What would you like to see for 3rd edition?

[Vasshpit]

The ability to attach heros to units. Of course for things like heros on monsters, etc this wouldn't work but anything else should work. 

Didnt oldhammer have something like this?

 

[Verminlord]

Would like an option to either spend a cp/+1 to roll/once per game ability reroll priority if being doubled

An after initial roll off seize initiative 6+ to pick who goes first would be nice

Would like to buy extra artifacts with points

Would like a version of 40ks hero rule for shooting. If a model is 8 wounds or less it cannot be chosen as the target of a shooting attack unless it is the closest model.

Model release wise, I would like them to add options /variety to smaller armies like Ironjawz and fyreslayers as well as cycle out and replace dated/resin models before another big stand alone army release

The new 40k coherency rule would be interesting but I really hope we don't go down in board size. Keep aos epic please.

 

Edited August 18, 2020 by Verminlord

[RuneBrush]

57 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

Bringing back Points per Model and Equipement would just bring another problem, that I already see in other forums.

40k has Powerlevel and Points (where Powerlevel is basicly what the points that AoS has right now.

The community is basicly split into two groups. The people that play with Points and literially state that Powerlevel should be removed because it is unbalanced and the people that like Powerlevel and don't want to spent hours to write there list.

Points is not better balanced (it never was)

The difference is, that with powerpoints units with much special equipment  has the preference while it is getting way to expensive with Points. It would basicly ****** up all existing lists and people would simply leave out all special equipment to get more models on the table.

Without getting into too deep a discussion (this is a wishlist thread after all and we're all allowed different wishes).  My point is that I think adding more granularity into AoS for competitive games cannot be a bad thing.  I don't think what 40k has would work for us, but I equally think what we currently have could be better.  This may be as simple as modifying point cost by single points (rather than multiples of ten) or allowing individual models to be added to a unit rather than a multiple of the base unit size.

I see the points/power level divide within 40k as being synonymous with competitive/casual play - which is ultimately down to your own personal opinion and will vary depending upon where you play.  Quite a few people I know use both systems depending on where and who they're playing - but I have friends who also stick to one of them.

[Bayul]

Oh, I know what else I'd like back in Age of Sigmar: Open War Cards!

https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/08/aos-embrace-open-war-cards.html

It works so good in Warcry for creating random scenarios. Most missions in my Gaming Book are boring. Why isn't this a thing anymore?

[Rhetoric]

Make non-hero monster warscrolls valid to bring in lists.  No more dropping underperforming units by ten points each GHB/Winter update.  If a warscroll needs to be re-worked, do it.  

[Lord Krungharr]

Lots of good suggestions in this thread.  My major wants for a AoS 3.0 would be:

-the general CA to reroll a spell-casting or unbinding

-non-monster/non-behemoth heroes within 3" of another unit (or whatever the current distance is) should probably just not be able to be targeted with shooting (magic should be useable though) unless they're the closest unit to the shooting unit, or any W/MW should be able to be passed off on a 4 or 5+ to that closest unit.

-heroes at the start of the charge phase should be able to nominate a single friendly within 3 or 6" of them to charge with them in one charge move and then they should strike at the same time.  This would give the CA of certain heroes usability, whereas now many are just not usable since they fail a charge perhaps and are not wholly within CA range, etc.  

-cover should be a hit modifier and not a save modifier, though GW has shown zero interest in that thus far in any game

-the Warcry alternating activation is awesome and keeps everyone engaged constantly.  Again GW has shown almost no interest in this type of game but it would be really good for a double-turn replacement.  I actually like the double-turn but is just so friggin powerful.  What might be better is keep the double-turn, but also use the alternating activation, having whoever wins turn priority gain +1 to their activation rolloff?  Double-turn is cool and dramatic and makes us think and hedge and feint, makes AoS unique.  But it does need some sort of mitigation, and not just the feeble Endless Spell controls (which almost never amount to any interesting gameplay as it stands).

