AoS GHB 2020 Predictions & Desires

[Erta Wanderer]

I think coalesced is stronger than people give it credit for, but I do agree that the terrain and the bravery allegiance ability are poorly thought through. I think they are just a small tweak away from being good (only negative debuffs and impacting all terrain).

i agree but they do lag quite a bit

I mentioned this a little in the above post, but I think there was a little reluctance to give us a powerful lore and bound endless spells. Bound spells are just absurdly strong. I do think they could have spent more time on the lore, I think it suffered from how long our book sat in playtesting. At the time of it being written, it wouldn't have stood out nearly as badly, but when it's dropped right between tzeentch and Lumineth it looks pretty sad by comparison. I would argue that a vast, vast majority of the spells in AoS are pretty useless. Maybe the Lumineth lore is a sign of things to come /shrug

mmm yeees but it means we have no options out side of endless spells

I agree and disagree. I think carnosaurs are very strong. Trogs are okay for their one trick. Bastiladons are strong. Stegadons could use some love.

casrasaurs CAN be strong if you sacrafice the rest of your army to do so and any competent general will drop them before they do any thing and bastiladons are just bad in the MW heavy world we have to day

If i had to say, my complaint with the dinosaurs is they are all kind of the same. The whole army is actually. Everything is more in that "glass cannon" space than anything. Not a whole lot of diversity, but i'll get into that below...


This is where i think design philosophy comes in a bit. It feels like this book was written with a specific idea of seraphon in mind. Every unit seems to be build around this ability to do a ton of damage, but can't take a punch at all. The monsters, the units, the heroes, it's all the same. With that in mind, I think that's the reason we didn't get an anvil unit. Our army isn't intended to have an anvil, because we've been designed (and hopefully balanced) around being able to do a level of damage that doesn't need one.

then it's a shame that we don't do all that much damage compared to good armies. even salamanders pail in comparison to the scary stuff out there. also this is going to conflict with something you say latter

Whether you agree with that or not is something else, but I don't mind that all armies don't get everything. I like that seraphon feel fundamentally different than an army like fyreslayers or something.

we don't have to be FS but it's just one less tool in out arsenal limiting out options

Hm. Can't say I agree here. I don't think seraphon have a boring playstyle, and I think it's far more nuanced than you're giving it credit for.

your earlier statment quote "my complaint with the dinosaurs is they are all kind of the same. The whole army is actually. Everything is more in that "glass cannon" space than anything. Not a whole lot of diversity," affirms what i said not a lot of nuance when every thing is a glass cannon espeshaly such a dearth of other tools to use

Again, not sure i totally agree. A vast majority of the units in this book are usable at a casual level.

i am not a casual player

A decent amount are usable at the competitive level. In terms of flexibility, we're actually doing pretty alright compared to other books. Ark and eternity warden are not good, i'll give you that. Ark really wasn't ever good tho, so not sure what you mean by it getting hit too hard. I think skinks are in a great spot, but i was sad to see wary fighter go. Like i mentioned above, it feels like they tried to make up for it by just cranking the damage up to 11.

the ark used to be situationaly very good but most of the time meh they droped a bad units damage by more then 60% that is what i ment by hitting it to hard. and our damage is more like a 8 then a 11

They've largely moved away from activation wars, for better or worse. I think not having run and charge (or some ability to move with speed) is problematic for Warriors for sure. I think being able to dictate the flow of the game with a good one drop could have helped with this.

i am glad that the activation wars are ending but it still hurts those that got left out.

all in all, i'll say thank you for responding at length! I do think that ultimately the opinion that shapes my beliefs is you gotta take the good with the bad. Every book has compromises, and so far i'm pretty happy with the compromises made here. I can see how those compromises might not be as palatable for everyone, but I do think that conversation should be had in the context of a book that's VERY VERY strong. It's important to understand that this is a good book, and if we want to complain about its faults, we should do so knowing there would be a cost to adjusting those faults. Giving this book everything you've outlined would create an extremely problematic battletome (moreso than it already is).

oh we don't need all of it but lacing any of it is what hurts so bad and what will keep us from being good on a competitive lvl. i don't want to be a tub thumper able to soundly beat people who don;t want to play i want to have the tools to fight on the big stage.

