Compared to point costs of the new Nurgle battletome many Destruction models seem overpriced

[Nico]

People have not appreciated how big the nerfs to Changehost are.

[svnvaldez]

23 hours ago, Nico said:

People have not appreciated how big the nerfs to Changehost are.

Until they can no longer shooting phase split horrors tying up a unit 8.9 inches away, dragging them into combat to stop a charge, the nerfs are not big enough (Not changehost specific I know).

Also the swap then congo line has to go... FAQ needs some wholey within wording.

[Yeled]

13 minutes ago, svnvaldez said:

Until they can no longer shooting phase split horrors tying up a unit 8.9 inches away, dragging them into combat to stop a charge, the nerfs are not big enough (Not changehost specific I know).

Also the swap then congo line has to go... FAQ needs some wholey within wording.

I dunno. I don't play Tzeentch, but that's a pretty fun ability. Sometimes I think people want to take some of the joy out of the game in the name of absolute balance.

[Nico]

Quote

Until they can no longer shooting phase split horrors tying up a unit 8.9 inches away, dragging them into combat to stop a charge, the nerfs are not big enough (Not changehost specific I know).

Why does this have to go? This is like saying Fanatics shouldn't exist. This is literally the core mechanic of the entire army. What do you expect Tzeentch Changehost to do - fight you in melee with no buffs whatsoever?

If you have read the FAQs in detail you can now shoot and wipe out 10 Pinks, then force the Tzeentch player to either deploy the Blues immediately (so you can shoot them with another unit) or not deploy the Blues at all. This is already a big nerf (compared to always being able to wait until the end of the phase and then decide whether to split).

Alternatively don't shoot at all, you don't have to. Charge in and get nearer the objectives. After people have played Tzeentch a few times, they stop making this mistake.

Quote

Also the swap then congo line has to go... FAQ needs some wholey within wording.

Classic! You're criticising a mechanic which has already been nerfed in this way to fix this issue. The swapped models now have to be within 9" of the first model that swapped (so you can stretch just over 10" with a unit of Pinks including base width (and no further with a unit of 20 Blues). The indefinite conga line has been dead since the GHB 2017 (the FAQs at that time).

Please stop suggesting nerfs to an army you haven't bothered to take the time to understand properly. It's infuriating.

The nerf you thankfully haven't suggested is suggesting that Split shouldn't allow models to setup within 3" - which would mean it wouldn't work in melee (which would be ludicrous both in terms of the lore of the game and balance).

Nerfing Tzeentch again, now, after dismal performances at the Masters and Heat One and with Nurgle sure to give them a tough time going forward is simply misguided. Even the Skyfires nerf seems to have done the trick (partly because the cost increase to the Shaman (whose own spell is essentially junk) is an indirect nerf to the Skyfires, which people haven't factored in). 

Balance changes should use the lightest touch possible. In that sense the last round of FAQs were very good (with a few minor issues) and the meta is both healthy with plenty of tier one armies competing and some tier two armies jumping up or very close to doing so (e.g. Wanderers); and fast changing (and that's before Legions of Nagash add another suit to the pack that Nurgle have just shuffled).

 

 

[Hyperion]

New Nurgle is incredibly strong.  I’m not crying wolf or complaining about power creep, just confused by the decisions gw makes sometimes.  

Normally with an army as resilient as Nurgle (which got even more resilient in the new book) you lose things like mobility or offensive power (which was the case pre maggotkin). Now however, they are even more resilient, got movement buffs, and have the damage output to compete pretty near tzeentch level.   Map wide multiple d3 mortals.  6 drones with blades of putrification can put out upwards of 22 unsaved wounds.  That’s just two examples.  

It’s a little crazy.  We will see how the meta shifts with them.  I’m not sure how it is in your areas but I’m thinking people aren’t really aware how strong they are.  And while they are low costed to much of destructions big guys, I think thier points cost over all is the only thing keeping them from being full blown ridiculous.  

[Hyperion]

On 1/19/2018 at 3:04 PM, Nico said:

Why does this have to go? This is like saying Fanatics shouldn't exist. This is literally the core mechanic of the entire army. What do you expect Tzeentch Changehost to do - fight you in melee with no buffs whatsoever?

If you have read the FAQs in detail you can now shoot and wipe out 10 Pinks, then force the Tzeentch player to either deploy the Blues immediately (so you can shoot them with another unit) or not deploy the Blues at all. This is already a big nerf (compared to always being able to wait until the end of the phase and then decide whether to split).

Alternatively don't shoot at all, you don't have to. Charge in and get nearer the objectives. After people have played Tzeentch a few times, they stop making this mistake.

