AoS 2 - Legion Of Azgorh Discussion

[Charly2912]

man thats a disappointment

[eekamouse]

Just to balance things out. This wasn’t the only army ignored by GHB 2020.

[spenson]

But it was the only army ignored by GHB2019. Ogors don't count since they got a BT. LoA is the only army that didn't get anything 2 years in a row.

Edited July 20, 2020 by spenson

[mattbarker]

5 hours ago, eekamouse said:

Just to balance things out. This wasn’t the only army ignored by GHB 2020.

Whilst you’re right, all the others just got a pdf update And we still got squat so... guess we’re still pretty middle of the road with no love 

[Lorax]

Is it too late to think that we might get another Forge World type update where they bring us back into the fold again?  I have to say I was pleasantly surprised the last time they did it, it reinvented our army.  We could certainly stand for a new update (in total agreement there).  Has it been confirmed that Forge World is no longer responsible for AoS rules?  Otherwise we might have to wait for them to do it.  

[Qrow]

Just now, Lorax said:

Is it too late to think that we might get another Forge World type update where they bring us back into the fold again?  I have to say I was pleasantly surprised the last time they did it, it reinvented our army.  We could certainly stand for a new update (in total agreement there).  Has it been confirmed that Forge World is no longer responsible for AoS rules?  Otherwise we might have to wait for them to do it.  

Last time I emailed them with LoA rule enquiries they responded that they are no longer in charge of the rules for their AoS products.

The last time we got an update was at the release of AoS 2.0. If the three years between editions timeline hold true, then we may see updates in next years AoS 3.0 release. I wouldn't bank on it, but it would be nice.

It is quite clear that we are an official army in name only, the GW AoS team has no plans to treat us with the consideration and respect that they do the other allegiances. Which is frustrating, because in my opinion as long as the models are being sold and advertised an active army, it should be treated as one.

[IrishCarBomb]

On 7/20/2020 at 11:52 AM, Qrow said:

It would seem that we have once again been looked over. I will keep messaging GW with battle reports and issues with balance in our battletome, but I think it is safe to say that we are a not considered a 'real' faction by GW. At least not in their balancing concerns

I can get in  on this to help amplify the message. Where do you keep sending your messages so that I know I am sending to the same contact? If you want to send over some topics you have previously mentioned I can slightly alter to say something similar. I wouldn't want to send an exact copy - they'll think you a bot!

[eekamouse]

1 minute ago, IrishCarBomb said:

I can get in  on this to help amplify the message. Where do you keep sending your messages so that I know I am sending to the same contact? If you want to send over some topics you have previously mentioned I can slightly alter to say something similar. I wouldn't want to send an exact copy - they'll think you a bot!

I'll definitely do the same. I'm confused who to reach out to now that the rules writing has moved away from FW.

[Qrow]

The email I was told to give feedback too was AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. I normally mention recent battle reports and suggestions for point adjustments; though in the case of the dreadquake mortar I suggest a warscroll lookover, poor thing is just... not great.

Feel free to disagree with point changes, but lately I have been suggesting adjustments in the ballpark of:

Leaders

Drazhoath: -60 to 260

Shar'tor: -20 to 200

Taur'ruk: fine as is

Castellan: -10 to 100

Standard bearer: -10 to 90

Deamonsmith: good as is

Battleline

Ironsworn: -10 to 80/210

Fireglaives: good as is

Other

Renders: -20 to 160/560

K'daai: fine as is

Artillery

Deathshreiker: fine as is

Magma: fine as is

Dreadquake: -40 to 140, really just need a total rework. Bring back the half move to hit units.

Behemoth

Iron deamon- -20 to 160

Skullcracker: fine as is

Battalions

War host: -40 to 120

Artillery train: -20 to 100

Execution herd: -20 to 140

 

I get that a lot of these changes seem extreme, especially the -40/60 point drops I suggest, but we have been skipped over twice (three times if you count the Christmas FAQ) and the newer allegiances severely overpower us. Just look at the Cities of sigmar dispossessed and compare them to ours. They get 3+ saves everywhere, irondrakes make our shooting look pathetic and they have actual synergy between units. Despite how much better their units are to ours, they are still not considered a top tier army.

[IrishCarBomb]

2 hours ago, Qrow said:

The email I was told to give feedback too was AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. I normally mention recent battle reports and suggestions for point adjustments; though in the case of the dreadquake mortar I suggest a warscroll lookover, poor thing is just... not great.

