AoS 2 - Beasts of Chaos Discussion

[kenshin620]

19 minutes ago, Kramer said:

 

I think they got it right with the kahadron skyports. Make your own (is great additon fluff-wise) or choose one of the bigger ports with no flexibility. 

The sentence: ‘if you choose a different Greatfray, simply pick the greatfray that most closely matches the nature of their own’

such a buzzkill. ? it feels like that  Ford quote: any colour you want as long as it’s black. 

The main problem though is that GW seems to be really allergic to "custom subfactions".

The only 2 armies in ALL of AoS and 40k with "pick your own rules" subfactions are KO and Imperial Knights (and Imperial Knights are a weird army to begin with).

I get the feeling custom skyports might not exist whenever KO get updated just purely based on Precedence.

[Dracothjay]

Im always torn with greatfrays vs custom builds. I love darkwalkers, but some of the allegiance traits and artefacts are so damn tasty also. It’s hard to choose at times as they all have merit and great benefits.

 

[decker_cky]

On 10/24/2018 at 4:14 AM, Frozenbeast said:

 

Agreed, it does not count for units deployed in the deployment as that happens before the first turn. 

It is basically the same requirements as the old Wildstalker brayherd battaion but for a waaaaay inferior buff! And speaking of that, does the new book over rule the Wildstaker Brayherd Battalion? Can we still use it? 

 

On 10/24/2018 at 4:19 AM, Tasman said:

I'm going out on a limb here and saying no..... at least not in matched play. There are no points for its win the book, anyway. Maybe in a totally relaxed club setting, sure.

 

On 10/24/2018 at 4:23 AM, Myrdin said:

Very interested in this as well. Good of you to bring that up !

 

*And yeah, I think most of our Warscroll Battalions are a joke (Khorne is decent, though quite expensive like the other ones, but if I had to choose one, this is my default go to battalion).  All of them are expensive, but the problem is with the unit restrictions and selection.

You cant even get creative (Nurgle battalion with MASS of single model units of Razorgors, shooting them like torpedos at targets of interest and doing single mortal wound once each pig dies.) with them. Really weak sauce, even more so when compared to the old Brayherd Wildstalker Brayherd mentioned above.

Wildstalker Brayherd cannot be taken in a Beasts of Chaos army (except as an ally in a ludicrously large army) because it has Brayherd, and not Beasts of Chaos, allegiance (same reason there needed to be an errata to correct the marked battalions). 

[Yoshiya]

My primary issue with the way they are going with subfactions is that they've already heavily limited what you actually get to customise before you even add in forced artefacts.

One command trait and one artefact is honestly a pretty terrible amount of customisation and leads to the same choices being seen time and time again. The new subfactions taking those two choices away from you and forcing uninspired artefacts (they all have to be generic enough for it to make sense that practically every hero in that subfaction apparently carries one) just seems to be saying "this is how you should be playing your army".

Couple in the recent coupling of battalions and CP (possibly their worst decision of AoS 2 in my mind) which resulted in battalions going up to eyewatering costs for often terrible bonuses, they've also made it harder to actually expand on the number of choices you get.

If things continue this way you'll end up at the point where many armies can quite literally be broken down into the subfactions regarding special rules and artefacts with little variation outside of units (which most subfactions seem to be pushing towards certain ones to take advantage of the bonuses).

You only need to look at Idoneth to realise that locking in artefacts or command traits is a bad idea as the most commonly played subfactions are Brom Hain and Fuethan, which are the only two that do not lock in anything. Ionrach occasionally sees use in ally/magic heavy builds but given the rule that benefits allies is a command trait, the actual named character ruler of Ionrach can't take advantage of it (despite him being the guy that's pushing for Deepkin to make allies and thus provides the fluff for that ability!)

[Bruinin]

Shaggy,

I got the idea from Blood of Kittens. 

He used a giant instead of a cygor.. 