-behemoths should count as 10 models for objectives or something, like Ogors have (not that I want my Ogors to get diluted in their awesomeness).  It would mitigate their horrible horrible bracketing.  They should bracket but someone said not til half power and I concur with that.

-when shooting into a melee, I agree with the person who wrote friendly units should be able to be hit with the misses, perhaps on a 4+ for those that missed.  should be penalties for such desparate actions!

Edited August 18, 2020 by Lord Krungharr

[Sleboda]

On 8/18/2020 at 8:38 AM, Vasshpit said:

The ability to attach heros to units. Of course for things like heros on monsters, etc this wouldn't work but anything else should work. 

Didnt oldhammer have something like this?

 

It did, and it created some of the least enjoyable situations in the history of Warhammer. You would make a few amazing characters, stick them in a unit where all of their powers and buffs would be in full effect at no risk of losing them.

 

They called it Herohammer. I'm not a fan of "cute" names like that, but it did sum up the problem well.

 

As an aside, I'm amused by how many suggestions in this thread are, intentionally or not, basically saying "let's go back to Warhammer Fantasy."

Edited August 20, 2020 by Sleboda

[Popisdead]

On 8/17/2020 at 4:57 AM, SleeperAgent said:

First, I would like spells to be allowed multiple castings per turn if the previous attempts failed. Sometimes you really just need one spell to go off and you get the snake eyes. There aren't nearly as many magic re-rolls available as combat re-rolls. Lets unleash the magic!

No.  Let's keep it balanced just scale down the power casters.  Right now Sylvaneth are pretty much garbage casters.  And it won't improve once corona lifts.

On 8/17/2020 at 6:01 AM, El Syf said:

Going on what you said about magic, maybe bring back miscasts and irresistable force?

If somehow challenges could come back and work, I'd like that a lot. No idea how it could be implemented and be worthwhile but I'd like it all the same.

I also honestly think you shouldn't be able to shoot if your in combat to me it just seems a bit much, I'll shoot you in combat and then attack with my melee weapons as well.

Goodness no.  Let's stop with the idea of making AoS WFB 9.0

On 8/17/2020 at 6:39 AM, Bayul said:

1. No more points printed in Battletomes but published regularly via PDFs. This is such an antique approach and a chunk of points are already available in errata anyway.


3. Rules for friendly fire maybe? I know shooting isn't broken in 2.0 but in my opinion it makes sense that you should be punished if you shot arrows into units that are within melee range with your own troops. Every failed hit roll could wound your own units for example.

4. A rehauled battleshock phase. This already has an own thread though:

 

 

1) PRoblem is starting out.  The Battletome, while to most is a Matched Play device also needs to accomadate newer players (not hitting FAQs weekly, not discussing meta), open play, etc.  Some people play Path to Glory.    

3) not a bad idea.

 4) see 40k core rules.  Pretty sure we'll be getting that.

 

Oof I stopped reading after a few,.. 

[amysrevenge]

Three things for me.  Each of these has been mentioned at least once upthread, but here they are in my words.

1) A complete re-do of the combat sequence language, most especially looking at the words "damage" and "wound".   The WFB hangover of carrying on with the name of the "To Wound" characteristic has got to go, or else they need to totally change how other things are described.  The sequence itself is fine, it's just the overlap of the words "wound" and "damage" that makes it complicated and causes so many casual, or even veteran, players (especially ones who come over from big brother 40k) to get it completely wrong.

2) Minor re-think of determining first turn priority.  I would like to see a random element in there, not just a list-building element (I know, if you happen to have the exact same number of drops the roll for first deployment is by default a roll for first turn priority, but that's the only time there is a random element, otherwise it's exclusively a list-building exercise).

3) Major re-think of the battleshock phase, or what we used to think of as Psychology, in general.  I don't have a solution, but I'm not the big fancy game designer.  The current battleshock phase is just not good.  It needs to simultaneously be a bigger risk for the armies that are immune(-ish) to battleshock, and a smaller risk for the armies that are crippled by battleshock.  It ends up dipping into Command Points, and unit point costs, and gets complicated.  No idea how to crack that nut.

