AoS 2 - Kharadron Overlords Discussion

[Eevika]

4 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

And every list/game would look the same. 

Go an play chess then, replacing the tokens with Warhammer models. 

You just hate balance dont you? As a competitive game chess is leagues above Warhammer 

[Phasteon]

3 minutes ago, Eevika said:

You just hate balance dont you? As a competitive game chess is leagues above Warhammer 

I have my opinion and you have yours, can we just stop arguing with each other as we wont agree on something anyway. 

 

I dont hate balance, I just have a different definition of balance. Accept it. 

 

Interesting point you make though. If chess is leagues above warhammer competitively because its so balanced and balance is everything - why is AoS so much more fun? 😉

Edited January 21, 2020 by Phasteon

[Cauthon]

You guys are lamenting the lack of choices when you shouldn’t be, there are a ton of choices. 

 

You just don’t like any of them but the choices are there. 

[Kramer]

3 hours ago, cofaxest said:

Just tell me then. Why ship is scoring but it's crew is not? Why models inside building - scoring but when they inside ship - not? What kind of logic is this

If it helps. The objective is an undefined thing. It might be a place of power, a artefact or anything you can imagine. So if theirs terrain in the spot where the objective is... it makes sense it’s in or on that terrain if it’s a building it’s in, and by garrisoning said building you can claim it. 
mid.

being inside the ship suring landing doesn’t help you claim the objective on the ground. If you disembark next turn it does. while the ironclad shooting every gun while landing is definitely a force that contests that objective during the turn. 
 

but frankly I could also write the narrative the other way around. The objectives are left narratively vague because they’re a gaming mechanism. So not scoring When garrisoned might also be just that. A gaming mechanism. 
 

[5kaven5lave]

Is there a link to the lists that did well in that tournament anywhere?

[Entombet]

9 minutes ago, 5kaven5lave said:

Is there a link to the lists that did well in that tournament anywhere?

Atm i seen only From Tempest 2020 but i wouldnt call it well

https://tabletop.to/Tempest2020/

[GoddammitGary]

50 minutes ago, Cauthon said:

You guys are lamenting the lack of choices when you shouldn’t be, there are a ton of choices. 

 

You just don’t like any of them but the choices are there. 

Hobson's choice lol.

Or

"Do you want a kick in the balls, a slap in the face or a tenner"  that kinda choice... The one where it's not really a choice at all ..

 

[dmorley21]

As someone new to the KO forums here, I have to say I'm pretty disappointed that there is so much bickering back-and-forth. I've got my own thoughts about the anti-synergies and problems that the book has (it does have problems, and that's fine to admit... and, golly gee,  wouldn't just allowing units to disembark after ships move/fly high fix just about everything?), but I think we need to have more constructive conversation about the KO book that we do have. I'm someone who really loves to list build, it's just a part of the game that I really enjoy. So let's talk about lists.

First off, I still think a lot of the list building is going to boil down to how many drops you think KO needs to be to compete. Despite high movement, low model count armies simply don't have a lot of room for error. There's plenty of armies that can turn 1 alpha strike us that screens won't do too much good at blocking (Cities, Tzeentch, Nighthaunt, Stormcast, Deepkin off the top of my head). So I'm not sure what the answer is here but let's look at lists based on drops:

1 Drop

Well, you're taking the Iron Sky Command battalion with a Dirigible Suit general. It's the obvious, and seemingly great, list. It also works for any Skyport.

2 Drops

Iron Sky Command battalion w/ Dirigible Suit general again. This time you get to add your own flavor of spice (Gunhauler/Thunderers/Knight Incantor+Comet).

Escort Wing battalion in Barak-Zon with a Dirigible Suit general. This is pushing it, as you only get one hero, but Zon Skywardens actually are a strong melee unit and the forced Command Trait/Artefact loadout make the Dirigible Suit general strong in melee too.

3-5 Drops

You're still primarily looking at the two lists above with more side spice. I think the Zon Escort Wing battalion really starts to shine at this amount of drops. You can add a couple of heroes along with a unit of Riggers.

You can also try Escort Wing in any of Urbaz, Zilfin, or Nar, as they open up Gunhaulers/Frigates/Thunderers as battleline. Urbaz will be the lowest drops, and is the first list where you don't need a Dirigible Suit general anymore.

You can also do a Zilfin Iron Sky Attack Squadron and get into this amount of drops easily without a Dirigible Suit general. I'm waiting on to see if this battalion gets Designer Commentary to specify whether it works after the Frigates "Fly High."

