The Rumour Thread

[badnewsbeers]

What do you guys think they’ll do with armies like the Mawtribes? So many models are ****** resin on squares bases. Do you think they’ll fix this before moving on to 3.0?

[Kasper]

  

1 hour ago, Gistradagis said:

Not having much around people playing might be the explanation, then. Many people aren't particularly happy with the direction Seraphon and Lumineth have taken (other than their players), and people fear we're seeing the rise of a meta of hero-sniping and factions with overwhelming control over the Hero phase. With Seraphon especially, it's the first time in my time with AoS where I've consistently seen people go "lfg AoS 2k (no seraphon)" so much.

While some things are fixed with a simple rule introduction (hero protection similar to 40k), it is true that the last year or so has seen some impressive power creep. Perhaps that makes people hope for AoS 3.0 to be at least in the works already.

This sounds so stupid. Where do you see "lfg AoS 2k (no seraphon"?

 

22 minutes ago, swarmofseals said:

 

• Misattribution of loss. There is nothing GW can do about this. In any game there are always lots of people who will attribute their struggles to luck or bad design rather than difference in skill etc. I suspect this is a huge factor in complaints about AOS.

Absolutely. So many people are too naive to even consider for a moment that maybe their list wasnt as finetuned as the opponent's list, or their deployment was terrible or they simply made a lot of bad mistakes during the game. Maybe the opponent was simply at a higher skill level and better at playing the game. There are a lot of factors why you lose a game of Age of Sigmar, but people are so quick to jump the "your army is way OP compared to mine and there was nothing I could do". 

Somewhat related to this - Having played and observed games in a lot of different clubs (what I would consider "middle skilled players"), I wonder how many AoS games are actually played correctly by the rules. My guesstimate would be 20%. The remaining 80% are games where people completely butcher either core rules or their own army rules that significantly alter how the game plays. This isnt necessarily on purpose, but simply due to not understanding the rules properly.

I have seen people play Slaanesh with Keeper + Archaon where they used the Excess of Violence to literally fight 2 times with both heroes right away before the enemy had a chance to activate a single unit (this wasnt due to Locus of Diversion) because thats how they read online how the rules work and how they understood Excess of Violence to be working. Needless to say, the receiving player thought Slaanesh and Archaon was badshit crazy op.  

I have seen people recently play with Lord Kroak thinking Celestial Deliverance was boardwide spell and other people play him with the oldschool Celestial Deliverance where it was *any* unit within range, not a max number of 3 units.

Edited July 6, 2020 by Kasper

[KriticalKhan]

1 minute ago, badnewsbeers said:

What do you guys think they’ll do with armies like the Mawtribes? So many models are ****** resin on squares bases. Do you think they’ll fix this before moving on to 3.0?

Unless that rumor about "GW resin production is stopping in [CURRENT YEAR+2]" ends up being true, then I think the most anyone can expect are reboxes after all the old Fantasy stock is gone.

 

[KingBrodd]

3 hours ago, Ogregut said:

My guess is stormcast vs orruks which hopfully means a hugely expanded range if the current tread of starter sets stands. Look at nighthaunt, death guard and new necrons. 

Stormcast VS Orruks would be awesome. I'd love for the Greenskins to take centre stage as it feels as though Death and Chaos have had the lions share of being the bad guys since AOS began and the Orruks have been sort of there or as fodder.

Orruks especially Ironjawz need more models pushed through, if they bring in standard Orruks for the Warclans that would be amazing, especially to see their new sculpts all Age of Sigmafied.

Would be a great way to reintroduce Chariots if they wanted, massive hulking chunks of metal pulled by some huge muscular beast, something like a Fantasy Hippo strapped with metal and metal tipped tusks.

6 minutes ago, badnewsbeers said:

What do you guys think they’ll do with armies like the Mawtribes? So many models are ****** resin on squares bases. Do you think they’ll fix this before moving on to 3.0?

Hopefully they'd update them going forward, slowly fazing out the resin . Who knows though that may take until they recieve a 3.0 Battletome which would be years away.

[Valentine009]

15 minutes ago, badnewsbeers said:

What do you guys think they’ll do with armies like the Mawtribes? So many models are ****** resin on squares bases. Do you think they’ll fix this before moving on to 3.0?

It's really just the butcher variants and maneaters (which are super easy to kit-bash).

Tyrant and Hunter both got plastic kits, (i'll ignore the Gorger). There are a lot of things you can use for Sabretusks, I use Fenrisian Wolves.

37 minutes ago, swarmofseals said:

 

• Matchup problems. Unfortunately our hobby is rather niche, so unless you travel a lot or happen to live in a real hotspot you're probably playing most of your games against a handful of people. Many only have one regular opponent. Even if the game overall is very well balanced, there are always going to be specific matchups that are lopsided, and people whose main experience of the game is a lopsided matchup are understandably going to complain about it (and justifiably so!). I'm not sure there is a solution to this problem though without sacrificing key elements of the game.

