The Rumour Thread

[wayniac]

28 minutes ago, Gauche said:

I don't think GW will mandate it, but I'm not mad if they do. It's just not their vibe compared to companies like PP.

Warmachine LoS might get very messy in this game. Warmachine is skirmish, AoS has a bigger scale. Pulling out the laser sight is never very enjoyable and we already have no facings. It would also favor horde armies because they could hide Heroes forever whereas other armies couldn't. Not to mention the messes with hills and stuff....

Warmachine isn't really "skirmish", usually its about 30ish models and several big models.  I guess it'd be like 1k points or so in AOS, but it's higher than skirmish (Shadow War: Armageddon or that Hinterlands/AOS28 thing everyone is raving about is skirmish)

Anyways, having played (and recently all but decided to abandon) Warmachine, I think AOS needs better LOS rules.  It's TOO open right now.  I also am not a fan of the crazy random terrain and every bit of terrain having its own crazy special rules, but that's also part of the cool factor of the Mortal Realms so It can stay, I guess.

[Gauche]

Warmachine is decidedly skirmish in what it's supposed to be, it just wasn't for many years because of InfantryMachine. The idea is 1-2 Units, big guys, 1-3 Solos. It just didn't pan out like that for balance reasons, from what I understand the game is more that way now in the new edition.

I've yet to see a proposed LoS system that I'd enjoy using for AoS. If it's too open for purposes of shooting, Cover is the easier tweak in my opinion. Not sure if I should be responding with these thoughts in a Rumor thread though.

[Captain Marius]

Ill put in a wish of cover changing to -1 to hit enemy units completely in cover rather than +1 save.

I dont think the change to base to base is essenial... but thats how i play open narrative and matched so it wouldnt change anything for me!

[shinros]

6 hours ago, DynamicCalories said:

Not a rumour per-se so don't lynch me, but Mr Skeletal has been reboxed for AoS:

Could the revenant legions be the name for death's battletome? Akin to blades of khorne and disciples of tzeentch etc. 

[Circus of Paint]

Revenant Legions would be a great name to cover a number of the smaller Death factions under one Battletome!

[Carnelian]

6 hours ago, daedalus81 said:

You're reaching for the stars on that one!

 

6 hours ago, PJetski said:

What needs to change about the core rules?

Just to be clear I don't think core rules changes are necessary or desired (although I can think of a few tweaks I'd appreciate) but it just seems they are hyping it more than  I'd expect for announcement of GHB2. 

But what do I know?

 

Almost literally nothing in this context

[Sleboda]

5 hours ago, PJetski said:

They can't make base to base measurements the default until they specify official base sizes for all models.

Well, they can do it,  but it would be really, really poopy of them.

 

@others They mandated base size in 3rd ed. I miss that. A lot.

Edited April 21, 2017 by Sleboda

[shinros]

1 hour ago, Circus of Paint said:

Revenant Legions would be a great name to cover a number of the smaller Death factions under one Battletome!

It seems strange to me they have deathrattle on the front of the box and revenant legions on the back. 

[Kosmion]

1 hour ago, shinros said:

Could the revenant legions be the name for death's battletome? Akin to blades of khorne and disciples of tzeentch etc. 

Aaaaaahhh!!! Fk yeah the hype is devouring me. But why not 20 skellies in a box...?

[James McPherson]

My guess is based off what Pete said, 'for more than one reason' so I am holding out for the long rumoured allegiances of the realms pdf update to give all the other existing factions their updates. Stormcast & Khorne Bloodbound both got their shiny newschool battletomes, but I can't see them re-doing Seraphon, Pestilens, Everchosen, Bonesplitters & Beastclaw, so I am hoping all those factions will get an updated set of artifacts, allegiance abilities, spells etc in a Ravening Hordes style pdf .

A new core rules update pdf is also a good call based off the Kharadron tome missing them in the back pages.

 

It'll most likely just be the new 40k though I expect!

[Circus of Paint]

I imagine the more specialised mini-factions will be chucked together in one book each - Beastclaw Raiders and Gutbusters, Pestilens with the other major Clans etc.

