The Rumour Thread

[Gutsu17]

5 minutes ago, Flippy said:

This would be a valid point, but it also underlines the profound impact of double turn. You need to build your list with double turn on your mind (how many drops? do I have sufficient number of screens?) and position units planning for double turn potential.
There is also a very problematic issue with smaller games - I played most of my AoS (and WHFB, half a century ago) games using 750 - 1500 points and I would very much like GW to treat smaller games as equally valid game modes, with active support. Is that possible with double turn? Maybe…

The smaller games thing is a very valid point, maybe add rules to limit lethality for games under 1500? Only X models from a unit can attack at a time or something like that

[dmorley21]

43 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:

This whole "if you take a double turn you can't score a battle tactic" will only be impactful if battle tactics are relevant, which remains to be seen.

Also : “I often ask competitive players, playtesters, and influencers the same questions,” says Matt. “What they’d add to the game, what they’d change about it, and what they’d remove from it. By far, the number one answer to the last question is this: ‘not the double turn!’ Our players are fiercely loyal to this concept, to the point it’s become a bit of a rallying call!”

And these people who "like the double turn", are they in the room with us now ?

This just blows my mind. So many people like the double turn. I know there’s people who don’t, but generally it’s very well loved. Several of my friends told Matt as much at Adepticon. 

[The Lost Sigmarite]

1 minute ago, dmorley21 said:

This just blows my mind. So many people like the double turn. I know there’s people who don’t, but generally it’s very well loved. Several of my friends told Matt as much at Adepticon. 

I hate the double turn ever since an IDK player traumatised me with a turn 2 into turn 3 double turn. Tabled me before I could do anything about it.

[Flippy]

2 minutes ago, Gutsu17 said:

The smaller games thing is a very valid point, maybe add rules to limit lethality for games under 1500? Only X models from a unit can attack at a time or something like that

Let’s wait and see the Spearhead rules. If GW is aware of the „double turn impact on smaller games” issue, they should propose a solution at least for this game mode.

[Gutsu17]

1 minute ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:

I hate the double turn ever since an IDK player traumatised me with a turn 2 into turn 3 double turn. Tabled me before I could do anything about it.

Maybe instead of hating the game, try to analyse why they tabled you? talk throuh the game through with your opponent after the fact, telling what and why you did something, if you are playing starcraft, or dota, you can always either blame the opponent that they play an unbalanced faction, or that rng is not on your side, or you could go and watch your replays

[Satyrical Sophist]

1 minute ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:

I hate the double turn ever since an IDK player traumatised me with a turn 2 into turn 3 double turn. Tabled me before I could do anything about it.

It feels like something bad happening to you once probably shouldn’t put you off a whole mechanic. I got absolutely smashed by night haunt in a game in 2nd where they got off like 80% double fights (the whole 10+ charge gets a bonus fight) in a game. Didn’t stop me playing night haunt.

 

5 minutes ago, Gutsu17 said:

The smaller games thing is a very valid point, maybe add rules to limit lethality for games under 1500? Only X models from a unit can attack at a time or something like that

I do agree that it can be an issue in smaller games. Spearhead having set contents may well be helpful for that, since lists won’t be as focused. 
 

[Satyrical Sophist]

1 minute ago, Gutsu17 said:

Maybe instead of hating the game, try to analyse why they tabled you? talk throuh the game through with your opponent after the fact, telling what and why you did something, if you are playing starcraft, or dota, you can always either blame the opponent that they play an unbalanced faction, or that rng is not on your side, or you could go and watch your replays

There absolutely can be some truly atrocious march ups. Unfortunately it’s the price of having a bunch of varied factions, even if they are overall balanced apparently for example Hedonites of Slaanesh somehow have an 11% win rate vs Kharadrons in woehammers latest stats thingie. KO seem to have a fair amount of skewed results.

