Is Age of Sigmar Spearhead... good?

We know basically EVERYTHING about Warhammer Age of Sigmar and... is it any good? Mmm, wrong question, WHO is it for?
If you're thirsty, I have a Patreon: / glasshalfdead
Buying Warhammer in the USA? Give me a kickback with Noble Knight: www.nobleknight.com/affiliate...
Buying Warhammer in the UK? Give me a kickback from Element or Wayland: elementgames.co.uk/?d=10999 affiliates.waylandgames.co.uk...
Music is by Guillaume David from the Mechanicus OST
#ageofsigmar #newaos #warhammer #spearhead

[@PixieProxy]

2+ Tough and all the guys at goonhammer seem to be really into it - honestly I think this example game was not made by the best people to truly showcase it. Most new players are gonna end up with a scrum in the middle of the board for example even in big games

[@GlassHalfDead]

Which, in fairness, is the experience most people will have and so the experience they should point out is fun and okay as a beginner experience. At this point I struggle to see any lasting depth in what they've shown so far, but I also seem to be the only person with anything remotely negative to say about Spearhead, so clearly I'm wrong, I suppose! But it's fine, I'll use Spearhead for a quick blast of game, and then AOS when I want something a bit more :)

[@jaredp8906]

I got to play a demo game yesterday at the Dallas Open and went from skeptic to a big fan. The rules are very tight, it was super easy to reference rules to the point I could play an army I'd never touch before without any reading ahead! Huge surprise there. The board size is tight with most of the objectives and twists referencing locations on the board to keep things moving. The thing that surprised me the most was how easy it was to get defeated models back on the board which meant the second half of the game wasn't just a few survivors scooting around. I loved the balance between things feeling dangerous but also models re-entering the game to keep things balanced. I think this game has some staying power.

[@Marcojaralaconich]

The doble turn is the best part of AoS, most model ability are made around the doble turn, also the map mechanic.

[@Vyrullax]

I think the format has potential but i think one of the big takeaways for my gaming group is we can use the twist decks and tactical objective cards for spearhead and play it in a full 2k game instead

[@GlassHalfDead]

I forgot to go into just how fun I think the battle tactics cards in Spearhead are! I really wish they were in full size too. I don't know what it is, or if I missed something, but being able to choose to score or do a tactic randomly drawn each turn sounds really cool. It could easily be expanded upon!

[@willschoonover8654]

I like the move to modularity in the rules. I hope they put out a 40k style objective deck as an option for replacing one or more of the advanced modules. And as others have said, the priority roll isn't bad, it is just subjective. Plenty of games have a rule like it, and for those of us who like those kind of rules, it adds more than it takes away.

[@nicholas1173]

So do you actually list build from the spearhead box or you use everything in it?

[@Shadowknightneo]

Do you guys remember the flying game mechanic they had in the 2021/2 GHB version? Wonder if spearhead is going to be a one season wonder and they GW drops it. I ask because I think some armies will just have a straight up higher chance of winning. Nighthaunt for example have 8" movement and can pretty much Wave of Terror multiple times when they charge the same unit and if you can charge turn 1 that's some serious stacking!

[@Arttano]

As an pretty competitive AoS player, the remarks about the double turn is very off base. The double turn is at the heart of AoS's strategic depth once you're familiar with the system, but it's very punishing to newer players. Not being able to score battle tactics on the double turn is instead GW forcing newer players to actually question if they should take the double instead of just always mindlessly taking it whenever offered, overextending, then getting wiped when the enemy cracks back.

[@GlassHalfDead]

So GW has now ruined the game by penalising the double turn so hard? Why would they do that?

[@Arttano]

​@@GlassHalfDead Ruined? Probably not. Dumbed down for the sake of new players? Most certainly. I'm currently unsure if this is a net positive or negative for the game however. Many people bounce off of AoS in their first few games because they think "double turn OP" before they learn the nuances of the mechanic and the power of choosing to NOT double turn until the correct moment. The scoring change is basically GW trying to beat new players over the head with the lesson "whether or not you take the double turn is an actual strategic choice. Consider both options". This lesson, however, comes at the expense of lowering the skill ceiling/room for skill expression. Previously when you chose to double turn you had two routes you could take: the damage double turn vs the score double turn. In the former you try to maximize the losses your opponent takes. In the latter case you're hoping to reposition to lock your opponent off the objectives for long enough that they have to make very risky decisions to catch up on points. If the option of a points double turn even occurs to them one of the things newer players misunderstand is that, assuming you're both positioned reasonably, the score double turn is actually the much bigger threat between the two. Since it's so unintuitive to new players GW basically removed the option of a points double turn but left the damage double turn completely untouched. Even if it means the more interesting form of double turn is gone, this may, in the long run, be worth the trade off if it means enough people get past that initial learning phase, but that remains to be seen. There's also the potential to make up for that loss in depth with warscrolls seeming to be more interesting this edition. Edit: While far from a perfect comparison, a similar idea would be if GW somehow toned down, but ultimately kept non reciprocal shooting in killteam. There's all sorts of strategic & tactical depth that it creates that entrenched/competitive players tend to enjoy, but new players often find it weird, unintuitive, and think that GW should remove it from the game. If GW kept it in the game, but somehow made it less interesting but more palatable for new and casual players is that a worthwhile tradeoff? How much strategic depth should we sacrifice for the sake of growing the player pool?

