AoS 2 - Kharadron Overlords Discussion

[Cauthon]

1 hour ago, GoddammitGary said:

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

I don’t think you understand what internal balance means. 

 

If your book book has one option that is the clear winner, that is the opposite of internal balance. 

[Qaz]

49 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:

 Comparisons are unavoidable, and....well....at least it proves that battletome power creep isn’t a thing.

Remember there's 2 guys: the guy who drinks tea and the guy who coked out. Could be the same guy, just different days. 

-----------

When the battletomes dropped and i saw Changehost, I could immediately field it with my collection and I did try. It was strong, but since then I had 5 games with KO and still only 1 with Tzeentch. KO still got me into AoS and I lucked out that the options presented is what I wanted to do anyways. (E.g Field ironclad with escorts etc). Power is not a concern.  Although I might still bring out to a small tournament if the mission format is favorable. Still my weakest army compare to Fyreslayers or Tzeentch so unlikely to get nerfed (other than the odd errata) and most likely get small buffs over time.

Still has more rewarding play than my other armies. 

So far, i can see many agrees that:

• KO is not a 5/0 nor a dominating battletome. More of B tier, 3-2 army.
• KO has more "pre-built" options in the battletome  (compare to previous no ship or 1 ship)
• The current ruleset does not support transport garrisons very well.  Probably see the improved 'Transport' system when Grotbag Scuttlers come out in 2-3 years or so... 

I rather talk about what we ca do: with what we have; to deal with what's out there.

Edited January 21, 2020 by Qaz

[FatherTurin]

3 minutes ago, Qaz said:

Remember there's 2 guys: the guy who drinks tea and the guy who coked out. Could be the same guy, just different days. 

When the battletomes dropped and i saw Changehost, I could immediately field it with my collection and I did try. It was strong, but since then I had 5 games with KO and still only 1 with Tzeentch. KO still got me into AoS and I lucked out that the options presented is what I wanted to do anyways. (E.g Field ironclad with escorts etc). Power is not a concern.  Although I might still bring out to a small tournament if the mission format is favorable. Still my weakest army compare to Fyreslayers or Tzeentch so unlikely to get nerfed (other than the odd errata) and most likely get small buffs.

This conversation has gone in circles and so far, we can agree on:

• KO is not a 5/0 nor a dominating battletome 
• KO has more "pre-built" options in the battletome  (compare to previous no ship or 1 ship)
• The current ruleset does not support transport garrisons very well.  Probably see the improved 'Transport' system when Grotbag Scuttlers come out in 2-3 years or so... 

I rather talk about what we ca do: with what we have; to deal with what's out there.

I don’t disagree.  My issue is more of a personal one, and between Ogors just feeling “better” for lack of a better term (not saying Ogors are top tier or anything, just a more fun experience for me right now), and pointy aelves on the horizon, I am just having a very hard time getting excited about KO.

I am supremely happy for folks who are excited and I’m not trying to say they are wrong or to cheapen their excitement, just expressing that for me personally, it’s looking like my dwarves stay in storage for a while longer.

[Entombet]

12 minutes ago, FatherTurin said:

 

Ahh i misread it. You ment that powercreep is a thing. I hawe similiar conclusion, Tzeentch is much stronger than us.

[FatherTurin]

4 minutes ago, Entombet said:

Ahh i misread it. You ment that powercreep is a thing. I hawe similiar conclusion, Tzeentch is much stronger than us.

No, I meant that as a general rule, consistent power creep is not a thing, otherwise both books would be equally (or at least comparably) obscene.  There are wild fluctuations in power, I am just not sure “creep” is the right term for it.

At the same time, I don’t think the gap between Mawtribes and OBR was this pronounced, so maybe “power gap” is the better term?

Edited January 21, 2020 by FatherTurin

[GoddammitGary]

31 minutes ago, Cauthon said:

I don’t think you understand what internal balance means. 

