The Rumour Thread

[Raptor_Jesues]

1 minute ago, Black_Templar_Lad said:

I actually don't know what I'm more excited for next week. 

A full showcase of Soulblight or the prospect of a completely new Goblin faction basically in the theme of the new Wolf Riders, and not only that, but up against more knightly themed Stormcast. 

That would just be sensational, deliciously sensational. 

i stormcast had bretonnian like helms i could actually like them, not gonna lie

 

[KingBrodd]

48 minutes ago, silverstu said:

My guess from the hints is that it will be a force that combines different types of greenskins but I don't think it will be generic - I think it will be strongly themed. Possibly around the clans of the Steppes - the idea around wolf riders and chariots, with Orcs and maybe trolls etc in there as well with the furs etc from the old hobgoblins [just not the same physique as them]. The bonesplittas and Ironjaws would be completely separate factions and distinctly different. I don't think they will look like the old O&G forces. Just a guess, AoS at its best pushes the identity of factions into new and interesting places - i'd expect that for our destruction brethren. 

I'd love to see more Troggoths added. Hill Troggoths or the Sulphur Breath.

[MothmanDraws]

16 minutes ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

I have no idea on how AoS3 is going to be, but i do have some wishes:
-fixing the morale issue (aka everyone and their auntie's cats are immune)
-since double turn is not getting anywhere i'd like another bandaid to not make me ragequit as soon as i do not get turn 3 priority
-some nerfs to magic and shooting, say some general dispelling for the army and a penalty for shooting and moving

I wonder if the rumour command point regen could limit double turn effectiveness. If going for double turn prevents you regenerating command points that round + objectives disappearing to opponents favour. Would also I think fit the fluff of whats happening, push the advantage but stretch the command structure of the force to do so. Its likely impossible but could also build in a magic fatigue if double turn is taken limiting spell casting if magic still proves oppressive on double turn. It would still leave some value in taking the double but does cost your army effectiveness. 

Im still in favour of more terrain entering the game, couple of large ruined houses or walls blocking shooting, charge through trees turn off stand and shoot, Area terrain giving a free charge reaction and armour bonus vs ranged attacks. Also gives more room for large creatures and behemoths to get some gimicks like ignoring defensive terrain as they just bash through the walls. 

If retreat is true I think we need to wait and see its full text before saying it makes melee dead and shooting strong if it comes with "if you are caught unit is wiped and retreating units cannot shoot next turn"

[OkayestDM]

21 minutes ago, MothmanDraws said:

If retreat is true I think we need to wait and see its full text before saying it makes melee dead and shooting strong if it comes with "if you are caught unit is wiped and retreating units cannot shoot next turn"

Agreed.

If these rumors prove to be true, then in all honesty I feel that the +1 save reaction would prove far more significant than the "retreat d6" one will. In a game of objectives, retreating isn't always going to be the most advantageous tactic, and d6 is incredibly unreliably. Sure, it might save you from a long-bomb charge, but what if other rules related to the charge are changed?

What if you now still have to move the rolled charge distance towards the enemy, even if you fail? (This is a wishlisting rule I've been hoping for since I first started playing.) Can you then pile in, potentially making up the difference from the d6 retreat (which is as likely to be 1" as 6"s)?

If the rumors are true and we really are facing a significant re-tuning of the system, there's bound to be more than what has been presented thus far, and until we know what those are we can never accurately rate how all of this will change the game. Then again, this could all be BS, and we're getting ourselves all in a tizzy over nothing. (Yes, I know, this is the rumor thread and that's what we do here.)

When they released second edition, the new and updated rules were pretty tight. In fact, they remained so until roughly early last year, which would be when GW had set their sights on the new edition and everything they were releasing at that point was just "filler."

If I recall from the talk about Psychic Awakening, folks complained that the 40k edition was doing alright until PA started releasing content that warped the game's balance out of wack. While BR itself doesn't seem to have broken the game all that much, most of the recent armies released within the last year are more powerful than the rest of the game and have resulted in the current imbalance and NPE complaints.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if GW uses that "filler" period before a new edition to throw some weird rules and design principles at the wall and see what works and what doesn't. They know it won't all work out, but they also know that they'll be changing everything shortly, so they might as well experiment and get a feel for what is and isn't a good design direction.

