Dreddships Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 From the sounds of it then, point discount for big units will be gone then And seems to fix Pythagoras Coherency for large based models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acrozatarim Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 26 minutes ago, PJetski said: What's the source of all these screenshots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimrock Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 21 minutes ago, Warbossironteef said: Have we seen anything about the number of models in regards to reinforcements? So my BigStabbas are minium 2 models. So I can only take 4 in a single unit now??? Yeah, and only if you want to spend the reinforcement point to get them there (that would mean you can't reinforce a different unit like savage orruks). It is possible (and I would say probable) that they update some of the minimum unit sizes in the generals handbook, so we'll just have to wait and see where everything ends up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warbossironteef Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Just now, Grimrock said: Yeah, and only if you want to spend the reinforcement point to get them there (that would mean you can't reinforce a different unit like savage orruks). It is possible (and I would say probable) that they update some of the minimum unit sizes in the generals handbook, so we'll just have to wait and see where everything ends up. Yeah as is it seems punishing. Orruks have mixture of horde and elite units. Ardboyz start at 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojojojo101 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Has anyone been able to decipher what the point in 'understrength' units might be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acrozatarim Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Just now, mojojojo101 said: Has anyone been able to decipher what the point in 'understrength' units might be? At a guess, either to skip round model number-based limitations (like the 6+ coherency rules), and for players who just don't have enough miniatures to fill out a unit's normal numbers but want to use their minis anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutton Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Bring on the rules rumor-brethren! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apinecone Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Acrozatarim said: At a guess, either to skip round model number-based limitations (like the 6+ coherency rules), and for players who just don't have enough miniatures to fill out a unit's normal numbers but want to use their minis anyway. Or they will be a way to use small bits of left over points, to give some more list building options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charleston Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 34 minutes ago, Warbossironteef said: Have we seen anything about the number of models in regards to reinforcements? So my BigStabbas are minium 2 models. So I can only take 4 in a single unit now??? I assume that in most cases the current min size will be used as new unit size. Well, comparing the Editions I look forward to 3.0, althrough it will be a true leap into a new sort of balance: 1.0 was a big rebrand from WHFB which aimed at making things different and easy and "fun". A lot of experimental stuff was later dropped but also the core aspects of AoS were defined at this early stage already: Skirmishy Army Game hybrid with faction based balancing for easier learning. Warscrolls limit unit rules to about 1 page or less, with the most important values beeing easy to find Different kinds of units are all showed with the same sort of profiles. Minor deviations for Artillery Magic system vastly as we know it right now 1.5 was "the big fix" adding structure to the ruleset which was required for a competetive/fair matched play. Points to balance the game Battlefield roles (Battleline/Leader) as well as restrictions to listbuilding Alligiences added more depths to the armies 2.0 was mostly a polish which defined this "restructured" experiment into the game we know. It improved but didn't redefined gameplay Adjustments to Magic (bigger ban radius, endless spells added) Shooting was limited so it could be "bound" in close combat 2.9 is what the game became with all the Battletomes added Battletomes added a lot of content to all factions, and with it a load of balance issues New design approaches like f.e. Combat Order manipulation lead the "have/have nots" to dominate Meta Invocations created to add Endless Spells to Factions w/o magic 3.0 has to come out yet, but we already can see what GW is aiming for: Getting the gameplay shaped up in a way again that makes the game feel like a fight of glorious heroes, huge monsters and some brave and exotic fighters. The heroic/monstrous deeds add options for gameplay as well as more heroic feel to the gameplay New cohesion rules also strongly hinder "weird" movement and model placement like conga lining or chafflines. This will propably be also to improve the aesthetics of the game. Minor remark: <Wholy Within> wording was introduced for the same purpose Reworked Battleplans pushing for MSU improves the skirmishy feel of the game. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrimeElectrid Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 14 minutes ago, Apinecone said: Or they will be a way to use small bits of left over points, to give some more list building options. 18 minutes ago, Acrozatarim said: At a guess, either to skip round model number-based limitations (like the 6+ coherency rules), and for players who just don't have enough miniatures to fill out a unit's normal numbers but want to use their minis anyway. 19 minutes ago, mojojojo101 said: Has anyone been able to decipher what the point in 'understrength' units might be? FYI under strength units already exists in current rules. Everyone calm down. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takyz Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 I like this new rule, but it feels a bit weird for certain units (like chaos warriors, max 15 seems quite low). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojojojo101 Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 24 minutes ago, Acrozatarim said: At a guess, either to skip round model number-based limitations (like the 6+ coherency rules), and for players who just don't have enough miniatures to fill out a unit's normal numbers but want to use their minis anyway. Feels like on of those things that if they had to make a rule to stop people trying to cheat the coherency rules they would have been better pressed to just rethink the coherency rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverchosen Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 12 minutes ago, Takyz said: I like this new rule, but it feels a bit weird for certain units (like chaos warriors, max 15 seems quite low). Yeah I run a unit of 20 with Sword and Shield... I guess I will have to create a new command and split off a portion of my unit 🤨 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SorryLizard Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, Neverchosen said: Yeah I run a unit of 20 with Sword and Shield... I guess I will have to create a new command and split off a portion of my unit 🤨 Sucks for the reroll saves trigger on 10+ though. I guess an excuse ot bring more sorcerors! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimrock Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 10 minutes ago, Neverchosen said: Yeah I run a unit of 20 with Sword and Shield... I guess I will have to create a new command and split off a portion of my unit 🤨 Honestly I'm expecting units that benefit from 10+ models (like reroll saves for chaos warriors) to get bumped up to a minimum size of 10 models. Same with blood warriors and only getting access to their command options at 10 models. At least I'm really hoping they do, I've got 20 sword and board too and I have no plans to buy any more until they get a full resculpt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverchosen Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Grimrock said: Honestly I'm expecting units that benefit from 10+ models (like reroll saves for chaos warriors) to get bumped up to a minimum size of 10 models. Same with blood warriors and only getting access to their command options at 10 models. At least I'm really hoping they do, I've got 20 sword and board too and I have no plans to buy any more until they get a full resculpt. The funny thing is I run 20 with sword and board and 2 units of 5 with two hand weapons... so either way I will have some conversion work to do... which is not a specialty of mine. 😰 Edited June 10, 2021 by Neverchosen Upon further reflection: I have decided... I will not bow to the pressure of WYSIWYG with an edition change... I will run a mixed sword and board/dual hand weapons unit and rest easily. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feorag Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 interesting new battalions 2 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charleston Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Feorag said: interesting new battalions Hej, look, even more Unleash Hell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnumaEilish Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Charleston said: Hej, look, even more Unleash Hell Two artillery and a commander is a pretty significant tax to pay for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliman Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Just now, Charleston said: Hej, look, even more Unleash Hell Common... you know that all ranged armies are going to spend 1 CPs every charge phase for 1 Unleash Hell... one for free is not a big deal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimrock Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 8 minutes ago, Feorag said: interesting new battalions Not sure where the image is coming from, but is there any confirmation on whether normal battalions are legal in matched play? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dankboss Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Grimrock said: Not sure where the image is coming from, but is there any confirmation on whether normal battalions are legal in matched play? They are gone, from what I read 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrispyXIV Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 Just now, Grimrock said: Not sure where the image is coming from, but is there any confirmation on whether normal battalions are legal in matched play? I'm like 99% sure that the same sources who predicted more or less everything confirmed so far also predicted that book battalions would not be, so... safe money says they aren't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sorokyl Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 I'm sure the answer is on one of those pages in that book. Come on man don't be a tease (whichever one of you it is). Just dump the whole book! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverchosen Posted June 10, 2021 Share Posted June 10, 2021 (edited) I really like the battalions but 'Warlord' and 'Command Entourage' seem remarkably similar. I can see how the distinction could matter for a few armies but it still feels rather redundant with a few exceptions. I think that we are missing something as to why you would take one over the other, beyond the few list compositions that feature a number of heroes and monsters/artillery with no basic troops? Are shared drops a thing or is that now restricted to 'Battle Regiment'? As this could explain why someone would chose one over the other. Edited June 10, 2021 by Neverchosen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.