Tossed into the Mawpot! Soup Armies Thoughts and Feelings?

[Charleston]

Talking about Soups, I recently noticed how bad I miss Chaos Daemons having their own tome. I really love the touch of the 40k one: An army that is actually soup made from so vibrant motifs that they compete against each other even in the artstyle. Like, each color is screaming for your attention. Each deity has it's own section and it will never become a homogenous army, which is great! I wish GW would finally support CD's in AoS. The current Legion of the First Prince is not more than a little fun experiment centered around a single character...

Wouldn't it be actually quite easy to merge Deamonic Rules into a single Battletome? Get the Belakor-Undependend rules from LotFP, get the 4 Locusts, get 4x3 God Dependend Generals-Traits and Artifacts, grab some spells from the lores. Extra flavour could be added by providing god-dependend battalions, maybe even a mechanic like hedonites pretenders that allows to get a general for each deity. 

This would lead to a freakin awesome battletome which, which btw would lure more players to play multiple chaos factions

[Barkanaut]

16 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

That is a different conversation. Honestly? Not much in this discussion is about rules.

Keeping identity and hope of new models seems more important to people.

I dont care about a games competitivness. Not one hoot as long as the lore and models are fantastic. Maybe 40k gw team will remember the 99% of its casual 40k fan base. If I want competitve stuff games do it 200% better and if not there are better wargames for comp players to play and probably ruin like so many wargames and video games. 40k whos reputation is sinking bybthe year while aos rises.

 

If I was gw I would make a separate rule book for comp play. In rts games devs are discovering oh wait most players play strategy games for casual fun and solo campaigns. 99% dont play like star craft 1 competitive players and by turning a casual game series competitive can kill it. Also 40k is by far more political. Sigmar has some of this but its kept very minimal and going away slowly.

 

40k is losing popularity at the rate sigmar is gaining... hmm I wonder why.

[zilberfrid]

3 hours ago, darkdark25 said:

What about a Duardin Cults book, leave Kharadron out of it, Fyreslayers hear of the Gazul worshipers and after a couple of contracts commission them to help resurrect Grimnir, with this comes ethereal Dispossed Units that with arm and head swaps can be regular units in a hypothetical Grungni battletome, and/or they encounter Daughters of Valaya and join them in their quest since both FS and DV are seeking their ancestors.

If this happened would it be preferable to a Kharadron/Fyreslayers soup tome?

Absolutely

[Televiper11]

18 hours ago, zilberfrid said:

It isn't a zero sum equasion. It's a 2+2=1 equasion. Both factions are diminished by sticking them together this way.

Well, then you wouldn't see them coming over that hill in the image, right?

Most tables have multiple hills 😉

and a soup tome is 1+1+1 = 4 as you’ll still have your separate allegiances AND the special soup allegiance so it is an enlargement, not a diminishment.

[zilberfrid]

6 hours ago, Televiper11 said:

Most tables have multiple hills 😉

and a soup tome is 1+1+1 = 4 as you’ll still have your separate allegiances AND the special soup allegiance so it is an enlargement, not a diminishment.

Oh, they could write some rules, probably abridged versions of what they already had.

For Disposessed, it's just Tempest's eye stripped of some options.

For Kharadron, it's just Thryng.

So the only winner on rules are Fyreslayers.

In identity, strapping Kharadron to a god strips them of their most unique aspect.

For Fyreslayers, it's the wrong god.

This is not expansion of rules from two factions that only had a double page in the GHB, it's cutting two battletomes in half (and maybe taking Disposessed out of Cities, depriving Cities of dwarves).

Cutting something in half doesn't mean you now have more of that something.

Edited May 29, 2021 by zilberfrid

[Overread]

MOD NOTICE

There's a fair bit of passionate argument going on around the site at present. Please, remember be passionate by all means, but remain respectful toward others and in the use of the language you all choose to employ. Do not start insults or provoking or trying to attack others. 

Engage each other in debate and discussion and remember; this is all just theory and opinions. What is said here will not change GW's course or alter the contents of books or such. It's just a group of great passionate hobbyists and gamers interacting with each other and sharing our passion. Let's keep it at that please. 

[DoctorPerils]

14 hours ago, darkdark25 said:

What about a Duardin Cults book, leave Kharadron out of it, Fyreslayers hear of the Gazul worshipers and after a couple of contracts commission them to help resurrect Grimnir, with this comes ethereal Dispossed Units that with arm and head swaps can be regular units in a hypothetical Grungni battletome, and/or they encounter Daughters of Valaya and join them in their quest since both FS and DV are seeking their ancestors.

If this happened would it be preferable to a Kharadron/Fyreslayers soup tome?

