GHB2019 Hopes & Expectations

[HollowHills]

Points reduction for idoneth deepkin units that aren't morsarr and the soulscryer to make the army more viable. Also a changing of how wholly within works. 

Reduced points for battalions across the board. 

Scrap realm artefacts and spells. 

Rule of one for command point stacking. 

Squat all WHFB factions. 

[Barbossal]

*cracks fingers* 

Devoted of Sigmar

Flagellants go from 80 > 60 (per 10)

Witch Hunters go from 50 > 40

Warrior Priests go from 80 > 70

War Altar go from 250 > 220

Seraphon

Saurus Warriors go from 100 > 80

Saurus Guard go from 100 > 80

Lord Kroak goes from 450 > 380

 

 

[AGPO]

It's a long shot, but I'd love to see two separate ways to build an army ala 40k, with power values introduced for narrative and pick up play and more granular points for tournament players. It would help to stop matched play becoming the default.

[Joseph Mackay]

points changes
Stormcast
-Evocators go up to about 240
-Sequitors go up
-Evocators on Dracoline go down to about 280
-Lord Arcanum on Dracoline go down to about 200 or 220
-all Paladins go down by 20
-Dracoths (at least one of the variants) become Battleline If Lord Celestant on Stardrake is General
-Gryph Hounds go down to 100

Daughters of Khaine
-Hag Queen goes up to 80
-Witches/Sisters of Slaughter lose horde bonues
-Blood Stalkers go down to 140 and Battleline If
-Morathi make Melusai Battleline

Idoneth Deepkin
-Allopex goes down to 120
-Leviadon goes down to 360
-Morrsar go up to 180 or lose Battleline If (one of these but NOT both)
-Ishlaen go up to 160
-Reavers go down to 100

Seraphon
-Saurus Guard go up to 120 with minimum unit changed to 10
-Saurus Oldblood goes down to 100
-Engine of the Gods becomes unique
-Saurus Warriors go down to 80 or 90
-Eternal Starhost,Firelance Starhost,Sunclaw Starhost all go down

Legions of Nagash
-Nagash goes up to at least 900 if not more
-remove all Nighthaunt units
-Skeletons go up

[Joseph Mackay]

24 minutes ago, AGPO said:

It's a long shot, but I'd love to see two separate ways to build an army ala 40k, with power values introduced for narrative and pick up play and more granular points for tournament players. It would help to stop matched play becoming the default.

yes id like something similar to that too. Matched Play, especially tournaments need points per model/paying for upgrades, but that system isnt needed for open/narrative

1 hour ago, HollowHills said:

Points reduction for idoneth deepkin units that aren't morsarr and the soulscryer to make the army more viable. Also a changing of how wholly within works. 

Reduced points for battalions across the board. 

Scrap realm artefacts and spells. 

Rule of one for command point stacking. 

Squat all WHFB factions. 

scrap realm artefacts and spells? why?
if anything id restrict their access to Grand Alliance armies only/those without allegeince abilities but wouldnt remove them completely. as i mentioned in another thread, these things are only a problem when they get used by the already top tier armies, if they were only used by Grand Alliance/non battletome armies theyd never have been touched by faq/errata. spells are only a problem when youve got Nagash running around able to cast all 6 in one turn plus all his other spells

squat WHFB armies? which armies specifally do you mean as technically this would include Seraphon, and although i dont play them often id rage quit if they were scrapped

[Payce]

I'd like to see Grimghast Reapers remain at the points they are, but moved to allies for LoN (and thus lose LoN allegiance abilities). The problem with them is gravesites, not their points cost, and a points increase would be downright destructive for an already struggling Nighthaunt.

While on the subject of Nighthaunt, I'd like to see Hexwraiths down to 140 points per five, Spirit Hosts unit size 3-9 with points at 100/260, Kurdoss Valentian lowered to 180 points, Lady Olynder to 220, Dreadblade Harrows to 80, and Dreadscythe Harridans to 80/280. All three endless spells could do with a 20 points decrease, they're all really bad and there's literally no incentive to take them outside of liking the models.

I'd also like to see the Black Coach get the HERO keyword, though this should come at a points increase (300 or 320 points would be in line with similar models). Reikenor could do with a 20 points increase as well. Finally, upping Chainghast unit size to 2-8 and costing them at 80/280 might actually make them playable.

