PDA

View Full Version : What Age of Sigmar does well



MLP
06-10-2015, 18:41
I've played a fair number of games of AoS since release and thought I'd share my thoughts on what AoS does well.

For clarity: I have played with two house rules, measuring from bases and no rolling for turns. Armies list have been made with the U.K. Independent Pool system ranging from 15 to 25 points(which is similar to 1500/2500 in old money).

What I think the game does well:

Monster wound charts(Also war machines crew charts). Something I've always felt missing from WFB, this is an amazingly cinematic way of portraying bringing a monster down. I had an epic battle with a unit of Men at Arms in a building holding off against a Kharibdyss and then a Brettonian Lord charges in to knock down some wounds allowing the Men at Arms to finish it off in it's weakened state.

Unique unit rules and synergies. Every different unit I have used feels different, unique and exciting. The ways certain armies interact between units and characters is actually quite well thought out and thematic. I particularly enjoyed a battle with many Slayers and the Slayer King inspiring them to fight harder with his command ability, all the while with a unit of old grumbler Longbeards behind ensuring they fight well.

Unrestricted armies. Some may not like this and at first I thought I wouldn't however with no restrictions on unit choice it allows some really characterful units that just weren't viable in WFB. Dwarf slayer armies, all vampire undead, monstrous hordes that aren't Throgg or ogre based, the list goes on. Alongside this, weaker troop based armies aren't unusable, I have had much fun and won some hard fought battles with my Night Goblin army. It also allows a good narrative scenario, not all fights in wars are equal(most aren't) small elite armies facing off against the hordes is always a good thematic battle no matter the outcome. This never worked so well in WFB as armies had to take some core units which were a waste for certain themed armies.

There are other things I think AoS does well, but I'll save that for a later post. Also I am not interested in what AoS doesn't do well as that is for another topic, I would like to hear your thoughts on what AoS does that you like compared to WFB and perhaps other similar games.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ToLongDidntRead
06-10-2015, 18:53
Not much of an AoS fan, but I do believe the game has some potential so here we go.

- New Khorne models and terrain look decent.

- Having played a few games, I have to say it does actually have abit more depth to it than it seems to on paper. It still needs a points system of some sorts though.

- Most of the artwork is leagues better than the tosh coming out of 40k atm.

Buddy Bear
06-10-2015, 19:04
- Free downloadable rules.

- I agree about the monster rules. I love giant monster riding models, but I always hated that they had separate stat lines and it was possible to kill one but the other could keep fighting (I was especially aggravated by the fact that the rider never had a foot version. How I wished the Emperor Karl Franz kit had a foot version of Karl Franz included, and so on). The combined stats for rider/monster is great, and I really like having the monster's abilities diminish as it takes more damage. That's a really characterful effect and far better than having a gigantic megabeast fighting at full strength when it's down from 10 Wounds to 1, but then abruptly dropping dead when it takes that last wound.

- Different generals providing different bonuses to their units. I like that the General of the Empire on Imperial Griffon provides more aggressive bonuses to his units while the Empire General is more defensive, and the bonuses he provides reflects that. They're kind of like Warlord Traits, but more useful and characterful instead of uselessly random.

smaxx
06-10-2015, 19:50
- I think it's really nice to have new rules for the existing WHFB units, and playing a skirmish game with the existing models is nice. I mean, I could use the exactly same models as proxies in some other game, but I like that in AoS the exact units and unique named characters are given new rules.

- I also agree on the monster rules :)

Holier Than Thou
06-10-2015, 20:50
The monster rules and combined profiles.

Avian
06-10-2015, 21:19
Keywords (though having the unit's own name as a keyword is pretty pointless)

Comrade Penguin
06-10-2015, 21:51
- Free rules that can used with existing collections

- Monsters getting weaker over time

- Magic is not over the top (other than summoning)

- games can be played with fewer miniatures than 8th, which makes it easier for beginners

Kahadras
06-10-2015, 22:37
Free rules - Try before you buy!

General improvments made to how monsters/ridden monsters work.

Simpler than WFB - Easier to teach, easier to learn so it's more attractive to newcomers.

akai
06-10-2015, 22:52
- 400+ pages worth of free rules

- no comp requirements allow people to field and buy what they want to play with.

- since there is no comp requirements. I have seen more varied matches. For example, on one table there was a battle that resembled previous Warhammer games of mostly troops with just a few terrain pieces; on another table there was a battle within a town of three bloodthirsters plus a few elite troops against 3 verminlords plus a few elite troops.

amysrevenge
06-10-2015, 23:05
Massive, cooperative, community-based force org rules. Because we have to. 2 months in and they are already starting to get really good, and are getting better all the time. So much better as an end-product than "send it out once and hope you got it right" that comes with rules-mandated force org.