6+ Drops

Go crazy! At this point, you aren't likely to have less drops than competitive armies that want to go first/second, so you can really build any list your heart desires and even leave the battalions at home.

 

Overall, I think we need to figure out how many lists we'd face where we would need to control whether we go first or not and to figure out how many drops those armies are. Once we do, I think we can look past the drops and start asking interesting questions such as:

2 Frigates vs. 1 Frigate w/ 10 Thunderers vs. Ironclad?

Enough drops so you can run a different general than the Dirigible Suit guy? The Admiral and Khemist both have game changing command ability options IMO (Cunning Fleetmaster/Collector respectively).

Spell in a Bottle or no Spell? People seem to have strong opinions about both sides, but I see both sides having strong arguments, especially because not only does the spell cost you points in an already low wound army, but also because KO have the best artefact options I have ever seen in a book.

Which spells for Spell in a Bottle are worth it? Obviously, Warp Lightning Vortex. The Comet I would save and only take if I ally in a Stormcast wizard, because Warp Lightning Vortex is the same points, but better IMO. I'd argue that there's merit to take Geminids in an alpha strike list. I'd also argue that Darkfire Daemonrift could probably do the most damage of any spell we could take. Purple Sun if you just want to have fun, but it's too swingy to count on since you only get to use it once.

What's our best unit for holding objectives? Arkanaut Company for point efficiency, or Thunderers for their -1 to hit and more firepower? Honestly, neither will stand up to a true melee force, but what about for holding it against the type of speed chaff that is usually running/flying around and grabbing objectives?

 

[Tittliewinks22]

These arguments are always the same.

Some people only value this game in a competitive capacity and cannot see the enjoyment of having sub optimal lists.  While other's cannot see the value in a highly competitive setting.

There is more than one way to play this game, as a member of a non-competitive playgroup, everyone seems to really enjoy these types of books.  Both KO and Gloomspite books are rated as the top flavorful/fun to play.  Yet neither are considered "top tier."

People need to realize that not everyone agrees with their vision for the game, and the best thing you can do is join a group or club of players that share the vision, you will have a more enjoyable time with it.

I would advise people to give up hope on trying to convince a competitive player that there are other aspects to the game, likewise, competitive players should probably give up hope on perfect "balance."

/2c

[RuneBrush]

+++ MOD HAT +++

Pack it in.  I've just tidied up a handful of rude comments and issued warnings as appropriate.  Being offensive and insulting to other members will not be tolerated under any circumstances

[Entombet]

Some choices in the book were really perplexing for me why did thunderers were chosen to take second wound, they were not a frontline unit. Ill get biased again but compare damage output of ic and 10 thunderers to 15 flamers and changehost battalion it cost 30p more but hawe friking 135 18" shoots 4+3+ -1 rend d3 dmg

[Ser_namron]

32 minutes ago, Tittliewinks22 said:

There is more than one way to play this game, as a member of a non-competitive playgroup, everyone seems to really enjoy these types of books.  Both KO and Gloomspite books are rated as the top flavorful/fun to play.  Yet neither are considered "top tier."

I actually just had my 3rd Gitz vs KO match since the new tome, and the Gitz player just got his army recently so its new to us. Easily had the best game i think ive ever had in AOS. we both built competitive lists, but the power levels of either army weren't ridiculous, their were some good synergies and some units outperformed others but overall it was a BALANCED game. It was great. He was a little bummed his army has been so swingy and not as effective as it could be because of the nature of his army ( lots of RNG for movement/ fanatics attacks did not go his way) . 

The problem is that im not only fighting Gitz and hes not only fighting KO, and we'd love to use our armies and not get roflstomped by armies from the past year with a huge lack of balance and over the top rules meant to sell models. Im hoping that isnt the case for KO and im enjoying the hell out of them so far, and im fixing the mistakes i make and learning the army. But strategy doesn't matter in the face of overwhelming force which this game has alot of. If every army got a nerf, the game would be in a better state competitively at the cost of some "cool" rules. And as i've discussed with some people in this thread, that seems to be GWs goal, not a balanced game, but a game with cool models and cool rules at the cost of balance. 

 

43 minutes ago, Tittliewinks22 said:

I would advise people to give up hope on trying to convince a competitive player that there are other aspects to the game, likewise, competitive players should probably give up hope on perfect "balance."

And this is the truth of it. But its not a pipe dream to have a game where competitive and fun are one of the same. PLENTY of multiplayer games accomplish that by tuning the game constantly. GW throws something out there, lets it sit for a year, and does minimal changes to try and balance it. Its possible to achieve, but not with GWs current design model IMO. 

