How does everyone feel about the new AoS 3.0 release?

[PraetorDragoon]

I can't say I'm optimistc to be honest. The high lethality and profileration of Mortal Wounds as a mechanic is more warscroll centered than rules centered, As such, I doubt a core rules update will adress anything about that.

The thing that could be interesting is the Path to Glory/Crusde rules, but if 40k is any indication, it will take a while before those are interesting.

[Doko]

I am veeeeery hyped.

 

This edittion have been a huge faill in balance between the free sumon and some random broken units(seraphons,ells,turtle,morathi) never have had nothing even close to a balanced meta. Its imposible next edittion be so umbalanced as this have been.

 

Also new rules if rumors are true seems very fun as the overwatch or run away.

 

But my problem is that have taken me around 4 years to get ready my dwarf army that in midway gw changed them from dispossessed to citys before even i could play with them. And now that finnally i am done with them i am also almost done with my fyreslayers also and so i started my vampires as my next long project but seems next edittion gonna have me buy the dominion box because it is so good in saving and i love the winged lady mini and if rumours are true i gonna buy the new free people and every new dwarf faction or mixed dwarf or everithing that have dwarf on it that come.

So i would have prefered some more time to build my vampires before all these new stuffs 

[Public Universal Duardin]

I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand, I'm excited for more AoS and I'm sure whatever rule changes come I'll be fine. The lore changes will undoubtedly entice me and no matter what I'll call myself a fan and if nothing else, keep buying Black Library products. That's just me being honest, hard to part ways with a hobby I've had for, oh lord, over 15 years. Now I feel old 😑

But on the other hand, all these FOMO and price raising tactics are really annoying and are pushing people away. Yes, I know plenty will shell out anything, but I see friends who are really into the hobby aspect (rather than lore or game) drop out in the past 2 years. If you want cool minis, other options than GW exists. And GW will continue doing it, because they care about the whales and hope pure franchise power keeps rest of us loyal. But the prices are getting really ridiculous and I doubt many kids of today will be able to afford the hobby like many of us here did in our youth, which is really short-sighted. After all, so many of us are fans today because we painted our first space marine or Chaos warrior as quite young and got hooked on "plastic crack". Maybe that's why the focus has moved to making Warhammer an entertainment franchise, because the hobby is with each passing year one for adult upper-middle class than, well, everyone. But this is just my duardin-like grumbling.

[Doko]

7 minutes ago, Public Universal Duardin said:

But on the other hand, all these FOMO and price raising tactics are really annoying and are pushing people away

Yes this is true.

I am lucky. All my armys are pretty cheap

 

City of sigmar that have behemots for 45\50 € when in any other army would be 120€ per example

 

Fyreslayers are expensive,but the start collecting is great so it isnt so bad and i play gotrek as sustitute of the second blob of hearthguards so my 2000 points have been pretty cheap

 

Stormcasts,i have 2000 points veeeeeeery cheap betwen aos1 starter edition box,blightwar box and 15 sequitors from mortal realm number1

 

Now my new army soulbligth all is pretty "cheap" and i got 2200 points only with fec start collecting,skeleton start collecting,new soulbligth start collecting and one box of blood knigths.

 

So is true some armys as lumineths are expensiver than gold but if people want play cheap we have many options,only for the meta chasers or any outliers as lumineths(i dont know why every lumineths unit cost as 30% expensiver than similar boxes in others armys)

[Ragest]

I'm going to trust in the writers for the first time since January’s debacle with the no-faqs.

I think that every “2.5” books are well balanced (even weak like slaneesh or lumineth) so the powercreep is being toned down and Kragnos itself, the great god of destrucion has a nice warscroll with some good ways to play against.

Taking off battalions and reducing table size is good to play around DR and teleports, so is a nice improvement aswell, and I’m hyped about the new ways to generate CPs.

 

[PJetski]

I'm looking forward to the new models and hope the game is more fun to play than 2nd edition. I think 2nd edition started out really well but the constant power creep and inconsistent design of army battletomes have spoiled my enjoyment of tournament matched play.

GW has shown me they are incapable - or just don't care about - writing a consistent ruleset alongside balanced and varied army rules. They errata every book they release to fix basic things that shouldn't get past a QA check like typos or how a special rule is written without considering how the core rules function. Half the books they write have zero chance of being viable in competitive games.

It seems to me that GW wants to give the impression that AOS is a competitive game as a marketing tactic but for one reason or another they always fall short of achieving that status. AOS is a game best enjoyed casually, because it's a frustrating mess when you try to take it seriously. I stopped caring about competitive play during the pandemic, and I doubt 3rd edition will change my mind.