Classic! You're criticising a mechanic which has already been nerfed in this way to fix this issue. The swapped models now have to be within 9" of the first model that swapped (so you can stretch just over 10" with a unit of Pinks including base width (and no further with a unit of 20 Blues). The indefinite conga line has been dead since the GHB 2017 (the FAQs at that time).

Please stop suggesting nerfs to an army you haven't bothered to take the time to understand properly. It's infuriating.

The nerf you thankfully haven't suggested is suggesting that Split shouldn't allow models to setup within 3" - which would mean it wouldn't work in melee (which would be ludicrous both in terms of the lore of the game and balance).

Nerfing Tzeentch again, now, after dismal performances at the Masters and Heat One and with Nurgle sure to give them a tough time going forward is simply misguided. Even the Skyfires nerf seems to have done the trick (partly because the cost increase to the Shaman (whose own spell is essentially junk) is an indirect nerf to the Skyfires, which people haven't factored in). 

Balance changes should use the lightest touch possible. In that sense the last round of FAQs were very good (with a few minor issues) and the meta is both healthy with plenty of tier one armies competing and some tier two armies jumping up or very close to doing so (e.g. Wanderers); and fast changing (and that's before Legions of Nagash add another suit to the pack that Nurgle have just shuffled).

 

 

Thank you for taking the time write my thoughts out for me.  I agree 100%. 

[Infeston]

On ‎18‎.‎01‎.‎2018 at 12:23 PM, angrycontra said:

Are they overpriced compared to GUO, well yeah maybe, but again that is like saying that they are overpriced compared literally to any balanced unit. I just feel that some tone in this thread attacks nurgle for being "undercosted" when they should be talking about how destruction units are overcosted.

I don't really care if Destruction is overpriced or Nurgle is undercosted. I just wanted to point out that something needs to change if you compare Destruction overall to any other faction (I am not talking about Ironjawz only, but also about Gutbusters, Grots and BCR).

After GHB2017 many Destruction players were told they shouldn't be so whiny after the overall nerf for Destruction, because it was justified. But if you look at GW's latest releases many armies seem to be a lot stronger and have mechanics which are also pretty strong. I would go as far as saying that even old Destruction (before the nerfs) couldn't stand a chance against the newly released armies.

I simply don't understand why Destruction had to get such a strong nerf only because of 1 Kunning Rukk + Stonehorn combi, when there are on the other hand many other armies which are even more ridiculous compared to old Destruction armies. And also the nerf didn' hit Kunning Rukk lists that hard. The only thing this nerf did was weaken BCR lists and also making mixed Destruction lists unviable.

Now the only lists which are viable in Destruction are often Bonesplittaz lists with Kunning Rukk. And they are not even fun to play, because you have to roll so many dice. I just wanted to point out that the Destruction changes after Generals Handbook 2017 seem over the board compared to the new armies and rules GW is releasing. 

Why did they remove the D6 move while on the other hand there are armies which move even faster without the D6 move and there is also a teleport meta where many units are even faster. 

The point I am trying to make is that I don't understand the logic behind GWs rules writing. After the first GHB the meta seemed a lot more balanced. I often have the feeling that GW just releases new rules and doesn't think about balancing or which effect this could have. Also it seems like GW often introduces better rules for newly released armies. And so older armies suffer even more, because with every new release there are appearing even better rules which become a necessary for every army after that. At the beginning things like teleporting and deepstriking where something which only few armies had and often only few units could deepstrike. Also they got other weaknesses to compensate for that.

Now I have the feeling that teleporting and deepstriking becomes a necessity in the new meta. And also many other armies are getting the things which made IJ or other Destruction armies unique. So why take IJ and Destruction in the end when every other army does everything better than Destruction?

[Malakree]

6 hours ago, Infeston said:

I don't really care if Destruction is overpriced or Nurgle is undercosted. I just wanted to point out that something needs to change if you compare Destruction overall to any other faction (I am not talking about Ironjawz only, but also about Gutbusters, Grots and BCR).

After GHB2017 many Destruction players were told they shouldn't be so whiny after the overall nerf for Destruction, because it was justified. But if you look at GW's latest releases many armies seem to be a lot stronger and have mechanics which are also pretty strong. I would go as far as saying that even old Destruction (before the nerfs) couldn't stand a chance against the newly released armies.

I simply don't understand why Destruction had to get such a strong nerf only because of 1 Kunning Rukk + Stonehorn combi, when there are on the other hand many other armies which are even more ridiculous compared to old Destruction armies. And also the nerf didn' hit Kunning Rukk lists that hard. The only thing this nerf did was weaken BCR lists and also making mixed Destruction lists unviable.

