CaptainNippon Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 5 hours ago, AverageBoss said: Unfortunately, there is still no point to the WK in this situation. You are better off taking 2 VLs, as their CAs can stack on the same unit and are not limited to just skeletons. The Wight King is cheaper though He's also a prerequisite for the Deathmarch battalion, in case you want to go with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhsellwood Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 why would you take a vampire lord and a Wight king? because command abilities probably won't stack (ref. the aether khemist restriction) so 2 of one can't buff the same unit so two similar but different provides overlapping buffs. because the Wight king is 20 points less and has a 3+ save. because in legion of nagash the Wight king is buffed by both lord of nagashizzar and the ossific diadem. because a Wight king is needed for the death march battalion which is really good. because the Wight king and vampire lords are awesome models. I really like the new command point rule. simple and intuitive with additional depth. specific advantages I can see: encouraged to take hero allies as they can boost their troops despite not being the general. Some characters that are currently not useful become a lot better - for example a cave shaman now is a really rounded support character as you can use him to add mobility without having to have him as your general. a range of heroes with command abilities becomes a source of flexibility rather than being reduced to the one good choice and the deadweight. a bit of a boost to msu armies as currently you are best off focusing your one command ability on one murder horde but with potentially multiple command abilities you could support multiple units more easily. finally if you do not link command points to battalions what do you link them to? at least with battalions there is a points cost attached so a lever of control over access to them. note that in my opinion 90% of battalions are garbage in matched play so any bonus is welcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 We will see what the future holds. But I will remain sceptical. And I still think there could have been better ways to implement such a system without disadvantaging anyone. And I have to say that in this forum people very often dismiss criticism on rules or AoS and marginalize the complaints of many people as "whining" or "hate". I think this is not a positive way to communicate with each other. I know that some people don't want this forum to turn into DakkaDakka and so on. But on the other hand I see that people dismiss valid criticism very often and tell the people that they should quit "whining", which I find very disrespectful. Also to dismiss valid complaints by saying that people just argue with "feeling" while the system on the other hand is just objectively unfair at the moment. This has nothing to do with feelings. We can only argue about the things we know at the moment. People might change their opinion when we see new rules. But I really have to say that I don't like that people dismiss any criticism on written rules by saying people only "argue on feeling" or are "just whining". The people argueing that we have to see the whole picture also don't know if the rest of rules GW will publish will compensate for the imbalance. So these people . also argue based on "feelings" (On the feeling that GW will eventually fix everything). The only straight "facts" we have are the rules we see on the GW website at the moment. Anything else what might come is just speculation. This is why I would wish for a more mature discussion which respects both sides and also criticism without marginalizing the people who complain. A little criticizing and complaining won't turn this forum into DakkaDakka2. An open and healthy discourse is the cornerstone for a healthy and growing AoS community. Most of the people who criticize the rules just criticise "the rules", whereas the other side criticizes the people who voice their opinion, not the rules. I think such behaviour devides people instead of bringing them together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainNippon Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 7 minutes ago, Infeston said: We will see what the future holds. But I will remain sceptical. And I still think there could have been better ways to implement such a system without disadvantaging anyone. And I have to say that in this forum people very often dismiss criticism on rules or AoS and marginalize the complaints of many people as "whining" or "hate". I think this is not a positive way to communicate with each other. I know that some people don't want this forum to turn into DakkaDakka and so on. But on the other hand I see that people dismiss valid criticism very often and tell the people that they should quit "whining", which I find very disrespectful. Also to dismiss valid complaints by saying that people just argue with "feeling" while the system on the other hand is just objectively unfair at the moment. This has nothing to do with feelings. We can only argue about the things we know at the moment. People might change their opinion when we see new rules. But I really have to say that I don't like that people dismiss any criticism on written rules by saying people only "argue on feeling" or are "just whining". The people argueing that we have to see the whole picture also don't know if the rest of rules GW will publish will compensate for the imbalance. So these people . also argue based on "feelings" (On the feeling that GW will eventually fix everything). The only straight "facts" we have are the rules we see on the GW website at the moment. Anything else what might come is just speculation. Very good point. Nobody wants this forum to become place for naysayers, but at the same time it should't become an echochamber for AoS fanbois. Scepticism should be encouraged, especially considering the company we are talking about here. Let's see what else this new edition brings and reserve our final