Jump to content

The Rumour Thread


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Wait, players of the army that gets 6+ to hit causing mortals on all their models is complaining that their army abilities are too weak?

Not weak, poorly balanced and not tested. Should be on wound rolls not hits. Same goes with the rest of the same abilities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

Then maybe GW should stop writing books that are only ready for the bin. I think the only reason there isn't more uproar about how bad a job they've done with Slaanesh is because of how overpowered Slaanesh was previously. 

There is nothing more demoralizing than painting some models you love only to see them have embarrassingly bad rules on the table.

Likewise sin guy is just as bad. There is no world in which Tzeentch or Sentinels should exist. Of course there will always be overpowered armies, but the existence of NPE rules that have no counter play shouldn't exist to begin with.

I don't really see why we shouldn't be holding GW to account and showing our annoyance as players at the balance issues which exist.

I will leave it there.

 

While I agree we should hold GW accountable for writing bad and broken rules, the "sin/bin guy" is nothing more than a meme and doesn't even really reflect reality, with 0 evidence to back it up besides people saying "this book seems strong, this one doesn't".

It's also way too reductionist - which "guy" wrote the Soublight book? Half the warscrolls are garbage, half the warscrolls are busted good.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, chosen_of_khaine said:

While I agree we should hold GW accountable for writing bad and broken rules, the "sin/bin guy" is nothing more than a meme and doesn't even really reflect reality, with 0 evidence to back it up besides people saying "this book seems strong, this one doesn't".

It's also way too reductionist - which "guy" wrote the Soublight book? Half the warscrolls are garbage, half the warscrolls are busted good.

Welcome to scapegoating when no one is directly to blame and complete lack of modern communication lines with the community make people think they are tone deaf. More like two different design groups with now common miscommunication with design principals or whatever other speculative information. Has always been a thing its not some new concept recently. People just gave a name and a face to the issue. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Wait, players of the army that gets 6+ to hit causing mortals on all their models is complaining that their army abilities are too weak?

I don't think it's unfair for OWC players to be disappointed by this week's article. It's supposed to be the first big preview of the battletome to get people excited, and they previewed a grab-bag of underwhelming filler abilities. We got a single-die reroll on ranged attacks, two different situational -1 to hit abilites, a very situational -1 to wound ability, and a Big Waaagh! ability that looks weaker than in 2.0 (though Waaagh! points have probably been changed, so it's impossible to say). The Stormcast article gave much more to be excited about by contrast.

 

Like I've said, I think extrapolating from one disappointing article to say the whole battletome is bad is a little melodramatic, especially since we haven't really seen the core allegiance abilities for any of the OWC factions. But I understand the emotional arc that led people where they are.

 

Honestly, I think the way GW rules previews work is extremely counterproductive. I'd appreciate it much more if they just showed whole allegiance abilities and warscrolls at once instead of handing out little snippets that provoke waves of premature nerd-rage when taken out of context. I don't know if they do things this way because they're afraid people will use full-context rules previews as bootleg battletomes, or if some marketing suit decided that it creates more "engagement", but every battletome preview causes the same cycle of drama, and it's gotten tiresome.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KingBrodd said:

Hopefully Warcry makes a comeback with the other Alliances present. 

Warcry is definitely coming back.

I'll bet good money that - following, even by GW's statements in their financials, the massive success of Cursed City and the clear hype for Skirmish considering the new Kill Team finally having some dedicated terrain and killteams - Warcry will become a big player in it's relaunch.

Season 1 was clearly big enough for Kill Team to get an entire rework - rules and models - that looks VERY similar. 

I'd imagine the Shadowstalkers were initally planned as part of this Season 2 - being the only warband not mentioned in the first core book - that got early import to get out Catacombs. 

If I'm a betting man - based around Death Korp appearing and the clear indication from GW that Kill Team will work to bring in some represenation for the 'forgotten' or 'niche' factions (Squats? Tau Auxilleries?) - I'd call that might import to Warcry.

Kurnothi, the Cities 'factions' like the Shyish Crow Worshippers, weird Destruction monsters.

I'm VERY excited for Warcry S2.

