Age of Sigmar Azyr Composition Rules 1.0b

[Dknight]

Hello Auticus.

I'm not sure on why the goblin warboss costs 1 and the night goblin warboss costs 3. Can you check it, please?

Thanks in advance

[Ray Rivers]

So based on your calculations, the AoS Starter Box set includes:

* Stormcast Eternals:

- Lord Celestant on Dracoth - 5
- Lord Relictor - 3
- Three Retributors - 3
- Two units of five Liberators - 4
- Three Prosecutors - 2

Total of 17 points

* Khorne Bloodbound:

- One Lord of Khorne - 4
- One Bloodsecrator - 3
- One Bloodstoker - 1
- One Khorgorath - 3
- Five Blood Warriors - 2
- Two units of ten Bloodreavers - 4

Total of 17 points

Is that correct?

[Auticus]

Hello Auticus.

I'm not sure on why the goblin warboss costs 1 and the night goblin warboss costs 3. Can you check it, please?

Thanks in advance

Goblin bosses were on the upper end of Tier 1 (1 pt). Night Goblin bosses were in tier 2 (2 pts) and then through playtesting their command ability gave them a boost which was enough to push them to the lower part of tier 3 (3 pts). When Azyr was just the 1-5 version , they were both 1 pt a piece.

- - - Updated - - -

So based on your calculations, the AoS Starter Box set includes:

* Stormcast Eternals:

- Lord Celestant on Dracoth - 5
- Lord Relictor - 3
- Three Retributors - 3
- Two units of five Liberators - 4
- Three Prosecutors - 2

Total of 17 points

* Khorne Bloodbound:

- One Lord of Khorne - 4
- One Bloodsecrator - 3
- One Bloodstoker - 1
- One Khorgorath - 3
- Five Blood Warriors - 2
- Two units of ten Bloodreavers - 4

Total of 17 points

Is that correct?

IF thats what the points come out to be then yes thats correct.

[Ray Rivers]

IF thats what the points come out to be then yes thats correct.

My only real uncertainty were the Bloodreavers which were set at 1 for 5.

I interpreted that as one unit of 5 is 1 point. One unit of 10 is 2 points. And one unit of 20 is 4 points.

Sorry, I'm new to this fantasy universe...

[Mr Mystery]

Hey dude.

I've not read through the whole thing, but I've got a question about how you factor in Battleshock when applying 'points multipliers' to those units that get benefits for large units (for instance, Empire State Troops, who get rock hard at 40 strong).

I was thinking about this, and realised that large units in themselves can be a bit of a liability when it comes to Battleshock.

Consider two units of twenty State Troops. After a solid kicking, the most I can get shot of with a single unit is 20, provided of course I'm tackling them one at a time, and my opponent has kindly chosen not to bundle me.

But, a unit of 40? Well they are absolutely a serious threat. 2+ to hit and 2+ to wound hurts, no matter who you are. But, something akin to Ironguts, Ogres or any unit which does multiple wounds can do solid damage to them - more than enough for a proper 'brown trousers' Battleshock test. If I'm able to wangle striking the first round of attacks, it's not unlikely I'll soon be eating into his numbers and his perks. Then, at the end of the combat round (and whether or not my unit is still on the board), Battleshock can see even more head for the hills.

So how do you factor that sort of thing in?

[Auticus]

Hey dude.

I've not read through the whole thing, but I've got a question about how you factor in Battleshock when applying 'points multipliers' to those units that get benefits for large units (for instance, Empire State Troops, who get rock hard at 40 strong).

I was thinking about this, and realised that large units in themselves can be a bit of a liability when it comes to Battleshock.

Consider two units of twenty State Troops. After a solid kicking, the most I can get shot of with a single unit is 20, provided of course I'm tackling them one at a time, and my opponent has kindly chosen not to bundle me.

But, a unit of 40? Well they are absolutely a serious threat. 2+ to hit and 2+ to wound hurts, no matter who you are. But, something akin to Ironguts, Ogres or any unit which does multiple wounds can do solid damage to them - more than enough for a proper 'brown trousers' Battleshock test. If I'm able to wangle striking the first round of attacks, it's not unlikely I'll soon be eating into his numbers and his perks. Then, at the end of the combat round (and whether or not my unit is still on the board), Battleshock can see even more head for the hills.

So how do you factor that sort of thing in?

Its not really. The points come off of the statline and how much average damage the model will do against a 4+ save model with extra modifiers such as if it flies, if it is a wizard, how many spells it can cast, and any other misc modifiers that really make a large impact such as an ability that gives a universal 4++ save or something to units for example)

Units that get bonuses the bigger they are tend to have their points buffed up a little bit, and then playtesting is taken into play.

There are so many modifiers and ancillary scenarios that coming up with everything is basically impossible.

That doesn't mean the system is perfect, because its not, but in general it has given some pretty good results for campaign play - which was its intention. Any obvious flaws or holes I fix immediately.

- - - Updated - - -

My only real uncertainty were the Bloodreavers which were set at 1 for 5.

I interpreted that as one unit of 5 is 1 point. One unit of 10 is 2 points. And one unit of 20 is 4 points.

Sorry, I'm new to this fantasy universe...

You are correct in how you are using the formula

[Dknight]

Hello

We have tested the game throughly today. We have played 4 games:
* Orcs vs Chaos (Nurgle) Orc victory
* Night Goblins vs Chaos (Tzeentch Barbarians) Night Goblin Victory
* High elves vs Demons (Nurgle) Demon Victory
* High elves vs Chaos (Tzeentch) High Elf victory

The games have been quite fine and fun, but here are few things we found odd:
* Cave Squigs were extremely effective on both games with greenskins. Even when they have such a low bravery and the random move, they seem quite a blast for 1 point
* The night goblin warboss was a bit pricey as i expected, compared with the common goblin warboss, the warboss on squig or Skarnik. Even when his command skill is quite good, 3 points seems a bit too much (oevr the orc warboss, for example)
* I seriously loved the spider raiders. The managed to stop the chaos knights to do anything for the whole game
* The Doom Diver was a bit disappointing as it's capacity to cause damage isn't really big
* Fanatics are a bit crazy in the new system but they are quite useful when you understand how to use them
* I imagine that mounted characters don't justify an extra point, but i would like something like that, to appear. I want to field unmounted and mounted chars and pay the same sounds a bit weird
* What do you think about adding a limitation to night goblin netters? (1 per every 5, for example). They appeared to be quite good

That's all for today! Thank you for everything!

[Auticus]

Mounted characters often do not warrant a price increase unless the mount is like a monster or something. The extra couple attacks never really push them into the next tier.

I will add the night goblin warboss to the list of things to look at. I have looked at it and the score was correct to price it, so it will need more testing. Point changes are not supposed to happen again until after our campaign near November to keep the document stable and allow playtesting to use the same standard.

I will also add cave squigs to look at.

The suggestion for netters is also already being considered, it is on our list

[Auticus]

Mournfang cavalry were bugged. Should be 2 pts for 1 model not 1 pt for 1 model.

[Auticus]

Updated with new celestials tonight. State troops fixed to be 1 pt for 5 as they have same ability as zombies do. WLC upped to 3 pts. Follow @Auticus on twitter for updates.