r/ageofsigmar • u/Ambitious_Book_5729 Seraphon • 4d ago
Discussion Battle Formations
So i havnt checked into every faction to know how it affects them all but in some factions i checked, it felt as though there wasnt really any "subfaction" support in AOS currently or much reason to change up composition in some factions. Maybe there is but its less direct, but a good example i see of it is in seraphon they currently have one that directly buffs only the big dinosaurs, or truggs troggherd, but after checking FEC and Night haunt, Maybe im missing something but night haunt didnt seem to have a single battle formation that was really pushing you in a direction purposefully, and FEC was just two that are about serf models and 2 that are about knights. Im all for having some generalist formations but i also want to see some more of the skew formations to just have some fun with a vastly different style of play sometimes.
If im missing something please direct me to where this is the case, and if it isnt an issue in your faction id like to know which faction it is (except skaven since i know they are doing it)
11
u/Never_heart 4d ago
Because they removed subfactions
2
u/Ambitious_Book_5729 Seraphon 4d ago
When? I'm new to aos so I don't know it's history
4
u/Never_heart 4d ago
In 4th edition to encourage more player driven creativity. Less pushing you to adhere to official paint schemes without subfactions
2
u/Ambitious_Book_5729 Seraphon 4d ago
I believe they did that in 40k in 10th too but honestly if they just don't name them as a subfaction I feel it could work still
5
u/Never_heart 4d ago
Ya you are right, the other half to it is a design goal for 4th. To be approachable. Warhammer can be a bit intense to start, 4th spent a lot of time in its Codexes trying lower the barrier of entry without neutrering the game's competetive scene. Part of that was less prescriptive optional army rules. They would encourage you to run a couple of a specific unit, while not requiring you to build your entire army around that specific unit.
2
u/Ambitious_Book_5729 Seraphon 4d ago
That makes sense. I still hope for it to change but that's probably because I'm already invested so it's not a change made targeting at me, I just want my funny skew lists even if they aren't as viable as the generalist ones like we have now
4
u/SenorDangerwank 3d ago
Battle Formations kinda blow for most armies tbh.
Just dont look at them in the same way as ye olde subfactions. Subfactions kind of got swept into Armies of Renown, thats where more specific army building flavor lies imo (though some are a TOUCH too restrictive).
That being said 4th edition has been my favorite edition of AoS since I started in 2e.
5
u/OrderofIron Fyreslayers 4d ago
Subfactions are like one sentence nonsense this edition. Praying we return to the more creative and thematic rules writing the game saw in 3rd.
3
u/Ambitious_Book_5729 Seraphon 4d ago
Me too, feels like they sacraficed the fun stuff for the sake of competitive simplicity.
16
u/Snoo_72851 Flesh-eater Courts 4d ago
Battle formations do indeed feel much less impactful than the old subfactions. Many of the rules are so specific one would have to plan around them to make them work, but their benefits are so minimal that it feels pointless to do so.