Jump to content

The Rumour Thread


Recommended Posts

The Scions have been teased since the first book last year but at this stage I’m not sure if they would decide to group them together with the new releases or not. If it’s true it’s seasonal and the package for season 2 would have different colours then definitely Scions will come before otherwise they could delay them even further. Pity because are some of my favourite warbands together with the Splinterfang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KingBrodd said:

I am excited to see where the next Underworlds season takes place. Hysh?

My money's on the realm of metal.

The novels all show Order making big pushes there despite some set-backs by the Gloomspite claiming some continents with da bad moon warping them and we just had a huge sky war which is even a prominent part of the new Open play.

My bet is the next Underworlds will be one of those sky islands that the Gloomspite recently terraformed into an underground (Underworlds) which leaves a reason to try and either conquer it or grab the prized alchemy stones lost there when the kingdoms came under new green management.

Though I certainly wouldn't say no to a shattered coastal city in Ymetrica to get our hands on troves of the aetherquartz brooches that went missing. xD

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Clan's Cynic said:

Other games have their internal balance issues also, but rarely to the point where huge chunks of armies are outright useless when going up again entire armies as if often the case in 40k and AoS.

I could forgive GW for that if they were two mates working out the back of their garage, but they're not. They're an extremely profitable company ... They can cripple multiple editions, kill off flagship games and squat units/armies on a whim, but none bats an eyelid for more than a few weeks, it's as much fascinating as it is baffling.

Hell, even I'm guilty of it by virtue of having AoS models at all, even if most of that is holdovers from WHFB.

I don't want to sound like a negative nancy (although I'd not have chosen my username if I wasn't more than most people here). but it's a damn shame GW doesn't realise they could claw even more people back from elsewhere if they paid more attention to their quality control.

First and foremost I want to be clear that I agree with the underlying sentiment of your post -- that historically GW has grossly underinvested in game design to the detriment of their products, and that they have been able to get by due to the quality of their models and the loyalty of their customer base.

That said, I think there are some flaws in your logic that point toward a different conclusion.

It's important to start with the history of GW. GW was a tiny and very niche concern that broke out and grew on the backs of two things: getting the exclusive right to distribute Dungeons and Dragons in the UK (or was it the EU? I don't recall) and then producing quality miniatures to be used primarily in other companies' games. The next step came with the introduction of Warhammer and WH40k, but I'd speculate that the corporate culture had already started to set by that point. We know that GW has long considered itself to be a miniatures company that happens to make some games as well. And in the beginning, this worked very well for GW. They didn't have to get people interested in a game to sell their models. They sold their models to people who were already playing different games. The in-house games design came about simply as a way to sell more models.

You argue that a large, profitable corporation should be able to do better. In a way, that is absolutely true -- GW has the resources to do better. No question about it. But there is a real way in which being a large and successful (and publicly traded!) company is actually a HUGE problem in this case. Large, successful companies are usually quite conservative and they have quite a lot of bureaucracy. There are entrenched interests in the corporate structure that benefit from the status quo, and it can be a real challenge to pitch a major change in strategy especially when things are going well. In this way, I think GW has been a victim of their own success, and specifically of how that success began. Ask anyone in business consulting about how easy it is to convince large stakeholders to do anything even when its blatantly obvious that they need to do something different.

I also have a little bit of a problem with your assertion that "none bats and eyelid for more than a few weeks." Quite the opposite is the case if you look at the End Times. I played WHFB starting in 5th edition but quit in the transition to 8th. I picked up AOS around the time of the first GHB, and came to learn about the transition to AOS after playing Total War: Warhammer. Suffice to say that every forum post that I read touching on the tabletop game was a flood of negativity, mostly from people who had quit after the End Times and were still bitter about it. It was only through sheer chance that I scrolled down and saw one person who had written a thoughtful post talking about how AOS had been improving and was worth a second chance (a post that had been massively downvoted). I followed up and did my own research and a couple years later here I am. If I hadn't waded through the vast majority of people who had completely given up on GW I would still probably assume that AOS is a trash fire.

