The Rumour Thread

[Icarion]

7 minutes ago, Nagash42 said:

Did anybody notice there doesn't seem to be a path to glory in the soulblight book?

I watched man reads book and I don't think it ever came up. 

Path to Glory, right in the middle of the table of contents.

 

[Sleboda]

13 hours ago, Damosane said:

Do what you want! I dont really care! You asked if there was confirmation so I told you what I saw, I see someone also posted a screenshot.  You can cling to your old book but its retired whether you like it or not. Doesn't make a difference if you play with reasonable friends.

I guess it's just confusing to me than an entire army would be squatted sooooo quickly, and then you add in that the "replacement" isn't even the same army ... I dunno, seems like a really bad turn from GW - and I really thought they had turned a corner with being better to customers. This really ... really ... really lowers my confidence in picking up new stuff from them. If entire armies are valid for only a few years, it's tough to justify buying them.

 

Ah well.  Thanks, all, for the replies and guidance.

Edited May 17, 2021 by Sleboda

[AngryPanda]

4 hours ago, OkayestDM said:

One of the going rumors is that this edition of AoS will focus less on releasing new factions and more on expanding existing ones.

I’m really hoping this is true: being both a mortal Khorne and mortal Slaanesh player has caused me to feel a ton of burnout this edition. Slaanesh because the recent book was, in my opinion, the worst battletome to be released since Sylvaneth. There was a survey that started on the Hedonites of Slaanesh TGA forum that get a decent number of responses regarding the absurd point costs and poorly written rules; I and a few others have sent the survey to GW, and it’s been confirmed that they’ve at least seen it. The hope is that when AoS 3 drops with the new core rule book, GW will consider the feedback and lower the points to values that are far more flexible. 

Khorne mortals have always struggled, especially Bloodwarriors; a majority of the mortals have never really belonged. Most of the mortal range is outshined by the superior Daemon choices, such as Bloodthristers, flesh hounds, bloodletters, etc. If they were to get a rework, it would be more complicated then simply lowering points, as Blades of Khorne would need a number of updates to their warscrolls to make them interesting and up to date with the current meta.

These are just two examples, for there are numerous other books that have stagnated via the battletome creep. Sylvaneth and Beast of Chaos deserve their time in the sun, and this edition is the time to do so (Ghur is the perfect setting for this); but my hopes have dwindled via GW’s poor battletome balancing recently and the Cursed City fiasco. As +2 Tough has stated, it seems as if GW has regressed to its “old ways” of lacking communication and feedback with its customers. 

Edited May 17, 2021 by AngryPanda

[Joseph Mackay]

9 hours ago, KriticalKhan said:

He's just being obtuse about whether or not it's still legal to use in matched play. It's obvious that it's been replaced and won't receive any further support, but until GW releases some kind of FAQ or errata, technically it will still be usable, but if I'm remembering the rules right, you'd have to use the updated warscrolls and points.

Actually, all the warscrolls now have the Soulblight Gravelords keyword and no longer have the Legions Of Nagash keyword. I don’t even think you could try to argue Legions is still legal, as it would be a book with no units

[Adamcbutton]

55 minutes ago, Joseph Mackay said:

Actually, all the warscrolls now have the Soulblight Gravelords keyword and no longer have the Legions Of Nagash keyword. I don’t even think you could try to argue Legions is still legal, as it would be a book with no units

Legions of Nagash never had a keyword on the war scrolls though: you added ‘Legion of Blood’ etc to the models you chose to use, but otherwise the units only had their own keywords without a faction one. 

[Aeryenn]

8 hours ago, Mutton said:

Sam (the AoS Labs guy) mentioned in his video that in 3.0 there'd be rules to try and prevent spamming units. A hard cap on using the same type of units, and some kind of system that limits unit size depending on how large other units are.

Better later than never. Imagine how this game would have been better without Hearthguard, eel, Witches and all other spams in the game. Basically without spammers thinking they are pros.