Also, round/oval bases are better looking, especially for centerpiece models.

Leogun_91
06-10-2015, 23:19
It allows for quicker games and while I myself do not think it weights up for it's many flaws it is nonetheless an advantage. My main problem with it is that I can't get the tactical and/or thematic battles I could in 8th but it is actually an acceptable game to kill almost an hour with.

Getifa Ubazza
06-10-2015, 23:24
For me it has to be the rules. I have memory issues, so could never play WHFB, even though fantasy is my favourite setting. The rules were just too complicated. I get that that is one of the things other players loved about it, but for me it gave the game an air of elitism which always put me off even attempting to learn it. With that being said, I still built myself an Ogre army. Never used it in a game, but still.

Another thing I love is the setting itself. Multiple armies fighting over multiple realms, all with their own uniqueness and themes. Cool.

The low model count you can play at also appeals. I can get a box of something and a hero or two and play. If I like it, I can expand it, if not I can try something else. I can even combine some of my rejected army ideas into a single army, as there is nothing stopping me from doing that. Well as long as it makes sense thematically.

Khaines Wrath
07-10-2015, 00:01
- Free rules

- I love the huge amount of freedom in terms of army building.

- I actually really like skirmish tabletop games, I would have preferred they kept ranked combat but skirmish is nice too.

Frobozz of the Nine
07-10-2015, 00:22
Lots of things!

1) smaller model count required to play
2) freedom to mix forces
3) warscrolls are interesting and varied unit to unit
4) lots of interesting special rules with tactical considerations
5) mixture of skirmish and ranked unit aspects
6) many possibilities for unit formations since models move and fight as a unit
7) engagement rules in combat actually make sense now
8) round bases

One example of #4 is Tomb Kings Skeletal Horse Archers being able to swap movement and shooting phases which creates some interesting possibilities.

Malagor
07-10-2015, 00:32
I will echo what others have said.
1. Free rules, if I had to pay for a expensive book for these piece of crap rules, I would be even more furious about it all.
2. Monster rule. It's a good idea actually, great idea even. Probably an intern that snuck that rule in while Jervis wasn't looking.

Smooth Boy
07-10-2015, 00:44
Combined profiles have already been mentioned but I also like that every model fights, I always wondered what WHFB without the abstraction would be like. Skirmish games, if done right, can be more involving in that every model is an actor.

big squig
07-10-2015, 01:18
Two of those three points I would count as a negative

Geep
07-10-2015, 01:40
I do like that the wounded monsters become weaker. I think it needs to go further though, in every GW game. Multiwound monsters, characters, beasts- whatever- should have the potential to lose eyes, limbs, etc. during the game (something like the 40k vehicle damage chart).

Shandor
07-10-2015, 02:20
Unrestricted armies. Some may not like this and at first I thought I wouldn't however with no restrictions on unit choice it allows some really characterful units that just weren't viable in WFB. Dwarf slayer armies, all vampire undead, monstrous hordes that aren't Throgg or ogre based, the list goes on. Alongside this, weaker troop based armies aren't unusable, I have had much fun and won some hard fought battles with my Night Goblin army. It also allows a good narrative scenario, not all fights in wars are equal(most aren't) small elite armies facing off against the hordes is always a good thematic battle no matter the outcome. This never worked so well in WFB as armies had to take some core units which were a waste for certain themed armies.

There are other things I think AoS does well, but I'll save that for a later post. Also I am not interested in what AoS doesn't do well as that is for another topic, I would like to hear your thoughts on what AoS does that you like compared to WFB and perhaps other similar games.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But it also opens the door for Undead Highelf Army supported by Goblins and Chaos Warrios with Steam Tanks..

But i have the say the Shared Profile is a good thing.. i wanted that for years. I always hated the fact that my General on Dragon need to avoid big Core Troops because the Troos just attack the soft-easy Dragon Targed wile the General on his back is nearly untouchable for them.

Yamabushi
07-10-2015, 03:54
It introduced me to other games, WHFB can't do that well enough.


OK, but on topic:

- Free rules
- Combined profiles
- No more laser guided cannons
- Monsters degrading as damage stacks up
- The concept of Command bonus from the characters

ShruikhanTK
07-10-2015, 06:45
You know what else was a good game? War of the Ring....lol

I did like the combined wound profiles but I'm not too sure about the combined attacking profiles it just kinda...makes the whole dynamic feel like mush. I like my carnosaur extra bitey and extra clumsy.