 

21 minutes ago, sal4m4nd3r said:

We went from 1 battalions choice where the unit was really good. To three choices where they are all mediocre AT BEST. They removed the Khemist buff and the skyhook spam. That’s fine. It was a dumb mechanic. But they didn’t replace it with anything! ArkCo are absolutely worthless. Thunderers are garbage for their points. And riggers are the best choice but with very little damage output.

If you defend garbage, then you are garbage

While i dont disagree with alot of what your saying, your being pretty obtuse. Khemist buff is something totally different now and they dropped the points, gave new artifacts...like ya its not as good as the initial buff but to say they didnt replace it with anything is just factually wrong... Arkco are far from worthless....i wish they didnt nerf the pistols range ( definetaly unnecesarry) but its a solid chaff unit. Thunderers have been hit or miss for me, i wouldnt argue with a points decrease ( especially with all the *not in garrison* rules). Riggers have some awesome damage at ranged, and full saws will still kill alot, plus thier healing improved and the hitcher rule is bomb so damage vs utility comes into play. 

Calling people garbage is about as unhelpful as can be. it accomplishes nothing. 

[Cauthon]

I just don’t get why you guys think we don’t have any options because we arnt at a high power level. 

 

No good options is NOT the same as NO OPTIONS. 

 

For me it’s harder to pick your allegiance in say OBR because there is one option that is SO MUCH BETTER (mathematically) than the others, how do you choose anything else. 

 

Ko has a TON of options and if you just don’t like how powerful they ALL are, that’s a whole different discussion. 

 

To me me it proves we have internal balance. (Yes we are underpowered imo)

[Ser_namron]

17 hours ago, Borsuk said:

love my KO and playing aos on hard is funny, but looking at tzeentch who gets -1 to hit, +1 rend, awesome spell casting, tons of battalions, great battline options with durability, good melee (tzaangors) or absurd shooting volume with some really easy achievable synergies makes me think are't we supposed to be shooty army? I feel like gw gave us shorter stick in aether war and we really need to work for our success. Nevertheless i’ll do my best. To the victor, the spoils. 

This is 100% how i felt after getting blasted off the table. 

 

11 hours ago, Qaz said:

For most part, It's who ever gets the first in second battleround wins in this matchup. Ha.

Thats when it was decided in our game lol. he got the first turn in both rounds. Me and tzzentch player were discussing it and it seemed liek if he had gotten a double turn it would be game over, and if i had gotten a double turn it wouldve been keeping me in the game. changehost lets him get first turn no matter what, and his teleport means hes going to kill what he wants barring a ton of chaff which is not something we are going to have. 

 

13 hours ago, Frowny said:

Firstly, I think the locus -1 to hit is only in melee. He was just playing it wrong (also new to the book no doubt).

Second, flamers of tzeentch are very very fragile. 120 points for 6 wounds with a 5+ save. Literally every unit in the KO book is sturdier than that. Maybe the right strategy is just to shoot/melee them directly. 

Thirdly, several of you are worrying about not being able to take screens. That's on you all. Take screens. Make room for screens. Screens win games.

1.the artifact was a -1 to missles, but locus is melee. So wasnt -2 but still -1. Also has a spell to give -1 to be hit i believe. 
2. Agreed, i think they should be the target. They arent as sturdy, but the range is 18" so they can keep them relatively safe with half decent positioning, and their output means any threats in range of where he decides to drop them are going to be blasted off the table. 
3. I changed my list and brought a 2nd unit of 10 arkco, and plan on dropping thunderers off in the 2nd turn to gaurd an objective. But we dont have bodies to spare really. 2 arkco units is already pushing it, their far from the ideal unit in our tome. Ya their output is solid...at 8" on an objective. Thats pretty restrictive, and again, tzeentch shooting is mostly 18". And Aether gold saves are great, but im not going to waste it on Arkco getting shot when my ships are also being targeted. IF you can use it on them without needing it for more important units than its great, but so far in my games that has not been the case. 

 

14 hours ago, Frowny said:

but not having turn order choice with KO seems far less bad than for some lists, since the fly high alpha is so strong. 

Outside of alphastrikes i love KO deployment. I have no issues keeping them in the back and taking 2nd turn, which is great in most games. Just really a bad matchup for tzeentch lol. 

