How does your Allegiance now stand with AoS 2

[Dan.Ford]

So aos2 is out, no points adjustments for 2+ years by GW maybe.

For me, this is from a purely competitive view at single events 2000 points.

What does this mean to your allegiance and Grand alliance, as you see it?

From a pure Blades of khorne perspective it’s not very great at all.

Some of Our commonly used Battalions have high priced for what they do, compared to other allegiances and what’s in the new books this year. Some of their hero’s, units and battalion’s costs are just too low. In years gone by this would have been re-costed within a month of Book release by the Player Committees.

Most of the Blades of Khorne battalions have never been seen at competitive events and are not common. Some are not even possible to put on the table.@2000

Our summoning is poor but we do have it ? . Also, it relies on hero’s being alive on the Summoning table.

Blades of Khorne lists will be pushed into a small pocket of lists a lot sooner than normal on a new release. Gore pilgrim at ‘200’ will be the main list at single competitive events.

Of the 6 Chaos Grand Alliance choices:

1,Worse big drop

2,Worse

3,Worse,1 in 3 if alive.

4,Worse

5,Same but meh

6,Same

Below are some average points values for battalion’s points in Allegiances.

Idoneth deepkin battalions 124points

Fyreslayers 98 points

Daughters of khaine 130

Seraphon 128

Stormcast 133

Sylvaneth 108

Nighthaunts 118

Bonesplitterz 146

Ironjaws 165

Blades of khorne 163

Slaves of Darkness 166

Nurgle 177

Everchoosen 160 but half of the abilities not possible as you CAN NOT have under strength unit in battalions. Lol

Clan Pestilens 165

[rokapoke]

I’m curious why you don’t expect any points changes in the next two years. There might be changes with the 6-month FAQ, but at the very least we should plan on GHB 2019 including a vast array of updated unit points. 

[Dan.Ford]

1 hour ago, rokapoke said:

I’m curious why you don’t expect any points changes in the next two years. There might be changes with the 6-month FAQ, but at the very least we should plan on GHB 2019 including a vast array of updated unit points. 

Just a feeling , no bases . But I did think that for certain that these warscrolls would go up  Murderhost , Hag Queen ( stayed at 60 ) and Vanguard Wing ( when down ) in AoS2 . 

You never know

[WindstormSCR]

6 hours ago, Dan.Ford said:

Just a feeling , no bases . But I did think that for certain that these warscrolls would go up  Murderhost , Hag Queen ( stayed at 60 ) and Vanguard Wing ( when down ) in AoS2 . 

You never know

Vanguard wing got gutted in the new battletome, so not surprising in that context

[Drib]

11 hours ago, Dan.Ford said:

Everchoosen 160 but half of the abilities not possible as you CAN NOT have under strength unit in battalions. Lol

A unit of 18 Tzaangors is NOT understrengthed, as the minimum size is 10.

[Dan.Ford]

Side tracked a little but I did thought the same until they pointed this out to me. In Pitch battle part of new book, very clear in last sentence

[AaronWilson]

I think Tzeentch will still be able to compete at the top levels, they dominate every magic phase (Seraphon & Nagash are the only ones to compete), can throw out a horrendous level of MW per turn via Umbral Spellportals and have a solid anvil in a blob of Gors. The allegiance ability remained incredibly powerful and the free summoning while not game breaking is reliable. 

[Guest]

Well, I play Anvilgard casually, usually 1000 points. I was interested and ready to share my thoughts and experiences, but then I saw that the OP has arbitrarily restricted the discussion to 2000 points matched play tournament lists because... reasons? 

[Dan.Ford]

12 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Well, I play Anvilgard casually, usually 1000 points. I was interested and ready to share my thoughts and experiences, but then I saw that the OP has arbitrarily restricted the discussion to 2000 points matched play tournament lists because... reasons? 

Reasons: Armies strength will swing at different point levels. 2000 points is a constant at most UK events.

[Drib]

1 hour ago, Dan.Ford said:

Side tracked a little but I did thought the same until they pointed this out to me. In Pitch battle part of new book, very clear in last sentence

Core Rules p. 13:

"If a model is fielded as part of a unit of two or more models, then the description will say how many models the unit should have. If you don’t have enough models  to field a unit, you can field one unit of that type with as many models as you have available. This is known as an understrength unit."

