Thoughts on GHB19 Points Changes for Death?

[Sception]

So the online reviews are coming in for the generals handbook, 2019, including in depth summaries of points changes.  EG: https://youtu.be/ndUWz85b-yo

Chat about the points changes has been going on in the various subfaction threads, but I thought it might be a good idea to have a central thread to look at them more generally.

Quick summary of Death changes only

Spoiler

 

FEC:  unchanged

LoN points increases:

• Nagash up 50 points
• Arkhan up 20 points
• Necromancer up 20 points
• Dire wolves up 10 points
• Court of New Lahmia up 40 points

LoN points decreases:

• Mannfred down 40 points
• Neferata down 20 points
• Bloodseeker Palanquin down 20 points
• Blood Knights down 40 points
• Grave Guard now in batches of 10, down 20 points compared to two of the old batches of 5.  Max unit of 30 down 60 points.
• Hexwraiths down 20 points
• Morghasts (both types) down 20 points
• Vargheists down 10 points

Nighthaunt increases:

• Grimghasts up 20 points, max unit up 60 points (I think?  video didn't say out loud)

Nighthaunt decreases:

• Olynder down 20 points
• Kurdoss down 20 points
• Reikenor down 10 points
• Dreadblade Harrow down 10 points
• Knight of Shrouds down 20 points
• Knight of Shrouds on Ethereal Steed down 20 points
• Black Coach down 20 points
• Chainghasts down 10 points
• Dreadscythes down 10 points, max unit down 40 points
• Hexwraiths down 20 points (same as LoN)
• Myrmourns down 10 points, max unit unchanged (no more horde discount)
• Shyish Reaper down 20 points
• Vault of Souls down 20 points
• Mourngul down 20 points

Endless Spell increases - not listing them all, just a few notable ones (to me, anyway)

• cogs up 20 points
• shackles up 20 (ouch)
• spellportal up 10
• swords up 10

Endless Spell decreases - again not listing them all

• purple sun down 50 points (wow)
• gravetide down 10
• Maelstrom down 10

Obviously these changes will need to be taken in the context of point changes throughout the game, of which there are too many to list individually here.  FEC are clearly still too recently released to have any changes based on feedback (before you might ask, the same is true for skaven as well, so I expect rough match ups for the forces of Nagash against their ancient spoilers for at least the next year or so).  Of the changes we did see, they mostly seem to be a mix of the expected expected (increases to dire wolves and grimghasts), and the hoped for (significant decreases to mannfred, neferata, grave guard, blood knights, small decreases to many nighthaunt units and characters).

The increase to Nagash wasn't a huge surprise, but is still somewhat painful.  The increases to Arkhan and the necromancer, I'll admit, caught me as an unpleasant surprise.  A few months ago I might have expected increases to them, but after the FEC and SKAVEN book, I though GW was just making casters stronger and cheaper in general, so yeah that kind of hurts.  I mean, I've long said that necromancers shouldn't cost less than wight kings, but that's because white kings are, and have been since the first handbook, pretty painfully overpriced and should have been decreased 20 points or more.  At least, imo.  So it's sad to see wight kings staying the same and necros going up instead.  I'm still not sure how you can justify a wight king for 120 when a vamp lord is only 40 points more (EDIT: whoops, 20 points more), tougher, faster, killier, better mount options, better invocation, is a spellcaster, and has the same command ability - only it works on all death units, not just deathrattle.  And even vamp lords feel a bit pricey to me at an unchanged 160 points (EDIT: 140 points, bit of a brain ****** there). 

I was also kind of hoping to see zombies go to 20 model minimum, with a slight discount compared to 2x10 at the current price.  60 for 10 just feels a bit high to me for how trash they are, and a 20 model minimum size would give them a unique role in meeting engagements beyond 'cheapest throw away minimum battleline'.  Sadly, until GW is ready to put out some new models for them, I don't think we're going to see any serious look at the rules or pricing of zombies in AoS.  As such, I didn't actually expect this change, so I'm not disappointed the way I am for wight kings not getting discounted.

Another year of wishlisting, I suppose.