[Aeryenn]

2 hours ago, AngryPanda said:

I’m really hoping this is true: being both a mortal Khorne and mortal Slaanesh player has caused me to feel a ton of burnout this edition. Slaanesh because the recent book was, in my opinion, the worst battletome to be released since Sylvaneth. There was a survey that started on the Hedonites of Slaanesh TGA forum that get a decent number of responses regarding the absurd point costs and poorly written rules; I and a few others have sent the survey to GW, and it’s been confirmed that they’ve at least seen it. The hope is that when AoS 3 drops with the new core rule book, GW will consider the feedback and lower the points to values that are far more flexible. 

Khorne mortals have always struggled, especially Bloodwarriors; a majority of the mortals have never really belonged. Most of the mortal range is outshined by the superior Daemon choices, such as Bloodthristers, flesh hounds, bloodletters, etc. If they were to get a rework, it would be more complicated then simply lowering points, as Blades of Khorne would need a number of updates to their warscrolls to make them interesting and up to date with the current meta.

These are just two examples, for there are numerous other books that have stagnated via the battletome creep. Sylvaneth and Beast of Chaos deserve their time in the sun, and this edition is the time to do so (Ghur is the perfect setting for this); but my hopes have dwindled via GW’s poor battletome balancing recently and the Cursed City fiasco. As +2 Tough has stated, it seems as if GW has regressed to its “old ways” of lacking communication and feedback with its customers. 

I agree with every single line. Have Mortal Khorne and Sylvaneth. Rules favoring daemons really have no sense and it can be seen across Khorne, Tzeentch and Nurgle. Not sure about Slaanesh. 

[Skreech Verminking]

2 hours ago, AngryPanda said:

Khorne mortals have always struggled, especially Bloodwarriors; a majority of the mortals have never really belonged. Most of the mortal range is outshined by the superior Daemon choices, such as Bloodthristers, flesh hounds, bloodletters, etc. If they were to get a rework, it would be more complicated then simply lowering points, as Blades of Khorne would need a number of updates to their warscrolls to make them interesting and up to date with the current meta.

and I always thought that khorne mortals would be the way to go if your not interested in spamming bloodthristers.

 

[edmc78]

6 hours ago, Nos said:

Think you misread the tone of my post dude

So long as it's not illegal, I genuinely dont care how GW do, or dont, market their toys

Was literally just a wry observation 

FWIW I'm pretty sure Cursed City *wasn't* a sucsess despite selling out as fast as it did. Successful companies aren't in the buisness of hiding phenomenonal money making ventures and generally scotching all reference of them from history as far as they are able. 

Agreed - cost of production and marketing cannot have been met with the limited sales. 

[Saï.Gonn]

Perhaps a limitation of 20 wounds of one kind of unit / 1000 points could avoid spams

[The World Tree]

3 hours ago, Sleboda said:

I guess it's just confusing to me than an entire army is would be squatted sooooo quickly, and then you add in that the "replacement" isn't even the same army ... I dunno, seems like a really bad turn from GW - and I really thought they had turned a corner with being better to customers. This really ... really ... really lowers my confidence in picking up new stuff from them. If entire armies are valid for only a few years, it's tough to justify buying them.

 

Ah well.  Thanks, all, for the replies and guidance.

But they aren't being squatted... it is just a name change...

[zilberfrid]

1 minute ago, The World Tree said:

But they aren't being squatted... it is just a name change...

I'd say that at least part of their range is squatted, the things that didn't make it to the new book.

[The World Tree]

Just now, zilberfrid said:

I'd say that at least part of their range is squatted, the things that didn't make it to the new book.

You mean the units that are in other death books and can be allied in?

[RuneBrush]

7 hours ago, Incineroar87 said:

Reminds me of the building system WHFB had, where unit choices were capped at a % of your total points and could only be taken so many times as a maximum in the case of heroes, special and rare.  Heroes and Core units were capped at 25% and special at 50%. 

This system worked great when ever army had bucketloads of unit choices, but in AOS there are many armies that don't have much unit choice available or only 1-2 viable options.  Hopefully this means the small armies in AOS will get blessed with a second wave introducing new units to balance.

I believe we're going to get a 40k detachment style implantation.  So you pick "Detachment A" which requires 1 hero, 2 battleline, 1 other and you can have +3 heroes, +4 battleline, +2 behemoth, +4 other and gain X command points per turn.  "Detachment B" may only include behemoths.