Only below minimum size is considered understrengthed.

[Ravinsild]

I've been watching, and I've been playing Ironjawz Battle Reports for 2.0. In the Destruction community there's this sentiment that we are the forgotten ones, and that we are the most out of date and in need of model redos and new battletomes to bring us up to par with several of the other factions like Chaos, Death and Order. 

However, I've won more than I've lost against such armies as Beastmen, Daughters of Khaine and even other Ironjawz. I tend to have trouble with Skaven and people who can do a lot of mortal wounds and long range armies. I don't have a ton of first hand experience right now, but I learn from my mistakes each game and I'm hoping to hone down some good tactics and strategies and ways to use my units to tilt victory more towards my favor than not. 

Other people who know Ironjawz more in depth can probably give you a more clear answer, but as for me, maybe it's because they're shiny and new to me, or maybe it's just because I revel in melee combat and I adore Orcs due to 15+ years of Warcraft (Horde player in WC3, Orc Warlock/Warrior main in WoW), but I'm feeling optimistic. 

[Thebiggesthat]

29 minutes ago, Jamie the Jasper said:

Well, I play Anvilgard casually, usually 1000 points. I was interested and ready to share my thoughts and experiences, but then I saw that the OP has arbitrarily restricted the discussion to 2000 points matched play tournament lists because... reasons? 

Seems unnecessarily passive aggressive statement, you could try asking the OP directly rather than what you have written. 

At 1000 points, you tend to see a bigger swing in the effectiveness of units. Added to this, the battalions tend to fit in a 2000 list better. This is because you have a larger pool of points to fill your 'required roles', such as objective grabbers, support characters, snipers, harassers and screens etc. At 1k, you have to gamble more, and also restrict the army list simply because some units are too expensive. That would be my take. 

 

[Ravinsild]

4 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

Seems unnecessarily passive aggressive statement, you could try asking the OP directly rather than what you have written. 

At 1000 points, you tend to see a bigger swing in the effectiveness of units. Added to this, the battalions tend to fit in a 2000 list better. This is because you have a larger pool of points to fill your 'required roles', such as objective grabbers, support characters, snipers, harassers and screens etc. At 1k, you have to gamble more, and also restrict the army list simply because some units are too expensive. That would be my take. 

 

As an Ironjawz player, I'm having trouble discovering which roles my units are supposed to fill. Is it possible for elite armies with low Warscroll/model counts (we have 8 unit warscrolls and 7 unique models total) to double up on roles or simply not have those roles to begin with? For instance, I think Ardboys might be objective grabbers and screens simultaneously? I'm not sure we have harassers or character snipers at all, but we have quite a few support characters. 

Same with Khorne Bloodbound, actually. We have...no sniping that I know of, at all. I'm not sure what a harasser is but it sounds like a shooty unit, which again we lack, but we have tons of Bloodreavers for screens and standing on objectives, and like all of our heroes are supports + fighty. Except the Bloodsecrator and Slaughterpriest. They're less fighty. 

[HollowHills]

I don't think GW particularly like the idea of warscroll battalions being good. If you look at the two most recent army books prior to aos 2, khaine and deepkin, all the battalions are fairly underwhelming and designed around collecting a theme tic force rather than giving a massive power boost. 

As for my army I don't see deepkin being top end in aos 2. They can't really get a one drop list unless you take some undesirable units like the turtle and the shark. I imagine eel alphas trike is potentially the best set up, but I don't think it has the power of certain army command ability stacking or spell combos etc. 

They are more than fine for the vast majority of games though. 

[AaronWilson]

I think Idoenth mass eels alpha is the best list they can play, similar to a Ironjawz Gorefist it covers  the board ridiculously fast and against armies that want to play  defensive (Seraphon, Nagash, Tzeentch) you can use that board pressure to try and get ahead on scenario. Like any army that runs an extreme though it will fall short against armies that can take the alpha and fight back, very much rock paper & scissors. 

[Ravinsild]

12 minutes ago, AaronWIlson said:

I think Idoenth mass eels alpha is the best list they can play, similar to a Ironjawz Gorefist it covers  the board ridiculously fast and against armies that want to play  defensive (Seraphon, Nagash, Tzeentch) you can use that board pressure to try and get ahead on scenario. Like any army that runs an extreme though it will fall short against armies that can take the alpha and fight back, very much rock paper & scissors. 

