The Rumour Thread

[Charles]

I really hope they don’t ditch all of the features that make AoS unique. Alternating combat, priority role are both excellent.

Also I hope they don’t go too much into command points anything that distracts from the miniatures and requires off the board lists really detracts from what makes Warhammer special. 

[chord]

IF this is all true, sounds like the things that AoS did that brought me into wargming are going away.  Bummer...

[HorticulusTGA]

14 minutes ago, LLV said:

Here's the rumour engine for the new death unit:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/02/06/rumour-engine-6th-february-2018/

Yeah, when the Knight of Shrouds came out we thought this RE was from his cloak - it's not the case. Good spot. 

[Blueraven84]

I'm not saying 40k is the best ruleset ever but it seems AOS could take couple hints from it and update the ruleset to the real aos 2.0

Im sure people have playtested it and tried if it works without heavily criticized rules like double turn or sniping characters....(just to name a few rules I would love to see gone)

[RuneBrush]

59 minutes ago, LLV said:

Not sure- just that you get command points to use command abilities. 

Hmm, that is quite interesting if that pans out - potentially could mean that there's a point to field heroes with a command ability without it being wasted.

To be honest, I'd not be that keen on losing the priority roll, nor 40k like combat, but will watch this space.  The rest makes sense - and new starter set ties in with the rescheduled AoS Open Day too.

[Rogue Explorator]

8 minutes ago, chord said:

IF this is all true, sounds like the things that AoS did that brought me into wargming are going away.  Bummer...

I am quite astonished how trusting everyone in this thread is so far to be honest. But then again, AoS has not had that many fake leaks since it came out (the time between end times and AoS released was pretty wild from what I gather, though I was not there to see it).

 

Of course, the rumors could be true, but when a poster goes from speculating along with everyone else to open floodgates of insider info pretty much overnight, I feel a bit of caution and salt is appropiate.

[Carnelian]

I was also wondering how much do these guys really know?

Edited March 26, 2018 by Carnelian

[LLV]

22 minutes ago, Rogue Explorator said:

I am quite astonished how trusting everyone in this thread is so far to be honest. But then again, AoS has not had that many fake leaks since it came out (the time between end times and AoS released was pretty wild from what I gather, though I was not there to see it).

 

Of course, the rumors could be true, but when a poster goes from speculating along with everyone else to open floodgates of insider info pretty much overnight, I feel a bit of caution and salt is appropiate.

New Friends

[Blueraven84]

Rumours are rumours, not facts. I want to thank LLV for juicy bits, whether they turnout to be true or not.

[Barkanaut]

43 minutes ago, chord said:

IF this is all true, sounds like the things that AoS did that brought me into wargming are going away.  Bummer...

 

[LLV]

3 minutes ago, Blueraven84 said:

Rumours are rumours, not facts. I want to thank LLV for juicy bits, whether they turnout to be true or not.

Thanks. Time will tell.

There are actually a few extra bits that I was asked not to say yet which I'll post when im allowed. New stormcast related stuff and the name of AoS phase 2.

Edited March 26, 2018 by LLV

[fredster4050]

26 minutes ago, Rogue Explorator said:

I am quite astonished how trusting everyone in this thread is so far to be honest. But then again, AoS has not had that many fake leaks since it came out (the time between end times and AoS released was pretty wild from what I gather, though I was not there to see it).

 

Of course, the rumors could be true, but when a poster goes from speculating along with everyone else to open floodgates of insider info pretty much overnight, I feel a bit of caution and salt is appropiate.

Heaps of salt!!

Doing away with those core mechanics makes for a generic operating system (iWarhammer anyone?) which may please the more competitive minded but does away with the uniqueness of the game. The double turn ability makes for some slightly asymmetrical warfare and is great for storytelling and for uncertainty in planning making for a more interesting game. Some players dislike the rule but it is not universally hated, by Khorne's Fiery Breath I hope this is just rumour nonsense!

Alternate combat regardless of charging prevents alpha strike shenanigans and that is a HUGE plus to this game!!

[HorticulusTGA]

4 minutes ago, LLV said:

Thanks. Time will tell.

There are actually a few extra bits that I was asked not to say yet which I'll post when im allowed. New stormcast related stuff and the name of AoS phase 2.

TY too !

And please, at least a hint  

[Skabnoze]

16 minutes ago, LLV said:

the name of AoS phase 2.

It should be: Age of Gork

or maybe Age of Mork?...

[LLV]

44 minutes ago, fredster4050 said:

Heaps of salt!!

Doing away with those core mechanics makes for a generic operating system (iWarhammer anyone?) which may please the more competitive minded but does away with the uniqueness of the game. The double turn ability makes for some slightly asymmetrical warfare and is great for storytelling and for uncertainty in planning making for a more interesting game. Some players dislike the rule but it is not universally hated, by Khorne's Fiery Breath I hope this is just rumour nonsense!

Alternate combat regardless of charging prevents alpha strike shenanigans and that is a HUGE plus to this game!!

Do remember that this is matched play we are talking about - it is soley meant for competitive minded. If players want the fun stuff thats what narrative and open play are for. GW created the '3 way to play' model for a reason.

[Swooper]

1 hour ago, HorticulusTGA said:

Yeah, when the Knight of Shrouds came out we thought this RE was from his cloak - it's not the case. Good spot. 

Knight of Shrouds was revealed months before that RE, though.

[SirPergrin]

The double turn and the alternate activation of the combat phase are what define AoS for me personally, and i think it will be a mistake to see them go, even if it is a matched play only change.  Otherwise i am hyped from LLV's rumours and as a SCE and a Death player, i can't wait for Summer!

