3.0 Actual Games Conversation

[yukishiro1]

8 hours ago, whispersofblood said:

Yeah I've been really thinking about FEC and OBR as of late. I think people who are dedicated to FEC are going to need to completely rethink how they build armies for this edition. 

And for OBR I think they are fine at the game, they just are like TK were in WHFB playing a completely different game to the rest of us. I think we might see more from them once the excitement from the new rules becomes more normal and people are looking to play something different. 

Build differently how, though? The problem with FEC is that they don't really have any options. You can either go heavy on monsters, or you can go heavy on elite units on 50mm bases. Monsters don't work any more because of the limitations on using multiples of command abilities or multiple commands on one unit. Elite infantry doesn't work because coherency means you can't run them above 3 without severely nerfing their damage, and you can't run them MSU because they rely on buffs so much to do damage and get around the field, and MSU neuters the effectiveness of all those things.

The only other option is running ghoul-heavy builds. But those aren't competitive because ghouls just aren't competitive, especially not in 3.0, which is not at all kind to stuff that has no rend attacks and no ability to generate mortals. FEC doesn't even have a priest to try to curse something, which would actually make ghouls theoretically scary, if hugely unreliable and hard to set up.

The whole army struggles because it doesn't have any shooting, very little high rend, or effective ways to get through screens, all things that became more important in 3.0. 

They just seem absolutely set up to fail. 

[Reinholt]

1 hour ago, yukishiro1 said:

Build differently how, though? The problem with FEC is that they don't really have any options. You can either go heavy on monsters, or you can go heavy on elite units on 50mm bases. Monsters don't work any more because of the limitations on using multiples of command abilities or multiple commands on one unit. Elite infantry doesn't work because coherency means you can't run them above 3 without severely nerfing their damage, and you can't run them MSU because they rely on buffs so much to do damage and get around the field, and MSU neuters the effectiveness of all those things.

The only other option is running ghoul-heavy builds. But those aren't competitive because ghouls just aren't competitive, especially not in 3.0, which is not at all kind to stuff that has no rend attacks and no ability to generate mortals. FEC doesn't even have a priest to try to curse something, which would actually make ghouls theoretically scary, if hugely unreliable and hard to set up.

The whole army struggles because it doesn't have any shooting, very little high rend, or effective ways to get through screens, all things that became more important in 3.0. 

They just seem absolutely set up to fail. 

This is my read as well.

I have been chatting with a few people to talk about winners and losers locally and here is what I would say:

Winners

1. Armies with efficient melee on 25mm bases
2. Armies with efficient minimum unit size (5 or less) melee on any size bases (as there are less giant blocks)
3. Shooting, especially if you can condense into a unit that can use Unleash Hell effectively, but in general shooting because large melee on non-25mm bases are less effective
4. Heroes, and especially Heroic Monsters, though the small former ones are still solid if you can self-heal to avoid the Tecnado type issues
5. Self-sufficient units or units that did not rely on overlapping buffs but rather army-wide abilities (as many of the latter you cannot stack and/or can use only once)
6. Fast armies

Losers

1. Melee on >25mm bases without 2" reach or better
2. Units that relied on stacking buffs or repeated buffs (e.g. if you can't use a command ability more than once you can't spam it all over now)
3. Slow armies (several of the new ways to score points will hugely benefit those who can either pick their fights or pick their situations)
4. "Balanced" armies that are neither MSU nor single-unit deathstars that can still be adequately buffed
5. Regular monsters (this may be counter to popular opinion, but they will give up a lot of points in contexts and don't bring enough vs. heroic monsters; some exceptions if a warscroll is great but in general they may be more of a liability than people expect)

TBD:

1. Endless Spells
2. Toughness based non-offense armies (I think with things being more survivable there may be builds where an army kind of doesn't need to hurt the opponent much except in specific moments but instead runs around just doing their thing)

 

So based on that, obviously there's a lot of internal balance shifts within armies, but in terms of entire armies I just have no idea what I would do to win, it would be this list: FEC, Sylvaneth, Slaanesh, and to a lesser extent Fyreslayers, Nighthaunt, and Khorne. I am ignoring Stormcast (ex Shootcast) because they will be outdated momentarily.