[MarkK]

I think the Narrative rules could borrow from the new 40k rulebook. A similar Crusade system for AoS would be appreciated.

Not critical, but in the new 40k book I really like the text box at the end of a rules section that summarises the relevant rules into bullet points. Makes it very clear and concise for the reader.

More battle plans and rules for multiplayer games (either core book or GHB)

Happy in general with the rules, only thing I want to see is warscrolls updated between books.

[El Syf]

10 hours ago, Popisdead said:

 

Goodness no.  Let's stop with the idea of making AoS WFB 9.0

Square bases, rank and file, movement trays, the return of the old world. Hit the reset button!

For the record I like AoS, I just don't like the fact there is no way to have a purely hero on hero combat, other units getting involved ruins the spectacle of two heavy hitters going at it to see who is the best.

[Beliman]

IThere is a lot that has been said that I’m totally all in. I don’t know if we need a total revamp or just a minor tweaks here and there and that’s why I separated them in three blocks:

Small Fix:

• Create a “timing” sheet that explains all possible gameplay's steps. Something like Malifaux “timing table” (attached img).

Spoiler

• Write the rules as clear as possible following the “Timing Sheet”. That could end a lot of discussions (when does this ability ends? Can I move if I moved early in X phase? Suffer vs Allocate wounds, etc…).
• As a lot of people said, remove the points from Battletomes and update Azyr and Warscroll Builder (first priority).
• Battleshock revamp. Nobody likes to remove an entire unit because you had one bad roll. At the same time, it should be a tool to play with (terror/horror, etc…).
• Terrain. I really like 40k approach but I don’t think that we need a lot of new abilities or invent the wheel again.
• As everyone said, don’t invalidate fluffy rules from White Dwarf or old campaigns. Just put them in the related battletomes or in a "Celestial Tome" new book.
• Command Abilities rework: New “lore” of command abilities for each battletomes. Maybe link them with the General Trait (take X and you receive Y Command Ability).

Bigger Changes:

• New “engineering” lore (and mechanic). Priests have Prayers, Mages have Spells and Heroes have CA. Time for engineers to have something too (100% wish, but whatever).
•  New kits for micro-armies (2^nd wave).
• Battlecasts spells (new keyword for some spells). Some spells could be cast after moving.
• Small fixes cor more tactical depth: Can’t shoot to an engaged unit, shoots that can “pin” the enemy in place, some type of overwatch, units formations (as Shining companies from Lumineth), maybe even some type of bretonian Spear Charge, etc… can't cast spells if engaged (unless the spell is a battlecast), etc...
• Something to stop people spamming the same units. Maybe new rules for list-building or whatever.

Biggest Changes:

• Alterante activations. 80% of other games that I play have AA, and I think that AoS could gain a lot with it.
• Remove or change the initiative roll. I know that people play with the double turn in mind, but there are armies that don’t have the tools to play around that.
• Revamped battleplans: Don’t know, but make better interactions with scoring points/ objective. Maybe use the 40k “special actions”, maybe just a platform that must be “defended” (King of the Hill), maybe something that should be moved (capture the flag, push the wagon), etc… btw, I love to have hidden agendas /auxiliary missions based around MY army too.
• Anvil of Apotheosis 2.0. What can I say, I love to customize my heroes and artefact+trait seems a bit boring for me.
• Elemental and CC mechanics: That's completely personal, but I love to play around elements: Fire that do more dmg to Sylvaneth, Ice Weapons that can slow the enemy, armours that can protect against them, poison tricks that do damage each round, etc... I don't know if it's even possible, but it could be really fun.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Beliman

[Popisdead]

8 hours ago, El Syf said:

For the record I like AoS, I just don't like the fact there is no way to have a purely hero on hero combat, other units getting involved ruins the spectacle of two heavy hitters going at it to see who is the best.

