The Rumour Thread

[KrispyXIV]

14 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

Not entirely, the Loreseeker is no longer unique (buff), and they get a few buffs in secondary objectives.

Was unique added to them via FAQ after it wasn't in the tome, or something like that?

What are the chances that book and this one were printed at around the same time, and it's the same omission...

[Clan's Cynic]

I want to know what intern got the job of doing Fyreslayers on his lunchbreak, because it feels so random.

Hearthguard Berzerkers were The Thing You Wanted To Spam, and although they were stealth nerfed by the loss of Battalions, most people ran them with a Runefather General to make them Battleline anyway and they were/are still our best unit. Them only going up by 5pts was odd.

Vulkite Berzerkers, whilst not bad per say, weren't amazing either and greatly overshadowed by Hearthguard and went up... 40pts?! What?!

Even weirder is the Battlesmith being taken in just about every list, but he went down 15pts. Huh? 

I never thought I'd say, "We need another Slaanesh Battletome already" but right now I feel for you guys and gals.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Clan's Cynic

[frostyeel]

Beasts of Chaos are no longer Allies of the 4 chaos gods and Slaves to Darkness units are only allies if they can't be given a mark. To me this seems like confirmation that Beasts of Chaos will be able to be given a mark and taken as coalition units, as a replacement for a function of the BoC god marked battalions.

[Chikout]

I genuinely think they just put everything into their points calculator with whatever changes they thought 3rd edition would change and went from there. I don't think it's a reactive change at all. 

Again since they were writing the book months ago, this is probably the only choice they had. 

The place were gw has a chance to be reactive is in the FAQ. Now I don't personally don't hold out much hope, but they have the chance to listen to what the community has been saying since the reveal. If they change the sentinels ability and increase a bunch of melee weapon ranges, there's still time to massively swing the early reactions in a more positive direction. 

[Azamar]

32 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:

I want to know what intern got the job of doing Fyreslayers on his lunchbreak, because it feels so random.

Hearthguard Berzerkers were The Thing You Wanted To Spam, and although they were stealth nerfed by the loss of Battalions, most people ran them with a Runefather General to make them Battleline anyway and they were/are still our best unit. Them only going up by 5pts was odd.

Vulkite Berzerkers, whilst not bad per say, weren't amazing either and greatly overshadowed by Hearthguard and went up... 40pts?! What?!

Even weirder is the Battlesmith being taken in just about every list, but he went down 15pts. Huh? 

I never thought I'd say, "We need another Slaanesh Battletome already" but right now I feel for you guys and gals.

Vulkites were 140 before so only went up 20 points. But yeah, odd that the hearthguard only had a tiny increase. 
 

 

[Orkmann]

29 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:

I want to know what intern got the job of doing Fyreslayers on his lunchbreak, because it feels so random.

The update hit the units with horde bonuses the most. Savege orcs for instance went up by 10 (120->130), but in practice you wanted to run them in big blocs, so if you look at a unit of 30, the cost went from 300 to 390.

The same goes for HGBs, where you could take 20 for 400 and blightkings where you could have 20 for 500. So the effective point increase on these army list is more significant.

[novembermike]

55 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:

I want to know what intern got the job of doing Fyreslayers on his lunchbreak, because it feels so random.

Hearthguard Berzerkers were The Thing You Wanted To Spam, and although they were stealth nerfed by the loss of Battalions, most people ran them with a Runefather General to make them Battleline anyway and they were/are still our best unit. Them only going up by 5pts was odd.

Vulkite Berzerkers, whilst not bad per say, weren't amazing either and greatly overshadowed by Hearthguard and went up... 40pts?! What?!

Even weirder is the Battlesmith being taken in just about every list, but he went down 15pts. Huh? 

I never thought I'd say, "We need another Slaanesh Battletome already" but right now I feel for you guys and gals.

Didn't HGB want to be in big 20 man blocks, so they effectively went up 100 points for the block? And you can only take 1 big block in a 2k point game? Vulkites actually seem like they came out better here since they don't have the same incentives towards big squads.

[readercolin]

22 minutes ago, Azamar said:

Vulkites were 140 before so only went up 20 points. But yeah, odd that the hearthguard only had a tiny increase. 
 

 

Ehh, hearthguard got another huge nerf.  Previously, they were taken in blocks of 20.  Now, since MSU is 5, they can be taken at max as a block of 15 - and you can only have 2 blocks of 15 in your entire army at 2k points.  This is probably the biggest reason they got only a small points change, just because how they are played is going to have to change a bit.

[Enoby]

I think, after cooling down a bit, I'm going to give 3rd a miss for a while at least. I was really excited for it, but seeing some of these points changes and the new shackles, my hype has pretty much gone for the edition

It just feels the rules writers don't have a clue what they're doing. Or if they do, they don't want to tell us why they do what they do. 