[kojiro2k]

I'll just leave it here. Nice alternative for some Nurglish Beastlord:


https://maxmini.eu/gharrak-the-bone-gnawer-miniatures?fbclid=IwAR1Mxe2c1MYGDSNigs-_PYVzEbfUWD8bg-FNL6X9zofx46pAyWh_sDFGIA0

Edited October 29, 2018 by kojiro2k

[The_Yellow_Sign]

5 hours ago, Bruinin said:

Shaggy,

I got the idea from Blood of Kittens. 

He used a giant instead of a cygor.. 

Looks great! Would love to see some more angles. What bits did you use other than the Ghorgon?

[decker_cky]

14 hours ago, Yoshiya said:

My primary issue with the way they are going with subfactions is that they've already heavily limited what you actually get to customise before you even add in forced artefacts.

One command trait and one artefact is honestly a pretty terrible amount of customisation and leads to the same choices being seen time and time again. The new subfactions taking those two choices away from you and forcing uninspired artefacts (they all have to be generic enough for it to make sense that practically every hero in that subfaction apparently carries one) just seems to be saying "this is how you should be playing your army".

Couple in the recent coupling of battalions and CP (possibly their worst decision of AoS 2 in my mind) which resulted in battalions going up to eyewatering costs for often terrible bonuses, they've also made it harder to actually expand on the number of choices you get.

If things continue this way you'll end up at the point where many armies can quite literally be broken down into the subfactions regarding special rules and artefacts with little variation outside of units (which most subfactions seem to be pushing towards certain ones to take advantage of the bonuses).

 You only need to look at Idoneth to realise that locking in artefacts or command traits is a bad idea as the most commonly played subfactions are Brom Hain and Fuethan, which are the only two that do not lock in anything. Ionrach occasionally sees use in ally/magic heavy builds but given the rule that benefits allies is a command trait, the actual named character ruler of Ionrach can't take advantage of it (despite him being the guy that's pushing for Deepkin to make allies and thus provides the fluff for that ability!)

Beastmen have two really good subfactions (darkstalkers and gavespawn), and command abilities and magic items good enough that you're not penalized for not taking a subfaction. The beastmen battalions aren't particularly limiting (nor do the benefits don't really define the army to a significant extent). 

I understand the complaints about subfactions and magic items in the game as a whole....but the beasts of chaos book is really not the place to make that argument.  Beasts of chaos is a demonstration of how subfactions can be done right. 

[Skoll]

So I've been lurking for a while and what I am seeing seems to be a consensus that bullgors and perhaps warherds in general are a sub par option in the book. There seems to just be an overall lack of way to either buff their ability to stick their hits . Am I missing something or is that overall the feeling here.

[SwampHeart]

56 minutes ago, Skoll said:

So I've been lurking for a while and what I am seeing seems to be a consensus that bullgors and perhaps warherds in general are a sub par option in the book. There seems to just be an overall lack of way to either buff their ability to stick their hits . Am I missing something or is that overall the feeling here.

Not that I speak for everyone but in my experience this is 100% correct. I do think that the non bullgor units have some functionality (not that works for me personally but I can see valid arguments). The Doombull, Cygor, and Ghorgon can probably all fit in various lists but actual bullgors? Bestigors are just a better option in every way I've experienced. 

[Agent of Chaos]

I dont know if theres been a consensus on warherds in general being sub par.  I think most people see value in the Doombull and Gorgon. The Gorgon's ability to select and remove a specific model, via eating, can be very powerful in the right circumstances. The Cygor is OK in specific scenarios but is probably better to summon rather than start with unless you know your opponent is strong in magic. Bullgors are OK and will hold a special place in many BOC player's hearts but that 5+ save doesnt stand up to much, as you noted the 4+ to hit is a big issue and there may be an argument for them being sub-par when compared to other options.

