PDA

View Full Version : Any (non-fluff) reason at all to use weak models in AoS?



Azulthar
04-07-2015, 11:53
Why would I ever take Goblins instead of (Black) Orcs (other than fluff reasons)?

I don't get it. No point values, all about model count. Why would I field Goblins? Like, at all? They have no rules to make up for their weakness. :confused:

Have I missed something? Genuine question.

inquisitorsz
04-07-2015, 12:09
My friends and I can't seem to figure it out.
Some of the "weak units" have some pretty nice rules... especially when combined with hero abilities.
For example.
Unit of 30 skeletons. Let's say that with spears, you can get about 15 in range of hitting an enemy. 5 wide, 3 deep.
If you have 30 in the unit, each guy gets 3 attacks.
You use the vampire's Blood Feast command ability and now each guy gets 4 attacks each.
Then you cast Vanhel's Danse Macarbe from the necromancer and that unit of skeletons can attack twice and gets and extra pile in move.... potentally get even more guys into combat range.
Let's assume it's still only the original 15 in range... that's now 120 attacks, which caused 20 wounds before armour saves.

That being said.... A unit like bloodknights (of whatever size) is still more powerful because on average each one causes 2.667 wounds before saves and has 3 wounds each.
In the above example, the skeleton unit would cause 6.66 wounds to the blood knights, killing 2 of them. Then one comes back in the next turn due to them having a standard bearer.

So weak basic units can still be good in some situations, but super elite units are still beyond broken and ones that can be healed or summoned are even worse.

I don't think it's a matter of basic units being bad... it's more about elite units being too good.

Laminar
04-07-2015, 12:10
If you use Great Gitmob warscroll, which is a goblin centered battalion.

Azulthar
04-07-2015, 12:13
The person who wins is the person who can buy the most powerful models. No reason to buy/use weaker models, no point limitations of any kind...

This...this isn't even a game, is it? It's some sort of story simulator :wtf:

Azulthar
04-07-2015, 12:15
If you use Great Gitmob warscroll, which is a goblin centered battalion.
But it's not noticeably more powerful than other formations to compensate for the fact that you have significantly weaker models.

duffybear1988
04-07-2015, 12:16
The person who wins is the person who can buy the most powerful models. No reason to buy/use weaker models, no point limitations of any kind...

This...this isn't even a game, is it? It's some sort of story simulator :wtf:

Exactly right. It's a poor excuse for a story based event.

Shadowsinner
04-07-2015, 12:22
i mean even the most powerful models arent that hard to kill. Goblins can totally mess up a bloodthirster in the new system. people need to shrug off the old concepts of power rankings from the last edition

Noodle!
04-07-2015, 12:33
Then if you look at power rankings from this edition.

For the bloodthirster:
http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Compendiums/warhammer-aos-daemons-of-chaos-en.pdf

For the goblins:
http://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Compendiums/warhammer-aos-orcs-and-goblins-en.pdf

In a game which is balanced on a model to model basis, how would those goblins mess the bloodthirsters up?

If GW later on shows some sort of way to balance I'm all willing to eat my words, but right now I can't see it.

Laminar
04-07-2015, 12:39
But it's not noticeably more powerful than other formations to compensate for the fact that you have significantly weaker models.

It's a non-fluff reason to take goblins, which is what you were asking about.

gutsmaka
04-07-2015, 12:41
well, 30 tomb king skeletons in the formation, with a nearby tomb ting get 90 attacks, hitting on 2+, gaining extra attacks on 4+ (which can generate even more attacks) and wond on 4+... that seems like something that could kill almost anything...

Noodle!
04-07-2015, 12:44
It's a non-fluff reason to take goblins, which is what you were asking about.


But that formation is still significantly weaker than the black orc formation, so in terms of power it doesn't seem like a reason?

Noodle!
04-07-2015, 12:45
well, 30 tomb king skeletons in the formation, with a nearby tomb ting get 90 attacks, hitting on 2+, gaining extra attacks on 4+ (which can generate even more attacks) and wond on 4+... that seems like something that could kill almost anything...

Would it kill 30 bloodthirsters?

Again, I'm willing to eat all my vitriolic words if the leaked ruleset is very different from what will be released, but from what we know now it seems to favor just buying the most expensive kits GW has to offer.

gutsmaka
04-07-2015, 13:02
Would it kill 30 bloodthirsters?

Again, I'm willing to eat all my vitriolic words if the leaked ruleset is very different from what will be released, but from what we know now it seems to favor just buying the most expensive kits GW has to offer.

I dont think there is a leak anymore... the rules are out, heres a compendium http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/07/warhammer-age-of-sigmar-rules-compendiums-free.html

I see your point, however. but still, I dont know anyone with 30 bloodthirsters, or even 10. money and cost will balence AoS, if nothing else

gutsmaka
04-07-2015, 13:03
Would it kill 30 bloodthirsters?