In the mean time, there's more good than bad here.  Grave guard still look maybe a little bit pricey compared to regular skeletons, they're MUCH more tempting to me now that they've basically switched prices with grimghasts.  I could see them being particularly worthwhile as battle line in Grand Host of Nagash, especially in meeting engagements where skeletons can't be brought at full strength.  Morghasts get another modest points decrease, this one bringing them within the legal ally allotment in 1000 point games, which may have interesting ramifications for Nighthaunt armies in meeting engagements.  And speaking of Nighthaunts, grimghasts did see a slight increase - something somewhat expected, though frankly they were mostly only abusive in LoN armies and imo a better solution would have been to rescind the errata that allowed LoN to take them as native units instead of allies, but to make up for it many of their non-poachable units saw modest point decreases, including all three of the named heroes, so that's cool.

In terms of endless spells, the shackles doubling in price hurts.  It's not entirely unexpected, imo that spell was way too useful for something that could be so easily dropped in with a few spare points.  On the other hand, I've always loved the purple son conceptually, and as a model.  Even at half the previous price it's still probably overpowered for something that requires you to roll a bunch of sixes to have any effect at all, and can so easily be used against you - from a pure optimization standpoint I can't imagine the purple sun being a better use of 50 points than just taking an extra command point.  But in terms of just-for-fun games I could at least see myself considering it now.

Overall, I'm relatively content with these changes, at least in and of themselves.  Still need to absorb the changes for other factions to get a sense of context - though for my personal games the most important context is the *lack* of changes to skaven, which I expect will lead to a year of uphill battles for my personal army.  Your thoughts?

Edited June 18, 2019 by Sception

[SleeperAgent]

Increasing Nagash is a joke.

Nighthaunt still need tons more drops. There's no way Mourngul should cost more (or even the same) as a Verminlord Warpseer. Spirit Hosts seems to have been forgotten by GW. They need to go down if Namarti Thralls are gonna be 130/360. I mean we're on 50mm bases for cryin out loud. Nighthaunt getting punished for Legions using Grimghasts is gonna sour a lot of people who bought into NH. I know it did for me. My army needs help and it's getting punished because someone else's army is using my units WAY more effectively than my book allows.

[TMS]

Since I only play Soulblight I feel the changes have been very generous to me. A bunch of characters down in points, Blood Knights dropping significantly, and Vargheists less so but at the same time they're now battleline again. The Dire Wolves coming up a little bit is a bummer, they were great for filling out those last spare points where Fell Bats or Bat Swarms wouldn't fit, although I think they can still do that.

All in all I'm content and feel like my army's gotten a revitalizing shot.

Edit: Most of all I get the feeling that GW still considers Soulblight to actually be a thing, which is a happy thought!

@Sception, Vampire Lords have actually been 140p this entire time, making the poor Wight King even less desirable in comparison...

Edited June 17, 2019 by TMS

[Evil Bob]

4 hours ago, Sception said:

And speaking of Nighthaunts, grimghasts did see a slight increase - something somewhat expected, though frankly they were mostly only abusive in LoN armies and imo a better solution would have been to rescind the errata that allowed LoN to take them as native units instead of allies, but to make up for it many of their non-poachable units saw modest point decreases, including all three of the named heroes, so that's cool.

Garbage elite options in LoN are still garbage.  The blame is better leveled at GW.  The offered a bedsheet elite option with a decent warscroll at a reasonable price to a book that lacked it.  I agree there was abuse involved except said abuse was from GW refusing to fix terribly outdated warscrolls in favor of profits.

 

Edit: GW had another incentive to nerf Grimghast Reapers.  As battleline in Nighthaunt they discouraged use of elite units and Chainrasps to an extent.

Edited June 17, 2019 by Evil Bob

[soots]

The problem with Legions is every unit basically overlaps each other for strategy. Its a derivative of move, attack, heal. Theres no shooting, no real funky mw, ae attacks, no ranged and no real offensive magic outside of realms. We are the ultimate tonka truck army.

Id really like to see differentiation. Like take unit A to be tanky, unit B for elite killing, unit C for horde killing.

The reapers filled every role beforehand. And now i feel like deathmarch will fill every role since they neutered the reaper wolf combo.

Having said that I like that they are now understanding if a unit doesnt have the "Summonned" keyword then it has to be significantly cheaper.  Vargheists and Morghasts coming down is great. Id like to see vargh at 130 and Morghast at 80 eventually or even better yet, a rewrite to make them more unique and specialized. Vargheist fill the same role as blood knights but are significantly worse. Morghasts are similar too. Move ~10 bruisers. They all overlap in usage. The best thing about Skaven is every unit is very unique and competitively pointed. For Legions, we flock to the best bruiser we can find and spam because theres no option in doing anything else for tactical sake.

 

[Charlo]

2 minutes ago, soots said:

Vargheist fill the same role as blood knights but are significantly worse. 

