The Rumour Thread

[Gistradagis]

5 minutes ago, Kurrilino said:

StD have no point changes !!!!

A small part of the list was cut off but not a single unit visible got any change.

Because the latest armies get an online update, not a book one.

[Kurrilino]

8 minutes ago, Gistradagis said:

Because the latest armies get an online update, not a book one.

Do we know when and where?

[Kramer]

14 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

Yeah right lol.

If GW knew what they were doing balance wise we wouldn't get slaanesh and OBR with 80% win ratios (excluding mirror matches).

If you have a good understanding of the game you can very easily spot an overpowered or underpowered rule.

I was talking about their marketing. 

edit: but it kind of proves the point of context is important. You only quoted one sentence, added a different qualifier to it and suddenly it looks like my quote was weird. That’s exactly what happens with these leaks. No context, means people make assumptions. And for better or worse that leads to wrong conclusions. At least for a small time. 

Edited July 6, 2020 by Kramer

[Gistradagis]

Just now, Kurrilino said:

Do we know when and where?

I'd guess the day of release, this saturday, and on the errata/FAQ section of the Community web.

[Ogregut]

1 hour ago, KingBrodd said:

Rumour question, do we think AOS 3.0 will drop in 2021? Have the delays in things perhaps shifted it till 2022? Or was 2021 not a realistic release anyway?

AoS 3 will have been done and dusted by now or at least very nearly finished. I can't wait to see the box set if the new 40k stuff is anything to go by. 

[KingBrodd]

17 minutes ago, Ogregut said:

AoS 3 will have been done and dusted by now or at least very nearly finished. I can't wait to see the box set if the new 40k stuff is anything to go by. 

Me either!! I'd assume one Faction will probably be Stormcast Eternals as they're AOS' poster boy and would end up with one of the first 3.0 BT. Though I would love if the 'Good guys'of the set were Free Cities and they were all updated modern sculpts. 

But for the enemy of the boxed set I hope they go with Orruks. SCE vs Orruks would be an awesome intro set, especially if almost all the models are new sculpts. Would be a great way to introduce standard Orruks into the game.

[JPjr]

eurgh... I would like a blanket ban on discussing possible AoS3 launch box sets*, at least until I've actually finished painting the Soul Wars (bought on release day) box

😬

 

*Ulgu Shadow Weavers vs. Slaanesh Mortals...**

 

 

 

 

 

 

** or more likely Stormcast Ruination Chamber vs Orruks??? ...

Edited July 6, 2020 by JPjr

[Ogregut]

4 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

Me either!! I'd assume one Faction will probably be Stormcast Eternals as they're AOS' poster boy and would end up with one of the first 3.0 BT. Though I would love if the 'Good guys'of the set were Free Cities and they were all updated modern sculpts. 

But for the enemy of the boxed set I hope they go with Orruks. SCE vs Orruks would be an awesome intro set, especially if almost all the models are new sculpts. Would be a great way to introduce standard Orruks into the game.

My guess is stormcast vs orruks which hopfully means a hugely expanded range if the current tread of starter sets stands. Look at nighthaunt, death guard and new necrons. 

[KriticalKhan]

Maybe I'm just getting old, but 3 years for an edition seems too short to believe, event though it's the pattern GW has been following for the last two releases. Feels like yesterday people were talking about rumors of a Stormcast vs Death box set.

[EccentricCircle]

1 hour ago, KriticalKhan said:

Maybe I'm just getting old, but 3 years for an edition seems too short to believe, event though it's the pattern GW has been following for the last two releases. Feels like yesterday people were talking about rumors of a Stormcast vs Death box set.

I wonder whether you could plot the lengths of every past edition, and work out the point at which they will accidentally release two sequential editions simultaneously. 

[Kasper]

42 minutes ago, Ogregut said:

AoS 3 will have been done and dusted by now or at least very nearly finished. I can't wait to see the box set if the new 40k stuff is anything to go by. 

What are people expecting from AoS 3.0? A complete re-write of the current rules (like combat) or re-write of various tomes? This GHB making FNPs non stack-able does feel kinda AoS 3.0-ish to me.

[amysrevenge]

I know that this has to be subjective, but at this point of AoS1 we were already prepared for, begging for, AoS2.    I don't think we are there yet with AoS2.  I could be wrong - I haven't been hanging around with gamers much lately other than here - but it seems like there is relative contentment with the current game.

[Raptor_Jesues]

LoN points leaked, a big drop for soulblight but not mutch more. All in all quite nice

[Ghoooouls]

6 minutes ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

LoN points leaked, a big drop for soulblight but not mutch more. All in all quite nice

Any chance you could show?

