AoS 3 New Rules Discussion

[The Red King]

On 6/4/2021 at 9:51 AM, SpiritofHokuto said:

You mean the video in this article?
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/06/02/the-new-edition-of-warhammer-age-of-sigmar-delivers-the-most-comprehensive-ruleset-ever/
If so, it doesn't say anything about taking Battletome battalions away from Matched Play, just that Core book battalions are being added? 

Yeah everyone keeps saying "batallions are gone." Like its fact and I dont even think that was rumored outside of them saying "some people have better and some have worse so we're adding generic ones for everyone!" 

I'm not saying they arent going but theres not actually any confirmation that they are and people are practically writing lists around the "fact" that they're out.

[SpiritofHokuto]

5 hours ago, Zeblasky said:

The thing about support heroes is very tricky though. You don't want them to be dead at the sight of shooting and magic MW spam, but you don't want them to be not worth the effort to focus down either. Hard to find the middle ground here.

Yeah, I guess I feel it more keenly as I'm a StD player primarily so Hero sniping neuters my main allegiance ability. 

The argument could be made to run as a god army, but from a flavour standpoint that's not a StD army. And if the latest Slaanesh tome is anything to go by, running approximately marked StD units in a god army is going to have limited benefits. 

[Sarouan]

Well, so far, the rules that were officially shown still don't give the full picture. They talked about reactive command abilities as well, indeed, so I expect the "charge reactions rumors" would be in fact those, meaning it's not free to use.

In the end, it really depends of what are the generic command abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't keep the same list than in AoS V2 with the last Handbook General updates. If the list is restricted as well as to who can use them (for example, who says Inspiring Presence won't have a "HEROES only" restriction ?), maybe our fears of the abuse won't have any reason to exist.

I'm not really fond of adding new gimmicks like Hero and Monster "special actions" in the core rules, that doesn't really go towards the design of simple rules of AoS at the beginning. But I guess there's no other way to justify a new edition to buy and we will eventually have rules added with the next editions as well, to the point it will become bloated like 40k V9 is already becoming. *sigh*

Well, so far, it's still bearable, so it's a bit soon to worry about it, I guess.

About core battalions, I still don't really see what GW wants to do with that. I honestly understood it as a new way to build your army with allies / mercenaries, actually. So I'm not sure it's about replacing the battletome battalions.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Sarouan

[Aelfric]

9 hours ago, Joseph Mackay said:

Your crossbow example doesn’t make sense though. My limited understanding of medieval era weapons, you have to load crossbows 1 bolt at a time, the dwarf in your example would kill you before you’ve even finished loading the crossbow

Crossbows with magazines exist in AOS and did in Fantasy.  Weapons in AOS are not mediaeval weapons (or any other historical era), though they may be inspired by them.

[Mcthew]

Interested to see what else is to come. Expecting/hoping for better terrain rules, which I think would not nerf shooting but improve the experience for non-shooting armies.

Also interested to see how mercenaries fit in. Given that Kragnos can be used in any Destruction army but means you can't run mercs must mean that mercs are about to come back, but better than previous rules? 

[Zeblasky]

11 hours ago, Joseph Mackay said:

I disagree. Shooting already has the advantage of the opponent not being able to hit you back, unlike in combat. That advantage is already not being accounted for in the points costs of shooting units, as well as a lot of shooting becoming better than melee these days

Then please name the overperforming shooting units, that hit too hard or too well for their point cost if compared to melee. Then compare them to a list of 3 factions that I've said are in need of nerf to their shooting potential.

[Lich King]

Get rid of double turn , get rid of battalions. Only allow scoring from the 2nd battle round and up. Maybe give that thing to monsters - those are really the only changes that should’ve been implemented .

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, Aelfric said:

Weapons in AOS are not mediaeval weapons (or any other historical era)

This concept, and others like it, should be tattooed on the foreheads of all gamers. Realism (as in connecting sci-fi or fantasy game rules to anything at all from our actual world) is, or should be, almost entirely meaningless and left undiscussed.

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, Mcthew said:

. Expecting/hoping for better terrain rules,

Say it with me now ...

We don't need better terrain rules. Gamers just need better terrain.