I think you can always say "a list made up of b-tier units is going to perform 3/4's as well as a list made up of a-tier units." That's true across every book in the game. However, i also think that people have taken the Kroak/salamander meta to an absurd place. There are plenty of other viable builds in the list, and there are even other viable builds if your intention is to be as competitive as possible (which is far from most peoples intention).

and i think that almost every thing we have is B teir units Kroak/salamanders are far to comon but thats becouse they are the only A teir stuff we have.

I think Kroak and salamanders strength have made us blind to the rest of the book, when there's some really cool stuff in there. Thunderquake is still extremely viable, as is Saurus Knight spam. If we're talking about more casual situations, you can run almost anything.

again im not a casual player the problems i have are not universal and many people will have fun with this book and thats ok. i just wish the army i love so much could work for me...

 

[Putzfrau]

I think you will find that my intention is to be as competitive as possible...with Kroxigors.

And also other things too. I want to use Terradons to good effect, and Saurus (all of them, anything that's Saurus keyword). And..I like Salamanders. And Bastiladons. I like everything.

Love the positivity

In terms of kroxigors, i think a unit of 6 fits beautifully into a fangs of sotek list and can be a strong component in a very competitive setting. I do wish you didn't need to babysit them with a skink hero so closely (maybe thats a good GHB wish hah!), but the amount of damage they can do is truly incredibly. And an 8 inch move isn't exactly super common from a melee unit. Hold them behind your skink line for a counter charge, or give them fly from a slann and a 3d6 charge and absolutely launch them from a safe location into a unit your opponent thought was safe.

As always, "being competitive" usually comes down to just getting in a ton of reps and understanding the nuances of your army and how it works agains tother armies. I'd find a list your comfortable with and just play more games than you know what to do with. Make subtle tweaks only after several games against different opponents, and slowly craft something that works for you.

 

[Putzfrau]

again im not a casual player the problems i have are not universal and many people will have fun with this book and thats ok. i just wish the army i love so much could work for me...

Again, totally appreciate the responses! I'm going to just jump right to this point because I think most other things are actually wrapped up in this one point.

Unfortunately, I think this is just the trappings of a competitive player. There aren't a whole lot of books out there that have a lot of diversified "top tier" lists. Even tzeentch and OBR, unquestionably 2 strong books, are pretty mono build.

Trust me, as a saurus lover and also a competitive player I totally get where you are coming from but I think it's largely a different (and march larger) argument about competitive play in general. Competitive play is just so, so restrictive it reduces options to the bare minimum by it's very nature. Even if a book had a ton of options, people would eventually figure out the "best" build and it would be mono build until the meta forced something different.

i'll make one more comment about the nuanced aspect of their playstyle. Seraphon may have a singular design philosophy, but that doesn't mean their playstyle is singular. For example, a fangs of sotek army plays much differently than a DT army by the sheer existence of their two primary abilities (dropping down and the overwatch command trait). Those drastically change the decisions you make on the battlefield, even if the look of both lists is incredibly similar.

With that in mind, I would still strongly argue that seraphon do not suffer from a singular playstyle, unless you are being very general in what you are describing as playstyle.

Dont' wanna spam anymore than i already have, but just wanted to say i hugely appreciate the responses and i'm sorry for being such a stormcloud the past week or so. Between this thread and the lumineth conversation on the New thread, i've realized i've been just as negative but about the community and that's not right. I'll be better!

