Tossed into the Mawpot! Soup Armies Thoughts and Feelings?

[Neverchosen]

The rumour thread spent a number of pages discussing the possibility of a shared Duardin faction as well as the pros and cons of various other 'soup' factions. @RuneBrushsuggested that we cover it in its own thread as it was taking over the Rumour thread. So here we go the official soup thread! Please share your thoughts and feeling on the subject.

Personally I am favour of soup lists and the two armies I currently collect are both technically soup armies to various degrees. I collect Slaves to Darkness (not traditionally considered a soup army) and mix and match between keywords using mostly traditional Chaos Warriors and Knights, but I also include a few demons and cultists. My second army is Ogor Mawtribes and so far I have exclusively purchased Beastclaw Raider units. I am considering getting some gnoblars as I enjoy the models and maybe a scrap launcher to tie the two sides together thematically but I was interested in the army for the specific purpose of collecting Ogors mounted on massive beasts. So personally I enjoy varied armies but the two I collect contain a strong thematic unity across their army and thus feel less soupy than other lists.

Any thoughts on souped armies? Any you would like to see tossed into the Mawpot? Maybe some you would rather see disentangled?

[AaronWilson]

I can see why GW is a fan, it's a very easy buy in if you own for example Ironjawz, well I could try a unit of Savage orcs.. suddenly very easy to own a Bonesplittaz army as well as a Ironjawz army. 

Personally in regards do I like it or not? I don't see any disadvantage to it and in terms of list buildings the books that have done that (Cities of Sigmar, Orruk Warclans, Ogor Mawtribes, etc) for me are some of the best books to write lists from, so I suppose I'm all for it. 

[Jefferson Skarsnik]

 

[zilberfrid]

It depends.

I like Cities, but vehemently oppose the Kharadron/Fyreslayer smoothie.

 

Cities gathered odds and ends that I could see banding together for survival.

 

For Kharadron stuffed in a box with Fyreslayers, it's different. They were already holding on. Lorewise, they are on opposite ends of the spectrum.

• Kharadron are the only non-religious faction in all the Mortal Realms, and them just folding to Grungni when he bothered to return irks me. They have their own thing going.
• Fyreslayers are religious fanatics that try to bring their own god, Grimnir (not Grungni) back from the dead.

They have no stylistic overlap between them except height.

• Kharadron are high tech, steampunky air pirates.
• Fyreslayers are mostly naked berserkers (though expressionless and static).

This may be my general dislike of religion adding to it, but it's a great loss lore wise to lose the only faction that didn't need any gods. 

I also don't have any hopes of GW making female dwarves (they started adding diversity after these lines were made) when they tape Fyreslayers to Kharadron, because that removes the aspect of the army that was lacking (melee infantry) and would make balancing shooting harder without removing Kharadron entirely. Thus, no new kits for either.

It does save me from spending money on the Ironclad or Frigate, because when the whole concept of Kharadron is hollowed out, why care about them at all?.

Edited May 26, 2021 by zilberfrid

[Jefferson Skarsnik]

I feel like Slaves to Darkness was a not-great implementation of that kind of thing because everything is kind of silo'd in very narrow, prescriptive groupings of synergies, if there's a big diverse range of units I want to have some reasonable flexibility about combining them. It's a balance though because you don't want it to feel too visually incoherent or like a really cynical,  min-maxy combination of wildly disparate units for competitive advantage

I think the unfortunate truth about why Fyreslayers in particular feel more soupable than other armies is that they're basically aesthetically (and probably commercially) a swing and a miss

[PJetski]

Racial soup books like Orruk Warclans, Gloomspite Gitz, and Ogor Mawtribes are boring. I want these kinds of battletomes split apart with new model waves for each racial subfaction. Give me an entire army of Gutbusters or Troggoths. Give me new models for Bonesplitterz and their own battletome (again).

The only soup book that is of interest to me is Cities of Sigmar since the City subfactions are generally not based on racial keywords. They might favour certain units but generally they allow a great deal of mixing the various subfactions, and they also have distinct "1 in 4" choices and ally rules. I wouldn't mind another book like that but it would also probably be boring (and likely not narratively appropriate) to have "Strongholds of Chaos" and "Temples of Death" and "Caves of Destruction".