[Skreech Verminking]

11 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

There absolutely can be some truly atrocious march ups. Unfortunately it’s the price of having a bunch of varied factions, even if they are overall balanced apparently for example Hedonites of Slaanesh somehow have an 11% win rate vs Kharadrons in woehammers latest stats thingie. KO seem to have a fair amount of skewed results.

Mmmh one faction in particularly seem to be missing

[Gutsu17]

4 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Mmmh one faction in particularly seem to be missing

Bonesplitterz?

[Satyrical Sophist]

5 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

Mmmh one faction in particularly seem to be missing

I think they mention that they only included results if there were at least some number of them. Bonesplitters just aren’t played in large numbers.

https://woehammer.com/2024/03/10/aos-meta-stats-w-ending-3rd-march-2024-battlescroll-nullstone-cache/?amp=1

[Dragon-knight77]

3 hours ago, Clan's Cynic said:

Calis and Toll are back (again) for this week's Dawnbringer Chronicle.

The verimindoom is coming. Love the increasing attention Callis and Toll is getting they really scratch that 80's action hero trope set in a D&D universe.

Assuming those rats were the new Wolf rats because if it was the giant rats or rat swarm then it would be kind of hilarious coming from the @SG Warhound list.

Quote

The bitter tang of blastpowder invaded his nostrils, momentarily banishing the room’s foul aroma. He looked up. There, crouching in a corner of the empty cabinet, clutching a double-barrelled scattergun almost as large as they were, was Val Petras. 

Shattergun Arch-knight when?

[Skreech Verminking]

6 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

I think they mention that they only included results if there were at least some number of them. Bonesplitters just aren’t played in large numbers.

https://woehammer.com/2024/03/10/aos-meta-stats-w-ending-3rd-march-2024-battlescroll-nullstone-cache/?amp=1

I must say that ine guy getting 3 wins with an army most players consider unplayable, is quit amazing.

now that’s a guy I’d like to see taking part at the next world event held by gw 

[KingBrodd]

18 hours ago, Beliman said:

If that means a warband of new Kharadron models, count me in.

Kharadron are so due for a Warband I wouldnt be suprised if theyre the next Order Faction to get one!! 

12 hours ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

There absolutely can be some truly atrocious march ups. Unfortunately it’s the price of having a bunch of varied factions, even if they are overall balanced apparently for example Hedonites of Slaanesh somehow have an 11% win rate vs Kharadrons in woehammers latest stats thingie. KO seem to have a fair amount of skewed results.

This image right here is why Ill never touch the gaming side of the hobby. That looks like hell.

[Bosskelot]

You know some of the statements being made by ardent double turn defenders really read like the people making them have never played any game aside from Sigmar.

[Ejecutor]

24 minutes ago, Gutsu17 said:

Bonesplitterz?

Nah, it gotta be BOC 🤭

[Rawenwing]

Do you think we will see the warscrolls for the 4 Warcry warbands or they are more likely to appear directly in 4th edition?

[Ejecutor]

7 minutes ago, Rawenwing said:

Do you think we will see the warscrolls for the 4 Warcry warbands or they are more likely to appear directly in 4th edition?

Those bands are (at least two) from the dawnbringers books, it has to have rules for 3rd edition.

[Mayple]

To counter the "Don't like doubleturn? Just git gud"  (paraphrased, ofc) point I saw earlier: 

Competitive player here. Win most of my games, absolutely loathe the double turn. Feels bad winning with it, feels bad losing to it. Pretty much been my only real critique of AoS as a whole since forever. Those that remember me will know I've been pretty consistent about that 😅

That being said, I do like their attempts at trying to make it work, if only because their solutions keep accidentally pushing them into "the other player gets to react" kinda territory. Curious to see how they'll try to solve it this time. 

Immediate concern: as it seems priority roll still involves the winner picks who takes the turn, I sure hope that double-turn penalty system only applies if you yourself decide to take a double-turn, and not if it is decided for you. If not, it's gonna be a lot worse, just reversed. 