[Yoshiya]

I'd like GW do to a better run on internal faction balance, even if creates short term issues with overall balance. The fact that so many armies have clearly optimal units and builds is ridiculous. I get that it's hard to balance a whole game but it shouldn't be hard to balance a few units within a faction.

Also, make sure that every model is covered by allegiance abilities besides the grand ones, even if it means just folding them into existing ones.

As for the people calling for a removal of optional rules like realm spells or artefacts, just don't use them in your games rather than ruining the game for everyone else... You can argue they ruin tournaments but if TO are choosing to use them clearly they think they are popular with the majority and worth using.

[El Syf]

There was a Facebook post where they asked for comments on regarding points changes for ghb 19 a few months back, which realistically is all we will probably get. 

Lots of people wanting Nagash to go up in points whilst wanting reductions in points to their own hot trash units. It’s all very subjective, personally I think treelords of all types need to go up in points but my regular opponent who plays Sylvaneth would absolutely hate that. Blood Knights need a points reduction, as if you don’t get a charge off with them they’re pretty useless and vargheists return to battleline  in a soulblight army like they used to be unless there’s a soulblight time on the way 😂

[JackStreicher]

12 hours ago, Nos said:

That’s kind of what happened to Warhammer-there was nowhere to go either in game or in the Lore, if you broke the balance and status quo everything broke. 

Are you claiming WHF had balance? 🤣🤣 that game had 3-4 top factions which were overtuned to the point of loughable auto-wins (High Elves and their Pheonix Guards, Dark Elves and their S10, 40 Attacks poison Witch Elves, Skaven Slave spam, endless amounts of imperial redirectors for no points)

[Nos]

2 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Are you claiming WHF had balance? 🤣🤣 that game had 3-4 top factions which were overtuned to the point of loughable auto-wins (High Elves and their Pheonix Guards, Dark Elves and their S10, 40 Attacks poison Witch Elves, Skaven Slave spam, endless amounts of imperial redirectors for no points)

No, I’m claiming the balance between how the Lore worked and modelling it within the rules of certain factions broke the game, as you say.

Whereas in AOS the game is specifically balanced around making every new release outlandish in its own way.  

 

[Gorks Pokin' Finger]

Expectations
-all pre-GHB armies (Ironjawz, FEC, Fyreslayers, Seraphon, Skaven Pestillants and Everchosen) will get at the minimum a battletome update
-Ironjawz and Everchosen will be combined with other factions in their respective alliances and receive new models (Ironjawz with Greenskins and Bonesplittas and Everchosen with Slaves to Darkness and new Darkoath)
-We will receive a brand new faction this year for AOS that we've never seen before (would Darkoath count lol)
-AOSRPG will be released in Q4

Hopes
-Destruction finally does something in the lore
-Greenskins will finally be legitimized with their own batttletome, get combined with Ironjawz and Bonesplittaz, or two pages in GH19
-Ironjawz get a new unit that's just a Brute in a giant spikey ball that runs over everything on the battlefield 
-Whenever Slaanesh gets their own AOS army, they receive two units of unique mortal units like Blood Warriors or Kairic Acolytes
-Dispossessed gets a surprise battletome with new terrain and a war golem
-A new skirmish game or system arrives this year that takes off like Kill Team did for 40k

[Skreech Verminking]

9 hours ago, HollowHills said:

Squat all WHFB factions. 

Man that would be terrible.

squat every armie with the exception of Bloodbound, fish-things and posterthings, and there wouldn’t be to many people left playing the game.

[HollowHills]

9 hours ago, Joseph Mackay said:

yes id like something similar to that too. Matched Play, especially tournaments need points per model/paying for upgrades, but that system isnt needed for open/narrative

scrap realm artefacts and spells? why?
if anything id restrict their access to Grand Alliance armies only/those without allegeince abilities but wouldnt remove them completely. as i mentioned in another thread, these things are only a problem when they get used by the already top tier armies, if they were only used by Grand Alliance/non battletome armies theyd never have been touched by faq/errata. spells are only a problem when youve got Nagash running around able to cast all 6 in one turn plus all his other spells

squat WHFB armies? which armies specifally do you mean as technically this would include Seraphon, and although i dont play them often id rage quit if they were scrapped

Mostly I don't like realm artefacts because they make battletome artefacts redundant. There are a few that are really strong, ethereal amulet, scales, previously doppelganger cloak. Then there are a lot that aren't overpowered but are just slightly better versions of similar things in battletomes. It means that you have have two to four tables of thematic artefacts in the battletome that no one uses. 