I hope every army gets a battletome as good or better than the Seraphon battletome. Failing that, I hope every army gets a battletome as weak as the recent Slaanesh and Gravelords books. I hope 3rd edition blows me away with a tight ruleset and awesome battletomes that make every model exciting and every army fun to play with and play against... but I have no trust left after so many years of disappointment.

At least the new Stormcast models look great

[Baron Klatz]

9 hours ago, nuttyknatty said:

The big question though is: How many pages will the rules be? 1.0 was 4, 2.0 was 16, 3.0…………?

It'll depend what they do with those diagram pictures. Take out the basic ones like "how to move models" that take up half a page and you easily cut the core rules down to 10 pages or less.

So i'm guessing 14 to 18 pages if they adjust that along with rule refinements. 20 pages max with full disgram use but I hope they surprise me and can cut it down to 12. That'd show efficient space used and is the God-king 's holy number.

[MitGas]

I’m looking forward to what will come along with the new ed but I really don‘t care much about the fact that we get a new edition to be honest - the current one felt pretty good to me. What I do care about is that some factions will now get expansions or a proper first wave and hopefully the balance will become better (maybe have the extremes on both ends be reigned in a little bit) but big base rules changes or new fluff (which is often miss IMO) is rather secondary for my enjoyment - so I’m not sure we needed an altered set of basic rules for that to happen though. The core factions are (unless there are Fimir in there... 0% chance, I know) (unfortunately) totally uninteresting for me, as I fear our destruction players won‘t collect them and we got no SC player in our main group, but the minis they‘ve shown at least look good. So yeah, my biggest hopes are next to some much needed range extensions a couple of big overhauls on the mini front (Skaven, Seraphon, CoS, maybe BoC...) along with the expected destruction releases... 

[mojojojo101]

Slightly conflicted about it tbh.

I think the game in general feels pretty good tight now, there are a few outliers but overall it's good.

I'm excited for new models and narrative but the rumoured rules changes don't really have me very excited, particularly losing battalions (mainly because the balance argument just doesn't add to me).

[Televiper11]

Power creep for 9E 40K is kinda wild right now so I don’t see that changing for AoS either

[Mcthew]

As Saturmorn Carvilli mentioned, I raised this yesterday and since then the news of Warhammer Dominion landed. I've gone from super hyped like a kid on a sugar rush to again the realisation that GW might really mess this up as they have too many times to mention recently. 

So my quandary is whether to put myself through the pain of at least spending £125 on the new set (but hey it could be a lot more) for rules that are a complete mess, with a ruleset focusing on selling new models rather than showing loyalty to past gamers and the armies they've spent good money on. Rules that are buggier than an EA game and need FAQs from the get-go.

And that's even if GW have the competence/morals/trust to make the Dominion set less "Cursed City" more "Indomitus" in its availability.

As for this Saturday, do I honestly think any of this Warhammer Community fanboy enthusiasm will make up for a lack of assurances from GW that everyone will get a chance to buy Dominion? 

I got to say, it all feels unlikely. And yep, my experience is that too many in the hobby have had enough of GW too. And the sad thing is that it's all avoidable.

Games Workshop needs to prove it can do this better than they have. They can't blame this all on Covid.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Mcthew

[edmc78]

My annoyance is that this Dominion set will sell out in minutes and if you want the minis from it you will need to pay £80 for a set of seven as well as purchase the starter sets. I hope Dominion gets a made to order option like Indominous and is not a ****** up as with Cursed City. 

[PJetski]

10 minutes ago, edmc78 said:

My annoyance is that this Dominion set will sell out in minutes and if you want the minis from it you will need to pay £80 for a set of seven as well as purchase the starter sets. I hope Dominion gets a made to order option like Indominous and is not a ****** up as with Cursed City. 

Theyll almost certainly be splitting the minis from the Dominion box into smaller boxes after Dominion releases. They did the same thing with all other edition launch boxes (Dark Imperium, Indomitus, Soul Wars, etc.)

[Mcthew]

What would you do if this does turn into another "Cursed City" debacle though?

I've been asking myself this - and honestly I don't think I'd walk away from Age of Sigmar. I think it's more likely that I'll continue playing AoS 2.0 if other players agree. It would mean not buying any new models or battletomes until say AoS 4.0, but ultimately that would hurt GW more than me. And would mean other game systems get my attention than just GW's.

[Fred1245]

I doubt I'll play much AoS unless the new stormcast really inspire me.

 

The current Stormcast book is clunky at best and the new DoK book is uninspired garbage. 40k is just the better experience at the moment and nothing I've seen in the leaked rules makes me think that's likely to change.

[Fred1245]

4 hours ago, Ragest said:

I'm going to trust in the writers for the first time since January’s debacle with the no-faqs.

I think that every “2.5” books are well balanced (even weak like slaneesh or lumineth) so the powercreep is being toned down and Kragnos itself, the great god of destrucion has a nice warscroll with some good ways to play against.

Taking off battalions and reducing table size is good to play around DR and teleports, so is a nice improvement aswell, and I’m hyped about the new ways to generate CPs.

 

From what I've seen both Lumineth and Seraphon are actually really really OP while DoK took essentially across the board nerfs and Slaanesh got the same treatment but worse.

I've never heard anyone accuse the last few books of being balanced.

[Ragest]

2 minutes ago, Fred1245 said:

From what I've seen both Lumineth and Seraphon are actually really really OP while DoK took essentially across the board nerfs and Slaanesh got the same treatment but worse.

I've never heard anyone accuse the last few books of being balanced.

I mean every rule coming from 2021. 2020 ended with Br1, a complete madness with DoK and IdK going near 70%wr in online tournaments, but Slaneesh, new DoK, new Lumineth, Belakor, Soulblight and Kragnos seem pretty balanced to me

Edited May 25, 2021 by Ragest

[Fred1245]

Just now, Ragest said:

I mean every rule coming from 2021. Br1 was a complete madness with DoK and IdK going near 70%wr in online tournaments, but Slaneesh, new DoK, new Lumineth, Belakor, Soulbight and Kragnos seem pretty balanced to me

Slaanesh is pretty much universally considered to be a significant step back, DoK is only still hanging around because of Morathi-Khaine, Lumineth are supposedly doing a bajillion mortal wounds every turn(my experience here is limited as we have no local lumineth players but with the amount of whining I've heard about them they're apparently quite powerful) and Soulblight is too new to really know for sure but considering it seems to be roughly at where Legions of Nagash was, I can't imagine they'll be particularly relevant.

 

I guess you could argue that the books are pretty balanced by being unspectacular, but that means basically every book that comes out will be a dud until everybody gets their dud books. I'm not entirely sure that's better? By adepticon next year we'll be looking at Seraphon vs Kharadron for like the top 50 tables, lol.

[RexHavoc]

33 minutes ago, Mcthew said:

What would you do if this does turn into another "Cursed City" debacle though?

I've been asking myself this - and honestly I don't think I'd walk away from Age of Sigmar. I think it's more likely that I'll continue playing AoS 2.0 if other players agree. It would mean not buying any new models or battletomes until say AoS 4.0, but ultimately that would hurt GW more than me. And would mean other game systems get my attention than just GW's.

This is EXACTLY what to do. There is little to no good reason to keep hopping editions, at least I've yet to hear one really good reason to swap editions every time GW says its time to do so.

  My group stuck with 1st Ed and its been one of the most liberating things for our hobby and in fact I've spent more money on AoS/WFB and new stuff that I ever did when I was attempting to keep up with editions for any of their games in the past. I can buy a new book because I like the lore/art/new range and not feel like I've been forced into buying my factions rule book for the sake of it. We stuck with the 1st GHB, though I did pick up the 2018 one for the aerial rules (thought we've still not managed to finish painting all the ships/dragons/owls/eagles we wanted to get painted for that game). I've brought models I'd never would have bother with previously and brought models for the simple fact of painting them for fun. I've brought almost the complete collection of 2nd Ed battletomes, simply because I liked the lore in them, but didn't feel like I had to rush out and buy the new ones that were made just months after release. We've not been affected by silly things: like the issue with the skaven terrain with the GHB rules that people saw as making it unplayable. 

I've a huge stack of unpainted models just for converting or painting on a rainy day, as I know I can fit them in to the campaign sometime and not worried that the rules are nerfed or faq badly.

Treat GW as you might do any other model or game company and the hobby becomes a lot less stressful.

[Saturmorn Carvilli]

I am certainly bias, but I feel that Lumineth aren't as powerful as they are made out to be (any overall tournament results have them in the middle of the field the few times I have bothered to see the results). At the same time, I do recognize that an issue with the Lumineth is they seem to be an army the opponent almost needs to know as well as the LRL player or they may find themselves caught in something that is tough to get out of. Of course in addition to being a LRL player, my other army is a Warrior/Knight heavy S2D army which really isn't overly bothered by the issues brought about LRL.  So I certainly have a difficult time seeing any issue (not to say there isn't, just my limited experience may be too bias to know).

 

As for Dominion selling out very quickly (à la Indomitus).  I think it is certainly possible.  Right now, I don't really have much interest in the box as I am lukewarm to adding to my SCE from the previous box set (which I haven't even built yet) as I really don't have space for another army.  And the other faction is far too much in limbo yet.  However, I do like gobliniods riding wolves, so I can't rule it out completely.  Just the same, I won't be as bummed out as much as I was when I didn't get a copy of Indomitus despite favoring AoS more.

 

For the quality of rules writing, I really do think that GW has stepped up their game as demonstrated in the 40k 9th edition codices.  To be sure, they ain't perfect.  But they are a heck of a lot better any edition I have seen (which to be fair isn't really that many).  I also lean away from the idea that 40k is going through a powercreep as I don't think it is as much powercreep as it is victory conditions (and the fundamental ways armies score those points) have changed a lot from 8th leading to factions that don't have strong playstyles to work under those conditions suffering until they get their 9th ed. codex. 

I have a strong suspicion that AoS 3rd ed is going to play a lot closer to 40k 9th ed than it currently does.  No real evidence of this, just a hunch.  I wouldn't all that surprised if AoS had Battleplans that played much like 9th ed 40k missions.  Though, I would miss some kookier Battleplans have from recent years.  I will admit that I am less concerned about the external/internal balance of Battletomes.  I came into play GW games knowing full well what to expect in terms of balance.  So I don't need good balance, just better balance.  Which I think the game designers at GW are accomplishing at the moment.  There will be slip ups.  But so long as things are improving, and my gaming group can find a general equilibrium of power we all build around it should be fine.

[Bosskelot]

I'll need to see more of what AOS3 actually entails before really deciding.

We know very little about it outside of vague statements and rumours. Some of those sound interesting and other sounds disheartening (double turn isn't going anywhere, boo!)

And even once they've announced all the changes and made a fancy trailer and Warcom article going through all additions, actual game experience can lead to very different results than previously held expectations. In the hype period for 9th edition 40K, people were saying the edition was going to become Vehicle and Monster spam for every army only for the actual reality of how the game plays to squash that notion completely.

I have no doubt that a few advertised changes to the rules, heralded by GW and the playerbase as being massive gamechangers end up being big wet farts in terms of actual impact. It is the nature of these things.

What IS a concern however, is whether or not AOS will have an actual design lead or some sort of unified vision for what it wants to be ruleswise. 9th edition 40k has been remarkably consistent so far in that all of the books released have been decent to good and have mostly done an okay job with feeling coherent and like they're part of the same game system with roughly the same goals. That's not to say they've been perfect and mistakes haven't been made, but even the Necron and Drukhari books feel like the same game, despite the large power differential between them. If we shift our gaze over to AOS however, HoS, DoK and LRL all feel like they've been made for 3 completely different editions with wildly different goals and visions. There is no consistency in AOS battletomes currently and it's a huge issue.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Bosskelot

[ZaelART]

I'm a rather slow hobbyist, so my only apprehension is with the breakneck pace of releases, errata, obsoletions... etc. I would like to buy the dominion box but by the time I'm ready to play a game I do worry that everything in there will be irrelevant.

[pseudonyme]

Very excited.

From a lore perspective, I like that they chose Destruction as the main antagonist. Being a Death fan, I really enjoyed Soul wars (even if BR Teclis was a let down imho). Destruction focus will be cool and hopefully fun.

Super excited by the rework of Path to glory. Narrative At All Cost!!

Rather happy to see that we will get generic battalions, because I am pretty sure it will hopefully reduce the power gaps between lists.

[pnkdth]

I enjoy the shake up each edition brings, so I'm looking forward to it. It will have its ups and downs but it isn't like the current edition is without its flaws.

 

[BaylorCorvette]

I am cautiously optimistic about 3.0. With 2.0 is was basically taking a game platform that was a joke and making a real game out of it. What 3.0 SHOULD be is taking what I feel is a fairly decent Core Rules and modifying them but not dramatically. For instance, we have a real problem with the shooting meta right now and there is a lot of mortal wounds from magic which usually requires line of site. A way to help tone it down without actually "nerfing" the warscrolls / abilities is to add in more scenery, create rules that block line of sight and perhaps adopt a mechanic similar to 40k when it comes to targeting Heroes. My fear is that if the rumors about charge reactions is true, it might end up making shooting even better in AoS, and frankly that is the last thing we need.