End of the day, for my part I actually have a lot of confidence that whatever GW changes for the next edition - and however extreme those changes are -  it'll end up being pretty solid. That doesn't mean everybody will like it or be happy about it, but there were a lot of complaints about changes when 2nd edition first released, and those went away fairly quickly once folks actually had a chance to play it and get a feel for how well the system actually ran.

[Yondaime]

1 hour ago, OkayestDM said:

Agreed.

If these rumors prove to be true, then in all honesty I feel that the +1 save reaction would prove far more significant than the "retreat d6" one will. In a game of objectives, retreating isn't always going to be the most advantageous tactic, and d6 is incredibly unreliably. Sure, it might save you from a long-bomb charge, but what if other rules related to the charge are changed?

What if you now still have to move the rolled charge distance towards the enemy, even if you fail? (This is a wishlisting rule I've been hoping for since I first started playing.) Can you then pile in, potentially making up the difference from the d6 retreat (which is as likely to be 1" as 6"s)?

If the rumors are true and we really are facing a significant re-tuning of the system, there's bound to be more than what has been presented thus far, and until we know what those are we can never accurately rate how all of this will change the game. Then again, this could all be BS, and we're getting ourselves all in a tizzy over nothing. (Yes, I know, this is the rumor thread and that's what we do here.)

When they released second edition, the new and updated rules were pretty tight. In fact, they remained so until roughly early last year, which would be when GW had set their sights on the new edition and everything they were releasing at that point was just "filler."

If I recall from the talk about Psychic Awakening, folks complained that the 40k edition was doing alright until PA started releasing content that warped the game's balance out of wack. While BR itself doesn't seem to have broken the game all that much, most of the recent armies released within the last year are more powerful than the rest of the game and have resulted in the current imbalance and NPE complaints.

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if GW uses that "filler" period before a new edition to throw some weird rules and design principles at the wall and see what works and what doesn't. They know it won't all work out, but they also know that they'll be changing everything shortly, so they might as well experiment and get a feel for what is and isn't a good design direction.

End of the day, for my part I actually have a lot of confidence that whatever GW changes for the next edition - and however extreme those changes are -  it'll end up being pretty solid. That doesn't mean everybody will like it or be happy about it, but there were a lot of complaints about changes when 2nd edition first released, and those went away fairly quickly once folks actually had a chance to play it and get a feel for how well the system actually ran.

The charge reaction is so wrong imho for the following reason:

-it will literally destroy alpha strike. at 3+ you have a 12" charge, at 4+ its impossible

-it makes melee armyes EVEN MORE weak, oh you are charging me with your BT? too bad, i rolled a 6, now watch me delete that bt next turn, this will be so frustating i will personally quit aos if it eventually happens to me

-overwarch with -1, now this is seriusly broken at the point i dont believe it will never happen, immagine charging a group of sentinels lol, or a ironclad

-+1 save its the only thing i maybe agree with, it could save weak targets, and at 1 CP  its good

- they know atm the problem in the meta its the heavy shooting, it makes the game pretty boring and the double turn roll even more frustating, double turn vs the likes of lumineth/KO/seraphon etc pretty means game over

 

 

[Raviv]

2 hours ago, KingBrodd said:

I'd love to see more Troggoths added. Hill Troggoths or the Sulphur Breath.

We have FellWATER troggoth and ROCKgut troggoth. If you add the Sulphur ones then in order to complete the elemental series we'll just need something with air. Flying troggoth? WindBreaking troggoth?

[Yondaime]

2 hours ago, MothmanDraws said:

I wonder if the rumour command point regen could limit double turn effectiveness. If going for double turn prevents you regenerating command points that round + objectives disappearing to opponents favour. Would also I think fit the fluff of whats happening, push the advantage but stretch the command structure of the force to do so. Its likely impossible but could also build in a magic fatigue if double turn is taken limiting spell casting if magic still proves oppressive on double turn. It would still leave some value in taking the double but does cost your army effectiveness. 

Im still in favour of more terrain entering the game, couple of large ruined houses or walls blocking shooting, charge through trees turn off stand and shoot, Area terrain giving a free charge reaction and armour bonus vs ranged attacks. Also gives more room for large creatures and behemoths to get some gimicks like ignoring defensive terrain as they just bash through the walls. 

If retreat is true I think we need to wait and see its full text before saying it makes melee dead and shooting strong if it comes with "if you are caught unit is wiped and retreating units cannot shoot next turn"

Now this is exactly the point for me to make double turn fun and interisting.