[@uther10]

Stormcasr Squidmar!

[@leeprochazka5420]

Only one spearhead army per faction. Sounds awesome.....

[@cullenasaro2229]

I will say. As someone who has played AoS for a long time. I play with top players (previous Team USA Worlds coach. Previous Team USA Players. Top in faction players, ITC winners) the double turn is an ESSENTIAL part of AoS. It is NOT a broken mechanic. And everyone who knows the game agrees that it is an ESSENTIAL mechanic for competitive AoS. You have to learn how handle it, and when you do you see how important it is.

[@GlassHalfDead]

And so they are all stopping playing with 4th because GW has removed that essential mechanic as the game will now not be competitive?

[@Shadowknightneo]

Unfortunately I have to respectfully disagree, while you have played with the top 1% or 0.1% of the player base I don't think that's the general consensus of the wider player base. Competitive players also measure their movement / ranges down to the 1/4 of an inch where most players would have the "that's close enough for this game" attitude. There's nothing worse than getting double turned and basically spending 40-60 minutes not able to do anything just watch your opponent play with their toy soldiers. It's why I love skirmish games and the alternative activation mechanics like Necromunda. They should do it in a bigger army scale basically eliminating the entire turn all together.

[@robertchmielecki2580]

So maybe you should play less AoS and play more modern, state-of-the-art games (going through the top 50 of BGG is a nice start) to see how terrible of a design decision a double turn like this is in comparison to what other solutions that already exist in the tt gaming world.

[@jamesalbright7581]

The double turn is a neat mechanic and keeps it interesting! You have to plan for if you get it or not. I enjoy it. They got the game mechanic from lord of the rings. Lord of the rings ( their best game) does have a game mechanic to help counter it. They use might points. Play it a while and you’ll come around.

[@torok8974]

idk how its logic to get a doubleturn mechanic in any game tho

[@bigfacenic]

I like the idea of it, but the lack of meaningful terrain kind of makes the board look a bit dull. I also kind of feel like if I'm looking at a skirmish version of Sigmar then I might as well bite the bullet and go balls deep on Warcry or Underworlds instead

[@GlassHalfDead]

Sigmar has never been a particularly terrain dense system, in fairness. And in a game based around turn 1 charges, why have terrain! Warcry will definitely have the more cinematic boards

[@04Royale]

Yooooo this made me reconsider what to buy as my first GW product (currently looking for killteam beginner box) #ph

[@GlassHalfDead]

If you're equally as into Sigmar as 40k, then honestly, I think GW puts more effort into sigmar. Kill Team is of course a lil passion project of mine, but it's not for everyone! It's all down to what you personally want from a gaming experience

[@Colorcrayons]

This echoes my own skepticism regarding the format. I am seeing nothing that makes me want to bother with this when I already have a decent system in Warcry. The live stream game was... unconvincing. 2+ Tough seems enthusiastic, but if this is how AoS is done better, then AoS wasn't a very good design to begin with. Just not a game for me. No loss for GW since I still buy their AoS crap for Warcry.

[@GlassHalfDead]

He thinks spearhead specifically is aos done better, or 4.0 is aos done better? I mean, you've got to remember 2 things. Firstly, excitement and hype is REAL and it affects everyone. Loretubers and hardcore top tier gamers alike. We all get excited and we all want the new thing to be what breaks the mould and revolutionises everything and grows the game to the biggest its ever been. Secondly, we all want different things from our gaming experience. Some people believe Warcry is the pinnacle of game design on every level, casual, narrative, competitve, and it can do no wrong. Others think Kill Team is that. Others think Shatterpoint or Warmachine. As a viewer it's all about know the creator's bias when watching what they say so you have context for how literally you should take their words. I try to be pretty open as I've done this a few times now. I am enjoying the current aos hype and letting it run away with me a bit, so I'm probably being more generous towards the system than I normally would be. And the key things I want from aos is a large community akin to 40k that plays "okay" with cool models.