judgement for when it's released. In the meantime, I'm sure that we can keep the discussion civil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Marius Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 8 minutes ago, Infeston said: But on the other hand I see that people dismiss valid criticism very often and tell the people that they should quit "whining", which I find very disrespectful. I like to use the forum to vent concerns or dissatisfaction with parts of the hobby, as much as i like to comment on the positive and read the insights of other posters. Id be wary of seeing my views as 'valid' or 'objective' tho, especially when concerning speculation over fragmented new rule snippets. In this thread just this week weve gone from "woe is me my beastclaws are in for a nerfing" to "these new command abilities are great for beastclaws" and weve only seen a fraction of what is to come! So by all means everyone should critique away, but if the criticism is contentious id expect to be called up on it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 3 minutes ago, CaptainNippon said: Very good point. Nobody wants this forum to become place for naysayers, but at the same time it should't become an echochamber for AoS fanbois. Scepticism should be encouraged, especially considering the company we are talking about here. Let's see what else this new edition brings and reserve our final judgement for when it's released. In the meantime, I'm sure that we can keep the discussion civil. Thanks. ? I am still excited about whats to come. And I also don't encourage hate and missbehaviour on both sides. @Captain Marius Maybe not objective, but I find it valid. And you on the other hand also don't know what GWs intention and upcoming rules are. So your claims are as much based on assumptions than the other people's claims that the rule changes are unfair. People like to speculate and discuss about things. That is what I thought this thread is also about. If this would be the rumor thread, I could understand that we shouldn't discuss about such things. But this thread is for AOS Second edition discussion and not for rumours like the Rumour Thread. So let the people discuss and complain. I don't have anything against talking about the rules, but on the other hand some people don't criticize the rules, but the people who criticize the rules. As long as it is all about the rules I have no problem. But if people are called "whiny" just for voicing criticism I find this to be unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karol Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 14 hours ago, Ar-Pharazôn said: I generally like the changes if I'm honest. The issues of connecting battalions and command points is an improvement. Especially when we consider CP spam in 40k. each other. 40K fans were similarly upset over how 8th was the "AOS" edition, but look how huge that edition has become. All of the criticisms are valid, and I agree with some, but I also think we need patience. GW has shown an unprecedented willingness to improve and update rulesets, and should AoS 2nd fumble, the FAQ will be right around the corner. Why didn't they make it that everyone starts with -2-3 points, and gets 1 per turn? You could buy relics with CP. Gives tactical options what ever you want to nuke with command abilities turn one, or buy more relics. Doesn't hurt people without battalions, and everything else gets changed to work like they wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karol Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 1 hour ago, mhsellwood said: finally if you do not link command points to battalions what do you link them to? Give the same flat number of CP for all armies ? 4 hours ago, Jamopower said: n a world where the double turn causes so much agony due to players just 'pushing their stuff forward and looking what happens' without planning for it, imagine what will be the effect of chargers always striking first in a similar playstyle means. The games will be decided who gets the charge in, which is decided by a priority roll... Isn't the problem with double turns, not as much being charged as being shot to hell when your trying to take objectives? I am a very new player, but I did expiriance a dual turn of magic from a tzeench list and it was not fun. And I couldn't do anything about it, because my army has no range units of its own, and if I didn't move up he would just take the objectives and won at the end of turn 2, if we didn't get double turns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaJeel Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 The article says every turn you get a cp, so that would lead me to believe that ever turn you get a cp, not every round. If it is every round that would mean that they have reduced inspiring presence effectiveness by half in a way, and made battalions super strong. Also the difference is having 5 cps per game to having 10, and I'd imagine they want the hero to be fun and full of choice rather than restrictive and heavily dependant on battalions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamopower Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 1 hour ago, Karol said: Give the same flat number of CP for all armies ? Isn't the problem with double turns, not as much being charged as being shot to hell when your trying to take objectives? I am a very new player, but I did expiriance a dual turn of magic from a tzeench list and it was not fun. And I couldn't do anything about it, because my army has no range units of its own, and if I didn't move up he would just take the objectives and won at the end of turn 2, if we didn't get double turns. Yes, but this was speculation about the persisting rumour that chargers are going first in combat in 2nd edition, which could change the game a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 38 minutes ago, Jamopower said: Yes, but this was speculation about the persisting rumour that chargers are going first in combat in 2nd edition, which could change the game a lot. Jeah, but wouldn't this make it fairer