Again, I'm willing to eat all my vitriolic words if the leaked ruleset is very different from what will be released, but from what we know now it seems to favor just buying the most expensive kits GW has to offer.

I dont think there is a leak anymore... the rules are out, heres a compendium http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/07/warhammer-age-of-sigmar-rules-compendiums-free.html

I see your point, however. but still, I dont know anyone with 30 bloodthirsters, or even 10. money and cost will balance AoS, if nothing else

Overtninja
04-07-2015, 13:06
Guys, having weaker models out on the field does the same thing it does in many rules sets - it presents a physical wall of dudes that prevent your opponent from getting to your other rules sets. Think about it like 40k a bit - sometimes it's good to have a bunch of weak dudes in front of the big scary thing to keep it from moving effectively towards the higher-profile targets in your army, allowing them to engage elsewhere.

A given scroll's footprint on the field is still going to matter - a cluster of goblins, spread out widely, is an effective wall. A pile of angry dogs can screen for your other guys who don't want to tango with your opponent's hydra. You can force your opponent to move certain ways with their army because they might not want to be surrounded by the pile-in from your empire footmen squad.

The battle reports I've seen haven't been large enough for this tactic to function - but I did see one with two large blocks of marauders, and their ability to not only be huge on the field but also literally envelop other things, even characters, and maul them with a crush of attacks is not inconsiderable.

There is a place for them on the field outside of fluff, it just doesn't immediately boil down to having the stats of a sherman tank.

edit - oh yeah, as for the 30 bloodthirsters thing - It would be damn near impossible for them to move effectively, and they'd get surrounded and piled into by like everything, and probably die from the combined weight of their army. You might not even be able to field them on the battlefield at all, they'd take up too much space!

Gork or Possibly Mork
04-07-2015, 13:06
In certain combinations they seem to be decent to pretty good and lets be realistic most people's collections are mostly weedy core. They can always be useful as meatshields, movement disruption and tarpits.

Also you don't just have to play the glorious victory conditions which is basically fighting till you table someone but if you play scenarios ( i believe there are 4 or so in the starter set and you can always create your own ) with alternate victory conditions and or limit the number of rounds so then their numbers will come into play with the synergy of rules & Hero combinations+Magic so it can buy you time to complete your objectives whatever they may be.

Azulthar
04-07-2015, 13:15
People seem to assume you can somehow field more weaker units than powerful units. "Weaker units can become quite powerful when massed!". Well so can Chaos Knights, and there's literally no reason at all you can't match that Goblin Horde with a Chaos Knight Horde model for model.


money and cost will balance AoS, if nothing else
This seems to be mostly the case. Pay to win :D

Gork or Possibly Mork
04-07-2015, 13:26
People seem to assume you can somehow field more weaker units than powerful units. "Weaker units can become quite powerful when massed!". Well so can Chaos Knights, and there's literally no reason at all you can't match that Goblin Horde with a Chaos Knight Horde model for model.


This seems to be mostly the case. Pay to win :D

Those models also have a bigger footprint and cost a ton more to field in the same numbers. Sounds much more horrible in hypothetical text but in reality it's not as big an issue as some people think it is.

Marauder Carl
04-07-2015, 13:29
If you are already giving up sudden death by chance, they could pad out your numbers for the percentages if you can prevent the sudden death. Just another problem if used creatively, or a liability, which is in character. If you would rather replace all your grots with Orrucks and play the meta optimal elite list- nothing preventing that. I didn't often see Gnoblars in OK lists in this area. In the future some comp system might award points for taking them as well, though I'd just leave them on the vine.

In a shift to bigger elite troops, some units will come in last place. Giving them a good niche to fill when they might be being phased out wouldn't make much more sense. Have you seen any rules for pikes? Could they have stuck a unit of RoR Pikemen into Empire simmilar to Ruglud's Armored Orcs entry in O&G? Sure. But if they are not coming back, why? So I take them as spearmen because I want to. Goblins are in this group now in a lot of ways.

Tichey
04-07-2015, 13:32
It seems to me that battles now will be up to the people involved to balance, if your opponent is happy to let you field a bloodthirster for every goblin then go for it. In practice however I expect the pre-game will now involve a little bit of bartering if people are going to want a balanced game. My group is intending to set up an arbiter system where a neutral third party judges what is and inst balanced.

infamousme
04-07-2015, 13:37
Those models also have a bigger footprint and cost a ton more to field in the same numbers. Sounds much more horrible in hypothetical text but in reality it's not as big an issue as some people think it is.


Cost as in money? Because points don't exist.

Shandor
04-07-2015, 13:40
The Reason to field Standard units it because you have them. Since it does not matter what you field they dont create a negative inpact on your Army. The Question is not: 50 Spears or something better. Its: %0 Spears AND something better the same Time.