Some of the best units have got away relatively untouched, the worst unit has been nerfed. It all feels so distant and messy, and I don't trust them to have made the right decisions despite the community. I would really appreciate some sort of designer's explanation, but I'm not expecting one. We'll just have to sit and wait until they eventually get around to the current mess and hope they don't make a new one in the process. 

I hope others will enjoy AoS 3, but I don't have any faith in the rules writers at the moment. 

[Noserenda]

It might be worth waiting for the full picture before declaring doom folks, theres still like 2 weeks before release to get commentary and FAQs out that sorts all this out.

Some really weird choices though ive gotta admit...

[MitGas]

28 minutes ago, Enoby said:I hope others will enjoy AoS 3, but I don't have any faith in the rules writers at the moment. 

Well, personally I‘m not whining just yet (who knows, everything gets new 3.0 warscrolls - there might be some upgrades we don‘t know yet), currently many changes feel pretty damn random. Personally I would‘ve changed fewer of the core rules and actually listened to the fans‘ input.  I‘m pretty sure most people here can name the strongest and weakest units of each battletome, so no idea how some of the point costs came to be unless the warscrolls got changed as well… but you‘re setting yourself up for disappointment if you trust into GW rules. It‘s almost always been like that.

[Kitsumy]

I really dont get those numbers.

 

Idoneth points are a joke, 

Balds are in units of 10 still so still unplayable after new retarded coherency rule, making then only figthing in 5 models.

Spear eels nerfed 16%???? In fact now cost the same as vampire riders, when vamp ones do like 17 1 rend dmg, eels only 10,5, more wounds, better save, double bravery, retreat fly charge and do 2mw, for 4 move and once per game 3 mw wtf?

 

Tank eels got hard nerfed with the save cap, still got nerfed by 12%????

Turtle aura is half useless again, since we have cover on t1 and armor cap at +1, so again useless on t1 and t5, still got nerfed 12%.

Shark raised by 14%..

Heck even the mage, one of the worst mages in all aos raised in points, or lothan the joke among the seas that none saw even on most casual game got nerfed, or revive bald hero....

 

So the only playable idk list got raised by around 14-16%, im not expert about every army but my inittial glimpse show a 5% raise on average?

 

Seraphons oh my.

Skinks raised by 25% wtf? They cant be 40 anymore so they allready lost half his power, cant stack so many things, his overwatch was nerfed since everyone got a generic one, and still gw deleted them?? Why?? Even 30 of them will do 6,6 dmg 0 rend for 225points.... 

 

Saurus were allready bad, new coherence rule made mace one useless since only 5 of 10 would fight, and spears one are sooo bad, still got nerf by 18%!!!! They should have been reduded in points instead.

 

Cold ones raised by 10%, again everyone saw them being spamed and wining tourneys sure.

Pteradons were allready one of the worst unit in all aos. I only used them for movility since the models are gorgeous,  but they were nerfed instead buffed wtf?

 

Troglodon, carnos, triceratops etc, again dinos were pretty meh not good not bad, why the increase, in case of troglodon it was useless a 6 average dmg on behemoth and 1 cast for close to 300p suure.

 

Estegadon lost his invul save with new nerf ruleset, and now even higher cost, when lots of elite ranged units do more dmg for like 80p less.

 

They are even worse than my idk, tipical list got like 20%+ more expensive, even normal lists with dinos saurus etc got raised by 10-15% when that list was mediocre at best.

[Neverchosen]

Getting to see the points changes it is not as bad as I feared but it also makes my 2000 points armies quite a bit more expensive. I do not see this as a terrible thing as it lets me change my builds although I do have to change up some unit compositions with the change to Chaos warrior sizes. My ogres are in a much different place but as I am still building them and getting them ready I can more easily course correct. I have 3 start collecting sets some frost sabres and an Icebrow hunter. So my plan of two Frostlords and a Huskard is switching to two Huskards and a Frostlord. Also my plan to add a Stardrake to dominion is seeming slightly untenable... but still doable. I might go with a Lord-Arcanum on Tauralon or Celestant Prime instead? Although, with a new tome in bound these units will likely change the quickest and so I should not put much stock in the GHB points. 

Still I think that despite the logic not being clear most armies seem to be effected in roughly similar ways. I do think that GW may have thought that the new table size will have more of an impact than we do regarding shooting. 

Edited June 18, 2021 by Neverchosen

[Doko]

These points are random or dont makes sense.

 

Fyreslayers:

Have the worst behemots together citys of sigmar of all aos but got big nerfs?