 

[ILKAIN]

I think coalesced is stronger than people give it credit for, but I do agree that the terrain and the bravery allegiance ability are poorly thought through. I think they are just a small tweak away from being good (only negative debuffs and impacting all terrain)..

this is exactly what I said in my post under expectations for GHB2020.... if the bravery protection only prevented negative modifiers and if the terrain mastery didn't restrict to specific types it would be a lot better, and we wouldn't even have to mess with the scaly skin which is contentious enough with it either breaking opponents armies damage or being useless depending on if they are big hitters or not. (too swingy imo but id take it I they would give us the other fixes)

 

[Krissey]

Love the positivity

In terms of kroxigors, i think a unit of 6 fits beautifully into a fangs of sotek list and can be a strong component in a very competitive setting. I do wish you didn't need to babysit them with a skink hero so closely (maybe thats a good GHB wish hah!), but the amount of damage they can do is truly incredibly. And an 8 inch move isn't exactly super common from a melee unit. Hold them behind your skink line for a counter charge, or give them fly from a slann and a 3d6 charge and absolutely launch them from a safe location into a unit your opponent thought was safe.

As always, "being competitive" usually comes down to just getting in a ton of reps and understanding the nuances of your army and how it works agains tother armies. I'd find a list your comfortable with and just play more games than you know what to do with. Make subtle tweaks only after several games against different opponents, and slowly craft something that works for you.

So rough draft would be like:
Kroak
Skink Starpriest
Skink Starseer
Skink Priest
Astrolith Bearer

40 Skinks
10 Skink
10 Skinks

3 Salamander Pack
3 Salamander Pack
6 Kroxigors

Balewind Vortex (Or Geminids, or whatever)
FOS

Obviously Starborne and...probably no battalion?

 

[Canas]

I also disagree strongly with bringing down the outliers (surprise surprise). This game has point costs for a reason. Units should be allowed to be strong at something as long as their points reflect that strength. Strong casters should exist within AoS just like strong fighters and strong shooters do.

It's of course fine to have stronger and weaker casters/fighters/shooters/whatever. But the outliers should still stay within reasonable bounds.

If outliers are allowed to go to whatever absurd extreme you'l run into issues when the outliers break shared abilities (endless spells, realm spells, etc.), because the outliers can just take far greater an advantage of these shared abilities due to the synergy with their inherent advantages as an outlier. Or you'l run into a point where the outliers become armies on their own and the only way to deal with them is by dedicating your entire army to stopping them, which isn't necesarly fun, and at this point his support can often sweep you up due to how much you had to dedicate just to deal with him(for reference, look at what happens when someone brings say a fully kitted out terrorgheist to an average 1000 point game)

 

[magnificrab_indeed]

So rough draft would be like:
Kroak
Skink Starpriest
Skink Starseer
Skink Priest
Astrolith Bearer

40 Skinks
10 Skink
10 Skinks

3 Salamander Pack
3 Salamander Pack
6 Kroxigors

Balewind Vortex (Or Geminids, or whatever)
FOS

Obviously Starborne and...probably no battalion?

I think if you want to commit to Kroxigors it'd be a mistake not to try for a Thunderquake Templehost. Giving your Kroxigors +2 attacks each is a significant buff, in Coalesced it's another +1 to the jaws while scaly skin makes them much tankier. For this you'd have to go for a monster-heavy list though and go as Thunder Lizard probably, and they compete in the same battalion slot as Salamanders, but that's what I'd do if you want to get value out of the Krox!

 

[Erta Wanderer]

I think if you want to commit to Kroxigors it'd be a mistake not to try for a Thunderquake Templehost. Giving your Kroxigors +2 attacks each is a significant buff, in Coalesced it's another +1 to the jaws while scaly skin makes them much tankier. For this you'd have to go for a monster-heavy list though and go as Thunder Lizard probably, and they compete in the same battalion slot as Salamanders, but that's what I'd do if you want to get value out of the Krox!

do you mean +2 wounds? because that's what thunderquake does and unfortunately krox aren't monsters so they do not benefit form it.

if you are talking about the battalion and jaws then that would compleatly change the list and force him to take 3 tax units to use the battalion not sure it's worth spending half your army to make 6 models better

 

[Canas]

do you mean +2 wounds? because that's what thunderquake does and unfortunately krox aren't monsters so they do not benefit form it.
if you are talking the battalion and jaws then that would compleatly change the list and force him to take 3 tax units to use the battalion not sure it's worth spending half your army to make 6 units better