[someone2040]

Many moons ago, in the world that was, GW did actually specify which bases models should go on. I think the last time they did this was during 6th edition. Here's a sheet which I think may have been provided in White Dwarf (and possibly the compendiums, not sure) which I have still to this day. For some reason, the Wood Elves don't make an appearance on this list. Possibly because Wood Elves were on the list to redo still.

 

That being said, I don't see GW specifying base sizes. It's an aspect which they haven't liked to do for a while, as it gives them flexibility to change bases when they feel like it will make models look better. I mean, changing from squares to rounds was bad enough for some people, and I certainly can't see them forcing 32mms on all those Space Marine players in 40k when they decided to start switching them over.

 

I also don't see GW wanting to get as into the competitive aspect of the game as back in 6th edition. That was the time when they were very focussed on making a tightly tuned game and stuff like specifying what bases things goes on made sense. In the spirit of openness and ease of getting into the game, I don't think we'll see GW mandate this stuff. I don't think they should either, I should have some flexibility in my base sizes, especially for heroes and the like.

I just recently got a Knight-Questor who's on a 32mm base due to Warhammer Quest. No way am I going to base him differently to all the other Stormcast.

[Thostos]

 I wouldnt rule out the announcement of the next rendition of 40k as its highly suspected that it will be rather "AoSified".Also there is  rumors of  making both games use the same(or very similar) ruleset.Perhaps in announcing this during the SCGT,they may hope to get some 40k players to take a closer look at  how AoS plays since that game would be heading in that direction.

 

 Combining this with the release date for the next GH would seem appropriate as well....and I would love to know as im running an event this summer and very much DONT want to have to use a comp pack going into it,heh.

 

[Bjarni St.]

2 hours ago, James McPherson said:

Stormcast & Khorne Bloodbound both got their shiny newschool battletomes, but I can't see them re-doing Seraphon, Pestilens, Everchosen, Bonesplitters & Beastclaw, so I am hoping all those factions will get an updated set of artifacts, allegiance abilities, spells etc in a Ravening Hordes style pdf .

If an update that size were free (as in pdf and not a book) I'd be mightily surprised.

Also, fun fact: Bonesplitters and BCR both have allegiance abilities but a) very few people run them as pure armies and b) Destruction allegiance is so good they completely pale in comparison.

[Captain Marius]

1 hour ago, someone2040 said:

Many moons ago, in the world that was, GW did actually specify which bases models should go on. I think the last time they did this was during 6th edition. Here's a sheet which I think may have been provided in White Dwarf (and possibly the compendiums, not sure) which I have still to this day. For some reason, the Wood Elves don't make an appearance on this list. Possibly because Wood Elves were on the list to redo still.

 

That being said, I don't see GW specifying base sizes. It's an aspect which they haven't liked to do for a while, as it gives them flexibility to change bases when they feel like it will make models look better. I mean, changing from squares to rounds was bad enough for some people, and I certainly can't see them forcing 32mms on all those Space Marine players in 40k when they decided to start switching them over.

 

I also don't see GW wanting to get as into the competitive aspect of the game as back in 6th edition. That was the time when they were very focussed on making a tightly tuned game and stuff like specifying what bases things goes on made sense. In the spirit of openness and ease of getting into the game, I don't think we'll see GW mandate this stuff. I don't think they should either, I should have some flexibility in my base sizes, especially for heroes and the like.

I just recently got a Knight-Questor who's on a 32mm base due to Warhammer Quest. No way am I going to base him differently to all the other Stormcast.

The Questor in Silver Tower has a 40mm base, I believe the only Stormcasts who differ are the Azyros and Venator on 50s, with the Venator available in one of the Silver Tower expansions. Fwiw the Blight Kings and Lord Castellant in Hammerhal are on 40s too /pedant

[someone2040]

1 minute ago, Captain Marius said:

The Questor in Silver Tower has a 40mm base, I believe the only Stormcasts who differ are the Azyros and Venator on 50s, with the Venator available in one of the Silver Tower expansions. Fwiw the Blight Kings and Lord Castellant in Hammerhal are on 40s too /pedant

Not according to the model I got and the GW website https://www.games-workshop.com/en-AU/knight-questor

But it's probably not really on topic for rumours.