The rules are fine when players use good terrain.

[Enoby]

8 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Say it with me now ...

We don't need better terrain rules. Gamers just need better terrain.

The rules are fine when players use good terrain.

What would you count as better terrain? Because the stuff GW sells always has small gaps in it so it becomes close to impossible to hide things out of sight.

For example, the Ophidian Archway has two windows and a large door, and the upper floor is covered by a short wall that many units will have at least their weapons peaking over. How can you truely hide a unit of more than three models? Otherwise they just get cover, which doesn't affect things like MWs at range.

I'm just curious about what you view as good terrain for a player to have? The stuff that GW currently produces doesn't do a good job of blocking AoS's line of sight. You could go third party, and often those pieces are bigger, but from experience tend to be less interactive; they end up as big blocks, which can block LoS, but aren't interesting beyond that. 

As an aside, terrain heavy tables are often pretty 'casual' unfriendly - or at least from my experience players are not enthused about buying more terrain to paint up and store. I can't imagine it's a good thing that the game's terrain system only works if you buy a lot of it, and it has to be a certain 'quality' of terrain.

I'd be interested of seeing an example of a table with what you consider good terrain?  

[Magnus The Blue]

Terrain also only goes so far when LRL shooting is mainly about moral wounds and can shoot out of LoS, so basically ignores terrain (unless they change the rules).

[RocketPropelledGrenade]

2 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Say it with me now ...

We don't need better terrain rules. Gamers just need better terrain.

The rules are fine when players use good terrain.

Better terrain would certainly help, but the rules could use some work too. I don't think it's an either/or situation.

[EntMan]

Do we know yet if the basic AOS 3 rules will be free like they were with AOS 2? And if the warscrolls will be free for download/on the App?

[dirkdragonslayer]

I like how people keep saying shooting is OP in a way that implies all shooting in this game is bad for the game, then when asked about the problem people complain specifically about Lumineth archers. This doesn't sound like a problem with shooting in AoS, this sounds like a problem with the Lumineth.

I mean, I never see people complain about Grot Shootas, Ogor leadbelchers, Melusai Stalkers, Arrowboyz, Fyreslayer hearthguard, Namarti Reavers, or the other 90% of shooting units in the game. It's almost always about the Auralan Wardens or Seraphon people point to. Terrain rules and stuff could definitely be improved, and we should all bring more full LoS blocking terrain, but maybe your problem isn't with shooting as a phase. Maybe your problem is a specific unit or faction.

I don't see anyone at my store complaining that my 60 Shootas are OP for getting 9 wounds (before saves) on average. It doesn't feel unfair when my Opponent's warp lightning cannon wipes my Troggs off the board without me hitting back. That is just how the game goes.

[Zappgrot]

Not a fan of how letting units command themselves removes counterplay from the game. Since you now can't prevent basic abilities by lureing units or zoneing out charaters.  This makes the basic command abilities more like 40k stratagems and that's bad. We don't want things to just be able to buff themselves a couple of times whit no counterplay to prevent it. 

[Zappgrot]

9 hours ago, Magnus The Blue said:

Terrain also only goes so far when LRL shooting is mainly about moral wounds and can shoot out of LoS, so basically ignores terrain (unless they change the rules).

Yea the lumineth realm lords shooting is just plain stupid games design. Who makes rule in a game whit a lot of melee armies. Where having terrain is a downside for the person whit the melee army.  That's nuts 

[herohammer]

I agree with the several people who have mentioned that the current “shooting meta” issues are much more an “overpowered battletome meta” than any inherent problem with shooting. It is easier to up the points or change the rules on 5-10 units than it is to try to nerf all shooting then fix all the garbage units a blanket nerf would create. At the end of the day I would rather see a wider variety of units see play whether they are shooting or melee. If you just nerf shooting in general you would still see the usual suspects you would just be even more unlikely to see the other 90% of ranged units.

[LuminethMage]

5 hours ago, dirkdragonslayer said:

I like how people keep saying shooting is OP in a way that implies all shooting in this game is bad for the game, then when asked about the problem people complain specifically about Lumineth archers. This doesn't sound like a problem with shooting in AoS, this sounds like a problem with the Lumineth.