Thunderquake templehost gives +1 attack to all melee weapons when the thunderquake is savage. Which would amount to 2 extra attacks on a kroxigor (1 bite, 1 hammer)

The thunder lizard gives the wounds, but that'sthe constalation, not the battalion.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

Thunderquake templehost gives +1 attack to all melee weapons when the thunderquake is savage. Which would amount to 2 extra attacks on a kroxigor (1 bite, 1 hammer)

The thunder lizard gives the wounds, but that'sthe constalation, not the battalion.

yes i did mention that in the second half of the post i mention the battalion and how it's probably not worth it

 

[Canas]

yes i did mention that in the second half of the post i mention the battalion and how it's probably not worth it

Ah sorry, misunderstood, thought you were questioning where he got the extra attacks from.

And yeah to specificly make a kroxigor list it's a hell of a lot of tax. I don't think you'l ever be able to make a list where the kroxigors are the star of the show, they're always just support as they get virtually no buffs from our heroes & in the one battalion that contains em they're a supporting part, not the focus.

 

[Krissey]

I think if you want to commit to Kroxigors it'd be a mistake not to try for a Thunderquake Templehost. Giving your Kroxigors +2 attacks each is a significant buff, in Coalesced it's another +1 to the jaws while scaly skin makes them much tankier. For this you'd have to go for a monster-heavy list though and go as Thunder Lizard probably, and they compete in the same battalion slot as Salamanders, but that's what I'd do if you want to get value out of the Krox!

Yep I've been working on a list exactly that like. 1 Stegadon Chieftan, 2 Stegadons, Kroak, Starseer, 30 Skinks, 6 kroxigors, balewind, and thunderquake templehost for now...

 

[Angela]

We have multiple strong builds across both "parts" of our army and at least one (i'd argue 3) VERY strong build that can compete with the best lists in the game.

Almost every single unit in the book is at least usable with a few notable exceptions. We can run a magic heavy list, a shooting heavy list, or a melee heavy list with good results. You can run saurus, you can run skinks, you can run with a slann or without.

I'm a relatively new player, I started playing in January. On other sites I've been reading about how OP we are and how we need to be nerfed in the upcoming GHB and it makes me feel like a bad player because I lose a lot. I like the book, but I feel overwhelmed by choices and I also feel obligated to try everything. I seem to prefer magic heavy or shooting heavy lists, and usually try to have both. So far, I prefer Fangs of Sotek and Thunder Lizard. I think I've only used the two options once each. I was wondering if you'd share your 3 strong builds. Also, are you supposed to build a list and then play it over and over? I take a list, play it, tweak it and then play it again. And then I make a new list or try a different army and start the play, tweak, play cycle again.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

I'm a relatively new player, I started playing in January. On other sites I've been reading about how OP we are and how we need to be nerfed in the upcoming GHB and it makes me feel like a bad player because I lose a lot. I like the book, but I feel overwhelmed by choices and I also feel obligated to try everything. I seem to prefer magic heavy or shooting heavy lists, and usually try to have both. So far, I prefer Fangs of Sotek and Thunder Lizard. I think I've only used the two options once each. I was wondering if you'd share your 3 strong builds. Also, are you supposed to build a list and then play it over and over? I take a list, play it, tweak it and then play it again. And then I make a new list or try a different army and start the play, tweak, play cycle again.

we are not as strong as many are saying so don't worry. every one losses the first few games and your in luck our casting and shooting is great!
i would highly suggest having a fixed list for a few months learn how it works and how to work within it's limits. if you need list ideas then chake out this thred our best general makes his lists public for us to use
http://www.lustria-online.com/threads/seraphon-list-for-battletome-2-o.24293/

 

[Canas]

I'm a relatively new player, I started playing in January. On other sites I've been reading about how OP we are and how we need to be nerfed in the upcoming GHB and it makes me feel like a bad player because I lose a lot. I like the book, but I feel overwhelmed by choices and I also feel obligated to try everything. I seem to prefer magic heavy or shooting heavy lists, and usually try to have both. So far, I prefer Fangs of Sotek and Thunder Lizard. I think I've only used the two options once each. I was wondering if you'd share your 3 strong builds. Also, are you supposed to build a list and then play it over and over? I take a list, play it, tweak it and then play it again. And then I make a new list or try a different army and start the play, tweak, play cycle again.