 

Thus I can see the frustration from those players: the core thing that made the army work is gone in many cases, the units that should be good are hamstrung either by base size or move limitations, and some of them (like FEC and Fyreslayers) just don't really have other things to go to that I see. I've played two games against an opponent with Fyreslayers now, and rolled him so hard it was uncompetitive twice; we played a third where we swapped armies and he rolled me (so clearly I had no idea what to do with the little guys either). HBG just don't have the critical mass now, the priests not throwing multiple prayers sucks, and the lack of speed really harms them on some objectives. Maybe there would be a list with magmas and more shooting and like one unit of HBG; I think there is something there? I'm not an expert with them so I don't know which way I would go but I can see frustration for a lot of factions in the new system because the things they would like as answers just aren't in the book in size. Certainly someone like FEC I have no idea what I would even do to make that work...

Edited July 6, 2021 by Reinholt

[stratigo]

1 hour ago, Reinholt said:

This is my read as well.

I have been chatting with a few people to talk about winners and losers locally and here is what I would say:

Winners

1. Armies with efficient melee on 25mm bases
2. Armies with efficient minimum unit size (5 or less) melee on any size bases (as there are less giant blocks)
3. Shooting, especially if you can condense into a unit that can use Unleash Hell effectively, but in general shooting because large melee on non-25mm bases are less effective
4. Heroes, and especially Heroic Monsters, though the small former ones are still solid if you can self-heal to avoid the Tecnado type issues
5. Self-sufficient units or units that did not rely on overlapping buffs but rather army-wide abilities (as many of the latter you cannot stack and/or can use only once)
6. Fast armies

Losers

1. Melee on >25mm bases without 2" reach or better
2. Units that relied on stacking buffs or repeated buffs (e.g. if you can't use a command ability more than once you can't spam it all over now)
3. Slow armies (several of the new ways to score points will hugely benefit those who can either pick their fights or pick their situations)
4. "Balanced" armies that are neither MSU nor single-unit deathstars that can still be adequately buffed
5. Regular monsters (this may be counter to popular opinion, but they will give up a lot of points in contexts and don't bring enough vs. heroic monsters; some exceptions if a warscroll is great but in general they may be more of a liability than people expect)

TBD:

1. Endless Spells
2. Toughness based non-offense armies (I think with things being more survivable there may be builds where an army kind of doesn't need to hurt the opponent much except in specific moments but instead runs around just doing their thing)

 

So based on that, obviously there's a lot of internal balance shifts within armies, but in terms of entire armies I just have no idea what I would do to win, it would be this list: FEC, Sylvaneth, Slaanesh, and to a lesser extent Fyreslayers, Nighthaunt, and Khorne. I am ignoring Stormcast (ex Shootcast) because they will be outdated momentarily.

 

Thus I can see the frustration from those players: the core thing that made the army work is gone in many cases, the units that should be good are hamstrung either by base size or move limitations, and some of them (like FEC and Fyreslayers) just don't really have other things to go to that I see. I've played two games against an opponent with Fyreslayers now, and rolled him so hard it was uncompetitive twice; we played a third where we swapped armies and he rolled me (so clearly I had no idea what to do with the little guys either). HBG just don't have the critical mass now, the priests not throwing multiple prayers sucks, and the lack of speed really harms them on some objectives. Maybe there would be a list with magmas and more shooting and like one unit of HBG; I think there is something there? I'm not an expert with them so I don't know which way I would go but I can see frustration for a lot of factions in the new system because the things they would like as answers just aren't in the book in size. Certainly someone like FEC I have no idea what I would even do to make that work...