I mean, I never see people complain about Grot Shootas, Ogor leadbelchers, Melusai Stalkers, Arrowboyz, Fyreslayer hearthguard, Namarti Reavers, or the other 90% of shooting units in the game. It's almost always about the Auralan Wardens or Seraphon people point to. Terrain rules and stuff could definitely be improved, and we should all bring more full LoS blocking terrain, but maybe your problem isn't with shooting as a phase. Maybe your problem is a specific unit or faction.

I don't see anyone at my store complaining that my 60 Shootas are OP for getting 9 wounds (before saves) on average. It doesn't feel unfair when my Opponent's warp lightning cannon wipes my Troggs off the board without me hitting back. That is just how the game goes.

And many people complaining about LRL archers probably have never played against them. It's a meme people are picking up. They do pose a problem for certain armies (reliant on small heroes, with no saves against MW, and those armies aren't only weak against Sentinels, but tend to generally don't do well for obvious reasons), but so do other good units to other armies.

Compare the damage of 20 Sentinels - which are slightly more expensive (40 points) than 40 Shootas on a stats app. If they don't get their spell cast, they do an average of one to two wounds more wounds per turn. If they get it cast it's 3 to 4. The damage is good but not great, it's that they can apply the damage almost anywhere on the battlefield which makes them worth their points. On the other hand, that's their only trick for 140 points. They don't have nets or anything like that. They don't do anything in melee. They aren't fast, they haven't got a high number of models to hold object either. It's just a missile unit that does good pinpoint damage where you want it. 

LRL aren't that great anyway. Many people who were on the "LRL are so OP" train when they were released have come around by now, like The Honest Wargamer for example. It's more a thing still here on this forum and some FB groups.

[Saturmorn Carvilli]

30 minutes ago, LuminethMage said:

On the other hand, that's their only trick for 140 points.

Well, 280 points for 20 Sentinels, but I largely agree with what you are saying.

After finally getting my Lumineth on the table, I wasn't overly impressed with my 20 Sentinels.  The no line of sight was a double-edged sword in my game as I first kept them completely hidden behind a centrally placed dense forest (no LoS).  All game they could only fire Aloft (30") as they were kinda boxed in and my opponent (Mawtribes with lots of Yhetees) had -1 to hit for most stuff. So hits were Mortal Wounds if I managed Power of Hysh (which I did not half the game).  Granted, my Sentintels were not supported in any way as I went heavy Alarith with both Alavenor and a Spirit of the Mountain (which were my MVPs).

I am not going to say Sentinels ain't nothin'.  They certainly can be all kinds of annoying to frustrating if they are supported and/or spike dice. At the same time, I don't think they are the boogymen they are made out to be all the time.  At least not if they aren't spammed.  Personally, I think Power of Hysh should work like Smite does in 40k with every attempt increasing the difficulty to cast.

I suppose it wouldn't hurt if they went up to 150pts for 10, maybe even 160pts, but there comes a point where they might become a burden to a Lumineth player not spamming and combo-ing everything they can into them.  Me, I still lean toward shooting being powerful and would prefer a more 40k approach as I think unit such as Sentinels should be screened and kinda screwed if they find themselves in melee.  However, I haven't experienced enough everything to know if such rules would mess over some factions.  I just know, it really wouldn't with Lumineth as they would have things to screen/counter getting stuck-in.

Edited June 7, 2021 by Saturmorn Carvilli

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

On 6/6/2021 at 7:06 AM, The Red King said:

Yeah everyone keeps saying "batallions are gone." Like its fact and I dont even think that was rumored outside of them saying "some people have better and some have worse so we're adding generic ones for everyone!" 

I felt comfortable adding this to the OP because "Battalions are gone in matched play, replaced with generic battalions" was one of the first AoS 3 rumours we got from ListLab, and it has since been confirmed that generic battalions are a thing.

ListLab has been reliable so far. I don't doubt that their other rumours will pan out, either, but I am waiting for official GW confirmation on stuff like charge reactions before I put them in.

[Backbreaker]

I love the hero and monster actions! 

But I'm a bit disappointed by what we saw of the shooting phase. I was hoping for a character rule similar to 40k.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

6 minutes ago, Backbreaker said:

I love the hero and monster actions! 