Fyreslayers need a second wave, not to be just another subfaction in a Duardin book.

[Doko]

As city player i LOVE soup tomes.

 

I dont mind the lore,and from hobby and player vision a soup tome is the heaven:

-you dont get bored building and painting the same unitx9999999 times because you can have multiple diferent looking units!

-you arent stuck with the same list every game(fyreslayer hearthguard bomb) and you can try multiples diferents lists 

-you can buy units that you never tougth get because you didnt wanted buy the full 2000 points army but now you can get 500\700 points of per example kharadrons

 

To me all are advantages, i get people fanatics about lore dont like the idea and i respect them. But as hobbyst and player i looooooove soup tomes.

 

But if i could choose between soup dwarfs or a second (lumineth) wave for my fyreslayers and dispossessed then i prefer get the second wave,but i know is a fact fyres are the least popular army and they havent got nothing in 7 years(a scenary and endless spells only) not even a battleforce or any bundle box as EVERY faction have got.so i prefer souo before nothing

[MitGas]

If it fits, it's good. It doesn't fit very often though... and by not very often I mean almost never. GW pretty much messed it up themselves by creating subfactions that are radically different (e.g. KO and FS) to each other, they won't fit together anymore. I already find IJ and BS to be an extremely poor match, especially because the fluff portrayed IJ as elitists. Putting IDK and DoK (as some have suggested due to their recent allegiance) together would IMO be a tragedy for example (and I'm all for fewer aelf factions but they are fundamentally different).

I do love armies that have visual diversity though. Nothing speaks more to me than seeing Warriors, Tzaangors, Chaos spawn and daemons together in a single list instead of pure lists out of either of them. Obviously that isn't everyone's taste but I prefer it over what I'd call an army of clones - however the Chaos thing grew "organically" (plus it'S CHAOS) and has been described in the fluff since ages, so it makes sense.

I'm happy that Skaven e.g. didn't get an update at the start of AoS (but now it's reeeeaaaaally time!).... cause then we'd probably have one single aspect of them evolved (Murder-kill Sneakshades or something) in such a way they'd be their own faction and wouldn't fit into all the subgroups Skaven currently have. 🤣 

[Baron Klatz]

Soups have two main cons:

One, they foreshadow a faction being put on the back-burner and unlikely to receive more than some hero models down the line, if that.

Two, your favorite sub-faction just became an extra ingredient rather than the main dish with whoever's on the front cover of the book taking the spotlight. That's why Dispossessed, Wanderer, Bonesplitterz, Spider Grots and even Deadwalker & Skaven fans like Pestilens or Eshin all keep hoping for a future break out like NightHaunt or Mega-gargants did or the Lumineth neo-army treatment.

Soup has a lot of benefits and is understandable from a resource point-of-view because the armies need limits especially with brand new armies popping up every year but they need to be handled well.

The big problem here though is how contrasting Fyreslayers are, they'd honestly do better with Cities of Sigmar as a new update to start expanding on elemental realm freeguild armies with some Aqshyian humans & aelves than lumped in with a sci-fi faction that doesn't need them and has very little lore cooperation with them beyond two seperate events in remote places.

As is, Kharadron easily threaten to make them a extra ingredient army that loses focus.

I'm really hoping they get a second wave instead & Grungni bringing in a add-on army that unites duardin keywords but if soup is on the menu then please GW give it the works, new models and heroes to show the two cooperating like Fyreslayer airships powered by their breath and Kharadron upgrading their Magma beasts with cyborg parts powered by their own body made steam. To say nothing of throwing in new demigod duardin like the 6 smiths Grungni made for Sigmar and a few units of Gholemkin to act like the Gloomspite Troggoth army but made of intelligent living rock & metal instead.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Baron Klatz

[RocketPropelledGrenade]

I like Cities, would be fine with soup in S2D if it had been executed in a way where that actually worked, wish BCR and Gutbusters were less siloed from each other in Mawtribes, and only care about Ironjawz in Warclans. I don't have a single, monolithic opinion on soup. Context matters.

In the specific context of Kharadron being souped with Fyreslayers and Dispossessed, I'm against it. It could maybe be executed well, but it still probably wouldn't be as good as a unique new Duardin army, maybe with a 1 in 4 rule to take one or both of the other two as allies or something. Largely echoing @zilberfrid as to why.

