Internet Rumors about a new Skirmish rule set in FEB

All the latest and greatest info concerning the constant struggle and strife across Middle-earth!

Postby Jack Napier » Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:02 pm

I've been pretty outa touch with LotR the last several months, The last game I played was in Oct, before that was at SITE. But these new books have me excited again. I like most of the new models, but will wait until I read up on things more before I buy anything.

I do have a crap load of goblins and some plastic wargs though... so if that Maruader warg thing is any good I could make up a bunch for free pretty fast.

And of course I am really excited about teh othe LotR release coming this summer.........




Image[/img]
User avatar
Jack Napier
 
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:39 pm
Location: Orlando

Postby febber » Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:08 am

JLeong wrote:It seems to me that the hero:troop restriction is attempting to increase the use of lower-point troops, thereby backing us off from the FV4, S4 hordes that have become the standard. It seems like there is a big push for regular Warriors of Minas Tirith and Orc warriors. Armies like High Elves will get EVEN SMALLER, and the White Hand will no longer be able to run with one or two heroes supported by a ton of powerful Uruks. I like the spirit of what they are doing, but I am very wary of the new army construction gimmick.


Unfortunately the new rules are likely to make certain armies obsolete. Bye bye high elves. Especially if the twins, which are technically 1 unit, don't count as 2 heroes. GW will eventually need to release a few additional mini-heroes to make all armies playable, which of course may have been their plan all along.
All-time LOTR Grand/National Tournament Record: 92-18-45 (W-L-D), 63 major victories
21 awards in 35 events inc. 5x Best Overall; 2x 2nd Overall (w/o Best General); 9x Best General
2007 National Circuit Champion
2008 National Circuit Champion
User avatar
febber
 
Posts: 1269
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:25 pm
Location: Tampa, FL

Postby griffen127 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:35 am

my boy blue is right on the head on this one. HE, some wood elves and some dwarfs are in the suck. and that sucks
griffen127
 
Posts: 665
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:40 pm

Postby old coast » Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:45 pm

Could you guys please elaborate on this so we can all understand how big an issue these things actually are? I'd like to see it from your perspective.

I keep seeing "change in the rules" being thrown around..but I dont see changes in the rules, I see new rules for new models, and changes to army list building but points and game rules seem untouched.

Changes in the existing force structure is a GW staple in every edition of every game they have ever released..that alone isn't a reason not to use the new rules especially since Adepticon is still 79 days away.

Personally if I am going to go drop $125 on new books this weekend, I'd like to use them, once we dig into the new books, where are going to inevitably start thinking of the game from that perspective and then to play the old rules 2.5 months from now- will be weird.

Using the new system for the Champs and the leaving the Team as is seems a to be a good way to cover all the bases.

I am not saying you guys are wrong, It would be helpful if you could illustrate some specifics to get everyone on the same page or as close as possible.
Last edited by old coast on Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
old coast
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:34 pm
Location: Cicero, IL

Postby jlong05 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:06 pm

Personally I see this as more of an annoyance than a real concern on new rules. As you said, the rules appear to have been left the same, and only the LoME rules were redesigned.

The issue I think many are having is that this causes everyone to rethink their army designs and for many, the old design of min/max may not work. Honestly, I doubt anyone really KNOWS yet what will/wont work as no one has the new books, but I am certain for iexample that my Moria list I hve for GitD is not legal for the new books as I dont have enough heroes.

I have a feeling that is MORE the concern now for Adepticon as many people have already finished their army plans, and to have to potentially rip those plans apart to create what they view as a sub-par list because they can't stuff those F4 models in as easily is more of the issue.

I think all this talk on should we/shouldn't we should really WAIT till this weekend when several of us all get our new books as well as the TOs get them so everyone can really make more informed decisions instead of the guess work we are all doing now.

I know we have been using the GW pre-made lists as an idea, but honestly, those are terrible lists to use as we all know GW doesn't make lists anyone would actually show up with in a tournament. The lists are fluffy and pretty, but not enough to survive a real tournament weekend event.
The only "hobby" GW is interested in is lining their pockets with your money.
User avatar
jlong05
 
Posts: 587
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:02 pm
Location: Glendale, AZ (In a lead-lined fridge)

Postby ChrisLS » Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:26 pm

Totally legit points, John we've only to wait until Saturday to have the truth...
In my fantasy world, we have pie.

Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself. - Mark Twain
User avatar
ChrisLS
 
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:04 am
Location: San Jose, CA

Postby Smeagol » Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:13 pm

points values have changed. Haradrim are now seven points according to the sample lists. Of course GW is math impaired and it's not like they've mispointed their example lists before.

Force building has changed most definitely. Of cource I'm not going to be able to participate so I'm just a peanut in the gallery.
User avatar
Smeagol
 
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:20 pm

Postby prion2001 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 4:54 pm

Smeagol wrote:points values have changed. Haradrim are now seven points according to the sample lists. Of course GW is math impaired and it's not like they've mispointed their example lists before.

Force building has changed most definitely. Of cource I'm not going to be able to participate so I'm just a peanut in the gallery.


I love the peanut gallery. :P

Obviously I will be checking further with registered players regarding how the new lists may affect their current Adepticon lists. But certainly, it's good to see what the community thinks in general.

The two sides, as I see them now, are this: 1) the new books WILL be the lists moving forward and knowing this group, you'll be building lists and talking your next army before the books hit the shelves (i.e. see the army list thread already!). So, by Adepticon, all anyone will be talking and thinking about are THESE books and lists, not Legions. Thus, the event will be very anitclimatic.

2)People have purchased, built, painted and playtested their Legions list and the list changes in these new books, no matter if deemed small, could invalidate their current list. Maybe it is a case of not wanting to think about a new list, maybe it's not being happy with the new list as it weakens the army, maybe it's the cost of new models they would need, maybe it's just the time and effort of painting and adding new stuff. Either way, is it fair to make some people change a list that is completely legit as of today?

The correct view? I don't know?

What I do know? GW screwed Adepticon, our LotR TOs and our players. Had we had some sense of this we maybe could have prepared better. As it is, any decision will be one that makes someone unhappy or affects our event probably in some negative way, both through no fault of our own.

As I told a close friend...Nice of GW to ruin a perfectly good and exciting release (for me). To be mad about seeing new support and models for the game I love, makes me crazy. :roll:

Jamie
"It is a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing." Boromir
Check out my painting blog at http://www.fivearmies.blogspot.com
Shop Gorgon Studios. http://www.gorgon-studios.com
User avatar
prion2001
 
Posts: 1328
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Tinley Park, IL

Postby Monty » Tue Jan 31, 2012 7:44 pm

I haven't gotten my first issue of WD yet :(

I was just thinking of the ease of getting into SBG for a new player with the new "warband" set up. A new player buys a box of 12 plastics and some type of hero blister and he can start small games with a friend to learn the game, maybe on a 2'x2' table.

I like that SBG stays considerably different than 40k and WFB. Interested to see how my own models will build into an army, but I have a good mix. I think that I, like a lot other players, buy and paint a lot of minor named heroes, that we never get to put on the table because we tend to fill up on troops to "up" the break point.

I agree with Jamie on the timing. This will make BBB an interesting tournament.
User avatar
Monty
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:25 pm
Location: Steger

Postby Slammers77 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:23 pm

I've been organizing GW tournaments since 2001, a good portion of that was WHFB. Every year GW would turn out a new book, or in the case of Storm of Chaos 12 new lists typically right before the Necro. It was always an inconvenience because we used to handicap lists and had a set system in place. So we would end up redoing our entire system 45 days before the event-that is the joy of being a TO in GW systems. I'm not going to Adepticon, but given it is 2 1/2 months out players can adapt-it is not like it is 2 days before. If the TO's can adapt, the players sure as hell can.

John
Slammers77
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 12:47 pm
Location: Orlando

Postby BrentS » Tue Jan 31, 2012 9:07 pm

prion2001 wrote:
The two sides, as I see them now, are this: 1) the new books WILL be the lists moving forward and knowing this group, you'll be building lists and talking your next army before the books hit the shelves (i.e. see the army list thread already!). So, by Adepticon, all anyone will be talking and thinking about are THESE books and lists, not Legions. Thus, the event will be very anitclimatic.

