|
3.0 is out
Jun 21, 2021 14:01:41 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by newguy on Jun 21, 2021 14:01:41 GMT -5
It just seems to me that if they made it so once you are in combat the distance between models changed to 1 inch to at least one model it would be fine.
|
|
|
3.0 is out
Jun 21, 2021 14:25:47 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by dave on Jun 21, 2021 14:25:47 GMT -5
I think the issue there is if you wiped your target, or they moved, suddenly you're no longer in combat/coherency and will lose models.
Seems like they wante to eliminate daisy chaining, but with buffs being "wholly within" for the most part, that really isn't the effective strategy it was in the past.
I honestly think it would have been better if they just left that alone entirely
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jun 21, 2021 15:42:48 GMT -5
Y guess would be that no one locally will saw "you inadvertently are 2mm out of coherency those guys all die". If it's anything like how we all play 40k it's as long as someone isn't blatantly abusing the coherency rules it goes very much by intent
|
|
|
Post by dave on Jun 21, 2021 16:54:06 GMT -5
Well sure, I can't imagine anyone in a casual setting complaining about 2mm. I'm just not sure having different coherency rules for different phases of the game would make for fewer complications. I may be over thinking it though.
|
|
|
Post by lastcranston on Jun 21, 2021 18:27:59 GMT -5
The new rules are unfortunate for larger units for sure. It means people are going to have to start sawtoothing their units to get as close to full rank and file as possible rather than wrapping units like they could before. Makes me think unit trays were not such a bad idea after all
|
|
|
3.0 is out
Jun 21, 2021 19:46:59 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jun 21, 2021 19:46:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Typhus on Jun 21, 2021 21:04:27 GMT -5
Plastic Craic is a funny guy. What awful formations GW makes us march in, though.
|
|
|
Post by dave on Jun 21, 2021 21:27:20 GMT -5
Yeah, that was the article I was referring to when I mentioned coherency. It boils down to "we can mostly get around it, but it will slow down the game and look ugly to boot". I think that's the one major miss for me so far. In most other cases I remain cautiously optimistic. It doesn't need to be the best ruleset ever for me to have fun pushing my models around (in ugly formations)
|
|
|
Post by Typhus on Jun 21, 2021 23:23:50 GMT -5
I wish they had done away with melee ranges, and just let us use the largely-superior 40k Fight phase rules.
Alas. I will also have fun pushing my models around!
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jun 22, 2021 8:46:00 GMT -5
General's handbook run down: www.goonhammer.com/age-of-sigmar-generals-handbook-2021-matched-play-missions/This is super interesting... unlike the...ahem... chapter approved 2021 which changes little, this is a HUGE amount of content. a dozen missions, all themed... new rules for everyone to reflect the realm of ghur (I'm guessing each year will have a similarly themed realm which was super smart on GW's part). The third turn 2nd player removing an objective is pretty crazy and the first counter-priority rule that I've seen where I think "wow, not double turning sure has an advantage this round!"
|
|
|
Post by lastcranston on Jun 22, 2021 8:50:18 GMT -5
Yea the handbook seems solid. I'm curious to see what the update schedule looks like for battletomes though. If kruleboyz and sigmarines get their update right away how long will the rest of us be out in the cold
|
|
|
Post by Typhus on Jun 22, 2021 9:06:30 GMT -5
The Battle Tactics and Grand Strategies leave a lot to be desired... not sure what the point of the Grand Strategy is, if you can't pick one in response to your opponent's army. I think there are about 3 competitive choices - have a Battleline survive, have a Monster survive, have a Wizard surive. And it basically just depends if you're playing an army with Monster battleline (a la Sons of Behemat or Mawtribes) or Wizard battleline (a la Lumineth, or Tzeentch).
Missions look pretty interesting. Wish they would ditch the concept of "normal mission, only no reserves".
End of turn scoring, coupled with generously large objective range, seems to indicate to me that points will see-saw back and forth will little opportunity to do much about it. Even so, good to see them trying out concepts like the vanishing objective on battle round 3. You might even be encouraged to allow yourself to get double-turned, just to be able to delete a key objective.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Shrapnel on Jun 22, 2021 9:09:31 GMT -5
Now that production seems to be back online, I'd anticipate a flood... because all the actual planning is probably done for the next very many releases but production would have been stalled due to the zombie apocalypse... now that is under control I'd anticipate army books / codexes would be an easy money maker as the research / playtesting would be completed a long time ago. Considering they're already talking about three 40k codexes in the next couple months, and they're wanting 3.0 to be a success, I'd guess that we'd be looking at 3-4 battletomes for the rest of the year, which would be a really good start!
(anyone remember one to two army books a year? I sure do!)
And weren't the battle strategies etc. more tie-breakers? I thought I read that somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by lastcranston on Jun 22, 2021 9:14:32 GMT -5
All I know is I have sarus to collect dust with and my other army is barely contortions the battle Tome is has into 3.0 so hopefully by playing both sides of the order/chaos fence I can get a release on one side or the other. A major skaven release would certainly be nice but I won't hold my breath. This year's theme fits molder pretty well and all the rats smaller than a hellpit abomination could use new models
|
|
|
Post by Hi I'm Derek on Jun 22, 2021 12:47:08 GMT -5
I think there are about 3 competitive choices - have a Battleline survive, have a Monster survive, have a Wizard surive. And it basically just depends if you're playing an army with Monster battleline (a la Sons of Behemat or Mawtribes) or Wizard battleline (a la Lumineth, or Tzeentch). Missions look pretty interesting. Wish they would ditch the concept of "normal mission, only no reserves". Big agree about Grand Strategies and **shudders** Total Commitment. For reference in IJ to fail to get the battleline one you basically have to be tabled. It's ALL battleline. This seems to be true for a lot of armies from the midpoint of 2.0 on. End of turn scoring is a little annoying when combined with progressive because I like my slow armies that can't blitz across the field and grab anything anytime but I'm not that put off. 2.0 had its fair share of annoyances when it came to scoring and objectives so nbd. I like the concept of the games being framed specifically through the lens of the campaigns on one plane as it takes the center stage in the fluff. It's a cool idea connecting a season of play to the events in the universe. Surprised it took this long to see it, the pairing of matched play missions to the meta plot.
|
|