Jump to content

AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion


Gaz Taylor

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Popisdead said:

Doom and gloom: with AoS 3.0 losing Battletome battalions for Matched Play, that is another nail in the coffin of BoC with Marks :(

Wait I'm used to you being the ray of optimism to MY gloom not the other way around lol but here goes.

 

My hope? Belief? Is that instead of the batallions we just get a subfaction for each of the 4 gods and then keep our own 3 or 4 factions. The subfactions would grant the GOD keyword (but since it's a subfaction of the beasts book it wouldnt create confusion about whether you can take them in another army like BoK or HoS) and adds GOD army to the list of allies you can take on top of presumably slaves to darkness.

 

I think that would be worse than how it works now cause you'd have one artifact/command trait/bonus rule, representing your GOD alignment rather than the full(er) selection offered in their individual books, but it would also remove alot of the odd non synergies and such that currently plague putting beastmen into other GOD armies and simplicity is probably most important to them.

That's just my 2 cents.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Popisdead said:

Doom and gloom: with AoS 3.0 losing Battletome battalions for Matched Play, that is another nail in the coffin of BoC with Marks :(

Honestly I can't imagine battalions being gone, even though that's what the rumor is. New core rules don't feel like the place to make that change either, it should be in the GHB (where they will just remove the point values for them).

Honestly I think the person just got it wrong and jumped to conclusions (I watched the video and it was clear he though battalions were bad for matched play). I suspect they are just ADDING generic battalions, and not removing the existing ones, and they just assumed it would replace normal battalions in matched play.

The rules probably say something like: "These battalions are available for use in Matched Play" and then proceeds to list the generic battalions, and they read in an "Only" somewhere.

I might be grasping at straws here but leaks are always unreliable and the removal of existing battalions is a questionable decision that doesn't really address any balance issues (Overtuned rules and power disparities exist across every aspect of the game, many top tier seraphon lists don't even run battalions, so this would be a buff to them). Meanwhile the addition of generic battalions is a slam dunk that adds new freedom in listbuilding and raises the quality floor on an armies' battalions.

Battalions also sell models, good battalions with bad tax models sell those bad models (sketchy practice here though) but also stuff like the BoC and StD mark battalions literally sell armies to another audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, The Red King said:

Wait I'm used to you being the ray of optimism to MY gloom not the other way around lol but here goes.

BoC is my one failing once in a while.  18 years of frustration of a super rad army being flubbed by GW means once in a while I get bummed.  Well,.. Wood Elves are my other since they've only been good in the early 90s, and 2005-2006.  

But good points.  

 

20 hours ago, Ganigumo said:

Honestly I think the person just got it wrong and jumped to conclusionsI suspect they are just ADDING generic battalions, and not removing the existing ones, and they just assumed it would replace normal battalions in matched play.

I might be grasping at straws here

 

Sorry yeah generic battalions and then whatever Open Play/Crusade/Path to Glory becomes for AoS 3 will allow for battalions perhaps?  I heard 40k changed Narrative/Open play significantly.  I am not fully aware as I haven't played 9th ed 40k yet.

I hope so too.  I hope it's just a playtester or random click bait guy.

The downside is battalions lead to high highs and low lows.  40k has generic formations and it works well.  Granted that's a nightmare of a game to balance.  AoS is much easier.  

 

I don't think you are grasping at straws but being more reasonable than my post :P  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2021 at 6:07 PM, Popisdead said:

BoC is my one failing once in a while.  18 years of frustration of a super rad army being flubbed by GW means once in a while I get bummed.  Well,.. Wood Elves are my other since they've only been good in the early 90s, and 2005-2006.  

But good points. 

Hey, I feel you.

 

I am determined to sell mine if they mess up another BoC release. I am done waiting and hoping for this army to be anything but trash fodder tier (not in lore, though that would be also nice, but mostly on the table).

After 11 years of collecting, converting and painting them I am done. One more uff from GW, and I`ll be getting rid of the entire collection. Will just keep few for a Warcry Warband, and use my CoS as my main army instead.

Edited by Myrdin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not in the Sky is falling mood at all yet, these are just rumors and even if true you can not judge 1 rule without know what else GW is going to do. Also marks could go away but we could be looking at the ability to play out of books without the need for battalions. And we can just paint/play w/e we want. 

Until i see something real and substances I really just don't care.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think BoC are destined for squatting. Us & Skaven are the only armies who got nothing out of Broken Realms and Kragnos is a kick-in-the-teeth: just look at him! His whole aesthetic screams BoC, not Destruction. I’m really bummed. We are an afterthought army.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just saw Cragnos .
I cant define by words how much I hate that entire thing. This should have been a Beastmen thing. This dude, even his backstory is what Dragon Ogors are... who in their right mind gave the OK sign for this guy to be in Destruction ? And with a body of a centaur at that!

