Age of Sigmar: Second Edition

[blueshirtman]

Quote

Those should be quite easy to manage in a non-competitive playgroup.

I hope you do not see this as trolling or trying to start a flame war, but how? Without changing the core structure of the game it would really be hard to pull off, and every one playing would have to be ok with it. Which would be problematic if the group already has armies.

 

2 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

 It should be quite quick to get into conclusion that if one side is summoning 50% extra units, the fun part of doing it is lost quite soon. 

Well yes, that is why people are going to do it, and those that won't are going to have a bad time. I am either missing something in the argument, or my understanding of english is not enough to get the full meaning here. Of course people will do everything that gives them an edge, and of course those who won't be able to do that will suffer. And it doesn't matter if whys to that is that they can't afford the extra models, or the fact that they don't like mechanic. The end effect is the same. A less efficient army. And less efficient armies work the worse, the less competitive  an enviroment is. Because the normal protection in the form of not playing bad armies, does not exist here. Which means the chance of someone ending up with a bad army is real.

 

5 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

Different thing altogether is when they next time adjust the points, as it's likely that the free summoning will make those armies that have it quite powerful, which will lead to points increases. After that you might be in a handicap if you don't summon, if the summoning means 20% overall increase for the units.

yeah, but with how fast GW updates stuff, and how they write their rules, You can be sure there is going to be some army, new or not, that is not just going to get summoning, but its units are not going to get a 20% cost buff, maybe even a cost downgrade. And even if this is done just for some time, lets say till a new tome comes out, this is still possibly a year or a half of playing.  Am not saying that a lot of people do it, but not everyone is ready to wait a year and hope for a fix to their, and even less to wait for fixing of their opponents army that is beating them. Specially as you never know, the fix may just make your opponent army even better. And what then, wait another 6-12 months?

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, Nevvermore said:

Wonder how many people that are not serious competitive players that will be happy about buying and painting all that new stuff to use for summoning so they aren’t handicapping themselves?

I think you probably meant this to have a somewhat negative tone (which is fine!), but I'll spin it slightly in my response:

They will feel great! A reason to paint more models for my model-painting hobby? Yes, please!

[Jamopower]

14 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

I hope you do not see this as trolling or trying to start a flame war, but how? Without changing the core structure of the game it would really be hard to pull off, and every one playing would have to be ok with it. Which would be problematic if the group already has armies.

 

Well yes, that is why people are going to do it, and those that won't are going to have a bad time. I am either missing something in the argument, or my understanding of english is not enough to get the full meaning here. Of course people will do everything that gives them an edge, and of course those who won't be able to do that will suffer. And it doesn't matter if whys to that is that they can't afford the extra models, or the fact that they don't like mechanic. The end effect is the same. A less efficient army. And less efficient armies work the worse, the less competitive  an enviroment is. Because the normal protection in the form of not playing bad armies, does not exist here. Which means the chance of someone ending up with a bad army is real.

 

I would assume that no one has an existing army based on free summoning at this moment. Thus if I play with my Seraphon against my friend's mixed elves, I just don't summon any units to keep it more balanced (probably the Seraphon will still have an edge), but if I play with my other friends Undead, we both can summon. It doesn't need any changes to the structure of the game.  I was talking about friendly casual games with friends here. I don't believe that any of the armies that have access to free summoning would be at a disadvantage against "non-competitive" armies without summoning as they happen to be already one of the better armies around from the start point. The problem is more of a case that some armies are already at disadvantage and if the already advantageous side uses all of his new tricks in addition, it won't make very good games. Thus in most cases, just by not using the new tricks, the game will not be any different as it is now.

[blueshirtman]

It is not a question of free, armies were summoning before, specially when it was really free aka no points. It is more of a question of blades of khorn player having a high chance of having both 30 blootletters and a bloodthirest in their collection, then let say a sylv player having all of ariels free summoning options.

Quote

I don't believe that any of the armies that have access to free summoning would be at a disadvantage against "non-competitive" armies without summoning as they happen to be already one of the better armies around from the start point.

Yeah, well am not an expert, but I think that trying to plays slanesh or nurgle without summoning, or tzeench too, wouldn't be optimal.

++MOD EDIT: Changed word to one less controversial ;)++

And I always forget that you guys call competitive armies something different then we do. So who knows, maybe when armies are picked out of random stuff from a catalog they are balanced against each other. I wouldn't know, as I have never seen or played against an army build in a such way.