GW started showing weakness in the mid 2000's and I'm pretty sure they saw their market share wane away in the face of increased competition for the better part of a decade. It seems that at some point it became clear that a change was needed and GW began to shift their corporate strategy away from the old model and toward a new model. No doubt there is plenty of publicly available information about this transition, but at the very least we know that customer relations strategy changed a great deal and GW started actively listening to feedback much more intently. We know that GW started soliciting game design feedback from the community (both at large and specific individuals) a couple of years ago, and we've seen some impact from those changes already.

It takes time, though. Being a large company with an established product actively makes the process harder. It's arguably more difficult to radically adapt a game that was originally designed with a different philosophy than it is to create a game from the ground up, especially in the context of a large company with an established way of doing business.

In my opinion, each an every year has seen substantial improvements in the quality of AOS as a game. I'd definitely love to see things improve more quickly and consistently, but it is what it is and I'm hopeful for the future.

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, KingBrodd said:

I'll take any AOS release for the fans*, especially the Scions of the Flame as I know many have waited for the Warband for a long time!!

And the Warbands are perfect filler weeks to keep us Mortal Realms lovers entertained whilst 9th has it's time in the sun. 

I am excited to see where the next Underworlds season takes place. Hysh?

* Of course I'd love for the Sons to drop you know me.

Underworlds 4 might be Beastgrave again, the first 2 were both set in Shadespire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Overread said:

Who knows perhaps they'll go to the realm of Shadow and unleash the shadow aelves. That said Beasts might be a good one to stick with as they can pair it to a new destruction force ;) 

The short stories about Gordrakk preparing for a Siege sounds interesting and also mentiones him being in the company of Gargants and Ogors. It would make perfect sense for the Sons of Behemat to be an extention of Gordrakks siege forces and then build on that with the siege foundations from Wrath of the Everchosen. Then we few new kits for Ironjawz and maybe Bonesplitterz and things would begin to look up for destruction. 

The Sons will most likely be absolutely terrible in matched play as a stand alone army, as whispers indicate they got nothing similar to might makes right from Ogors, making them horrible for objectives, but boy will they look fun mucking about ;) 

I think Malerions faction is a fair distance into the future still, I think we might be seeing some more stuff added to DoK before that at least, the new warband of assassins are also aligned with Khaine, so maybe Morathi is being more inclusive and PC with those khainite shadowstalkers. Those models go all in on the Ulgu theme, so if DoK adpots that, maybe Malerions faction will be something different entirely.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Overread said:

Who knows perhaps they'll go to the realm of Shadow and unleash the shadow aelves. That said Beasts might be a good one to stick with as they can pair it to a new destruction force ;) 

After the recent community Podcast with Phil Kelly himself dropping hints that they're are more Aelves out there not yet shown it's almost confirmed that there are Shadow Aelves.

I cant even begin to imagine what new Force for Destruction we could get in the future.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things to keep in mind

1) Right now it would be more abnormal for shadow aelves to not appear than for them to appear. Strangely whilst GW has released several armies that "have always been there but just never mentioned in the lore at all until they were released" the shadow aelves and the light ones (which are now partly out) have been in the lore since the very beginning. 

2) Destruction could get a whole range of different armies added, one thing that hinders our ability to guess is that AoS is still in a very malleable state whereby its possible for there to be whole kingdoms and races that are "present" since the beginning of time and are major players, but are just not mentioned. It's a sort of soft-ret-con when they are added in. 

It's like how the Ossiarchs were hidden in plain sight, but their leader was a major player. Someone who wasn't mentioned at all until he was released and the army came out. So the revelation that he was the big dark power in the end of Shadspire was interesting but not as epic a moment as if we'd known all about him for years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Scurvydog said:

The short stories about Gordrakk preparing for a Siege sounds interesting and also mentiones him being in the company of Gargants and Ogors. It would make perfect sense for the Sons of Behemat to be an extention of Gordrakks siege forces and then build on that with the siege foundations from Wrath of the Everchosen. Then we few new kits for Ironjawz and maybe Bonesplitterz and things would begin to look up for destruction. 