Now the only lists which are viable in Destruction are often Bonesplittaz lists with Kunning Rukk. And they are not even fun to play, because you have to roll so many dice. I just wanted to point out that the Destruction changes after Generals Handbook 2017 seem over the board compared to the new armies and rules GW is releasing. 

Why did they remove the D6 move while on the other hand there are armies which move even faster without the D6 move and there is also a teleport meta where many units are even faster. 

The point I am trying to make is that I don't understand the logic behind GWs rules writing. After the first GHB the meta seemed a lot more balanced. I often have the feeling that GW just releases new rules and doesn't think about balancing or which effect this could have. Also it seems like GW often introduces better rules for newly released armies. And so older armies suffer even more, because with every new release there are appearing even better rules which become a necessary for every army after that. At the beginning things like teleporting and deepstriking where something which only few armies had and often only few units could deepstrike. Also they got other weaknesses to compensate for that.

Now I have the feeling that teleporting and deepstriking becomes a necessity in the new meta. And also many other armies are getting the things which made IJ or other Destruction armies unique. So why take IJ and Destruction in the end when every other army does everything better than Destruction?

I suspect to some extent it's because newly released armies are designed to compete with T1 armies, so people will be willing to buy them.

Of course that does lead to power creep but it's more the directions they get pushed which is bad.

For example, ironjawz was supposed to be a very tanky army which grinds out the melee, but because GW didn't fix save stacking you end up with 1+ save speed bumps which hose melee focused armies.

To make those broken armies killable they added mortal wounds to everything as a band aid at which point high saves become mediocre.

AoS needs a couple of core rules tweaks to fix the underlying problems. Those being infinite save stacking, map wide redeployment and 6+ triggers. (Imo at least).

Of course making those changes is going to be hugely unpopular because all the top armies abuse them.

[Infeston]

1 minute ago, Malakree said:

I suspect to some extent it's because newly released armies are designed to compete with T1 armies, so people will be willing to buy them.

Of course that does lead to power creep but it's more the directions they get pushed which is bad.

For example, ironjawz was supposed to be a very tanky army which grinds out the melee, but because GW didn't fix save stacking you end up with 1+ save speed bumps which hose melee focused armies.

To make those broken armies killable they added mortal wounds to everything as a band aid at which point high saves become mediocre.

AoS needs a couple of core rules tweaks to fix the underlying problems. Those being infinite save stacking, map wide redeployment and 6+ triggers. (Imo at least).

Of course making those changes is going to be hugely unpopular because all the top armies abuse them.

Jeah. I totally agree. For me it also isn't so much about competitive viability but more about interesting playstyles and battles. I think if every army shares the same toolbox the battles get very boring. 

Jeah I know the D6 Ironjawz move was pretty strong, but you could also play around it and Destruction didn't have good shooting units. In my opinion the power creep meta destroys the interesting and unique battles which you could fight before.

If everyone can teleport around and reach their enemy in 1 turn, why even use a large battlefield? I mean there are some people who complain that there is too much terrain on the battlefield and find it unfair that some terrain blocks their shooting. 

I think it would be overall better if AoS as a whole gets slower. I think it was cool when only a few units could teleport or deepstrike, but when a whole army can do everything the playstyle becomes very boring. I just wish for more variety in the game and unique playstyles which can all succeed instead of everyone gets the same abilities etc.

Mortal wounds also should have been an exception and not a necessity. Also ward saves, teleporting, deepstriking, redeploying.

I for myself don't play matched play games anymore. I often design my own campaigns for my friends and act as a game master so I can regulate the difficulty by myself, so I always recognize if the game isn't challenging for my friends anymore, so I can add extra elements that make the game harder for them.

[SolarBur]

Most new army releases are going to be powerful. Game Workshop doesn't do poor army releases, original incarnations of them might not be strong since they are trying to find their feet with them, but they are released with some relative strengths. With the new nurgle release, this is pretty much just the same thing. They are throwing out the points they think feel right and will let them carry on until the new generals hand book when the points will be fixed up and sorted. Its the same for every army in this regard. 

Regarding the strength of new armies or feeling somewhat too powerful, its again a bit of the same thing. The abilities and play style has been tested and tested, but obviously some things will slip through the cracks and make it into the new battletome. Right now its a case of dealing with it and just waiting till the next generals handbook

[Anaticula]

9 hours ago, SolarBur said:

Most new army releases are going to be powerful. Game Workshop doesn't do poor army releases, original incarnations of them might not be strong since they are trying to find their feet with them, but they are released with some relative strengths.