Me too.  well the hero on hero sexy action that could be happening.    AoS is great and I have fun playing it.  Warscroll issues (Beasts of Chaos looking at you) are a bigger issue than double turn, magic issues.  

[Thamalys]

 

Plastic Blood Knights

That's it, we don't need anything else.

In all seriousness, though, I don't feel we need a 3rd edition at all. Changes? Sure (a few that have been already put forward here and there below...), but a new edition? GW, please, gives us a bit longer before massively draining our wallets once more!

Things that just changed for the best (or that were already there) in 40K that can have a beneficial impact on AoS as well:

- The choice of going first or second in the first battleround should be decided by a roll-off. Enough with this nonsense of giving priority to the lowest n. of drops. 

- A solid number of Command Points (CPs), dictated chiefly by the size of the game. ALL of our factions have AMAZING Command Abilities - why should we limit our games to one or two CPs / turn? Give everyone something like twelve, get rid of the CP-farming nonsense and enjoy the show. 

- CP re-rolls (which you can have if you have more CPs, see above). It's such a great mechanics... and it's still about dice rolling. 

- Proper secondary objectives / actions. The hidden agendas are going in the right direction but very slowly indeed.

You might say: "oh well, but then we'll be playing 40K with fantasy miniatures". Firstly, I don't see a problem with that. Secondly, as long as the potential for the double turn (which I love) os there, AoS is a different, better game. Thirdly, what is starting to make AoS look like 40K is the shooting nonsense of some factions / units. If this has to be a thing, we need alternate activactions during the shooting phase as well - more on that below.

Other changes:

- Too many rules for terrain - bring them back to 6 while getting rid of the lest-powerful ones.

- The dream: no turns anymore - every battleround goes back and forth. Don't tell me it's probably not doable - I get it. I just thinkit would be glorious.

- Plastic Blood Knights.

Ok, so maybe all of the above does call for a 3rd edition... but I don't really care - as long as GW gets me plastic Blood Knights - have I mentioned that already?

[PJetski]

I think the game is too fast and we should slow things down. Maybe it's just my experience, but you can predict who will win by the initiative dice roll for round 2 in >99% of games. I would like to get back to a point where turn 1 charges are not the normal, you actually play out all 5 rounds of a typical match, and maybe even have some models left over at the end.

Furthermore, I think that there is too much overlap in what armies can do. You don't ask your opponent "can your army deep strike/teleport?" you ask "how does your army deep strike/teleport?". Similarly, actions outside of their normal phases are too common.  These special effects should be rare and army defining features, but they have become the norm and the few armies without them are left to suffer.

• Too many armies have reserves and/or teleport. We need to tone down mobility, change some reserves/teleports to movement bonuses.
• Too many armies can do actions outside of phases. Extra shooting, extra combat, extra movement - these are incredibly powerful force multipliers and should be rare, but they are instead commonplace.
• Combat phase arms race needs to be dialed back. Fighting first (or making enemies fight last) and fighting twice are too prevalent, too easy to use, and too powerful.
• Horde units are too easy to use. I think you shouldnt be able to easily fit so many models into a combat. There should be more risk to using large blocks than there is right now. Maybe the solution is to add more terrain to battlefields, like they did in 40k 9th ed.
• The game is too lethal - combat doesn’t last more than a single round because everything does too much damage and is too accurate. It used to be that elite units were on 3+/3+ with rend, but now that is the baseline and most units are even more accurate than that.
• The game is starting to require too many models after years of point cost reductions. Wipe the slate clean and increase point costs across the board.
• Too many mortal wounds. Across the board I would reduce all sources of mortal wounds from D3 to 1, and change some D6 to D3.
• Battleshock needs a revamp. Too many armies can either ignore it outright or take minimal effect, and it's usually the armies that ought to be punished by it the most with immunities.

