The Rumour Thread

[Kramer]

14 hours ago, Still-young said:

No they didn’t. They showed stuff from it when they said it was delayed, but all they’d told us about before that was Looncurse. 

Look back the twitch stream episode with Ben Johnson, he did say separate release later on there. No specifics. 

[Still-young]

2 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Look back the twitch stream episode with Ben Johnson, he did say separate release later on there. No specifics. 

My point is, they didn’t announce it was going up for preorder the next week, and then it was delayed. I’m assuming they already have the Generals Handbook, if they’ve announced it’ll be up for preorder next weekend. 

[Qrow]

16 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

With the move to a downloadable document I could see a 6 monthly update become a reality - I think would also help reduce "army list paralysis" in June*!  If they do a 3 monthly, then with luck we don't see any changes for armies that have come out in the last six months or so, to give them time to settle

* i.e.  "I want to write a list, but want to wait until the new handbook in case something changes"

I would like to see something like a 6 month check in after a codex is released, similar to how they do the erratas now. Around the 6 month mark they look at the armies results, check for over/underperforming units or rules, and adjust how they can to keep the playing field more level.

I do completely agree with people saying 3 months is too short, 3 months leads to a lot of knee-****** reactions and no chance for people to learn counters. However, I think most people (certainly those at my local clubs and in many of the forums I read) agree that the last few releases have been a full step ahead of previous battletomes in relative power terms. If GW can develop a new method to minimise these issues then I'm all for it, one of the reasons I stopped playing 40K was due to consistant power imbalances. Though AoS has way less ranged vs melee issues to fix, thankfully.

Maybe they could adopt a similar program to privateer press; they announce a faction will being going up for review and take in community feedback, then there is a month where they offer beta rule/point adjustments while taking in more feedback from playtesters, adjusting slightly each week until they have a better idea of what is happening then close the beta. After that, they internally review for about a month, then release the new profiles.

Edited June 10, 2019 by Qrow

[pseudonyme]

6 minutes ago, Qrow said:

I would like to see something like a 6 month check in after a codex is released, similar to how they do the erratas now. Around the 6 month mark they look at the armies results, check for over/underperforming units or rules, and adjust how they can to keep the playing field more level.

I do completely agree with people saying 3 months is too short, 3 months leads to a lot of knee-****** reactions and no chance for people to learn counters. However, I think most people (certainly those at my local clubs and in many of the forums I read) agree that the last few releases have been a full step ahead of previous battletomes in relative power terms. If GW can develop a new method to minimise these issues then I'm all for it, one of the reasons I stopped playing 40K was due to consistant power imbalances. Though AoS has way less ranged vs melee issues to fix, thankfully.

Maybe they could adopt a similar program to privateer press; they announce a faction will being going up for review and take in community feedback, then there is a month where they offer beta rule/point adjustments while taking in more feedback from playtesters, adjusting slightly each week until they have a better idea of what is happening then close the beta. After that, they internally review for about a month, then release the new profiles.

That way, I guess the hype won’t be half of what it is for each release since the beginning of AoS

[SleeperAgent]

6 months after a book comes out is good. Lots more data available. Points changes every 3 months could be feasible as long as they aren't drastic. I'd love them to drop some things by increments of 10 and raise some the same if they go to a quicker schedule. 

All I know is my spooky boys needs some help. We are without a doubt the worst 2.0 army.

[Qrow]

1 minute ago, SleeperAgent said:

6 months after a book comes out is good. Lots more data available. Points changes every 3 months could be feasible as long as they aren't drastic. I'd love them to drop some things by increments of 10 and raise some the same if they go to a quicker schedule. 

All I know is my spooky boys needs some help. We are without a doubt the worst 2.0 army.

Totally with you on nighthaunt, we could use a little love.

The only way I could possibly see a 3 month turnaround working would be if it was just tapping at an issue. Like 10-20 point changes at the absolute max, then re-adjust again in 3 more months, even then the 20 point changes would have to be saved for extreme cases (looking at you verminlord warpseer)

[Zanzou]

I would say 4 to 6 months for mass-point updates would be appropriate.  The key thing to remember here is, points only change if there is something noticeably off in balance to the testers.  So the more often they update points, the less things will need to be changed as they find balance.  (Unless they plan to routinely release game-changing boxes and rules like they did with endless spell releases, then all bets on "finding balance" are permanently off).

Edited June 10, 2019 by Zanzou

[Laststand]

1 hour ago, Qrow said:

Totally with you on nighthaunt, we could use a little love.

Really? Whats the problem? You have a huge range of bonuses and allegiance abilities. Your heroes spit MW all over the place and units (which heal/ressurect) seem a decent price. Not to be funny but I think NH are in a decent place compared to others.  