Kharadron Overlords obviously was not strong enough game-wise. They didn't want to have the same problem again.

[SolarBur]

8 minutes ago, Anaticula said:

Kharadron Overlords obviously was not strong enough game-wise. They didn't want to have the same problem again.

Was it not ? 

I thought it was a fairly decent gunline army with good mobility considering they are duardin, and had transports which is a fairly new concept in the fantasy world. I played them once in store, but never really saw anyone else with them. Did they not take too well to the board or something in tournament play ? 

[PlasticCraic]

8 hours ago, Anaticula said:

Kharadron Overlords obviously was not strong enough game-wise. They didn't want to have the same problem again.

Yeah I'm not sure about that.  They aren't used that much, but people who do use them tend to do very well.  Against "normal"armies they are terrifying, against top tier armies they are rock paper scissors.

I can't speak for everyone but I bought the book on release day with the intention of buying into them.  Read through it, came up with a Clown Car list, got excited about how strong it was.  Thought about how those games would play out and decided I'd rather play an actual game of Warhammer.  

I think it's more that some people don't like the shock 'n' awe playstyle, rather than that they are underpowered as such.  Although if you try to use them for anything other than Clown Car I agree that they would be very tricky to use well and possibly a bit soft.  So I guess we're on the same page in that sense.

[SolarBur]

3 hours ago, PlasticCraic said:

Yeah I'm not sure about that.  They aren't used that much, but people who do use them tend to do very well.  Against "normal"armies they are terrifying, against top tier armies they are rock paper scissors.

I can't speak for everyone but I bought the book on release day with the intention of buying into them.  Read through it, came up with a Clown Car list, got excited about how strong it was.  Thought about how those games would play out and decided I'd rather play an actual game of Warhammer.  

I think it's more that some people don't like the shock 'n' awe playstyle, rather than that they are underpowered as such.  Although if you try to use them for anything other than Clown Car I agree that they would be very tricky to use well and possibly a bit soft.  So I guess we're on the same page in that sense.

I think it could have also been something to do with the price of the army too. Given the ships were £70, £50, and £30, but also being a bit of a large player within the armies, its not that surprising that you were unlikely to see a lot of them. I know there are more expensive army compositions out there, but that is normally a tournament style army and not the regular games night ones. 

Heck even with its monster heavy list you can get two Beastclaw monsters for just a little over the price of an ironclad and the both of them taking up a lot more points in the game (just under 300 i believe). Still, really nice looking models though, got to give them that much. 

[PlasticCraic]

Just a special shoutout to Favoured Poxes.

Probably the main reason you take the Troggoth Hag is for her amazing spell: casts on a 7+, 12" range, cripples an enemy unit with -1 to hit and save debuffs.  Only available on a 360 point model, with no access to +1 to cast.

Favoured poxes offers the exact same debuffs, AND -1 to wound.  And it has a 14" range.  And the casters have access to +1 to cast.  And you can put it on a 100 point Herald.

The whole thing about "It lasts for ever until to you do anything" has its upsides and downsides.  On a cheap caster you just cast it on a key unit your opponent has and you don't care, he can stand there doing nothing.  It's actually better in a lot of cases (especially if you don't give up a double turn) because whereas the Hag has to try to cast it again on a 7+, Nurgle can just set and forget.  

In this case Nurgle is a very valid direct comparison to a (relatively) strong and competitive Destruction unit.  So it's stricly better, way cheaper, has a further range, and is easier to cast.  Nope, nothing to see here!

[Auretious Taak]

On 1/17/2018 at 2:43 AM, Anaticula said:

We will see how strong Nurgle turns out to be soon. I don't think that they are overall as annoyingly strong as Tzeentch, BUT when I look at Blight Kings I get sick. Not only because of the obvious pestilence but because of their pricing: 140 pts for 5 with an increase of one wound per model i.e. 4 and 5 wounds for the champion. Brutes have 3 wounds and cost 180 pts. Please nobody tell me that it is well balanced.

Actually, Putrid Blight Kings are 160 points for 5, not 140.

Yes, they have an extra wound each but look at their stats (forgive me if I'm wrong on Brutes, I only have the destruction book right now for Ironjawz) - they have 3 attacks at 3+ to hit and 3+ to wound with1  damage each. their only real ability is on a 6 to hit they get D6 hits instead of 1. So ina  unit of 5 you are looking at 2*6's rolled giving an average of 7 hits instead of 2 for the ability. But they have zero rend and lack the resilience of Nurgel demon units (Disgustingly resilient.

brutes have 1 less wound each, they cost 20 points more for the unit and have a bit less bravery.