So using both I don't agree. They are very similar but not entirely the same.

Vargheists fly, have guaranteed 2 damage and a good shot at blending hordes with the extra attacks and will be the same in the second round of combat.

Blood Knights hit harder on the charge (more attacks, D3 damage) but don't want to be stuck in.

Different uses - plus BK have some synergy in legion of blood.

[Rod]

well even with the point increase a think Grimghastrepaers are still very superior than grave guards,   purple sun price drop is nice though and if u take nagash with it is like they never incresed his points lol

[soots]

20 minutes ago, Charlo said:

So using both I don't agree. They are very similar but not entirely the same.

Vargheists fly, have guaranteed 2 damage and a good shot at blending hordes with the extra attacks and will be the same in the second round of combat.

Blood Knights hit harder on the charge (more attacks, D3 damage) but don't want to be stuck in.

Different uses - plus BK have some synergy in legion of blood.

How do Vargheist have guaranteed 2 damage? You mean fixed damage profile? Its still too similar. 150pts of vargheists do about ~11 wounds per turn r2. Blood dragons do ~13w r2  at 200pts (and a lot more on charge) .  Vargheists dont want to be in combat either rocking no grave healing and soft save. The output is comparable and blooddragons make vargheists redundant imo. 

Ive noticed everything is glasshammer in Sigmar. So round 2 combat is a anomoly. I play alot against plaguemonks and a 200pt of plaguemonks will kill 500pts of bloodknights or vargheists or even grimghast in one round so round 2 is just an anomaly anyways, both units will hurt if attack first, or get hurt if not. 

As for the knights thing. I agree, though BK are more extreme in this regard, they far outdamage blooddragons pt for pt and they can be healed and they can auto-alphastrike . If I was to be more accurate, we have direwolves, bk and bruisers. Thats the differentiation in our army. BK for charge, direwolves for chaff (though im not sure at 70pts now, they may fall under bruiser) and everything else is a flavour of  bruiser.

[Charlo]

Vargheists can fly which is unique and are 2" faster and 50pts cheaper. Room for all!

[Qrow]

I think I need to wait for the july errata that will give point changes to the more recent battletomes before I can fully judge our point changes. If the new tomes get hit hard, then our new changes will begin to feel better for me. However, if GW just incrementally increases even the ludicrously costed units in the news tomes (if the verminlord warpseer only goes up 20 points ima be mad) then I will feel really salty.

I'm alright with most of the nighthaunt changes, at least it feels like they see what units need help, although the grimghast increase is frustrating and I'm guessing even GW doesn't know what to do with stalkers. It does feel like GW set this GH up to be the start of more frequent point changes, as in that most units only went down a little in preparation for more incremental decreases over the year. At least I hope, 20 point off of the mourngul? Hell they even advertised it in the community post as if 20 points would change anything for it.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Qrow

[AverageBoss]

@Sception
Just two corrections.

Skaven and FEC (and everyone other than HoS), will get points changes in July via a PDF document.

Vampire Lords are, and have been 140 points for a long time.

[RuneBrush]

I think overall the changes aren't too bad.  A slew of reductions for Nighthaunt on the whole, which is positive.  I've said a few times before that my own view is each allegiance needs it's own list of points - thus allowing LoN and NH to have differing costs (and unit sizes) for Grimghast Reapers (or infact any units).

Not dropping Wight Kings is a massive shame, would love to justify giving mine some table time, but there's just better options out there for what he does.  Necromancers aren't a surprise and my guess is it's because of their spell (let's hope we see point increases for similar abilities).  The other one that I think was missed was Stalkers not being reduced & made battleline if the general is a Nighthaunt model.  Battalion costs also remain high, but that appears to be across the board.

I'm also still of the opinion that Bladeghiest were meant to be one of the battleline option for Nighthaunt and not Reapers.  They have a number of buffs when they're within range of specific heroes (fairly common to battleline) and the box contains 10 unique miniatures - Reapers and Harridans have pretty much just 5 bodies.  However having assembled 20 Bladegheist I can fully understand the decision...

[Qrow]

51 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

I think overall the changes aren't too bad.  A slew of reductions for Nighthaunt on the whole, which is positive.  I've said a few times before that my own view is each allegiance needs it's own list of points - thus allowing LoN and NH to have differing costs (and unit sizes) for Grimghast Reapers (or infact any units).