[Greybeard86]

I think that soup might not be by design, rather a patch to salvage AoS 1 factions.

Early factions like FS, or even KO, had only a handful of kits and have hardly had additions. Their rules might make them more or less meta, but they are clearly quite different from the new releases with wide rosters, such as Lumineth.

I am convinced this is not the result of some weird favoritism by designers (X likes elves), but rather a whole design shift in AoS. We all know how AoS 1 launched, and how many of the "simplyfing changes" have been reverted over the years.  I believe that perhaps AoS 1 launched with the intent to have continuous launches of hyper focused factions. Those factions would be like warbands, and gradually get phased out.

This might have been a response by GW to the "problem" of minis lasting too long, and to the fact that new releases are what brings money in (or so I have been told), far more than existing older models. Given that it is costly to continually stock older models, it is clear that if they could get us to continually buy new armies and models, they simply would. I believe that primaris marines, and End Times + AoS (paired with the new narrow army philosophy) are part of that sales plan.

Now, somehow this has reverted. Mid game there was a management change, and old marines were not squatted (at least as fast) and first gen AoS factions have been kept. New AoS factions are released with "wide" rosters, and they are putting a bit more effort in balancing. So, what to do with first gens then? Soup them to better fit this new paradigm. True, they won't keep updating and adding to the roster as much as they would if they were independent factions. But they were never planning to do so! The alternative to that might just be legends (aka trashcan).

[JustAsPlanned]

I think we have enough soup tomes tbh. Don’t get rid of any existing ones, but don’t go scuppering the chance for Fyreslayers or Kharadron to develop in their own separate ways.

[Red Bull]

As an old WHFB player, I think combining subfactions into tomes is a soup-er idea!

In the other thread, people were complaining about Dwarfs being combined and then pretending all subfactions of elves will have their own tome. I think that's extremely unlikely.

I think the Dwarf alliance is bound to happen. But I also think Morathi and Malerion will combine. Tyrion and Teclis will be the same. Arielle and Orion will be the same. Not sure where Idoneth fit in, maybe with M&M?

Also, maybe Chaos Dwarfs will come back in some form. That would make the score 3 to 2 in favor of the elves. Which is roughly equal to the height difference. Seems fair.

Who knows what the future holds (other than Whitefang, of course). I see the combining of subfactions as a way to open up options and require less books. Both positive outcomes in my mind.

[dirkdragonslayer]

I like well made soup. It's really appealing to me to be able to have multiple armies in one book, instead of having many small armies in their own book. Want to take a break from painting Moonclan? Well here, make an entire army of Troggoths who can work on their own or within the same force. I don't like mini battletomes with no options, like the original Ironjawz or Skaven Pestilens.

Orruk Warclans could have done a better job joining the two sides (maybe a hero unit that has traits of Ironjawz and Bonesplitterz). Skaven's list building makes little sense and honestly shouldn't have treated the subfactions so disconnected from eachother. But I like how Gloomspite, Cities of Sigmar, and Mawtribes work. If unified Duardin works like that then count me in. I always wanted some Dispossessed to counter my Gloomspite but have been afraid to invest.

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

Haven’t counted but guessing through Zoom League and pre-COVID times approaching 50+ games with Mawtribes.  This includes pure Gutbusters, pure BCR, mild hybrids (e.g adding a Butcher to a BCR list or a FLoSH to Gutbusters) and pure soup with no problems.  The only things I lost from my ore-soup experience with both was Braggoth’s Beasthammer Battalion and the Thundertusk’s awesome snowball.  As I’m guessing both were gone regardless of whether they souped or just updated BCR I don’t blame soup for that.  Gained a whole lot though.  And not just me.  Mawtribes is the one tome everyone in Zoom Leafue loves and everyone wants there turn to play.  

We have to be approaching three dozen games in Zoom League with Warclans too.  No pre-soup experience to compare with but again will note w3ve had zero problems playing pure Ironjawz, pure Bonesplitterz or Big Waaagh!!!  Each has a very different feel and game play experience for both player and opponent.

And simply put that’s why I love me some soup.  We get so much high quality variety out of the soup tomes. On a $$$/hour of play time soup tomes done right like Mawtribes or Warclans are unparalleled in my experience.  (Don’t have as much experience with Gloomspite Gitz but enough to understand some of the worries of what can go wrong if they are kept too keyworded to allow for that smooth hybrid transition between sub-factions.)