But The Brutes have the Duff Up da Big Things rule so against Putrid Blight Kings with their 4 wounds a piece and 5 on the champion you get to re-roll ALL failed hit rolls, significvantkly increasing the damage output against them. Moreover, every Brute weapon has a rend of at least -1. So straight off the bat you are not only hitting more, but due to the rend, your wounds which are the same, end up causing more failed saves and thus more casualties. More importantly, the Brute Boss with a Boss Klaw and Brute Smasha gets a re-roll on the hit roll for the Brute Klaw vs these wonderful 4 wound Nurgle buggers and meaning you are now at 75% chance of hitting with the Klaw instead of 50% and thus auto hitting with both attacks from the Smasha which is -2 rend and D3 damage, again on a 3+. Pretty damned potent compared to those Putrid Blight Kings and what? For a mere 20 points more?

Buffing Putrid Blight Kings is at least 100 points but closer to 140-220 depending what you want. Buffing Brutes is a mere 80 for a Warchanter to give +1 to hit, now one on one those Putrid Blight Kings are being hit even more and taking even more damage from your unit that costs 20 points more but also gets buffed for a massive amount cheaper then your Brutes.

The Brutes are actually OP and should be increased in points compared to what they are now if you really want to get down to it, especially considering that Brutes are Battleline in an ironjawz army and Putrid Blight Kings are Battleine in a Nurgle army.

Now, as a whole, Nurgle forces are much more expensive, it's actually a really well written and balanced army because no straight out over-powered combos and armies are dominating right now in terms of the Nurgle forces, it's all beinga pproached in a many faceted way and this is healthy for the game. That Great Unclean One may cost 340 points and be very resilient to damage and a decent caster to boot but it's combat damage out put leaves much to be desired. A lot of Nurgle players will take one as a support model with a bell for an extra 3" movement whilst within its' short range, but then they are outside of it and it may be able to tarpit but at 340 points that's a lot of points sunk into it. the Maw Krusha, that thing can do a lot more damage, has greater mobility and the ability to dish out a lot of mortal wounds if played right. It costs more for a reason people.

Nurgle armies aren't very forgiving in points. Sure, you can get some rather obscene smaller armies at say 1,000 points like a GUO, Rotigus (GUO Character) and 2 units of 5 Putrid Blight Kings, and at that level it is truly filthy and beardy to the extreme, but once you start expanding beyond that, maintaining the army wide strength that the smaller pointed army has, is increasingly difficult.

Are Nurgle armies powerful? Yes. Are they imblamnced points wise? Not in my opinion. Do destruction units need some loving and attention? Yes, but the points are relatively balanced between the units and The Maggotkin/Nurgle forces as a whole. Just because you see one unit in isolation and have a vomiting sensation at the power they exude (just how Nurgle wants you to react mind!) doesn't mean they are broken as all heck. Nurgle armies are small armies and to make them tick it costs a lot of points. What do destruction armies have to wipe out things like the Lord of Blights in a Blight Cyst battalion? Oh look, 2 Doom Divers are 20 points more expensive then the Blight Cyst battalion cost, and 3 cost as much as the battalion and the Lord of Blights. The difference being, you can kill that fellow without line of sight on your first turna nd suddenly that battalion has lost a large chunk of its' strength in the lack of any ranged damage. Heck 3 Doom Divers is the same cost (well 20 points more) as a Great Unclean One and their potential to snipe characters and other powerful support elements in a Nurgle army is potent to say the least.

Look, The new nurgle armies are powerful, but they aren't imbalanced in any blatant ways. They are still new so they are still steam rolling armies left right and centre, but once people realise how fast they can be and what elements are being used to buff what and how the army works, they'll start to lose strength because they can be out played more predictably then many armies.

[Auretious Taak]

On 1/22/2018 at 2:14 AM, Hyperion said:

New Nurgle is incredibly strong.  I’m not crying wolf or complaining about power creep, just confused by the decisions gw makes sometimes.  

Normally with an army as resilient as Nurgle (which got even more resilient in the new book) you lose things like mobility or offensive power (which was the case pre maggotkin). Now however, they are even more resilient, got movement buffs, and have the damage output to compete pretty near tzeentch level.   Map wide multiple d3 mortals.  6 drones with blades of putrification can put out upwards of 22 unsaved wounds.  That’s just two examples.  

It’s a little crazy.  We will see how the meta shifts with them.  I’m not sure how it is in your areas but I’m thinking people aren’t really aware how strong they are.  And while they are low costed to much of destructions big guys, I think thier points cost over all is the only thing keeping them from being full blown ridiculous.  