[Raptor_Jesues]

1 minute ago, Ghoooouls said:

Any chance you could show?

i think it is against the rules but i know those for sure:
 

Blood knights -20

Coven Throne - 20

Prince Vhordrai - 20

[Ghoooouls]

1 minute ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

i think it is against the rules but i know those for sure:
 

Blood knights -20

Coven Throne - 20

Prince Vhordrai - 20

Nice if this is true, for a super old tome we arent in such a bad position already, point reductions will be very welcome until an update!

[Gistradagis]

29 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

I know that this has to be subjective, but at this point of AoS1 we were already prepared for, begging for, AoS2.    I don't think we are there yet with AoS2.  I could be wrong - I haven't been hanging around with gamers much lately other than here - but it seems like there is relative contentment with the current game.

Not having much around people playing might be the explanation, then. Many people aren't particularly happy with the direction Seraphon and Lumineth have taken (other than their players), and people fear we're seeing the rise of a meta of hero-sniping and factions with overwhelming control over the Hero phase. With Seraphon especially, it's the first time in my time with AoS where I've consistently seen people go "lfg AoS 2k (no seraphon)" so much.

While some things are fixed with a simple rule introduction (hero protection similar to 40k), it is true that the last year or so has seen some impressive power creep. Perhaps that makes people hope for AoS 3.0 to be at least in the works already.

Edited July 6, 2020 by Gistradagis

[amysrevenge]

20 minutes ago, Gistradagis said:

Not having much around people playing might be the explanation, then. Many people aren't particularly happy with the direction Seraphon and Lumineth have taken (other than their players), and people fear we're seeing the rise of a meta of hero-sniping and factions with overwhelming control over the Hero phase. With Seraphon especially, it's the first time in my time with AoS where I've consistently seen people go "lfg AoS 2k (no seraphon)" so much.

While some things are fixed with a simple rule introduction (hero protection similar to 40k), it is true that the last year or so has seen some impressive power creep. Perhaps that makes people hope for AoS 3.0 to be at least in the works already.

This is definitely possible. 

Do people expect that edition-level changes would fix battletome-level problems?  I mean, AoS2 as an edition could be good indefinitely if all the battletomes were more like Gloomspite Gitz or Slaves to Darkness or Stormcast or Nighthaunt (or any of the low- to mid-tier armies) in power level.  It seems like 90% or more of what dissatisfaction there is around the current game is based around battletome complaints.

[Gistradagis]

8 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

This is definitely possible. 

Do people expect that edition-level changes would fix battletome-level problems?  I mean, AoS2 as an edition could be good indefinitely if all the battletomes were more like Gloomspite Gitz or Slaves to Darkness or Stormcast or Nighthaunt (or any of the low- to mid-tier armies) in power level.  It seems like 90% or more of what dissatisfaction there is around the current game is based around battletome complaints.

Pretty much what you're saying. The thing is, the meta had been melee-oriented for a very long time, and now we're seeing factions that not only are super powerful due to power-creep, but bring strengths that the current playstyle can't quite handle. Being so recent, too, we can't really expect a battletome update to basically nerf problematic design, or a very late FAQ that says "Kroak, salamanders and skinks were just a joke guys, they actually aren't real."

What's left is either hoping that the GHB somehow introduces a couple rules to matched play that lessen these dangers (shooty armies should be a playstyle option; shooty armies that hero-snipe and wipe you off the board before you've done much, should not), or that AoS 3.0 is somewhere on the horizon and brings some key changes to how shooting works, or how heroes work (hero protection, heroes "joining" units, etc).

At the same time, however, we need to accept the possibility that maybe GW doesn't care about this particular problem, or they don't see it as such, at which point I expect to see more people join the "lfg no seraphon" club (and to be fair, I feel bad for Seraphon fans, because many had been waiting for a long time to finally play their big dinos and saurus, but GW has released such a busted faction that no one wants to play them now).

Edit: Also agree on the middle-of-the-table thing. StD is one of my armies, and I like how balanced it generally is. Wish you weren't forced to either play Ravagers or Archon, but still.

Edited July 6, 2020 by Gistradagis

[HollowHills]

34 minutes ago, Gistradagis said:

Not having much around people playing might be the explanation, then. Many people aren't particularly happy with the direction Seraphon and Lumineth have taken (other than their players), and people fear we're seeing the rise of a meta of hero-sniping and factions with overwhelming control over the Hero phase. With Seraphon especially, it's the first time in my time with AoS where I've consistently seen people go "lfg AoS 2k (no seraphon)" so much.

While some things are fixed with a simple rule introduction (hero protection similar to 40k), it is true that the last year or so has seen some impressive power creep. Perhaps that makes people hope for AoS 3.0 to be at least in the works already.

Bear in mind too how the new realm rules can make this even worse. If a LRL player gets to pick ulgu you will have the ability to cast spell portal instantly, place it in the middlenof your opponents army and then instantly cast an 18 inch damaging spell.

