extra VP on top of that per priority target killed.

I expect this to become problem. Last week my bonesplitters woucd have got 6vp more by this vs 1st prince. Won game by 1 vp as is. 6vp is silly lot in many scenarios.

I think Legion of the First Prince might become non-viable, and Cities/Stormcast lists will take 1 or the other of Longstrikes/Fulminators instead of both.
I don't think "Oops all stormdrakes!" lists will exist any more but will probably still take 1-3 units if that's your chosen flavor of stormcast. They'll just fill points with other units.

I find this to be such a weird way to balance the game. Feels like they could have just changed points if they weren't so averse to giving "free point updates".

I think rules like this are a big source of feelsbadman for all involved. Basically leads to perceptions that certain people only won games because their army got a handicap out of the bonus VPs. Also leads to people feeling like they can't play certain units without handing the win to their opponent. Like if I'm a Tzeentch daemons player (and I have been for ~15 years now) wtf am I supposed to do about the fact that the unit thats basically my basic troops/battleline choice is now going to hand over bonus VPs to my opponent??

Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the rule, I just wish it was more limited - I think it should have been limited to characters and one-off units that aren't battleline choices (maybe with the exception of Stormcast dragons and mega-gargants), and only come into play vs armies with the prime hunters rule (instead of giving the bonus VP to everyone).

It's like they don't know what these words mean and just kinda threw it together.

Awful. 0/10.

 Eldarsif wrote:
I find this to be such a weird way to balance the game. Feels like they could have just changed points if they weren't so averse to giving "free point updates".

Wait. So this new update doesn't have point changes ?

I mean this comes from a team who still see the Double Turn as a major beneficial feature of the AoS rules set.


I figure the issue is that for all the money and love AoS clearly gets on the model and creative side; its just not backed up in the rules side of things. Which to be fair is pretty normal for GW.



This rule reminds me of the old depravity rule for Slaanesh as a rule where depending on the two armies, the disparity in experience can be extreme. It's not a totally daft idea to try and introduce more risk to taking powerful models in your army, but I don't know it feels like trying to patch over the problem of the model being powerful as opposed to tackling it

I figure the issue is that for all the money and love AoS clearly gets on the model and creative side; its just not backed up in the rules side of things. Which to be fair is pretty normal for GW.

I'd honestly say that AoS has the better rules side between itself and 40k.

For example, the depravity issue you pointed out - was fixed by making depravity more consistent against enemy armies. There's still a gap between fighting say, Beasts of Chaos which often have 17+ units for you to possibly attack and get depravity from and Sons of Behemat which often only have 4, but it's not as bad as "never depravity from skaven, always lots against stormcast"

In addition, the White Dwarf updates have been fairly solid if not totally game-changing and mostly show a keen understanding of what sort of stopgap buffs armies need to keep chugging along.

And then they go and do something like this...

"Prime Hunters" should have been a rule added to specific units, with "Priority Target" being a generic thing added to Heroes and Monsters--plus units designated "Prime Hunters".

I don't think that would have achieved nearly the same thing, nor would it even attempt to solve the same problem that this is trying to solve? Maybe the flavorful naming could be a better fit but for rules designed to
1) hamper spamming good units/add more interesting list building decisions
2) give more opportunities to lower tier factions

These work fairly well at a glance. We'll see the actual impact after a few tournaments, though.

Too stupid.

So. 15 blood stalkers double shooting is issue. So that's why i have to be 2vp behind having 2x5 without ability to shoot in hero phase? Thanks!

Raptors would be lot less oppressive btw if holy command didn't work with reinforced like call for aid. Or even better unit was single

Interesting take for sure.

Don't feel strongly about it either way. Anecdotal, but the AoS Maryland FB page seems to be positive about it, and they will integrate it in a big tourney this weekend.

Initial impression is that it certainly beats out another round of points changes, or nerfing/remaking warscrolls.

This is heaps and bounds better than changing rules/points.

At least your casual list doesn't get invalidated because someone at a tournament on the other side of the world managed to find a way to break people's toys with your list.

This is a change which is aimed at top tier lists and affects only them.

Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.

This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap

That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you　kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.

tneva82 wrote:
Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.

This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap

That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you　kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.

Casual players aren't really showing up to tournaments expecting to win anyways, and if they're really casual why are they playing the bloated, tournament focused mess that is Pitched Battles 2021 instead of like, Contest of Generals? Which is still Matched Play but isn't the hardcore grinder tournament format explicitly designed to make tournament play more interesting.

This sort of doesn't feel like an actual balance update lol.

More a list of 'These units are really strong' and another list of 'these factions or sub-factions suck ass right about now.'

Rihgu wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.

This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap

That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you　kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.

Casual players aren't really showing up to tournaments expecting to win anyways, and if they're really casual why are they playing the bloated, tournament focused mess that is Pitched Battles 2021 instead of like, Contest of Generals? Which is still Matched Play but isn't the hardcore grinder tournament format explicitly designed to make tournament play more interesting.

Because people tend to use same mission pack outside tournaments. It's also 12 scenarios instead of 3 with no real difference of complexity. Contest of generals isnv any less bloated. The scenarios aren't any simpler. There's just less variations. (seriously if you think scenarios are somehow hardcore...lol. checkers your idea of complicated rules?)

And if you think casual players don't want to win any games..lol what on earth you are smoking to have such a delusion?

