The Rumour Thread

[Vaellas]

29 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

But where is that line drawn? Stormcast got dragons and Ironjawz do too? Abraxia rides a land dragon yet we have Dracoths?

Is a chaos Manticore that look completely different from one single character normal manticore really sharing?

It would be pretty neat if they get a new Chaos dragon reveal. Adding Chaos on to it makes it different enough from the Stromcast dragons. 

[Kronos]

29 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

But where is that line drawn? Stormcast got dragons and Ironjawz do too? Abraxia rides a land dragon yet we have Dracoths?

Is a chaos Manticore that look completely different from one single character normal manticore really sharing?

This, This this. More Variants of creatures. It’s such a Warhammer thing. We used to have Forest Dragons, Chaos Dragons, and Black Dragons (technically we still do via Old World).

 

If Dwarfs, Men and Elves can all fall to Chaos I don’t see why a monster should be any different. Or even align itself out of common cause or because it got beaten into servitude. There are so many reasons a Manticore Could be ridden by a Chaos Lord. 
 

I was always in awe of this old Gem when I first got into the Hobby, and quite possibly why I associate Manticores with Malevolence (I make no apologies for my recent nostalgic contributions).

 

 

[NotBeastmanBob]

17 minutes ago, Vaellas said:

It would be pretty neat if they get a new Chaos dragon reveal. Adding Chaos on to it makes it different enough from the Stromcast dragons. 

I would love the idea of Wyvern as our equivalent.

 

Full on "Reign of Fire"/Smaug Wyvern-style and just run with it and own it

[Chikout]

3 minutes ago, Kronos said:

This, This this. More Variants of creatures. It’s such a Warhammer thing. We used to have Forest Dragons, Chaos Dragons, and Black Dragons (technically we still do via Old World).

 

If Dwarfs, Men and Elves can all fall to Chaos I don’t see why a monster should be any different. Or even align itself out of common cause or because it got beaten into servitude. There are so many reasons a Manticore Could be ridden by a Chaos Lord. 
 

I was always in awe of this old Gem when I first got into the Hobby, and quite possibly why I associate Manticores with Malevolence (I make no apologies for my recent nostalgic contributions).

 

 

It’s funny how tastes diverge. I really didn’t like this model when it was released. The wings were a particular problem. How many monsters did they release with exactly the same wings? There were a lot of monsters but them all sharing the wings kind of ruined it. I do think Abraxia is the ‘replacement’ for the manticore. I’m certain will we see more monsters for slaves to darkness in the future but they’ve already had plenty. It wouldn’t bother me if Slaves to Darkness go an edition without a major release for the first time. It’s time to put some other factions in the spotlight. 

[Mandzak-Miniatures]

I think it would have been better if CoS had a large gargoylian mount instead of the manticore..

[Vaellas]

5 minutes ago, Mandzak-Miniatures said:

I think it would have been better if CoS had a large gargoylian mount instead of the manticore..

I expected a Griffon, but then that went to Stormcast.

[Hollow]

If AoS were to get a range of "larger" kits, I would much rather see War Machine/Monster units than singular creatures ridden by characters. Faction ranges are already far too "top-heavy" in my opinion. The way battalions work, you can only include a few characters in an army. I want more unit options and variations.

Whatever happened to the distant rumour of a potential plastic War Mammoth? That would be cool to see on the 5th. 

 

[Neverchosen]

6 minutes ago, Hollow said:

If AoS were to get a range of "larger" kits, I would much rather see War Machine/Monster units than singular creatures ridden by characters. Faction ranges are already far too "top-heavy" in my opinion. The way battalions work, you can only include a few characters in an army. I want more unit options and variations.

Whatever happened to the distant rumour of a potential plastic War Mammoth? That would be cool to see on the 5th. 

 

I have always liked the Zombie Dragon/Terrorgheist approach of optional hero. 

[MitGas]

54 minutes ago, Vaellas said:

It would be pretty neat if they get a new Chaos dragon reveal. Adding Chaos on to it makes it different enough from the Stromcast dragons. 