That actually sounds pretty cool 😃 not necessarily the road I'd have picked to play up with the Fyreslayers, but it's thematically coherent at least.

In fact, it needn't be Gazul worshippers, it could always be some other death faction who become lawful good after nagash's absence?

[Snorri Nelriksson]

@darkdark25while i think it could be still a wrong to Fyreslayer players, i'd love an expansion for dispossessed/classic dwarves based on ancestor gods.

The Gazul Zagaz used runesingers to summon ancestor spirits, Valaya need to be ressurected and Grungni have already an established cult even between not dwarves(in spear of shadows we see that he welcomes everyone wants to master and knows the secrets of the forge, there's even an ogor).

Still there's  the lore passage about the betrayal in the dwarf pantheon that still puzzles the status of the gods.

Edited May 29, 2021 by Snorri Nelriksson

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

So… does the big expansion of Orruk Warclans today put to rest the idea that souped factions don’t get new models?

 

[Snorri Nelriksson]

12 minutes ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

So… does the big expansion of Orruk Warclans today put to rest the idea that souped factions don’t get new models?

 

Considering they are another subfaction i'd say no, the fear is that existing subfactions get left to rot.

So let's wait to see new ironjawz and bonesplittaz first.

Edited May 29, 2021 by Snorri Nelriksson

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

1 minute ago, Snorri Nelriksson said:

Considering they are another subfactions i'd say no, the fear is that existing subfactions get left to rot.

So let's wait to see ironjawz and bonesplittaz first.

At a minimum i think we have to give credit that this does a great job of:

(a) addressing the visual gap between the two - owning both I feel comfortable saying I could slot these into either side without them looking out if place

(b) address gaps in both factions pretty nicely - some shooting for Ironjawz and some non-horde options for Bonesplitterz

Given Soulblight essentially replaced original soup LoN with lots of new models too then I continue to think soup vs not soup re: model support a red herring.

[Snorri Nelriksson]

Just now, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

At a minimum i think we have to give credit that this does a great job of:

(a) addressing the visual gap between the two - owning both I feel comfortable saying I could slot these into either side without them looking out if place

(b) address gaps in both factions pretty nicely - some shooting for Ironjawz and some non-horde options for Bonesplitterz

Given Soulblight essentially replaced original soup LoN with lots of new models too then I continue to think soup vs not soup re: model support a red herring.

Idk, greenskins always had the "good point" of looking better united even between different syles like in the O&G whfb army(but these ones are really different from other orruks so idk, perhaps they'll  go better with caped and crooked moonclan).

Rulewise surely helps the list building ideas.

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

11 minutes ago, Snorri Nelriksson said:

Idk, greenskins always had the "good point" of looking better united even between different syles like in the O&G whfb army(but these ones are really different from other orruks so idk, perhaps they'll  go better with caped and crooked moonclan).

Rulewise surely helps the list building ideas.

They never bothered me to be honest but enough people in this thread had claimed it was an issue and one that existed for dwarf soup.  I see the new stuff as an excellent midpoint between the mostly naked BS and the totally armored IJ.  But aesthetics will always be subjective.

To me, a faction I already love just got better and I’d be thrilled to see Duardin get a similar bump in a similar way.  But guessing no matter what examples we get the fear will persist until we actually see and the resistance in some corners long after.  Fair enough.  To each their own.

For me, a huge pick me up after the disappointment of Kragnos’ points…

[zilberfrid]

2 hours ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

So… does the big expansion of Orruk Warclans today put to rest the idea that souped factions don’t get new models?

They are the best Orcs I have ever seen, but neither Ironjaws or Bonesplitters.

It does kinda take one of my points away that I expect (still do) no new dwarf models the coming years. Chaos Dwarves could be sooner than expansion (more than one or two heroes) for existing dwarves.

Also doesn't fix slapping a god in Kharadron's faces, and the wrong one on Fyreslayers.

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

5 minutes ago, zilberfrid said:

Also doesn't fix slapping a god in Kharadron's faces, and the wrong one on Fyreslayers.

On this one we’re just gonna have to agree to disagree because I think there are plenty of more likely ways to have a combined tomes without KO taking a walk along the road to Damascus and without Fyreslayers abandoning their quest to put their ur-gold Humptey Dumptey back together again.

[zilberfrid]

6 minutes ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

On this one we’re just gonna have to agree to disagree because I think there are plenty of more likely ways to have a combined tomes without KO taking a walk along the road to Damascus and without Fyreslayers abandoning their quest to put their ur-gold Humptey Dumptey back together again.

There is a slim chance they'll pull it off.

But since GW mostly writes cultist and religious fanatics, I'm far from optimistic.

[King Under the Mountain]

7 hours ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

So… does the big expansion of Orruk Warclans today put to rest the idea that souped factions don’t get new models?