for melee armies? At the moment in the combat phase the other side can also strike back and the activations are alternated. Even if chargers strike first, the defenders can still strike back if they survive the charge. The shooting phase never had alternated activations. So it was always stronger than the combat phase. But if they would change it to chargers strike first, melee centered armies would also have a chance to do something. The current meta heavily relies on shooting. Some armies consists even only of archers. I think this might change the way the game is played at the moment and might not have that big of an impact as everyon thinks. With the change shooting-heavy armies also might have to include melee units to protect their archers and this would propably add a new level of tactical maneuvering. In most of the games I played against shooting-heavy armies, most of the damage was done even before my units could reach the enemy. I don't think it would that much of a game-chaner and instead give other armies the ability to compete. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aelfric Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, Infeston said: Jeah, but wouldn't this make it fairer for melee armies? At the moment in the combat phase the other side can also strike back and the activations are alternated. Even if chargers strike first, the defenders can still strike back if they survive the charge. The shooting phase never had alternated activations. So it was always stronger than the combat phase. But if they would change it to chargers strike first, melee centered armies would also have a chance to do something. The current meta heavily relies on shooting. Some armies consists even only of archers. I think this might change. Shooting-heavy armies also might have to include melee units to protect their archers and this would propably add a new level of tactical maneuvering. If you are facing a shooting only army with your melee army, why do you need chargers strike first? nearly all Missile troops are so useless at melee it would make very little difference. You say that the shooting phase was stronger because it never had alternated activations. How would being able to shoot in your opponent's turn as well as your own make missile armies weaker, especially against melee armies who couldn't shoot in either turn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lousy Beatnik Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 2 hours ago, Karol said: Give the same flat number of CP for all armies ? Yeah, that would have been better in my eyes. Easier and takes less to explain, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michu Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 We have a faction focus for Slaanesh: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/05/19/19th-may-faction-focus-hosts-of-slaaneshgw-homepage-post-3/ And unfortunately price rise for brushes: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/05/19/paint-brush-price-rise/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ar-Pharazôn Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 I enjoy the subtle hint that a Slaanesh release is coming. Depravity points sound interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLV Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 Again for all the naysayers saying it wouldn’t happen.....? Free summoning.....check so you’re Khorne, nurgle and death tables / abilities now make sense. It’s almost as if this was all planned a year ago or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turragor Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 1 minute ago, LLV said: Free summoning Well alternate, steady-gained resource summoning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkiham Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 Yes! Free balewinds again. I'm going to need to carry around a mop an bucket for all the salty tears Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michu Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 Just now, Arkiham said: Yes! Free balewinds again. I'm going to need to carry around a mop an bucket for all the salty tears I think Balewind would be one of the "changed warscrolls" ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furuzzolo Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 5 minutes ago, LLV said: Again for all the naysayers saying it wouldn’t happen.....? Free summoning.....check so you’re Khorne, nurgle and death tables / abilities now make sense. It’s almost as if this was all planned a year ago or something So, now, confirm once and for all the charge-go-first-thing... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLV Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 Everything else I’ve been told has been on the money so at this point I think the charge go first is inevitable. Not just charge go first but the way 40k pile in etc works Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rokapoke Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 15 minutes ago, LLV said: Again for all the naysayers saying it wouldn’t happen..... The “I told you so” mantra is really getting old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkiham Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 Time to dust off my chaos spawn army. Think I used to generate 6 a turn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeryenn Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 I'm really, really happy that they bring some normal summoning rules. It's fun that they will differ across armies. I wonder with what will they come up regarding Sylvaneth. Wyldwoods will generate summoning points? Or wizards in those forests? Great news indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S133arcanite Posted May 19, 2018 Share Posted May 19, 2018 Sounds like tzeentch is getting a new way of summoning... https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/05/19/19th-may-faction-focus-hosts-of-slaaneshgw-homepage-post-3/ That, or seraphon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.