Definitely not a fan of all the reaction abilities. I think the hard limit on CP is going to somewhat mitigate spamming them though, especially since people will want AoA most of the time. The OC stuff I'm really not a fan of, lol! Especially since so many units buff/debuff it. Going to be really annoying to keep track of from what I can tell.
Honestly, the most annoying bit about OC is that it probably won't matter all that much in 9 out of 10 scenarios.
But when it does matter, there is a lot of potential for weird sheningans and annoying bookkeeping.
It's a prime candidate for frustrating gameplay moments.
Yeah, it seems that they prefer influencers to playtest and write articles about how fun it was rather than see what the armies can actually do. They also clearly don't playtest all the units in an army. I think they always seem to be looking more for feedback on the general rules and looking for "bugs" rather than trying to see "is this army fun but balanced and are the individual units in it good?"
They don't even seem to go for influencers, plus testers are under an NDA anyway so its not like there's a point in using influencers. Anyways, some of the testers definitly are just well known figures, like famous players or something, but based on what they showed in that white dwarf article, some of them just happen to be friends. I think they even mentioned it was on a semi-voluntary basis, or at least, it wasn't a paid job.
It really shouldn't be a surprise that the testers mess up with some frequency when it's organized like this.
One thing I'm very happy about in 4e is losing the focus on summoning. You'd think that GW would lower point costs on them rather than increase them for that reason, lol!
Meh, given how often changes come a GHB later than they should, I'm not surprised. I'm guessing someone just forgot to update their point cost formulas or something
But yeah, I'm just kind of speechless at how GW just absolutely refuses to make our dinosaurs combat monsters on par with what other factions have.
I mean, we've spend 2 editions stuck with an army with a split personality thanks to the clashing playstyles of our subfactions.
It took them 3 editions to decide saurus should get vaguely lore-appropriate stats.
We didn't get any actual endless spells,despite having some of the most powerfull wizards in the lore.
In general, our magic has always been kind of uninspired and dissapointing, even if it was reasonably effective.
We've never had prayers, despite the faction prominently featuring several castes of priests.
In the lore of AoS we are either punching bags, or deus ex machina; and are rarely featured for more than a few sentences.
For a long time, the best thing to do with our most powerfull wizards was to not cast spells.
The great plan is somehow even less coherent than it was in WHF.
It's the only faction that hasn't really moved on from their WHF roots.
Seraphon are full of weird little contradictions and inconsistencies, I think GW simply doesn't really know what they want to do with Seraphon; both narrativly and mechanicly.
As much as I love the game, you have to constantly remind yourself that the company that makes the game's only goal is to get you to give them as much of your money as possible, and they will do everything they can to try to force you to replace your army/start a new army as often as possible
I'm pretty sure I'd spend more money if I could reliably build a 2nd or 3th army without having to worry about it getting outdated.
Or better yet; a 4th or 5th. There's plenty of models I think look cool; and I would buy a spearhead here, a unit there, and then maybe a tome, if I knew it would eventually get me a functional army. But that's far too slow to keep up with the updates.