If you want a monstrous cavalry style unit that represents value for points; Dragon Ogres are faster (both as a base and with their allegiance ability), have more wounds and a better save, can be healed via the Shaggoth's 20"range spell which also allows them to reroll wound rolls, they reroll 1's to hit if within 12" of a Shaggoth and are 20 points cheaper for a unit of 3 (140 vs 160). Granted in a single round of combat Bullgors should do more damage with the ability for some mortal wounds, however the dragon ogres will stick around longer which might mean more damage over the course of the game.

That being said, if we consider the Shaggoth buffs in the dragon ogre's value then the Shaggoth's points (180) need to be considered. Likewise if you are taking Bullgors then you are probably taking a Doombull (120) to buff their wound rolls. For a single unit and corresponding hero the warherds are 40 points cheaper and perhaps that is the argument for taking them over Dragon Ogres. The gap reduces to 20 points cheaper if you take two units of Bullgors vs Dragon Ogres and reaches parity if you take 3 units with the corresponding hero at which point Dragon Ogres seem streets ahead given their higher durability.

You could buff the Bullgor hit rolls with some slaughterpriests in a khorne army using the Brass Despoilers battalion which might be the key to unlocking the true potential of Bullgors however it remains to be seen if that forms the basis of a competitive list. 

Edited October 30, 2018 by Agent of Chaos

[Skoll]

42 minutes ago, Agent of Chaos said:

You could buff the Bullgor'****** rolls with some slaughterpriests in a khorne army using the Brass Despoilers battalion which might be the key to unlocking the true potential of Bullgors however it remains to be seen if that forms the basis of a competitive list. 

I've been looking at that specifically, and it does feel that the bullgors are overall better in a blades of khorne army than in a beasts of chaos army. The extra attack from a blood secrator alone + slaughter priests bonus do wonders to truly make them into decent combat units. It is honestly a crying shame, that I cant ally those khorne characters that bring bullgors online in a BoC army, but i suppose at that point, bestigors would still be able to benefit from those buffs and be better point per point.

I see value in the doombull, and while he is relatively cheap, I am saddened that something that should be a center piece model has such few attacks, but I guess we can afford 2-3 doombulls for every vampire on dragon or maw crusha on the other side 

[Agent of Chaos]

Indeed the "Doom" part of the Doombull's name is subjective at best! Bullgors would go off in a Khorne army with those buffs you mentioned, not to mention a bloodstoker to increase their charge and reroll 1's to wound. However its a tricky list to put together. Something like this maybe... 

Allegiance: Khorne
Doombull (120)
Bloodsecrator (140)
Bloodstoker (80)
Slaughterpriest (100)
Slaughterpriest (100)
Slaughterpriest (100)

10 x Blood Warriors (200)
10 x Bloodreavers (70)
10 x Bloodreavers (70)

3 x Bullgors (160)
3 x Bullgors (160)
3 x Bullgors (160)

Brass Despoilers (190)
Gore Pilgrims (200)

Total: 1850 / 2000

390 points is a stupid amount to spend on battalions however it makes for a two drop list and Gore Pilgrims ensures some reliability out of the Priests and extends the range of the banner (because if you arent getting those buffs onto the Bullgors what was the whole point?).

I would probably fill out the remaining 150 points with either a second unit of 5 x blood warriors in the gore pilgrims plus a CP, or possibly assorted BOC units that fit into Brass Despoilers, pair of chariots maybe??? 

It looks like a fun list and you would definitely enjoy charging buffed up Bullgors into the fray and hoping you kill enough stuff to summon some daemons. However I seriously doubt if it would be competitive. 

[Skoll]

3 minutes ago, Agent of Chaos said:

Indeed the "Doom" part of the Doombull's name is subjective at best! Bullgors would go off in a Khorne army with those buffs you mentioned, not to mention a bloodstoker to increase their charge and reroll 1's to wound. However its a tricky list to put together. Something like this maybe... 