I own both Fyreslayers and KO and based on the above experience would love to see them souped (I want those Hearthguard marching out from an Ironclad gosh darn it!!!) as while I enjoy both I tend to get satiated play wise with either of them pretty quickly as the breadth and depth for experimentation just isn’t there.  Sure, “just add more units” a legit response there but I don’t think soups are any more or less likely to get new models.  Plenty of mono line fractions got as little as new in 2.0 as Warclans or Mawtribes.  And the update of one of the original soups, Soulblight replacing Legion of Nagash, just got one of the biggest updates of 2.0 (or maybe first of 3.0?).  Would love to see Mawtribes or Warclans get the Soulblight treatment in this age of Destruction.

[Neverchosen]

18 minutes ago, Red Bull said:

Not sure where Idoneth fit in, maybe with M&M?

I can easily see IDK really merging with any of the current Aelven factions to be honest. I know the idea makes people mad, but I can see them joining with the Lumineth after Tyrion is introduced. I feel that they can be accepted as part of the River Temple and be purely a Tyronic enclave within Lumineth. As such I can imagine that there will be a rule that prevents them from being run alongside Teclis. I doubt it will play out this way but I think it would be a cool thing to see unfold within the narrative. Alternatively they could also be adopted by Allarielle but I think they will have to get some Coral and Seaweed troops beforehand.

[Snorri Nelriksson]

The problem is that Gw changed army design many times in the same edition so we're in a mess (the list i'm writing is not chronological).

Aos started with micro-micro faction like the stormcast chamber, then new "mini armies"(Fyre and IJ), then legacy armies splitted and/or augmented (Sylvaneth,pestilens,Dok), then medium new armies (Ko,Bonereapers,idoneth) , placeholder soups (Lon and cities), legacy augmented armies with soup added(Gloomspite that got new things like a proper wave but got two other microfactions attached), re-unified splitted microfactions as the old whfb tome (mawtribes/skaven),new aos native "Big army"(Lumineth,Stormcast) and the last piece is just the old whfb army with something less(Soulblight that lost some things of Lon and Fec but got new characters).

There's still the great "mystery" about how Cos will evolve, probably they'll  axe some more models like the high elves before Lumineth (or put them in some other new army ,like corsairs in Dok).

Souping will be different if done for factions that should never have been splitted like skaven clans or between aos native armies (idoneth and lumineth for example).Also it should be noted that GA matters, as some GA are bigger than others.

If Gw wants to soup they'll do of course but needs to do in a logical way.

Also idk if Tow will change some ideas, mostly Cos as i think they'll maybe will aosify it aesthetically speaking.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Snorri Nelriksson

[mojojojo101]

One of the things I like most about AOS, especially in comparison to WHFB and 40K is it's factions are tight, they have strong identity, they have strong narrative and they play in a clear, identifiable way on the table that (for the most part) matches up to that story and feel of the army (probably reflects in my main armies right now being DoK and FeC). To me, soup'ing armies together means you risk loosing some of that.

I'm not wholly against big, wide armies with lots of options, Cities of Sigmar and StD are places where I think that can work particularly well but i definitely think in a lot of cases you lose more than you gain.

Personally I'd like to see books like Orruk Warclans and Ogor Mawtribes which have 2 pretty distinct halves and a bit of a hand-wavey way to play them together either split back up again or tied together a lot more tightly.

As for Fyreslayers being souped into a joint Duardin book I really think it is basically a more palatable option than just getting rid of them entirely which I suspect GW would prefer.

 

Edited May 26, 2021 by mojojojo101

[zilberfrid]

40 minutes ago, mojojojo101 said:

One of the things I like most about AOS, especially in comparison to WHFB and 40K is it's factions are tight, they have strong identity, they have strong narrative and they play in a clear, identifiable way on the table that (for the most part) matches up to that story and feel of the army (probably reflects in my main armies right now being DoK and FeC). To me, soup'ing armies together means you risk loosing some of that.

I'm not wholly against big, wide armies with lots of options, Cities of Sigmar and StD are places where I think that can work particularly well but i definitely think in a lot of cases you lose more than you gain.