2)People have purchased, built, painted and playtested their Legions list and the list changes in these new books, no matter if deemed small, could invalidate their current list. Maybe it is a case of not wanting to think about a new list, maybe it's not being happy with the new list as it weakens the army, maybe it's the cost of new models they would need, maybe it's just the time and effort of painting and adding new stuff. Either way, is it fair to make some people change a list that is completely legit as of today?


So based on this comment above... here's my wacky suggestion. Why not for Adepticon this year (and only for Adepticon this year), allow both army building rules to be allowed...

1) This would ensure that players that have been building armies for a while not have to change their lists if they don't want. As long as they are LOME legal then they can use them and they are bound by the army building rules and profiles from LOME and the "old sourcebooks".

2) This would allow the players to embrace the new army building rules from day 1 (if they wanted). Any player (or team) that does this would be bound by the army building rules and profiles in the new sourcebooks.

Now as I see it, the scenarios that are being finalized for Adepticon could work for either army build. Afterall, I suspect its fairly easy to make army using the army building rules and still be LOME legal (with the obvious exception of some of the bow limits and "upgrades"). But as best as we can tell so far, its not like the way we play the game has fundamentally changed so there is no reason a scenario like Meeting Engagement, Domination, etc couldn't work using the new army building rules.

In my mind, the biggest downside to this idea is that it creates the possibility that games could be perceived "unbalanced" or "unfair". It could also create the situation where players are playing the same game using two different profiles for the same model. Yes that could be an issue, but I think we all adult enough to recognize that these tournaments while being competitive are more just a chance for us to get together and throw some dice and have some fun. There could be some awkward games but in the end, that doesn't bother me nearly as much as either (1) having someone not want to attend Adepticon because their army they've built, painted and play testsed is now "invalid" or (2) having someone not be interested in Adepticon because we are using rules that are 2.5 months old and largely irrelevant.

Anyway, just my 2 cents...
User avatar
BrentS
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:38 pm

Postby Sajii » Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:42 pm

@Brent

I think using both rule sets would be competitively unbalanced. Strong 1 or 2 hero Legion lists such as Legolas + wood elves would have advantages in both numbers and shooting compared to warband armies. Before warbands Legions could mimic the warband rules by simply using more heroes, but hero heavy armies are rare. Most armies can work with just a few heroes, so why spend points on more? While I like the warband rules, its only because you are FORCED to include heroes.

Having not played a game like this, I don't know how big the power gap is. I do agree that these events are more theme oriented/ fun than competitive, but competitive players might find issues with dual rule sets. This is just a shot in the dark though, saturday will be the big day!
What, do I sign my name here or something?
Sajii
 
Posts: 152
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:13 pm

Postby BrentS » Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:15 pm

Sajii wrote:@Brent

I think using both rule sets would be competitively unbalanced.


Maybe.

I suspect that those players that favor the low hero max armies would already have these advantages, even against other LOME armies. So I personally don't think that is a deal breaker from either army building method.

For what it's worth, I still don't think you have to have a min/max army to win. I've won more games than I lost with an army that only has 15 models in it.

Anyway, just my opinion... I'm just trying to find a way to accommodate the best of both worlds.
User avatar
BrentS
 
Posts: 6295
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:38 pm

Postby Smeagol » Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:00 am

How do you handle Aragorn and Malbeth combos? And other such nonsense that LOME restricts.
User avatar
Smeagol
 
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:20 pm

Postby prion2001 » Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:17 am

Smeagol wrote:How do you handle Aragorn and Malbeth combos? And other such nonsense that LOME restricts.

Could you elaborate on this? I'm too lazy to think about how certain combos can be abused. I get the theme/timeline issue for sure.

Jamie
"It is a strange fate that we should suffer so much fear and doubt over so small a thing." Boromir
Check out my painting blog at http://www.fivearmies.blogspot.com
Shop Gorgon Studios. http://www.gorgon-studios.com
User avatar
prion2001
 
Posts: 1328
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Tinley Park, IL

PreviousNext

Return to Lord of the Rings News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron