Jump to content

Soulblight Gravelords News, Rumours and Speculation


Neil Arthur Hotep

Recommended Posts

Well, if all fails, GDubs still makes a lot of money, because AoS 3 then will burn all books...

if max modifier is -2 what are 30 plaquebearers going to do, when being shot at? All points, all synergies would have to be revamped by a team that is known for hit and miss rules.

maybe the revamp of command points to a more generous 40k like level could be ok, with a more active approach for such abilities (which also then need to be rewritten)

 

this sounds really concerning, didn’t play WHF during Endtimes, but this must be the feeling... we will change everything for better, that will be fun for everyone, then Nagash summoned 2k models onto the table each turn 🤣👍shortly after summoning was worthless 🙈

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Il Maestro said:

why do you think being forced to use all of your resources every turn confers more tactical ability then being given the choice? Somewhat beside the point, but I would have thought that having to make decisions with pros and cons to either, where you might suffer a worse outcome now for the delayed gratification of an advantage later was inherently more tactical than ‘must use all CP now or lose them’.

More tactical in the sense that it will be a back and forth between the players, active and reactive choices, as opposed to the more strategic option CPs are now. I don't really see one system as superior to the other but in conjunction with being able to burn objectives if you get double turned, charge reactions, I see a system which isn't purely "I go, you go" and let's the opposing player react. This + keeping the double is going to keep us on our toes throughout the game.

-

I fully expect a complete points update as well when the 3rd ed hits.

Edited by pnkdth
  • Like 1
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Honk said:

Well, if all fails, GDubs still makes a lot of money, because AoS 3 then will burn all books...

if max modifier is -2 what are 30 plaquebearers going to do, when being shot at? All points, all synergies would have to be revamped by a team that is known for hit and miss rules.

maybe the revamp of command points to a more generous 40k like level could be ok, with a more active approach for such abilities (which also then need to be rewritten)

 

this sounds really concerning, didn’t play WHF during Endtimes, but this must be the feeling... we will change everything for better, that will be fun for everyone, then Nagash summoned 2k models onto the table each turn 🤣👍shortly after summoning was worthless 🙈

yeah, if i have to be honest the rumors sound a bit like bull*** to me

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On one hand I think it’s time for an official 3.0 to clean up a lot of stuff. I don’t want it to effect our new Battletome negatively in any way. I would like to think that since their releases are close together, SBG will in fact be the first “3.0” Battletome fully compatible ( don’t think the Tomes will be necessary to release in high demand after this like in 1.0 to 2.0).

On the other hand, GW doesn’t care too much about the stability of a cohesive rule set as much as having an excuse to sell us more product. Let’s be honest - they literally write the rules in such a way to sell us more plastic / paper. So I don’t know - looking at the history of the company they do a good job in the beginning but a year or so after they start going autistic with extra ****** we don’t need or really want and mess up whatever semblance of balance or rules cohesion they actually had to begin with .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

the rumors sound a bit like

Well, maybe the details,

but I could see a certain way of double turn mitigation, although burning your own objectives sound stupid, but it is a sore point for some.

generic battalions, maybe somehow, but since the armies are very different, the battalion with a hero, one fast elite and one battleline unit gets rule X can either be valid or stupid, just like now...

I’d rather have better more integrated detachment rules like 40k, so I can take a flock of flayers into my Legions, with full fec benefits...

Charge reactions? maybe, but the costs should be really significant. if you’ll try to charge sentinels and they crit-fish you to death  (-1 who cares) cause the spell lasts a round 🙄
More active opponent phase? Sounds funny, maybe we’ll just play the activation game through all phases, no more dedicated turns 🤯 and bookkeeping for days 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it’s perhaps not so useful to think of new rules in relation to outlier cases, ie stand and shoot < sentinels. 

a) we don’t have the whole picture yet

b) they form a teenytiny bit of the overall meta

In terms of the proposed battalion changes, I for one would absolutely like to see them sod off. They are massively unbalanced between armies. They are bloated and often poorly thought out, with probably close to 90% never seeing the light of day. The remaining 10% which are used, whilst intending to bring variety and flavour, in fact do the complete opposite. If you ARENT taking Change host, for example you are simply opting to handicap yourself. This is already an issue with sub-factions, many of which are a no brainier. 

Look at the battalions in LoN? Absolute bilge water right from the off.

My feeling re battalions is having less in total, might just permit more careful and considered games design. 

Can’t believe I’m about to quote Mark Twain, but his words are on the money here:

I didn't have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead.

i.e it’s MUCH easier to write pages and pages of tosh, than it is to write a paragraph of quality. Hopefully this change will beckon in less bloat and more elegance.