The Sons will most likely be absolutely terrible in matched play as a stand alone army, as whispers indicate they got nothing similar to might makes right from Ogors, making them horrible for objectives, but boy will they look fun mucking about ;) 

I think Malerions faction is a fair distance into the future still, I think we might be seeing some more stuff added to DoK before that at least, the new warband of assassins are also aligned with Khaine, so maybe Morathi is being more inclusive and PC with those khainite shadowstalkers. Those models go all in on the Ulgu theme, so if DoK adpots that, maybe Malerions faction will be something different entirely.

I think after the Siege groundwork laid in Wrath of the Everchosen, the next campaign book will almost certainly be the Siege that Gordrakk has been planning  wether that be Azyr or Excelsis. 

The Sons are coming at the perfect time for this as living battering rams, we cannot say how they will play just yet but I cannot wait to find out, there were rumours that they would be able to kick objectives so that could combat them not having the same abilities as Mawtribes.

  • Like 1
  • LOVE IT! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

I think after the Siege groundwork laid in Wrath of the Everchosen, the next campaign book will almost certainly be the Siege that Gordrakk has been planning  wether that be Azyr or Excelsis. 

The Sons are coming at the perfect time for this as living battering rams, we cannot say how they will play just yet but I cannot wait to find out, there were rumours that they would be able to kick objectives so that could combat them not having the same abilities as Mawtribes.

Yeah, I have a very strong feeling that there are going to be siege rules that are going to be pretty well tailored to large monsters. The Sons will be fantastic for siege battles. I just love the idea of a giant's head visible over the ramparts as a bunch of Stormcast freak out loading a ballista only to have a separate wall breached. I am curious to know if the new 40k scenery rules would be adaptable to AOS in a siege like scenario?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a random theory I've been entertaining the past month or so about what's coming for AoS, in terms of rules, 3rd edition, new releases and how sieges might play into that.

So let's say next year does see the release of the 3rd edition, along with a suitably big box set with new models in. I mused the other day that whilst SCE are the most obvious another option could be Malerion/Ulgu Aelves vs. New Slaanesh models. They'll want to tie the release in to a big lore development, the freeing of Slaanesh would make sense as being the main narrative for this arc and those would be reasonably obvious factions to kickstart it off with.

And as a big starter set it would allow them to introduce one entirely brand new army that would be hugely anticipated and a much needed update (in model terms) to the chaos faction missing it. But what about Stormcast and the opening of the next chamber? I hear you cry.

Well yeah, I did assume any new starter box would feature them but I was thinking SCE have so many models right now (and are still so new that the first wave can't just be waved away) that if they were to do a sacrosanct size release the tome would either become ridiculously huge or we get into the realm of separate tomes for each chamber.

So what if the, I don't know let's say, Ruination Chamber is one focused on big war machines and it's opening is tied into the Excelsis storyline. They could do that with just 2 or 3 kits plus a piece of scenery, which SCE are missing, and then the next SCE Battletome wouldn't have to be  much larger than the current one.

Assuming we get something like Malign Portents or Psychic Awakening in the lead up to 3rd, giving armies that need it a little spit'n'shine, they could release an Orruk vs SCE siege box set along with aSiege of Excelsis book, then freeing up the 3rd edition starter to not feature SCE.

It makes sense the first two editions focused on getting big SCE ranges out as they were starting from scratch and setting the tone for the new game, but as a more mature product by 2021 there's a chance, no matter how slim, that it might be less necessary.

 

 

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 2
  • LOVE IT! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JPjr said:

It makes sense the first two editions focused on getting big SCE ranges out as they were starting from scratch and setting the tone for the new game, but as a more mature product by 2021 there's a chance, no matter how slim, that it might be less necessary.

