Match Play: Hopes and Dreams

[Mr Mystery]

I reckon the points thing will put a cap of some kind on summoning.

As it stands, it's horrific to face if your army can't summon - the fact that even Nagash can be dropped by standard troops (especially at range if you've got a bit of Rend) doesn't help too much, as with just a couple of turns (and droppable as he is, it ain't gonna be quick!) he can completely change the game you're currently playing.

Archaon is another BIG NASTY....but just like Nagash, he's far from unkillable - trick is to just keep hitting him - and he's actually fairly susceptible to Mortal Wounds, as he only saves those on a 5+. Nasty, for sure. But when I can statisically knock 12 of his 20 wounds off with Thundertusks in a single shooting phase, you realise that another adjustment to the long term Warhammer mindset is due.

But that's all part of why I've taken to AoS - it's a very different game to Warhammer, and presents lots of new challenges to get really good at it As I mentioned earlier, something I'm still to get my head round in terms of tactical opportunity is the freedom to retreat from combats. Yes it limits the retreating unit for your next turn, but done at the right time, as part of a plan, you could do wonders with it (effectively switching units that are in combat). Just needs more finesse to really capitalise on it than I currently possess. Fair chunk of my current bafflement was an original mis-reading of the rule. I read it as you could only retreat up to 3", when it's actually just a normal move. Clearly this is good for Cavalry, as not only can they all get up to 'feigned flight' shenanigans, but they have the movement value to properly get out of the way.

Though I'd give an example of a unit which could give Nagash or Archaon pause for thought...

The humble Empire Handgunners. Unit of 30, that hasn't moved. 3+, 3+, Rend -1. 20 hits, 14 wounds ( I always round up. Habit!), 7 wounds on either. That's quite a difference to the potential damage they can do in Warhammer. And another good reason for me to do a thread highlighting changes etc.

[Erik Setzer]

Of course, the trick then is to hold Nagash out of their range as long as possible, and drop a bunch of units around them, to harass and/or kill them.

Nagash is probably a terrible example, because of that ability to throw out another six units on the table each turn. (The only saving grace for my opponents was that, since I had all my Undead on the table, I couldn't summon more. Still, that was a massive wall of dead guys marching forward.)

For as much as there's differences, there are still some similarities, but I think that's mainly down to them being miniatures games, and all miniatures games will tend to share some characteristics.

[odinsgrandson]

I can't say I can object to those who criticised the game for not having an army structure in place - it was very unusual, and, outside of set scenario Historical play, completely unique to the best of my knowledge.

But to explain the Hate Mob I was referring to (those who will always criticise anything GW does, because that's what they seem to live for) can be reference by reading [url=http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/aug/31/terry-pratchett-is-not-a-literary-genius]this article, which was an ignorant and utterly unwarranted attack on not only my favourite author, but an internationally respected author whose passing prior to the article, left him unable to respond[/url]. The literary bigot responsible then tried to make amends, [url=http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/sep/11/jonathan-jones-ive-read-terry-pratchett-now-its-more-entertainment-than-art]by reading just one of Sir Terry's 46 (count 'em) Discworld novels[/url]. Feint praise, but ultimately still snide.

Worse, he didn't read one of the later ones, when for my money Sir Terry really hit his stride (Sam Vimes is probably my favourite character). And having not read more than one, he's completely missed the compelling, ever changing world Sir Terry created - events from one book affect the rest in the series. He's also missed possibly the greatest part of Sir Terry's writing - you can read the books in any order - they're not direct sequels, just continuations of the Discworld background. Yes you get more out of reading them in the correct order, but it's by no means a requirement.

It's the same with the Hate Mob - never played it, don't intend to play it, but they knew before even look at the rules it was terribad.

Interesting arguments.

The article on Pratchett comes from the ivory tower the moderns gave us (writers of the past, from Beowulf to Shakespear to Charles Dickens were writing for the largest audience they could muster, while the Moderns decided that it was a bad thing if your work doesn't discourage readers who aren't literature professors). He's hating on Pratchett out of habit of dismissing anything with qualities that are not in line with what literary professors have learned to value in books (that people don't read). Said he: "The prose is average." As if that's what people read Pratchett for.

And there are people who are predisposed against Games Workshop for the sake of it. I do think that some of the voices against AoS go in that direction. I think that some of them are reasonable folks who have a point- without a balancing system, the game rules really are kind of unfinished.

But the whole thing does play into the GW hater's world view.

GW hater says "GW makes games that aren't balanced, and don't listen to our community. Also, rage!"
GW says "Real players need no balance. We're removing balance from our games."
GW hater says "See how they do the opposite from what we ask for?"

And the worst part was that GW actually made some statements about how the guys who criticize them aren't their audience.


As for the DBAD paradox, I've certainly seen it happen. Both in person and in forum threads, I've seen questions of "How would you guys deal with X (broken?) tactic." And the response from a lot of people has been, "I make passive aggressive remarks congratulating my opponent on his "win" as I pack up my army without playing."

That's a d*ck way of enforcing DBAD.