Jump to content

AoS 2 - Hedonites of Slaanesh Discussion


HERO

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Benkei said:

I don't really mind if units are a little overcosted, but what gets me is the total lack of creativity and lore/stats relation with the exception of Glutos. It feels really lazy, the example with the Blissbarb arrows and the Symbaresh weapons being the most egregious one. 

Why couldn't most units be more like Glutos and the Shardspeaker? Not powerwise but varietywise

Precisely.

Maybe all the creativity went into sculpting models and afterwards everyone had no more creativity for lore inspired rules. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to try a shooty list with the battalion. For 1250 points + battalion (not sure how much that is) in pretenders, we can do an average of 41 damage at range against a 4+ save; it can take a nice chunk out of someone's list but probably won't make many friends :P

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, AngryPanda said:

However, I feel it’s just common sense just by simply glancing at the warscroll. Slaangors will be destroyed by pretty much anything point-to-point. Blood warriors, mortek guard, witch aelves, fyerslayers, etc. will slap them around without effort, and they’re all troops! 

It's even worse as Grots and Corsairs offer you similar damage for those points, and lots of bodies too- no need to compare to dedicated melee units. Bloodwreck Shrine will now perform similar to them in melee, for just 20pts more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes creativity in lots of fancy rules just bloats an army with loads of complicated terms. It can sound really cool, but at the same time make them a lot harder to pick up as a force. It's already tricky that GW will have the same ability with different names even in the same book, let alone between books. Adding even more can make learning and playing an army more of a challenge. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Overread said:

Sometimes creativity in lots of fancy rules just bloats an army with loads of complicated terms. It can sound really cool, but at the same time make them a lot harder to pick up as a force. It's already tricky that GW will have the same ability with different names even in the same book, let alone between books. Adding even more can make learning and playing an army more of a challenge. 

 

 

Ogres for example have very few tricks. Just good damage output, decent chunks of wounds, decent foot speed.

They don't win a lot of events but people who play them seem to just really enjoy doing so.

But to a degree I think there's an amount of selection bias in play there. People drawn to one type of aesthetic are likely to trend toward enjoying a similar aesthetic in another area.

i.e.: if the power fantasy of an ogre is raw power and smashing you likely don't want fancy rules interactions getting in the way of the smashing. While someone who's choosing a sophiticated, artsy, lithe, fast, lethal strike force probably does want something with subtle overlapping mechanical widgets with which to express that power fantasy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Benkei said:

Then why have different factions at all? 

Because its a visual game not just a maths game. 
And there are rules systems out there where there are different models for different armies, but each army has the same model roster of unit types. With the army then having an overarching few properties unique to them. Ergo a spearman is a spearman with the same stats no matter if you're building a human, vampire or lizard people army.

It's about finding a balance between being unique enough and not so different that each army is a huge hurdle to learn. 

2 minutes ago, SorryLizard said:

Ogres for example have very few tricks. Just good damage output, decent chunks of wounds, decent foot speed.

They don't win a lot of events but people who play them seem to just really enjoy doing so.

But to a degree I think there's an amount of selection bias in play there. People drawn to one type of aesthetic are likely to trend toward enjoying a similar aesthetic in another area.

i.e.: if the power fantasy of an ogre is raw power and smashing you likely don't want fancy rules interactions getting in the way of the smashing. While someone who's choosing a sophiticated, artsy, lithe, fast, lethal strike force probably does want something with subtle overlapping mechanical widgets with which to express that power fantasy.

True, but at the same time such displays of army style are purely in a persons own head. Furthermore as armies grow and diversify within themselves, those themes can get diminished. Furthermore (esp with AoS) different people will pick up on different traits of their army. Eg a DoK player might focus on the blood magic side; or the survival of the fittest; or the acrobatics - etc... There are multiple angles they might be inspired by. They might feel that DoK should all be rushing in and bathing in blood like vampires; whilst another might see them as dancing acrobats who wouldn't stain a hint of cloth or skin with blood spurting from their opponents as they slice their way through them etc... 

So in some ways a simpler style of rules lets all play to their own imaginations. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Yikes with some of these new mortal units. Not sure what GW was thinking here. Such a stunning miniature range, but the rules are just terrible on the surface level.

Really hoping it plays better than the initial read is leading me to believe. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Official warscrolls up on the NZ, so no more chan diving - yay!