We're not particularly OP, there is however a specific list which is fairly impactfull and not super fun to deal with (teleporting salamander spam...). Other lists are more or less balanced with nothing standing out in particular.

As for sticking with one list; practise makes perfect. And it's going to take a while till you know a new list well, especially as a new player. Experimentation is of course fine, but especially while learning you should probably stick to relativly similar lists, if only till you've learned to remember your various abilities.

 

[Putzfrau]

I'm a relatively new player, I started playing in January. On other sites I've been reading about how OP we are and how we need to be nerfed in the upcoming GHB and it makes me feel like a bad player because I lose a lot. I like the book, but I feel overwhelmed by choices and I also feel obligated to try everything. I seem to prefer magic heavy or shooting heavy lists, and usually try to have both. So far, I prefer Fangs of Sotek and Thunder Lizard. I think I've only used the two options once each. I was wondering if you'd share your 3 strong builds. Also, are you supposed to build a list and then play it over and over? I take a list, play it, tweak it and then play it again. And then I make a new list or try a different army and start the play, tweak, play cycle again.

I'm going to disagree with the two people above me a little bit and say that seraphon are an extremely strong army. While it might not be as strong as tzeentch or OBR (altho i think its arguable), it's definitely a top 5 book and capable of performing very well in a tournament setting with multiple builds.

Although, if you're a new player you shouldn't feel bad for losing in the slightest! I've played an absolute ton of games and I am still far from a great competitive player. This game is extremely complicated and requires tons of practice to truly excel at. The "names" in the competitive scene are players that play multiple (we're talking 4+ games) a week and then cram before tournaments. They are usual in groups or clubs with other competitive players who try to pick lists apart and workshop strategies.

I think you shouldn't touch a list too much until you've played a decent amount of games with it. It's just hard to get a holistic idea of what a list can do without a ton of practice with it. Sometimes you'll know right off the bat if something just isn't working, but drastically changing your list after ever loss is a sure fire way to stunt how much you're learning.

Honestly if you're a new player you shouldn't be worrying about "strong builds" you should be worrying about getting an army painted up and learning the basics (screening, threat ranges, when to yolo for the double turn, when to be conservative, what the other armies threats are, target priority, understanding how to deploy against certain armies and on certain battleplans, etc etc).


3 magic/shooting lists that are strong from 3 different constellations.

Dracothians Tail
Kroak
Astrolith
starpriest
priest

10 skinks
10 skinks
5 guard

2 full units of salamanders
vortex + geminds

You have about 450 points left over to mess around with. Could add another slann, more skinks, more salamanders, but thats a good core.

Thunder Lizard
Kroak
Scar Vet Carno
Engine
Priest

10 skinks
10 skinks
10 skinks

full unit of sallies
2 bastis
thunderquake + extra command point

no summoning or teleport, but has more range and less counters at the top level. Very deadly against chaos demons which are extremely popular, and the -1 damage is very problematic for certain armies.

Fangs of Sotek
Kroak
Astrolith
priest
starpriest

40 skinks
40 skinks
5 guard

20 chamo
20 chamo

balewind

Similar idea as the first option, but you're buffing up the 40 skink blobs (or the chamo skinks) and throwing them forward instead of sallies. Chamo skinks provide the deepstrike so you can keep them off the board if needed.

However, i really can't stress enough that these builds are what i would consider potential "5-0" lists at a major or GT AND not at all necessary if you have any other objective (playing with friends, going to tournaments just to get some games and hang out, etc). And if you aren't already in that 3/2 or 4/1 space regularly in tournaments, there are more important things to worry about than the list you're bringing.

