The Rumour Thread

[Chikout]

I think the Soulblight rules are looking pretty good. I was surprised by the zombie changes. They lost the bonuses to hit but they gained a six inch pile in and they do mortals on a six to hit. They also get to add a killed model on a 2+ rather than the old 6+. That's not too bad for cheap chaff. 

[Acrozatarim]

Honestly, if the new Destruction faction doesn't involve fimir in some way, I'm somewhat inclined to bang together some rules for a full faction of the old one-eyed swamp horrors myself.

[Warfiend]

I honestly don't think the leaked rules are bad rules. The problem is that they're bad compared to the few crazy strong armies. Which makes playing these weak armies less fun esp when facing the strongest lists,

However if you compare these rules with the other armies that have "bad" rules they seem to be a whole lot more balanced then the stongest armies among eachother.

Personally I think playing more evenly matched forces is much more fun way of playing the game then the current almost rock paper scissor meta.

Currently the main "skill" component of the gamy side of they hobby comes in the form of understanding armies and how to build great lists, the strategical side (which I like and I think should stay an important part of the game).

Because of the way the strongest armies generally work (having only a small segment of their army being actually strong) and the fact that only a small part of all armies are in the top, in an competitive setting this leads to a majority of the participants bringing top armies with top lists resulting in a lot of very similar lists fighting for the top spots.

Due to the nature of the game this leads to battles that involve very little tactical decision making. Which is a shame.

However when using the weak armies and pitch those against each other you will find that the underlying synergies are often not strong enough to lock a game down. Instead you actually have to fight and let the dices do the work. Suddenly tactical decision making becomes a lot more important and the game becomes more fun.

 

Edited May 13, 2021 by Warfiend

[Joseph Mackay]

8 hours ago, PJetski said:

They're costing units in increments of 5 now? 

I like the smaller unit sizes and removal of horde discounts. I hope it's a common theme moving forward into 3rd ed

Awesome, now they can fix the balance by raising Eels points by only 5 every six-twelve months instead of 10! 🙄

note the sarcasm, and very strong bitterness in my comment lol

[Joseph Mackay]

4 hours ago, Aeryenn said:

In my AoS playing group we joke that rules writers should have their name written down on the front page so we could know what kind of power level to expect.

"You bought a battletome from writer A? Ahhh, I can't match that with my battletome from writer B. How about this time you bring your old army with battletome from writer B so we can both have fun?"

This is part of the very reason they stopped doing it, writers like Matt Ward were receiving death threats and all sorts of nonsense 

[wayniac]

19 minutes ago, Warfiend said:

I honestly don't think the leaked rules are bad rules. The problem is that they're bad compared to the few crazy strong armies. Which makes playing these weak armies less fun esp when facing the strongest lists,

Which is exactly the problem with balance in AOS.  The fact there are a few crazy strong armies skews everything else.

[Feii]

54 minutes ago, Chikout said:

I think the Soulblight rules are looking pretty good. I was surprised by the zombie changes. They lost the bonuses to hit but they gained a six inch pile in and they do mortals on a six to hit. They also get to add a killed model on a 2+ rather than the old 6+. That's not too bad for cheap chaff. 

You think it is healthy for a basic chaff units to start getting MW dealing rules? People have already made posts/discussed it on this forum and some people are sick of MW altogether. 
 

zombies do mw vampires dont 🥲

[RuneBrush]

One thing I'll chip in, is don't forget that this book is very clearly written with AoS3 in mind.  Based on the leaks, points are now in multiples of 5, we've reduced max unit sizes and no horde discounts.  We don't know what changes AoS3 will bring to the game and certainly don't know what changes we might get for existing battletomes so we may find that Gravelords becomes a solid middle of the road army

[Chikout]

1 minute ago, Feii said:

You think it is healthy for a basic chaff units to start getting MW dealing rules? People have already made posts/discussed it on this forum and some people are sick of MW altogether. 
 

zombies do mw vampires dont 🥲

People were saying the new book is looking weak. I don't think that's true. Whether it is healthy or not is a different discussion. 