Spiney Norman
07-10-2015, 07:47
One of the biggest strengths of AoS is a greater variety of narrative scenarios than either warhammer or 40k rather than the traditional method of randomly rolling for one of six scenarios that are largely the same in any case.

I also like that my army size is not dictated by a standard points match, it means I don't have to buy a lot of stuff all in one go and spend the next year and a half playing with grey plastic because I'm desperately trying to catch up on my purchases with my (fairly slow) painting speed, it's much easier to increase the size of your games slowly as you paint mores stuff.

I like that there is nothing in the game that costs too many points for what it does and as a result gets passed over all the time.

Like others have said, keywords, monster profiles that change with damage taken are really good innovations too

Dosiere
07-10-2015, 08:08
to be honest I haven't played AoS in weeks and have no plans to play it ever again, which sucks because it is the new warahmmer and at times I appreciated some of its design.

1) The system of having a small core ruleset and putting all of the special rules into the war scrolls themselves is a good idea. It means it's easier to track what's going on and there is no rulebook page flipping.

2) if someone could figure out how to keep the freedom of the original force selection with some kind of balancing system it might even start to be a good game. I loved being able to take whatever I wanted, but detested the way most games played out because it's just silly not being able to easily balance two forces out. When I played mirror matches, the game was much more engaging. Most comp systems do a pretty good job of adding balance, but also severely restrict not just numbers but also what type of units you can take.

3) I like how battleshock works. it feels much better than the all or nothing of WFb and especially 40k.

4) oddly, I like Magic and the spells so far, It's there and it's a thing, but it's not what the game is about, which is good. Except for Nagash, and summoning in general. Your typical wizard/necromancer though is pretty low key though.

ToLongDidntRead
07-10-2015, 13:59
You know what else was a good game? War of the Ring....lol



Is it wrong that I dream of a fantasy rules revamp based off the two LoTR games over a re-release of 8th ed? :p

Two of the best games GW have released without a doubt.

Davidian
07-10-2015, 16:37
I like the character unit buffs and command abilities. It made your general feel more like a leader than a high stat beatstick.

The monster rules for deteriorating power along with combined stats for riders is the best thing about the whole game imo.

rmeister0
07-10-2015, 19:17
Is it wrong that I dream of a fantasy rules revamp based off the two LoTR games over a re-release of 8th ed?

Nope.

That was what I was hoping AoS was going to be.

But of course, GW didn't go there because it was something I would have wanted.

Mawduce
08-10-2015, 08:04
1. Rules are free so you can get a good look at what you're getting before you pick it up. You can even proxy models to try them out before hand to see if they fit your desired play style or meta.

2. They way monsters are handled as the battle goes on is very good and thought out.

3. Despite the price in real world dollars being very high you don't need many to start out. One box can get a game going if need be, but I imagine that isn't common.

4. I feel it's less restricting in terms of how units move about the board. WHFB had this sense that I was looking at a table and two officers were moving pieces about that could have just as well been 2d squares with symbols on them while a real battle was going on outside, not on the table.

Don't get me wrong, I feel there is a lot wrong with it but I'll give the devil his due.

Vladyhell
08-10-2015, 15:27
retreat is an amazing mechanic

sephiroth87
08-10-2015, 16:27
I like the character unit buffs and command abilities. It made your general feel more like a leader than a high stat beatstick.

The monster rules for deteriorating power along with combined stats for riders is the best thing about the whole game imo.
I second that. They needed a reason to compete with mages and needed to do stuff that's thematic to their role.

I read this stuff and think about how good this game could have been. [emoji53]


Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

MLP
08-10-2015, 20:59
Lots of good mentions here. Retreat is a great one I haven't really had a chance to use much in game but I can imagine some shenanigans with certain armies.

I agree with battleshock also, it does seem more realistic than the old method.

Great to see a relatively positive attitude and that there's others around who see good in the game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

EmperorNorton
08-10-2015, 21:19
Was "gold spray paint" already mentioned?

Sephillion
08-10-2015, 21:29
Despite my reservations…



Free rules. Duh.
I think it’s a good thing that GW tried something else and moved away from the system to try new things. I just don’t happen to like the result, but I am not against the principle.
Simplified rules and army openness. I’m not against those things, again, it’s more the result than the principle.
Unique rules for units.

Spiney Norman
08-10-2015, 23:25
Was "gold spray paint" already mentioned?

Well we made it half way down page two before the first troll I guess...

Katastrophe
08-10-2015, 23:35
Well we made it half way down page two before the first troll I guess...

I believe he was making light of what GW claimed was great about AoS. Not sure that's trolling.

explorator
09-10-2015, 02:02
Ability to play mega battles in a few hours. We have had games with 3 or 4 players per side and it was awesome.