How many games have you played so far with the new book? If you havent played a ton of games of age of sigmar, losing is pretty much the way you learn. Would be kind of crazy if someone playing for a month could roll up on someone whos been playing for years and beat them

 

[Angela]

we are not as strong as many are saying so don't worry. every one losses the first few games and your in luck our casting and shooting is great!

Thank you for the link, Erta Wanderer! I do love magic and shooting, although I wonder sometimes if that's because Seraphon (even in the old book) was good at it. I use to play lots of Razordons. They were the first painted unit that I was really proud of.

And it's going to take a while till you know a new list well, especially as a new player. Experimentation is of course fine, but especially while learning you should probably stick to relativly similar lists, if only till you've learned to remember your various abilities.

Canas, I am always forgetting abilities and synergies! It's a very complicated game. I especially hate when I deploy and then remember that this unit has to be within X" of that unit!

I'm going to disagree with the two people above me a little bit and say that seraphon are an extremely strong army. While it might not be as strong as tzeentch or OBR (altho i think its arguable), it's definitely a top 5 book and capable of performing very well in a tournament setting with multiple builds.

I think you shouldn't touch a list too much until you've played a decent amount of games with it. It's just hard to get a holistic idea of what a list can do without a ton of practice with it. Sometimes you'll know right off the bat if something just isn't working, but drastically changing your list after ever loss is a sure fire way to stunt how much you're learning.

Honestly if you're a new player you shouldn't be worrying about "strong builds" you should be worrying about getting an army painted up and learning the basics (screening, threat ranges, when to yolo for the double turn, when to be conservative, what the other armies threats are, target priority, understanding how to deploy against certain armies and on certain battleplans, etc etc).

How many games have you played so far with the new book? If you havent played a ton of games of age of sigmar, losing is pretty much the way you learn. Would be kind of crazy if someone playing for a month could roll up on someone whos been playing for years and beat them

Thank you for the list ideas, Putzfrau. I only have 10 chameleon skinks, but I have the models for the other lists. I do have lots of salamanders. I started buying them on a whim before the new book came out and it turned out to be a very lucky thing. I also bought a sunblood on the same whim, he's still on sprue....

I'm pretty sure I never defeat OBR. The Petrifex Elite build seems horribly unfair with the -1 rend and the reroll saves, reroll 1s to save, extra saves, and more extra saves...It's technically my army though, so I suppose I can't complain too much. But my husband often takes it when I play Seraphon.

I think I've played five 2000 pt games and 1 meeting engagement with the new book. I've been very lucky in that I play in my house with my husband, so the COVID crisis hasn't had much of an effect on our gaming. We were in a Path to Glory campaign with the old book at our local store that got cancelled, but other than that nothing has changed for me. We usually try to spend some time building/painting on one weekend and then play 1 game the next weekend.

I can't figure out the concept of bringing a fair list to a casual game. I know a won a game with a Thunder Lizard List that was Kroak, Priest, Priest, Star Priest, 10 skinks with javelins, 10 skinks with boltspitters, 3 max salamander units, stegadon, bastiladon, geminids and command point. It felt like a "mean list" so I haven't played it since. It was also an easy list for me because I just put a priest/star priest right behind each salamander unit.

How does one learn to screen? By practice I suppose? In all honesty, I started playing so my husband would have someone to play with. Last weekend we played a "mega battle" because he's always wanted to, and I realized in the second turn that I should have screened my heavy shooters with skinks, because he rushed in in the bottom of round 1 and locked most of them into melee. I actually think that is the first time that the concept of screening has occurred to me. Then he double turned me and it was essentially all over, but we kept playing until he held all the objectives and I lost. Honestly, I don't like to put my skinks in the front lines. If I do that, they all die.

I'm slowly picking up on target priority. I'm learning what can really hurt me and more importantly, what I seem incapable of hurting back (Nagash, Alarielle). I don't understand the concept of planning for or playing around a double turn. It's so random. And being doubled turned really hurts the other player. To me it seems like whoever gets the double turn wins. At least that's how our games always turn out.