 

If your book book has one option that is the clear winner, that is the opposite of internal balance. I

I know EXACTLY what it is. And ko have LESS because they have LESS viable units...because of the reasons I stated...

 

Petrifex while powerfull at least let's you use all the units. Being tied to a Battalion/item combo reduces to what ever fits in that very narrow combo.

 

So while obr internal balance isn't amazing ...they at least get to use (competetivly ) all thier scrolls...KO internal balance is junk however. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by GoddammitGary

[Cauthon]

You just love to move them goal posts don’t you

 

if all our units are equally unviable then that is internal balance. By freaking definition bro. 

 

If obr has one allegiance that is flat out better THAN THE OTHER ALLEGIENCE ABILITIES, then that is the OPOSITE of internal balance. 

 

Leave the warscrolls out of it we are talking about the allegience abilities. 

 

Internal balance doesnt have A SINGLE THING to do with our level of competitiveness. That would be the external balance as in wether two books are balanced to each other.

 

you say you know but then you kept talking and proved you didn’t.  Less viable units doesn’t equal bad internal balance unless you have 1 amazing unit and a bunch of not great units. All of our units are equally meh and that means that it is internally balanced. 

 you think it’s a garbage book full of garbage units and that’s ok, I’m not even saying you are wrong about that. 

Our book is is very balanced internally it’s just at a crappy power lvl COMPARED TO OTHER BOOKS. 

[GoddammitGary]

"if all our units are equally unviable then that is internal balance. By freaking definition bro. "

Do you even read responses before spouting off.

 

I litterally said the KO choices are tied to a battalion/combo. So those units are the viable ones. A very small number of scrolls that can go in that battlion and carry that item...that it LITERALLY ****** internal balance...cos your ALWAYS incentivised to take a SMALL portion of the book over EVERYTHING ELSE

"just at a crappy power lvl COMPARED TO OTHER BOOKS. "

Also I never said this and have activly said otherwise. I think it CAN be competitive..but ONLY by taking a very SMALL cross section of units /tome choices. That is by definition, ******, internal balance.

 

I also never said it was full of garbage units.  But incentives and synergies that only benefit a very few. Please READ what people say before arguing the toss

 

The book is bad!

You can make a good list however !

It is made from a narrow sliver of the book , meaning the internal balance it shot to ******!

So long as you don't mind having a one trick pony list you can do well..even have fun ...but do not confuse that with having a well thought out book that allows diverse builds or indeed expect your opponent to have fun as you spin down the ONLY path the books allows you to play the game in anything approaching a even playing field with everything else ...they fact that is forces you down this path with janky anti synergies and exceptions is another reason it is BAD and has ****** internal balance.

 

I do not know how plainer that can be explained.

 

Edited January 21, 2020 by GoddammitGary

[Borsuk]

1 hour ago, FatherTurin said:

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

Ow man, I'm with you on this one. Why they couldn't at least squeeze in there those are just guidelines for fluff? It used to be my favorite and one of better ports and now I feel like choosing them is shot to the foot. 

And one more general thought after reading today's discussion. I think it is ok to like new tome, enjoy an army, but  stillcriticize things we don't like.  It is fine. This book is not terrible by any means, but it's not perfect. 

[Cauthon]

I have been. Just because I have a view point that’s different than yours does not mean I am not reading your posts. 

 

Which small portion of the book are you referring to that you’re “always forced to take over everything else”? 

 

You are crying about the internal POWERLEVEL and wrongly referring to it as internal BALANCE. 

 

The book can be internally balanced at a ****** powerlevel. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. 

 

You say we are less internally balanced  because we have less viable options. That is very poor logic unless you want to tell me which of our one “viable” options is that stands so much higher than the rest of the “non viable” ones. 

 

I think maybe you are so bitter about the book that you physically can’t handle someone saying something halfway positive about the book that you have to go in for personal attacks just because they arnt bitching as loudly as you are. 

