wayniac Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 41 minutes ago, BURF1 said: Very unimpressed so far, most of these are horrifically expensive with their special additional bonuses being impossible to get in 2000 point games for several of them. Most of the bonuses are underwhelming considering how bad the battalions you have to take are. The celestial vindicators are the best of the bunch because of the hammerstrike force but the other ones still have the problem of 'land 9 inches away, fail your charge, lose 200-400 points of paladins to shooting/counter charge. Not so sure that's a bad thing, they remain viable in Open/Narrative play, and don't seem so amazingly great that losing them would be such a huge deal for Matched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DynamicCalories Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 4 minutes ago, Bjarni St. said: Yeah but considering GW's skull policy ("Needs more") that could be actual anything. Always been surprised they haven't just made a golem out of skulls yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronin_cse Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 So do we know what the special additional chamber bonuses on page 115 are yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dez Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 8 minutes ago, ronin_cse said: So do we know what the special additional chamber bonuses on page 115 are yet? One page back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronin_cse Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, Dez said: One page back. I'm not seeing them. I'm talking about the bonuses you get if the chamber contains the maximum number of battalions thing. For example the Tempest Lords gain the Lightning Strike and Celestial Nimbus abilities listed on page 116. Maybe I'm just blind and I keep missing them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dez Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Just now, ronin_cse said: I'm not seeing them. I'm talking about the bonuses you get if the chamber contains the maximum number of battalions thing. For example the Tempest Lords gain the Lightning Strike and Celestial Nimbus abilities listed on page 116. Maybe I'm just blind and I keep missing them Oh I'm sorry, I thought you meant the Chamber Bonus in general. Not yet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Explorator Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Rumor engine could truly be anything, not just due to "skull-policy" reason, but also because it looks like basing. Furthest guees I will venture is that it is propably 40k, due to gothic pointiness. On the front of keeping the Meta fluid, I call in for "Yay". It is not pleasant to be building something only to see the rules for it weakened, but no miniatures get invalidated, the option of Open and Narrative play can soften the blow of "Nerfs" and through the years, we will hopefully see most armies and units enjoy times in the limelight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BURF1 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 20 minutes ago, ronin_cse said: I'm not seeing them. I'm talking about the bonuses you get if the chamber contains the maximum number of battalions thing. For example the Tempest Lords gain the Lightning Strike and Celestial Nimbus abilities listed on page 116. Maybe I'm just blind and I keep missing them If you use points, don't worry about what those abilities do, you'll never get to use them, I think only 1 or 2 of them are even attainable in 2000 points and you'll be crippling your army to do it. At least a handful of the battalions have the same problem. There's a battalion with dracoth and chocobos that's 1880 points minimum and doesn't cover your battleline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZaelART Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Interesting stuff, wierdly have yet to see any battalions featuring any of the new units though? I presume there are some... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Alec Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Loving those Stormhost-specific bonuses. Great marriage of narrative and rules. Makes me want to buy and paint up a specific force for each one! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleboda Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 6 hours ago, Rhellion said: I bought and assembled an entire army in the last 2 weeks based on units and a battalion that no longer do what they did a week ago. Maybe this is the new Squatting. Sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisada11 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Doesn't feel anything even close to squatting. SCE are getting a whole new battletome with a whole new recon wing with rules and models. How is that even close to GW dropping a faction?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayniac Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kisada11 said: Doesn't feel anything even close to squatting. SCE are getting a whole new battletome with a whole new recon wing with rules and models. How is that even close to GW dropping a faction? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Because oh noes some battalion you don't need can't be used in one of three styles of play. Must be GW squatting the entire faction! Seriously, seeing more of these leaks has me excited. Also apparently that in the fluff it's 50 years since the realmgate wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daedalus81 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Sleboda said: Maybe this is the new Squatting. Sucks. Oh come on now. We don't even have the full book. Edited February 15, 2017 by daedalus81 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Alec Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Now this might just be me remembering the good old days... But we did literally hear this sort of commentary every time a new army book came out. It's nothing new, and shouldn't be unexpected by either the players of the armies or the people around them. Being annoyed that the stuff you liked changing is only natural. We all grumble a bit when our toys change Adjust, live and learn. The book looks amazing, and exactly what the doctor ordered for everyone who isn't playing Warrior Brotherhood. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grailstorm Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Couldn't be more excited about this. I also LOVE that they seem to be removing the Warrior Brotherhood. This will freshen up the army no end, and banish the silly notion that Brotherhood/Slayers was the only way to play them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BURF1 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 25 minutes ago, Sleboda said: Maybe this is the new Squatting. Sucks. I'm not really a huge fan of this book so far(they made a battalion that is perfectly in line with how I like to build my army and then made it too expensive to use in matched play smh), but this is pretty far-fetched. The new units should make up for a bit of the loss of the warrior brotherhood and while I doubt we'll see stormcasts on a top table again in the very near future, it's not like we're suddenly trash tier. Someone will find a combo with either shooting or cav that will wreck face in the middle of the pack and then refine it over the next few gts until it can compete. The book is a small set-back not a squatting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleboda Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 11 minutes ago, daedalus81 said: Oh come on now. We don't even have the full book. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited as heck for this. I'm just feeling Brad's pain. He bought an army, a whole army, because of its rules. He felt safe in the purchase, I would guess, since the army and its rules were very, very new. Plus, GW had shown a change in philosophy in many ways lately, including not invalidating purchases. Yes, he can still use his new models, just as people could still use the Btetonnians for several editions after they got left behind, but (and only he can answer this), would he have bought that collection is he knew its rules were going away in a few weeks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wayniac Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 (edited) Do we even know if Warrior Brotherhood is no longer viable? Again, the rules for it was in Grand Alliance: Order, not Battletome: Stormcast Eternals (v1.0). Logically that would mean it is still valid for use. Edited February 15, 2017 by wayniac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N_Watson Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, wayniac said: Do we even know if Warrior Brotherhood is no longer viable? Again, the rules for it was in Grand Alliance: Order, not Battletome: Stormcast Eternals (v1.0). Logically that would mean it is still valid for use. I tend to disagree. I believe that there are formations in this book that were in previous books, either updated or not, and the contents of a lot of what can be included in these battalions. reviewed points/rules updates. I would argue that they had every opportunity to include those battalions in this book and made a conscious decision to leave them out. Why would they go to the hassle of creating a whole new balanced army trait and update everything else, yet leave these two vanilla battalions that have a mechanic that was allowing them to over perform, that subverts the use of this new army trait? It doesn't make sense to me and arguing for the brotherhood/skyborne rules still being viable in matched play seems like grasping at straws. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BURF1 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 6 minutes ago, wayniac said: Do we even know if Warrior Brotherhood is no longer viable? Again, the rules for it was in Grand Alliance: Order, not Battletome: Stormcast Eternals (v1.0). Logically that would mean it is still valid for use. We'll know saturday. If it disappears of the app, it'll likely be unusable. If it stays then it's probably fine. Even if it does stay though, the change to the knight azyros made it significantly worse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinncinnatus Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 I actually think the components and function of a Warrior Brotherhood will continue to be useful under a Hammerstrike formation now. It won't be as sure of a thing since you'd need to roll for the deepstrike on the prosecutors, but that style won't disappear. It's just going to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthKnightSteg Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Concerning the validation of "missing" battalion scrolls as I see it: the whole Matched play points list in the SE (new) book invalidates the whole GHB v1.0 lists of SE and SE Extremis. In my opinion any other reasoning is just rules lawyering to keep your hopes up on keeping out of balance stuff viable 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brucimus Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 4 minutes ago, StealthKnightSteg said: Concerning the validation of "missing" battalion scrolls as I see it: the whole Matched play points list in the SE (new) book invalidates the whole GHB v1.0 lists of SE and SE Extremis. In my opinion any other reasoning is just rules lawyering to keep your hopes up on keeping out of balance stuff viable As the Errant Questor is missing, does that make it invalid also? I think it would be prudent to wait for an FAQ which will undoubtedly come before making assumptions. But unless GW explicitly states that the battalion is invalid for matched play, assume it is valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chord Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 14 minutes ago, BURF1 said: We'll know saturday. If it disappears of the app, it'll likely be unusable. If it stays then it's probably fine. Even if it does stay though, the change to the knight azyros made it significantly worse. Not true the app doesn't run on any of my devices. So the app is not the standard since its not universal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.