7 hours ago, Jamopower said:

The problem is more of a case that some armies are already at disadvantage and if the already advantageous side uses all of his new tricks in addition, it won't make very good games

Well yes, if a good army gets more stuff to play with and a bad army gets no new stuff or the stuff is bad, or the player playing the bad army limits himself in addition to his army being bad, then yeah the games are probablly not going to be fun. I agree with that, but it is not like it is something new. Pre 2.0 we had shoting, msu or ultra chaff horde, redeployment mechanics for the good lists etc and some armies had 0 of those options, this made them rather unfun to play with. I see this rather as a norm then the expetion, and from what I have been told that this is the case with GW games since their very begining.

[Mcthew]

3 hours ago, Jamopower said:

Thus in most cases, just by not using the new tricks, the game will not be any different as it is now.

Completely agree. GW did their job well with all the hype (and on occasion forum members here have helped exaggerate the hype by panicking about the rules, tbh) so that it seemed AoS 2.0 would be a game-changer. It isn't, honestly.

I went into a store at the weekend expecting to part with upwards of £150 on pre-ordering both Soul Wars, Malign Sorcery and GHB18, thinking they would be essential. They had the SW boxset and Malign Sorcery to pore through, and in all honesty, I wouldn't be using much of it. The spells are ok, but not a massive leap from current AoS. The SW box set is fun, good value, but the Core Book adds little to the old book, just better organised fluff. Plenty that was promised in the Core Book, such as various rules etc, are being bumped into the GHB18, leaving the Core Book more as hobby book full of lore and the occasional highlighted change. Endless Spells for example, are in the Core Book as a summary, but with no actual rules. 

And then we discussed GHB18, and I was told there are few changes, but none of it is seismic. There will be subtle points uplifts/decreases (I think Bloodsecrator was one who increases by 20pts for example, but again it's not the end of the world) and there will be more scope for fun games, with the emphasis on narrative and open play. But game-changing? Not for most of us. There's been more rumour and counter rumour than actual real changes, but that's GWs doing with the drip-feed of reveals (cunning really, as it's kept the game and this forum lively with debate!), but I doubt the impact on the field (or sky) of battle will be that different.

Yeah so, the ultra-competitive might find changes of 10 points here, and 10 points there, as changes that micro-shift the scales of power, and might even find changes in summoning a blow to their perfectly crafted army lists, but I've seen nothing so far in AoS 2.0 to get into a flap over - for the majority of gamers. It's not like we're losing armies, like we lost the Tomb Kings, and we are in fact gaining armies. These are really just tweaks to a young gaming system.

I went away from the store feeling underwhelmed, but quite liberated really, realising that GHB18 is a must in July, but the rest? Well, maybe someday this year. Not essential to the hobby by any means.

 

Edit: (Also should note that the Core Book I saw in the shop is different to the one previewed in GW - quite different. A lot of what has been promised seems to be missing from the version I saw, including the Open War generator promised. I was told this is now part of GHB18 and not the Core Book. A little annoyed with GW for that. Previews should hold true, should they not? How are you meant to pre-order something that isn't correctly previewed?)

[GeneralZero]

Weird number of miniatures in the Soul Wars box set. (not really different than AoS 1 in this regard)

I've seen somewhere (can't remember) that for matched play, unit min is different than the miniatures given in the box.  As I don't have (yet!) the GH 2018, Can someone  tell for all the unit in the Soul Wars box, the minimum unit size  please?  (and the final question: do we need 2 boxes?)

[Mcthew]

6 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

Weird number of miniatures in the Soul Wars box set. (not really different than AoS 1 in this regard)

I've seen somewhere (can't remember) that for matched play, unit min is different than the miniatures given in the box.  As I don't have (yet!) the GH 2018, Can someone  tell for all the unit in the Soul Wars box, the minimum unit size  please?  (and the final question: do we need 2 boxes?)

The warscrolls, as ever, are different to Matched Play. Some units have no minimum sizes on the warscrolls, but in Matched Play they do. I recall the Pitched Battle profiles at the end of the campaign book in Soul Wars was a little out of step with some of the sizes in the box. SCE Sequitors, for example, have any number of models but one of every three gets the 'heavy weapon.' And yet I saw minimum unit sizes of 5 (or 4, so don't quote me though, memory isn't what it used to be!) in the campaign's pitched battle profile.

[grungolah]

As a new player of Nurgle (and thus not competitive),  and one who built an army of non-summonable mortals,  with little magic presence, and still can't buy Gnarlmaws... I still welcome summoning changes. 

 

I have been given direction.  What to paint, and what to play.   Easy enough to adapt. 

