Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

[pseudonyme]

Do you think they will do 3 different starters like at 40k 8th launch: the full starter at around 120€ ( 1 medium/mounted mini, 1 hero, 1 « elite » infantry / cavalera and 2 battleline units, a 65€ Know no fear box (full starter minus 1 hero and 1 battleline unit), and a 25€ Storm of Sigmar startest of starter  (a fraction of battleline unit and élite infantry in easy to build)?

[Aeon]

Sigmar actually did the 3 different starter sizes first.

 

and yep, if not on release, likely a month or two later.

[HorticulusTGA]

Between the starter set (maybe with the core book, or in different size), two new armies and all the new edition  goodies, I'm going to end up SO broke in July it's not funny 

? 

[stratigo]

As a kharadron player, the previews are doing nothing for my excitement for the game. Tightening the rules at the cost of making my army virtually unplayable might be nice for many players, but leaves me quite cold after multi hundred dollar investments into the army.

[AthlorianStoners]

15 minutes ago, stratigo said:

As a kharadron player, the previews are doing nothing for my excitement for the game. Tightening the rules at the cost of making my army virtually unplayable might be nice for many players, but leaves me quite cold after multi hundred dollar investments into the army.

But you haven’t seen the book yet

[kozokus]

5 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

But you haven’t seen the book yet

I think he may be refering about some incoming restrictions regarding shooting like "no shooting outside of combat" .

For my part, i won't bat an eye for restrictions on the most one-sided/unfair section of the rules. 

[tgi_shaun]

Way too early to begin speculating on how everything is going to be affected. 

"No shooting outside of combat" can have other implications that we won't know about until the book is released. Not to mention point balancing, hero phase changes, command points, etc.

[Gecktron]

27 minutes ago, stratigo said:

As a kharadron player, the previews are doing nothing for my excitement for the game. Tightening the rules at the cost of making my army virtually unplayable might be nice for many players, but leaves me quite cold after multi hundred dollar investments into the army.

I have 3,5k points of Kharadron Overlords at home and I have no fears whatsoever about AoS 2.0.
GW has seen the shortcomings of the Sky duardin this last year. GWs will to balance the game and simply the success of these kits guarantees that GW will do something about it. 
We have heard rumors before that there will be a second wave of Kharadron stuff. So maybe we even get a new battletome sometimes after the new edition drops. Or at least there will be some balancing with this years Generals Handbook.

[tgi_shaun]

30 minutes ago, stratigo said:

As a kharadron player, the previews are doing nothing for my excitement for the game. Tightening the rules at the cost of making my army virtually unplayable might be nice for many players, but leaves me quite cold after multi hundred dollar investments into the army.

Way too early to begin speculating on how everything is going to be affected. 

"No shooting outside of combat" can have other implications that we won't know about until the book is released. Not to mention point balancing, hero phase changes, command points, etc.

[Still-young]

I’m glad the ‘we know next to nothing about the new rules but my army is definitely unplayable now’ has started already. 

[Ollie Grimwood]

Hang on I thought the quote was “ no shooting out of combat” might simply be that if a unit is with 3” of you, you have to target that unit. 

Also I prefer AoS to 40K I certainly don’t want to see a direct port over of 40K rules. I don’t think that’s going to happen though 

[Xasz]

33 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Hang on I thought the quote was “ no shooting out of combat” might simply be that if a unit is with 3” of you, you have to target that unit. 

This is exactly what I'm expecting.

[Tittliewinks22]

Still hopeful they revert the Grundstok Thunderers to their original ruleset in next ghb

[stickybluetoffee]

wish-listing here but I’d like to see an ending to summoning by spells and giving terrain features (like Gnarlmaw and Wildwood) a Wounds and Save characteristic do they can be torn down.

[TheMuphinMan]

Also there is a good chance that some units will get rules to ignore the no shooting outside of combat rule like how verminus has the retreat and reengage rules

[Waiyuren]

16 minutes ago, stickybluetoffee said:

wish-listing here but I’d like to see an ending to summoning by spells and giving terrain features (like Gnarlmaw and Wildwood) a Wounds and Save characteristic do they can be torn down.

Yes please!

Dirty balewind user here; I would love for terrain to have stats such as wounds and an armour save. Also drop the 3" bubble from my bullpoo tornado so my non-shooting opponents can smack my gaunt off it... Because that rule is just dumb. ?

 

Do the right thing gw.  ?

[PJetski]

34 minutes ago, TheMuphinMan said:

Also there is a good chance that some units will get rules to ignore the no shooting outside of combat rule like how verminus has the retreat and reengage rules

I can certainly see that being the case for large units like the Stegadon and Leviadon where the riders atop the beasts could continue to focus on shooting while the monster is engaged below.