As chaos dragons are tzeentchian creations, DoT should get them! As a triple kit! Sorcerer on dragon, Egrimm on Baudros and Galrauch, the first chaos dragon, himself! I‘d be willing to let S2D ally in my lord‘s great creation, I‘m not like that… unlike that rule writer who took allies away! 😤
 

A man can dream…

 

If guys like Sigvald return, then at least Aekold Helbrass could. He actually has a lore reason to be still alive! 
 

And Valnir the Reaper could be re-raised for Nurgle. Gotta love that old Wayne England design. 
 

I keep dreaming… but it‘s my bedtime. 

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

1 hour ago, MitGas said:

If guys like Sigvald return, then at least Aekold Helbrass could. He actually has a lore reason to be still alive! 

I'm surprised that Aekold hasn't turned up yet, actually. He was a favourite of many back in the day, and his design was iconic. 

[Jetlife]

1 hour ago, Chikout said:

I do think Abraxia is the ‘replacement’ for the manticore. 

Yes, totally agree. Or even the Chaos Lord on Karkadrak could be considered a replacement since they still have chaos lord on daemonic mount.

Ad far as chaos sorcerer on foot, it seems GW has several options especially if they bring back some of the underworlds/warcry bands. 
 

I feel like we won’t see a new chaos Lord on foot and instead the old will be retired and they will retire the warscroll for the exalted hero and use that sculpt as the chaos lord on foot. But that’s just pure speculation 

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

1 hour ago, Jetlife said:

I feel like we won’t see a new chaos Lord on foot and instead the old will be retired and they will retire the warscroll for the exalted hero and use that sculpt as the chaos lord on foot. But that’s just pure speculation 

Seems sensible. 

Who actually fields a Chaos Lord on foot, anyway? They're not exactly the most tactically sound geezers around. 

[Tonhel]

1 hour ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:

Seems sensible. 

Who actually fields a Chaos Lord on foot, anyway? They're not exactly the most tactically sound geezers around. 

This was already the case in 3th edition. It's a real shame that a Chaos Lord on foot has zero impact in AoS.

[Ejecutor]

6 hours ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

But where is that line drawn? Stormcast got dragons and Ironjawz do too? Abraxia rides a land dragon yet we have Dracoths?

Is a chaos Manticore that look completely different from one single character normal manticore really sharing?

IJ and Abraxia's mount could be called dragons, but they are clearly different from the Stormcast ones. I even doubt if they are technically dragons. I guess if chaos get a manticore it will be as different as the IJ great lettuce.

[Ejecutor]

5 hours ago, Mandzak-Miniatures said:

I think it would have been better if CoS had a large gargoylian mount instead of the manticore..

IMO gargolians wouldn't be a suitable mount. If for some reason the level of faith decreases during the battle they should dissappear. And a faith linked mount is not the best suiting mount for Tahlia.

[Beliman]

36 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

This was already the case in 3th edition. It's a real shame that a Chaos Lord on foot has zero impact in AoS.

Imho, I think that foot-heroes are a lot better in AoS 4th than 3th. Most of them have a chain-fight activation with an extra +1hit or +1 wound. That's like a free CP without spending an activation for your units to FIGHT. 

But foot-heroes have 3 problems:

1. The first one is with high-damage units/combos (aka, deathstars), that can remove an entire unit (and a hero) before they hit back. Each army has their own "hammer", and that means that only armies that can give Attack-First to their foot-heroes are going to make use of their 500p hero+unit.
2. Articats/Traits/Buffs to high wounds characters. A 5+ward is better on a 15 wounds than a 5 wounds hero.
3. Movement. Most foot-heroes have 4"-6" movement. High damage units have 10-12" (cavalry). And AoS 4th is all about movement and engaging the right units.

Even all of that, I've seen a Lord Terminos destroy 600p with a chain-fight activation of 6 reclusians, and that alone can surprise and win a game.

 

Edit: A half-solution could be to make some restrictions for Heroic Traits/ Artifacts, and maybe use other keywords (War Machine) to do more damage to high-wounds/high saves units. But I woudn't expect to see something like that until 5th edition.