[@Spardin]

might be fun on a bigger board i think, looks a bit squish

[@GlassHalfDead]

Board size is an eternal problem! I think as soon as you lock down movement when in engagement range and don't have an easy disengage mechanic, board size and movement ranges become absolutely critical to balance. For example, in mesbg, after you complete a fight, you disengage and so movement in the next turn is free

[@torok8974]

did you see the presentation before the 2h of games ? they explain how we manage the team through the board, its more thematic now, not just a positionning game, its about managing your army through events and points, its more thematic now

[@leeprochazka5420]

Say it again. It makes you smarter. Thematic.......

[@AltroseSenar]

Looking at the videos and articles by those that got a chance to play it, it really feels like their special showcase just did a terrible job of actually showcasing the gameplay. Which honestly feels in brand.

[@GlassHalfDead]

Yeah, I seem to be the only naysayer, so I'll just assume I'm wrong. I standby the idea that from what they've shown so far, it really doesn't look like something "serious" players will play more than a handful of times, but that's just me focusing on the current messaging around how it's a deeply tactical game for pros AS WELL AS beginners etc. It looks like a fun little lunchtime skirmish

[@DaWeirdcast]

That was a great video! Happy to see ya'll are excited for Spearhead as much as we are. If you and your community are interested we are running a SPEARHEAD demo game this Friday (5/24/) at 8pm CST on our twitch channel. We'd love if ya'll stopped by. twitch.tv/daweirdcast

[@itsallfunandgames723]

It always seems like these "new ways to play" come with a lot of fanfare, then quickly disappear from memory. I think what it will really do, is encourage veteran players to pick a force starter box, under the idea that they can play with it straight away, but then after trying that for two months or so the whole AoS community will move on. If you're going to the trouble to get out a small AoS army to play a 90-120 minute game with special rules, why not just do a medium sized game of AoS in 120-180 minutes with normal rules?

"The double turn is dumb" stopped the video right there. You got filtered. I'll be back for some KT content but maybe don't comment on AOS if you don't play or understand the game.

[@wetland3010]

Nah, all the experts will move to the new meta and find a new winning exploit. Don't want to be left behind 😛

[@adambusenbark63]

Woof. Terrain basically meaningless and just swamped up on top of each other from turn one sounds... Well it doesn't catch me. Good to know, I can safely avoid this one! Excellent reporting!

[@GlassHalfDead]

I mean, this is just from what we see here. I seem to be the only naysayer, so far everyone that has played a game says it's the second coming, so who knows

[@adambusenbark63]

@@GlassHalfDead ehhh. Even if the terrain does something, that table size should have like 5-10 minis a side tops, it's just gonna be a giant melee. Perhaps others really like it, but I can't see me being one at this point. Maybe I'm too into stuff like mordheim and Frost grave 🤷

[@7nineofspades5]

The double-turn is an oft misunderstood mechanic, play with it a bit and you'll like it. Them changing it so dramatically now is actually what could finally make it bad imo.

[@Aki777craft]

Spearhead is miles better than warcry

[@sitrucsimian5450]

I’ll stick with Warcry.

[@GlassHalfDead]

Totally valid! Warcry has a huge depth of list building and is its own unique system. And obviously your boards will look way cooler. I'm quite excited for Spearhead to buy one box, and use it to learn a faction quickly. Hopefully they manage to make the Spearhead factions play like a microcosm of the larger factions! I mean, Sigmar models are the coolest, so the collecting is fun in itself.

[@earnestwanderer2471]

This isn’t a game really. It’s just an excuse to roll dice. The board is too small for the model count. Movement is basically nonexistent let alone any opportunity for actual maneuver. To be honest, it’s not that much different from the big brother games, where army construction and deployment contribute more to success than actual game play. The goal being to get the most advantageous matchups between units, both by selecting the best units during list construction and then deploying your units to engage those enemy units which are easiest to defeat.

[@GlassHalfDead]

But finishes in an hour (once you know what you're doing), and you can just roll dice and see what happens, with one or two tactical decisions along the way. There's value in that for the newer players!

[@earnestwanderer2471]

I guess, as you said in other replies, it’s a matter of taste, what you’re looking for in a game. 40k Combat Patrol, at the start, for ME, was just awful. The balance between boxes was nonexistent. But some folks claimed to love it. Don’t see much evidence that it’s a widely played format even casually, let alone at tournaments. It might have had some value as a teaching tool, but that phase of your journey only lasts so long. I’d be more interested in something that had value for experienced players. Enough depth to justify repeated play sessions, over and above... well we can actually get a game in on a work/school night. Warcry and KT21 are both games that you can play a couple of times in an evening and actually reward skilled play (KT21 admittedly more so) in addition to luck rolling dice.