Looking at the new Gravelord book, there are a lot of heroes that make units battleline.  We may find that as each battletome gets revised we get a wider range of "battleline if" options - in addition second waving a number of factions (looking at you Fyreslayers)

4 hours ago, Athrawes said:

Path to Glory, right in the middle of the table of contents.

Most battletomes had the old school path to glory rules in, so I'm not 100% convinced this is the crusade/path to glory ones.  Would be cool if it were though!

[Deakz28]

46 minutes ago, Saï.Gonn said:

Perhaps a limitation of 20 wounds of one kind of unit / 1000 points could avoid spams

I have a feeling the SBGL battle time is written with 3rd in mind since the leaks show so many differences, and that would go against the zombies and skeletons, however the 1000 point thing could really work! 

[alghero81]

35 minutes ago, The World Tree said:

You mean the units that are in other death books and can be allied in?

Yeah, I don’t understand the logic... the only squatted unit is Bat Swarms and to be honest was not exactly the most compelling unit ever... Arkhan and Morghasts are in OBR, again don’t think even in OBR are particularly good, and the few Nighthaunt models that are still Nighthaunt have no more synergies and no meaning in Soulblight.

Everything else seems to be Legions 2.0 with new models for existing units.

The only things potentially missing are Chainrasps and Grimghasts, but hey, that’s the core of the Nighthaunt army so not sure it’s much a loss as much as the prompt to expand that direction.

I personally started my journey with Nighthaunt from GHB 17 when there were only 5 units with Neferata as ally summoning the rest I needed to get to 2000 points.

 Then they merged with Legions and I was forced to buy Dire Wolves as battlelines (and painted them ethereal).

Then Nighthaunt got their main release and now I have two armies... I have bar swarms and six Morghasts... not going to shed a tear for them..

 

ah and Legion Coach was squatted but there was no model for a while already. One thing I don’t understand is why the Mortis Engine is not sent to Nighthaunt 

Edited May 17, 2021 by alghero81
Added legion coach reference

[Beliman]

1 hour ago, Deakz28 said:

I have a feeling the SBGL battle time is written with 3rd in mind since the leaks show so many differences, and that would go against the zombies and skeletons, however the 1000 point thing could really work! 

I have the exactly same feeling! A lot of abilities and wording that seems to be done a bit diferent from older battletomes:

1. Retreat/moving (blood knights)
2. Rerolls 1 to hit abilities CA (wight kings)
3. Saves 5+ with shields (black knights/ skeletons)
4. Unique characters that become a "second" general
5. A lot less rerolls to hit and more +1 hit/wound
6. Low rend and controlled mortal wounds (that doesn't scale very well unless you put a lot of points to do that).

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that rumors of new CAs (+1saves, +1hit, etc..) and max of +1/-1 to hit/wound could have a bit impact on Soulblight Gravelords.

Edited May 17, 2021 by Beliman

[Hypno]

1 hour ago, Saï.Gonn said:

Perhaps a limitation of 20 wounds of one kind of unit / 1000 points could avoid spams

This is fine until you get to destruction... it makes, ogors, orruks, SoB and troggoths completely unplayable 

[zamerion]

Belladama 40e

radukar the beast 40e

annika / kritza 25e

direwolves 40e

start collecting 80e

 

[herohammer]

I would assume any limitations on units would not effect battleline choices. That is how it works in 40K. That way armies with limited unit selection don’t get squeezed as much and conditional battleline is more important.

[JPjr]

1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

Most battletomes had the old school path to glory rules in, so I'm not 100% convinced this is the crusade/path to glory ones.  Would be cool if it were though!

None of the reviews I've seen of it have mentioned PtG/Crusade, which I assume means it still the same otherwise you'd like to think that even the most matched play focused types would surely have had something to say about it

Which is a shame if it means that we'll need to wait 2/3 years for SB to get that

Also I've noticed whilst it's been said that the new BT has been designed with AoS3 in mind, I haven't actually seen anyone point anything out in the book that really gives us any clue what about it is that makes it so

The only thing I've seen is the way certain models act as a general even if they aren't which maybe I'm mistaken but not sure I've seen before and could have some relevance to command traits and abilities going forward.