I actually think the meta is going to shake out competitively as

 

Winners:

Armies with 3 plus to save hero monsters

Armies with a lot of mortal wounds, and particularly mortal wound shooting

 

Losers:

Everyone else

 

 

The current state of save stacking means high base save monsters are unfathomably difficult to kill without mortal wounds, and trivially trounce over every unit in the game except themselves or strong mortal wounds. 

 

I think 3.0 is gonna actually narrow what armies are tournament viable. 

[yukishiro1]

I am concerned about high save monsters too, especially with ward saves. With rend above -2 essentially nonexistent in the game and even rend -2 quite rare across most armies, you do seem to end up in a place where stuff with 3+ base saves becomes impractical to kill without being able to output large numbers of mortal wounds. And if it then has a ward save too (like, say, the 5+ they inexplicably gave every non-unique hero in the game access to...) on top of that, even mortals become impractical.

Even stuff with only a 4+ like an annointed on frostheart is looking incredibly difficult to put down. I mean, it was hard to kill before. And now it can be a wizard that can buff its own save so it's on a 3+ that can potentially ignore rend 2 (+1 from command, +1 from ability, +1 from mystic shield) with a 4+ ward on top of that (and -1 to wound too, of course). And then it can heal itself in every phase with around a 90% chance of success. Or cast flaming weapon on itself. Or function on top profile even if it has only 1 wound left. Or cast lifeswarm itself (at +1 to cast) and then heal itself 3d3 that hero phase. And it can roar, or stomp, or smash your faction terrain. And it went down by 5 points.

Unless you've got something that can put out ~24 MW in a turn or ~72 normal wounds, it's not going anywhere. And that's only a mid-tier monster in the just over 300 point range, stuff like Archaon is something else entirely. 

Edited July 7, 2021 by yukishiro1

[swarmofseals]

I have found that it's more often than not better to play around unkillable monsters. They can only engage/kill a limited portion of your army at a time, so work around them and focus on deleting the rest of their army.

As for shooting, I've played with and against a lot of very shooting heavy armies. Shooting works great against synergy based opponents where picking off soft support heroes ruin the opponent's plan. Shooting doesn't work so well against large numbers of efficient wounds. Shooting units have way lower offensive efficiency than good melee units, but they make up for that by being able to select defensively inefficient targets. If a player goes too heavy on shooting they will get run over when the melee units actually make contact.

Shooting is powerful in the new edition, but there are still plenty of factors that make going full gunline a questionable strategy.

One thing I'll absolutely agree with are the coherency rules though. I think overall they are fine, but I'd like to see more units with coherency exemptions as skirmishers and I'd like to see the threshold changed from >5 to >6 as that would allow single reinforced units of larger based monstrous infantry and the like to still function nicely. 32mm bases with 1" reach as bad as all that. You'd often end up honeycombing them before to maximize models in range, and doing that conveniently keeps you in coherency now as well. Reinforced units are at risk of having some idlers, but that was true in the last edition as well.

[Zeblasky]

4 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

I am concerned about high save monsters too, especially with ward saves. With rend above -2 essentially nonexistent in the game and even rend -2 quite rare across most armies, you do seem to end up in a place where stuff with 3+ base saves becomes impractical to kill without being able to output large numbers of mortal wounds. And if it then has a ward save too (like, say, the 5+ they inexplicably gave every non-unique hero in the game access to...) on top of that, even mortals become impractical.

Even stuff with only a 4+ like an annointed on frostheart is looking incredibly difficult to put down. I mean, it was hard to kill before. And now it can be a wizard that can buff its own save so it's on a 3+ that can potentially ignore rend 2 (+1 from command, +1 from ability, +1 from mystic shield) with a 4+ ward on top of that (and -1 to wound too, of course). And then it can heal itself in every phase with around a 90% chance of success. Or cast flaming weapon on itself. Or function on top profile even if it has only 1 wound left. Or cast lifeswarm itself (at +1 to cast) and then heal itself 3d3 that hero phase. And it can roar, or stomp, or smash your faction terrain. And it went down by 5 points.