Even though I play stormcast (along with 4 other armies, yes I have a problem) then I think it would be the best thing for Stormcast to get as few models as possible right now, that is the last thing they need. I would argues as well that for most players the new chambers is not adding to the army, they are basically new armies, if I wanted to play with vanguard I would be better of playing only vanguard, or sacrosanct, usually I would choose to have fun with a new army instead. As long as the various chambers do not have any synergy at all, this problem persist, and more chambers in this format would just make a mess of a battletome, Gloomspite and Ogors do a better job of combining their sub factions.

I don't think AoS needs a 3rd edition, the core rules are quite solid I think, and I don't know many who has major issues with how the core game functions, with only the double turn really being a dividing factor in my experience. 

I would be surprised by any new Aelf faction just yet, we do not even have Lumineth out yet, but with them, Deepkin, DoK and the hodge podge in cities, I think the setting has a wide serving of aelves available. I strongly believe anything in the cities book will disappear or change at least, I can't see a cities V2 book come out, I would be very very surprised if that happens.

I would love to see something similar to Psychic Awakening for AoS, with small but varied releases and new/improved rules for factions within some narrative focus, and I can't imagine GW not expanding on that format somehow. The Wrath of the Everchosen book was a bit of a thin release, but I think books with goodies to a few mmore factions and a model/kit or two would be really nice.

Imagine a book with some extra rules for fyreslayers vs bonesplitterz for example, with some new sub factions and warscrolls, like skirmishing juvenile magmadroth riders for fyreslayers and wyvern riders for bonesplitterz or something. I think such a format could really boozt sales for multiple factions at once and keep excitement going for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Scurvydog said:

I don't think AoS needs a 3rd edition

yeah I get that totally but I honestly the way I see it now, for both 40K and AoS, is that we're really in an age of living rulesets.

I suspect that from here on in, what will happen is just every 3 years (or so) we'll just get a new "edition" that just takes everything that's been introduced in supplements during the previous iteration's life, work in anything that's worked in 40k (or vice versa), and then package it together with a lovely big new hardback book, a big new storyline and a big box of new models.

the rules will essentially at their core remain the same so in our case 2nd edition battletomes, like 8th edition codexes, will still work and the latter ones released will have been made with the new edition in mind.

after 30-40 years of tinkering with both systems I think they know they're roughly in the right spot, they have these other games (Warcry, Kill Team, Apocalypse etc) to explore slightly different ways of playing but the central system can just be subtly amended with each new edition, without having to rush out 'indexes' for all the armies or have people's armies unplayable for ages until they get a codex/BT.

each new edition then just becomes basically a big jumping on point for new players and an advance in the story. I'm sure sales of Soul Wars, Tempest of Souls and Storm Strike will have tailed off now (outside of say Xmas), so a new edition becomes more about marketing, getting people excited and on-boarding a new generation rather than making dramatic changes to the rule system.

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Overread said:

Two things to keep in mind

1) Right now it would be more abnormal for shadow aelves to not appear than for them to appear. Strangely whilst GW has released several armies that "have always been there but just never mentioned in the lore at all until they were released" the shadow aelves and the light ones (which are now partly out) have been in the lore since the very beginning. 

2) Destruction could get a whole range of different armies added, one thing that hinders our ability to guess is that AoS is still in a very malleable state whereby its possible for there to be whole kingdoms and races that are "present" since the beginning of time and are major players, but are just not mentioned. It's a sort of soft-ret-con when they are added in. 

It's like how the Ossiarchs were hidden in plain sight, but their leader was a major player. Someone who wasn't mentioned at all until he was released and the army came out. So the revelation that he was the big dark power in the end of Shadspire was interesting but not as epic a moment as if we'd known all about him for years. 