[Tiberius501]

Feel free to tell me to stuff it if this also breaks the rules, but could someone please PM me the leaked pics?

Thanks/sorry.

[Aeryenn]

32 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

This is part of the very reason they stopped doing it, writers like Matt Ward were receiving death threats and all sorts of nonsense 

We are just joking this way. No psycho fans among my group at least. I still take pleasure in playing my Sylvaneth, though it is considered the weakest army there is at the moment. Although while playing Sylvaneth you might lose four games out of five, it is the fifth time when you win, makes you feel like king of AoS.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

1 hour ago, Warfiend said:

I honestly don't think the leaked rules are bad rules. The problem is that they're bad compared to the few crazy strong armies. Which makes playing these weak armies less fun esp when facing the strongest lists,

That's not really it for me. It's more that this tome commits the biggest sin of all: It does not get me excited for any of the play styles it purportedly supports. I look at the book right now and see no list that really gets me excited. This is made worse by the fact that much of the exciting stuff LoN previously had was removed at the same time.

And I say this as someone who mostly supports the allegiance ability nerfs because I think, while weaker, they lead to a more dynamic play style. However, for what it's worth: I think the book is mechanically strong in some areas. I am sure there are a few viable lists in here. Blood Knights and Vargheists in Kastelai seems good. Vyrkos seems solid, too. I think Deathrattle lists can work. Grave Guard and Coven Throne are really good now, too. The tools are there, but they are just kinda boring.

[Neverchosen]

1 hour ago, Envyus said:

Personally think people are being a bit kneejerky about Soulblight.

So I could be wrong about this, but I find people react that way with every release. I will always point to the absurd reaction FEC received upon release, people were incensed at unit costs and did not consider the various internal synergies and balances, they just looked at the warscrolls and points. I have seen plenty of positive reactions to the books that ended up being weak because either people liked the basic warscrolls or found some very simple strategies off the bat... of course those simple strategies were often easily checked in game. 

[Boar]

2 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

So I could be wrong about this, but I find people react that way with every release. I will always point to the absurd reaction FEC received upon release, people were incensed at unit costs and did not consider the various internal synergies and balances, they just looked at the warscrolls and points.

Saw same with Seraphon and to lesser degree with KO

[Neverchosen]

26 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

 It's more that this tome commits the biggest sin of all...

Lack of Tomb Kings? 😁

14 minutes ago, Boar said:

Saw same with Seraphon and to lesser degree with KO

Yeah I specifically remember being really excited about the Seraphon release and seeing all the angry reviews that certain strategies would have to change... not that there was anything bad just that they needed to change the one effective strategy and people were very angry over it. Now we all know that it is a really powerful army that allows different styles of play and is significantly better off than it was before.

I mean it is fine to be worried about certain changes or realize that your current list no longer works, which is typically the result of point changes, battalion alterations or battleline/behemoth/hero taxes, not the actual rules. 

[sandlemad]

Neferata preview up: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/05/13/forget-mannfred-here-are-5-reasons-to-serve-queen-neferata-instead/

I mention this mainly to note that bit of art. Not sure it it's new (what seem to be ghouls makes me think not) but regardless, lol, those are tomb kings skeletons. Vampire Counts shields, Tomb Kings standard and headdress. A nice nod to her particular ancestry and a cause for great lamentation among TK players.

Edited May 13, 2021 by sandlemad

[zilberfrid]

2 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

Interesting note:

The SBGL Allegiance Abilities forbid to use Mercenaries if one fields Nagash.

Might this be a hint at 3.0?


Imo the worst thing the designers can do to a book is bland warscrolls. Well...

In the Warscroll builder, the Gargants are listed under factions as Mercenaries

Edit to add: Mortal wounds on zombies? It seems mortal wound spam isn't going away. Or is this some kind of martial mastery?

Edited May 13, 2021 by zilberfrid

[Chikout]

I find all this a little frustrating. There are always lots of fairly justified complaints about poor balance in the game. A book this comes out which seems to aimed squarely at the fat middle and everyone complains about it being underpowered. 

