The Rumour Thread

[Mutton]

I wish Bonds of Battle was just a core rule and we did away with weapon ranges. Measuring ranges every combat always takes a not-so-insignificant amount of time. It would also fix the ever-present 32-40mm infantry problem.

[KarrWolves]

1 hour ago, PrimeElectrid said:

4 or less wounds 

Can you tell us more about what wasn't in today's Warhammer Community post?

Like the Battle Tactics and Grand Strategies?

Or about the Sylvaneth (&Rat) Battletome?

Thanks in advance!

[Nezzhil]

My units with spears are crying right now.

[Vastus]

Ah okay so a new keyword, that clears things up. I thought the 'counts as 3' batallion in the original rumors was called Veterans.

That's...interesting but I'm not sure if I like it. Rules like the +1 damage batallion (assuming that's true as well) heavily alter the viability of basically all infantry in either direction and various magnitudes. It would take so many adjustments to properly balance that out, that by the time they could feasibly do so, this season has already passed. You now want your GV units to have as many models and as high a number of attacks as possible to benefit from this the most. Meanwhile units like Ogor Gluttons benefit relatively less from this since they have a lower volume of bodies and attacks.

It does seem like conditional Battleline also qualifies, which can be good or bad depending.

Have to wait and see a bit, but this feels a tad hamfisted and will have far-reaching effects far beyond just making battleline more important.

[Nerdkingdan]

I was nervous about this, and had been thinking about negative implications, but seeing the actual rules that we have so far I'm a bit more optimistic.    Withholding final judgment.

 

[novakai]

9 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

My units with spears are crying right now.

They still have purpose if you attacking from the third rank or your unable to pile in to attack due to coherency.

[Vastus]

On a different note, this sounds interesting:

'With rules for exploding realmstone caches that must be claimed as objectives, vast tunnel networks to ambush opponents through, and scuttling horrors guarding valuable caches, the General’s Handbook offers a fresh crop of strategic conundrums to solve using the only language that makes sense in the Mortal Realms – war.'

We may get some more interactive objectives and maps/battle plans.

[Enoby]

7 minutes ago, novakai said:

They still have purpose if you attacking from the third rank or your unable to pile in to attack due to coherency.

I think this is true for units on a small base, but for units on 32+mm bases, I don't think spears allowed attacking in the third rank. This is what I meant by these rules being too general - it's fine for some units, but other units/weapon options have been missed and that's a shame. 

They can't catch everything with general rules but it would be good if they had specific exceptions (e.g. Chaos Warrior Halberds had a benefit, or if Squig Hoppers could attack in two ranks). It would take a lot of time for rules writers, but at the same time, the GHB is a paid product that should have maximum effort put into it.

[Mutton]

26 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

My units with spears are crying right now.

Just say they're using the other weapon option. It's fine. Nobody cares. We aren't 40k players.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Mutton

[KingBrodd]

31 minutes ago, Baron Klatz said:

I really love the flavor change here. 
 

Marching from the open plains of Thondia where monsters roamed free to cramp winding tunnels with terrifying storms overhead is thematically moving from beasts to the heavy elite as stomping Ogors & clanking armored demigods push their way through shifting tunnels(pretty much the intestines of the continent. Gallet=Gullet) and claim important objectives while watching for giant creeping insects and explosive realmstone clusters. 
 

Very excited to grab this and see the future ones as they travel through the varied realmscapes. Will we head north towards the Gnarled Woods & Gutfort next and focus on scouts & sieges? Continue west and hit the shoreline strongholds and ports that may mean infantry and war machines/airships to defend them from monsters or flyer focus for sea island battles? Or are we gonna go south into the Everwinter ravages and focus on monsters & monster riders again to push through the ferocious blizzards? 
 

Really hoping each season continues to drop a Thondia-like Tome as well. Never enough Mortal Realms lore.  

Lastly the big focus on Gallet tunnels and insects makes that new Incarnate rumor of a giant realmstone spider elemental seem all but certain now. Probably will be the July 4th anniversary reveal. 🕷 

Couldnt agree more mate!! I really hope we move towards the Great Gutfort and have the Ogors take a key role in the narrative!!

I also hope it means that a new Seasons of War will be upon us soon. Would love to have it centre on Gallet and the cramped tunnel fighting with beasts.

 Gallet’s bugs range from the fist-sized to the unimaginably huge. The Spiderfang grots love it.

This to me confirms your idea mate!! Spider Incarnate coming soon!!