I think this is becoming more and more of a problem. Case in point... Mawtribes. With so much D2, they pretty much lose to a faction like Coalesced Seraphon. Petrifex have a cake-walk against armies that cant throw out mortal wounds. A ton of factions that are reliant on 4w support characters now get them insta-gibbed by 3 or 4 armies. The new Lumineth spell that DOUBLES THE COST OF COMMAND TRAITS. Some of the things out there are just not beatable with certain factions.

[KriticalKhan]

3 minutes ago, Valentine009 said:

(i'll ignore the Gorger).

 

Based on Mawtribe's rule, so did GW.

[Mutton]

One thing I'd like to see in AoS3 is the introduction of a "minimum damage" rule like some things in 40k---e.g., "this D6 damage weapon does at least 3 damage." Or for something like the new Blast rules, where units above X number of models automatically take the maximum number of hits/damage.

Also, get rid of drops as a first turn deciding factor. It's a terrible mechanic that only limits army creativity. Battalions are already insanely good.

[Neverchosen]

43 minutes ago, Mutton said:

One thing I'd like to see in AoS3 is the introduction of a "minimum damage" rule like some things in 40k---e.g., "this D6 damage weapon does at least 3 damage." Or for something like the new Blast rules, where units above X number of models automatically take the maximum number of hits/damage.

Also, get rid of drops as a first turn deciding factor. It's a terrible mechanic that only limits army creativity. Battalions are already insanely good.

I feel like 40K 9th ed seems to have taken some lessons from AOS, so I am sure it goes both ways and we will get some of the transferable 40k rules.

[LuminethMage]

2 hours ago, Valentine009 said:

It's really just the butcher variants and maneaters (which are super easy to kit-bash).

Tyrant and Hunter both got plastic kits, (i'll ignore the Gorger). There are a lot of things you can use for Sabretusks, I use Fenrisian Wolves.

I think this is becoming more and more of a problem. Case in point... Mawtribes. With so much D2, they pretty much lose to a faction like Coalesced Seraphon. Petrifex have a cake-walk against armies that cant throw out mortal wounds. A ton of factions that are reliant on 4w support characters now get them insta-gibbed by 3 or 4 armies. The new Lumineth spell that DOUBLES THE COST OF COMMAND TRAITS. Some of the things out there are just not beatable with certain factions.

As you can see from my member name, I obviously have skin in the game, but can we at least wait until you have actually played against Lumineth before already stating it's impossible to win because of one ability? You usually have some ways to adept at least a bit (artifacts, traits, buy a command point at list building etc.). 

Not saying that it couldn't turn out to be too strong and therefore need to be adjusted (give it at range, maximum per turn or get rid of it altogether), but already going "nothing can be done, this sucks" before you even have played one game against them seems a bit pre-mature, or? If Teclis is not on the field, this spell is not at all certain to go off, much less so every turn (and can only be cast by a 5 wound 5+ save hero ...). And if Teclis is on the field, then your opponent put a lot of points into bringing him, so how about wait and see? 

GW has to experiment with new abilities for new armies, otherwise everything will just be stale after a while. Some of them obviously are too strong and need adjustment, but there are also abilities/units where people at first thought they are OP, but in the end didn't turn out to be. Other times people were accurate with their predictions. 

I feel the same about the Seraphon, most people haven't even played against them yet, and already banning them from groups? (This part is not specifically quoting you) 

[Chaos Shepard]

On the subject of what to expect from AOS 3rd Edition, I have two thing I would like to see. One, we will get the new moral system that is being introduced into 40K 9th edition, this one just seems tailor made for AOS. And two, I hope that they wont get rid of the double turn, unless they plan on fully uprooting the "I Go You Go" system.

[Beastmaster]

8 hours ago, badnewsbeers said:

What do you guys think they’ll do with armies like the Mawtribes? So many models are ****** resin on squares bases. Do you think they’ll fix this before moving on to 3.0?

In the case of Mawtribes it’s not that many. And since it’s mostly miniatures which have a niche that’s fillable with other units (and which don’t have the strongest rules anyway), it’s not really a big problem for most players.

That said, I’d be the first to order new plastic yhetees. 😁

Edited July 7, 2020 by Beastmaster

[Nezzhil]

GITMOB returns to the GHB2020!!! 100% confirmed!

[whispersofblood]

9 hours ago, swarmofseals said:

Personally I doubt that there is a set of rules changes that could singlehandedly level the field. I don't think bringing everything down to the lowest level though is the only answer either. I think bringing everything up to the higher level would work just as well, and it would future-proof better against power creep. Some problems with lower tier armies can be fixed with points changes, others are more mechanical and would probably require warscroll rewrites or battletome changes.