6 Drones - 400 points.

Demon Hero to activate their locus for the extra attack - minimum 100 points - having the mobility to keep pace with them looking at up to 220 points for the Lordd of Afflictions.

Blades of Putrefaction is a Rotbringer spell so you need a Sorcerer which is 120 points.

6 drones can pump out upwards of 22 unsaved wounds but to do so you need at least 620 points of units working together to get there.

620 points minimum.

That is one heck of a lot of points.

The Plague Drones have 5 wounds and a 5+ save and ignore 1/3 of all wounds or mortal wounds thrown at them thanks to Disgustingly resilient.

Oh look.

Gordrakk the Fist of Gork costs us 620 points also.

But lets mess with things a bit hey?

I have an allied Gitmob Shaman and 60 Gitmob Grot archers. 350 points total. Those little buggers will do 20 wounds at rend 1 on average. Lets add 1 doom divers and 1 rock lobber to the party, 570 points. We can snipe the supporting Sorcerer and kill him before he gets his Blads of Putrifaction off and the Grots do a lot of damage regardless. Those Plague Drones are going to take a lot of damage before they hit the lines,e specially if you bubble wrap the main unit, you know, tactics and strategy.

Honestly, too many people are over-reacting to some of the more potent combinations the Nurgle Maggotkin army can dish out without looking at just how expensive these combos cost and how many pieces have to chain together to go off just right. Think outside the box a bit and look at how you can use the mixed forces of destruction (allies exist for you mono-army lads and lassies) to damage key parts of the nurgle army because the army is a massive multiple pieces need to fit to make it work just right, but once those pieces start to disappear, the army loses a lot of its' strength.

One of those strengths is how contagion points work but because you need to build them up over time to bring in your reinforcements via the contagion summoning, most of the nurgle players are raging about how it is inferior and not fair to them that they have to wait to get things brought in during matched play yet they will all drop all the feculent gnarlmaws down ever if left to it. You know, they can summon ina  sorcerer that then summons in a unit of pink horrors because damn the fluff, it can be done! But few of them are even considering the possibilities. Currently you have a core group of nurgle players who are alla bout the blight cyst, but as demonstrated above, your brutes can wail on them and win most of the time and for cheaper because you need a blight cyst to really make them powerful enough to compete and that's 220+140 for the lord+the units of blight kings themselves. Then you have the people rockinga unit of 30 Plaguebearers everywhere and then you have the peolple pushinga way from everyone else in weird and wacky ways. But they alls hare this common theme of they need multiple elements working together to be effective else they simply don't have the damage output, even in a war of attrition, to make things work.

Sit back (everyone) and take a deep breath and let Gork go and stomp on a few of those Nurgle buggers, at the end of the day we still will laugh as orruks and gobbos are want to do whilst half the nurgle forces will be all despondent and the other half fair to average at best.

 

[Fungrim]

I agree with the early sentiment in this thread that it would be nice if, instead of points changes, Ironjawz (& Destruction in general) had a boost to their warscrolls and synergies. Sadly, this just isn't realistic, not only because of the volume of work it'd create for rules writers etc, but also because it'd mean re-releasing Grand Alliance books that overwrite all previous books. This is isn't impossible, but is highly improbable, as it would inevitably anger a lot of people whose literature would become redundant overnight.

Points changes are the easiest way to re-distribute meta balance, whichever way we spin it. I personally wouldn't mind brand new GA books if it meant Destruction gets the re-modelling it needs, but I completely get why it's bad customer service from GW's perspective.  A new GHB (or 2nd ed AoS), is the most efficient way of doing it.

That said, as much as I'd love to see certain elements of Destruction get reductions in price, I do think Nurgle have had a particularly good time in how they've been costed, and call me cynical, but at the end of the day, GW wants to sell their products. There's huge, huge differences between Nurgle and Ironjawz however. Both in terms of gameplay and in terms of the state of the faction as it currently stands.

Nurgle is one of the biggest factions in AoS, with a massive range of heroes and units to choose from. Ironjawz is one of the smallest. Nurgle has access to faction-specific, cheap, varied battleline - Ironjawz do not. Nurgle has access to differing levels of varied magic, IJ does not. Nurgle has access to numerous behemoths, IJ does not. (I could go on).

This isn't a hit at Nurgle, it's more to point out the apples-and-oranges type comparisons we're seeing. Ironjawz just had the misfortune of being released before AoS kicked into gear, so it's battletome is fairly basic. Hence why the faction abilities in GHB17 were so great for us - it really gave the army some character.