Unless you've got something that can put out ~24 MW in a turn or ~72 normal wounds, it's not going anywhere. And that's only a mid-tier monster in the just over 300 point range, stuff like Archaon is something else entirely. 

Sure, it's all true, but at the same time that's kinda all Annointed on Frost can do, just being a debuffing roadblock. His damage is quite low for the cost, a treelord (190pts) outdamages it by a wound on average. 

[yukishiro1]

For sure, it hits like a wet noodle (though not as wet a noodle as it used to be, stomp + ability to be a wizard so it can do d3 mortals and/or add 1 damage to up to 8 attacks, plus the ability to easily hit on 2s, and wound on 2s once per game, moves that calculus significantly compared to its damage output in 2.0). 

So it survives significantly better than it used to, it deals a lot more damage than it used to (but still not very much objectively for a 300 point unit), it has far more utility than it used to. And yet it went down in points. And this is a unit that already saw play in 2.0. it wasn't a meme unit like a Kharybdiss or something. 

I'm not saying it's necessarily a problem yet. It's just an initial concern I've had playing games so far, that the game seems to be really pushing list design in the direction of beefy heroic monsters. I hope we don't end up with a game where all the top lists looks pretty much the same, 1000 points of tanky monstrous heroes, a strong, reinforced shooting unit, and then some cheap chaff. 

Edited July 7, 2021 by yukishiro1

[Kadeton]

It's a valid concern to have - I know my Frostlords feel like they're in an ideal position to dominate this edition, as heroic monsters with 3+ saves and 5+ wards with significant mortal wound output and in-faction healing.

But, this is an Actual Games thread. Can we keep the theoryhammer to a minimum, and focus on feedback from games played? Run some of these monster-hero-and-reinforced-shooting armies, or play against them, see how it goes in practice, and let us know!

[yukishiro1]

My comments were based on the games I've played, sorry if that wasn't clear. So far I've won every game with my monster-hero-and-reinforced-shooting army, and the only one that was difficult was the one vs another similar list. Only 3 games period, not a large sample size obviously, and one of them was the FEC game that honestly I probably coulda won with half my army not doing anything but standing there. 

[Kadeton]

@yukishiro1 Not aimed at you specifically, though I realise I did respond directly to your comment. More that the thread had generally swerved into "This is what I think the competitive meta is going to look like," rather than "Here's how my recent games went." I just don't think this is the thread to be discussing in depth what future hypothetical tournament-winning lists might do. But results of actual tournament games would be great, if anyone is already playing competitively!

[Pariah]

played my first game of 3.0 tonight, have a lot of thoughts, many of which are unfortunately negative. want to preface that I am in no way a competitive player, quite the opposite, spent the latter half of 2nd edition losing nearly every game with my goblins but I didn't mind much because I enjoy pushing around my plastic soliders and rolling dice, don't care much as to who wins so long as the game is fun. 

my army in 2nd was a bunch of goblins I'd been working on pretty much since gloomspite were released. the core is a 60 man unit of spear stabbas with some loonsmashas, the incredible sub-optimal loonboss with a giant cave squig, the cave shaman, and some squigs for battleline. also some rockgut troggoths, madcap shaman, boingrots, depending on the game size (max 1500 because I got caught up painting other game systems). 