I think there are a few major sources of complaint:

• Actual faction imbalances, particularly for outlier factions like pre-nerf DoK, FeC, Slaanesh, Tzeentch etc. on the high end and Nighthaunt, SCE and the like on the low end.
• Mismatches between expectations and reality. Some people want to take whatever models they like the most and still have it be super competitive. To some extent this can be reduced with improved internal balance, but there will always be people who want to take weird compositions or quirky armies that are just not that good on the tabletop. When these people admit to themselves that they are making a trade off it's just fine, but when they want to have their cake and eat it to it can lead to a lot of complaints. A good example is the all-squig army. Squigs are awesome, but their fundamental design is not conducive to competitive play. Any army that is totally relying on random movement is going to have a lot of trouble putting up consistent results.
• Misattribution of loss. There is nothing GW can do about this. In any game there are always lots of people who will attribute their struggles to luck or bad design rather than difference in skill etc. I suspect this is a huge factor in complaints about AOS.
• Matchup problems. Unfortunately our hobby is rather niche, so unless you travel a lot or happen to live in a real hotspot you're probably playing most of your games against a handful of people. Many only have one regular opponent. Even if the game overall is very well balanced, there are always going to be specific matchups that are lopsided, and people whose main experience of the game is a lopsided matchup are understandably going to complain about it (and justifiably so!). I'm not sure there is a solution to this problem though without sacrificing key elements of the game.
• Negative Play Experiences. This one is really hard to tackle because one person's NPE is another person's preferred play style. There are some folks who just seethe whenever they play against a defensive army. Some players just want to run in and bash the other guy, and defensive armies are going to be very good against that playstyle. When your primary enjoyment of the game gets negated by your opponent's strategy it feels bad. Of course it goes the other way, too. Some people hate playing against any alpha strike army even if the game is winnable. They just don't like it when an opponent can take a third of their army off the table on turn 1. But just like some people love to turtle, others love to rush. Unless GW tamps down on these strategies to the point where all factions play basically the same way on the table there are going to be folks who have NPEs because the game is designed to accommodate a variety of playstyles. 

Hopefully the first point on this list will decrease over time, but the other four are never going away and there will always be people complaining about balance because of them.

_____________________________

Side note: if the Blood Knight point drop is true they are pretty spicy now! I wonder if there is a shell there that can make them work.

Mate you're doing Teclis' work here but humans prefer to do anything besides work harder, or accept capability.

Mechanical problems aren't a level of issue the majority of gamers want to or know how to deal with. Most have no idea what an economy is and just want point increases on anything better than the thing they prefer. But, then most communities are just a reflection of the irrationality of our society so...

Then there is a large portion of the player base that don't even know the rules of the game. See; the reactions to the one wound negation roll.

Edited July 7, 2020 by whispersofblood

[KingBrodd]

1 hour ago, Nezzhil said:

GITMOB returns to the GHB2020!!! 100% confirmed!

Seriously!?

[Nezzhil]

1 minute ago, KingBrodd said:

Seriously!?

yeah!... but... none of the Destruction armies can ally with them.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Nezzhil

[Thamalys]

59 minutes ago, whispersofblood said:

Negative Play Experiences.

In the context of competitive play, I genuinely don't get the concept of a NPE. Every tournament I have been, every time I have been moving around to a new table I have heard somebody going "ah, the <filthy netlist> list. That's it, I'm done - nothing I can do about this one *sighs*". If anything, I believe it's the opponent who is having a NPE - being blamed for bringing a tool which maximises their chances to win. It's a tournament after all! Note that I play exclusively what are perceived to be low-tier factions (Nighthaunt, Soulblight and Legion of Blood). Do I win tournaments? No, not quite. Is this because I am playing allegedly weak factions? No, it's definitely because I'm not good enough. I believe the beauty of AoS is that your ability play the game outmatches the low-tier top-tier divide. There is always a chance against every list. Do I enjoy the useless process of trying to dislodge 30 Hearthguard Berzerkers from an objective? Of course not, but I shouldn't be in that position to start with. Does my opponent enjoy being charged by my fully buffed 10 Blood Knights? Of course not, but they should have tied them up last turn instead. Don't blame the rules!

The Honest Wargamer (love the guy and his show, by the way) would tell you that you have a NPE when you can't do anything about it. Yes, there are things against which you can't do anything (and yes, a couple of those might be coming up with Teclis) but those are just a few pieces of the puzzle that you have to factor in while both building your list and playing your games. If we are talking about showing up at the local shop with Changehost... well, I for one wouldn't do that, but in tournaments? Bring it on, it's fair game - deal with it with your tactical prowess of jump on the power creep train. Both are perfectly valid choices to me.