It should be a high reward/high risk decision, you get double turn? no more command point for you and you lose an important objective, but with the chance to do some serius damage, if you fail, you'll lack important resources

 

Now 99,99% you literally have no reason to give it exept for some niche mission and maybe some good geminids positioning

[PJetski]

9 minutes ago, Yondaime said:

The charge reaction is so wrong imho for the following reason:

-it will literally destroy alpha strike. at 3+ you have a 12" charge, at 4+ its impossible

-it makes melee armyes EVEN MORE weak, oh you are charging me with your BT? too bad, i rolled a 6, now watch me delete that bt next turn, this will be so frustating i will personally quit aos if it eventually happens to me

-overwarch with -1, now this is seriusly broken at the point i dont believe it will never happen, immagine charging a group of sentinels lol, or a ironclad

-+1 save its the only thing i maybe agree with, it could save weak targets, and at 1 CP  its good

- they know atm the problem in the meta its the heavy shooting, it makes the game pretty boring and the double turn roll even more frustating, double turn vs the likes of lumineth/KO/seraphon etc pretty means game over

 

 

Are we already at the stage of the preview cycle where people get mad after seeing 0.01% of the rule text?

[Ratboy genius]

13 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Are we already at the stage of the preview cycle where people get mad after seeing 0.01% of the rule text?

we are perpetually at that stage of the preview cycle, tbqh

[Enoby]

Maybe I totally misread it, but I thought the charge reaction was after the charge. As in, they charge into you and then you fall back, which means they still get a pile in. Then again I didn't look into it much and probably just made that up

[Ragest]

1 minute ago, Enoby said:

Maybe I totally misread it, but I thought the charge reaction was after the charge. As in, they charge into you and then you fall back, which means they still get a pile in. Then again I didn't look into it much and probably just made that up

I understood the same

[Yondaime]

34 minutes ago, PJetski said:

Are we already at the stage of the preview cycle where people get mad after seeing 0.01% of the rule text?

I am just talking about the possibility and thinking about what the repercussions could be, this is a rumor thread after all

Still they have to fix the heavy shooting problem

i am not mad lol

[Yondaime]

14 minutes ago, Enoby said:

Maybe I totally misread it, but I thought the charge reaction was after the charge. As in, they charge into you and then you fall back, which means they still get a pile in. Then again I didn't look into it much and probably just made that up

it still measn that at 4+ you go out of combat at potentially can do whatever you want the next turn, and in a heavy shooting list vs a heavy melee it means gg most of the times

[Gitzdee]

They should give a unit over 10 models with shields a shield formation ability that gives them +1 against shooting and cant charge!
 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Iksdee

[Nezzhil]

16 minutes ago, Yondaime said:

it still measn that at 4+ you go out of combat at potentially can do whatever you want the next turn, and in a heavy shooting list vs a heavy melee it means gg most of the times

You can pile in after charge anyways so it's impossible to avoid the combat with a 1D6" movement. A unit that retreats only can avoid being target by 1" weapons with a 5+.

[Marcvs]

1 hour ago, Yondaime said:

-it will literally destroy alpha strike. at 3+ you have a 12" charge, at 4+ its impossible

if you take the rumor at face value, then you shouold take it all: the video explicitly says that if the charge originates outside of 9" (so, in case of deepstrike at preent rules) you cannot use the retreat reaction.

EDIT: just checked to see if I remembered correctly (I did), it's around 5m and 10 seconds

Edited April 28, 2021 by Marcvs

[KingBrodd]

10 minutes ago, Iksdee said:

They should give a unit over 10 models with shields a shield formation ability that gives them +1 against shooting and cant charge!
 

This has nothing to do with the topic but I now may just make a Mega Gargant covered in shield pauldrons. 

[Ganigumo]

6 hours ago, Beliman said:

I want to say that I don't have any problem with actual AoS Warscrolls, but, from my knowledge of lurking for a lot of AoS forum, various blogs and twitch channels, that question seems to be a lot trickier than what it seems:

The whole AOS community seems to find diferent issues with AoS main mechanics and a lot of them can be resumed between balance and NPE, and it's a bit blurry when one ends and the other starts. 

Between this two concepts, we had the dreaded double turn, the high lethality armies (and ending games in turn 2), the small diference between units (some people say "unit specializations" is needed), Monsters disparity, etc...

Changing warscrolls could have a direct impact to a lot of this things and solving some of them. A good example is the infinite debate of S vs T: It can solve the "more specialized units", taking down lethality and making monsters a bit more "thoughter".