[novakai]

Maybe next season is on a steeple and there rules for mounted Cavalry units lol

Edited June 15, 2022 by novakai

[Harioch]

16 minutes ago, novakai said:

Maybe next season is on a steeple and there rules found for mounted Cavalry units lol

Part of me wish that Gw steamline rules for unit roles, like this Bond rule for infantry. Maybe the "Mortal wound on a 2+/4+/whatever if this unit has charged during that turn" will be the one for cavalry. 

I have no complaints about thoses rules right now. I need to try these before making any judgment. Something that I'm sure however is that both my zombies/mortek armies will surely not play as they did.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Harioch

[KarrWolves]

10 Decimators (430pts) vs any 11+ models of Infantry:

Buffed with:
- Bounty Hunter Battalion (+1 damage against infantry)
- Knight Excelsior Battle Trait (+1hit/wound if more models in enemy unit)
- Unleash Thy Hatred Holy Command (+1 attack)

Against 2+ save: 56 damage
Against 3+ save: 75 damage
Against 4+ save: 94 damage
Against 5+ and worse: 112 damage

You can one-shot 20 Pink Horrors of Tzeentch.

Edited June 15, 2022 by KarrWolves

[Baron Klatz]

5 minutes ago, KarrWolves said:

10 Decimators (430pts) vs any 11+ models of Infantry:

Buffed with:
- Bounty Hunter Battalion (+1 damage against infantry)
- Knight Excelsior Battle Trait (+1hit/wound if more models in enemy unit)
- Unleash Thy Hatred Holy Command (+1 attack)

Against 2+ save: 56 damage
Against 3+ save: 75 damage
Against 4+ save: 94 damage
Against 5+ and worse: 112 damage

You can one-shot 20 Pink Horrors of Tzeentch.

 

 

 

 

Lovely~ 🥰 

This was also pointed out on Reddit:

”One funny counter to Expert Conqueror hordes is Orruk Brutes with You Messin'? . Your thirty Clanrats count as ninety models? No, buddy, they count as zero.”

Seems the kings of the Realm of Beasts(Ironjawz & Knights Excelsior) are gonna make sure newcomers that just fell through the Realmgates know who’s in charge.  

Edited June 15, 2022 by Baron Klatz

[angrycontra]

I know it's maybe too early to complain, but am I the only one who sees that +1 damage battalion potentially being so broken that it ruins the game until it is either banned in events/local games or changed/removed completely. Adding +1 damage to almost any unit is already broken (and there is no stack limit to damage bonuses so ironjaws with +2 damage can become a thing) and it just turns the game into "whoever gets to attack first, auto wins", because the damage is absurdly high that you don't need more than single turn to delete a unit. And this in turn will just lead people to use more units that can't be harmed by this (dragons, stormfiends, magmadroths in lofnir etc.) which is literally the opposite intention of this "grand battleline battlepack". Certain armies will be completely butchered by this, because their battleline options are too poor for it.

[Grimrock]

I am happy they've finally put reasonable coherency rules in the game, but I agree with @Enoby that this is far more of a bandaid than an actual fix. It does nothing to help models like skull crushers or varanguard. Heck with the +1 damage battalion it might actually be an overall nerf to most infantry.

It'll be interesting to see how everything pans out. On first glance I'd say that these rules would actually lead to a massive reduction in infantry models to avoid the liability of getting nuked by units that have suddenly doubled in damage, but the battle tactics and strategies will likely change that. If they require veterans to complete then there will at least be a reason to take them, and I think what we'll get in the end is just shorter games. Both armies take bounty hunter veterans because they need to for tactics, combats almost always resolve in a single round due to double damage, and most games are over by turn 3 or earlier. Whether that's a good or bad thing really just depends on what kind of game you want to play. 

[Enoby]

6 minutes ago, angrycontra said:

I know it's maybe too early to complain, but am I the only one who sees that +1 damage battalion potentially being so broken that it ruins the game until it is either banned in events/local games or changed/removed completely. Adding +1 damage to almost any unit is already broken (and there is no stack limit to damage bonuses so ironjaws with +2 damage can become a thing) and it just turns the game into "whoever gets to attack first, auto wins", because the damage is absurdly high that you don't need more than single turn to delete a unit. And this in turn will just lead people to use more units that can't be harmed by this (dragons, stormfiends, magmadroths in lofnir etc.) which is literally the opposite intention of this "grand battleline battlepack". Certain armies will be completely butchered by this, because their battleline options are too poor for it.