Time will tell! Feel like its an obvious flaw, so suuurely they've taken it into account 😎

 

[Gutsu17]

35 minutes ago, Bosskelot said:

You know some of the statements being made by ardent double turn defenders really read like the people making them have never played any game aside from Sigmar.

I think the idea that IgoUgo is inherently outdated and bad, and that there should be atleast something to brake it up is a pretty simple one, the problem is that Priority is the farthest gw is ready to go away from it

[chosen_of_khaine]

36 minutes ago, Bosskelot said:

You know some of the statements being made by ardent double turn defenders really read like the people making them have never played any game aside from Sigmar.

I find it's the opposite, it's usually people who have only played a handful of games (and aren't that good at it, if I'm being frank) that are the most vocal detractors of it. But that's just me.

 

40 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

This image right here is why Ill meber touch the gaming side of the hobby. That looks like hell.

You'll never play a game of AoS because of some of the match up disparities at tournament level play? Interesting, but to each their own.

[Tonhel]

34 minutes ago, Bosskelot said:

You know some of the statements being made by ardent double turn defenders really read like the people making them have never played any game aside from Sigmar.

I have to agree. The posts saying that double turn adds tactics and causes you to think ahead is a bit bizar as there are many games fantasy or historical that achieve the same or even better without it.

Double turn is in AoS, because GW thinks its revolutionary and gives in their opinion AoS something unique compared to other games. I am not a fan of it. As in most of our games the most important roll is the priority roll. It "currently" is to decisive in the outcome for the game.

[Grungnisson]

In all my time with AoS (since its release pretty much) I went to one tournament. Never in my life have I built a meta list. I play a game once a month, if lucky, to once every three months. I play for fun, for the experience, for the joy of putting my painted plastic toys on the table, and for the social time spent with my hobby friends.

I used to absolutely hate the double turn, and at some point I thought even of giving up.

Then I started listening to advice of some of the far more experienced players: always play for going second. Always play like you're going to get doubled. And boy, did that do absolutely nothing to my winning rate, but at least I finally realised that it wasn't the game's fault, it was mine.

I would hate to see it go. It has become a part of the experience, and a challenge. The priority roll is the core DNA of AoS and the game would be far less emotionally engaging without it (IMO).

But that leads us to 4.0 now, where as I see it, GW are aware of some people not liking it, while they definitely don't want to give up on it altogether. And I think it's a bit of a problem. Because in order to please the opponents, they clearly are trying to include elements that make taking the double less attractive and there is a risk they might push it too far and tipping the balance the other way too hard.

Now, of course, nobody else has to share my sentiment here. But at the same time, I do get a bit annoyed when people make sweeping statements about nobody liking the double turn, or absolutely everyone hating there. It's simply not true. There are people, like me, and all my AoS playing friends, who have no issue with it at least, or even appreciate and like it being the part of the AoS experience.

[Rawenwing]

19 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

Those bands are (at least two) from the dawnbringers books, it has to have rules for 3rd edition.

I was thinking the same, at least nighthaunt and lumineth have to be in the last book. Let’s hope the preorder is this weekend as i really want those riverblades!

[Ejecutor]

9 minutes ago, Rawenwing said:

I was thinking the same, at least nighthaunt and lumineth have to be in the last book. Let’s hope the preorder is this weekend as i really want those riverblades!

Those particular bands are from Book V. Maybe the newly announced ones come in Book VI. It is purely a production problem. We should have had them already.

[Gitzdee]

To be honest, i couldnt care less about the double turn. I dont do tournament play and i just play without the double turn. Less feel bad moments, more fun imho. Dont have time for mechanics that need to be build around, casual play for me it is. Just my opinion.

Hope they fix smaller points games though. Thats the thing im waiting for the most.

Edit: Also would like it if they give a heads up if they plan to remove any models/subfactions in the long run like they did with CoS. 

Edited March 29 by Gitzdee