Edited 20 hours ago by Beliman

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

6 hours ago, Vaellas said:

I expected a Griffon, but then that went to Stormcast.

They talked about that in the designer interviews for Cities. They wanted Tahlia Vedra to have a wild looking mount in her manticore as opposed to the more regal, heraldic choice of a gryphon to express her status as an outsider and mercenary through her model. I also found it interesting how they specifically mentioned not wanting to presume feudalism/monarchy for the Cities, which is why they didn't make Vedra a queen.

[Tonhel]

42 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Imho, I think that foot-heroes are a lot better in AoS 4th than 3th. Most of them have a chain-fight activation with an extra +1hit or +1 wound. That's like a free CP without spending an activation for your units to FIGHT. 

But foot-heroes have 3 problems:

1. The first one is with high-damage units/combos (aka, deathstars), that can remove an entire unit (and a hero) before they hit back. Each army has their own "hammer", and that means that only armies that can give Attack-First to their foot-heroes are going to make use of their 500p hero+unit.
2. Articats/Traits/Buffs to high wounds characters. A 5+ward is better on a 15 wounds than a 5 wounds hero.
3. Movement. Most foot-heroes have 4"-6" movement. High damage units have 10-12" (cavalry). And AoS 4th is all about movement and engaging the right units.

Even all of that, I've seen a Lord Terminos destroy 600p with a chain-fight activation of 6 reclusians, and that alone can surprise and win a game.

 

Edit: A half-solution could be to make some restrictions for Heroic Traits/ Artifacts, and maybe use other keywords (War Machine) to do more damage to high-wounds/high saves units. But I woudn't expect to see something like that until 5th edition.

Yes, but that does make a Chaos Lord more a buff token, than a combat character. I already posted it during 3rd, but a Chaos Lord on foot should still be a force to be feared in melee. Which he sadly isn't. The Lord Terminos can everything what a Chaos Lord does, but better.

Anyway, even when a Chaos Lord was the best buff providing character in the game it still wouldn't do the concept of a Chaos Lord justice as he would still be a weakling in combat.

1. That's why they should have done the same as in 40K, let them join specific units.

2. With only one artefact/trait per army, with only 3 choices means it will almost never be given to a foot hero. Anyway artefacts and etc should cost points.

3, Jup, it's a serious weakness + the fact that they don't really for WoC add a different regiment composition compared to the other non foot Chaos lords in WoC.

 

15 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

They talked about that in the designer interviews for Cities. They wanted Tahlia Vedra to have a wild looking mount in her manticore as opposed to the more regal, heraldic choice of a gryphon to express her status as an outsider and mercenary through her model. I also found it interesting how they specifically mentioned not wanting to presume feudalism/monarchy for the Cities, which is why they didn't make Vedra a queen.

That's a bit strange, because you can do a lot with a griffon, different bird heads, rear legs, pose and the overall look instead of just stealing the Manticore from WoC. I mean it's AoS, so just taking the Manticore from WoC is the easy option.

Also if CoS doesn't get a replacement for the old Warhammer griffon and black dragon and is only stuck with a named character on a manticore. It's a loss for the army.

Same for WoC, if there isn't a replacement for the Manticore, it's a loss for the army. 

Edited 19 hours ago by Tonhel

[Beliman]

4 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

Yes, but that does make a Chaos Lord more a buff token, than a combat character. I already posted it during 3rd, but a Chaos Lord on foot should still be a force to be feared in melee. Which he sadly isn't. The Lord Terminos can everything what a Chaos Lord does, but better.

Yeah, I partialy agree. Chaos-Lord is not a bad unit, but it's not the powerhouse that was in Fantasy. He is on par with a Lord-Celestan (a bit better btw), that is an already good unit and that's fine if you don't look back in fantasy.

The Lord-Terminos is a more punchy character from a chamber that has better abilities. Maybe that's what's missing from the S2D roster that previously was tied to the Chaos Lord.