[GeneralZero]

I found this (but with a grain of salt...)

units in soul wars (min in matched play)

4x Grimghast Reapers – (min unit 10, 140 per segment) 
5x Glaivewraith Stalkers – (min unit 4, 60 per segment) 
20x Chainrasps –(min unit 10, 80 per segment)

3x Evocators – (min unit of 5, 200 per segment) 
5x Castigators – (min unit of 3, 80 per segment) 
8x Sequitors – (min unit of 5, 120 per segment) 

[Still-young]

57 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

The warscrolls, as ever, are different to Matched Play. Some units have no minimum sizes on the warscrolls, but in Matched Play they do. I recall the Pitched Battle profiles at the end of the campaign book in Soul Wars was a little out of step with some of the sizes in the box. SCE Sequitors, for example, have any number of models but one of every three gets the 'heavy weapon.' And yet I saw minimum unit sizes of 5 (or 4, so don't quote me though, memory isn't what it used to be!) in the campaign's pitched battle profile.

I think what they mean is, the Grimghast reapers have a min unit size of 10, but you only get 4 in the box. 

[Mcthew]

15 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

I found this (but with a grain of salt...)

units in soul wars (min in matched play)

4x Grimghast Reapers – (min unit 10, 140 per segment) 
5x Glaivewraith Stalkers – (min unit 4, 60 per segment) 
20x Chainrasps –(min unit 10, 80 per segment)

3x Evocators – (min unit of 5, 200 per segment) 
5x Castigators – (min unit of 3, 80 per segment) 
8x Sequitors – (min unit of 5, 120 per segment) 

Yeah, that's about right for what I saw at the weekend. It also follows the behaviour of starter sets for AoS so far, with just 3 retributors in the Thunder and Blood set, but a min of 5 in a unit for Matched Play.

Yet, oddly, in the Soul Wars boxed set they've included what the Matched Play minimum unit sizes are in the campaign book, which could leave you a little short-changed and wondering what you've paid for. You wouldn't get a decent Matched Play army out of either side in the boxed set, tbh, without buying more models. That's good sense for GW I guess, but for a competitive gamer, that £95 you're shelling out for the new starter set, is only the tip of an expensive ice-berg! ?

[Bellfree]

4 hours ago, stratigo said:

Seraphon have nothing better to do. The slann's spells suck, but he supports the army while summoning hundreds of points. By turn two he'll have added his points cost onto the battlefield.

 

Nurgle literally does the things they will ALWAYS do and gets points. Nurgle sacrifice nothing and will swim in summoning points. You'll be seeing around 30 to 50 more plaguebearers every game.

 

 

A Slann can generate 18pts in two turns. Considering the chart seems to average about 9pts per summoning point, it seems unlikely that you're correct. If you're adding points from other sources, you're misrepresenting your argument. Nurgle can summon 20 plaguebearers either 2 or 3 and another twenty 4 or 5 so 40 is the max you'll see in a 5 turn game with 20 likely coming on in turn 5.

When you use hyperbole like this you undermine what is a very valid point, summoning for these armies is going to be exceptionally powerful. With no really meaningful nerfs, these already powerful armies are seeing between and 10 and 15% increase in efficacy from their summoning. Even with perfect counter play I'd say you're looking at them being between 7-9% better than they were pre GHB while most other competing factions saw either very small increases in power or small decreases in power(or large decreases in the case of Tzeentch). Seraphon and Maggotkin are very worrying at the moment. LoN is much harder to pin down but has the potential to outstrip them both.

When you play with and against these armies keep track of what you and/or your opponent are able to do with their summoning. Get concrete data. Then, assuming you see an issue, send the FAQ team your findings and hope for the best. GW isn't great at army balance but they're better than they used to be and they're willing to do left-field nerfs when things get out of hand.

[RuneBrush]

11 minutes ago, Bellfree said:

A Slann can generate 18pts in two turns. Considering the chart seems to average about 9pts per summoning point, it seems unlikely that you're correct. If you're adding points from other sources, you're misrepresenting your argument. Nurgle can summon 20 plaguebearers either 2 or 3 and another twenty 4 or 5 so 40 is the max you'll see in a 5 turn game with 20 likely coming on in turn 5.

When you use hyperbole like this you undermine what is a very valid point, summoning for these armies is going to be exceptionally powerful. With no really meaningful nerfs, these already powerful armies are seeing between and 10 and 15% increase in efficacy from their summoning. Even with perfect counter play I'd say you're looking at them being between 7-9% better than they were pre GHB while most other competing factions saw either very small increases in power or small decreases in power(or large decreases in the case of Tzeentch). Seraphon and Maggotkin are very worrying at the moment. LoN is much harder to pin down but has the potential to outstrip them both.