I also think the realm spells and rules are unbalanced and particularly vulnerable to exploitation by units like Nagash. I don't know why GW push them for tournaments when they just add a random factor that most matched play players hate. 

Even the realm rules are awful. I played an opponent in ghyran to try them out in the summer and we rolled on the table for a random result. We got the feature that meant units without fly couldn't run. Terrible for his army, no issue for my eels. I knew I'd won before we even rolled a die. 

I'd rather they keep fluffy stuff to narrative and open play, though I don't know anyone who even plays those. 

While we're at it I'd love to see matched play be the only ruleset and less time be spent on writing non matched play rules. 

1 hour ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Man that would be terrible.

squat every armie with the exception of Bloodbound, fish-things and posterthings, and there wouldn’t be to many people left playing the game.

I'd like to kill the WHFB armies because to some extent I think they are a trap for new players and set unreasonable expectations. 

Armies like dispossessed, greenskinz, free guild and darkling covens appear to be legitimate from the web store. Some of them even have allegiance abilities. However, the fact is they are terrible on the table and mostly are out of place with the setting. 

Then you get salty players on forums and in shops upset that their WHFB army that their lucky to even be able to play isn't able to beat a proper army like Stormcast, DoK or Nighthaunt. 

I know some of them will get soup tomes but personally I feel it would be better to kill them. They are just hold overs from the transition period. A lot of them detract from the fluff too, like the whole story of freeing aelf souls from slaanesh even though there are loads of random little high and dark elves running around. 

At the very least they should make it clear that grog armies aren't going to get supported going forwards. 

[eciu]

6 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

Armies like dispossessed, greenskinz, free guild and darkling covens appear to be legitimate from the web store. Some of them even have allegiance abilities. However, the fact is they are terrible on the table and mostly are out of place with the setting. 

Because they suffer from WHFB syndrome that being "lack of attention" ? Not everyone loves our new Stormcast overlords....

squat yourself

[RuneBrush]

10 hours ago, AGPO said:

It's a long shot, but I'd love to see two separate ways to build an army ala 40k, with power values introduced for narrative and pick up play and more granular points for tournament players. It would help to stop matched play becoming the default.

Would love to see this and think that it'd be a huge boon to allowing the Narrative & Open playstyles to flourish.  For anybody who raises an eyebrow at this, it effectively moves the competitive list building part of the game over to Matched Play rather than bleeding into what should be less serious Narrative and Open play games.

9 hours ago, Joseph Mackay said:

Skeletons go up

Curious on your thoughts behind this?  

8 hours ago, Payce said:

I'd like to see Grimghast Reapers remain at the points they are, but moved to allies for LoN (and thus lose LoN allegiance abilities). The problem with them is gravesites, not their points cost, and a points increase would be downright destructive for an already struggling Nighthaunt.

I've said it a couple of times, what I believe would be a good solution would be to increase the points of Grimghast Reapers when fielded in a Legions army* - increase by 20 points per 10, limit to a maximum of 20 per unit and as such drop the horde bonus.  This leaves the current points when fielded within a Nighthaunt/Grand Alliance army.

* this being an army that uses the Gravesite mechanic

[Joseph Mackay]

29 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Curious on your thoughts behind this?

Skeletons, like Witch Aelves, are too cheap for what they do considering all the buffs those units get loaded with (mostly from outside scources, ill admit) and the fact they can be healed back up to starting health (or even have a whole unit of 40 brought back).

ill admit, skeletons are probably the least problem thing in Legions of Nagash that needs nerfing, but its still something that should probably be addressed.

as for having Grimghast Reapers with a different points cost based on the army theyre fielded in? no, just ban them from Legions if they are a problem so that nighthaunt arent nerfed for Legions sins. Speaking of which, i wish in tournament rankings, Legions of Nagash was ranked seperately based on the actual allegience taken (Grand Host of Nagash, Legion of Blood etc) for the same reason, the sins of Legion of Sacroment or Legion of Blood shouldnt hurt Legion of Night as an example, but the way theyre lumped together in tournament results paints a bad picture for future nerfs

[Jetengine]

The issue of the objective holding mechanic is a tad thorny imo, cause if you make "Most wounds hold it not numbers" then you have the issue of someone dropping  Nagash or some other crazy monster on top whom is unmovable. Maybe make it a rule just for BCR ?

