• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS Is an army list forum necessary?

Without points for units, do we even need an army list subforum?

  • Yes, definitely keep it

    Votes: 18 40.9%
  • Maybe, wait and see

    Votes: 18 40.9%
  • No, lump it in with the tactics forum

    Votes: 8 18.2%

  • Total voters
    44
We expect that everyone behave, and watch their language and/or comments.
If you prefer 8th or AoS does not matter, we assume that everyone behave and accept that not everyone else share your ideas or feelings about the game.

By all means, have the forum if people want it. My opinion doesn't set the course. It's just really strange to have a forum covering a thing that doesn't really exist in the game.
As AoS matures, time will decide if this part of the forum earn its right to live or not. At the current time we do not have enough information about AoS to properly decide on a course of action.


Though I am surprised in regards to the people saying lists does not exist in AoS.

When reading the rules as RAW, this is correct. Lists does not exist anymore, all you are supposed to do is bring all your models and keep putting them on the table until you get tired. Though personally I struggle with this part, since it basically mean I need to bring the majority with my models, just in case I end up playing someone who has decided to put all their models on the board.

Even if you bring all of your models, there will always be some models that are better than the others, which you want to place early on. These could in theory go into a list, if you wanted to share it with the community, both to get feedback on it, and to show what worked for you. Especially since we are now allowed to pick any warscrolls and use them in our army.

If (or perhaps when) the community or GW adds a way to balance armies by size, we would also be back to lists.
 
Who said anything about having to be a fanboy? For that matter, do we really have any of those around here?
Sorry, That was me. I kinda hope we don't have any; I was 'hearing' more reverence in your comment than perhaps you intended. My bad. :bag:

I'm answering the poll question. Is there a need for an army list forum for a game system that doesn't use army lists? No.
Small point: This system DOES have lists. There are two lists at the end of each Compendium of Warscrolls... :bookworm: ...they call them Battalions I think, but lists by another name.

What's next? A subforum called "Soup Recipes Using Age of Sigmar Ingredients" ...
Chuckle. But seriously, a different name might help to distinguish this sub-forum from its OLDhammer/8THhammer counterpart.
 
How about Seraphon Forces or Age of Sigmar Deployment Strategies or Seraphon Unit Synergies?
 
Seraphon Forces --- if the limitation of just using one book compendium was a thing, but is it?
Age of Sigmar Deployment Strategies --- long, but abbreviating AoS to three letters helps that.
Seraphon Unit Synergies --- this one is a good thread title for the tactics sub-forum.

"AOS Force Rosters" ??
 
The deployment one is the one I liked best. It reflects how "lists" really are now -

You have a bunch of models you would like to use, but deployment really sort of dictates what you'll actually end up fielding.

It used to be "here is my army list that I will use today, no matter what the scenario, terrain, or other factors are.". Now it's "here is my collection of models that I will draw from as we go through deployment."
 
How about "AoS scenarios"?

A subforum where people can invent and discuss scenarios, posting the narrative, army lists for both sides, any special rules and win conditions etc.

This would allow for people to use their creativity in a constructive way within the parametres of AoS!
 
Just to point out a very valid spot where it is fair to call someone a cheating son of a skaven is deploying models from outside your Grand Alliance.
 
Just to point out a very valid spot where it is fair to call someone a cheating son of a skaven is deploying models from outside your Grand Alliance.
Why? There is nowhere in the rules that specifies that this is not allowed.

While I agree it should not be allowed for fluff reasons, we cannot scream RAW one day, and next day argue against it.
 
I think the question is:
[Is it] fair to call someone a cheating cheesy son of a skaven [for] deploying models from outside [their] Grand Alliance?
(paraphrased your original a bit)
I am leaning toward Yes.

There is nowhere in the rules that specifies that this is not allowed.
But then, I find myself looking over the cheese selections on the menu.

However...
Just to point out a very valid spot ...
I also thought the alliances limitation was in there somewhere. Have you spotted it? Maybe what I think I remember was just one of the rumours...

That said, the keywords on each warscroll entry look like they are structured to provide the mechanism for exactly that sort of limitation. I noticed they are ordered from broadest category, Grand Alliance, to narrowest category. (However, I did not check every last scroll.)

Scenarios could be specified such that:
  • First keyword has to match
  • First and Seconds keywords must match
  • 1st, 2nd, 3rd.... etc.

This is a valid point, it is all different now:
Now it's "here is my collection of models that I will draw from as we go through deployment."
Depending on phrasing and context:
collection, could = inventory
inventory, could = selection
selection, could = list.
We are pondering which of several synonyms is best. N.B. The war scrolls call lists: organizations but sometimes battalions.
 
I definitely think an AOS list forum is valuable. Fluff and themed lists are feasible now and encouraged! Even just throwing your list with the amount of models in each unit with an explanation of the synergies. @Bainbow has a perfect example on the Skinks useless? Thread:
Skinks can be bloody brutal if you know how to use them right. The only catch is that if you want Skinks to be good, you need a Skink army rather than a mixed army. My brother asked for help designing one, so I built him a nearly game-breaking one. Let me show you.