  • Like 5
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Wait, players of the army that gets 6+ to hit causing mortals on all their models is complaining that their army abilities are too weak?

Do you see that Hobgrot crying? That's your fault!

  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, chosen_of_khaine said:

While I agree we should hold GW accountable for writing bad and broken rules, the "sin/bin guy" is nothing more than a meme and doesn't even really reflect reality, with 0 evidence to back it up besides people saying "this book seems strong, this one doesn't".

It's also way too reductionist - which "guy" wrote the Soublight book? Half the warscrolls are garbage, half the warscrolls are busted good.

Sin guy/bin guy isn’t directed at any one person and anything who thinks it is has misunderstood the point. It is a criticism of the wildly inconsistent rules writing and quality between battletomes, often released at exactly the same time. Slaanesh and daughters. Ogres and ossiarchs. Etc. 
 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Subscriber
32 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

Then maybe GW should stop writing books that are only ready for the bin. I think the only reason there isn't more uproar about how bad a job they've done with Slaanesh is because of how overpowered Slaanesh was previously. 

There is nothing more demoralizing than painting some models you love only to see them have embarrassingly bad rules on the table.

Likewise sin guy is just as bad. There is no world in which Tzeentch or Sentinels should exist. Of course there will always be overpowered armies, but the existence of NPE rules that have no counter play shouldn't exist to begin with.

I don't really see why we shouldn't be holding GW to account and showing our annoyance as players at the balance issues which exist.

I will leave it there.

 

While I do agree that GW does often miss the mark with battletomes and warscrolls, I do think fans often declare a faction under or overpowered too quickly and without much understanding of said faction. 

Sometimes it's obvious - for example, I have no clue who though 2019 Slaanesh was going to be okay. But more and more I've seen some battletomes be declared trash or OP by people who have close to no experience on the faction, and this gets parroted around until it ends up as a 'fact'. 

Not only can it be discouraging for a new player to be told their faction is bad, it can be annoying for any player to be told "yeah well that win doesn't count because you're playing a broken faction" (I had this a lot in 2019 Slaanesh even when using pure beastmen). In addition, a lot of experimentation is halted by people deciding that a faction isn't even worth looking into - I saw this on a Slaanesh group chat where someone said they had a really good list that won against tournament level 'meta' armies, and people pretty much accused them of lying. 

So yeah, I agree GW should have more focus on ensuring every battletome is as good as it can be, but at the same time fans should be less reactionary and look at every army from at least an informed viewpoint rather than declaring 'sin' or 'bin' without even seeing a game with the faction :)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ogregut said:

There is no 'sin' or 'bin' guys, just people having kneejerk reactions to a few isolated rules not seen in the context of the whole ruleset. 

I used to be an optimistic player like you, but then I took Hedonites of Slaanesh 2.0 in the knee. 

Edited by Sigmarusvult
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If my brother and his massive Ironjawz army wasn't my absolute nemesis, I'd happily collect a soup of Orruks. I like the idea of having a huge collection and pulling a range of lists from there. It's what always drew me to Chaos - can't remember which edition it was in Fantasy but you could soup mortals, beasts and demons in some crazy combos. 

I love Cities of Sigmar in theory, but I'm a painter first and foremost and the new kits are, in my opinion, a huge leap ahead of those older kits. I would love to see more units in these soup tomes use a range of races. Warcry does this really well (Spire Tyrants for example) but I'd love to see Greatswords or Irondrakes get this treatment. I understand the tome was a way of keeping old collections relevant but I think the Dawnbringer Crusades are a great excuse to start updating those model lines and make them more visually interesting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Sin guy/bin guy" is a metaphor for design ideology. We're not literally talking about individual people here.

However I do agree to some extent that it puts a negative connotation on anything its attributed to. And while criticism is good, constant negativity isn't--especially if viewed from an outside (or newer player) perspective.

Overall, I think we could come up with some better terms for our Warhammer angst.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collective collaboration on creating documents on various accounts of the game state, the community groups, and transparent marketing with a yearly roadmap of who is expected to get a release and doesn't need a specific date. Along with who gets the axe and the data they use for balancing. Eventually the community is gonna give with the various issues we are not addressing directly to them with the data we have as a community and playtesting.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dreddships said:

Warcry is definitely coming back.