Allegiance: Khorne
Doombull (120)
Bloodsecrator (140)
Bloodstoker (80)
Slaughterpriest (100)
Slaughterpriest (100)
Slaughterpriest (100)

10 x Blood Warriors (200)
10 x Bloodreavers (70)
10 x Bloodreavers (70)

3 x Bullgors (160)
3 x Bullgors (160)
3 x Bullgors (160)

Brass Despoilers (190)
Gore Pilgrims (200)

Total: 1850 / 2000

390 points is a stupid amount to spend on battalions however it makes for a two drop list and Gore Pilgrims ensures some reliability out of the Priests and extends the range of the banner (because if you arent getting those buffs onto the Bullgors what was the whole point?).

I would probably fill out the remaining 150 points with either a second unit of 5 x blood warriors in the gore pilgrims plus a CP, or possibly assorted BOC units that fit into Brass Despoilers, pair of chariots maybe??? 

It looks like a fun list and you would definitely enjoy charging buffed up Bullgors into the fray and hoping you kill enough stuff to summon some daemons. However I seriously doubt if it would be competitive. 

I actually have something extremely similar written out. But I arrived at the same concern you did, with 400 points being way too much to spend on battalions.

I however went for additional bull gors instead of the extra slaughter priest(I figured 30 inch bubble should be enough for the blood secrator). Kept my blood warriors at 5 and dropped in a khorne prince (as I felt there was no suitable combat general ).

I figured I'd play the reavers and warriors as pseudo screens and chaff, and rely on the bulls to do the legwork.

However I'd toyed with the idea of eschewing the brass pilgrims battalion altogether , and perhaps attaching say another bloodsecrator (I've seen a huge argument about the stackability of the buff ).

I truly wish bullgors were just general battleline as long as a doombull was the general, as I'd more than be willing to give up BoK command traits and relics to not have to take additional battle lines.

[Agent of Chaos]

To be clear, the bloodsecrator's banner definitely doesn't stack. It was open to interpretation initially but has since been clarified via an FAQ.

Correct me if im wrong but I think its possible to run the Brass Despoilers battalion in a BOC army and just take the khorne heroes you want as allies. 320 points gets you a bloodsecrator, bloodstoker and a single slaughterpriest... not ideal but there is some buffing potential there and that way your Bullgors count as battleline assuming a Doombul general. Unfortunately there is some redundancy in the bloodsecrator given the herdstone buff while anything that ambushes will likely be out of the attack buff range. Perhaps a better ally allotment is 3 priests and a Bloodstoker for 380 points. Leaves only 2 slots for BOC heroes but you may see more value out of the priests then the bloodsecrator, provided they pass their 4+ prayer rolls!

[Skoll]

2 minutes ago, Agent of Chaos said:

To be clear, the bloodsecrator's banner definitely doesn't stack. It was open to interpretation initially but has since been clarified via an FAQ.

Correct me if im wrong but I think its possible to run the Brass Despoilers battalion in a BOC army and just take the khorne heroes you want as allies. 320 points gets you a bloodsecrator, bloodstoker and a single slaughterpriest... not ideal but there is some buffing potential there and that way your Bullgors count as battleline assuming a Doombul general. Unfortunately there is some redundancy in the bloodsecrator given the herdstone buff while anything that ambushes will likely be out of the attack buff range. Perhaps a better ally allotment is 3 priests and a Bloodstoker for 380 points. Leaves only 2 slots for BOC heroes but you may see more value out of the priests then the bloodsecrator, provided they pass their 4+ prayer rolls!

As far as I am concerned, BoC are not allies to BoK, the FAQ allowed the battalions to have the additional words and the BoK ally list to include BoC but BoC ally list only includes Slaves to darkness .

But id be extremely happy to be wrong

[Agent of Chaos]

Shizen!!!

[Agent of Chaos]

They were so close to giving us something workable... such a tease!

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, Agent of Chaos said:

They were so close to giving us something workable... such a tease!

Well you could also take Gors as your main battleline if your interested in including them.