The problem with Ironjawz however, is whilst their battalions got readjusted points-wise like the rest of the factions, it was the battalions (Ironfist in particular), as well as the destruction move, that allowed Ironjawz to sit so comfortably at mid tier pre-GHB17. Whilst the update brought points drops for units, options to ally, and nifty faction abilities; the loss of movement, I feel, has been fairly catastrophic.

This extends to BCR  too. The typical 'Mixed Destructon' list of pre-GHB17 fame, and how GW went up trying to nerf this kind of list, has now left factions like Ironjawz and BCR really behind in terms of the meta.

The biggest tell of what we can expect from GHB18, will be how Death is now pointed - especially their behemoths/large heroes. Although - their synergies are so tied up with these models, that it's difficult to tell if the points cost has been carried over from this rules packaging.

[Imperial]

40 minutes ago, Fungrim said:

I agree with the early sentiment in this thread that it would be nice if, instead of points changes, Ironjawz (& Destruction in general) had a boost to their warscrolls and synergies. Sadly, this just isn't realistic, not only because of the volume of work it'd create for rules writers etc, but also because it'd mean re-releasing Grand Alliance books that overwrite all previous books. This is isn't impossible, but is highly improbable, as it would inevitably anger a lot of people whose literature would become redundant overnight.

Points changes are the easiest way to re-distribute meta balance, whichever way we spin it. I personally wouldn't mind brand new GA books if it meant Destruction gets the re-modelling it needs, but I completely get why it's bad customer service from GW's perspective.  A new GHB (or 2nd ed AoS), is the most efficient way of doing it.

That said, as much as I'd love to see certain elements of Destruction get reductions in price, I do think Nurgle have had a particularly good time in how they've been costed, and call me cynical, but at the end of the day, GW wants to sell their products. There's huge, huge differences between Nurgle and Ironjawz however. Both in terms of gameplay and in terms of the state of the faction as it currently stands.

Nurgle is one of the biggest factions in AoS, with a massive range of heroes and units to choose from. Ironjawz is one of the smallest. Nurgle has access to faction-specific, cheap, varied battleline - Ironjawz do not. Nurgle has access to differing levels of varied magic, IJ does not. Nurgle has access to numerous behemoths, IJ does not. (I could go on).

This isn't a hit at Nurgle, it's more to point out the apples-and-oranges type comparisons we're seeing. Ironjawz just had the misfortune of being released before AoS kicked into gear, so it's battletome is fairly basic. Hence why the faction abilities in GHB17 were so great for us - it really gave the army some character.

The problem with Ironjawz however, is whilst their battalions got readjusted points-wise like the rest of the factions, it was the battalions (Ironfist in particular), as well as the destruction move, that allowed Ironjawz to sit so comfortably at mid tier pre-GHB17. Whilst the update brought points drops for units, options to ally, and nifty faction abilities; the loss of movement, I feel, has been fairly catastrophic.

This extends to BCR  too. The typical 'Mixed Destructon' list of pre-GHB17 fame, and how GW went up trying to nerf this kind of list, has now left factions like Ironjawz and BCR really behind in terms of the meta.

The biggest tell of what we can expect from GHB18, will be how Death is now pointed - especially their behemoths/large heroes. Although - their synergies are so tied up with these models, that it's difficult to tell if the points cost has been carried over from this rules packaging.

I asked about any update for destruction in this year, but got only this asnwer:

 Good to hear from a fellow Destruction fan! I'm a Beastclaw Raider myself - what's your flavour of smashing enemy face in?! 

There are plans and schemes afoot for loads of different armies and factions in the coming months and years of Warhammer Age of Sigmar; we have not forgotten about any of them at all. As for new models, well, we can't give away anything here but who knows what the future will bring! Watch this space for any and all updates when they get announced!

[Malakree]

20 minutes ago, Imperial said:

There are plans and schemes afoot for loads of different armies and factions in the coming months and years of Warhammer Age of Sigmar; we have not forgotten about any of them at all. As for new models, well, we can't give away anything here but who knows what the future will bring! Watch this space for any and all updates when they get announced!

Soon^TM

[Imperial]

4 minutes ago, Malakree said:

Soon^TM

 loads of different armies and factions in the coming years and years (c) GW  

[Fungrim]

1 hour ago, Imperial said:

There are plans and schemes afoot for loads of different armies and factions in the coming months and years of Warhammer Age of Sigmar; we have not forgotten about any of them at all. As for new models, well, we can't give away anything here but who knows what the future will bring! Watch this space for any and all updates when they get announced!