Not dropping Wight Kings is a massive shame, would love to justify giving mine some table time, but there's just better options out there for what he does.  Necromancers aren't a surprise and my guess is it's because of their spell (let's hope we see point increases for similar abilities).  The other one that I think was missed was Stalkers not being reduced & made battleline if the general is a Nighthaunt model.  Battalion costs also remain high, but that appears to be across the board.

I'm also still of the opinion that Bladeghiest were meant to be one of the battleline option for Nighthaunt and not Reapers.  They have a number of buffs when they're within range of specific heroes (fairly common to battleline) and the box contains 10 unique miniatures - Reapers and Harridans have pretty much just 5 bodies.  However having assembled 20 Bladegheist I can fully understand the decision...

Yep, 40 assembled and painted bladeghiest here, though they didn't seem too bad after the bloody spirit hosts. To think, I originally was considering having 18 spirit hosts for the execution horde...

I think even GW has no idea what to do with stalkers, they frankly need a rework because no realistic drop in points is going to make them worth taking over other options.

I do agree on the wight kings though, I anticipated a 20 point drop for them.

Edited June 18, 2019 by Qrow

[Sception]

10 hours ago, AverageBoss said:

@Sception
Just two corrections.

Skaven and FEC (and everyone other than HoS), will get points changes in July via a PDF document.

Vampire Lords are, and have been 140 points for a long time.

Hopefully FEC and Skaven will have gotten enough feedback by then to see some meaningful corrections, then.  We're not the only faction to have seen price hikes on our dedicated casty guys, and Skaven's casty heroes and monsters slready put most ewuivalent units to shame in efficiency before this round of changes.

As for the vamp lord thing, what can I say, bit of a brain ****** there.

...

In terms of wider issues, I certainly agree that there's too much overlap in a lot of death units.  It's hard to envision any amount of points tweaking that would have zombies and skeletons and grave guard all worth fielding without one just being objectively better than the others.  Same for vargheists and blood knights and morghasts, or grimghasts and bladegheists and dreadscythes and glaivewraithes.  these units aren't exactly the same, but they overlap too much to meaningfuly separate via points value.

FEC don't have this overlap problem apart from archregents just being better kings, since they just don't have enough units for overlap to begin with, so points adjustments could do a lot of good there.  But just not having units to choose from in the first place isnt really a great solution, imo.  Formations could help with this, but nighthaunt don't have enough good ones, and LoN don't have enough period, and ever since GW pinned extra CP and artifacts on formations, the formations themselves have gotten somewhat prohibitively expensive.

The core mistake is defining an entire grand alliance as much by what it isnt (no shooting, no armor) as by what it is.  That leaves death too narrow, and leaves death subfactions like nighthaunt WAY too narrow.

...

But changes on that level weren't really within the scope of the yearly GH points adjustments anyway.  In and of themselves, I see more changes in the right direction than the wrong here, which allows me to be mostly content with these changes despite them not really fixing the underlying problems of the faction, and I look forward to seeing if I can get some better use out of the units that saw points decreases.

Then again, I play Grand Host, not Nighthaunt, so I didn't see one of my staple units slapped with a heavy nerf because of the things some other faction was doing with them.  I could see being more bitter about this in that case.

[Qrow]

17 minutes ago, Sception said:

Hopefully FEC and Skaven will have gotten enough feedback by then to see some meaningful corrections, then.  We're not the only faction to have seen price hikes on our dedicated casty guys, and Skaven's casty heroes and monsters slready put most ewuivalent units to shame in efficiency before this round of changes.

As for the vamp lord thing, what can I say, bit of a brain ****** there.

...

In terms of wider issues, I certainly agree that there's too much overlap in a lot of death units.  It's hard to envision any amount of points tweaking that would have zombies and skeletons and grave guard all worth fielding without one just being objectively better than the others.  Same for vargheists and blood knights and morghasts, or grimghasts and bladegheists and dreadscythes and glaivewraithes.  these units aren't exactly the same, but they overlap too much to meaningfuly separate via points value.

FEC don't have this overlap problem apart from archregents just being better kings, since they just don't have enough units for overlap to begin with, so points adjustments could do a lot of good there.  But just not having units to choose from in the first place isnt really a great solution, imo.  Formations could help with this, but nighthaunt don't have enough good ones, and LoN don't have enough period, and ever since GW pinned extra CP and artifacts on formations, the formations themselves have gotten somewhat prohibitively expensive.

The core mistake is defining an entire grand alliance as much by what it isnt (no shooting, no armor) as by what it is.  That leaves death too narrow, and leaves death subfactions like nighthaunt WAY too narrow.