[Kramer]

5 hours ago, Skoll said:

So I've been lurking for a while and what I am seeing seems to be a consensus that bullgors and perhaps warherds in general are a sub par option in the book. There seems to just be an overall lack of way to either buff their ability to stick their hits . Am I missing something or is that overall the feeling here.

Yes and no, people are mathhammering  everything to death and claiming everything left right and centre is utter trash. 

1. Unless you want to go for the #1 spot in the most elite tournaments. Ignore all that. I’m convinced we’ll see enough lists  perform very well in the next few months. We’re just not a kill them all army. I’m my mind we’re an objectives army with great speed, cheap bodies, some relative hard hitting units, options for synergies and a whole lot of options in general. A mind shift needs to happen for some players because being an objective army  doesn’t really line up with the fluff 

2. Every time you read ‘sub optimal choice’ Or other cringe terms like that. It will be a perfectly fine unit for local play. You’ll Do better by improving your tactical choices rather than min maxing everything. Those lessons not only apply with Beast of Chaos but with every army you’ll ever Play. 

3. The saltiness is real... and everywhere. I collect several ( armies and in every single thread about those armies... people are b*tching that their favourite force isn’t strong enough. Or, in the case of Daughters of Khaine, that the army will be nerfed and GW is doing everything wrong  because  bla bla bla. 

Learn to read past peoples complaining or else it will hurt your excitement for your army. 

At least that’s what I’m trying to do, but it’s getting harder and harder on this forum. 

[Dracothjay]

29 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Yes and no, people are mathhammering  everything to death and claiming everything left right and centre is utter trash. 

1. Unless you want to go for the #1 spot in the most elite tournaments. Ignore all that. I’m convinced we’ll see enough lists  perform very well in the next few months. We’re just not a kill them all army. I’m my mind we’re an objectives army with great speed, cheap bodies, some relative hard hitting units, options for synergies and a whole lot of options in general. A mind shift needs to happen for some players because being an objective army  doesn’t really line up with the fluff 

2. Every time you read ‘sub optimal choice’ Or other cringe terms like that. It will be a perfectly fine unit for local play. You’ll Do better by improving your tactical choices rather than min maxing everything. Those lessons not only apply with Beast of Chaos but with every army you’ll ever Play. 

3. The saltiness is real... and everywhere. I collect several ( armies and in every single thread about those armies... people are b*tching that their favourite force isn’t strong enough. Or, in the case of Daughters of Khaine, that the army will be nerfed and GW is doing everything wrong  because  bla bla bla. 

Learn to read past peoples complaining or else it will hurt your excitement for your army. 

At least that’s what I’m trying to do, but it’s getting harder and harder on this forum. 

I applaud you mate. What I see a lot of is not so much hatred toward bullgors, but a few verbal slaps about how they aren’t that great and not worth their weight in points. Well, I totally disagree.  I use tonnes of bullgors and I can honestly say bullgors are brutal. I’ll admit, they can’t take a slap but Christ, they can dish out the hurt. They always do my heavy lifting. I think the issue people get confused with is a one fits all type unit. Bullgors you really have to pick your fights. 

Edited October 30, 2018 by Dracothjay

[Myrdin]

Allright so on the Bullgor viability.

In a 1500 game I tried a unit of 6 with a DB, runnigh the Brass Bull Battalion.

Opponent got lucky and managed to charge them with his 9 ....paladins ? Dudes with shields-hammers and special dudes with Dmg 2 weapons in the mix.

They were not able to fully pile in, leaving 3 guys out of the strike zone.

Killed 3 Bullgors.

The remaining 3 (one was a champion) killed about 2/3 of that unit and broke it via Battleshock.

 

What people seem to ignore when it comes to Bullgors is the fact that they have -2, DMG 3 weapons. Yes 2 attacks is relatively meek, thats why you need a DB and Ideally you want to run them either ina Brass Despoliers or Marauding Beastherd list to get some much needed hit multiplier onto their weak sauce 4+

But make no mistake.  That -2 is a big deal and DMG 3 hurts anything, be it elites, monsters or mass infantry.