Then again I've missed the speculation but are we all also assuming that this book wasn't actually supposed to come out a few weeks before the new addition but months ago?

[Enoby]

5 hours ago, AngryPanda said:

I’m really hoping this is true: being both a mortal Khorne and mortal Slaanesh player has caused me to feel a ton of burnout this edition. Slaanesh because the recent book was, in my opinion, the worst battletome to be released since Sylvaneth. There was a survey that started on the Hedonites of Slaanesh TGA forum that get a decent number of responses regarding the absurd point costs and poorly written rules; I and a few others have sent the survey to GW, and it’s been confirmed that they’ve at least seen it. The hope is that when AoS 3 drops with the new core rule book, GW will consider the feedback and lower the points to values that are far more flexible. 

Khorne mortals have always struggled, especially Bloodwarriors; a majority of the mortals have never really belonged. Most of the mortal range is outshined by the superior Daemon choices, such as Bloodthristers, flesh hounds, bloodletters, etc. If they were to get a rework, it would be more complicated then simply lowering points, as Blades of Khorne would need a number of updates to their warscrolls to make them interesting and up to date with the current meta.

These are just two examples, for there are numerous other books that have stagnated via the battletome creep. Sylvaneth and Beast of Chaos deserve their time in the sun, and this edition is the time to do so (Ghur is the perfect setting for this); but my hopes have dwindled via GW’s poor battletome balancing recently and the Cursed City fiasco. As +2 Tough has stated, it seems as if GW has regressed to its “old ways” of lacking communication and feedback with its customers. 

I might make a topic on this general school of thought because you've brought up some really good points. AoS battletomes seem to vary wildly in rules quality - not necessarily strength, but some books seem to have a lot of TLC with interesting warscrolls and sub allegiances (e.g. LRLs) and others are uninspiring and frustrating to play (e.g. BoK).

I'm not sure what people think in general, but there seems to be a more negative consensus for some of the more recent battletomes, and with a rise in prevalence of the 'bin guy/sin guy' meme I think people are thinking about this at the moment.

I think it would be good to discuss, especially if there's any way we can make positive improvements going forward.  

[Chikout]

I have a feeling that with 3rd edition we might see a lot of armies increase in points while Slaanesh and Soulblight stay more or less the same. This edition seems to be borrowing a lot from 40k 9th and an overall increase in points was a change we saw there. 

[KingBrodd]

I really hope 3.0 is for updating existing Factions and with Ghur and Beasts being the focus I hope that falls on Destruction getting the major releases. 

I'll be realistic and assume that the Sons of Behemat wont get a new Mega Gargant this Edition, everyone knows I would love nothing more but to temper my expectations I'll not expect anything. BUT I would love an updated Mancrusher pleaaaase.

With the new 'Morruk' Faction it will be interesting to see if its bundled into Warclans, because if its is I'll honestly be happy about it. Give the Ironjawz an armoured Crossbow unit and Siege weapon, a Warboss on Gore Grunta and a Gore Grunta Chariot and they would be in an incredible place. Same goes for Savage Orruks, update the monopose battleline and give them a new unit or two and they would be sweet.

Gloomspite, MOAR TROGGOTHS. We've heard of the Sulphur breath so they would be a great addition alongside some form of Cavlary such as Centipede riders.

Ogors I believe have the most work to be done to them. Introduce the Firebellies as a full sub faction. Update the Gluttons, Ironguts and Leadbelchers, Frost Sabres, Icebrow Hunter, Butcher, Slaughtermaster, Icefall Yehtees and Gorger.

 For new units give them most Beasts, a Giant Ground Sloth or Mammoth/Mastodon centrepiece model. Imagine a Howdah full of Ogors with Crossbows on the back of Giant Sloth!! 

I'm so damn hyped for 3.0!!

[sandlemad]

I'd be surprised if these new Krool Boyz/Morruks/whatever were folded into Warclans rather than being their own beast. Ironjaws do need something fresh just for variety's sake but wouldn't that be moving right back towards the Legions of Nagash approach that SBGL represents a step away from?

Edited May 17, 2021 by sandlemad