[Beastmaster]

On 8/18/2020 at 3:38 PM, Vasshpit said:

The ability to attach heros to units. Of course for things like heros on monsters, etc this wouldn't work but anything else should work. 

Didnt oldhammer have something like this?

 

Sounds logical. Oftentimes they have buffs which are useful for a certain unit anyway.

[OkayestDM]

MORE STORMCAST MODELS!

 

Right?

Right?

. . . nobody?

Ok . . . I'll show myself out . . .

[yarrickson]

An end to stacking the same command ability altogether. Still feels random which ones can and can't stack up. Been surprised the last two GHBs haven't taken the opportunity. 

Edited August 20, 2020 by yarrickson

[Overread]

46 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:

MORE STORMCAST MODELS!

 

Right?

Right?

. . . nobody?

Ok . . . I'll show myself out . . .

How about we get to the middle ground - new Stormcast models.

 

But they are all Gryph Hounds! 

[The World Tree]

2 hours ago, PJetski said:

I think the game is too fast and we should slow things down. Maybe it's just my experience, but you can predict who will win by the initiative dice roll for round 2 in >99% of games. I would like to get back to a point where turn 1 charges are not the normal, you actually play out all 5 rounds of a typical match, and maybe even have some models left over at the end.

Furthermore, I think that there is too much overlap in what armies can do. You don't ask your opponent "can your army deep strike/teleport?" you ask "how does your army deep strike/teleport?". Similarly, actions outside of their normal phases are too common.  These special effects should be rare and army defining features, but they have become the norm and the few armies without them are left to suffer.

<snip>

Completely agree with all of this. I think it is definitely a battletome issue. I'd much rather a clean slate for next edition - same rules, erasure of battletomes.

[Sleboda]

3 hours ago, PJetski said:

The game is too lethal - combat doesn’t last more than a single round because everything does too much damage and is too accurate. It used to be that elite units were on 3+/3+ with rend, but now that is the baseline and most units are even more accurate than that.

This is actually one of my favorite parts of the game as it is why putting things like gods on the table is ok.

 

Everything dies.

 

I like it.

[OkayestDM]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

How about we get to the middle ground - new Stormcast models.

 

But they are all Gryph Hounds! 

Man, I'd spring for that in a heartbeat.

Love me my bird-dogs!

[Grim Beasties]

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

"Everything dies.

 

I like it."

-Nagash, Supreme Lord of the Undead

[Overread]

The problem with everything being very good at killing very fast is that it means whoever gets the alpha-strike can often twist the game into a win for them (especially any army strong with magic/ranged and thus not playing with the alternating close combat system). Doubly so if they get a double turn. 

 

The doubleturn aside the issue with high damage units in a game like this is that it tends to push the game toward wanting more and more models so that players who get hit at least have something to respond with next turn. 

 

What's interesting is that 40K's Apoc rule set actually delays all damage dealt until the end of the game round, not the phase. This means your opponent gets to "reply" with attacks from their models during their turn because the whole round isn't over. It basically represents the enemy fighting back as you're fighting them. The result is that you can have very killy units which destroy a lot; but your opponent equally gets to make a "reply" to this attack before removing models. It takes the sting out of the alpha strike and out of high damage units. 

[OkayestDM]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

What's interesting is that 40K's Apoc rule set actually delays all damage dealt until the end of the game round, not the phase. This means your opponent gets to "reply" with attacks from their models during their turn because the whole round isn't over. It basically represents the enemy fighting back as you're fighting them. The result is that you can have very killy units which destroy a lot; but your opponent equally gets to make a "reply" to this attack before removing models. It takes the sting out of the alpha strike and out of high damage units. 

When I heard about these rules, I was desperately hoping that it was a sign of the direction games like AoS would take going forward. Having simultaneously combat would change everything, and give your units a chance to shine, even if they got deleted in the aftermath.  I gave up on that dream shortly thereafter (it's highly unlikely GW would change AoS that fundamentally) but it sure would be nice if they went that way.