[Ser_namron]

1 minute ago, Cauthon said:

to me me it proves we have internal balance. (Yes we are underpowered imo)

i 100% so far think this is true. The output seems solid, the defense is solid, the shenanigans feel solid. the internal balance is pretty rock solid ( barring some unnecessary restrictions IMO). But the external balance of it in the rest of the game is lack luster so far.  if every army was internally balanced we would be in a great spot. But their not. 

[GoddammitGary]

13 minutes ago, Ser_namron said:

i 100% so far think this is true. The output seems solid, the defense is solid, the shenanigans feel solid. the internal balance is pretty rock solid ( barring some unnecessary restrictions IMO). But the external balance of it in the rest of the game is lack luster so far.  if every army was internally balanced we would be in a great spot. But their not. 

I'd argue the internal balance is worse than obr.

 

At least in obr once you cracked the code (petrifex) you can put almost what you want into it ....with KO when you crack the code it's a battalion /general choice which limits what models you can even pick in the first place...let alone items etc.

 

List building discussions slowly devolve into which list you like best. The one I'm taking this weekend or the thunderer version....everything else is just tiny variations of a theme. That's not choice. That's a straight jacket

[sal4m4nd3r]

@Ser_namron

Hard to type on mobile. My comment was supposed to read if you defend garbage you are in garbage. I’m not calling anyone garbage. But this book is not good, poorly written, ambiguous at times, requires EXTENSIVE faqing. Yet I’m supposed to just like it because they forced us to pick a specific Barak for more then two battleline option? So a max of three total..

Yes ArkCo are cheap. That’s all they have. They have. They die to really anything that touches them, can’t put out any ranged damage of note or melee damage of note. They exist.. and that’s all the positives they have. 

 

[stus67]

As much as I love the KO all of this blind and aggressive support from people that seem to have never played a game with them is getting pretty tiresome. I've played about seven games in a decently competitive play group so far with a few combinations of lists and options and I have to say that they are by far my weakest army, even behind my stormcast, which is my main squeeze.

This book needs a massive FAQ , and some serious points adjustments, to say the least. Our options are limited, we don't have many answers to other armies, and a majority of our units hit like a wet paper towel and have just about as much durability, but we pay a hefty price for them. It's a sad reality, but it is the reality of the army,  and arguments otherwise seems to just devolve into name calling because they know it's true.

Is it a fun army to play in a more casual environment? Yeah they're pretty dope, but I wouldn't be caught dead at a tournament with them.

Edited January 21, 2020 by stus67

[Cauthon]

My blind and aggressive support is not in defense of our power level. I have been very clear about that. 

 

My blind and aggressove support is for our expanded battleline options and how much it opens up list building. 

 

I’ve played a handful of games already too thanks 

[Ser_namron]

27 minutes ago, sal4m4nd3r said:

My comment was supposed to read if you defend garbage you are in garbage

Huge difference lol. I def see what you meant now. 

[GoddammitGary]

17 minutes ago, stus67 said:

As much as I love the KO all of this blind and aggressive support from people that seem to have never played a game with them is getting pretty tiresome. I've played about seven games in a decently competitive play group so far with a few combinations of lists and options and I have to say that they are by far my weakest army, even behind my stormcast, which is my main squeeze.

This book needs a massive FAQ , and some serious points adjustments, to say the least. Our options are limited, we don't have many answers to other armies, and a majority of our units hit like a wet paper towel and have just about as much durability, but we pay a hefty price for them. It's a sad reality, but it is the reality of the army,  and arguments otherwise seems to just devolve into name calling because they know it's true.

Is it a fun army to play in a more casual environment? Yeah they're pretty dope, but I wouldn't be caught dead at a tournament with them.

I'd agree with 96% of that.

 

There is a list I'm sure of it....A good one..I'll be trying it at heat 1 this weekend.

 

But.

 

It's litterally a tiny tiny small sliver of the book . Once you find it it's almost silly how the whole book seems to funnel you to it. And if gw don't like it , it will get an errata and we're back to khrons list which I think is s solid 3/2 list or 4/1 piloted by a good player on a good day ...

[FatherTurin]

So, having “lived with” the book for a little over a week, I wanted to throw my two cents in.  
 

Kharadron Overlords are the army that got me to give AoS a chance.  I love the army, not only because of the lore and the models, but because it got me into what has become a really awesome game.  I shelved them for most of 2.0, and I was really looking forward to bringing them out again with the new book.

Now let me start by saying that this book is a huge improvement over what we had before.  That being said, the one word I would use to describe the army now is frustrating.  It’s frustrating to build a list, it’s frustrating to pick a Sky-port, it’s frustrating to find combos, it’s frustrating top to bottom.