[SleeperAgent]

13 minutes ago, Laststand said:

Really? Whats the problem? You have a huge range of bonuses and allegiance abilities. Your heroes spit MW all over the place and units (which heal/ressurect) seem a decent price. Not to be funny but I think NH are in a decent place compared to others.  

All our abilities feel like 2.0 Beta abilities. Some of our units have mortal wounds on unmodified 6's, but the attack ends (and theyre horrid like Spirit hosts at 120 points which hit on FIVES and wound on  fours). Compare to Khorne which continues attacking, or Fyreslayers which does 2 mortal wounds and keeps attacking.

Our "extra combat" ability is totally random and does basically nothing if the turns are in the wrong order and we get charged. Compare to FEC 1 point extra combat, or you can take a delusion and get free ones every turn. Or Fyreslayers who get to pile in and attack first out of order for one command point, and still attack later in the phase.  Ironically the most fair of these being Slaanesh who gets to use a unit again on their activation. Wave of Terror is great, if it goes off. As someone who mains Nighthaunt, I can tell you that it will go off on average 1-2 times a game. And the longer the game, the weaker it is because the units that it goes off on are weaker and you have no choice in the matter.

All new books get to pick a Court/Hoursehold/Lodge/etc to gain more abilities whereas we just get the stock 6, which most of are pretty bad.

We are supposed to be the army that attacks opponent's bravery yet our entire book only has 1 thing that lowers bravery, by 1, and it's our allegiance ability. This is WOEFULLY overvalued by GW when EVERYONE gets multiple ways to basically avoid the battleshock phase. This essentially nullifies our Feed on Terror allegiance ability, which isnt great to begin with.

Our heroes are exceedingly weak for the points they cost. Lady Olynder and Kurdoss being the big culprits here.  240 and 220 respectively for 7 wounds. They put so much value on ethereal, but then put that damn amulet in the Malign Sorcery book so every other army could have their best unit with a 3+ save be unrendable. Our entire army cannot benefit from cover so that tactic is thrown right out the window.

I love the spooky boys, but they are in dire needs of cost reductions, and in some cases (glaivewraiths, endless spells) complete warscroll reworks. There is a reason the army is the lowest win% of all 2.0 armies. The main problem is Nagash lists take huge piles of Grimghast Reapers and bring them back for one command point so the rest of our army suffers because everyone thinks we are THAT good. When in reality we do not have access to gravesites or invigorating aura.

I'm well aware that every army "pays a cost" for the abilities of their allegiance, but Nighthaunt got the shaft. ALL of our abilities are weaker than 2.0 armies, AND we have high points costs.

[Kugane]

3 hours ago, BobbyB said:

Speaking to one of the AoS rules team at WHF, they specifically said that they were waiting for the results of the survey to make a decision about how often they update points in future

I bet the survey will say as often as possible lol.

[divineauthority]

One thing from the video that I'm looking forward to is city fighting with rules for buildings including KNOCKING THEM DOWN!

Time to start a new fantasy city board methinks. Hopefully we might see some new actual buildings scenery too one day!

[Qrow]

39 minutes ago, Laststand said:

Really? Whats the problem? You have a huge range of bonuses and allegiance abilities. Your heroes spit MW all over the place and units (which heal/ressurect) seem a decent price. Not to be funny but I think NH are in a decent place compared to others.  

To add on to what sleeperagent said, you can see the issue when looking at tournament stats in the attached images. Nighthaunt are the weakest 2.0 battletome, in fact it is far better to take them in legions of nagash than it is in their own battletome.

A lot of our abilities are either negated by new battletomes (battleshock debuffs) or have a 16% chance of happening (wave of terror). Most other armies can simply spend a command point to attack twice, or have an ability that is at least 50/50 to be allowed to attack first, ours is chance. So on the odd occasion that it actually goes off when you want it too, it feels more like winning through sheer luck than any actual planning.

Add in that our heroes are very expensive for only having seven wounds, being unrendable is great except when you realise your 240 point model will statistically die if it has to make just 14 saves with no rend.

A lot of are units were overpriced when compared to other 2.0 codexs, it would be nice to see that changed.

[Sleboda]

Just a Grumpy Old Man point:

Codex=40K

Battletome=AoS

[Qrow]

3 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Just a Grumpy Old Man point:

Codex=40K

Battletome=AoS

Yeah, I still struggle with that, I have played 40k for ages, so codex is just the first word that pops into my brain when referencing army books. I got it right 3/4 times, but tripped on that last sentence, so close...

[alghero81]

Nighthaunt definitely needs some love, especially their endless spells, but I doubt there will be anything on that topic before a couple of years.

 But back to the GHB19 digital pitched version, while it’s true that you can find all those points for free in different ways from the community website itself, in some situations make sense to see what is officially supported and published.

For example today Greenskinz and Gitmob Grots are still a supported option as per GHB18 while in next published pitched profile they should be gone for good... (or relegated to legacy options like the old WHFB armies).

