Jump to content

AoS 2 and what it means for Destruction


Soulsmith

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 313
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 hours ago, Skabnoze said:

Also bear in mind how GW releases 40k 8th edition a year ago.  While they did invalidate all of the existing codexes and make a clean shift, they also put out a full set of rules for each faction.  In addition, for the most part the full codex for many factions has often been just small tweaks to much of those initial rules and the addition of stratagems and whatnot.

The point is that the GW rules team seems willing to put in serious effort when they need to.  So I would not rule out a fair number of updates being a possibility.

They did. The question is are BCR going to get a Inari/eldar type of index or a grey knight/space wolfs one? I think a rules change is a good thing, and they are clearly things wrong with how some AoS stuff works. For example the org at, and I know this isn't much of an argument world wide, checked how much getting double turn relates to winning games comparing to not winning. And people with exact the same armies in exact the same match ups over 6 months of tournaments had an over 120% higher win rate when they got double turn. I hope  that if anything is done, GW fixs at least that. Don't ask me how though, because I don't know how to fix it.

 

I just hope BRC won't end up with a copy pasta index with a few changes here and there, that won't really matter. And of course to get points for those we are going to have to pay. But who knows, maybe they will fix an army with no new models.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that BCR have to worry (I play them too). They will get some kind of update. They need it. GW tries to balance a little bit and does not want to ****** off players too much (I think they have proven that), though obviously certain factions always get a bonus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

This maybe off topic, but the last batch of faq/errata for w40k killed or almost killed w40k here. So am kind of a worried about any updates from GW. I really wouldn't want BCR to become even worse.

Why killed? I play after FAQ with beta rules and all was fine. No more spam units now! It's very good! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/13/2018 at 10:12 PM, kenshin620 said:

Maybe its me, but I get the feeling greenskins may be folded into ironjaws and become their version of bloodreavers/marauders.

That's an interesting concept and one I hadn't considered. The more I think about it the more I like this idea from a game play standpoint. It gives IJ immediate access to more units. They would have to come up with a fluff reason for it though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Imperial said:

Why killed? I play after FAQ with beta rules and all was fine. No more spam units now! It's very good! 

Well we had a far share of BA players, they also were people whose armies stoped being legal, because of the rule of 3. I don't play w40k, but they play in the same store. And from what I heard their last event pre FAQ had 30 players, now they have 12, and the last one is the store owner himself. And it is summer seson people have more time to play etc.  Ah and a GK dude had a melt down at the store. The only ones still playing are those that have some sort of IG or eldar list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

Well we had a far share of BA players, they also were people whose armies stoped being legal, because of the rule of 3. I don't play w40k, but they play in the same store. And from what I heard their last event pre FAQ had 30 players, now they have 12, and the last one is the store owner himself. And it is summer seson people have more time to play etc.  Ah and a GK dude had a melt down at the store. The only ones still playing are those that have some sort of IG or eldar list.

Gw broke only spam lists. If ppl's like with spam it's very sad .... I realy like this faq. After this fix i can play some "trash" units. In my town ppl's dont with Imperial Knights because of lascannon spam. I realy hope we will get the same fix in AoS in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blueshirtman said:

Well we had a far share of BA players, they also were people whose armies stoped being legal, because of the rule of 3. I don't play w40k, but they play in the same store. And from what I heard their last event pre FAQ had 30 players, now they have 12, and the last one is the store owner himself. And it is summer seson people have more time to play etc.  Ah and a GK dude had a melt down at the store. The only ones still playing are those that have some sort of IG or eldar list.

There has been a regain of life at my store since the FAQ, spammy rule is one of the cause. One of teh big canadian event had trouble hitting 64 last year, rumor s has it that it will beat the 128 mark...  Not sure it killed it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to sound condescending to tourney players but if you quit because your cheesy list gets broken by a nerfbat, I think you care about winning too much. In 40k it was ridiculous to see nothing but fliers or 10 psykers vomitting out Smite as if they were heavy bolters! And wit htheir new faq, some of the nerfs were lessened on units that didn't warrant it (like Grey Knights)

Now I do understand that Destruction isn't really cheese and has been hurt by nerfs in the past (Bonesplitterz really only having one viable list) but I'm sure that any new update would be good. I mean most of the new battletomes have been positive. Unless you're trying to run a beasts of nurgle menagerie list....that still kind of sucks!