So now we are completely scrapping any centigor lore. No more Ghorros. Coz its a destruction thing now apparently. Hell watch them release "Sons of Cragnos" a Destruction only Centigor sculpts.

Edited by Myrdin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Myrdin said:

Just saw Cragnos .
I cant define by words how much I hate that entire thing. This should have been a Beastmen thing. This dude, even his backstory is what Dragon Ogors are... who in their right mind gave the OK sign for this guy to be in Destruction ? And with a body of a centaur at that!

So now we are completely scrapping any centigor lore. No more Ghorros. Coz its a destruction thing now apparently. Hell watch them release "Sons of Cragnos" a Destruction only Centigor sculpts.

https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/Kholek_Suneater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Red King said:

I don't think it's as dire as we're feeling (which is an odd sentiment for me). We can't expect to have sole ownership of all things bestial after all even if we do feel a bit forgotten in the narrative.

But . . . . Goats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do feel sorry for you guys - it's odd, every army besides you, Khorne, and Skaven have been touched in BR, and Skaven and Khorne have had new models in the last two years. That's not to say you're getting squatted, but currently it feels like you're the black sheep of AoS armies. 

I hope you get your time in the sun soon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who plays beastmen, skaven, and wood elves, as well as Dark eldar when I played 40k, perhaps I'm just used to not getting any attention lol.

 

That said the lore states beastmen were in the mortal realms BEFORE chaos and Kragnos was not their god. So Ghorros can still be the sire of all centigor. Kragnos says only the weak remain of his people so that could be the other centigor corrupted by chaos. Ours. I don't think we're being squatted, just ignored as usual.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theory: Beasts of Chaos doesn't really fit with S2D or chaos in terms of allegiance anymore. They are not truly dedicated to a single god. The true children of chaos are above all that, the natural state of the world is pure undivided chaos. As Kragnos breaks free, so does BoC, and we'll see a new narrative between BoC (or Beast of Destruction) versus the new beefed up Alarielle and her Sylvaneth (as a new combined Sylvanth/Kurnoth tome). 

I know, I'm probably teetering on delusional optimism here but just a thought. :D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like theres honestly room for chaos and destruction beastmen. I don't think GW would do it because it's probably a balancing nightmare but undivided beastmen being destruction and marked beastmen being chaos could be an option. You've got humans of chaos and humans of order and humans of death (with a little less... meat) so it isn't impossible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly at this point I'd just like warcom or someone 'official' to acknowledge their existence.

The fact that Kragnos isn't BoC sucks, but it doesn't bother me as much as they more or less confirmed many of the factions that would be used in the upcoming book and would be getting rules/battalions/updates/etc.  I expected them to at least be a side player in this, but apparently not.

The problem is I only just started BoC a few months back, and I'm increasingly concerned they're being squatted/forgotten.  Maybe they'll be split to gods / StD.  Maybe they'll just languish on... but darn, it would be helpful for someone to say something at this point. I've barely been in this for long and already lived through:

No points updates / end of year faq

Slaangor - not having brayherd or other relevant keyword, and otherwise being stinky 

Nothing in Broken Realms at all (despite there being a centaur creature) and further, not being acknowledged. 

 

So.. maybe there is some sort of AoS 3.0 plan to separate them, or give some of the the destruction keyword, but darn. It feels rough.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bullgors and the Warherd were my first AoS army, and they will be the last!  Love my old 'eavy metal bulls.  But I thought for sure BoC were gonna get some anarchy boost with all the happenings of the gates collapsing and ******.  Figured the Thunderscorn would march on Azyr at that point....led by a giant Dragon Ogor character.

I'll be peeved if we lose the ability to dub our beasts in the the name of a Chaos god and use them with god marked buffers, like the Bloodsecrator and Slaughterpriest for Khorne.  Maybe if they do god based subfactions they could let the Beasts have so-marked allies then, whereas now it's only StD allies (which sucks).  That would be sensible.  Though I like being able to use Blood Tithe (won me some games with Beasts of Khorne).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Enoby said:

That's not to say you're getting squatted, but currently it feels like you're the black sheep of AoS armies. 

Mine are blue sheep actually.

20210503_175937.jpg.d2273a70f804ebbd40dc21ac9669fd4c.jpg

As for Kragnos, I think he looks awesome and I'm happy for the Destruction people.  They've been on the back-burner almost since AoS was released.  They had a bit of bump with Ironjawz and the new Gloomspite but they've never been central to the lore until now.

As for our Centigors, well, I think its obvious.  Kragnos is the last of his people, right?  That's what he said.  All the rest are dead...or corrupted by Chaos perhaps?  I think centigors are the last twisted remnants of Kragnos people and he's more than welcome to come and try and take them back if he can!  

🪓🐐🛡️

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...