Then I guess I'll just have to sharpen my scissors, and my grunta's tusks. 

[AaronWilson]

There might be some value in the wierdnob batallion which can make your Foot of Gorks fairly reliable to cast but you for alpha Gorefist & Cogs means your charging turn one. It forces your opponent to have sufficient screening models & to play defensively. Even then with Bashing & Smashing sometimes you make holes in there screen. 

[Thebiggesthat]

So as a Moonclan/Sylvaneth player...

 

Moonclan. If we ignore the command stacking, as it's not long for the world, I think we have a slightly more positive outlook this edition. The look out sir makes our squishy characters more survivable, the changes to the FW rules make us stronger as well. It's all about the Battletome in a couple of months though..

Sylvaneth. Seem stronger, but slightly one dimensional maybe. Dreadwood is clearly the 'way to go' with the points changes, and summoning is fairly decent with Alariele and Branchwraith. Will be interesting to see how the army develops with a change in meta, and with some tournaments comping first turn, how the army do going forward is a strange one. One thing I see going forward is the difficulty in wood placement, especially as other armies are getting terrain to place now. I can see AoS2 needing some clarification on this, as having a canny player stop me dropping a wood at any point can pretty much mean a handshake before first turn has gone. 

 

[Skreech Verminking]

16 hours ago, Dan.Ford said:

So aos2 is out, no points adjustments for 2+ years by GW maybe.

 

For me, this is from a purely competitive view at single events 2000 points.

 

What does this mean to your allegiance and Grand alliance, as you see it?

 

From a pure Blades of khorne perspective it’s not very great at all.

 

Some of Our commonly used Battalions have high priced for what they do, compared to other allegiances and what’s in the new books this year. Some of their hero’s, units and battalion’s costs are just too low. In years gone by this would have been re-costed within a month of Book release by the Player Committees.

 

Most of the Blades of Khorne battalions have never been seen at competitive events and are not common. Some are not even possible to put on the table.@2000

 

Our summoning is poor but we do have it ? . Also, it relies on hero’s being alive on the Summoning table.

 

Blades of Khorne lists will be pushed into a small pocket of lists a lot sooner than normal on a new release. Gore pilgrim at ‘200’ will be the main list at single competitive events.

 

Of the 6 Chaos Grand Alliance choices:

 

1,Worse big drop

 

2,Worse

 

3,Worse,1 in 3 if alive.

 

4,Worse

 

5,Same but meh

 

6,Same

 

Below are some average points values for battalion’s points in Allegiances.

 

Idoneth deepkin battalions 124points

 

Fyreslayers 98 points

 

Daughters of khaine 130

 

Seraphon 128

 

Stormcast 133

 

Sylvaneth 108

 

Nighthaunts 118

 

Bonesplitterz 146

 

Ironjaws 165

 

Blades of khorne 163

 

Slaves of Darkness 166

 

Nurgle 177

 

Everchoosen 160 but half of the abilities not possible as you CAN NOT have under strength unit in battalions. Lol

 

Clan Pestilens 165

 

Well how should I put it, many army’s have similar problems with the newer or older aos addition.

some of those, are just barely even used or known by players , since they lack more or less of everything.

as a big fan, and owner of a ridiculous big  skaven army, I find it a little bit sad that so many army’s with great potential, where just left out and probably already forgotten by Gw.

does army’s lack in more or less everything, not owning their own allegiance, means they have to take one of the grand allegiances, who have one of the worst ability’s ever seen since ghb 2018.

but with the new edition, you could say that a new hope is coming?

For old world army’s, like moonclan grots, Aelves, skaven etc.

 

 

[Thostos]

 Destruction certainly has the short end of the stick,,more so now than in GH2017.They are solid bottom tier now.

  Bonesplitterz was gutted of Kunning Ruk due to points increases,Ironjawz,sadly I dont see any way they can make it past mid tier.Mixed destruction is just for funz.

 To me though,,its a glaring signal that they must be next for a Tome,and it should be one along the lines of LoN encompassing Trolls,Grots and moxed Orruk tribes.Just hope GW doesnt drop the ball on this.