Battleline: yes, we have options now.  However, our “options” are still seemingly the most restrictive ones in the entire game.  We have one character that unlocks battleline, everything else is locked to a sky-port.  Why an arkanaut admiral couldn’t unlock thunderers is a mystery to me.  So many battleline options being tied to a sky-port also limits (in my opinion) the viability of going port-less.  
 

Anti-Synergy: ok, I hate to bring too much in from Warhammer Weekly’s super negative review, but in this regard they hit the nail on the head.  There are so many things that seem awesome, but then you realize they don’t work.  Here’s an example:

I loved Barak-Mhornar.  Not only did I love the fluff of being straight up pirates, but their rules were pretty fantastic.  Now, at first glance, I thought they were garbage.  Then I realized that the command trait bypasses the model count limit on fly high.  Sweet!  I can toss 20 thunderers and some characters in an Ironclad and start nuking people.  Sure, that’s half my army, but that’s pretty hilarious!  Even the artifact works to prevent a counter charge!  Except...the command trait only works if the general can garrison a boat, so no dirigible endrinmaster.  So, arkanaut Company is my battleline.  So ironclad plus thunderers plus at least a navigator plus 30 company puts me at 1,360.  Only 640 points left to come up with some kind of battalion.  Even if I can manage that, I’m at a minimum of 4 drops.  If I can’t squeeze in a battalion, I’m sitting at 6 drops already, so most likely not getting first turn, so even using the command trait to get in range of the enemy makes it likely I lose half my army turn one.

Ok, so no Barak Mhornar.  Good thing I haven’t painted my KO yet.

This is just one example, and I haven’t even gotten to the insane decision to drop the range on Arkanaut Company pistols.

Let me be clear, I recognize that there is some very real strength in this army.  Ironclads on their own can absolutely get some work done, to say nothing of how good the endrinmaster with dirigible suit is (also, he’s very nearly necessary to get some flexibility in the army, so I hope folks can get their hands on Aether-War).  I’m not trying to get down on KO, I really do love the army, and once I develop some variety of list that I think I will actually enjoy (right now it’s looking like an Urbaz escort wing or a Nar iron sky command), I know I will have a blast.  Right now though, it’s hard to reconcile the frustration I’m feeling with how easy it feels to slap together a Mawtribes list (my other main army).  KO are more complicated at every stage of the game, and that isn’t a bad thing, it just maybe isn’t what I’m looking for in AoS at the moment.

Also, KO has the horrible misfortune of having their book drop at the same time as the new Tzeentch book.  Comparisons are unavoidable, and....well....at least it proves that battletome power creep isn’t a thing.

[Ser_namron]

So, kinda off topic but not really. Does anyone know what GWs play testing involves? Is their a dedicated team, is it one dude with a calculator, is there any transparency as to how they create rules and balance the profiles? 

[Entombet]

14 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:

Also, KO has the horrible misfortune of having their book drop at the same time as the new Tzeentch book.  Comparisons are unavoidable, and....well....at least it proves that battletome power creep isn’t a thing.

What do you mean?.

[FatherTurin]

17 minutes ago, Entombet said:

What do you mean?.

Disciples of Tzeentch have an almost trivially easy one-drop army that can teleport 2 units a turn (changehost), and flamers have been buffed substantially, especially in Eternal Conflagration.  Flamers can delete units with their shooting and since they retained their range, can even do it from far enough away to make screens irrelevant or sit far enough back to make a counter charge difficult.  And if you do get into melee, they can bounce mortal wounds back at you.  Horrors have a non-trivial ranged attack as well, to say nothing of the fact that 200 points of horrors gives you 50 wounds to chew through.

Also, only one of the covens (their version of sky-ports) alters or replaces a main allegiance ability, unlike all of the KO ones.  If you don’t want to drown the enemy in ranged attacks, you can instead go with the coven that lets you summon a 380 point greater daemon after only 9 spells are cast (counting both armies).

Speaking of magic, there are 27 warscrolls in the DoT book (not counting endless spells).  16 of those warscrolls are wizards.  4 of those are double casters, and there is one triple caster.

So Disciples of Tzeentch have really good shooting, great mobility, phenomenal magic, easy access to one drop lists, powerful allegiance abilities that aren’t overwritten by their sub factions, three battleline choices before even considering the conditional battleline (another 3), no special characters that are set to a sub-faction, and aside from most of the hotness skewing towards the daemon side rather than the mortals, very little need to make anything resembling tough choices.

I understand that it isn’t fair to compare the two, but it’s unavoidable, at least to an extent.