Our priest are paper weak but could cast 2 prayer,now are paper and only cast one prayer but cost 120 when others as seraphons priest cost 80

Our best unit elite zerkers only got a 5 points nerfs when have 5 model the unit,30base and 2" reach but the vulkites got a 20 increase even if they gonna be useless this edition with 10 models the unit,30 base and only 1" reach

 

Citys of sigmar:

 

The best unit of the tome got a buff in points.........yes is true,the demigryfs got a 5 decrease in points.......but maybe the worst unit of entire aos,the gyrobomber got a HUGE nerf from 80 to 95 points????????

Also the best shooting units as are crossbowmen and handgunner got 5 increase but others worse got more increase(irondrakes10,darkshards15,sisters20)

 

I dont know the global balance,but in my tomes the internal balance is worse even with this general hanbook doing the gap betwen good and bad units even bigger

 

Ohhhhhh also i forgot,city of sigmar have lost one of our alegiances(empowered endless spells) so if we dont get something in the faq.......

Edited June 18, 2021 by Doko

[CommissarRotke]

Just a thought:

Since GHB changes seem to be quite negatively received, maybe we should make a point to not buy it? Would it be impossible to play 3.0's rules with 2.0's current points? I don't think so, the main change would be any additional (or removed) keywords from certain warscrolls.

edit: not talking about ignoring the 3.0 rules... talking about the GHB points changes only.

Edited June 18, 2021 by CommissarRotke

[Icarion]

11 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

Just a thought:

Since GHB changes seem to be quite negatively received, maybe we should make a point to not buy it? Would it be impossible to play 3.0 with 2.0's current points? I don't think so, the main change would be any additional (or removed) keywords from certain warscrolls.

A few people whining on internet forums and facebooks groups does not constitute any type of consensus.

People I know personally who live a breathe AOS are giddy about how many of these changes might effect their games. 

I'm more excited for 3rd edition than I was for second. And I imagine that barring a vocal minority online, that is probably going to t be true most Age of Sigmar fans. Are there some things about 3rd I have questions about? Obviously. And I eagerly wait to start getting games in to test those concerns, and maybe even an FAQ to address them, but compared to past edition changes, I think this one has far more hits than misses, and that includes points changes. 

In short, I cannot wait to get my hands on 3rd edition and the GHB!

[Doko]

If everyone would have got per se a 15% increase due to smaller map. And then overpower units as sentinels a 25% to balance them........we would be happy

 

But what have been done?

Overpowers units in every tome(not only overpower in global)  got buffs or only 10% nerfs meanwhile underperforming units in every tome got 20% increases.......dont make sense these changes

[shinros]

24 minutes ago, Athrawes said:

A few people whining on internet forums and facebooks groups does not constitute any type of consensus.

People I know personally who live a breathe AOS are giddy about how many of these changes might effect their games. 

I'm more excited for 3rd edition than I was for second. And I imagine that barring a vocal minority online, that is probably going to t be true most Age of Sigmar fans. Are there some things about 3rd I have questions about? Obviously. And I eagerly wait to start getting games in to test those concerns, and maybe even an FAQ to address them, but compared to past edition changes, I think this one has far more hits than misses, and that includes points changes. 

In short, I cannot wait to get my hands on 3rd edition and the GHB!

Or people are rightfully upset for good reason and in the very stream that detailed the points, no one can really defend what happened to Slaanesh, the narrative was the last nail for me, the points made me turn away from the faction period. GW basically shot them in the back of the head. I don't know whether it's incompetence or pure favouritism towards certain factions. Also, Enoby is one of the most positive people on the forum, knows a lot more about the game than I do, and if such a person is bowing out for awhile doesn't mean he/she is whining for no reason. Unless you truly think that way? 

Edited June 18, 2021 by shinros

[Tiberius501]

Man GW need to get with the times. They need to do points organically and digitally for free. Publishing everything into a money making book is hurting them and their balance. I get that it helps with their growth that their shareholders desperately lust after, but they should be allowing for a more consistent and healthy system for points.

Because this book seems very odd and out of time/the loop with current balance.

I’m all for blanket point raises, I enjoy smaller games. But there’s some seemingly random changes here. Seriously Sentinals, wtf? These duders going up so little baffles me even with the current points.

I’m sure in a few months some of this will be rectified in another publication but man, just update this stuff for free. A better game for a little less cash, you’re making enough as it is lol.

[Kitsumy]

Lol not only i wont buy that garbag.. eer book, i wont play that eddition with " the worst ruleset ever!!" Untill they fix the retreat comand, overwatch, and 32 bases unit only fugthing with half unit. Only will build paint etc till next eddition i guess.

 

In a rangedhsmmer and u see the worst ruleswritter ever making a cm to let ranged move d6 when will be charged, or any unit cloose fire a ultrabroken overwatch! Not 6s only to the unit being charged like in 40k noooo, any unit in range can shot with only -1 haha. Armys like cities cloose to his hurticanun wont even have that penalty and will fire as normal only for 1cp haha.