Azulthar
04-07-2015, 13:47
It really does all come down to money then. You field them because you already have them, or because they're cheaper (money-wise) than the equivalent number of Chaos Chosen.


Maybe players should agree on a dollar/euro limit before the battle then. "Tonight we're playing $500,-. Damnit, I'm just a few dollars over!" :D

Noodle!
04-07-2015, 13:52
It seems to me that battles now will be up to the people involved to balance, if your opponent is happy to let you field a bloodthirster for every goblin then go for it. In practice however I expect the pre-game will now involve a little bit of bartering if people are going to want a balanced game. My group is intending to set up an arbiter system where a neutral third party judges what is and inst balanced.

Those are just examples to show how absurd the "rules" can be though. I really want balanced games but it's harder and more headache inducing than ever to have that now.

Haravikk
04-07-2015, 14:03
I think there's clearly going to be a need for house ruling in this, as things seem massively exploitable right now.

On the whole I actually really like the war scroll compendiums that I've read so far; in fact the Wood Elves scrolls seem far superior to their last book, particularly regarding the incredibly disappointing dryads they got, compared to that the new scrolls could actually be a lot of fun.

But I just don't see any balancing factors, particularly for special characters. I could place a Dwarf Thane as a single war scroll (and single model with regards to outnumbering), but my opponent could play Archaon or Be'lakor, and it's pretty clear which is the more powerful in that situation. Some things internally don't make much sense either, for example, Dwarf Bolt Throwers can now fire two shots per turn with a full crew, but so can cannons, so why would I ever take bolt throwers (at least Grudgethrowers ignore terrain)?

I thought maybe there'd be other balancing factors, like Bolt Throwers coming in pairs, or tougher characters having restrictions, but as far as I can see there isn't anything to stop me from fielding five Archaon's against an enemy infantry force, and getting all the underdog bonuses for being outnumbered.

The formation scrolls kind of balance things a little, since they require more sensible combinations, but they're not really powerful enough to make a difference against someone being a dick. I guess it should still be fine for casual games with the right players, but I really don't see how this is going to work for competitive gaming.


There is an upside to this however; it means that GW have finally realised that they suck badly at writing balanced rules, so they're just focusing on making things characterful and fluffy. But it's going to make it hard for tournaments who'll now have to assign categories and points to ever war-scroll so they can be balanced somehow.

flamingon
04-07-2015, 14:16
Why would I ever take Goblins instead of (Black) Orcs (other than fluff reasons)?

I don't get it. No point values, all about model count. Why would I field Goblins? Like, at all? They have no rules to make up for their weakness. :confused:

Have I missed something? Genuine question.

I think the most important part of Age of Sigmar is that in this game, you are not playing AGAINST an opponent, but rather you play WITH a fellow player. Think of both players as being a team, and the stronger army you got, the weaker your teammate will be. And in order to reach the goal (ie having a fun game) everyone in the team will have to be strong and function properly. If one part of the team is too weak, then no- one will reach the goal.

So, for the sake of the game, there are lots of reasons for you to pick goblins instead of black orcs.

this is not a game for competitive players where winning is key. Instead it is a game you play with fellow players, cheering equally for the fortunes and failures of both sides, and just having fun as you both create the story that is your game.

Vipoid
04-07-2015, 14:25
I think the most important part of Age of Sigmar is that in this game, you are not playing AGAINST an opponent, but rather you play WITH a fellow player.

That is just plain idiotic.

Gork or Possibly Mork
04-07-2015, 14:25
On the multiples of special characters thing i'd be surprised is anyone was that much of an ass hat and if they were they can have fun playing with themselves.

This applies to pretty much most of the stuff people are whining about. People on the internets seem to just look at how they can break the game instead of looking at how they can have fun with it and perhaps talk about how to address mechanics of the rules that are clunky.

If the people you're playing against are that much of a ****** to try to game the rules or lack of in-depth enough rules in cases why the hell would you even play against that person?

I'm not worried about balance at all it's called not being a ****** or playing against them. :p

Only thing that concerns me is the rules are so abstract & not in depth enough at this point. Some questions are unanswered about how to resolve some clunky circumstances. I'm more worried that this game loses steam before it ever gets off the ground. I think it has a lot of potential and would like it to grow and develop as a supported alternative to WHFB. I would hope they would have the sense to keep 8th around at least in a frozen capacity and not just drop it completely if this AOS is going to be the new development game.

HJFudge
04-07-2015, 15:13
I think the most important part of Age of Sigmar is that in this game, you are not playing AGAINST an opponent, but rather you play WITH a fellow player. Think of both players as being a team, and the stronger army you got, the weaker your teammate will be. And in order to reach the goal (ie having a fun game) everyone in the team will have to be strong and function properly. If one part of the team is too weak, then no- one will reach the goal.