[fredster4050]

32 minutes ago, LLV said:

Do remember that this is matched play we are talking about - it is soley meant for competitive minded. If players want the fun stuff thats what narrative and open play are for. GW created the '3 way to play' model for a reason.

Absolutely, but the core mechanics have remained the same. Are they saying they'll split it into 2 different rules sets; matched vs narrative/open?

[LLV]

3 minutes ago, fredster4050 said:

Absolutely, but the core mechanics have remained the same. Are they saying they'll split it into 2 different rules sets; matched vs narrative/open?

No, just that expecting GW to think of narrative and open players when making the matched play rules(which they have finally come to realize is what drives majority of sales) is unlikely.

 

[Soulsmith]

What I really don't want is the removal of damage carrying over from one attack to multiple models. If my megaboss has a huge axe doing two damage, it simply goes through one guy and takes out the other. The armour save represents them both. Makes sense to me.

[mhsellwood]

Very early days, so who know what the outcome will be.

So, my reaction to the current rumours:

• I play a fair bit of 8th Edition 40K and do enjoy it, so not fussed about certain cross pollinations
• I actually prefer the chargers are all resolved first rule - gives a bit more oomph to the speed stat as getting the charge off can allow a line breaking mass attack with quick movers. This makes cavalry a much more different choice compared to infantry. In 40K the problem is often that many armies are able to mechanise to such an extent that if you can't move fast you are not a useful assault unit. In AoS I think in game it will do a lot to differentiate units.
• I don't have an issue with the roll for priority every turn - as others have said it does introduce a lot more uncertainty to the game, and a bit of uncertainty is a good thing. However from reading various forums it is probably one of the sticking points to a wider acceptance of the game, so it would be nice to see rolling for priority every turn as a core rule, and within Matched Play an advanced rule that basically switches it back to a first turn roll off.
• Command Points is an interesting idea. I wonder where these would come from? Somebody else mentioned Malign Portents which has a Command Point equivalent and you gain a D6 + fixed amounts from specific key words, so perhaps that? Or perhaps command points come from the army build part where Battleline gives +1 point etc, or a more detailed army building approach?

Finally I see some people bewailing the fact AoS will turn into 40K, and we will have alpha strikes and first turn charges and games finished by turn 2. I do not see that happening. My reasons are as follows:

• Tough things in 40K are hugely tough compared to tough things in AoS. You think Nagash is tough? Compare him to Guilliman - you can't even shoot Guilliman, he has a 3+ save that cannot be modified, and he comes back from the dead! Or an AoS monster versus say a Land Raider... What this results in is weapons that can destroy a Land Raider are required, and these weapons then vaporise things like orc buggies so lots of firepower on the board. AoS does not do that as in general there is less of a binary - right weapon is success, wrong weapon is fail (eg. Witch Aelves will do good in your army whether you fight hordes of Skeletons or a small number of Stonehorns, while lascannons in 40K are good if your opponent has good targets for them). In 40K the result is that the game is over very quickly (and potentially before the game really starts), because you either have the tools and you do the job, or you do not and the job is done to you.
• A basic guy in 40K can mostly shoot you up to 24" away, and is likely to carry weapons that can hit at 36" - 48". So if you are a gun line you can not move and shoot cast firepower from one side of the board to the other. To counter this, close combat units are often able to charge turn 1 (turn 2 at the latest) and wipe out whole units. So you have really extreme units. In AoS most armies struggle to put down really serious firepower at any kind of range, so damage is overwhelmingly done in close combat meaning that games tend to go for more turns. I don't see this changing.
• Units move faster in 40K, or do not need to move at all. This builds up the tempo of the game, and again encourages a binary of units - units are fast (Death Company in a Blood Angels army can cover 24" + 3d6" on turn one, rhino mounted Berzerkers move 12" + d6" turn 1, charge 9" + 2d6" turn 2, Bloodletters drop in at 9.1" then charge 3d6" + 1" with a re-roll on turn one) or they do not move and shoot the other side of the board (Imperial Guard infantry with Mortars firing from behind cover at 48", devastator squads with quadruple lascannons, Dark Reapers always hitting on 3+ and able to shoot from behind cover, twin assault cannon razorbacks with re-rolls galore). So, on turn 1 you have access to tools that allow you to cripple your opponent. I don't see any real equivalent within AoS.
• To sum up, the issues that are being identified with 8th Edition 40K (and again, full disclosure I actually enjoy playing it, far more than any previous edition of 40K) are more a result of the whole setting being turned up to 11 rather than inherent issues with the rules

[Qaz]

I would miss the double turn, it is one of the things that keep aos fresh for me. 

3 hours ago, Soulsmith said:

What I really don't want is the removal of damage carrying over from one attack to multiple models. 

I am of the opposite opinion, having no carry-overs mean that you have a more interesting weapon consideration and create another dimension of choice: should I pick weapon A to kill hordes or weapon B to kill elites.

[Jamopower]

If the combat changes to 40k style, I might have to start looking for a new game to play with my models. It is very non-interactive compared to what we have now  It's also the main reason why my interest in the new 40k died after the first game on the release day.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Jamopower

[Aeryenn]

Just when I believed ghb17 to be the worst thing that happened to AoS they come with this. It might be the end of AoS for me as well. 

[Johann]

27 minutes ago, Jamopower said:

If the combat changes to 40k style, I might have to start looking for a new game to play with my models. It is very non-interactive compared to what we have now  It's also the main reason why my interest in the new 40k died after the first game on the release day.

I don’t understand the negativity against the 40k combat phase, is there something besides  charging units strike first? It really prefer this, then charges matter and it makes sense to charge with more than one unit. In the second fighting phase we have the alternation as usual.