 

[MightyMetro]

Im not a matched-play competitive tournament player.  More of a open/narrative type who spends far too long looking at points, so that games, whether balanced or imbalanced, feel somewhat measured. So, i may not be representative of ‘your meta.’ This isnt directed at anyone in particular.

6 hours ago, HollowHills said:

If you look at the two most recent army books prior to aos 2, khaine and deepkin, all the battalions are fairly underwhelming and designed around collecting a theme tic force rather than giving a massive power boost. 

This is exactly what i hoped battalions would become long before second ed. Apologies if youve heard this before...

 Batallions can support “suboptimal fornations” and mitigate formations that embrace certain synergies.  For example, strong bonuses for thematic forces with negative synergies, such as nurgle and others who would dare partner with them. Alternatively, formations can mix unrelated, yet thematic, factions, such as Sylvaneth and Deepkin. Finally, less-game-changing battalions can be available for those of us seeking to optimize our netlists or gather command points.

Ive read so many comments on tga recently about potentially banning artifacts, Endless Spells, and realms from tournaments.  I can to some extent understand the concerns of these players. My point is that if we can ban or house rule all of these because they are “not for matched-play” why assume that battalions should be designed solely for matched play.

I dont have numbers to argue either way, but what about considering as a community that AOS may not be primarily a matched play tournament game?

Of course, we are all welcome to use the system as we please, but lets not assume ‘competitive’ design features should trump others.

[HollowHills]

29 minutes ago, MightyMetro said:

Im not a matched-play competitive tournament player.  More of a open/narrative type who spends far too long looking at points, so that games, whether balanced or imbalanced, feel somewhat measured. So, i may not be representative of ‘your meta.’ This isnt directed at anyone in particular.

This is exactly what i hoped battalions would become long before second ed. Apologies if youve heard this before...

 Batallions can support “suboptimal fornations” and mitigate formations that embrace certain synergies.  For example, strong bonuses for thematic forces with negative synergies, such as nurgle and others who would dare partner with them. Alternatively, formations can mix unrelated, yet thematic, factions, such as Sylvaneth and Deepkin. Finally, less-game-changing battalions can be available for those of us seeking to optimize our netlists or gather command points.

Ive read so many comments on tga recently about potentially banning artifacts, Endless Spells, and realms from tournaments.  I can to some extent understand the concerns of these players. My point is that if we can ban or house rule all of these because they are “not for matched-play” why assume that battalions should be designed solely for matched play.

I dont have numbers to argue either way, but what about considering as a community that AOS may not be primarily a matched play tournament game?

Of course, we are all welcome to use the system as we please, but lets not assume ‘competitive’ design features should trump others.

In theory I agree 100%, battalions do not necessarily need to be the best way to play an army. I think the problem is that some armies such as the Deepkin have only got a few battalions two of which will never see daylight in matched play (phalanx and alliance of sea and wood) and three which are generally not that great. Now on it's own that's fine, but other armies such as Sylvaneth, Nurgle etc have some battalions that are really, really good. Which means they can build for a one drop, extra command point and extra artefact while still presenting an incredibly strong list.

My point isn't that Sylvaneth should be nerfed or Deepkin buffed, just that the design seems inconsistent between armies.   

[Skabnoze]

11 hours ago, WindstormSCR said:

Vanguard wing got gutted in the new battletome, so not surprising in that context

I expect this will happen with a number of others as they start rewriting battletomes.  And since battletomes now come with points inside I expect that as books release they will replace the values in GHB18.

Every single rules edition of a GW game comes along with book rewrites for the majority of the game.  It is easy money so I highly doubt that AoS 2 will be an different in that regard.

[Tip4Tap]

12 hours ago, AaronWIlson said:

I think Tzeentch will still be able to compete at the top levels, they dominate every magic phase (Seraphon & Nagash are the only ones to compete), can throw out a horrendous level of MW per turn via Umbral Spellportals and have a solid anvil in a blob of Gors. The allegiance ability remained incredibly powerful and the free summoning while not game breaking is reliable. 

I don't think compete is the right word. I think 'shut down' is a better way of putting it. 

[AaronWilson]

1 hour ago, Tip4Tap said:

I don't think compete is the right word. I think 'shut down' is a better way of putting it. 

In what sense sorry?