So, for the sake of the game, there are lots of reasons for you to pick goblins instead of black orcs.

this is not a game for competitive players where winning is key. Instead it is a game you play with fellow players, cheering equally for the fortunes and failures of both sides, and just having fun as you both create the story that is your game.

Honestly I think thats the best description of the new ruleset Ive heard. Some people cant just get the whole idea of 'cooperative storytelling' into their head.

STILL they shouldve had some sort of structure for those of us who wanted it.

Ill play it. But when I want to compete? I'll houserule the **** out of it :P

Katastrophe
04-07-2015, 15:24
I think the most important part of Age of Sigmar is that in this game, you are not playing AGAINST an opponent, but rather you play WITH a fellow player. Think of both players as being a team, and the stronger army you got, the weaker your teammate will be. And in order to reach the goal (ie having a fun game) everyone in the team will have to be strong and function properly. If one part of the team is too weak, then no- one will reach the goal.

So, for the sake of the game, there are lots of reasons for you to pick goblins instead of black orcs.

this is not a game for competitive players where winning is key. Instead it is a game you play with fellow players, cheering equally for the fortunes and failures of both sides, and just having fun as you both create the story that is your game.

So this is an RPG with 2 GMs rather than a war game. That's not what I signed up for.

inquisitorsz
04-07-2015, 15:33
Honestly I think thats the best description of the new ruleset Ive heard. Some people cant just get the whole idea of 'cooperative storytelling' into their head.

STILL they shouldve had some sort of structure for those of us who wanted it.

Ill play it. But when I want to compete? I'll houserule the **** out of it :P

That sort of mentality is suited more to using your imagination or playing scenarios with set lists that tell a story. That's cool. Nothing wrong with that, but a normal "standard game" shouldn't be like that.
I can story tell all I like in a game of monopoly but it doesn't have to be in the rules. If you have rules, they need to be complete. If you don't have rules and let people do whatever they want (like AOS) then that's more of a hobby than a game. Which is also fine... except that nearly everyone wants a game.
I can still paint and collect models without any game at all... But we all come here because of a game.

flamingon
04-07-2015, 15:54
Honestly I think thats the best description of the new ruleset Ive heard.

that's probably one of the nicest thing's I've read today


So this is an RPG with 2 GMs rather than a war game. That's not what I signed up for.

yeah, I totally understand that. Nor is it truly the game for me, as I have collected and played warhammer for over 20 years.

But, times are changing, and well, our time have passed. Warhammer have been a game primarily for the competitive, really serious players for many editions now. it is about time we give others a chance too, with a funnier, far less rule-heavy game.

I know for sure this version of the game will be much better to play with my children than 8th could ever be. And well, it is their turn now to enjoy the game. We've had our run already.

Philhelm
04-07-2015, 16:42
Guys, having weaker models out on the field does the same thing it does in many rules sets - it presents a physical wall of dudes that prevent your opponent from getting to your other rules sets. Think about it like 40k a bit - sometimes it's good to have a bunch of weak dudes in front of the big scary thing to keep it from moving effectively towards the higher-profile targets in your army, allowing them to engage elsewhere.

A given scroll's footprint on the field is still going to matter - a cluster of goblins, spread out widely, is an effective wall. A pile of angry dogs can screen for your other guys who don't want to tango with your opponent's hydra. You can force your opponent to move certain ways with their army because they might not want to be surrounded by the pile-in from your empire footmen squad.

The battle reports I've seen haven't been large enough for this tactic to function - but I did see one with two large blocks of marauders, and their ability to not only be huge on the field but also literally envelop other things, even characters, and maul them with a crush of attacks is not inconsiderable.

There is a place for them on the field outside of fluff, it just doesn't immediately boil down to having the stats of a sherman tank.

edit - oh yeah, as for the 30 bloodthirsters thing - It would be damn near impossible for them to move effectively, and they'd get surrounded and piled into by like everything, and probably die from the combined weight of their army. You might not even be able to field them on the battlefield at all, they'd take up too much space!

With a points system, a player would be able to have a larger mass of Goblins as opposed to, say, Chaos Warriors. With Age of Sigmar, you can make a mass of soldiers from any unit, so from a purely game-winning standpoint you may as well place a unit of 100 Chaos Warriors and leave the Goblins at home (or place them too - no limits, after all).

Azulthar
04-07-2015, 18:21
I have no trouble with cooperative games. I love playing, say, Arkham Horror or Epidemic. I'm also a veteran tabletop roleplayer.


But that's not what I signed up for with Warhammer. Also, almost all cooperative games I know make you play together AGAINST the game (sometimes, but not always, represented by a GM). Not so in Age of Sigmar.