After the disappointment with Slaangors, I'm somewhat pleased about the Painbringers. They might be overcosted at 150 (they seem somewhere between chosen at 140 and warriors at 100), but I look forward to trying them. 

image.png.3d6788cd770092f1b0f4e38c2708d803.png

Maybe the most surprising thing, looking at the warscrolls, is the lack of 'weird' rules. Like you expected some stupefying musk that debuffs the enemy or some mechanic where they compete with friendly units. But it's mostly rerolling hits, adding an extra attack, that kind of thing. Not a good or bad design choice per se, I just expected some of that, well, pomp. 

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

I'm a bit disappointed with hellstriders. Or rather how the clawspears (the best weapon in my view) is basically only giving you rending; otherwise it has less reach (important for big cavalry) and also less attacks (save on the charge). They also don't have any fancy charge in and out ability. Meanwhile the hell scourges (whips) get more attacks and greater reach. They cost the same and yet the only thing the whips lack is -1 rending. It just doesn't "feel" that special to take the clawespears unless I'm missing something. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Overread said:

I'm a bit disappointed with hellstriders. Or rather how the clawspears (the best weapon in my view) is basically only giving you rending; otherwise it has less reach (important for big cavalry) and also less attacks (save on the charge). They also don't have any fancy charge in and out ability. Meanwhile the hell scourges (whips) get more attacks and greater reach. They cost the same and yet the only thing the whips lack is -1 rending. It just doesn't "feel" that special to take the clawespears unless I'm missing something. 

What's the hellstrider change? I saw the points were raised but not the new scroll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Klamm said:

Official warscrolls up on the NZ, so no more chan diving - yay!

After the disappointment with Slaangors, I'm somewhat pleased about the Painbringers. They might be overcosted at 150 (they seem somewhere between chosen at 140 and warriors at 100), but I look forward to trying them. 

Maybe the most surprising thing, looking at the warscrolls, is the lack of 'weird' rules. Like you expected some stupefying musk that debuffs the enemy or some mechanic where they compete with friendly units. But it's mostly rerolling hits, adding an extra attack, that kind of thing. Not a good or bad design choice per se, I just expected some of that, well, pomp. 

Yeah that warscroll looks pretty much exactly what I always wanted for chaos warriors or blood warriors. There is an unfortunate lack of personality, but they're solid regardless.  Definitely too expensive points wise so the buffs in the army will be needed to unlock their full potential. The only thing I'm a little unhappy about is the real life monetary cost is a little high for what amounts to basic battle line troops. They're pretty comparable to other models like blood warriors for size and complexity, but they're almost twice the price. I know new and shiny and all that, but at their price I just don't think I can justify the hobby budget to buy enough to make them work on the table.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, umpac said:

According to the pics I'm watching spears are 140 and whips are 150.

This is why I hate chatting about battletomes without the tome infront of me ;)

Though have to say the price increase in points surprises me. They don't strike me as bad for their points originally and their new abilities only ping on a charge and they don't have a charge in-out of combat ability. So if anything their performance has likely gone down yet their points have gone up. Unless there's some really neat synergies I've overlooked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So slaanesh turned out like I hoped, a big fat middle army. That's what it looks like to me, I personally prefer a weaker army with multiple build options than an army that has one strong, overpowering option.

The big fat middle armies are the ones that are played and collected the most than the stronger books.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, shinros said:

So slaanesh turned out like I hoped, a big fat middle army. That's what it looks like to me, I personally prefer a weaker army with multiple build options than an army that has one strong, overpowering option.

The big fat middle armies are the ones that are played and collected the most than the stronger books.

Fair point, the only problem I have is that depravity points are still just your summoning budget and I don't want to play a summoning army. I was hoping for something more like the blood tithe where you can spend them on some buffs instead. I'm with you on not wanting to play an overpowered faction, but I don't like how there's only a downside in keeping to a mortal only-theme. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, willange said:

Did I hear wrong that blisbarb archers (foot) are 160?  They really don't seem worth that much reading through their warscroll on the NZ site.  Like, they seems way overcosted (as do painbringers though by not as much and then of course slaangors).

The payoff of DP farming, because there isn't so much synergies around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ragest said:

The payoff of DP farming, because there isn't so much synergies around them.

Yeah that still doesn't make much sense to me.  It'll take some playing to figure out if DP farming can be good or not.  Obviously your opponent will try to deny that wherever possible, but it's tough to know how people will react to that once they're used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...