[Skreech Verminking]

11 minutes ago, alghero81 said:

Nighthaunt definitely needs some love, especially their endless spells, but I doubt there will be anything on that topic before a couple of years.

 But back to the GHB19 digital pitched version, while it’s true that you can find all those points for free in different ways from the community website itself, in some situations make sense to see what is officially supported and published.

For example today Greenskinz and Gitmob Grots are still a supported option as per GHB18 while in next published pitched profile they should be gone for good... (or relegated to legacy options like the old WHFB armies).

The question remaining though is which factions would replace the allies the Gloomspite gitz can take, if Greenskinz and The gitz would vanish.

[Dirtnaps]

2 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

The question remaining though is which factions would replace the allies the Gloomspite gitz can take, if Greenskinz and The gitz would vanish.

Ironjawz would be my guess, not really sure why they aren't allies to begin with honestly.

[Overread]

Gloomspite are a bit like Skaven in respect that most of the natural allies they'd take are actually built into their own battletome rather than standing separate armies. For GW this makes a lot of sense as the Tome allows them to keep several smaller armies united under a single banner, so sure whilst you've sitll got people playing a pure Pestilens army, they can still take whatever they want from the other forces and are more encouraged to do so. It also means if GW releases one new Skyre or Maulder model it still stands as a valid update to the Pestilens players too. 

So now updating 1 of the 5 or so skaven or gloomspite armies counts as an update for them all. It's a very sensible way to manage smaller sub-armies whilst also keeping a lid on the games sprawl of factions and keeping more players happy. Now instead of updating 5 skaven or goblin armies one after the other to keep 5 separate markets happy, they update one and all are satisfied because they can, in theory, all take the new model even if its not purely in their sub-group.

[alghero81]

In looncurse Skagrott subjugated some green skins, so maybe Ironjawz or whatever form they assume may become their allies. 

I’m actually looking forward to see if after the “let’s get a 2.0 battletome” phase, GW will start revisiting some of the sub-factions adding a bit more lore and strategies in specialized armies, a bit like DoK would be in a reunited Dark Elves soup tome or Deathrattle (and to a certain extent Nighthaunt) would be after LoN...

[sorokyl]

1 hour ago, Dirtnaps said:

Ironjawz would be my guess, not really sure why they aren't allies to begin with honestly.

I susect Gloomspite will be an option for ironjawz(like moonclan is now). But ironjawz will not be an option for gloomspite (like they aren't an option for moonclan today). The reason is fluff. You can imagine goblins following a megaboss into battle, but ironjawz will not follow grots into battle. 

The gloomspite tome doesn't really need allies, you have moonclan, spiderfang, troggoths, and gargants. And now you have Mercenaries.   Same for skaven. No natural allies. 

[JPjr]

more info on the mercenary system...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/10/the-generals-handbook-2019-mercenary-companiesgw-homepage-post-2/

handily for myself I already have a huge blob of skeletons and necromancer, fully painted and with a tasty backstory to boot, that will be getting a run out soon in some other armies and wrecking ****** with 4 attacks each.

 

EDIT: ha just remembered Vanhel's Danse Macabre spell too. Could be fun.

 

Edited June 10, 2019 by JPjr

[Dreadmund]

18 minutes ago, JPjr said:

more info on the mercenary system...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/10/the-generals-handbook-2019-mercenary-companiesgw-homepage-post-2/

Glad to see some StD as a nurgle player. Seems like it could be a beneficial way to take some Marauders into an army that already synergises well with them. I'm feeling pretty optimistic about mercenaries personally!

Edit: Seem like they are like mini battalions?

Edited June 10, 2019 by Dreadmund

[the_master288]

14 hours ago, alghero81 said:

Most disarming thing they mentioned is the reason why there is a digital version: they finished the GHB before Gloomspite was completed so the points for them and all other books afterwards are not included.

It's too bad that GW didn't just delay the book if needed.  It's strange to me to buy a book that is supposed to be our tome for matched play and it's already almost 6 months out of date...............

[Charlo]

21 minutes ago, Dreadmund said:

Glad to see some StD as a nurgle player. Seems like it could be a beneficial way to take some Marauders into an army that already synergises well with them. I'm feeling pretty optimistic about mercenaries personally!

Edit: Seem like they are like mini battalions?

But you can take marauders already with the mark of Nurgle....?

Mini Battalions that eat up allies points and cost you a Command Point instead of granting one, so pretty nicely balanced.

I'm very excited for the Artillery one! Undead cannons and Gyro?! Yes please!

[El Syf]

Some of the mercenary descriptions made me laugh, Blood Knights being heavy cavalry and trying to make skeletons sound dangerous. The only one that did catch my eye was the artillery heavy one.

Edited June 10, 2019 by El Syf