 

3 hours ago, sporadicMike said:

That's an interesting concept and one I hadn't considered. The more I think about it the more I like this idea from a game play standpoint. It gives IJ immediate access to more units. They would have to come up with a fluff reason for it though. 

 

Well its not like normal greenskins have all that much fluff anyways...

Plus it could harken back to old O&G book where nothing really stopped you from having any combination of O&G so you could have a Black Orc Warboss leading Night Goblins or a Goblin Warboss leading Savage Orcs. I don't think Orruks and Grots would be combined, but I think normal greenskin orruks may easily be filed under ironjawz. Remember that greenskin warbosses can use their waaagh ability on any orruk!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kenshin620 said:

Not to sound condescending to tourney players but if you quit because your cheesy list gets broken by a nerfbat, I think you care about winning too much.

I cant think of a proper tourney player that would. The fun for them can be solely in finding and building those lists so they often have a high army turnover rate, selling and buying armies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 40k FAQ simply said that aside from troops (battleline in AoS) you should not have more than 3 of the same choice, and also that you should not be able to have huge chunks of your army appear right next to the enemy on the first turn (it is ok from 2nd turn onwards).  Those seemed like very reasonable changes to me. 

The change to Deep Striking (or similar other teleport methods) has actually been the way 40k has worked in every single previous edition since 2nd ed.  So, even though that change has a number of hard-core tournament players making a big stink people should not be that freaked out because we have been playing like that for over 20 years and only since the release of 8th edition a year ago have you been able to dump your army right in your enemies face with guaranteed success (there is no longer any sort of deep strike scatter or potential death - as in past editions) and almost no repercussions.  This change is a good one.

As for the restriction on spamming non-troops units, that too is a good change because aside from the Force Organization detachments 8th ed 40k has no unit-type restrictions in place for army construction.  Age of Sigmar matched-play rules does have restrictions.  You are allowed to take X number of heroes, Y number of artillery, Z number of behemoths, and are required to take Q number of battleline for any particular game size.  40k has none of  this.  It sort of had this system in the past when you only got to use 1 Force Org chart unless you maxed out the chart selections and could then add another, but 8th edition does not have that.  Instead, they have multiple different force org charts that can be combined together however you want and it basically allows you to take as much of whatever it is that you want without any real restrictions.  Imagine if in Age of Sigmar you could build an army of as many Star Drakes/Blood Thirsters/Maw Crushers/whatever that you wanted in matched play - and that is effectively how 40k was operating.  So you saw some army lists that had 6+ Chaos Demon princes with wings flying around or 6+ flying Tyrannid Hive Tyrants, etc.  They restricted it to 3 of a specific unit selection at 2000 points, which honestly fits about 98% of the armies I have seen most people build over the years.  The only people that really got hit hard were the ones building wacky skew tournament lists around single specific units.  I shed no tears for the loss of those lists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kenshin620 said:

Not to sound condescending to tourney players but if you quit because your cheesy list gets broken by a nerfbat, I think you care about winning too much. In 40k it was ridiculous to see nothing but fliers or 10 psykers vomitting out Smite as if they were heavy bolters! And wit htheir new faq, some of the nerfs were lessened on units that didn't warrant it (like Grey Knights)

Now I do understand that Destruction isn't really cheese and has been hurt by nerfs in the past (Bonesplitterz really only having one viable list) but I'm sure that any new update would be good. I mean most of the new battletomes have been positive. 

