General Chat Thread

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

3 hours ago, Ejecutor said:

I don't find this that problematic. In my experience, it is as easy as telling your opponent: "This guy with a two-handed axe it is using a two-handed maze instead".

Yes, yes... but 'counts as' is a slippery slope. 

Besides, I find there's pleasure in having the Warscroll and the model matching up properly. Don't ask me to explain why, because I don't know. 

[Grungnisson]

23 minutes ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:

Yes, yes... but 'counts as' is a slippery slope. 

Is it though? I know one could come up with any sort of outlandish examples, but come on, let's be pragmatic. One, the hobby's expensive, and when I'm making a purchasing decision, I'd rather spend the money on an additional different unit, rather than duplicating a kit I already have, just for the sake of a different weapon option. And two, space is also an issue. It's one thing to have a duplicate of a foot hero, quite another to duplicate a unit of 10 models on 32mm bases, for example. Even more so, when we multiply it across an army. And god forbid you have more than one army, too.

 

29 minutes ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:

Besides, I find there's pleasure in having the Warscroll and the model matching up properly. Don't ask me to explain why, because I don't know. 

 

And on that note, obviously, your own preference is your own preference. You do you, as long as you're fully aware that it is a choice you make for yourself, and don't present it as a requirement coming from the game. Which it isn't. AoS is not a WYSIWYG game, never has been.

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

41 minutes ago, Grungnisson said:

Is it though? I know one could come up with any sort of outlandish examples, but come on, let's be pragmatic. One, the hobby's expensive, and when I'm making a purchasing decision, I'd rather spend the money on an additional different unit, rather than duplicating a kit I already have, just for the sake of a different weapon option. And two, space is also an issue. It's one thing to have a duplicate of a foot hero, quite another to duplicate a unit of 10 models on 32mm bases, for example. Even more so, when we multiply it across an army. And god forbid you have more than one army, too.

Quite so. Which is why I'm glad that they're having combined weapon profiles in this edition. 

[Beliman]

12 hours ago, brocktoon said:

Thumbing through these more extensively now. Reiterating concerns about the smoothing over of some of the Age of Sigmar weirdness that drew me through the "they killed WFB oh no" doldrums and made me fall in love with the game. The GUO simplifying meaningful weapon choices into "Colossal Blight Weapons" for the sake of squeezing everything into a single page hurts my heart. I get it: they (and most players) want a streamlined game with an eye toward balanced competition and GW seem to now be fine putting the complicated old school design ethos into Heresy and now TOW. But, man, give me some edge cases for unpredictability and tradeoffs at the list building level. Let me customize and chance something outside the meta at the individual model/unit level.

Maybe that stuff comes back with the army books but I wouldn't bet on it.

As a Kharadron Overlords player, I'm not a fan.

We still have a lot of loadouts, and most of them suck. We are going to use the same weapon (Wardens with pistol+pile, Riggers with saws+pistol, Thunderers and Arkanauts with all specialist weapons), because they are plain better.

If a campaign, new edition or whatever swaps that, all this models will end with meh loadouts, and for an elite army that mostly plays with 40-50 models, if 30 of them have meh weapons, the army will go down.

Of course you can ignore WYSIWYG, but for a lot of people (me included), accept that as part of the hobby.

I know it's a selfcentered opinion, but I prefer to buy new units to use as diferent roles than the same units with diferent weapons.

[Dragon-knight77]

Oh the new novel "On the sholder of giants" cover is drawn by Igor Sid (same as the Darkoath novel). Just want to bring up a cool artist and show off this art

[Ejecutor]

33 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

Oh the new novel "On the sholder of giants" cover is drawn by Igor Sid (same as the Darkoath novel). Just want to bring up a cool artist and show off this art

It is curious that as it is using the same colour for the background and similar colours, it looks like they are not that far one from another.

[brocktoon]

6 hours ago, Grimrock said:

Yeah I'll take this any day. So much better than having my $200 model that I spent 20+ hours painting suddenly be a paperweight for a whole edition because his weapon loadout was good last edition and now needs to be nerfed into oblivion to 'encourage' me to buy another one. I can see it's a bit more boring at the list building level but I think it opens up so much at the hobby/customer friendly levels that it more than balances out. 