But I'm a bit disappointed by what we saw of the shooting phase. I was hoping for a character rule similar to 40k.

No changes to Look Out, Sir! are the big surprise for me at the moment. But I do think there are still a lot of ways in which GW could try to make shooting more fun. Given that there are more command points now and reaction command abilities are being introduced, I definitely think that is one way we will be able to deal with shooting in the future. I would also not be surprised if terrain rules were slightly reworked to make sure that there is more line of sight covering terrain on the board, regardless of true line of sight.

[AaronWilson]

I'm very excited to take a deep dive into the rules. Will units with a champion now be be able to inspiring presence them selves? Are we 100% seeing batallions from army books go, etc. Cannot wait to sit down and read through it all. 

[RuneBrush]

On 6/5/2021 at 5:33 AM, Sunchaser said:

I may have missed talking about it so excuse me if I have...

I'm deeply curious how this command point change will effect Ossiarchs since they're unable currently to use CP. It seems like a pretty significant advantage not to be able to use a very important buff to the rest of the factions. Thoughts?

 

Likely if a change occurs it will be with errata for them. Although I think the more hopeful among us would say we get a new book for OBR with archers and such haha.

I'm 99% positive that on the 3rd there will be a wave of new Errata and FAQs to sort out some of the oddballs that are going to exist 😊

On 6/5/2021 at 12:54 PM, Magnus The Blue said:

Mostly I'm looking forward to Roaring at Flesheaters Terrorgeists to stop all that fight twice then fight when I die nonsense dead in it's tracks. 

To be honest I'd be very surprised in inspiring presence doesn't at least change.  With more command points and champions issuing command abilities it would render bravery almost completely pointless.

I think we could see bravery change and likely inspiring presence with it.

On 6/5/2021 at 5:26 PM, Zeblasky said:

Here's the thing though. If you give units penalties for shooting into friendly melee and make it possible to shut down unit shooting completely by tying it down in melee, you will have to severely BUFF current shooting in order to compensate for such a weakness. So in some cases, you could shut down enemy shooting too early (like with a few aetherwings for example) and remove a lot of power from an opponent, and in some cases overwhelming and concentrated shooting will be able to easily kill enemy forces wave by wave, thus leading to even more one sided games and less fun for both melee and shooting lists.

Speaking hypothetically, I don't think you'd need to buff shooting units if they implemented a friendly fire mechanic.  Part of the skill of a ranged army is making sure you're in the right place so that you can attack your opponent with impunity.  I don't think it'd be any less one sided then a KO army sniping out all the heroes when playing against a Khorne opponent.

On 6/6/2021 at 6:06 AM, The Red King said:

Yeah everyone keeps saying "batallions are gone." Like its fact and I dont even think that was rumored outside of them saying "some people have better and some have worse so we're adding generic ones for everyone!" 

I'm not saying they arent going but theres not actually any confirmation that they are and people are practically writing lists around the "fact" that they're out.

The short interview with Ben Johnson talked about there being specific battalions for use in matched play.  I'm sure this was repeated somewhere else too.  I can't recall the precise wording (I'll have to rewatch the video at home), but it was pretty much read as confirmation that the battletome battalions wouldn't be usable in matched play.  List building now is very premature though - I've a feeling the new matched play battalions may well work in a similar way to 40k detachments.  Fully expect us to have this revealed to us over the next month

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

8 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

I think we could see bravery change and likely inspiring presence with it.

There has to be some sort of change, right? That was always one of the most prevalent complaints about AoS 2: Battleshock just kind of does not exist because Inspiring Presence is just so easy to give out. And if it stays as it is, it's only getting easier, since there are more command points around and unit champions can possibly use it. Plus all those +1 bravery abilites they have been printing recently.

Personally, I would guess that Inspiring Presence and all the reroll 1s abilites are probably not sticking around. I say this because it seems like getting a 2+ to hit/wound/save is getting a lot more achievable, given the most recent warscrolls we have seen. And in that situations, reroll 1s is actually quite strong. If hit, wound and save bonuses get capped at +1 to reduce buff stacking, then having rerolls still be commonplace seems like it would conflict with that design goal.