Fixing problem over random bandaid is ALWAYS preferable

tneva82 wrote:

Rihgu wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Uh right the 2x5 blood stalker list that has no way to shoot hero phase is problem enough it needs to be under huge drawback. Basically winrate is going to drop a ton.

This hurts the casual players more. And raptors/dragons still same. They table enemy or lose. Now just lose by more vp's but not relevant on gap

That's actually worst part of this. The lists that spam these either table enemy or if opponent can deal with them loses anyway. This does very little anyway. If you　kill mega gargant a turn you win. If you kill just 2 you lose. This doesn't change that. Just makes win win bigger which is irrelevant.

Casual players aren't really showing up to tournaments expecting to win anyways, and if they're really casual why are they playing the bloated, tournament focused mess that is Pitched Battles 2021 instead of like, Contest of Generals? Which is still Matched Play but isn't the hardcore grinder tournament format explicitly designed to make tournament play more interesting.

Because people tend to use same mission pack outside tournaments. It's also 12 scenarios instead of 3 with no real difference of complexity. Contest of generals isnv any less bloated. The scenarios aren't any simpler. There's just less variations. (seriously if you think scenarios are somehow hardcore...lol. checkers your idea of complicated rules?)

And if you think casual players don't want to win any games..lol what on earth you are smoking to have such a delusion?

Fixing problem over random bandaid is ALWAYS preferable

The people showing up to tournaments to play casually may want to win games but are under no such delusions that their bad or silly lists and loose gameplay are going to get them anywhere but 0-5 or 1-4 if they play another among their number.

Contest of generals isnv any less bloated.

Categorically untrue and easily proven false. No Realm Rules, which means no Realm Spell, Command Ability, Battle Tactics, Grand Strategies or extra Core Battalions with special add-on rule that THESE Core Battalions can only be taken once per army unlike REGULAR Core Battalions. Now there are also no Priority Targets/Prime Hunters to worry about.

I mean, yea, if casual players are going to get sad because they're playing the mode with extra rules and restrictions, I can't really blame anybody except for the players who didn't read the label on the tin? When I play with my friends, we're not going to play by these rules because none of us play at a level where this will add anything to our games. The Sylvaneth, Bonereapers, and Fyreslayers are top dogs around here. Playing extra tournament rules that give them bonuses to make them even more top dog? No thanks! ESPECIALLY when the Ironjawz player who just plops 2+ maw-krushas on the table and rushes them forward into combat with no thought of preservation or objectives who never wins anyways (and is fine with that, too!) is going to bleed 5+ points to people who are already beating him by like 10 points every game.
When I go to play an actual tournament? Yes, I'll play the tournament rules. Not for my casual games with my non-tournament-playing friends, though.

Rihgu wrote:


The people showing up to tournaments to play casually may want to win games but are under no such delusions that their bad or silly lists and loose gameplay are going to get them anywhere but 0-5 or 1-4 if they play another among their number.

You're missing the point of what tneva was saying, which is that in most casual settings tourney related stuff ends up taking over because it's all that gets talked about online. People seem to think it's the de facto standard but don't know why it has that distinction.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Rihgu wrote:


The people showing up to tournaments to play casually may want to win games but are under no such delusions that their bad or silly lists and loose gameplay are going to get them anywhere but 0-5 or 1-4 if they play another among their number.

You're missing the point of what tneva was saying, which is that in most casual settings tourney related stuff ends up taking over because it's all that gets talked about online. People seem to think it's the de facto standard but don't know why it has that distinction.

I get the point that tneva and you are making but for these groups of players who are playing tournament-mode-but-casually, I'm not sure if they're going to notice a difference? They already play Pitched Battles 2021 which in general is going to punish their style of playing. Maybe the guy playing 2x5 blood sisters or whatever might notice he loses slightly more games or the games he loses are by a slightly bigger lead. Is he going to up his game? I feel like he would've upped his game already if he cared.

I think it is an interesting idea. I am happy to see GW bending their creativity towards matched play and trying something out of the box. It may not work, but I respect the attempt and keen to see how it plays out.

What I dislike about this artificial limiting of units(like Blood Stalkers) is the fact that AoS factions don't really have the same roster as many 40k factions, which tends to limit what you can actually do with the armies.

Prime Hunters is such a backhanded way to say joke faction.

The penalty is basically comp and hamfisted but probably somewhat effective. The boost is... not gonna work. First you have to assume these factions only struggle against these specific units, then you have to assume that they're able to take down these units effectively, which, if they could.... probably wouldn't leave them underpowered.

This is the answer to lists spamming overpowered units, I guess.

I get it, but I'm not really fond of that way. It feels like ripping victory conditions from set scenarios to "punish" people (ab)using the most optimized units in their build.

Frankly, that they still haven't seemed to realize Vanguard Raptors are always going to be a problem since it's basically just an "autotake" for anyone is ridiculous.

They should have locked them to Vanguard Chamber only from the outset.

 LunarSol wrote:
Prime Hunters is such a backhanded way to say joke faction.

That I can agree with. Just call them what they are : Underdogs or some variant of that.

 nels1031 wrote:
Don't feel strongly about it either way. Anecdotal, but the AoS Maryland FB page seems to be positive about it, and they will integrate it in a big tourney this weekend.

...whatever happened to events requiring a lead time of n days/weeks before new material was in effect for an event?