I don't want to say it's broken, but I can see some potential issues. 

If it's +1 damage against any (non-mount) battleline, then I'm afraid the game may become more rocket tag, where whoever strikes first wins. In addition, +1 damage is perhaps the most dangerous buff to give out because it doesn't scale equally.

As we've seen with Decimators, +1 damage gets better for every attack you have, so now battleline units with multiple attacks are considerably better. It would have been better if it was additional rend or +1 to wound - still very useful, but not quite "wipe your unit off the board with a sneeze useful". 

I like that they're being experimental, but I'm worried it will have unintended consequences that will break some units while leaving others useless. It remains to be seen, but the more general something is, the more problems it's prone to.

[mojojojo101]

1 hour ago, Mutton said:

I wish Bonds of Battle was just a core rule and we did away with weapon ranges. Measuring ranges every combat always takes a not-so-insignificant amount of time. It would also fix the ever-present 32-40mm infantry problem.

Unless your in tight, base to base contact, your still going to need to measure stuff with this system anyway right?

As is, your unit can be close enough to be coherent (within 1") but not close enough to attack (within 1/2" of something within 1/2").

Can't say I'm a massive fan of this, it seems like piling rules on top of rules instead of just fixing the actual bad rule at its base (or fixing weapon ranges on warscrolls).

[Enoby]

Also, as an aside, they mention that the points are in a separate book:

"It’s bundled with a 34-page Pitched Battle Profiles book with all the latest points values, which will also be available online for free."

This is fine and all, but a little disappointing to hear - I'd hoped they'd stopped putting points in the GHB so they could update points more reactively online, rather than being restricted by print.

[Nezzhil]

3 minutes ago, Enoby said:

Also, as an aside, they mention that the points are in a separate book:

"It’s bundled with a 34-page Pitched Battle Profiles book with all the latest points values, which will also be available online for free."

This is fine and all, but a little disappointing to hear - I'd hoped they'd stopped putting points in the GHB so they could update points more reactively online, rather than being restricted by print.

The booklet will not be fully updated as always.

[KrispyXIV]

Any info on the restrictions/composition of the "Bounty Hunters" +1 damage battalion?

We've heard "Troops", but 1-2 Troops vs 2-3 Troops is a big deal.   

Anything that walks onto the table with +1 damage bolted on will have a big target painted on it, with folks planning to engage it with stuff it won't get that bonus against.  

1 or two targets may be pretty manageable. 

[Enoby]

2 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

The booklet will not be fully updated as always.

I think that's true for new books (probably Nurgle onwards), but iirc, 'old' factions get their full update in the GHB points book and the online part is for new factions, or particularly egregious old factions. However, old factions that need a bit of a tweak won't see that between the physical and digital copies.

It does make you wonder why they bother with physical points books at all.

I'm personally just hoping for a Slaangor rewrite 😔

[Landohammer]

1 hour ago, Ganigumo said:

Overwhelming Assault? More like Underwhelming Assault 🤣

Like seriously you need to target a unit with 4 or less wounds with less than 6 models and roll the die.
Most valid targets for this won't be a threat, and the for few that are it will still be a gamble. I'm sure there will be situations where you use it, and it pays off, but I'm not a fan of this.
It does work most of the time against grot heroes though.

 

Its pretty situational I agree. But it does seem geared toward small but elite infantry units like Annihilators or maybe Ironguts. In those situations, a multi-charge is universally a bad idea. This at least gives you a shot at taking them down before they wreck you with return attacks.

 

[zilberfrid]

30 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I don't want to say it's broken, but I can see some potential issues. 

If it's +1 damage against any (non-mount) battleline, then I'm afraid the game may become more rocket tag, where whoever strikes first wins. In addition, +1 damage is perhaps the most dangerous buff to give out because it doesn't scale equally.

As we've seen with Decimators, +1 damage gets better for every attack you have, so now battleline units with multiple attacks are considerably better. It would have been better if it was additional rend or +1 to wound - still very useful, but not quite "wipe your unit off the board with a sneeze useful". 

I like that they're being experimental, but I'm worried it will have unintended consequences that will break some units while leaving others useless. It remains to be seen, but the more general something is, the more problems it's prone to.

What about Gyrocopters with steam guns? They would kill so many for so few points.

[novakai]

5 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

What about Gyrocopters with steam guns? They would kill so many for so few points.

I believe it melee attacks only