I get the argument and the one weapon profile stuff wasn't a mystery to me but the GUO brought some stakes into clearer focus. There it's not just the "pick extra rend or extra damage" thing but the tactics around the bell and knife. You can't have a buffing and/or castier guy now (and for the record I don't). It's just blades. Again, I get it and even respect it, but moves like that remove an entire style of play which revolved around that one model. That cascades down to interactions with other models.

We can radiate that out. No morale means no interactions with morale. Something goofy like the herald for FEC offering a bone is gone. I get it, I do, but certainly for me, and I'm going to venture more people than we realize right this second, that sort of odd stuff and the mechanics revolving around more than fight/interact with this dot on the table was a core part of AoS' appeal.

Or spells, which I mentioned I guess last week. Three spells per faction. Yes, past editions had clear better choices and you could choose poorly (my response tends to be that learning a game iteratively through trial and error is part of a game's stickiness). But what if you want to play a conclave of CoS wizards? Why would you take a fourth wizard? What about a sorcerous Tzeentch army?

It might be a smoother game and it might be a more competitive game. I'm not sure it's as interesting a game*.

*To stave off doom and gloom, there's also a whole lot about the game I like, it's just mostly in the core mechanics.

[Beliman]

23 minutes ago, brocktoon said:

But what if you want to play a conclave of CoS wizards? Why would you take a fourth wizard? What about a sorcerous Tzeentch army?

Wait for the battletome.

We are at the begining of the first AoS "reset", and the main focus after a reset will aleays be to put all armies in the same square. With Destruction Battle Pack and Regiments/Armies of Renown, we are going yo move to another phase of the edition, where we can play the game with all the supported models. Aftet that, battletomes, campaigns, etc... will show how this edition will be fleshed out.

Btw, I expext the games to go wide instead of high, that's why I have high hopes for this modular system. The first battletomes are going to be one of the milestones of this edition.

[Ejecutor]

Faction Pack: Gloomspite Gitz: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/HALRx6OJ2CfFauWz.pdf

Faction Pack: Ogor Mawtribes: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/ebKGdlM1L86DgpCl.pdf

Faction Pack: Orruk Warclans: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/qVK4g9JQFo0ekZeZ.pdf

Faction Pack: Sons of Behemat: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/C5FnxtfWN5T9cCNI.pdf

Destruction Battletome: Bonesplitterz: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/e7Ea3ofZo5IbycWO.pdf

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

49 minutes ago, brocktoon said:

But what if you want to play a conclave of CoS wizards? Why would you take a fourth wizard?

I get your point about loss of choices, but there are answers to this specific question. They are "to cast warscroll spells", "to cast unlimited spells" and "to cast endless spells".

[Periophtalmus]

The Webspinner Shaman has litteraly become Spider-Man lmao.

 

 

[brocktoon]

2 hours ago, Beliman said:

Wait for the battletome.

 

Yep, that's why I'm merely cautious rather than enacting my thought about 2nd ed return. And I admit that I'm in a rare position: I only play narrative and gobble up 1e/2e Path to Glory play. Most people have a different idea of what was or is appealing about AoS than I do, which I'm abundantly okay with, sincerely.

Don't want to multiquote but re: warscroll spells, there are an awful lot of wizard models who don't have them. At least, with the above battletome waiting period, for now.

[Boingrot Bouncer]

Can't the just release the new app soon? It sucks doing lists on paper, and in Monday all warscrolls will be out.

In Monday I say we allarch on their HQ and demand it! Since I am in Sweden it might take some time to arrive, but if you in Britain start I'll come join you "soon".

[Beliman]

9 minutes ago, brocktoon said:

Most people have a different idea of what was or is appealing about AoS than I do, which I'm abundantly okay with, sincerely.

Don't get me wrong, there are some things that I'm not a fan of, even if 4th seems to fix most of my structural issues that AoS has since the begining.

It's just that we are at the begining of a reset and we don't know how battletomes are going to be written.

I'm just crossing fingers for a "wide" upgrade in each battletome.