Personally I'd like to see books like Orruk Warclans and Ogor Mawtribes which have 2 pretty distinct halves and a bit of a hand-wavey way to play them together either split back up again or tied together a lot more tightly.

As for Fyreslayers being souped into a joint Duardin book I really think it is basically a more palatable option than just getting rid of them entirely which I suspect GW would prefer.

I'd rather have Fyreslayers in Cities. These already are in Aqshi, and Disposessed are compatible.

With the current models they have, I'd rather lose Fyreslayers than make Kharadron religious (but then I think their models are bad and don't collect them).

[Popisdead]

7 hours ago, Neverchosen said:

The rumour thread spent a number of pages discussing the possibility of a shared Duardin faction as well as the pros and cons of various other 'soup' factions. @RuneBrushsuggested that we cover it in its own thread as it was taking over the Rumour thread. So here we go the official soup thread! Please share your thoughts and feeling on the subject.

Personally I am favour of soup lists and the two armies I currently collect are both technically soup armies to various degrees.

I'm a fan and defender of options and feel the nay-sayers to alternative or new introductions for game-play damage the game.  For example historically I've seen Cities of Death, Planet Strike, Storm of Magic all killed locally by a couple power gamers just saying "oh all you have to do is X and it ruins the game."  Meaning,.. if you don't do this one thing the game is something to explore.  

Being such a fan of Ghorros and Centigors I"m thinking of finally resurrecting my old metal stone trolls and playing destruction.  I guess it means soup?  Perhaps I can proxy throgg as a uh.. troll leader, dankhold troggboss?  So maybe I could get a 2k army out of this as mixed destruction.  

It's just a game.  

[KriticalKhan]

Frankly, it's disingenuous to compare something like Mawtribes to a united dwarf tome. Mawtribes was a return to form and reuniting of a single faction split apart. Dwarf soup would be taking two completely separate armies with completely different identities.

If we assume GW is not going to add new models to either faction, then a soup tome is a LOSS. You LOSE options because one book cannot support the amount of lore, factions, battalions, and allegiance abilities of two factions. Yes, Warclans and Mawtribes let you run the microfactions separately, but compare how much space is dedicated to each of them compared to what they had with their own books. What was GAINED outside of letting you run some more units together? Couldn't you already do that with allies and GA armies?

People say stuff like, "Soup tomes are good because then I don't have to paint the same thing over and over again!!"

Cool! Buy a different model. You're not locked into one faction forever. The idea that armies are just the same idea copy-pasted between all the units is a vestige of AoS 1.0 and isn't reflected in modern original factions. Do you want FEC souped into Bonereapers for more diversity in aesthetics? What, that doesn't make any sense? Neither does Kharadron and Fyreslayers.

I'm not even against the idea of Fyreslayers getting rolled into another book. I don't think they're popular enough to warrant a second wave. But to put them with Kharadron specifically? It's an awful idea. It has no redeeming features. Kharadron don't need Fyreslayers. They'd be sacrificing half of their book to fit in less than half a dozen kits that don't work with what they already have.

If neither army gets new units, then you're deleting half of what they are for the convenience of updating them at the same time. That's it. How is that worth it?

If Fyreslayers are really a dead-end with no real future, then let them stay that way or roll them into whatever neo-Dispossesed army eventually comes out. Don't drag down Kharadron with them.

 

[Greybeard86]

Are KO going to get new units though?  Because, no offense, I think lots of people are willing to throw FS under the bus because hardly anyone plays them.

In my opinion, the point is whether many factions with narrow ranges can be sustained over time or whether they ll just languish and die from neglect. This is not new to AoS, chorfs and dogs of war suffered that fate in WHFB.

It seems that now AoS is going back to large releases with wider ranges. Now, the previous design iteration of narrow ranges can either fold into a wider faction or...what? What do you think will happen? How long can KO continue to operate with 1 battle line and now new minis? Not to speak of FS since that’s been discussed to death. 
 

I think there is room for actual bigger alliances that work, and we have to allow for some time to GW to write the lore to support it. Likely, this will lead to some retconning. Usually, I dislike that. But between death from moth or retconning, I guess I’d choose the later.

[zilberfrid]

3 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

Are KO going to get new units though?  Because, no offense, I think lots of people are willing to throw FS under the bus because hardly anyone plays them.