[Joseph Mackay]

@Jetengine Beastclaw Raiders, i think, are exactly why objectives became 'most models'

[Jetengine]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

@Jetengine Beastclaw Raiders, i think, are exactly why objectives became 'most models'

Which is fair, but now the faction is crippled. They need a way of taking objectives that isnt "Ally in 40 grots and make sure they dont get slaughtered"

[Gotrek]

50 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

Skeletons, like Witch Aelves, are too cheap for what they do considering all the buffs those units get loaded with (mostly from outside scources, ill admit) and the fact they can be healed back up to starting health (or even have a whole unit of 40 brought back).

ill admit, skeletons are probably the least problem thing in Legions of Nagash that needs nerfing, but its still something that should probably be addressed.

as for having Grimghast Reapers with a different points cost based on the army theyre fielded in? no, just ban them from Legions if they are a problem so that nighthaunt arent nerfed for Legions sins. Speaking of which, i wish in tournament rankings, Legions of Nagash was ranked seperately based on the actual allegience taken (Grand Host of Nagash, Legion of Blood etc) for the same reason, the sins of Legion of Sacroment or Legion of Blood shouldnt hurt Legion of Night as an example, but the way theyre lumped together in tournament results paints a bad picture for future nerfs

1) The reaper fix is actually pretty easy, drop the summonable keyword from them & update any night haunt healing/resurrection abilities to specifically include them. Suddenly legions can't bring them back or heal them.

2) you stay the ****** away from my skeletons. Yeah they get a bucket load of attacks...that hit on 4s, wound on 4s, have no rend, and damage 1. Add in a 5+ save that vanishes if anything has rend (base 6+ shields make it 5+ but only against rend - attacks) and you will take them off the table by the handful. Granted, I haven't had any situations where I've had to bring back an entire 40 brick with a command point but they also dont kill anything either. The counter to them is MSU. Deny the skeletons the ability to leverage their bodies and they just fall apart. Literally. 

 

 

[EMMachine]

1 hour ago, HollowHills said:

Even the realm rules are awful. I played an opponent in ghyran to try them out in the summer and we rolled on the table for a random result. We got the feature that meant units without fly couldn't run. Terrible for his army, no issue for my eels. I knew I'd won before we even rolled a die. 

I think the mainproblem is, that realm rules shouldn't be random. Except for the case of a narrative scenario where the army went through a realmgate not knowing what they will find on the other side, both army should know what the rules of the place they fight are, what we could see in the armylist if the army has the options.

1 hour ago, HollowHills said:

While we're at it I'd love to see matched play be the only ruleset and less time be spent on writing non matched play rules. 

I don't know if this would be a good idea, because it could make games too serious (we have seen this in WHFB as well as Wh40k where you had the feeling that everything that didn't had a "official GW stamp" on it is forbidden or at least ignored completely.

The actual rules, making "rule pakets" and not having "the only ruleset" can help creating an optimal experience for the players and encourage houserules.

In the end it would also break the immersion between rules and lore (I have seen this in 9th age where the focus was mostly on Matched Play).

1 hour ago, HollowHills said:

I'd like to kill the WHFB armies because to some extent I think they are a trap for new players and set unreasonable expectations. 

Armies like dispossessed, greenskinz, free guild and darkling covens appear to be legitimate from the web store. Some of them even have allegiance abilities. However, the fact is they are terrible on the table and mostly are out of place with the setting. 

Then you get salty players on forums and in shops upset that their WHFB army that their lucky to even be able to play isn't able to beat a proper army like Stormcast, DoK or Nighthaunt. 

I know some of them will get soup tomes but personally I feel it would be better to kill them. They are just hold overs from the transition period. A lot of them detract from the fluff too, like the whole story of freeing aelf souls from slaanesh even though there are loads of random little high and dark elves running around. 

At the very least they should make it clear that grog armies aren't going to get supported going forwards. 

Actually it would nearly cripple the realms. The realms are nearly endless and need some population. They just would need a little attention, giving them an identity thats not only "we are models from the world that was".

11 hours ago, Joseph Mackay said:

-Dracoths (at least one of the variants) become Battleline If Lord Celestant on Stardrake is General

At least I would say, Lord Celestant on Stardrake or Lord Celestant on Dracoth. I think most of us have the Vandus Hammerhand model (and want an Extremis Chamber lead by a Lord Celestant on Dracoth and perhaps want to play Drakespawn Templars (after a full chamber already would include 3 Templars).