Edited by warhammernerd
  • Like 2
  • LOVE IT! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Honk said:

Well, maybe the details,

but I could see a certain way of double turn mitigation, although burning your own objectives sound stupid, but it is a sore point for some.

...

 

yes, just remove the double turn that half the player base groans about xD
yeah, i am making my mind up, the more i look at those rumors the more i think they are fakes

Edited by Raptor_Jesues
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

i am making my mind up, the more i look at those rumors the more i think they are fakes

Well, the guy who posted the leaks has been on the money two times previously and is a regular host on Honest Wargamer - so unless he couldn’t give two figs about his reputation or he is hardcore trolling us all, I’d suspect these are close to bang on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd actually love battalions to be more like 40k's detachments, with core requirements for all. But then I'd rather see more variation in battlefield role as well, instead of just the 4 we have now. 

As said in the vid and by others, most battalions differ dramatically between either super powerful or super bad. I also find them to be quite restrictive. I'd much prefer a battalion to require me to take, for example, 3 battleline rather than 3 specific battleline choices. 

Whether the rumours are real or not, I'm really enjoying the speculation and can't wait for whatever's coming. 

Edited by lare2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, warhammernerd said:

Well, the guy who posted the leaks has been on the money two times previously and is a regular host on Honest Wargamer - so unless he couldn’t give two figs about his reputation or he is hardcore trolling us all, I’d suspect these are close to bang on.

imma say citation needed for this one, i seriously do not recall any of this except him saying it on the start of the video. Also there are some other weird things about the subject:
- you can get lawsuited quite hard by gdubs for such things if what he says is actually based on evidence, this is expecially true lately
-this goes double since he is not the source of this and could get other people into trouble
-the rules are weird from a design point of view, generic battalions makes you sell less variety of troops for example, it sounds more like wishlisting to me
-the ways he presents the rules is a little sketchy and i cant really put my finger on it but he discusses like 4 rules in a 15 minutes video on a fairly small channel wich is a little sus

i will give the benefit of doubt but i cant help to feel intrigued and suspicious at the same time, so i do not really know what to think.
 

Edited by Raptor_Jesues
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, warhammernerd said:

having less in total, might just permit more careful and considered games design. 

Please do not be offended... but what? Who? How? We’re on totally uncharted territory then 🤣

5 hours ago, warhammernerd said:

If you ARENT taking Change host, for example you are simply opting to handicap yourself.

For me personally, that’s what being a casual gamer is all about... and what I like about the broad approach to my main armies (FEC & LoN)

Just ran a gristlegore menagerie for fun, all terrorgheists 🥳 I ran a try hard mordant/smashbat list 

With LoN I go 120+ models in a LoNight, I play 20 Knights in LoBlood. Deathmarch, first cohort 

I think in all these discussions, the extremes are mentioned (same for me!), but the armies and the possibilities should not be measured by the most broken WAAC- or Dumbsterfire-lists... 


We had Skyfire/ Clowncar / Kurnoth shooting before and people will adapt to LRL and KO, same as eels. Bach before FEC 2 Ben (?Souza?) scored 5th in a big event because of tactical acumen, with a back then terrible faction. The big events are missing and so the ideas for counterplay are a big lacking...

I hope they’ll make AoS 3.0 fun, without killing off factions or forcing people to take certain things. But writing carefully balanced rules in well designed books, that sounds like fiction 😂

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

alas you are 99% mistaken, it is another ****** elf 
much rejoicing is to be had, hurray

Or vampire...

But the rumor engine got resolved... The insectegg on top 😉

Edited by Aturox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Aturox said:

Or vampire...

But the rumor engine got resolved... The insectegg on top 😉

branchlike horn/bagpipe, pointy ears, insects eggs, hippie hair and vines coming up from the ground, that is a silvaneth if i ever seen one, the skirt also looks like it is made of leaves
don't get your hopes up bloodling

Edited by Raptor_Jesues
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Raptor_Jesues said:

branchlike horn/bagpipe, pointy ears, insects eggs, hippie hair and vines coming up from the ground, that is a silvaneth if i ever seen one, the skirt also looks like it is made of leaves
don't get your hopes up bloodling

Every second i looked at the image it became clearer that it isnt a vampire but lets wait... We had wolfs and rats so maybe insects next 🥺

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Liquidsteel said:

The White Dwarf preview for May has Undead vs Lumineth battle report on the front page.

 

I half expect this to be changed to Soulblight vs Lumineth upon release, they just don't want to confirm anything yet.

really now? that could be interesting but i did not hear about this, is this from WC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...