I'm curious as to what Destruction would get added as so far they have been no 'New' armies, Orruk Warclans, Gloomspite and Mawtribes already existed in one form or another and the same goes for the Sons as Gargants were already around (Just for arguements sake, I am so so so ****** happy they are here as you are all well aware) so I'm wondering if GW would make a brand new Destruction army or twist of, much like the OBR for Death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's a bit like DnD, 5th edition has been around for ages now but why spook all those new fans and risk a tedious edition war. If/when DnD 6th comes (Q3/4 next year just before the DnD film drops would be my bedt guess) I imagine it'll just a new set of the 3 core books with some key but not game changing edits.

Just some of the best of the new Unearthed Arcana stuff that's been introduced added in and stuff that's clearly not worked subtly excised, my bet for a big change would be on something like alignments getting radically changed or ditched, TBH I doubt it would even be labelled as the 6th edition.

Likewise GW can look at AoS and 40K right now and say holy ****** we're going gangbusters, why mess with this. we just need to make little changes here and there, there's plenty of design space to change the game without messing with the basics of how it plays. Just changing things like how points are scored can dramatically change the nature of the game without anyone needing to learn a whole new set of rules or have their army instantly invalidated.

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

I'm curious as to what Destruction would get added

OK see as an example eliminating the Grand Alliances is exactly one of the things I can see a 3rd edition doing that wouldn't be a dramatic change to the rules system but would shake things up.

It's essentially a kind of very basic idea that made sense at the start of AoS but has less and less relevance now and in fact just causes more problems than it fixes.

We're already at the stage where lots of the factions can only ally with very specific ones from within their GA, and I think the big matrix in the new GHB for team games is a prelude to how things are going to go.

It's much more lore friendly, but also it opens up some more interesting space for people to do more interesting things.

Instead of these 4 monolithic groupings what if it's much more subtle and flexible, some factions can never mix, some can mix but with problems but it opens up more space and allows people to feel like they can buy more different things (yay for  friendly capitalism) and create armies based on their own lore.

If you're waiting for 3/4 years for new models for your army and then you just get say a new hero or WHU war band that's a recipe for bad feels but there's no way GW can do more than that. This way yeah it might be a year or 2 till you get a new Gloomspite unit but in the mean time you can pick and choose a few new cool things that you like the look of, and can use in say Warcrym and of course you might then expand upon. (yay again for friendly capitalism).

So if you run a Cities of Sigmar army that's based in Shyish, just maybe you can take some ghosts or skeletons because in your city you fight alongside your ancestors, or it's just a matter of convenience but this allows you to do that.

Or Fyreslayers, they kind of did this last year with mercenaries but just make them available to be included in nearly all armies, that represents their nature. They're a small range and updates will always be few and far between, but this means that anyone whose collected them can re-use them with anyone other armies they collect and get some use out of them.

Plus doing away with the GAs means there's less of that feeling that oh we (destruction) have so much less than order, or whatever, that's always going to be a false equivalence and this way armies stand on their own.

 

Edited by JPjr
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still on board with the idea of giving Aelves their own Grand Alliance. It reduces the order bloat and would make most of the alliances similar sizes. Also Order could still field elves through Cities which would work independently from this hypothetical alliance. 

As for Destruction proper. I think it is really interesting that there is little in the way of rumoured factions beyond two possible Goblin armies. Grotbag Scuttlers have a lot of dedicated fans who have already made custom armies. Ever since Rippa's Snarlfangs release I have seen folks clamouring for a dedicated Gitmob release. I would normally expect these to be enfolded into a single army or released as expansions of Gloomspite in the future but something about these armies seem like they could work as stand-alones.

I have stated many times that the aesthetic and play style of Idoneth and Fyreslayers would have made them interesting additions to destruction but their current lore does not make either of them the best fit. I also think an army of classical witches would make a cool destruction army and I would love an army of riderless wild dragons. I feel a lot of people want Fimir but I feel that they are somewhat underdeveloped conceptually and might feature as part of a larger swamp themed army (might work with my idea for a classical witch army). 