[Ogregut]

1 hour ago, amysrevenge said:

I know that this has to be subjective, but at this point of AoS1 we were already prepared for, begging for, AoS2.    I don't think we are there yet with AoS2.  I could be wrong - I haven't been hanging around with gamers much lately other than here - but it seems like there is relative contentment with the current game.

My guess AoS will be a tightening of rules and tweaks here and there.  I would also guess any battle tomes from from Seraphon onwards (maybe even before) will have been written with AoS 3 in mind. 

[swarmofseals]

4 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

This is definitely possible. 

Do people expect that edition-level changes would fix battletome-level problems?  I mean, AoS2 as an edition could be good indefinitely if all the battletomes were more like Gloomspite Gitz or Slaves to Darkness or Stormcast or Nighthaunt (or any of the low- to mid-tier armies) in power level.  It seems like 90% or more of what dissatisfaction there is around the current game is based around battletome complaints.

Personally I doubt that there is a set of rules changes that could singlehandedly level the field. I don't think bringing everything down to the lowest level though is the only answer either. I think bringing everything up to the higher level would work just as well, and it would future-proof better against power creep. Some problems with lower tier armies can be fixed with points changes, others are more mechanical and would probably require warscroll rewrites or battletome changes.

I think there are a few major sources of complaint:

• Actual faction imbalances, particularly for outlier factions like pre-nerf DoK, FeC, Slaanesh, Tzeentch etc. on the high end and Nighthaunt, SCE and the like on the low end.
• Mismatches between expectations and reality. Some people want to take whatever models they like the most and still have it be super competitive. To some extent this can be reduced with improved internal balance, but there will always be people who want to take weird compositions or quirky armies that are just not that good on the tabletop. When these people admit to themselves that they are making a trade off it's just fine, but when they want to have their cake and eat it to it can lead to a lot of complaints. A good example is the all-squig army. Squigs are awesome, but their fundamental design is not conducive to competitive play. Any army that is totally relying on random movement is going to have a lot of trouble putting up consistent results.
• Misattribution of loss. There is nothing GW can do about this. In any game there are always lots of people who will attribute their struggles to luck or bad design rather than difference in skill etc. I suspect this is a huge factor in complaints about AOS.
• Matchup problems. Unfortunately our hobby is rather niche, so unless you travel a lot or happen to live in a real hotspot you're probably playing most of your games against a handful of people. Many only have one regular opponent. Even if the game overall is very well balanced, there are always going to be specific matchups that are lopsided, and people whose main experience of the game is a lopsided matchup are understandably going to complain about it (and justifiably so!). I'm not sure there is a solution to this problem though without sacrificing key elements of the game.
• Negative Play Experiences. This one is really hard to tackle because one person's NPE is another person's preferred play style. There are some folks who just seethe whenever they play against a defensive army. Some players just want to run in and bash the other guy, and defensive armies are going to be very good against that playstyle. When your primary enjoyment of the game gets negated by your opponent's strategy it feels bad. Of course it goes the other way, too. Some people hate playing against any alpha strike army even if the game is winnable. They just don't like it when an opponent can take a third of their army off the table on turn 1. But just like some people love to turtle, others love to rush. Unless GW tamps down on these strategies to the point where all factions play basically the same way on the table there are going to be folks who have NPEs because the game is designed to accommodate a variety of playstyles. 

Hopefully the first point on this list will decrease over time, but the other four are never going away and there will always be people complaining about balance because of them.

_____________________________

Side note: if the Blood Knight point drop is true they are pretty spicy now! I wonder if there is a shell there that can make them work.

[Greasygeek]

Quick question. Assuming that AOS 3 is on its way do you guys think that the dobbelturn will remain in AOS 3?

Not gonna ask about oppinions on the subject as that has been debated many times over. But do you think it will stay and why?

[Kramer]

41 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

This is definitely possible. 

Do people expect that edition-level changes would fix battletome-level problems?  I mean, AoS2 as an edition could be good indefinitely if all the battletomes were more like Gloomspite Gitz or Slaves to Darkness or Stormcast or Nighthaunt (or any of the low- to mid-tier armies) in power level.  It seems like 90% or more of what dissatisfaction there is around the current game is based around battletome complaints.

I think it would be the opposite. Edition level changes will force battletome level changes to function. If the 3.0 actually changes something. 

but I reckon you’re right. The edition can always be tweaked. But a real overhaul seems unnecessary. 

[KriticalKhan]

1 minute ago, Greasygeek said:

Quick question. Assuming that AOS 3 is on its way do you guys think that the dobbelturn will remain in AOS 3?

Not gonna ask about oppinions on the subject as that has been debated many times over. But do you think it will stay and why?

It's been here so far, and most of the complaints about it are (in my experience) from newer players who aren't used to planning around it. I don't see much of a desire at the higher-levels for its removal, and GW does most of their balancing based on tournament data and feedback.