Well I can't say much about w40k as I don't play it. But let me tell you something from someone who has not won a single game since he started to play. Losing o er and over again sucks, and not just a bit. When I think I could have used the money on a used laptop and no longer be forced to borrow one from my parents, and I could play games on it, I get sick. But it is not like I can take it back to the store and demand a refund because the product doesn't work. I really hope the new edition will fix it, I don't know how though.  Am not a rules guru, nor a sales major. And this maybe real life creeping in to my perception, but if someone e here says stuff like X may suffer a bit, or "we will work on it", it is just better to move to UK or Sweden.  I hope the update is awesome, I understand the need for it, and there is nothing I will miss ruleswise from this edition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skabnoze said:

 So you saw some army lists that had 6+ Chaos Demon princes with wings flying around or 6+ flying Tyrannid Hive Tyrants, etc.  They restricted it to 3 of a specific unit selection at 2000 points, which honestly fits about 98% of the armies I have seen most people build over the years.  The only people that really got hit hard were the ones building wacky skew tournament lists around single specific units.  I shed no tears for the loss of those lists.

That was exactly the thing that made our onlyGK player melt down. First he was told he couldn't use some FW model, because it was no longer GK, then hid opponent told him he could deep strike turn one or have more then 3 units, and when the GK player asked why his opponent army had 7 DP, he was told that they were taken from different books. After that the GK player quit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

Well I can't say much about w40k as I don't play it. But let me tell you something from someone who has not won a single game since he started to play. Losing o er and over again sucks, and not just a bit. When I think I could have used the money on a used laptop and no longer be forced to borrow one from my parents, and I could play games on it, I get sick. But it is not like I can take it back to the store and demand a refund because the product doesn't work. I really hope the new edition will fix it, I don't know how though.  Am not a rules guru, nor a sales major. And this maybe real life creeping in to my perception, but if someone e here says stuff like X may suffer a bit, or "we will work on it", it is just better to move to UK or Sweden.  I hope the update is awesome, I understand the need for it, and there is nothing I will miss ruleswise from this edition.

I feel you dude. I win games locally but the moment i go to an event i get stomped, and I know it's not just me causing that (just largely that), its the sh1tty Destruction rules. Even worse is coming close to winning very often but never quite make it, because of the sh1tty destruction rules. Every other GA seems to just accidentally haemorrhage buffs from every orrifice on multiple units, whilst we just have mystic shield and inspiring presence. Even the battletome armies suck. 

I'm a stubborn ****** so not gunna quit though. Jokes on you GW i'm gunna keep buying goblins til I win! 

Depressing thing is that GW try so hard to achieve this ****** level of balance. I've only been in the hobby for a year and i'm already pretty cynical about them fixing things. From what I gather, they have always deliberately made the shiny new factions by far the strongest so thats not gunna change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blueshirtman said:

That was exactly the thing that made our onlyGK player melt down. First he was told he couldn't use some FW model, because it was no longer GK, then hid opponent told him he could deep strike turn one or have more then 3 units, and when the GK player asked why his opponent army had 7 DP, he was told that they were taken from different books. After that the GK player quit.

The different book arguments for the Demon Prince does not hold weight.  I am almost 100% certain that you cannot get around that 3 of a single model restriction by trying to ally Chaos Marines codex, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, or Demon armies together.  At that point the GK opponent was just being a j.erk.  It does not sound like the group he was playing in were the the friendliest of players.  People like that in my neck of the woods tend to quickly find themselves without any opponents willing to play them except for a tournament.

Although I am curious what unit the GK player was trying to take a bunch of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know much about 40K but the guys at my club who play don't like the FAQ.  Not because of the restriction on spamming (they like that) but because of what they perceive as a hard nerf on combat armies (which I think they call "assault").  Not just the deep striking but also the restriction on scaling scenery (so you can flood out the floorspace with your gunline and not be charged - "the floor is lava").

Also there is a lot os disillusionment at the "not targetting heroes" thing, the perception being that GW change the rules every few months and still can't get them right.  Specifically that you can hide the nearest unit out of LOS and then your opponent can't target a visible character, and therefore can't shoot anyone even though there is an enemy clearly visible.  Which is more than a theoretical issue, it happens in real games quite frequently.  Apparently.