I'll bet good money that - following, even by GW's statements in their financials, the massive success of Cursed City and the clear hype for Skirmish considering the new Kill Team finally having some dedicated terrain and killteams - Warcry will become a big player in it's relaunch.

Season 1 was clearly big enough for Kill Team to get an entire rework - rules and models - that looks VERY similar. 

I'd imagine the Shadowstalkers were initally planned as part of this Season 2 - being the only warband not mentioned in the first core book - that got early import to get out Catacombs. 

If I'm a betting man - based around Death Korp appearing and the clear indication from GW that Kill Team will work to bring in some represenation for the 'forgotten' or 'niche' factions (Squats? Tau Auxilleries?) - I'd call that might import to Warcry.

Kurnothi, the Cities 'factions' like the Shyish Crow Worshippers, weird Destruction monsters.

I'm VERY excited for Warcry S2.

I'd love for this to happen!! Hopefully it means more Terrain for Season 2 and some really interesting Warbands we saw teased in the picture of Varanthanxs Maw.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

I'd love for this to happen!! Hopefully it means more Terrain for Season 2 and some really interesting Warbands we saw teased in the picture of Varanthanxs Maw.

Hopefully finally some terrain that's not just 'city', 'ruined city', 'city ruins' or 'ruins'. Besides the faction terrain there's barely any interesting terrain. In a setting as highly magical as AoS, I'd love to see some interesting natural features as well (something like the Shrine Luminor). There's so much room for more than just half broken manmade structures. Skyports, Magmaholds, Floating Seraphon cities, etc. Or even just terrain based on the outer reaches of each realm.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are people on crazy pills talking about that Stormcast article as any good? It showed 3 things:

1. Stormkeeps there to stay. Stormcast could already do this after Broken realms and get 1/4 units from cities, nothing new here.

2. "Redeemer" units, meaning most of the battleline only, is better at capping, you know, those units that never do anything from stormcast. They get to count for a few more models while prices have gone up. This will help Stormcast not simply getting all their stuff capped turn 1 from flying monsters instantly after losing 1 model. a chance to do d3 mw when charged, erm ok I guess.

3. Staunch defender now lets you reroll that little 3+ to MW poke if charged, if it was a battleline unit in ranged getting charged, wholly within 12" of your general... that is incredibly bad for a trait! It was +1 save wholly within 12" aura before! Jeez that is the greatest nerf of all time.

Of course we need more rules than this. But how is anyone getting vibes from this being anything at all, there is hardly anything new or really impressive or substantial, a minor buff and the greatest nerf of all time to arguably one of the best command traits, that actually by itself made people play without stormhosts before.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GW's previews aren't designed to give you information, they're designed to generate "engagement," by which they mean, people talking about it on the internet. "This thing's wicked! This is terrible! No it's wicked! No it's terrible!" is exactly what they're hoping to do. It's the modern marketing strategy that says that any reaction to your product, even frustration at being teased, is positive because it keeps people talking about the product and therefore keeps it in their minds. 

So yes, they're useless and frustrating from an objective point of view. But the point is to manipulate you into being primed to buy them, not to give you anything objectively valuable. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Scurvydog said:

Are people on crazy pills talking about that Stormcast article as any good? It showed 3 things:

1. Stormkeeps there to stay. Stormcast could already do this after Broken realms and get 1/4 units from cities, nothing new here.

2. "Redeemer" units, meaning most of the battleline only, is better at capping, you know, those units that never do anything from stormcast. They get to count for a few more models while prices have gone up. This will help Stormcast not simply getting all their stuff capped turn 1 from flying monsters instantly after losing 1 model. a chance to do d3 mw when charged, erm ok I guess.

3. Staunch defender now lets you reroll that little 3+ to MW poke if charged, if it was a battleline unit in ranged getting charged, wholly within 12" of your general... that is incredibly bad for a trait! It was +1 save wholly within 12" aura before! Jeez that is the greatest nerf of all time.

Of course we need more rules than this. But how is anyone getting vibes from this being anything at all, there is hardly anything new or really impressive or substantial, a minor buff and the greatest nerf of all time to arguably one of the best command traits, that actually by itself made people play without stormhosts before.