 

Not even a little.

 

If this was a big expansion of Ironjawz or Bonesplitterz then yes, I would agree with you.

[Greybeard86]

The new orcs are fine, but I could not help but feel that adding more models in a new faction  while talking about the need to consolidate was a tad odd.

I think that the whole “new,  enter, bigger, scarier!!!” cycle might be exciting, but clearly is unsustainable from the perspective of keeping all the products relevant. Which obviously might not be GW goal, but I do think should be the goal of a good system.

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

4 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:

The new orcs are fine, but I could not help but feel that adding more models in a new faction  while talking about the need to consolidate was a tad odd.

GW was explicit in saying these new models will be playable in Orruk Warclans, a frequently referenced soup tome in this thread because it didn’t get any new models when it was souped.  As far as I can tell the number if models in the Orruk Soup that is Big Waaagh!!! Just about doubled with that announcement.

And if we’re able to look past our AoS corner at other precedents to see if GW tends to support soup with new models we can easily see that GW’s single biggest moneymaker is the ultimate soup called Space Marines.  Again, I just don’t see much evidence no matter where I look that soup in GW means neglect model wise.

[King Under the Mountain]

31 minutes ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

GW was explicit in saying these new models will be playable in Orruk Warclans, a frequently referenced soup tome in this thread because it didn’t get any new models when it was souped.  As far as I can tell the number if models in the Orruk Soup that is Big Waaagh!!! Just about doubled with that announcement.

And if we’re able to look past our AoS corner at other precedents to see if GW tends to support soup with new models we can easily see that GW’s single biggest moneymaker is the ultimate soup called Space Marines.  Again, I just don’t see much evidence no matter where I look that soup in GW means neglect model wise.

I think you are missing the forest for the trees.  I dont want a soup because I want Kharadron (and also Fyreslayers) to stand on their own and receive all the benefits of being a major faction.  Again your argument with Orruk Warclans hold's no water because  Ironjawz or Bonesplitterz have not received support. 

To break it down simpler.  I am a Kharadron Overlords player.  We get souped.  Suddenly they add a 3rd Dwarf faction of skinny jungle Dwarfs that worship a Dragon and are in no way related at all too Kharadron's theme and culture.  While you would say "See look how much support they are getting now!", I would still be disappointed. 

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

9 minutes ago, King Under the Mountain said:

I think you are missing the forest for the trees.  I dont want a soup because I want Kharadron (and also Fyreslayers) to stand on their own and receive all the benefits of being a major faction.  Again your argument with Orruk Warclans hold's no water because  Ironjawz or Bonesplitterz have not received support. 

To break it down simpler.  I am a Kharadron Overlords player.  We get souped.  Suddenly they add a 3rd Dwarf faction of skinny jungle Dwarfs that worship a Dragon and are in no way related at all too Kharadron's theme and culture.  While you would say "See look how much support they are getting now!", I would still be disappointed. 

What I am trying to do is address multiple different parts of the soup argument.

One point that has regularly been raised is that soup tomes don’t get new models support.  I think that one can pretty clearly be set aside at this point as many people have highlighted that soup is not a determinative factor in support.  Now that the one soup people cited as having gotten nothing in the new models category when souped has been about doubled in size hopefully we can move past that.

I’m actually fine with you labeling that a forest argument but I’m also happy to talk trees because your specific concern is whether or not there will be specific sub-categories of models within the soup and that is a narrower part.  I understand there is a lot of debate as regards to how to count them but I would note that both sides of Warclans have now gotten Underworlds models.  I regularly face Ironskulz Boyz on the table so here they are actually played.  And I fully expect to see more IJ and BS coming in 3.0 particularly BECAUSE the Orruk soup is now a bigger part of the game and the narrative.

If you don’t want to count the two new sets of IJ models and one set of BS models Warclans has gotten because you don’t count the warbands (either because they don’t have good rules or are a tax on your drops) I’m not going to argue with you because that’s personal preference/subjective.  But our personal preferences don’t change the reality that those warbands were made.

So whether you want to talk about the Warclans forest double in size or the number of IJ or BS trees increasing it is clear both have happened.

And I think the same would be true in a combined dwarf forest too.  More absolute trees, as well as more KO trees and more Fyreslayers trees.  That’s what the precedents seem to show.

[Greybeard86]

1 hour ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

GW was explicit in saying these new models will be playable in Orruk Warclans, a frequently referenced soup tome in this thread because it didn’t get any new models when it was souped.  As far as I can tell the number if models in the Orruk Soup that is Big Waaagh!!! Just about doubled with that announcement.