In comparison, Bestigors dish out more hits, and wounds in general, but being DMG1 and only -1 rend, there are some targets that you dont want want them in (though the saying "throw enough ....poop.... on the wall and some of it sticks does work here. Its the same with how Witch Elves deal with stuff).

Personally though, I found out that sometimes its better to use Doombulls buff on himself. Especially if you use Gnarled Blade (viable choice if its a KhorneBull due to the rerolls), or the Brass Cleaver Axe. 3 Attacks rerrolling 1, Wounding on 2 (if you REALLY need something dead you can use the Once per Battle Wound reroll from Brass Desp.) -3 (really big deal, as most of the stuff wont be saving against this. Only the best of the best will get a 6+) and 5 dmg each.

That DB removes things. Anything that has less than 15 wounds and 3+ is in risk of getting "one turn, one kill"-ed.

But back to the bullgors - They can work, and they can be pretty scary. But unlike let say Bestigors Enlightened or Dragon Ogors (who are amazing as a cheap tank unti that just looks scary and soaks all the ranged damage with relative ease), they require more babysitting.

Personally my issue with them is not really the stat line, or weapons, but the fact that they have 1" Range. By sheer logic and rules consistency with similar units, if we are talking about a Bullgor, with TWO HANDED WEAPONS, that reach should be much bigger. If a paladin dude with a two handed mace can have 2" Range so should have Bullgors who are towring over him. The bigger price tag doesnt really do them favors either, when there are things that straight out outcompete them in their vanila form (as in: no buffs applied).

So yeah they can work, but you need to have another big threats in yoru army, less they get focused down quickly. And if you can buff them, be it via Chaos Spawn, or Bloodsecrator, they get scary real fast.

 

**As for "Can I ally with Blades of Khorne" discussion.... so can we ? or can we not ?

It was to my understanding that the FAQ amended this for specific God battalions, so I will be really surprised to find out its still not a viable choice

(and here is the ****** moment when you consider the massive oversight the writers of this book did. Beast of Chaos should be able to ally with any other Chaos faction, spare maybe Skaven. Be it mortals or demons)

[Frozenbeast]

On 10/13/2018 at 8:55 PM, Skreech Verminking said:

Sry for the tag it is not needed but my phone plays up. 

 

So, to the topic, no you cannot ally BoK in BoC. You can take BoC god battalion in god s army with THAT keyword, meaning all other BoK units will be ok as the have BoK keyword too,  ut gou cannot take BoC allegiance and ally some BoK unis in. 

FAQ stated this as this was the dispute. There is no dispute on which allies BoC can have as that is StD ONLY. 

 

[Skreech Verminking]

1 hour ago, Frozenbeast said:

Sry for the tag it is not needed but my phone plays up. 

 

So, to the topic, no you cannot ally BoK in BoC. You can take BoC god battalion in god s army with THAT keyword, meaning all other BoK units will be ok as the have BoK keyword too,  ut gou cannot take BoC allegiance and ally some BoK unis in. 

FAQ stated this as this was the dispute. There is no dispute on which allies BoC can have as that is StD ONLY. 

 

Well, aren’t chaos warrior when taken to a blade of khorne army battleline?

isnt it then the same with Gors?

afterall they count as a generic battleline option, and there is nothing stating that they can only be a battleline option in a boc army.

[Tasman]

1 hour ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Well, aren’t chaos warrior when taken to a blade of khorne army battleline?

isnt it then the same with Gors?

afterall they count as a generic battleline option, and there is nothing stating that they can only be a battleline option in a boc army.

Don't think it works like that. WoC and marauders as well, are kind of 'generic', if you will. Once given a mark, they are battle line.

HOWEVER, just because something is battleline for a specific alliance doesn't mean that it's BL for any other army. Take for example plague monks in a maggotkin list. Not BL, but don't count against ally points because of god mark.