Feel free to disagree with point changes, but lately I have been suggesting adjustments in the ballpark of:

Leaders

Drazhoath: -60 to 260

Shar'tor: -20 to 200

Taur'ruk: fine as is

Castellan: -10 to 100

Standard bearer: -10 to 90

Deamonsmith: good as is

Battleline

Ironsworn: -10 to 80/210

Fireglaives: good as is

Other

Renders: -20 to 160/560

K'daai: fine as is

Artillery

Deathshreiker: fine as is

Magma: fine as is

Dreadquake: -40 to 140, really just need a total rework. Bring back the half move to hit units.

Behemoth

Iron deamon- -20 to 160

Skullcracker: fine as is

Battalions

War host: -40 to 120

Artillery train: -20 to 100

Execution herd: -20 to 140

 

I get that a lot of these changes seem extreme, especially the -40/60 point drops I suggest, but we have been skipped over twice (three times if you count the Christmas FAQ) and the newer allegiances severely overpower us. Just look at the Cities of sigmar dispossessed and compare them to ours. They get 3+ saves everywhere, irondrakes make our shooting look pathetic and they have actual synergy between units. Despite how much better their units are to ours, they are still not considered a top tier army.

Nice Assessment! I agree with you on virtually all of those. The 3 most apparent over-costed units are the Dreadquake, Drazhoath and Renders and in that order. I think Renders should be dropped to at least 160 or even 150, OR keep them at cost but add 1 additional attack to their Darkforged Weapon profile.  I also agree Shar'tor and the Battalions need to have points reductions. I would even argue a slight increase to the magma cannon +10 pts to 150 would be acceptable if the other units were adjusted accordingly. 

Also, I'll get a message out to them soon...

I think we should have Forgeworld cc'd on all correspondence as well. Even if they state they are not the ones to change the rules any longer I am sure they have some influence over their armies. Let's flood their mailbox with requests to at least update the unit profiles a bit. Something as simple as  point cost reductions immediately makes the army more competitive on the table - no other changes necessary. (...but if a change were to come - I still would like to see a couple more artifacts and/or additional spell in the Spell Lore. One more new unit or hero would be amazing too!)

I almost forgot - here is the Forgeworld email I have used to communicate with them in the past: forgeworld@gwplc.com

 

Edited July 21, 2020 by IrishCarBomb

[eekamouse]

Thanks. Just dropped an email to the  AoSFAQ@gwplc.com address as well expressing concerns.

[IrishCarBomb]

I just sent mine to both AoSFAQ@gwplc.com  and forgeworld@gwplc.com. 

[Morglum StormBasha]

Qrow I don’t agree with the ironsworn change as 30 for 210 is too cheap.

I do agree that Drazhoath should be 260 and Shartor 200 and 20 off renders, dreadquake and battalions.

this would do a lot to keep us at least as competitive as say stormcast and sylvaneth...

[Qrow]

2 hours ago, Morglum StormBasha said:

Qrow I don’t agree with the ironsworn change as 30 for 210 is too cheap.

I do agree that Drazhoath should be 260 and Shartor 200 and 20 off renders, dreadquake and battalions.

this would do a lot to keep us at least as competitive as say stormcast and sylvaneth...

30 for 210 is too cheap, but there does need to be a change for them. They don't get used in favour of fireglaives and compare poorly with other similar options from other factions, such as CoS longbeards. I think they are another option that needs a warscroll rework, bumping them up to a 3+ save would be the best option in my opinion; a 3+ save would give them a place as an anvil, at least giving them some bonus over fireglaives.

4 hours ago, IrishCarBomb said:

Nice Assessment! I agree with you on virtually all of those. The 3 most apparent over-costed units are the Dreadquake, Drazhoath and Renders and in that order. I think Renders should be dropped to at least 160 or even 150, OR keep them at cost but add 1 additional attack to their Darkforged Weapon profile.  I also agree Shar'tor and the Battalions need to have points reductions. I would even argue a slight increase to the magma cannon +10 pts to 150 would be acceptable if the other units were adjusted accordingly. 

Also, I'll get a message out to them soon...

I think we should have Forgeworld cc'd on all correspondence as well. Even if they state they are not the ones to change the rules any longer I am sure they have some influence over their armies. Let's flood their mailbox with requests to at least update the unit profiles a bit. Something as simple as  point cost reductions immediately makes the army more competitive on the table - no other changes necessary. (...but if a change were to come - I still would like to see a couple more artifacts and/or additional spell in the Spell Lore. One more new unit or hero would be amazing too!)

I almost forgot - here is the Forgeworld email I have used to communicate with them in the past: forgeworld@gwplc.com

 

Thank you. Renders are in a weird place, as if you lower them too much and they are just become flat out better than k'daai and that makes one of our options bad again. The biggest issue I see is that they actual have synergy in the army: they can be buffed by battalions, shar'tor and the taur'ruk. I think with all that support and being 150/520ish they would be a no brainer, in a bad way. An extra attack or 3+ save and a small drop would be nice, but GW seems resistant to warscroll changes even in the most troubling units in AoS.