When you play with and against these armies keep track of what you and/or your opponent are able to do with their summoning. Get concrete data. Then, assuming you see an issue, send the FAQ team your findings and hope for the best. GW isn't great at army balance but they're better than they used to be and they're willing to do left-field nerfs when things get out of hand.

Completely agree.  I think we'll have a few months of "suck it and see" and most likely get some FAQ/Errata.  LoN is going to be tricky to work out as the summoning is linked with Command Points and Gravesites - one of which is in limited supply and the other very easily capped off.

I think the biggest thing is going to be understanding how each summoning mechanic works so that you can work out how to combat it.  Contagion points can be reduced with having units in the right place and good board control for example.

[Nozdormu]

Does anyone know what is  the "hidden" status which is mentioned in Warhammer Age of Sigmar Command & Status Dice description? Is it something new to AoS New Edition?

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Age-Of-Sigmar-Command-Status-Dice-2018

[christophe]

4 hours ago, Nevvermore said:

Wonder how many people that are not serious competitive players that will be happy about buying and painting all that new stuff to use for summoning so they aren’t handicapping themselves?

yes I for exemple dislike most minor deamon models, and the Slann mini. I will not buy/paint them... which makes my chaos and Seraphon armies super uncompetitive... I will not let GW push me buying mini I don't fancy painting, but my armies will suffer a great deal (at least till the next change in rules, or more fancy new minis)...

[Trayanee]

4 hours ago, Nevvermore said:

Wonder how many people that are not serious competitive players that will be happy about buying and painting all that new stuff to use for summoning so they aren’t handicapping themselves?

This is what really made me sad. I simply don't want to get and paint any horrors. It's out of theme for my arcanites, but the list got so expensive because the summoning is factored in the costs, that I will end up putting Tzeentch on a shelf for a long time.

[Bellfree]

12 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Completely agree.  I think we'll have a few months of "suck it and see" and most likely get some FAQ/Errata.  LoN is going to be tricky to work out as the summoning is linked with Command Points and Gravesites - one of which is in limited supply and the other very easily capped off.

I think the biggest thing is going to be understanding how each summoning mechanic works so that you can work out how to combat it.  Contagion points can be reduced with having units in the right place and good board control for example.

I will add one small thing in that I think the degree to which people will be able to combat summoning is often as overstated as the degree to which it can be abused. Blocking off gravesites against a LoN army is a lot more difficult than people give it credit for, stopping contagion points involves hanging out in locations you would never really want to be in otherwise, and killing the Slann is more dependent on either shooting it to death or some form of deepstrike attack than anything.

Even then though, the summoning wouldn't be any problem at all(like how no one is really very concerned for Tzeentch, Khorne, Slaanesh, or FEC) if Maggotking and Seraphon weren't already top tier. The bonus, even at full utilization, is relatively small. It's the fact that the armies are already so close to the borderline that creates potential issues. LoN is the obvious outlier but their summoning is so drastically different than everyone elses that it's pretty much destined to be one of those 'LoN are useless, you can't summon anything! No, LoN are broken, my buddy had to buy a new house for all the stuff he summoned in one game!'.

[TheOtherJosh]

18 minutes ago, Nozdormu said:

Does anyone know what is  the "hidden" status which is mentioned in Warhammer Age of Sigmar Command & Status Dice description? Is it something new to AoS New Edition?

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Age-Of-Sigmar-Command-Status-Dice-2018

Likely a different description for “In Cover”? If you’re in cover you’re “hidden from view”. But that is entirely supposition.

[TheOtherJosh]

2 hours ago, Mcthew said:

A lot of what has been promised seems to be missing from the version I saw, including the Open War generator promised. 

The open war generator is in the Core Book. It’s like 2-3 pages hidden in there and easy to overlook.

[Mcthew]

1 minute ago, TheOtherJosh said:

The open war generator is in the Core Book. It’s like 2-3 pages hidden in there and easy to overlook.

Ah, that would explain it. Neither of us could find it, although we didn't have the time to go through every page ?. Thanks for sharing...

[Nevvermore]

3 hours ago, Mcthew said:

Completely agree. GW did their job well with all the hype (and on occasion forum members here have helped exaggerate the hype by panicking about the rules, tbh) so that it seemed AoS 2.0 would be a game-changer. It isn't, honestly.