Edited by Neverchosen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Gotrek and Mortal Wounds discussion, a lot of the wording needs to be better. If I made an instruction that has different functions with naming as similar as the whole damage/wound mess, I'd have very angry users.

English has a lot of different words, use them, and have descriptions match the effect (like, mortal wounds, which need not be mortal at all).

Making wording clearer would help a lot. I would also like less rules that affect an opponent paywalled in battletomes, but that's not the direction GW seems to be taking.

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

5 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

I am still on board with the idea of giving Aelves their own Grand Alliance. It reduces the order bloat and would make most of the alliances similar sizes. Also Order could still field elves through Cities which would work independently from this hypothetical alliance. 

As for Destruction proper. I think it is really interesting that there is little in the way of rumoured factions beyond two possible Goblin armies. Grotbag Scuttlers have a lot of dedicated fans who have already made custom armies. Ever since Rippa's Snarlfangs release I have seen folks clamouring for a dedicated Gitmob release. I would normally expect these to be enfolded into a single army or released as expansions of Gloomspite in the future but something about these armies seem like they could work as stand-alones.

I have stated many times that the aesthetic and play style of Idoneth and Fyreslayers would have made them interesting additions to destruction but their current lore does not make either of them the best fit. I also think an army of classical witches would make a cool destruction army and I would love an army of riderless wild dragons. I feel a lot of people want Fimir but I feel that they are somewhat underdeveloped conceptually and might feature as part of a larger swamp themed army (might work with my idea for a classical witch army). 

I think gitmob and Grotback could get an Orruk warclans style book, with two separate allegiances, and then a little waaagh! allegiance. Honestly based on how well I've heard the gloomspite line went, I think it might be possible that the destruction faction at the forefront of the next edition could be this new goblin faction, with the starter set focusing on one half, and the initial release covering the other, catching both nostalgic players and those hyped for the new AoS style.

The obvious choice would be ironjawz but Ironjawz wouldn't expand well, there's only a couple potential units you could add to the army without all the units feeling samey or breaking the focus of the army. Warclans would probably get expanded by the creation of a new clan, if/when it happens.

  • LOVE IT! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would be interesting if they increase the synergy of allied units into armies, rather than feeling like you're being punished as they don't get allegiance abilities. that would open up the space to create much smaller factions that thematically (or for practical reasons) aren't designed as full standalone factions (but can be expanded upon at a later date).

you could look at Sons of Behemat as tilting that way, they're what 4 warscrolls (and 2 kits). sure there will be people running pure SoB armies because it'll be LULZ but they'll probably see most action allied into armies, so hopefully they make up for the lack of AA in that case in some other way.

Grotbag Scuttlers could potentially work well like that too. Maybe just 2 or 3 units to start, like 2  airships and 1 kind of marine style pirate raiders, eventually they could be expanded into a whole army but they could start off like that with rules that make them work particularly well as allies to certain factions.

It would free up the design team to do lots more interesting, weird stuff that just needs a couple of kits.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

I am still on board with the idea of giving Aelves their own Grand Alliance. It reduces the order bloat and would make most of the alliances similar sizes. Also Order could still field elves through Cities which would work independently from this hypothetical alliance. 

As for Destruction proper. I think it is really interesting that there is little in the way of rumoured factions beyond two possible Goblin armies. Grotbag Scuttlers have a lot of dedicated fans who have already made custom armies. Ever since Rippa's Snarlfangs release I have seen folks clamouring for a dedicated Gitmob release. I would normally expect these to be enfolded into a single army or released as expansions of Gloomspite in the future but something about these armies seem like they could work as stand-alones.

I have stated many times that the aesthetic and play style of Idoneth and Fyreslayers would have made them interesting additions to destruction but their current lore does not make either of them the best fit. I also think an army of classical witches would make a cool destruction army and I would love an army of riderless wild dragons. I feel a lot of people want Fimir but I feel that they are somewhat underdeveloped conceptually and might feature as part of a larger swamp themed army (might work with my idea for a classical witch army). 