What use could small battleline units have counting as x3 in an objective game when Stormcast are typically outnumbered 🤔 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Wait, players of the army that gets 6+ to hit causing mortals on all their models is complaining that their army abilities are too weak?

Spider riders have mortal wounds on 6's to hit as well.

A good rule on a bad chassis is like polishing a ******, and mortals on 6's to hit are only really valuable when a unit has rerolls or can stack high numbers of attacks. The only unit we've seen that can really get a lot of mileage out of the rule is gutrippaz, but in order to do that you need at least 20 with a shaman, which is 485 points to deal 13-14 mortal wounds, and negligible normal damage. 20 Wardens can put out that kind of damage for 290 points, and are similar in durability(half the wounds, but the save is better and they have access to consistent -1 to be hit, plus aetherquartz lets them stack against rend easily). Bolt Boyz don't even come close to being as efficient as sentinels either, with worse range, less bodies on objectives, less wound efficiency, and worse output without a shaman to back them up (at which point 3 will be slightly better than 10 sentinels).

From what I've seen of Kruleboyz rules so far the rules make you jump through hoops and add inconsistency into things other armies just get, why do they need to have so many restrictions on getting a -1 to hit? Gutrippas need to be out of combat AND beat bravery on a 2d6, the subfaction requires a die roll of a 6+(lol) or a 4+ for monsters, and the mount trait shown off only works in the literal worst case scenario.

This isn't the first book written this way either, some of the weaker books like BoC have the exact same issue, "jump through hoops to get the same buffs other armies get for free". If you need to work for the buffs, or they're inconsistent like they are here they better be stronger than what other armies get or you're already at a disadvantage.

Maybe Kruleboyz will be mid tier, but based on how the rules we've seen so far are written I expect them to be low-mid.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Enoby said:

So yeah, I agree GW should have more focus on ensuring every battletome is as good as it can be, but at the same time fans should be less reactionary and look at every army from at least an informed viewpoint rather than declaring 'sin' or 'bin' without even seeing a game with the faction 

I agree. It'll never happen, not in a million years, but I 100% Agree.

 

I think we're missing something important about the Kruel Boyz. Yes, the abilities listed aren't necessarily staggeringly exciting, but that Dirty Trick rule that's -1 to wound in the first battle round is only one of several. We don't even know how those work. It could be like IDK where there's just a specific Dirty Trick active in each round, or it could be like the KO Code where you get to pick and choose which tricks you use and tailor them to your list and strategy. Or it could be something else entirely. 

Kruelboys also have a lot of monsters, and there's no reason to suppose that they won't be pretty decent, especially considering that some or all of them will also be benefiting from that MW on 6 ability. Which could be huge!

Stormcast definitely look like they're getting some good rules, but nothing here is outrageous. Perhaps a bit flashier or spicier than what's been shown for the Kruel Boyz so far, but hardly game breaking. Stormcast have always had decent MW output, and that didn't do them a ton of favors back in 2.0. They're still gonna be slow, which is a big deal, even with reduced table sizes (and their drop from the heavens ability looks to be the same as it was last edition, so still not game breaking.)

I'm really excited about what I've seen for the Kruel Boyz. They look like they'll be a tricksy tactical army supported by big  stompy monsters, and I see plenty of damage potential in there. I'm also really excited that Stormcast look like they're finally going to be the mighty and deadly warriors that they've always been portrayed as. I eagerly await the release of their battletomes!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:

I think we're missing something important about the Kruel Boyz. Yes, the abilities listed aren't necessarily staggeringly exciting, but that Dirty Trick rule that's -1 to wound in the first battle round is only one of several. We don't even know how those work. It could be like IDK where there's just a specific Dirty Trick active in each round, or it could be like the KO Code where you get to pick and choose which tricks you use and tailor them to your list and strategy. Or it could be something else entirely. 

I would almost be willing to bet money dirty tricks are a type of enhancement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:

I would almost be willing to bet money dirty tricks are a type of enhancement.

Possibly, but I don't think they'd make one-turn enhancements for an army.

Edited by OkayestDM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...