It felt like 3rd edition was designed to punish my (already unsuccesful) way of play. Points went up on everything, will be fine at 1500 because it seems to have happened to everybody, but at 1000 really hurt combined with the squigs becoming minimum 12 for 160 in warscroll builder now. basically my whole army because just the spear formation, hidden loonsmashas, their support models, and some squigs for battleline. this was also largely because there is no longer a points decrease for max size stabbas.

the limit of +1/-1 on everything but rend on saves annoys me simply because it makes 2 of my warscrolls just plain worse even if it's normally not a change at all if there is other modifiers. the stabbas shields and moon banner both provide a +1 save (one if 10+ with shields, one against shooting). unless facing rend now only one applies. additionally my go to artifact is the cammy cowl which to my understanding can only be taken by characters who already have a -1 all the time (the various loonbosses) meaning that that only applies once unless the enemy has a plus to hit to cancel out. oh also now backstabbing mob is only a plus one (errata change) making the stabbas that much less likely to have attacks go through. 

the coherency was annoying when my unit was near dead but was less of an issue than I expected. what was a huge point of frustration is the limit of 1 command ability per unit. given that I had my army built around supporting one unit (the stabbas) it sucked to learn that I can only use either the loonbosses or the all out attack on them, not both. not to mention that all my gloomspite stuff built around giving me extra command points was useless because the unit I could use them on could only recieve one at a time, so they just built up them disappeared because that's a thing now. 

what I'm getting at is that it feels like this edition was engineered to push large units for existing and make sure that its hard to create an army with synergy around a core unit. It's just frustrating because I've been playing about this build for a while now and it's never been powerful or game breaking, it's just the way I have the most fun, buffing a big unit and rolling lots of dice and having small goofy units in the background like the troggoths or boingrots do their thing. I don't have the points for my goofy units now and the big unit has been nerfed. 

I'm not sure if the points on warscroll builder are final, and maybe the gloomspite battletome 2 with come out and fix these issues, but it just felt like the game was slowed down and complicated by unnessicary extra rules (the heroic action things, the battalions which have not a lot of affect on the game, at least the first two don't). I could always rebuild my play style and army from the ground up, but I don't have a lot of time to paint my goblin backlog because of work and quite frankly find it annoying that my already not very effective army had been rendered even less so in the new edition in a way which makes it less fun to play (yet again losing isn't the issue, it's that I have less synergy and most of my models cost more points now meaning less "comic relief" units can be taken. maybe I'm being too negative but so far my fears about the new editions changes seem to be coming true. I hope other people are having more fun with the new rules than I am. 

Edit: also it feels kinda dumb for this post to be why I came back to the forms after a long time, but I figured it'd be a good place to share my experience

Edited July 7, 2021 by Pariah

[yukishiro1]

Thanks for giving your experience. It's all valuable. Especially the impressions of people who don't have large collections and can't just swap in what now works for what now doesn't, it's important to remember lots of people like you exist and so "what used to work doesn't any more, what didn't used to work now does" has real adjustment costs for many hobbyists. 

[King Under the Mountain]

Won't play for a while as I'm in the process of moving across the world to Germany. Already joined a Warhammer gaming group from the area and although they are 40k heavy I'm working on corrupting them to the superior side of swords and magic.  They are forming a Path of Glory Campaign and ill be bringing my Fyreslayers for one last ride before the great Souping of 202X. 

[JackStreicher]

2 minutes ago, King Under the Mountain said:

Germany

Welcome to the country of (good) beer and bretzels

Do you move to Stuttgart by any chance?

[King Under the Mountain]

Just now, JackStreicher said:

Welcome to the country of (good) beer and bretzels

Do you move to Stuttgart by any chance?

Uh oh did I just dox myself? 

That's exactly where i'm going.

[AaronWilson]

I had my first game of AoS 3 last night, I took Slann, Starpriest, Astrolith, Oldblood on Carno, 4 x 10 skinks, 1 x 30 skinks, 2 razordons, 2 salamanders, 2 x 5 chamos, opponent had Blades of Khorne with 5 heroes, 1 a bloodthirster, 10 bloodreavers, 10 blood warriors, 6 skull crushers, 2 x 5 flesh hounds, 10 wrath mongers. 

He gave me first turn, i picked battle tactic to kill blood reavers, did that with razordons + magic, buffed 30 skinks teleported them with a skink screen in front of them and they killed 4 blood warriors, right flank just hold objective.

