Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Thoughts of Sigmar

I really believed this.
So, Age of Sigmar is about to get a points system- an official one, where GW has playtested the rules and values associated as well as gotten input from, and changed things based on the input of, tournament organizers. I am thrilled.

Until now I have been trying the game out, and it is a pretty slick system. I've picked up some ideas, some tactics (it matters which models you use and how you deploy / move them). The PPC system seems pretty good. It too is community tested, and seems balanced enough. The games I have lost have been due to poor tactics on my part. I have discovered this by watching tactics articles online that show how to utilize things like the pile-in move to your advantage. I have read articles on which weapons work best on which model, and why (This concerns me a bit, but I see uses for all the kit Stormcast have). The game has some combos, and they all help out, but none are game breaking.

That said, I am worried.

My worry is, of course, about an "official" set of points. While I look forward to (and have ordered) a copy of the General's Handbook, I worry about things slipping through playtesting cracks. Rules don't get truly checked out until they're released "into the wild", where gamers hell-bent on breaking them look for any playtesting "oopsie" they can find, and pounce on it. Power gamers, and I feel I can call them out as I once was one, are going to sit down, grab a calculator, and crunch the numbers to come up with the best bang for the point. While no system is perfect (looking for that is a fool's errand, as I have mentioned before), some systems are better than others. Only a select few people have seen the actual system, so what do I know?

This is... a thing?
...Then a picture got leaked. Supposedly it is a picture of the new points system for Age of Sigmar. Looking at it, which you can do as well if you gaze to the right, there are some questions right off the bat. The "Min" and "Max" columns are pretty straightforward. You can take from (Min) to (Max) models in a unit. No surprise there.

Next you have the point costs themselves. The values seem a bit high for a per-model value. Word is games are still 2,000 point affairs, and High Elf archers are clocking in at a double-digit cost. What that is can't really be determined unfortunately. So, is this a "per grouping" cost? Say, for X points you get Y models?

Finally, the names of things. There are no "Lizardmen" (second purple header), there are "Seraphon". There are no "Elves", there are "Aelves". There are no "Ogres", there are "Ogors". Seems odd to me that GW would miss that. Then again, there are a bunch of legacy unit names there. Teclis, High Elf Archers, The Shadow King... This could be some of the point values for the old lists. The models not in the Grand Alliance books.

If only the picture weren't so blurry! That, however, is the way of hoax postings on the internet. Make something up, take a really bad picture of it, throw it to the drooling masses, and lulz as the masses go wild.

As you can most likely tell from my tone, I don't believe that the above image actually is legit. As a person that loves skepticism, I attempt to use it as often as possible in my life. I have chosen to deploy that tool here, so I shall go with my old mantra; "I'll believe it when I see it". When I'm holding the actual published book, am leafing through it, and find this chart, I will believe. Until then, it's just a blurry picture of...


Nothing other than that.

Blurry thing that doesn't exist plays AoS using blurry point values that are just as fake.

No comments:

Post a Comment