...

But changes on that level weren't really within the scope of the yearly GH points adjustments anyway.  In and of themselves, I see more changes in the right direction than the wrong here, which allows me to be mostly content with these changes despite them not really fixing the underlying problems of the faction, and I look forward to seeing if I can get some better use out of the units that saw points decreases.

Then again, I play Grand Host, not Nighthaunt, so I didn't see one of my staple units slapped with a heavy nerf because of the things some other faction was doing with them.  I could see being more bitter about this in that case.

Oh yeah, as a nighthaunt player, I'm bitter. But not at LoN or its players, at GW for not seeing this issue ahead of time. Death as a faction has too much overlap between allegiances in its army roster, on top of too many units competing for the same role.

Whatever new faction/battletome death get this year, I really hope it is entirely seperate from the rest of the roster. No unit overlaps at all, despite Nagash being the god of death they need to seperate the allegiances out. And for love of all GW, don't give LoN access to any of the new units outside of possibly allies.

Personally, kinda hoping for undead pirates; they are quite popular in total warhammer and would give idoneth an actual threat to deal with. They are far too safe living under the sea...

[Sception]

TBH, even just within nighthaunt grimghasts were a problem.  Not for external balance, but internal.  The only thing chainrasos really have is being battleline.  Grimghasts being battle line AND one of the strongest nighthaunt elite options in pure stats...  why play any other elite when grimghasts do the same job and fill battleline?  Why play any other battle line when grumghasts do the same job and can kill things?

And I mean, just looking at the unit, individually they're cool modrls, but they don't look like a hoardy battle line unit.  just trying to maneuver 30 of the things in coherency with their swirley robes and scythes all akimbo is a nightmare.

Grimghasts should have been a small, non-hoardy, non-battleline unit from the start.

Oh, well.  Too late for that now.

[AverageBoss]

I don't think overlap on its own is the problem. Chaos as a GA has FAR more overlap that we do. Some units can be fielded in as many as 5 different allegiances (6 if you count the GA itself). And Chaos has nowhere near the issues Death has imo.

I think the big issue comes from the simple fact that when LoN was written, really the only thing that changed was the resurrection mechanics, moving from banners and innate abilities, to characters and gravesites. Other than that, the warscrolls are all still mostly the same, flat, stats over substance, warscrolls we got when AoS launched.

[Sception]

That's not the kind of overlap I'm talking about.  To me, the overlap problem with death us too many units that are too similar in their battlefield roles.  Skeletons vs zombies vs graveguard as fragile slow hoardy summonable melee infantry.  Morghasts vs vargheists vs blood knights as fast expensive melee hammers.  Bladegheists vs grimghasts vs myrmourns vs grimscythes as elite ethereal  summonable melee infantry.  Since these various units perform so similarly on the battlefield, its hard to balance them with points.  Inevitably one in each category will be the most effective or efficient and the rest will be redundant.

[Qrow]

28 minutes ago, Sception said:

That's not the kind of overlap I'm talking about.  To me, the overlap problem with death us too many units that are too similar in their battlefield roles.  Skeletons vs zombies vs graveguard as fragile slow hoardy summonable melee infantry.  Morghasts vs vargheists vs blood knights as fast expensive melee hammers.  Bladegheists vs grimghasts vs myrmourns vs grimscythes as elite ethereal  summonable melee infantry.  Since these various units perform so similarly on the battlefield, its hard to balance them with points.  Inevitably one in each category will be the most effective or efficient and the rest will be redundant.

I agree with this. At one point during wishlisting for the GH a few weeks ago people were talking about what point cost dreadscythe harridans should be, and how to vary the bladeghiest/grimghast/dreadscythe role in the army. The problem is that, when the only thing adjusted is the point cost, it become a simple maths problem; which one is the most efficient for its points.

They are all largely the same with very similar roles, and whichever one is the most efficient will be spammed while the others will be left to casual games. It is the nature of competition, why would you disadvantage yourself and not take the most efficient option.

I'll admit my last point was poorly made (and I didn't realise how much overlap there is in chaos). As a primarily nighthaunt player who is just beginning to use the legion of grief, the issue of too many units vying for the same role has really become apparent.