Buddies turn one he moved up, I used re deploy on 30 skinks and rolled 4, kept them safe from any threats. blood warriors charged skink screen in the centre, I spiked horrendously on unleash hell from 30 skinks and killed the unit, 10 wrathmongers + blood thirster charged and killed the skink screen in the centre. Buddy was a bit triggered from unleash hell, he only read it as the unit charged can shoot not a unit just within 9" of the charging unit.

I won priority, Carnosaur used finest hour, he got hand of glory, he got serpent staff, he got the great drake, comets call kileld two heroes over two turns, in shooting I killed 5 flesh hounds + the blood thirster, in melee with canrno I killed the wrath mongers as they had taken chip damage throughout the turn. 

Buddy called it there, with him having like 4 units left and me not lost a model + 11 summoning points in the bank

Not the first game I wanted, I couldn't see a good way for him to play around unleash hell and redploy is really strong to extend those charges + keep units behind a screen safe from melee ranges / a double charge etc. Certainly seems another hurdle for melee lists to jump over. Redeploy another thing to keep in your head at all times as well.

Champions being able to issue commands to their own unit is great, big +. 

[Zeblasky]

7 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

I hope we don't end up with a game where all the top lists looks pretty much the same, 1000 points of tanky monstrous heroes, a strong, reinforced shooting unit, and then some cheap chaff. 

That's literally my AoS 2.0 Living City army though x) I just had to change one Sister of Thorn into an Annointed for a new edition, and that was kinda it. I was ready for a new edition a year before, haha.

 

 

[whispersofblood]

I actually think the GSG and FEC have similar solutions. It involves a lot of screens, redeploy, unorthodox units or using existing units in unorthodox ways. I think I might have some ideas but I'd have to spend some time with the books, and there is a might backlog. 

[whispersofblood]

7 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

My comments were based on the games I've played, sorry if that wasn't clear. So far I've won every game with my monster-hero-and-reinforced-shooting army, and the only one that was difficult was the one vs another similar list. Only 3 games period, not a large sample size obviously, and one of them was the FEC game that honestly I probably coulda won with half my army not doing anything but standing there. 

I think we should keep in mind that people are only just gaining experience with the tools available. Like any edition change there is an early meta, which is usually the application of the most obvious stuff. In 8th edition it was smashing steadfast hordes into each other, eventually we got better tools via armybooks and the game envolved into something unrecognizable.

Right now I think hero monsters are the most obvious play. But, I predict that to change in the not too distance future as armies are built to take advantage of the rest of the ruleset.

[Skreech Verminking]

6 hours ago, King Under the Mountain said:

Won't play for a while as I'm in the process of moving across the world to Germany. Already joined a Warhammer gaming group from the area and although they are 40k heavy I'm working on corrupting them to the superior side of swords and magic.  They are forming a Path of Glory Campaign and ill be bringing my Fyreslayers for one last ride before the great Souping of 202X. 

 

6 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

Welcome to the country of (good) beer and bretzels

Do you move to Stuttgart by any chance?

Mates, I may not live in Germany, but you guys are definitely in reach. (Got like a two hours drive per train to stuttgart.

(although any other place in germany and I might have to stay the weekend.))

So if you guys are desperate for killing some rats (you may at least try),just call your friendly neighborhood skavenplayer😉.

[Xil]

On 7/5/2021 at 3:27 PM, JackStreicher said:

Curious. Against which armies did you play? The two games I played were more enjoyable than any 2.0 or 1.0 game I've ever played

Tzeench

[The World Tree]

1 hour ago, Xil said:

Tzeench

There we have it lol (unfortunately)

[Paul Buckler]

My experience so far after around 100 Games.

 

There are a LOT of things to do now, lots of subtle changes that really influence the game.  It seems like you have a lot of CP to use, but in reality you have to make some hard choices on what to spend them on.