Edit: @Boingrot Bouncer try with this: https://www.listbot.co.uk/listbot/?faction=3062

Not perfect but really fun

Edited July 12 by Beliman

[Boingrot Bouncer]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Don't get me wrong, there are some things that I'm not a fan of, even if 4th seems to fix most of my structural issues that AoS has since the begining.

It's just that we are at the begining of a reset and we don't know how battletomes are going to be written.

I'm just crossing fingers for a "wide" upgrade in each battletome.

Edit: @Boingrot Bouncer try with this: https://www.listbot.co.uk/listbot/?faction=3062

Not perfect but really fun

Thank you, fint to play around with the list!

[Grimrock]

4 hours ago, brocktoon said:

I get the argument and the one weapon profile stuff wasn't a mystery to me but the GUO brought some stakes into clearer focus. There it's not just the "pick extra rend or extra damage" thing but the tactics around the bell and knife. You can't have a buffing and/or castier guy now (and for the record I don't). It's just blades. Again, I get it and even respect it, but moves like that remove an entire style of play which revolved around that one model. That cascades down to interactions with other models.

We can radiate that out. No morale means no interactions with morale. Something goofy like the herald for FEC offering a bone is gone. I get it, I do, but certainly for me, and I'm going to venture more people than we realize right this second, that sort of odd stuff and the mechanics revolving around more than fight/interact with this dot on the table was a core part of AoS' appeal.

Or spells, which I mentioned I guess last week. Three spells per faction. Yes, past editions had clear better choices and you could choose poorly (my response tends to be that learning a game iteratively through trial and error is part of a game's stickiness). But what if you want to play a conclave of CoS wizards? Why would you take a fourth wizard? What about a sorcerous Tzeentch army?

It might be a smoother game and it might be a more competitive game. I'm not sure it's as interesting a game*.

*To stave off doom and gloom, there's also a whole lot about the game I like, it's just mostly in the core mechanics.

Yeah I totally get that. For weapon profiles specifically I prefer it simplified, but I've been pretty annoyed by how much they're stripping from the game in other areas. So many loreful and thematic rules, options, and models thrown out for the sake of making the game easier to balance. I've been feeling a little better in the last few days because some of the indexes do look pretty compelling to try out, but it's still a shame to have lost so much in the transition.

The best way I can think of it is this is a true index, stripped back as far as possible so that they have room to grow in the next couple editions before they hit reset and index again in 7th edition. I'm hopeful we'll see more options and rules reintroduced in the 5th and 6th and we'll be in a much better place by then, and in my opinion the base game they've created here is far better than the one we got in 1st edition AoS. 

[Ejecutor]

3 minutes ago, Grimrock said:

Yeah I totally get that. For weapon profiles specifically I prefer it simplified, but I've been pretty annoyed by how much they're stripping from the game in other areas. So many loreful and thematic rules, options, and models thrown out for the sake of making the game easier to balance. I've been feeling a little better in the last few days because some of the indexes do look pretty compelling to try out, but it's still a shame to have lost so much in the transition.

The best way I can think of it is this is a true index, stripped back as far as possible so that they have room to grow in the next couple editions before they hit reset and index again in 7th edition. I'm hopeful we'll see more options and rules reintroduced in the 5th and 6th and we'll be in a much better place by then, and in my opinion the base game they've created here is far better than the one we got in 1st edition AoS. 

I wouldn't say they did it with balance in mind, but with playability in mind. That's just the direction they decided to go. Quicker games, in all aspects.

[Boingrot Bouncer]

Yes, love that weapons profiles are simpler, but lack those fun warscroll abilities.

[CommissarRotke]

 

6 hours ago, brocktoon said:

the GUO brought some stakes into clearer focus. There it's not just the "pick extra rend or extra damage" thing but the tactics around the bell and knife. You can't have a buffing and/or castier guy now (and for the record I don't). It's just blades

i'm sorry you lost this for the GUO I have to agree it's straight better for weapon profiles to not matter, but losing fun abilities or even an entire role because of squishing is lazy! We can definitely have both--the Stormcast warscrolls did it fine. I don't understand why the GUO would lose a battlefield role just to save 1 warscroll.

