Having fun > winning. Honestly AoS is a really fun game, and the downsides to it don't really midigate the fun i get from it.
So i think this discussion is super interesting especially regarding negative play experience around the double turn. Because i had a really bad experience with double turns when i started the game. I had a game where i was basically shut out of the game because of a devastating double turn. And its one of the most negative play experiences i have ever had in a game. So you would think my opinion on the double turn would be quite negative but honestly i have to admit. I love it as a mechanic. Something i never realised until i played aos is that i kind of have a beef with the i go you go turn order of a lot of games. It becomes way to easy to figure out who is going to win when the turn structure is that rigid. Sure it sucks to pack up at the end of turn 3 because you lost because of a double turn but it sucks even more in my opinion to look at the board state turn two and realise that there is no way for you to get back into the game because you just dont have anything that can swing the game your way. I cant even count the games anymore where i should have packed up early but i kept playing because i knew that even if the chance was small i could swing the game back in my favor with a double turn. And its also find it tense and fun to be in the dominant position but knowing if i overcomit i will be screwed if my opponent gets the double turn So i like the double turn because at the end of the day it kinda keeps me playing aos longer. Because if im winning im at risk of having the momentum swung back so my opponent doesnt want to give up. and if im losing i still have The chance to get back in the game with the double turn. Sure there are also games where being double turned is kind of a win more thing and that kinda sucks when it happens. But all in all I think i like it the way it is.
I tend to think that the "You go, I go" format is not the hopeless way to play the game, usually. It leaves more room for strategy and not just luck. The double turn mechanic is a luck mechanic, make no mistake. You can try and strategize around the double turn, but that doesn't make it a strategic mechanic. If you're certain you're losing at the bottom of turn 2 and you need a double turn to win, so you set yourself up to take advantage of a double turn, your strategy has become luck-based. If the turn order is set, and you're losing at the bottom of turn 2, you can't just hope for a lucky double turn, you have to outwit your opponent to pull out the win. Imagine how awful chess would be if it had a double turn mechanic. AoS may not be chess, but removing the double turn is eliminating a luck-based mechanic and one that feels awful whenever it happens, even in your favor.
I mean yes its true the double turn is a luck mechanic i never said it wasnt. However i dont necesarily think thats a bad thing. I guess that didnt come across in my first message. But i dont think the comparrison to chess is very apropriate here. This is a dice game after all. Luck was always part of the equation. Chess works so well because both players have The exact same resources and nothing is left to chance. In aos this is very much not the case. Especially when we start bringing in things like unbalanced battletomes and the have and have nots of certain factions. I Also i like it for the fact that it frees up list building. If the turn order is decided by the amount of drops then having a low drop army would be way more important then it already is and i personally like the fact that i can build lists where it doesnt feel like im too heavily pusnished for having a high amount of drops. Sure it sucks to give away first turn but also that just means im in the position to get the double turn so i dont mind it. And sometimes i pick to go second if im first because i dont want to risk dealing with the double turn later in the game. So all in all I think its a good mechanic for this game. It brings a lot of decision making around risk assesement that isnt in a you go i go type game. And I think thats cool personally.
the double turn tends to be a balancing factor more often than not, especially for combat armies going up against the heavy shooting meta. the shoot army will probably win almost all of the time anyway in a you go i go turn order
not really... it'l help the melee army just as often as it hinders it. On average over multiple games it should be completly neutral in terms of balance. Issue is that wildly swinging mechanics that average out over multiple games tend to not be much fun during the individual games where they swung wildly...
>Go against Changehost/lumineth; >get first turn without being able to reach anything; >doubled against shooting/magic army.
Yeah but the melee army will lose more of those matchups regardless. You go from losing, to a 50/50 of lose more or win
Low drop shooting is more of a problem than the double turn. I think its a misdiagnosis of the problem
That it can turn a hopeless matchup into a 50/50 matchup based on pure RNG would not exactly be indicative of a good or fun mechanic either. Anyways, it might not be the biggest problem, but it is a rather visible one. Hence it generates a lot of discussion.
Other than fangs of sotek, we are really resilient against most shooting. I always have close and fun games against KO, sentinel spam lumineth and changehost. I feel for the other armies, but they need updates badly, so I am hesitant to say its a shooting problem when people lack the proper tools in their books.
Im saying that the shooting is a problem, not the turn. The turn at least can help the melee army out and make the shooting army think about wether or not 1 screen is enough. Otherwise you just put forward 1 screen a turn, knowing they can never hit your shooters. but outside of that, the turn priority adds a level of randomness and surprise that as a player you have to prepare for. It allows for greater skill to be shown
EXACTLY. THIS A THOUSAND TIMES THIS. I feel like people are generally cool with the double turn until an army shows up that is just going to table you on the double without much counterplay. Thats a warscroll and army issue not a core rules one. The prevalence of powerful shooting combined with easy access, low cost teleports and/or low drops is the biggest (and I'd argue only but im a bit of an optimist) issue.
So out of curiosity What the fuck that was just discussed has anything to deal with NPE? Because all I see is people still circle jerking on whether the double turn is needed or not while inserting irrelevant statements. Like the discussion about the double turn seems to be at a standstill due to one side throwing out irrelevant evidence that doesn't even relate to the subject and the other just flat out doesn't have enough energy to try with em
It's a branch of the Double Turn creating NPE in a lot of situations. And it further evolved into the point that it creates NPE not because of the mechanic itself, but because certain armies take advantage of it in a very impactful way, creating that NPE in huge swathes of the game space. It's relevant. Also, as an addition, Vince's latest WW video is pretty interesting to watch. I'll provide it below for those that might not have seen it. It seems to explain/give reasoning why NPE is more important to think about in a casual setting, rather than in a much higher competitive setting. Not that it shouldn't also be addressed there, as fun is still a factor when competing.
There we go simple explanation that even my autistic ass can understand. Reaffirming me that the discussion and energy is relevant to the sub. On top as being professional as shit. Thank you carnikang. Your explanation was wonderful