We were in a good place when 2.0 came out, we had a strong army with good rules and only a few bad units (dreadquake...). But after 2 years with no updates and the power creep shift that has been happening every 3-4 battletomes, we have fallen way behind.

[Latty]

I s

7 hours ago, Qrow said:

The email I was told to give feedback too was AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. I normally mention recent battle reports and suggestions for point adjustments; though in the case of the dreadquake mortar I suggest a warscroll lookover, poor thing is just... not great.

 

I sent an email as well, maybe enough of us sending messages in a short period of time might get something out of GW.

[Charly2912]

I joined too and just sent an E-Mail

 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Charly2912

[Qrow]

I just sent another email, added a bunch of justification for the point changes, as well as stating that increasing the save of the bull centaurs and ironsworn would also assist those units in being more competitive. 

Though with the bull centaurs I would suggest dropping 20 points and adding a 3+ save, they compare poorly to stormcast dracoths and the dracoths are not consider to be great.

[IrishCarBomb]

I'm liking the momentum here with everyone's submissions! Hopefully anyone else reading these will do the same.

And I see your point on dropping the Renders to 150, Qrow. I do like the idea of the 3+ save and a 20 pt drop, but I personally would prefer the points stay the same or maybe a 10 pt drop(to 170) and add a 4th attack, though admittedly this is less likely as you already mentioned. 

[Charly2912]

I've just received a reply from FW and want to share it:

"Hi There

Thanks for the email and for letting us know your thoughts and feedback.

We do take all feedback very seriously from our customers, so this email has been passed on to the relevant heads of departments to look into.

Thanks again for your email, and should you need anything further, please let me know.
Kind regards"

Sadly there is not a word of any future plans mentioned. It was not even ensured that they want to keep the range (as they usually do)

In general it sounds just like a generic awnser, but I hope it will be forwarded and read.

[Qrow]

4 minutes ago, Charly2912 said:

I've just received a reply from FW and want to share it:

"Hi There

Thanks for the email and for letting us know your thoughts and feedback.

We do take all feedback very seriously from our customers, so this email has been passed on to the relevant heads of departments to look into.

Thanks again for your email, and should you need anything further, please let me know.
Kind regards"

 

Sadly there is not a word of any future plans mentioned. It was not even ensured that they want to keep the range (as they usually do)

In general it sounds just like a generic awnser, but I hope it will be forwarded and read.

At the very least, it may mean the AoS rules team gets an email from each of us, as well as forgeworld forwarding them for us.

It's a pity that they haven't kept us up to date with the other allegiances, as we are such a cool army. The k'daai,  huge bull centaurs, drazhoath, even our artillery are so distinct. Hopefully they will listen at some point and start treating the legion of azgorh the same as other allegiances; even if the range never grows, it would be great to be middle of the pack competitively.

[IrishCarBomb]

6 hours ago, Charly2912 said:

I've just received a reply from FW and want to share it:

"Hi There

Thanks for the email and for letting us know your thoughts and feedback.

We do take all feedback very seriously from our customers, so this email has been passed on to the relevant heads of departments to look into.

Thanks again for your email, and should you need anything further, please let me know.
Kind regards"

 

Sadly there is not a word of any future plans mentioned. It was not even ensured that they want to keep the range (as they usually do)

In general it sounds just like a generic awnser, but I hope it will be forwarded and read.

For what it's worth - I asked them back in April before purchasing my whole army (about 3000pts worth) whether they were keeping the line alive or not. They stated they had no intention of retiring the line.

I also received an auto reply from both GW and Forgeworld. Funny though, my Forgeworld reply stated something about "currently experiencing a higher than normal volume of emails" and there may be a delay in replying to me. Maybe we overloaded their mailbox already - touche!

Edited July 22, 2020 by IrishCarBomb

[Charly2912]

 

On 7/21/2020 at 7:02 PM, Qrow said:

The email I was told to give feedback too was AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. I normally mention recent battle reports and suggestions for point adjustments; though in the case of the dreadquake mortar I suggest a warscroll lookover, poor thing is just... not great.

Feel free to disagree with point changes, but lately I have been suggesting adjustments in the ballpark of:

Leaders

Drazhoath: -60 to 260

Shar'tor: -20 to 200

Taur'ruk: fine as is

Castellan: -10 to 100

Standard bearer: -10 to 90

Deamonsmith: good as is

Battleline

Ironsworn: -10 to 80/210

Fireglaives: good as is

Other

Renders: -20 to 160/560

K'daai: fine as is

Artillery

Deathshreiker: fine as is

Magma: fine as is

Dreadquake: -40 to 140, really just need a total rework. Bring back the half move to hit units.