[Silas7]

15 hours ago, Grimrock said:

Yeah I'll take this any day. So much better than having my $200 model that I spent 20+ hours painting suddenly be a paperweight for a whole edition because his weapon loadout was good last edition and now needs to be nerfed into oblivion to 'encourage' me to buy another one. I can see it's a bit more boring at the list building level but I think it opens up so much at the hobby/customer friendly levels that it more than balances out. 

Why didn't you just say they had the other weapons?

[Grimrock]

1 minute ago, Silas7 said:

Why didn't you just say they had the other weapons?

Personally I'm fine with doing that for a game or two as a proxy to try things out, but in the long run I prefer to have my models match with the rules I'm running. It's not such a big deal for small side weapons or a chaff unit maybe, but especially for something like a GUO where the weapons are bigger than most models I just don't enjoy proxying for extended periods of time. I'm fine if other people want to do that, I just don't enjoy it.

[Tonhel]

22 hours ago, Beliman said:

As a Kharadron Overlords player, I'm not a fan.

We still have a lot of loadouts, and most of them suck. We are going to use the same weapon (Wardens with pistol+pile, Riggers with saws+pistol, Thunderers and Arkanauts with all specialist weapons), because they are plain better.

If a campaign, new edition or whatever swaps that, all this models will end with meh loadouts, and for an elite army that mostly plays with 40-50 models, if 30 of them have meh weapons, the army will go down.

Of course you can ignore WYSIWYG, but for a lot of people (me included), accept that as part of the hobby.

I know it's a selfcentered opinion, but I prefer to buy new units to use as diferent roles than the same units with diferent weapons.

This has always been a problem with GW. The balance of different options is always off. Same for the marks with StD. Mark of Khorne and Mark of Nurgle are much better than the other two and the difference becomes even bigger when you reinforce the units.

A reinforced StD unit with the Mark of Khorne is a lot better than a reinforced unit with the Mark of Tzeentch and both cost the same.

Sadly for AoS with the limited amount of stats and no individual point cost of options stuff like "Colossal Blight Weapon" is best possible solution.

[Ejecutor]

12 hours ago, Grimrock said:

Personally I'm fine with doing that for a game or two as a proxy to try things out, but in the long run I prefer to have my models match with the rules I'm running. It's not such a big deal for small side weapons or a chaff unit maybe, but especially for something like a GUO where the weapons are bigger than most models I just don't enjoy proxying for extended periods of time. I'm fine if other people want to do that, I just don't enjoy it.

I am the same, but it is super tricky, considering that the rules can change every 3 years. So either buy more minis or magnetise.

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

9 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

Sadly for AoS with the limited amount of stats and no individual point cost of options stuff like "Colossal Blight Weapon" is best possible solution.

I know it's totally against the grain of AoS, but going old-school and having 'magic item' options that cost points would be kinda good, I think. Just one or two optional upgrades for Greater Daemons and their ilk. That way the points cost of individual items can be fine-tuned in updates, just like the points cost of units. 

[MitGas]

24 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

This has always been a problem with GW. The balance of different options is always off. Same for the marks with StD. Mark of Khorne and Mark of Nurgle are much better than the other two and the difference becomes even bigger when you reinforce the units.

A reinforced StD unit with the Mark of Khorne is a lot better than a reinforced unit with the Mark of Tzeentch and both cost the same.

Sadly for AoS with the limited amount of stats and no individual point cost of options stuff like "Colossal Blight Weapon" is best possible solution.

Well, someone who worked on these new rules clearly hates Tzeentch. MoT slaves still feel much better than DoT. Getting a ward against the new spells is way worse than it was tho with offensive spells being so, so, so much weaker now. 
 

Little survivability, meh shooting, very few decent units in close combat, and worst of all, mostly atrocious spells! There’s nothing that army can do well now. 😂 Wyrdflame-rules are hella lame too…. And I can‘t even officially use my slave units. I got enough to field a whole slaves army! It‘s certainly strange that Tzeentch is pretty much the only army to become cheaper points-wise in the new edition, just tells you that they‘re utter trash now. 
 

I do hope that the next battletome will change a lot of thing for the better and that we will get a wave now ASAP. No fatemaster hurts especially now that Enlightened are the last few decent units we have!