In my opinion, the point is whether many factions with narrow ranges can be sustained over time or whether they ll just languish and die from neglect. This is not new to AoS, chorfs and dogs of war suffered that fate in WHFB.

It seems that now AoS is going back to large releases with wider ranges. Now, the previous design iteration of narrow ranges can either fold into a wider faction or...what? What do you think will happen? How long can KO continue to operate with 1 battle line and now new minis? Not to speak of FS since that’s been discussed to death. 

I think there is room for actual bigger alliances that work, and we have to allow for some time to GW to write the lore to support it. Likely, this will lead to some retconning. Usually, I dislike that. But between death from moth or retconning, I guess I’d choose the later.

Other people are willing to toss the identity of Kharadron to save the Fyreslayers. Sure, they now have always been religious, and are increasingly zealous.

If GW wouldn't staple FS trough the soul of Kharadron, they would get a new kit or two, they are popular enough.

Ballasted by badly sculpted fanatics? Probably not.

[JustAsPlanned]

Way I see it, souping Fyreslayers and Kharadron together is an absolute shocker of an idea, and if GW do it I’ll be REEEEEEEEALLY peeved. They share absolutely NOTHING in common other than that they’re both dwarves. They have entirely different play styles (Kharadron shooty, Fyreslayers choppy), they have entirely different aesthetics (big orange Mohawks and Brassy armour don’t mix at all), and it would generally just be a massive cop out. It’d be like trying to mix IDK and DoK, or BoC and STD. Hell, even in one of the BEST soup tomes (Mawtribes) a lot of fluff and design space was sacrificed on the BCR’s part. It’s an insult - a little plaster on a gaping wound of underdevelopment. “Here ya go, enjoy your new steam dwarfs Jimmy McFirepants! Be sure to look forward to your new FS clampack hero in 6 years!”

And to top it all off, there aren’t any good names they could give this hypothetical soup faction. Duardin Skyslayers? Kharafyre Overdronlordslayers?

[Snorri Nelriksson]

35 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

Are KO going to get new units though?  Because, no offense, I think lots of people are willing to throw FS under the bus because hardly anyone plays them.

In my opinion, the point is whether many factions with narrow ranges can be sustained over time or whether they ll just languish and die from neglect. This is not new to AoS, chorfs and dogs of war suffered that fate in WHFB.

It seems that now AoS is going back to large releases with wider ranges. Now, the previous design iteration of narrow ranges can either fold into a wider faction or...what? What do you think will happen? How long can KO continue to operate with 1 battle line and now new minis? Not to speak of FS since that’s been discussed to death. 
 

I think there is room for actual bigger alliances that work, and we have to allow for some time to GW to write the lore to support it. Likely, this will lead to some retconning. Usually, I dislike that. But between death from moth or retconning, I guess I’d choose the later.

Well better soup than dead...but.
One of the most important things in warhammer is always army identity though.
If they want to make "bigger alliances" let's go back to GA books and stop at it, the result would be the same: armies with many incoherent styles in them.
I accept that GW could not sustain 30+ armies (and i agree that we have too many allegiances), BUT there's room to improve the thing.
They want to soup dwarves?OK, then put dispossessed 2.0 and Fyreslayers together remaking some of the models to better fits, let's unite DOK and Corsair and Malerion's, trim the fat of Cities taking away every non human factions and create new non-human and human units as auxiliaries giving a new aos aesthetic and not let them be "whfb leftovers", same for warclans bridge the gap between the two halves with some "basic orruks".
The irony imho is that for soup tomes you actually need more units to bridge the aesthetic gap.


Also i don't think that GW will start adressing the army problem with wider ranges, in fact i'd say that they still do'nt know what to do: Slaanesh like every chaos god army got both demon and mortal part because is "chaos", Lumineth are the second native aos army with two waves (third if we count Slaanesh in some form), the Soulblight are like LON a soup with little differences from the past of whfb.
And if the rumors are true Kroolboyz are part of warclans but maybe they also have something other than orruks like "gloomspite" containing various greenskinz.
IDK i think the designer still do'nt know what to do.....or maybe they're biding their time for some big change.
I'm not against the concept of soup but it should be done better IF done.

 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Snorri Nelriksson