Now an important thing to know for any Skink army that, while the Saurus battalion is rubbish, the Skink one is downright necessary for any Skink player. Now, for this Battalion you'll need two units of either Skinks or Chameleon Skinks. Assuming you're not made of money, regular skinks will be the more affordable choice (though Chameleons are just better in every way, so if you are made of money then replace every Skink here with a Chameleon.) Skinks are downright puny in small numbers, but in groups of thirty or higher, they'll be hitting on 3+ with their ranged attacks which is great. However, because the Javelin's range is too small and puts the Skinks in harm's way, you want to use the Boltspitters. 5+ to wound may seem weak, but remember that your 3+ to hit adds some needed balance to this. I recommend two units of 40 skinks, that way you can afford some casualties without losing your 3+ to hit, and the Shields will give you an immunity to -1 rend which will save a few lives in a few scenarios, better than a melee weapon that the Skinks would never need because they stand up in melee about as well as a rotten tree branch.

Then for the battalion, you need some fliers. I'd say go for the Ripperdactyls for two reasons. Firstly they're more melee oriented, and you'll need some muscle in order to keep your flimsy Skinks safe. The second reason I'll go into in a minute.

Lastly for the battalion, you need a Skink Priest. Pick one that has the Cloak of Feathers for that improved save, and the increased movement with fly because positioning your Priest here is key. This is because the Battalion gives him an ability where you can pick one enemy unit he can see in your Hero Phase, and all hit and wound rolls of 1 can be rerolled against that target unit. Those 3+ hit roles are looking much nicer now, eh?

Now for the real game changer, as well as the reason why Saurus are unwanted here. For your general, pick a Skink Chief. You want him for his Command Ability, pick a Skink unit within 10" of the Chief and they can add +1 to all their hit rolls. Now remember those 3+ to hits with rerolls of 1? Now they're 2+ to hit with rerolls, and 40 shots too. Suddenly those 5+ to wounds seem feasible due to the sheer number of hits you're delivering.

In addition, remember those Ripperdactyls I said we'd come back to? Well thanks to the Battalion's rules, you don't set them up at the start of the game. Instead they remain off the board because they're flying high above the clouds. In any of your Movement Phases, you can have them dive to the ground, and set them up anywhere on the board that's no closer than 3" from an enemy. In addition, you add +1 to all their To Wound rolls in this turn. So you drop them near an enemy unit, monster, or hero that you want dead very, very badly and charge them in that turn. The Skink Riders' spears are okay, and the claws get three attacks per which is cool, but you want the Beak attacks the most. The Beak attacks once per model, hits on 4+ and wounds on 3+. But every time you hit, you get to make an additional attack. And if that hits, you make another. And another. And another until you miss all your hits. So you can theoretically hit infinite times. In addition, the Rippers have a rule that lets them move their line of sight to their bases rather than their high up models in exchange for rerolling all failed hits and wounds, so now your infinity beaks get rerolls. And don't forget, they're Skink models so your Chief can buff their to hit roles to 3+ as soon as your Hero Phase pops up again, so that's a rerollable 3+ which results in even more hits in the chain. And lastly, if there's a Blot Toad nearby, the Rippers go berserk and get three attacks with their infinity beaks instead of one. I say 6 Rippers is minimum here, because then you're throwing in 18 Beaks that hit on 3+ with rerolls and can generate more attacks.
While it may be tempting to throw them right into the fight to make use of that rerollable 2+ To Wound they get for the beaks when they first descend, but I think it's better to drop them down behind your defensive line and wait until they're buffed with the Chief's command ability before sending them off to murder their Blot Toad-marked target.

Lastly, add in a Stegadon (I like the one with the fire throwers myself, great against hordes,) and a Bastiladon (Solar Engine rocks, by the by) for more muscle to protect your skinks, plus a Wizard for some support (I prefer Tetto'Eko, a fun character and fits a Skink theme better than a Slann, because army themes is awesome in AoS due to more freedom in what you field, plus the rerolls are amazing when you have a priest that only uses his Rites on a 4+ like we do.)
Oh, and one last note. Arcane Shield and Priestly Rites together on the Bastiladon makes for a scary combination, a 2+ rerollable armour save that cannot be reduced by anything short of a mortal wound, and even mortal wounds are stopped on a 4+. Makes for what I consider the best tank in the game, needed for your Skinks to feel safe.

And there you have it, a monster of a Skink army. Play smart and you'll win a lot.
 
Yesterday I played in a doubles tournament, allowing each pair to take 100 models between them. The victory conditions from the book were taken into consideration, and after te first game myself and my partner ash found that they were vital to the succes of the game.
The main thing we had to think about, was numbers in our army. Obviously because we had a model limit, but also because if we had an army that was 40 wounds less than the enemy, we could triple all victory points we earned.
So In our first game, we slapped everything we had between us on the board, and it was a slow and messy game between for players, where we got about two rounds in resulting in me losing two units of ten blood reavers, and the enemy losing Manfred Voncarstein (this was evidently not a single combat between these units :L).

In our second game, we thought, let's just place ten scrolls on the board between us. A small model count, of a few nasty bits. This was because we our next opponents were using battle scroll organisations. So by placing a handful of wounds on the table, we pressured them to either place their full formations giving us the triple pints, or to place equally small forces and loose their formation bonuses.
The combination of that, and me fielding a chaos mammoth (which neither of the opponents had encountered before) really got in their heads.

Basically what I've saying is we had to really think about what we deployed to give us the advantage on the field.
We found that taking two wizards, four monsters and a unit of re-summoning spirit hosts was enough to keep the enemy's duly arrayed host at bay and claim the necessary objectives to win us the game.

Sorry this is such a long post, basically I learnt that there's more tactical planning in AoS if you want to win, than just bringing along 10 Carnosaurs five slaan and 85 Temple guard.
 
Back
Top