Behemoth

Iron deamon- -20 to 160

Skullcracker: fine as is

Battalions

War host: -40 to 120

Artillery train: -20 to 100

Execution herd: -20 to 140

 

I get that a lot of these changes seem extreme, especially the -40/60 point drops I suggest, but we have been skipped over twice (three times if you count the Christmas FAQ) and the newer allegiances severely overpower us. Just look at the Cities of sigmar dispossessed and compare them to ours. They get 3+ saves everywhere, irondrakes make our shooting look pathetic and they have actual synergy between units. Despite how much better their units are to ours, they are still not considered a top tier army.

While we are already here, I'd like some more warscroll related changes instead of only point adjustments. 

1.) First of all the Fireglaives Champion. I think its kind of stupid that the Fireglaives are the only unit with a champion who is worse than the rest. I realy loved the old warscroll for Fireglaives when they also could drop a grenade once per game and would like to see it back! Even if not give the champion at least the 16" weapon and maybe one extra attack or better to hit. 

2.) I also disliked the change to the castellan when they removed his weapon options. I understand that there was no Bullcentaur miniature with Great or dualwield Weapons from FW and so they removed those options from the game. BUT there is NO official FW Castellan Miniature (even I am using one of the deamonsmith as many other players) so i dont see the point in giving him only 1h+pistol. Would like to see the Shield and Great Weapon options back. Also a little more range on his command ability wouldnt hurt. BTW castellan is at 120 right now and not 110. So we need - 20 for 100 points. 

3.) Bullcentaur Battleline should not be tied to Shartor as General. It would be nice if a Tauruk had this ability, but I would be totally happy if it is enough to have Shartor in your army instead of him being the General. OR maybe another route could be to add in a new Warscroll for a "Bullcentaur Executioner" or something fitting Shartors Role without the unique keyword. Maybe without the mask ability to differentiate him from Shartor. This would also give us some reasons to buy a 2nd Shartor and convert that one slightly (up to you if thats good or bad ) In that Case Tauruk 160, Executioner 180 and Shartor 200 Points. 

4.) War Host: Remove the stupid part where cant move to profit from the rerolling 1s in melee.

5.) Half Movement for Dreadquake and Point adjustments would be a great start as you already suggested

6.) There is one thing about kdaai I will never get. They are DAEMONS with a bravery of 6... The usual 10 would be great for the Big unit of 12 (which already lost their chaos sorc lord support). Also just by their Looks it should be a 4+ ethereal save with all that armor hammered onto a fire daemon instead of the chainrasp like 5+, but I can see that their points would need to go up too.

7.) I like the ideas of ironsworn and bullcentaurs 3+ save

8.) Draz should have always have the shrug not only in melee (maybe without the reflecting stuff even I think its amazin!! I remember him being wiped of the board by Gordrakk (both full HP)  just to kill him with reflections in return. Ofc it was a one-trick pony because that player never ever allocated all of Gordraks attacks again into Draz)

9.) I really enjoyed the Iron Daemon when we had no own allegiance  but GA: Chaos and there was the command traits to give + 1 to Hit to another unit (Dark Avenger against order or Lord of War otherwise). Maybe with a 3+ to hit they might do some work. Bring back some Synergy maybe in form of a command ability for the Deamonsmiths (should have enough range though) which can buff all warmachines in some sort. 

This brings me to the last topic. Since we dont have acces to a lot of CPs  for Command Abilities anyway and there are also no more realm artefacts we can choose from, I would be so glad to see at least 3 new artefacts. One of them for the CP generation. Also at least 3 more Command Traits and the Lore of Hashut as our own Spell lore

 

 

Edited July 23, 2020 by Charly2912

[Kaulder]

I just sent an email too with some feedbacks. I hope it will make a difference 🤞

Let's go back to painting Draz now...

[Shaquilleoheal]

Just founded a good alternative miniatures for chaos dwarf on MOM miniatures set, has anyone else bought from them lately?How long it takes for the arrive?

Same question on FW miniatures,the order in these times of covid how long it takes? EU for EU

 

[IrishCarBomb]

6 hours ago, Shaquilleoheal said:

Just founded a good alternative miniatures for chaos dwarf on MOM miniatures set, has anyone else bought from them lately?How long it takes for the arrive?

Same question on FW miniatures,the order in these times of covid how long it takes? EU for EU

 

First off, love your name!

But if you can purchase the Dwarves from Forgeworld (I know they are more expensive) then it will help to support the line and thus keep interest up for the army. I had to buy my two Deathshriekers from another site but supported Forgeworld and the LoA line with the rest of my purchases. If you are interested in the site where I bought the Deathshriker Rockets just PM me.