I went into a store at the weekend expecting to part with upwards of £150 on pre-ordering both Soul Wars, Malign Sorcery and GHB18, thinking they would be essential. They had the SW boxset and Malign Sorcery to pore through, and in all honesty, I wouldn't be using much of it. The spells are ok, but not a massive leap from current AoS. The SW box set is fun, good value, but the Core Book adds little to the old book, just better organised fluff. Plenty that was promised in the Core Book, such as various rules etc, are being bumped into the GHB18, leaving the Core Book more as hobby book full of lore and the occasional highlighted change. Endless Spells for example, are in the Core Book as a summary, but with no actual rules.  

And then we discussed GHB18, and I was told there are few changes, but none of it is seismic. There will be subtle points uplifts/decreases (I think Bloodsecrator was one who increases by 20pts for example, but again it's not the end of the world) and there will be more scope for fun games, with the emphasis on narrative and open play. But game-changing? Not for most of us. There's been more rumour and counter rumour than actual real changes, but that's GWs doing with the drip-feed of reveals (cunning really, as it's kept the game and this forum lively with debate!), but I doubt the impact on the field (or sky) of battle will be that different.

Yeah so, the ultra-competitive might find changes of 10 points here, and 10 points there, as changes that micro-shift the scales of power, and might even find changes in summoning a blow to their perfectly crafted army lists, but I've seen nothing so far in AoS 2.0 to get into a flap over - for the majority of gamers. It's not like we're losing armies, like we lost the Tomb Kings, and we are in fact gaining armies. These are really just tweaks to a young gaming system.

I went away from the store feeling underwhelmed, but quite liberated really, realising that GHB18 is a must in July, but the rest? Well, maybe someday this year. Not essential to the hobby by any means. 

 

Edit: (Also should note that the Core Book I saw in the shop is different to the one previewed in GW - quite different. A lot of what has been promised seems to be missing from the version I saw, including the Open War generator promised. I was told this is now part of GHB18 and not the Core Book. A little annoyed with GW for that. Previews should hold true, should they not? How are you meant to pre-order something that isn't correctly previewed?) 

The Core Book you saw is going to be exactly the same as the one GW previewed, you simply missed that stuff while having a quick look-through. The book will have been printed many months ago and any final changes made before that. This is not stuff you can change last minute.

[Nevvermore]

4 hours ago, Sleboda said:

I think you probably meant this to have a somewhat negative tone (which is fine!), but I'll spin it slightly in my response:

They will feel great! A reason to paint more models for my model-painting hobby? Yes, please!

Well, that's awesome for you and glad you will be able to do it. As for me, I have a two kids and a full-time job, and very little time to paint. I also play other games and like to paint a wide variety of different models if I can. Now, if I want to fully utilize my Tzeentch army I will have to buy and paint a total of 60 Blue Horrors and 60 Brimstone Horrors just as a start. They aren't that fun to paint, especially 60 of each. I have a recipe I use to make the process as quick as possible, but it would be both expensive and time-consuming. And remember, this is simply to cover the "Split" rule for my Pinks, I haven't even mentioned any further summoning! Fun fact, I picked Pink Horrors as my battleline unit because they would be fast to paint and I don't have the time to paint 30 super-detailed battleline models like Tzaangor. I was also happy that they worked well in the game as three units of 10, unlike say Skeletons or Skaven where you really need to max the units out for them to be useful.  The most likely outcome is that I'll shelve my Tzeentch army and find one where I don't need 150 (!) models for my minimum size battleline units. 

Now mind you, I'm not really angry at GW for this, I won't be boycotting anything or burning my army. I'm sure many people love free summoning and it could very well be good for the game. I'm just sad because I've been playing Tzeentch since the 90s and now it's unlikely I will be able to keep it up.

[GeneralZero]

2 minutes ago, Nevvermore said:

I'm just sad because I've been playing Tzeentch since the 90s and now it's unlikely I will be able to keep it up.

or...adjust strategy. I'm not sure that summoning is the key. It can help but we have several other options especialy for a heavy magic army.

[Nevvermore]

4 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

or...adjust strategy. I'm not sure that summoning is the key. It can help but we have several other options especialy for a heavy magic army.

Well, there are not other ways to use Summoning Points other than for summoning. There's no strategy since there's no decision. So by not using it, I'm effectively nerfing myself. Keep in mind that almost every Tzeentch unit was raised in points, and Pinks for example are now priced to account for the free Blues and Brims you get from them.

[Jamopower]

Outside from horrors, that likely has no connection to summoning as the units raised in cost were some of the best in the game. Thus against armies that don't summon, you should still be more or less on equal terms (at least outside top level competition). If the free summoning turns out to be so huge benefit that you can't manage against it without summoning yourself, then it's not just Tzeentch armies' problem, but quite a big problem for the whole game.