I'm not sure if that's what we need (I'm just a casual player that only wants to have fun), but I understand some of this points even if I think that we don't really need them.

 

My experience has been very different, I've seen complaints, but the vast majority of people I've interacted with think the rules are some of the best warhammer has ever had and don't want them shaken up too much (me included). It's a lot easier to ruin a good thing than it is to improve it. Even then I think some of the claims are completely unfounded, like the "shooting issue". Nobody is complaining that stuff like dreadshards or Underguts are OP, just that the top tier shooting units/armies like Tzeentch, KO, Lumineth and Seraphon. So the truth is the vast majority of shooting units in the game are within an acceptable power level, and it's just those armies that need to be adjusted. I'll never understand why people want to rewrite core rules just because a battletome is poorly balanced. We have the technology to nerf books.

3 hours ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

I have no idea on how AoS3 is going to be, but i do have some wishes:
-fixing the morale issue (aka everyone and their auntie's cats are immune)
-since double turn is not getting anywhere i'd like another bandaid to not make me ragequit as soon as i do not get turn 3 priority
-some nerfs to magic and shooting, say some general dispelling for the army and a penalty for shooting and moving

Morale has never been a "fun" it's not fun when you lose 3-5 models from a single model dying, or in WHFB you could lose 60+ goblins because you rolled poorly(this happened to me many times, despite trying to avoid it). I'd rather see it removed entirely over making it more powerful, but I don't hate how it works right now.
Lets just nerf Seraphon/KO/Lumineth/Tzeentch, possibly just removing the bonuses to unbinding on their wizards since that's what shuts down other armies.

56 minutes ago, Raviv said:

We have FellWATER troggoth and ROCKgut troggoth. If you add the Sulphur ones then in order to complete the elemental series we'll just need something with air. Flying troggoth? WindBreaking troggoth?

There's a passage about troggoths that use flatulence for echolocation.
 

 

1 minute ago, Nezzhil said:

You can pile in after charge anyways so it's impossible to avoid the combat with a 1D6" movement. A unit that retreats only can avoid being target by 1" weapons with a 5+.

It'll depend on when the charge reaction is activated. If it's used before the charge move you can make their charge fail, if its after the charge is successful you'll be able to pile in against them and they might be able to avoid damage if they roll high enough on the retreat move.

[Nezzhil]

Just now, Ganigumo said:

It'll depend on when the charge reaction is activated. If it's used before the charge move you can make their charge fail, if its after the charge is successful you'll be able to pile in against them and they might be able to avoid damage if they roll high enough on the retreat move.

 

You don't declare charge objectives in AoS, so they must change all the charge phase to implement the charge reactions before the roll.

[Ganigumo]

1 minute ago, Nezzhil said:

 

You don't declare charge objectives in AoS, so they must change all the charge phase to implement the charge reactions before the roll.

"You may spend a command point to use a charge reaction after an opponent has declared a charge (but before they roll)"
If the wording is similar to this you would be able to use the reaction after the charge is declared, but you wouldn't know who is being charged. I doubt it would be written like this, but it could be.

Also it is a new edition so they might rewrite the whole charge phase anyways.

[RuneBrush]

Going to be honest and say that I'd not be putting too much credence over some of those rumours.  The fact that somebody is talking about charge reactions that wouldn't work with the current charge mechanic, without also talking about a rewritten charge phase doesn't particularly fill me with confidence they've got it right!

[Feii]

1 hour ago, Enoby said:

Maybe I totally misread it, but I thought the charge reaction was after the charge. As in, they charge into you and then you fall back, which means they still get a pile in. Then again I didn't look into it much and probably just made that up

It could mean that but after a charge might mean that an opponent just finishes rolling their dice then you get to decide your action. Depends on how they word the charge in the third. Right now you don’t declare charging specific units in the rule set which will imo change if there are charge reactions

[Feii]

30 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Going to be honest and say that I'd not be putting too much credence over some of those rumours.  The fact that somebody is talking about charge reactions that wouldn't work with the current charge mechanic, without also talking about a rewritten charge phase doesn't particularly fill me with confidence they've got it right!

As I wrote above the charge phase most likely needs rewriting if there are charge reactions. So it makes sense to me

[KK9T]

Lotta fake news coming out of this thread. Sad!

[Nezzhil]

Broken Realms: Sacrifice

 

https://ageofsigmar.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2021/04/14-Sacrifice-PDF.pdf