Part of me is hoping for a Wild Tribesman Faction for Destruction. With Skin changers such as Werewolves and Werebears alongside larger Beasts such as AOS versions of Hippos and Elephants, maybe bipedal heavy versions of these that want to reclaim nature, almost Destructions answer to BOC.

Edited by KingBrodd
  • Like 4
  • LOVE IT! 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 minutes ago, JPjr said:

it would be interesting if they increase the synergy of allied units into armies, rather than feeling like you're being punished as they don't get allegiance abilities. that would open up the space to create much smaller factions that thematically (or for practical reasons) aren't designed as full standalone factions (but can be expanded upon at a later date).

I'd be for that. Heck, i hope AoS3 makes the standard Grand Allegiance abilities more powerful so people will wnt to use them competitively.

Nothing's better than seeing a mixed force or proper grand allegiance army. It looks awesome seeing so many different races working together to survive in their particular realms like they do in lore and makes it more enjoyable for new hobbyists that want to expand their armies in multiple directions.

As for Destruction they could expand on the Skybasha Ironjawz for the ones making pirate airships (scrapfleets), that'd go well with Grotbags for two types of greenskin airfleets.

Also from Realmgate Wars the more powerful Ironjawz commanded Scrapcogs in the Sea of Bones which are gigantic paddle wheel ship fortress hybrids with shaman crow nests so they can cast magic shielding on the cogs to protect them from attacks and the giant Grindworms that lurk in the deserts.

Would make a great centerpiece for them.

On new factions I would like the draconic Sanskrit creatures who are empire builders around the Sea of Bones, evil versions of the Aetar eagle people (probably giant vulture people) and a repentant Ogroids & Fomoroids force that  threw off chaos' shackles and came back to Gorkamorka.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

The obvious choice would be ironjawz but Ironjawz wouldn't expand well, there's only a couple potential units you could add to the army without all the units feeling samey or breaking the focus of the army. 

Well I don't really agree with this, however they currently have a problem with Ardboyz and Brutes being samey in game, even though they only have 3 units to choose from! There is so much you could do with big nasty Orruks who likes to beat both beasts and armor plates into submission. With Gordrakk laying siege, adding a warmachine to Ironjawz would be awesome, anyone who played WoW and saw warmachines from the Iron Horde would have an idea here, like a broken and whipped mawkrusha like beast having a crude mega shotgun strapped to its back basically, or a Megaboss in a grunta chariot, to fill that gap between foot hero and Behemoth. 

The current Warclans book was a great disappointment to me, none of the factions got anything new, not even terrain, and sacrificed a more diverse offering of sub factions for both IJ and BS to get a combo allegiance which is still not good for combining these armies, as every single spell, ability and warscroll has no synergy with the other faction. To make things worse they even overlapped in function. Orruks and foot with shields, Orruks on boars with hand weapons or spears... 

No despite the rules being decently strong, orruks as a race is in a dire spot compared to the rest of destruction. The theme of both Ogors and their hunger+everwinter is so much stronger, and gitz with their musrooms and bad moon binds it all together. Orruk warclans feel like someone took a very limited range and an old range with just enough life in to not scrap with the other greenskinz and then taped them together and slapped som vague lore on top. I don't even play them, but I was really entertained by the lore of the gitz, while the warclans is just so generic it hurts, with barely anything interesting going on in an overall narrative.

Argh tore up that wound again, time to patch it up and drown the sorrows. At least the new underworlds warband of brutes look sweet, altthough 3 brutes cant possibly be useful in AoS, they are hopefully a sign of things to come...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/07/16/warhammer-underworlds-the-2020-road-map/

Underworlds Roadmap

Next two Warbands will be coming in August, a Multiplayer Expansion in September, a completely new kind of free expansion in November (This will be a true game-changer, involving brand-new game mechanics like player health pools – defend yourself as well as your fighters!) and Season 4 in December

Edited by Matrindur
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...