[tgi_shaun]

2 hours ago, stickybluetoffee said:

wish-listing here but I’d like to see an ending to summoning by spells and giving terrain features (like Gnarlmaw and Wildwood) a Wounds and Save characteristic do they can be torn down.

As a Sylvaneth player, I’m personally offended.  

 

In all fairness though, i have to agree they should have more than a few rare ways to be removed. 

[AthlorianStoners]

Really really hoping for some BCR adjustments, specifically: 

- Points adjustments 

- Giving huskards the priest or wizard key word 

[Brightstar]

9 hours ago, Spiny Norman said:

They're pretty streamlined and not complicated at all. Just more tactical depth due to cover, various weapon types, stratagems, fall backs,  no shooting in combat (Jesus AoS really?!) and so on.

Think of them as a sophisticated AoS ruleset.

I'm actually liking the Warscrolls and the potential they have to bring individual tactical varity, so I personally would just like to upgrade the AoS Base rules above the "1 page of rules" nonsense but not making them too complicated. I like the idea to operate with warscrolls though.

I feel 2nd ed is just about all that, so my hopes are  high.

 

 

Why people, IMO, seem to love the new 40k over AOS (no double turn, chargers strike first, strength vs toughness comparison, no wound wrapping, etc) - it gives players more control over the game's math by making statistics more impervious to player choices, tactical decisions, randomness, and other variables  during game-play than the AOS system. 

As a game, in terms of design, 40k actually suffers in a number of areas.  AP's are far too high compared to rends so it still has to rely on a sub rule (invulnerable saves) even though the game doesn't really need them.  The damage system doesn't need to be as excessive.  Wounds not wrapping to the unit doesn't add depth, just complicates an otherwise streamlined rule design in AOS.   And chargers striking first is 100% less tactical, flexible, and sophisticated in terms of design compared to  the I go u go system in AOS.  It is a throwback to GW's antiquated systems that AOS was designed to abandon in the first place.

When I play 40k I feel like I am playing the beta test for the AOS ruleset, not the other way around.          

A rulebook's page count =/= sophistication.  Chess can fit on one page.  It is still, to this day, considered the most sophisticated and complex rule set on the planet.  

 The only parts of AOS  that needs to be reworked is measuring from the base and shooting.  In terms of shooting, instead of starting with the core rules,they should start by giving every faction in the game access to some form of shooting attacks.  That would go a long way to fixing this problem.

As  for the double turn, all it really needs is the LOTR - in case of a tie, whoever didn't have it last turn gets it this turn - mechanic.   The complaint that the game is determined by a roll of a die, is what GW games are all about.  If its not a priority roll, its another single die roll that determines who wins the game.  The complaint here, again, is about statistical math.  Players do not have access to a statistic that influences the dice roll so this dice roll is bad because they can't "math to win it."  

Everything else, like command points,  expanded hero phase, expanded magic rules, would only improve an otherwise fantastic set of rules.  I hope GW spent their time working on those aspects and largely left the core rules alone. 

 

[treeclimber]

Very very interesting. I too started to panic when I heard the shooting changes but then I remembered the golden rule: wait, gather information and see how it plays out before making a judgement.

[Soulsmith]

9 minutes ago, Brightstar said:

When I play 40k I feel like I am playing the beta test for the AOS ruleset, not the other way around.          

Spot on.

[Sete]

I can't wait! Me and my mate are already splitting the Starter set!

Arrrghhhh the wait will kill me!

[stratigo]

4 hours ago, kozokus said:

I think he may be refering about some incoming restrictions regarding shooting like "no shooting outside of combat" .

For my part, i won't bat an eye for restrictions on the most one-sided/unfair section of the rules. 

Shooting never ended up one sided in any match I played, or competetive match I have examined. Not a single one. I have never understood where the impression that shooting was OP derived from a hold over from 2016 armies. But that was down to overly effective units, not an overly effective range. 

 

2017 solves shooting by nerfing the problems. Hunters and sylvaneth in general dropped away. Kunnin ruk grew very rare. Thunderers were nerfed into uselessness. The only shooting that stayed extremely viable was skyfires, and even then they were not the best choice any longer. 

It’s obvious the bias was formed before a ton of refs and hardened so that your opinion could not change, and isn’t based on the actual state of aos for the past year

 

[Arkiham]

6 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Yep. Exactly!

That's why people should stop making up intentions and just follow the rules - either as published originally or as clarified/changed in a FAQ.

you missed my point, which was that you dunno the intention. so you are forced to make on in some instances. 

 

for instance the deepkin with their banners in the thrall unit or what ever it is, 

 

was it intended for the entire unit to be allowed this or not? rules as written yes, but who knows?