Sometimes we go back after games and play through scenarios differently than in the game we just finished. For example, what would have happened if I charged my stegadons into Nagash instead of just sitting there. Those little exercises are very instructive. It's probably the only good thing I do.

 

[Vexcor]

i had the same experience with Thunderquake. i nearly destroyed my friends chaos units in turn 2 and they had no chance of recovering.
i try a different list every time, next saturday is the showdown tzeentch vs my Dread Saurian.

i am afraid of to hard hammer nerfs or heavy point increases on Seraphon, on the other hand maybe they fix our Realm Engine.
Maybe a Troglodon change, but thats just not prio 1.
i love the options we have and the different playstyles, what the opponents maybe misunderstand is not "Seraphon are overpowered" they just struggle what they have to focus and what can left aside.

Should you target a 1+ save bastilodon with myhstic shield or a pack of salamanders with your flamers?
i have seen it ..... he tried it .... Basti took ZERO dmg where the salamanders could be wiped out

 

[Canas]

Honestly, I don't like to put my skinks in the front lines. If I do that, they all die.

Such is the life of a skink, sacrificial fodder for those who are important

And don't worry too much, a lot of this is practise and comes naturally with time. A lot of the more abstract concepts also work in other games, so feel free to switch it up occasionally when you get bored of AoS

As for fair lists in casual games, this is indeed a problem within AoS. Especially when players are inexperienced or have acces to a very limited set of models. It's very easy for 1 side to have something that the other side simply can't deal with, especially in a straight up fight. It's why objectives are so important to create balanced matches.

 

[Grotpunter]

Canas, I am always forgetting abilities and synergies! It's a very complicated game. I especially hate when I deploy and then remember that this unit has to be within X" of that unit!

Practice makes perfect. I think we all forget sometimes about staying within range of certain buffs, but I feel that you learn from your mistakes. If you are generally new I would look into getting AoSReminders.com (you import your list from warscroll builder and basically get a PDF with reminders of what to do each phase) or make a "cheat sheet" where you write down that you need to do X, Y and Z. I try not to do it personally so I force myself to learn things, but it might be helpful in the start.

How does one learn to screen? By practice I suppose?

This has to do with the quote below.

I don't understand the concept of planning for or playing around a double turn. It's so random. And being doubled turned really hurts the other player. To me it seems like whoever gets the double turn wins. At least that's how our games always turn out.

It is a pretty common thinking that whoever gets the double turn wins, but it is just not true for the majority of the times if you play around it. If you dont and simply push everything forward, the double turn is massive. This was my view too when I was new/bad at the game, but once I picked up on the tactical aspect of AoS, I saw how important the double turn is for the game and started to think alot more about it. When it is my turn I think about "what if my opponent gets the double turn? how do I prevent him from getting into my important units if he gets 2 turns in a row?" and if Im going second in a battle round and win priority, I often opt to give my opponent the turn to ensure it continues with you go - I go. It makes the game much more predictable for you and it eliminates the possibility of your opponent getting a double turn whilst it opens up the chance that you might win priority and capatilize on a double turn later on.

People that lose purely due to the double turn typically dont think too far ahead and dont use screens. They push everything forward in their turn and then get hammered. Screens are great to prevent your army from getting charged in turn 1, but you can also use them to mitigate the opponent getting a double turn, especially melee armies. I always have 1 line of 10 Skinks in the front, then a second line ~5" behind. In his turn he will charge and kill the 10 Skinks, if he gets the double he will have to charge and kill the second line of 10 Skinks, but then it will be my turn and I can destroy whatever he sent forward and wasted on ~20 Skinks.


As @Putzfrau said, AoS is so complicated yet it isnt. If you want to you can just move everything forward max distance every turn without too much thought and have a blast with friends/lover, but if you start to get a little more competitive and focus on the tactical aspect, the game is rather deep. I would suggest getting a build (not necessarily the most competitive list) and just keep practicing it. Dont just change things up each time you lose. If you keep forgetting about your spells, command traits, alligiance abilities, artefacts etc. it isnt about the list, but rather about learning and remembering your rules.