[FatherTurin]

23 minutes ago, GoddammitGary said:

*snip*

6 minutes ago, Cauthon said:

*snip*

Folks, with all due respect, I think both of you should maybe take a breath.  Arguments over what is, ultimately, semantics, don’t really do anyone any good, and this is getting really heated and personal, so can we all try and bring it down a notch?

The KO tome does give us the “Time Crisis” of army design.  It seems super wide open and amazing at first, but then you realize you don’t have as many choices as you thought, a lot of the times they are false choices, and ultimately they tend to lead to the same place.

Strictly speaking I’m not sure that constitutes bad internal balance.  Bad internal balance would be if a fleet of Zilfin frigates with an admiral on an Ironclad was far and away the best and nearly the only viable list.  Bad internal balance (disclaimer: as I understand and use the term) is if one option makes all other options bad by comparison.  There really isn’t anything like that in KO.

What we have in KO is overly restricted design.  I’m not going to make a value judgment and say it’s bad design per se, I just know that I don’t like it.

Anyway, my point is, it really looks like you two are more or less saying similar things, just using different terms to say it, and this fight is coming from “who is using the term the right way,” and that isn’t productive in the least.

[Overread]

@GoddammitGary and @Cauthon I suggest you both take a breather and step back from the thread. A mod only just left a warning and removed posts 1 page ago and you're both heading down the same path again! Please drop the swearing (the filter is there for the odd word not multiple over and over again) and refrain from fighting with each other.

Users are free to disagree and to debate different points of view, but we expect users to respect other viewpoints and to debate in a calm manner; no matter how passionate you are about something. 

[GoddammitGary]

Apologies

 

[Cauthon]

I havnt received any warnings and thought I was debating in a calm and respectful manor. 

 

Guess we can drop it though, sorry. 

[5kaven5lave]

Re: Comparisons with the Ogors book and how it’s easy to throw a list together: wasn’t everyone beating their chest and wailing to the heavens about how disappointing it was 3 months ago? The book has only been out a week guys, the only way it’ll go is that we unlock more of it as more people play. (Doesn’t mean I think the book shines right now).

Plus if AoS 2.0 gets its own ‘Psychic Awakening’ we’re sure to get more rules. 

I think ultimately GW dropped the ball by making KO in the first place. They’re so amazing that if they really played as well as the fluff suggests we’d be stuck in the OP followed by FAQ cycle again. Pragmatism suggests they’ll always be decidedly below the curve so that they’ll never be above it. That’s always going to disappoint some people. 

[Borsuk]

Well I guess gw try to make fun to play ko, but are afraid that truly shooty army will be op and this way we're stuck with this "stupid sandwich". I really don't care atm, I played them when they were Z-tier, I will definitely play them when they're fun to play, sky pirate, steam punk - tier. 

[Kramer]

15 minutes ago, 5kaven5lave said:

Re: Comparisons with the Ogors book and how it’s easy to throw a list together: wasn’t everyone beating their chest and wailing to the heavens about how disappointing it was 3 months ago? 

 

Yeah, and before that it happened (in threads I was interested in) for Daughters of Khaine, Beast of Chaos, Fyreslayers, Skaven & Cities when their book dropped. Only exception seems to be Slaves to Darkness 🤨 Chaos really corrupts  apparently. 😂

[Kramer]

On a different note. Anybody considered this terrain to build a skyport?

[Ser_namron]

16 minutes ago, Borsuk said:

that truly shooty army will be op

But in the same release give DoZ some of the most insane shooting/ alphastrike in the game as a secondary to their magic and melee. Honestly i think GW just doesnt know how to communicate within their design team. because its hard to imagine the people writing tzeentch and Ko were working together when ones got more restrictions than a FAQd army on release, and the other has some of the most lenient building and battalions so far in the game. Not even mentioning power level comparisons. 

i've said it once, ill say it a million more times, GW game design is atrocious from a balance standpoint, and as others have pointed out to me, balance isnt their goal, selling models is. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Ser_namron
spelling

[Phasteon]

I give up discussing this tome. I have a 100% winrate at the moment after 7 games and I know I would have lost them all before the update, so I am very happy. 