[Sception]

It's particularly frustrating for players trying to chase the tournament scene with "optimal" unit selection.  When the units all do the same things and the only significant difference is points efficiency, tournament players spam the most efficient choice.  Then ghb time rolls around and gw looks at tournament usage stats and says, 'woah, this unit is used constantly to the exclusion of everything else, better hike their points and lower the rest', so now there's a new most efficient choice and tourney players & trend chasers are left ferling like they wasted their money and now need to go out and collect a whole army of the new most efficient unit and the process continues.

If the units all did something different, you wouldnt be able to just slot in the obvious most efficient choice.  Different players would take different units for different jobs in different builds.  People would run a variety of units instead of spamming just one, and relatively shallow points variations like we're seeing here wouldnt hit so hard.  I mean, if you ran a varried nihthaunt army with only one unit of grimghasts before then their current price hike would likely have been more than compensated by the discounts to other units.

 

For a contrary example, take dire wolves, a fairly unique unit for the legions.  faster than all the other battleline options.  operate better in small units.  Even in large units don't have the potential hitting power after buffs of 40 skeletons or the screening coverage of 60 zombies.  Nothing else that the faction has access to is quite like them, especially in battle line, so even though they're getting hit with a points hike, I havent personally felt inclined to ditch them, nor have i seen too many others complaining that they're trash now as some are with grimghasts.

Same with necromancers - no other hero does what they do for you, so while 130 might be (read: definitely is) an unreasobable points cost, they're still going to see use.  Their points cost can go up or down a fair bit without rendering them unplayable or causing them to eclipse other options.  Even if necros were unreasonably cheap instead of unreasonably expensive, people would still have cause to also run one or more faster, tougher, killier vampires with their reliable cp buff and different soell selection.  Because of their uniqueness, there's a wide margin of error on necro pricing, in a way that there wouldnt be if the legions had access to several dedicated casty heroes with similar spells & lore access, the way that nighthaunts have access to several other elite ethereal melee infantry that now threaten to supplant grimghasts entirely.

...

Again, though, the kinds of changes needed to fix that situation are outside the scope of a yearly GH points update, and taken for what they are I still see more to like than to hate here.  Though my tune may change once i get some actual experience with the new values under my belt.

[Evil Bob]

7 hours ago, Qrow said:

Personally, kinda hoping for undead pirates; they are quite popular in total warhammer and would give idoneth an actual threat to deal with. They are far too safe living under the sea...

During the GW Bush presidency there was a naval action option for Warhammer Fanstay Battles.  Gamesworkshop put out a plastic bag that had zombie and empire sprues (no instructions just creative kit-bashing fun) to assemble undead pirates.

It was fun and in no way influenced by a certain movie franchise. 😏

[soots]

8 hours ago, Sception said:

 

The core mistake is defining an entire grand alliance as much by what it isnt (no shooting, no armor) as by what it is.  That leaves death too narrow, and leaves death subfactions like nighthaunt WAY too narrow.

 

So this is my problem here. Undead are associated with no shooting and are supposed to be hordey unstoppable and terrorising with hero support.

Khorne was just supposed to be super elite troops. I remember their core troops hit has hard as a human lord. Nowadays they rock very strong offensive magic and lots of shooting options and cannon buffs.

We had a special unbreakable crumble rule which is now given to everyone. We had summon which they gave to other armies. We could make armies run which is now impossible. We even had a plethora of undead offensive spells which are now gone.

Its clear gw is willing to break the mould, but its time it went both ways.

[ianob]

Pretty much a dead faction now imho (lol puns). Top tier players crushing new/casual players at warhammer world or elsewhere  will always throw up skewed results, but if you want to go to an event and be able to beat anybody in your way, LoN are not “it” anymore. They just have nothing going for them in the current metagame.

Nagash changes were bad, but bearable - just play something else.

Grimghast points change was ham fisted and shows a lack of understanding of why they were good. 10 points - maybe. 20 is a joke.

Arkhan, Dire Wolf and Necromancer points changes were highly unnecessary.

CP buying changes hit us very hard especially since the Nagash/Arkhan/Necro changes also hit our only playable battalions.

 

I dont see a  real competitive list out of LoN anymore. Grave Guard change is a joke (still the same points as hearthguard berserkers? Ok), Blood Knight change is still not enough especially considering their lack of supporting models. We’re tier 2, maybe. Probably more like tier 3 now.

 

[Undeadly]

On 6/17/2019 at 2:45 PM, SleeperAgent said:

Nighthaunt getting punished for Legions using Grimghasts is gonna sour a lot of people who bought into NH. I know it did for me. 

I think you mean that its gonna sour people who bought 90 Grimghasts.