And if we’re able to look past our AoS corner at other precedents to see if GW tends to support soup with new models we can easily see that GW’s single biggest moneymaker is the ultimate soup called Space Marines.  Again, I just don’t see much evidence no matter where I look that soup in GW means neglect model wise.

True, but we have a bad precedent with SM. Some elements within the SM soup are pretty bad for extensive periods of time (e.g. Dark Angles SM).

All I am saying is that while new models are cool, more support for existing lines is needed. Sometimes this means adding extra minis to factions like FS, or making sure they can soup well with good rules. Just effort into certain parts of the game that are not precisely thriving.

I think we will all agree that SC did not need new models when some many of the units in the old range are barely used.

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

1 hour ago, Greybeard86 said:

True, but we have a bad precedent with SM. Some elements within the SM soup are pretty bad for extensive periods of time (e.g. Dark Angles SM).

All I am saying is that while new models are cool, more support for existing lines is needed. Sometimes this means adding extra minis to factions like FS, or making sure they can soup well with good rules. Just effort into certain parts of the game that are not precisely thriving.

I think we will all agree that SC did not need new models when some many of the units in the old range are barely used.

I’m happy to keep evolving the discussion as to whether soup makes you more or less competitive and whether we want to define that at the holistic level or piece by piece.

But again, look at the space marine precedent re:existing models.  We get Primaris than 9e and Primaris starts absolutely dominating lists?  No.  Sure you see some Primaris like Eradicators or Bladeguard shine.  But you also see older models like attack bikes and vanguard vets come through as excellent.  And given all the different factions you really do see a diverse mix of units when you start looking across lists whether you’re talking new vs old or any other category.

Fully agree that SCE didn’t need new models just like SM didn’t need new models.  But if I want a better SCE tome that makes more units viable SM/Indomitus/Primaris/9e precedent suggests that just maybe I get it from SCE/Dominion/3e new models.  

Could SCE tome flop?  Of course.  But I can’t look at Indomitus & Primaris in 9e and say it made legacy SM worse across the board.

Edited May 30, 2021 by Beer & Pretzels Gamer

[Greybeard86]

17 hours ago, Beer & Pretzels Gamer said:

I’m happy to keep evolving the discussion as to whether soup makes you more or less competitive and whether we want to define that at the holistic level or piece by piece.

But again, look at the space marine precedent re:existing models.  We get Primaris than 9e and Primaris starts absolutely dominating lists?  No.  Sure you see some Primaris like Eradicators or Bladeguard shine.  But you also see older models like attack bikes and vanguard vets come through as excellent.  And given all the different factions you really do see a diverse mix of units when you start looking across lists whether you’re talking new vs old or any other category.

Fully agree that SCE didn’t need new models just like SM didn’t need new models.  But if I want a better SCE tome that makes more units viable SM/Indomitus/Primaris/9e precedent suggests that just maybe I get it from SCE/Dominion/3e new models.  

Could SCE tome flop?  Of course.  But I can’t look at Indomitus & Primaris in 9e and say it made legacy SM worse across the board.

I think we are getting into a slightly different debate (my fault!). For me, soup is an effort to consolidate factions so that you can keep them relevant together, given that you wouldn't be able to support them separately (or wouldn't want to, it is just business, after all). By support I mean a combination of new models and keeping the old models relevant.

SM has been a very good example of how old units have been mostly eradicated from "competitive" play. Every few months a few outliers will be very competitive (old scouts, vanguard vets, attack bikes, some terimators), but SM armies are, at their core, primaris.

Old GW did something better, IMHO. While they added armies and new units, a lot of the release cycle was also re-sculpting of older models. New guard regiments, plastic dwarf warriors, and other refreshers of the existing lines. This was great, as it offered choices and didn't feel as much as simply planned obsolescence.

[DoctorPerils]

In a way, the new Kruleboyz are a relief, it is definitely support for the Warclans as a whole (though I've heard some mention that they may have their own battletome which may access Big Waaagh). It currently doesn't seem like there's going to be any support for Ironjawz or Bonesplittaz, though I cross my fingers that may change.

Someone mentioned them bridging the visual gap between the two pre-existing factions of Warclans, which seems to be the case. It remains to be seen if they bridge the thematic gap but I remain hopeful about that too I still remain to be convinced a duardin soup would be made coherent and cohesive in a similar way (though those hopes are up ATM for me); and I'm definitely not convinced it'd be a good thing to make soup separated along fantasy race lines like a duardin one would be (Warclans with Kruleboyz at least presents the opportunity to have gobs and troggoths)

 

However, what's gotten me most excited is the implied presence of Chaos Dwarves - if they were to soup them with S2D or anything else I'd be fine with that, they definitely seem to have a cult following, but not certain there's enough of one to make a stand alone battletome... But yeee Boy, Furnace Kings on their way 🤞