Aside from the wight kings which are unfortunately rather poor, almost everything has some utility. There are lots of possible builds. You can build a good zombie hoard army. You can build a high damage armoured army with graveguard, blood Knights and Prince Vordrai. You can build a cool wolf themed army. There are lots of ways of making a fun army that will be reasonably competitive army. 

This is how every battletome should be balanced. 

[Jefferson Skarsnik]

The minimum unit sizes are 10 for skeletons and 20 for zombies, so if you have Cursed City I guess the skeletons are a unit but the zombies aren't much use cos you'd have to buy another box that contains 20 anyway? Unless there's any rule I'm not aware of for putting extra ones on the table that would make having a spare 10 useful

[Red Bull]

2 hours ago, Feii said:

slaanesh is my fabourite chaos god, the sculpts are absolutely gorgeous and I have saved up money to start a new army BUT their new battletome rules and warscrolls are absolutely uninteresting and stat wise they have like 40% winrate on TTS/IRL (australia). While getting older made me a more casual and one would call me a dad gamer I just have some personal subjective preferenced and playing something so uninspired goes against them. 

This is why I only play factions I enjoy from a model/background perspective. I'll try my best to win with the stuff I like.

I first started playing in tournaments in 6th edition with Dark Elves. They were really bad. I tried everything, amassed a huge Dark Elf army in the process. I was usually towards the bottom of tournaments and my friends constantly beat me. However, I was becoming a very good general. I was learning the game on hard mode.... and then the 7th and 8th edition Dark Elf books happened and I was rewarded for my dedication.

GW is too expensive for me to buy an army based on the rules. Rules change, but minis are forever. If you like Slaanesh that much, and think their sculpts are gorgeous (I agree!), then I think you should absolutely start them. Play them on hard mode now and enjoy the pain. You know Slaanesh wants you to.

Whenever the rules change, you'll dunk on everyone and you can brag about how you played them before they were cool... like I've been doing for 20ish years with Dark Elves 😆

[Chikout]

4 minutes ago, Jefferson Skarsnik said:

The minimum unit sizes are 10 for skeletons and 20 for zombies, so if you have Cursed City I guess the skeletons are a unit but the zombies aren't much use cos you'd have to buy another box that contains 20 anyway? Unless there's any rule I'm not aware of for putting extra ones on the table that would make having a spare 10 useful

If zombies kill a model they can turn it into another zombie on a 2+ so the cursed city zombies will have a use. 

[Jefferson Skarsnik]

1 minute ago, Chikout said:

If zombies kill a model they can turn it into another zombie on a 2+ so the cursed city zombies will have a use. 

Ah that's cool! I wasn't sure if it was one of those things where you can't go over the original unit size

[JackStreicher]

9 minutes ago, sandlemad said:

Neferata preview up: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/05/13/forget-mannfred-here-are-5-reasons-to-serve-queen-neferata-instead/

I mention this mainly to note that bit of art. Not sure it it's new (what seem to be ghouls makes me think not) but regardless, lol, those are tomb kings skeletons. Vampire Counts shields, Tomb Kings standard and headdress. A nice nod to her particular ancestry and a cause for great lamentation among TK players.

What bothers me the most are my beloved Black Knights 🥲 rip in your ancient tombs. 
Tbh, why would you field them, even if they are Battleline? Zombie doggies are better and cheaper. Losing the Lance bonus really puts the nail in the coffin for them. 
 

[Boar]

1 minute ago, JackStreicher said:

Tbh, why would you field them, even if they are Battleline? Zombie doggies are better and cheaper. Losing the Lance bonus really puts the nail in the coffin for them. 

Hey if enemy has 2+ saves and relatively low wounds their impact hits are good value! Otherwise... well

[Aeryenn]

18 minutes ago, Jefferson Skarsnik said:

The minimum unit sizes are 10 for skeletons and 20 for zombies, so if you have Cursed City I guess the skeletons are a unit but the zombies aren't much use cos you'd have to buy another box that contains 20 anyway? Unless there's any rule I'm not aware of for putting extra ones on the table that would make having a spare 10 useful

That's just mean for CC owners regarding zombies.