Purely anecdotal, but 40K has gone from being top dog to a distant second at our club, and still falling.  It's been great for AOS, because we've got a really thriving scene and we continue to pick up former 40K stalwarts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just hope they will not increase the complexity of AoS too much (i'm a bit worried they will). I think they hit the target with a game focused on models and not supplement (GW are expert at vomiting supplement it's scary). Simple and easy to grasp rules, but difficult to master game. I even think they could have went further by making batallion free to download!

Now we are looking at 2 essential supplement for every army (2nd edition rulebook + GHB2018) + faction battletome. And GHB is a yearly supplement and battletome are likely to be reedited to often (creating a balance issue that is hard to fix). With all the brushes and paint stuff, it's starting to be a huge investment.

For poeple who already play and have an army, it's not so bad. But every layer you had increase the gap to bring new players into the game...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, broche said:

just hope they will not increase the complexity of AoS too much (i'm a bit worried they will). I think they hit the target with a game focused on models and not supplement (GW are expert at vomiting supplement it's scary). Simple and easy to grasp rules, but difficult to master game. I even think they could have went further by making batallion free to download!

I miss the days when I could  read the warscrolls of my opponent's army on the app and know what their army does.

I now keep a pdf of every battletome and a notebook with important (powerful) things such as battalions, enclaves, artifacts, alliances abilities, prayers, and spells.

Very different game now then it was post GH1 but pre-Syvaneth battletome.

Maybe it was needed for growth but I was happy when battletomes were just a hardback copy of all the free rules and the only additional rules were in the GH 4 GAs artifacts and abilities.

I should say that I still love AOS but I like new models with new rules (Warscrolls) over supplements (Battletomes) like you say @broche. Very excited for the new edition, my 2 least fav things about AOS currently are incentives for 90+ battleline and that there is nothing in the rules/they still sell models on squares.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skabnoze said:

Buying goblins is winning in my book.

Unless its hob goblins. Get out of here you super back stabbing gits! ?

It would actually be kind of neat if gitmob grots became more hob goblin like, especially since I don't think FW is ever giving them to the legion of azgorh.

But yea I too want destruction to get up there in the standings. Especially since for us old folk, orcs have always gotten the short end of the stick for years. *shudders* animosity rule.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’d love to see a LON style book for all armies they don’t want to continue but have a nice range of plastic models. Trolls, Giants, Greenskinz, Gitmob, Gutbusters.

And then release sick new models and battletomes for Moonclan like they are doing with Nighthaunt... followed by a rerelease and new models for IJ, BCR, BS.

Short run I just want sensible points and allegiance abilities for a lot of our stuff.

Silly we only got IJ in GH2 and across the board point increases. GH2 has a lot of issues imo. My guess is someone lost there  job!  part of the reason for the quick turnaround from GH2 and making the 40k rules writer in charge. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always enjoyed forest goblins, but I have to say that I really like how they tweaked them into Spiderfang in Age of Sigmar.  Forest goblins have always had a spider theme - but they really doubled down on it.  As much as I love moonclan and squigs - I really hope that they expand spiderfang in some fashion.

The grot sky pirates sound fun, and I would love them as I do all things goblin, but I really don’t want GW to ignore Spiderfang.  I just want more big spiders all over the board!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Skabnoze said:

I have always enjoyed forest goblins, but I have to say that I really like how they tweaked them into Spiderfang in Age of Sigmar.  Forest goblins have always had a spider theme - but they really doubled down on it.  As much as I love moonclan and squigs - I really hope that they expand spiderfang in some fashion.

Dynamically posed spiderfang grots on foot would be amazing, grots really suffer from "rank up" syndrome outside of the fanatics.

 

Like go from these poses

Spoiler

 

99120209002_GoblinRegimentNEW01.jpg


 

to something like these

Spoiler


99121462008_HunterOrcsNEW01.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...