May 13, 2010

Ardboyz Missions, part deux



Seriously people? Getting this worked up about it? Granted, Andy tends to go overboard on his criticisms, but I have spoken to many people that feel the same way: Scenario 1 & 2 are tailored to specific army types and Scenario 3 punishes mech.

A.K.A. "Games Workshop sucks and they have no idea how to play the damn game."

I wholeheartedly disagree. Does anyone remember the missions from 2 - 3 years ago? Scenario 2 was referred to as the WTF mission. Broke every rule of the game, caused roll to go first to auto-win, weird infiltrating, etc.

Look, Scenario 1 & 2 are basically adaptations of the Standard Missions. Yes, mech has an easier time making it to Objectives - but if you're playing foot, you already know that (or you're an idiot). You have taken that into account, because as a non-mech player that is what the game is about now.

Scenario 3 punishes mech unfairly, sure. But as I stated in my last post, you're likely to be facing another mech army at this point if you're on the top table(s). The fact that GW updated the mission to clarify what does/doesn't count towards the 3 KP category shows that they care.

I'm not saying all is well and the Care Bears are dancing in GW-land, but I'm saying that they're improving. Nothing here breaks the basic tenets of the game. They're improving. I say give props for what is better, and give gracious feedback on what can still use improvement.

I'm done with the Anti/Pro Ardboyz stuff. My next post will be Sun/Mon with my experiences at the tourney.
Posted by at 1:41 PM
Labels: , ,

5 comments:

  1. The problem with the crazy third mission is this:

    There are so many bad armies that come to ard boyz, there will inevitably plenty of bad foot lists that are 2-0 after the first missions. So then giving them a mission that is "if you don't get tabled, you win" and vice versa for mech armies is really really stupid.

    2 first two missions don't matter much if you get massacred in the last one.

    So, yes, they are a lot better. But 1 bad mission (especially at the end) can ruin the entire competition.
    ReplyDelete
  2. Oh I realize that's a possibility Timmah, I just don't think it's likely. Not that there won't be foot armies on the top tables of game 3 - but that it most likely will not be a Win button (unless you're the crazy person bringing the 70 KP IG army).

    Most of the mobile armies that I have tried out for this tournament seem to land in the 30 - 45 KP zone. That's a pretty big spread, yes. Most foot armies aren't coming in at less than 20 KP. So yes, you have a handicap - play through it!

    Not trying to excuse GW over this mission... it really is bad. But I *am* trying to point out that the quality of the missions have improved. They still need to go further to be good, much less acceptable - but it's getting there.
    ReplyDelete
  3. John, if you published a software product this bad, you'd lose your job.

    This is their job.

    You don't Q&A with live products and not expect to take flak when it falls flat on it's face.

    Fourth times the charm? Fifth? Sixth? It's pathetic.
    ReplyDelete
  4. Yup - I would be out of business, but for some reason, everyone keeps drinking GW's lemonade.
    ReplyDelete
  5. Obviously Microsoft needs to buy GW. ;)
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)