Most influential CA - Redeploy

The GHB missions have a wide variety, and to get a list to work in them all takes some practice.

Endless spells are really worth looking at now, treat them almost like a bonus unit that has an ability or damage rather than a spell.

Forces on the up, I would say these 3

SoB

S2D

Soulblight

 

Re: Unleash Hell, its a strong ability but no where near the game breaker that some have said.  You get used to it and often add a unit in your army to counter it.  Gemenids just stop it the majority of the time, if you are really worried.  Taking 1 CP out of your allotment to account for it really hurts.  Also for non mortal damage things like mystic shield and finest hour really mitigate.  For LRL rem that the unit casts are pretty random, so concentrate on stopping that where possible if it really troubles you.  Removing objective round 3 means you really take a risk castling up with an archer bunker setup.

 

This is honestly the best edition I have played and am looking fwd to seeing what thousands of brains dream up using the new rules/army composition.

 

 

[Grimrock]

Got another game in last night, this time nurgle against slaves to darkness. A few of my thoughts on the game in no particular order:

- Coherency was definitely an issue through the game, but it didn't eat up too much time. Combats regularly lost 2-3 attacking models and trying to maneuver a 10 man unit of blight kings was particularly troublesome. Maybe not a huge impact but losing 2-3 models can make a big difference in a combat if those models are blight kings or have a bunch of buffs like the plaguebearers. The units of 5 cavalry seemed like a breath of fresh air in comparison since they didn't have to worry about coherency at all
- I saw a huge opportunity for Redeploy to make a big difference in the game, but rolling poorly on it made the play useless. I'm wondering how often it will be used competitively since it's so inconsistent. Maybe in future tomes we'll see fast units have abilities that add +2 to the roll or something?
- Command points and abilities continued to feel great. The slaves player had plenty to summon on their free units (they were running the Ravagers sub faction) and Nurgle had lots to put out the generic abilities and keep plague bearers around with Inspiring Presence
- Endless spells continue to be a question mark for me. I used the lifeswarm and it regenerated some plaguebearers, but the ability to unbind in both hero phases meant it went away the next turn and never came back. I've yet to see one really run amuck, they're always shut down before they can make a big impact. I'm thinking you really need to have a casting focused army and 2 or 3 spells to overwhelm your opponent 
- Battle tactics did lead to some interesting back and forth in the game. For example I passed on taking the double turn on turn 2 because there were no viable tactics available. Going second allowed me to free up a unit in the slaves turn and then use it to score Sieze the Center on the bottom of 2. The slaves player intentionally tried to lose a fragile unit on their turn to try to avoid giving up an easy tactic later
- The FAQ has significantly changed a number of units. Plaguebearers for example are extremely tough now, like ridiculously tough for their points. Locus of Corrosion reducing rend, a free +1 to their save if they're near daemon heroes, and a flat -1 to hit if they have 10 or more models made them extremely difficult to shift. Similarly the changes to slaves that took away re-roll saves reduced their survivability. Definitely need some more games to get to grips with the changes 

Edit:
- One more thing of note. On the third turn the chaos lord on foot popped Finest Hour and charged into a damaged Great Unclean One. He tanked all the GUO's attacks and then managed to chip off the last few wounds to get the kill. He promptly rolled a double 6 on the Eye of the Gods table and ascended to daemonhood! Just about the most thematic way possible haha

Edited July 7, 2021 by Grimrock

[yukishiro1]

Oh wow, I hadn't even noticed that you can now dispel endless spells in both hero phases. That's actually a huge nerf, because if they dispel it in your hero phase,, that means you can't resummon it that turn, losing a whole turn of impact. And a priest loses nothing by doing so on your turn. We'd definitely been playing that one wrong, that quite drastically lowers the value of endless spells. More like "ending spells" these days, the chance of any one sticking around through to your next hero phase is pretty much nil. 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by yukishiro1