With the same profile of the Lord-Terminos, I think it should be enough for a Chaos Lord to be above the Lord-Celestan, but I'm not sure if that's what a Chaos Lord should be in AoS.

[Nezzhil]

8 hours ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

But where is that line drawn? Stormcast got dragons and Ironjawz do too? Abraxia rides a land dragon yet we have Dracoths?

Is a chaos Manticore that look completely different from one single character normal manticore really sharing?

Ironjawz is a Wyvern (with Mister Olympia complex). Dragons are an Order race.

[AquaRegis]

7 hours ago, Hollow said:

If AoS were to get a range of "larger" kits, I would much rather see War Machine/Monster units than singular creatures ridden by characters. Faction ranges are already far too "top-heavy" in my opinion. The way battalions work, you can only include a few characters in an army. I want more unit options and variations.

Whatever happened to the distant rumour of a potential plastic War Mammoth? That would be cool to see on the 5th. 

 

I just wish that AOS had more customization with mounts tbh, similar to what WHFB and 7th 40k had. 

Not only does it make your choice of heroes a bit more flexible it allows you to customize and convert to your hearts content. A loonboss riding on the back of a troll or a palanquin of scrap metal for example. How about Cities having a wizard on a horse, or chariot. 

[Ejecutor]

5 minutes ago, AquaRegis said:

I just wish that AOS had more customization with mounts tbh, similar to what WHFB and 7th 40k had. 

Not only does it make your choice of heroes a bit more flexible it allows you to customize and convert to your hearts content. A loonboss riding on the back of a troll or a palanquin of scrap metal for example. How about Cities having a wizard on a horse, or chariot. 

The problem with this kind of request, IMO, is that we are asking for legit stuff, but stuff that would eventually come. We are not yet at that point of the game development. We are still placing the roots. Once all that roots are sorted, I think we will see more stuff like that.

[AquaRegis]

36 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Yeah, I partialy agree. Chaos-Lord is not a bad unit, but it's not the powerhouse that was in Fantasy. He is on par with a Lord-Celestan (a bit better btw), that is an already good unit and that's fine if you don't look back in fantasy.

The Lord-Terminos is a more punchy character from a chamber that has better abilities. Maybe that's what's missing from the S2D roster that previously was tied to the Chaos Lord.

With the same profile of the Lord-Terminos, I think it should be enough for a Chaos Lord to be above the Lord-Celestan, but I'm not sure if that's what a Chaos Lord should be in AoS.

Lumineth are a decent example of an abundance of foot heroes done well (at least in 3rd, I haven't used them in 4th). All the heroes have a defined role as either support units, or offensive attackers like the Lore master. The foot heroes in cities also function pretty well in their own niche. 

In my experience the armies with the classic beatstick foot heroes like most Chaos and Destruction factions, normally just have a better mounted option that overshadows them. Why take a chaos lord on Foot, when you can pay a bit more and take a mounted option, with better offensive and defensive options?

[The Lost Sigmarite]

12 minutes ago, AquaRegis said:

I just wish that AOS had more customization with mounts tbh, similar to what WHFB and 7th 40k had. 

Not only does it make your choice of heroes a bit more flexible it allows you to customize and convert to your hearts content. A loonboss riding on the back of a troll or a palanquin of scrap metal for example. How about Cities having a wizard on a horse, or chariot. 

It would also reduce the bumber of warscrolls. Sadly I don't see it coming. GW is very focused on their "official WYSIWYG" policy of one kit = one rules profile (except for dual kits).

Edited 18 hours ago by The Lost Sigmarite

[Chikout]

17 minutes ago, AquaRegis said:

I just wish that AOS had more customization with mounts tbh, similar to what WHFB and 7th 40k had. 

Not only does it make your choice of heroes a bit more flexible it allows you to customize and convert to your hearts content. A loonboss riding on the back of a troll or a palanquin of scrap metal for example. How about Cities having a wizard on a horse, or chariot. 

AoS does have hero customisation including mounts. The anvil of apotheosis will be in every battletome. It provides almost exactly what everyone says they want. They even have points.