 

11 hours ago, AGPO said:

It's a long shot, but I'd love to see two separate ways to build an army ala 40k, with power values introduced for narrative and pick up play and more granular points for tournament players. It would help to stop matched play becoming the default. 

Hm. At the moment AoS actually uses something similar to the 40k power values as Matched Play rules. There could be a possibility makting something like in 40k (and the matched play points with values for each item could also be used for skirmish in some sort), but in the end it would mean that 2 pointlists have to be maintained or one list will be favoured over the other. And I have the feeling if points per model and itemcosts would come back, next to the Pitched Battle Points we have at the moment the points per model system would most likely rule out the Pitched Battle variant as the default used rules.

[Joseph Mackay]

the fact of Dracoth battleline is that i feel its a themed and narrative list and should be an option, but theyd be extremely powerful as a battleline option, so the tax needs to be significant, thats why i suggest only the Lord Celestant on Stardrake, maybe the Drakesworn Templar, for unlocking battleline status

[LionofFenchurchEast]

14 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

Actually it would nearly cripple the realms. The realms are nearly endless and need some population. They just would need a little attention, giving them an identity thats not only "we are models from the world that was".

I agree with you tbh I think that they fact they've just stuck WHFB models into AoS is totally disjointed, I find it hard to believe from a lore standpoint that Duardin from "the world that was" wouldn't alter in some format tbh I'd like to see them become part of a larger Duardin faction that creates a sort of " mechanised ground pounder" counter point to the Overlords give them some form of "tank" and "APC" models to balance against the Airships and then you've got Fyreslayers as an "infantry" option 

[Kaleb Daark]

6 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

Are you claiming WHF had balance? 🤣🤣 that game had 3-4 top factions which were overtuned to the point of loughable auto-wins (High Elves and their Pheonix Guards, Dark Elves and their S10, 40 Attacks poison Witch Elves, Skaven Slave spam, endless amounts of imperial redirectors for no points)

I agree.  stuff going back to all that again.

Elf armies winning the initative and then smugly sitting back knowing that in their next turn it was blender time again with their always strike first.

Whole blocks of chaos warriors having to chase a flock of bats around the field because they were frenzied, and artillery armies pulling the six from the back blag to always hit you.

I love the double turn, even though it's wiped me out probably more times than it's blessed me.  You can't guarantee anything because of it and as a result it alone more than anything else can change the battle and create a cinematic heroic victory for even the most mundane army.

 

if anything I'd like to see a bit more modularity to allow us to field cool options with multiple models.  But this isn't a GHB thing - it's a personal wish list.

So for instance my beloved war mammoth:

In the old army lists you could field it as a mount for a character,  a warshrine, or with a howdah a transport.

Those of us fortunate enough to have that model could easily put a character in the howdah to achieve the first, and I would be happy to buy a warshrine to perch on top of it to achieve the second.  - But always in the context of the available GW models.  No models no banana.  But that's a FW warscroll thing not relevant to this thread.

In light of the soul wars, I'd like to see all warscrolls also get the mortal / celestial / daemon / undead  keyword.  after all, beasts for instance although not human are still mortal and we've seen things who's condition specifically targets these keywords.

On topic, I think it's a great idea as @RuneBrush has mentioned  to break the pack down into segments so that you can just take the matched play part with you to a game for instance, and if that could have the mechanics from the "core rules" in it that would be great - saving you carrying the core rule book around as well for realm abilities etc.

I wouldn't begrudge paying for the content again as i'd see it as you buy the core book for fluff, and all the lavishness of it but the ghb is an annual spend which forms the staple part of my gaming experience.  I'd happily pay to have the convenience of every thing I need for that years gaming at my fingertips in one place.  A rules compendium (outside of battletomes) if you will -  including the core, ghb and malign rulesets in one easy format.

As players we know we're going to buy it whatever every year, so it would be nice if it's also thanking us for the loyalty and commitment in this way.

 

Not just for GHB but all GW literature:

I'd like to see a code / scannable tag / anything else that allows you to unlock the digital version if not free, at a reduced price.

I've bought GHB, blades of khorne, beasts and others twice over - physical and digital just so I could unlock the functionality in the azyr app. It peeves me a little to have to do that.  It wouldn't be difficult to have the action as a single activation tied to your user ID so that were you to sell the book on, you've been the one in essence thanked for purchasing new.

other than those little things, I'm actually quite happy.

[Ironbreaker]

13 hours ago, HollowHills said:

grog 

Opinion discarded