All the people talking about how bad/disappointing this book is achieve nothing but creating a negative vibe about this amazing army. Thats why I and probably so many others are disagreeing so aggressively. 

To show people that there are not just people being frustrated. 

And I dont care how many times you say „its obviously/surely/1000% bad“ I will never agree with you.

And just because its your OPINION nothing more, nothing less you have no right to be offensive against people who actually like the book and are happy with it. 

And there is a huge difference between being „naive“ about the book as some people say and being overly negative about it as I would call it. Being POSITIVE is always better than being NEGATIVE because all you guys create by saying the book has too many flaws/is too restrictive yadda yadda is more negativity. And thats it. You are frustrated and because of that you are frustrating other people. 

Its ok, we accepted your opinions about it, we disagreed. Can we move on and be constructive* from now on? 

 

*Constructive means can we stop crying about what some people wish this book would be and work with what we got? 

 

[TheadTheOgorSlayer]

On 1/20/2020 at 1:33 PM, Ser_namron said:

Had a match with tzzentch and OH BOY it did not go well lol. Im not quite sure what to do against them. 

Our mobility and ranged are our biggest advantages, but Tzzentch can teleport 2 units 9" away every hero phase and they have some INSANE shooting. The conflagration coven ( might be wrong name) gives their shooting -1 to rend. That leads to blobs of horrors and flamers getting 30-60 shots at -1 rend. The flamers are doing d3 damage with +1/+2 to hit based on enemy unit size. They can EASILY blow away our ground forces, and can take out a ship or 2 a turn with focused fire.  they also have a -2 to be hit by ranged with the covens artifact and the general locus, so the mobs of flamers/horrors are hard to actually hit ( not to mention they split up when they die so you havent actually removed the threat). 

My major issue was that i lacked a proper screen, but with the low wound count of the army theirs not a ton to spare and im loathe to leave my thunderers as a screen to die. Even if i did have a screen, the movement on the models is no joke so they can get where they need to be. I tried to deploy in a corner with my ships in the back, but he killed 2 gunhaulers in the first turn, and i decided to try and kill his LoC that was giving the -1 hit locus and artifact. It took my entire army to just barely get him. then he got the initiative and we called it a game before he shot my entire army off the table. 

If i had retreated to a flank with fly high he wouldve just dropped the flamers outside 9" again and roasted me for a 2nd turn in a row. I felt liek the only chance i had was to get a double turn. 

Felt like a pretty impossible matchup, but i'd love to hear some advice. 

Locus only effects melee that I’m aware, the tzeentch player played it wrong

[Ser_namron]

13 minutes ago, TheadTheOgorSlayer said:

Locus only effects melee that I’m aware, the tzeentch player played it wrong

pretty sure i misremembered and he only had the -1 fromt he artifact in effect. But that was kinda the least of my problems in the matchup lol.

 

[Cauthon]

9 minutes ago, Ser_namron said:

pretty sure i misremembered and he only had the -1 fromt he artifact in effect. But that was kinda the least of my problems in the matchup lol.

 

-1 from the command trait and -1 for look out sir, I too played against tzeentch last night. Unoptomized tzeentch list and I made some bonehead mistakes so you all probably arnt super interested. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Cauthon
Command trait, not ability.

[Borsuk]

55 minutes ago, Phasteon said:

I have a 100% winrate at the moment after 7 games and I know I would have lost them all before the update, so I am very happy. 

Can you share with us what were your match-ups and general list building idea? Thanks for some insight. 

[Borsuk]

4 minutes ago, Cauthon said:

-1 from the command trait and -1 for look out sir, I too played against tzeentch last night. Unoptomized tzeentch list and I made some bonehead mistakes so you all probably arnt super interested. 

Been there, done that

I think we need to decide if we rather want to get rid of Loc ASAP or focus on the shooters. This - 1 to hit for shooting is really cumbersome.