Red Skullz
09-10-2015, 07:42
The dry wit of EmperorNorton is legend. You're never quite sure if he's joking or serious :)

I think a lot of the good stuff that we all can agree upon has been covered so instead of repeating that I'll add one of my favorites.

I like that I can layer the complexity as I see fit. What I mean about that is that you have the basic rules and warscrolls as the ground layer. Adding a battle plan is the second level (and you have at least 16 to choose from so far) and per now you have 5 different time of war rules that form the third layer that alter all kinds of things and give a new depth to the rules. Note that it's only 3 realms out yet but the 5 ToW rules cover various areas within the realms or are just add-on rules. I'd go as far as call it advanced rules to use a term coined by the specialist games.

My hope is that well see more of these layers so one can mix and choose as one see fit.

Ronin[XiC]
09-10-2015, 09:45
#1 Free rules
Not an argment. Lots of stuff is free and people still don't get it. Rules which are bad are do not become worth it just because they're free. And in fact, they aren't really free. All those OVERPRIZED "scenario" books are neccessary for scenaries is what people think AoS needs and "does best"

Drasanil
09-10-2015, 11:42
The free rules, well the "free" part any ways, the "rules" part is pretty lacklustre. Apart for that the command bonuses and the merged-degrading statlines for monsters are much needed improvements in principle but let down by the package that is the game itself.

Sephillion
09-10-2015, 15:01
Well we made it half way down page two before the first troll I guess...

Who killed your sense of humor? It’s from GW themselves anyway, how’s that trolling? :rolleyes:

Tokamak
09-10-2015, 15:07
I love the terrain and... well I love the terrain.

Geep
09-10-2015, 15:57
I think the merged monster/rider statlines work for the AoS system (thanks to the weird 'attacks' table) and are great for that game, but I'm glad they weren't common in Fantasy. How would that work? Karl Franz and the Griffon would have the one statline so that Karl Franz would strike with the Griffon's strength and the Griffon would benefit from wielding Ghal Maraz?

I do find it funny though that the skirmish-sized game is the more abstract one regarding those rules.

HelloKitty
09-10-2015, 18:43
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiG1fUObVN0

Tyler does a good job in this video explaining things that I largely agree with.

Okuto
10-10-2015, 03:51
-free rules, regardless of what I think of them, it is appreciated

-no restrictions, finally was allowed to field that empire/dwarf/elf army or that "seven samurai" hero army I always dreamed of without asking

-missed warbands/mordheim so liked the smaller scale at first glance

-got to see old friends come out and play, while brief it was good to see them on the tabletop, got to learn AoS in good company

-monster rules, already been said

-toned down magic, detested 8th's magic system so was welcome

Yeah feels about it

Frobozz of the Nine
10-10-2015, 22:13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiG1fUObVN0

Tyler does a good job in this video explaining things that I largely agree with.

Great video!

UndeadKing
11-10-2015, 09:19
Monsters getting weaker the more damage they take.
Game is easier to follow.
Round bases look cool.
Cool synergies.
New models look great, even stormcast have some cracking models.
Its a cheaper buy in than fantasy as I don't need hundreds of the same box for a single unit and it also means I can easily afford two or three different armies and more.
Rules are free. Big books add extra rules at cost or on app but its extra layers.
The app is quite good
Game doesn't take HOURS.
The aos community yes there is one is rather a friendly bunch and full of fun ideas and cool inspiration.

There is more but its early and Sunday

Lissė-Prime
11-10-2015, 09:44
It introduced me back to Warhammer after ditched it since 8th
The thing that invited me (and quite a few friends) back:


Free Warscrolls with unique ability per Warscroll.
No longer have to remember 'Special Rules'.
Lower barrier of entry for new players.
Tons of synergy with Battalions and Battleplans
20+ Battleplans and 6 Times of War rules so far, plus 1 Multiplayer Battleplan makes the battles vary.
No points, model, unit limit whatsoever. Now I can see 2,000+ rats on board, which was only in dream in WFB. This lower the time needed to prepare army since you do not need calculation to prepare Army List. In fact Army List is obsolete altogether, which is good if you just finished work at 9PM and call some friends out to have a quick battle.
Being no Army List means you can buy or build any model you want. In WFB I wanted to buy 3-4 Dragons but never bought because I'm likely to not ever see them in action so I built other 'useful' units instead. Now I'm not worry about putting 10 dragons and still can win.


The things to hate though:

Hit and Wound roll are quite boring, no interaction
Measurement from model makes creativity a problem (build a luxury high base and you'll be subjected to every missiles in the battlefield)