'plans and schemes' eh? Grot pirates incoming  

[Richelieu]

3 hours ago, Fungrim said:

I agree with the early sentiment in this thread that it would be nice if, instead of points changes, Ironjawz (& Destruction in general) had a boost to their warscrolls and synergies. Sadly, this just isn't realistic, not only because of the volume of work it'd create for rules writers etc, but also because it'd mean re-releasing Grand Alliance books that overwrite all previous books. This is isn't impossible, but is highly improbable, as it would inevitably anger a lot of people whose literature would become redundant overnight.

I dunno, they did it with Stormcast.  Rewrote powerful warscrolls, eliminated abusive battalions.  There were some grumpy murmurings, but no widespread anger.

[hughwyeth]

On 1/18/2018 at 9:40 PM, Richelieu said:

I disagree with the characterization that Nurgle just does what IJ does, but better.  At no point would I be worried about a Nurgle charge.  They're going to get up in my face, sit there and block me from doing stuff,  whereas IJ is going to get up up into my face, kill stuff and move on to the next target.  I'm not saying I think IJ is better as it's pretty plain to see that they don't have the same size toolkit and they are overpriced in comparison, however just because they can both get up in your face quickly doesn't mean they do the same thing.

Nurgle player here- Yeah I've played ironjawz a couple of times and will start a beastclaw/ogor force soon- Nurgle have almost no rend and very low damage threat from their basic stat line. Sure there is some mortal wound output, but it really requires multiple buffs to units to get it work properly.  The idea that nurgle are scary in combat is laughable. They are resilient, that is their strength. 5+/5++ is great and the defining aspect of nurgle- and only half the army get that. Blightkings are fine against hordes but, again, require multiple buffs to present a threat to anything but single wound battleline units. I would have thought that Tzeentch are destruction's polar opposite and biggest threat- huge mortal damage and ranged damage output, zero resilience. 

I know there's a feeling of power creep, I just don't think it's as great as a lot of people here think it is. In addition, the nurgle tome is fantastic fluff and rules wise (not because they're powerful necessarily, but because they're so thematic and interesting, there are no bad choices in there!) and should make us all hopeful for future battletome releases. GH has also proven to be a good antidote to these perceived balance issues. 

[Fungrim]

1 hour ago, Richelieu said:

I dunno, they did it with Stormcast.  Rewrote powerful warscrolls, eliminated abusive battalions.  There were some grumpy murmurings, but no widespread anger.

Bit of a give and take job though that. Brought together loads of new Stormcast into one book, what little purging that did take place was softened by its replacement with better stuff (battalion-wise). Loads of bonus stuff in the way of prayers etc.

I agree though, it's not something that will never happen. I just think they're so busy churning out Battletomes that the only time they'd be able to hit reset on the Grand Alliance books is when things have settled a bit more (AoS is still very new bear in mind).

Has been rumours of 2nd edition coming soon though, this year or next, so maybe!

 

2 minutes ago, hughwyeth said:

Nurgle player here- Yeah I've played ironjawz a couple of times and will start a beastclaw/ogor force soon- Nurgle have almost no rend and very low damage threat from their basic stat line. Sure there is some mortal wound output, but it really requires multiple buffs to units to get it work properly.  The idea that nurgle are scary in combat is laughable. They are resilient, that is their strength. 5+/5++ is great and the defining aspect of nurgle- and only half the army get that. Blightkings are fine against hordes but, again, require multiple buffs to present a threat to anything but single wound battleline units. I would have thought that Tzeentch are destruction's polar opposite and biggest threat- huge mortal damage and ranged damage output, zero resilience. 

I know there's a feeling of power creep, I just don't think it's as great as a lot of people here think it is. In addition, the nurgle tome is fantastic fluff and rules wise (not because they're powerful necessarily, but because they're so thematic and interesting, there are no bad choices in there!) and should make us all hopeful for future battletome releases. GH has also proven to be a good antidote to these perceived balance issues. 

 

Interesting hearing it from the other side. Have to say I've only played a handful of Nurgle armies this side of the End Times, and that was with my old Order list.

The only Nurgle I've faced with my Ironjawz, is in Mixed Chaos lists. In that scenario, I'm fairly terrified of it. This is because more often than not it comes in the form of 30 Plaguebearers, and that wall... urgh... not only will I not get through it, I'll probably get battered by it - volume of attacks, buffed, will probably beat most Ironjawz elite units, especially a 3 of Gruntas or 5 Brutes.

Add to this now, the new range of benefits from the book, GUO boost etc etc - it's definitely something to be wary of.

Like anything, it all depends on what that particular list has been tailored for