Or copy paste 40k coherecence rule but dont change combat ranges, making any 6+ msu unit with 32base with 1 range totally useless and unplayable.

 

And now those points, breaking some armys raising points in 15-25% and others get like 5% change at best

[The Red King]

4 hours ago, novakai said:

well i think the problem with how GW does things was that this GHB was written 7 months ago (at least that what i been told) and this was probably printed way before the HoS came out to the public last February where most of the lurkwarm response came out.

of course people have wanted GW to just switch to a digital format when it comes to points and rules instead of relying on books but I doubt that will change anytime soon.

So they intended to raise the points of HoS before they released them? They preemptively prepared the ghb nerfs to fix how broken they were DEFINITELY gonna be at launch? Lol

[CommissarRotke]

48 minutes ago, Athrawes said:

A few people whining on internet forums and facebooks groups does not constitute any type of consensus.

People I know personally who live a breathe AOS are giddy about how many of these changes might effect their games. 

I'm more excited for 3rd edition than I was for second. And I imagine that barring a vocal minority online, that is probably going to t be true most Age of Sigmar fans. Are there some things about 3rd I have questions about? Obviously. And I eagerly wait to start getting games in to test those concerns, and maybe even an FAQ to address them, but compared to past edition changes, I think this one has far more hits than misses, and that includes points changes. 

In short, I cannot wait to get my hands on 3rd edition and the GHB!

yeah that's...that's why I said use the 3.0 rules? I just meant the GHB POINTS values. Rules changes look great even if they'll take time to get used to.

[Ogregut]

Not seeing it as that big a deal, taking into account no battalions or extra command points to buy.

I'm still stoked by AoS 3, from the battle reports I've watched, it feels  more dynamic and cinematic. Heroes being heroic, monsters stomping on the little guys. 

Those are the moments that make a game and the bits you remember. 

Point changes will come and go and there will always be a kneejerk reaction. 

Play some games, try out the new stuff, who knows you might have fun. 

Edited June 18, 2021 by Ogregut
Pretty sure kneejerk is 2 words but the censor doesn't like the j word lol

[Clan's Cynic]

 

1 hour ago, Athrawes said:

A few people whining on internet forums and facebooks groups does not constitute any type of consensus.

A few apologists doesn't mean it's well-written either. 

46 minutes ago, Tiberius501 said:

Man GW need to get with the times. They need to do points organically and digitally for free. Publishing everything into a money making book is hurting them and their balance. I get that it helps with their growth that their shareholders desperately lust after, but they should be allowing for a more consistent and healthy system for points.

Because this book seems very odd and out of time/the loop with current balance.

I’m all for blanket point raises, I enjoy smaller games. But there’s some seemingly random changes here. Seriously Sentinals, wtf? These duders going up so little baffles me even with the current points.

I’m sure in a few months some of this will be rectified in another publication but man, just update this stuff for free. A better game for a little less cash, you’re making enough as it is lol.

The problem is there's no incentive. Just about every single wargames with almost no non-GW exceptions (Flames of War) releases both their rules and their updates for free these days, the issue is that even if those systems were the best written, most fun, most balanced games on the planet, it's not necessarily a recipe for success. Those systems live and die on appealing to the customer's best side because any slip up and odds are they're going to lose players fast, so damn good balancing, taking feedback and releasing rules/updates for free are just necessary.

By contrast however, everybody is going to line up for GW products no matter how bad they get. The PR department (as in, actually having one) solved Kirkby's problem wherein they had naff rules combined with non-existent customer engagement. Now they have customer engagement down and people are all too happy to keep buying into this, shrugging that "well I NEED the GHB to play matchplay, which is the only way to play!" 

GW knows that even if the pages were glued together by spit, the ink was smeared and the pictures were done in crayon, they'll sell thousands of copies. The only way that's going to change is if the paper poisons people somehow and sales of the GHB tank, but it seems more likely GW would simply stop committing staff to updating the rules at that point rather than make them a free update.

I think the best you might get is publications like the GHB being available via Warhammer+ so long as you're maintaining your subscription, which is still costing you money - and you're out of luck if you like dead trees - but at least the cost of a yearly subscription will probably cost as much as buying the new GHB every year.

Thank Grimnir I don't play Hedonites.

Edited June 18, 2021 by Clan's Cynic

[novakai]

16 minutes ago, The Red King said:

So they intended to raise the points of HoS before they released them? They preemptively prepared the ghb nerfs to fix how broken they were DEFINITELY gonna be at launch? Lol

yes but maybe for reason that they didn't foresee that Slaaneshi was over costed at the time and still gave them the general point increase they gave to other armies but I don't know honestly lol