6 hours ago, LuminethMage said:

can we at least wait until you have actually played against Lumineth before already stating it's impossible to win because of one ability?

Yes we can - and we should. The same with the dreaded "Salamanders List" -  I think I know what to do with that one (he said confidently), I haven't thought about the Lumineth yet... but that's the thing, I welcome new factions, new rules, new changes. They force you to keep working on your list, they force you to stay up to date. 

1 hour ago, whispersofblood said:

Side note: if the Blood Knight point drop is true they are pretty spicy now! I wonder if there is a shell there that can make them work.

There already was a way! I have been using Blood Knights in Legion of Blood (where they get an in-built +1 to all their melee attacks and they auto-rebuff everything with a - 2 bravery) for a while, and with some effort you could really make them work already (small units in cover, playing the rend mechanics to your advantage, using multiple units to work on your charges). The points drop is significant and puts Black Knights in a weird spot. Vhordrai down 20 points is also a significant change that is bound to make an impact on the endless debate  (Vampire Lord on Zombie Dragon or Prince Vhordrai?). I am obviously very happy about these changes, but I would also say that they still don't change the fact that most Soulblight units need some finesse to be manoeuvred effectively.

[KingBrodd]

24 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

yeah!... but... none of the Destruction armies can ally with them.

Interesting...this does bode well that we could be getting Gitmob before the year is out, or at least before A0S 3.0

[PraetorDragoon]

Good news that the gitmobs return. Bodes well for the other legends miniatures.

33 minutes ago, Thamalys said:

Yes we can - and we should. The same with the dreaded "Salamanders List" -  I think I know what to do with that one (he said confidently)

Famous last words.

[Thamalys]

55 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:

Famous last words.

Don't worry about it - I just need 50 dire wolves to screen what matters for 5 turns straight 😜

[Kramer]

2 hours ago, Thamalys said:

If we are talking about showing up at the local shop with Changehost... well, I for one wouldn't do that, but in tournaments?

This hits the core of the issue for me. 
you might be going to the tournament to win it, I just might want to play five games in a weekend. 
Locally you can talk, and manage, expectations between players. Tournaments you can’t because lists are set. 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Kramer

[Thamalys]

35 minutes ago, Kramer said:

you might be going to the tournament, I just might want to play five games in a weekend. 

Point taken - can I just say: that's what I want to do as well! To me, AoS tournament = 5 games in a weekend, that's all that matters. I just accept that there might be  a number of people (might be the majority... I wouldn't say that's always the case, though) bringing the latest fashion of the most powerful filth - but even when playing against those lists, I do have fun nonetheless. At the end of the day is mostly the opponent who makes a game enjoyable or not and I don't really think there exists a correlation between filthy lists and non-enjoyable players. In addition, by the time is game 2 or 3 you usually stabilise within that section of the play field where lists are more or less in line with yours in terms of "power level"? 

[Raptor_Jesues]

1 minute ago, Thamalys said:

Point taken - can I just say: that's what I want to do as well! To me, AoS tournament = 5 games in a weekend, that's all that matters. I just accept that there might be  a number of people (might be the majority... I wouldn't say that's always the case, though) bringing the latest fashion of the most powerful filth - but even when playing against those lists, I do have fun nonetheless. At the end of the day is mostly the opponent who makes a game enjoyable or not and I don't really think there exists a correlation between filthy lists and non-enjoyable players. In addition, by the time is game 2 or 3 you usually stabilise within that section of the play field where lists are more or less in line with yours in terms of "power level"? 

same here, a tournament is just 5 games to me. I also usually get stomped from those lists but since i really dont care mutch abount winning i just try to be as annoying as possible and try to make them score as little points as i can 
all of this in game ofc, im always very polite and playful

[Kramer]

26 minutes ago, Thamalys said:

Point taken - can I just say: that's what I want to do as well! To me, AoS tournament = 5 games in a weekend, that's all that matters. I just accept that there might be  a number of people (might be the majority... I wouldn't say that's always the case, though) bringing the latest fashion of the most powerful filth - but even when playing against those lists, I do have fun nonetheless. At the end of the day is mostly the opponent who makes a game enjoyable or not and I don't really think there exists a correlation between filthy lists and non-enjoyable players. In addition, by the time is game 2 or 3 you usually stabilise within that section of the play field where lists are more or less in line with yours in terms of "power level"? 

Yeah that’s true. It does level out. But if a tournament would have box ‘not playing for prices’ to tick, I would. 
And would be more likely to go. 

[Jeremierty]

Hi folks ! What do you think about the rumored limitation of only 3 endless spells per army for a 2000 point game ? 

Do you think it will improve the game ?

[KingBrodd]

Rumour Engine July 7th 2020

Is this Nurgle related? Tyranid? FEC? Soulblight?

Edited July 7, 2020 by KingBrodd