 

Interested to see what the big announcement is. Big news could mean anything really, it could just be the announcement of GHB2, or the upgrades to the warhammer community (Like the forums, community FAQ, etc), or it could be something simple like Shadespire release date.

I'm not sure about Core Rules changes. On the one hand, I can see how it not being printed in the Kharadron Overlords it makes sense in a way (Although, they could've just printed the old rules in there). On the other hand, I'm not sure there's that much you could change while still keeping it down to 4 pages and streamlined.

Another thing I could see them announcing is the next narrative saga in the Age of Sigmar. Set a prelude for Nagash rising up and his legions of Death venturing further into the mortal realms. Slaanesh has been found in the realm of Shadows, and new wars between Chaos and Order erupt after things have settled a bit after the Realmgate Wars.

[PJetski]

The GW website is wrong, the Knight-Questor clampack comes with a 40mm base. 

[Nin Win]

3 hours ago, shinros said:

It seems strange to me they have deathrattle on the front of the box and revenant legions on the back. 

It's just a fictional description.  For example the new overlords unit box says something like "bold privateers of the open skies" where this box says "revenant legions"

[Dez]

I can see some basic rules revisions...but I'm also thinking it may have been to keep the page count low so they could include painting and tactics. IF that's the case, keep on going with it!

[Captain Marius]

Am i the only one who isnt a fan of painting and modelling guides in army books? They feel like filler to me, taking up room that couldve gone to more fluff! On the other hand i do enjoy painting and modelling articles, but prefer them in WD, or on forums like this one. Hopefully their inclusion is not a trend going forward!

[Nin Win]

3 minutes ago, Captain Marius said:

Am i the only one who isnt a fan of painting and modelling guides in army books? They feel like filler to me, taking up room that couldve gone to more fluff! On the other hand i do enjoy painting and modelling articles, but prefer them in WD, or on forums like this one. Hopefully their inclusion is not a trend going forward!

I'm sure there is a whole spectrum of people with different opinions on the different sections of a given army book.  I've been loving the novels, so I kind of feel like there's a better place for fiction, so I guess that's similar to how you feel there's a better place for painting articles.

Going forward I kind of hope they keep a little bit of everything because I think they should have a broad appeal even if I'd rather read a novel than a short story.

I totally get wanting more of what you love and less of what you don't though.  So I can see where you are coming from.

[Carnelian]

3 hours ago, someone2040 said:

Another thing I could see them announcing is the next narrative saga in the Age of Sigmar. Set a prelude for Nagash rising up and his legions of Death venturing further into the mortal realms. Slaanesh has been found in the realm of Shadows, and new wars between Chaos and Order erupt after things have settled a bit after the Realmgate Wars.

Announcing a new campaign / narrative arc would be awesome!

[stickybluetoffee]

I just feel sorry for whoever is playing the Live streamed game 2 tomorrow. Just enough time to set up and start playing before ...

Sorry we need to stop showing your game now to launch another hype train.

[Teletomas]

17 hours ago, wayniac said:

For it to be BIG news, it'd have to be 8th edition 40k release date, or maybe GHB2 release date but that doesn't seem like HUGE news, just good timing because of SCGT which is an AOS only (I think?) event.  So GHB2 seems likely, maybe something like a revamped set of rules?  Basically a new edition, not just GHB2?  I mean, GHB2 isn't really "huge" news is it?

No pink (or was it blue, I forgot) days this month as I've heard in the local store, though there are some pink (?) days coming in july or june (don't remember which) so I very much doubt it'd be the big'un (40K 8th edition) today.... Probably tome or rules.

Edited April 22, 2017 by Teletomas

[Gladders1980]

2 hours ago, Captain Marius said:

Am i the only one who isnt a fan of painting and modelling guides in army books? They feel like filler to me, taking up room that couldve gone to more fluff! On the other hand i do enjoy painting and modelling articles, but prefer them in WD, or on forums like this one. Hopefully their inclusion is not a trend going forward!

 

No I like the painting guides, I prefer that to the fluff, the fluff can go in novels for me.