The Winter Rules Update

[JackStreicher]

Why are we discussing about Battleline in this thread? Back to topic please!

[Kadeton]

48 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:

Why are we discussing about Battleline in this thread? Back to topic please!

Did you have an on-topic discussion point you'd like to raise?

[JackStreicher]

35 minutes ago, Kadeton said:

Did you have an on-topic discussion point you'd like to raise?

Yes. That the historical composition of armies is irrelevant to this topic. Open a new threat if you want to talk about it. I am interested in what the thread title implies.

Edited December 30, 2021 by JackStreicher

[Enoby]

++ Mod Hat ++

Gentle nudge back to the Winter FAQ as the topic at hand I'm happy to set up another thread for discussing the place of battleline in AoS if that interests people?  

[Lord Krungharr]

I for one am very pleased at the even cheaper Bullgors and Dragon Ogors, more Beasts means less performance anxiety!   We'll see if this remains the same with a new Beasts tome or if they get new augmented rules and a points hike.  

Not super pleased about even more points for Irondrakes but at least was only 10.  Not too bad. 

Glad Horrors are more now.  Still, I'd be more pleased if the Eternal Conflagration only made Flamers/Exalted Flamers rend-1.  More themey sense there.

I don't think the Amulet nerf was warranted really as whole armies get a 5+ ward sometimes, or units easily get it (like apparently Sequitors), but a special artefact on one hero is only a 6+?  Kinda lame.

[Skreech Verminking]

17 minutes ago, Lord Krungharr said:

I1) for one am very pleased at the even cheaper Bullgors and Dragon Ogors, more Beasts means less performance anxiety!   We'll see if this remains the same with a new Beasts tome or if they get new augmented rules and a points hike.  

2)Not super pleased about even more points for Irondrakes but at least was only 10.  Not too bad. 

3)Glad Horrors are more now.  Still, I'd be more pleased if the Eternal Conflagration only made Flamers/Exalted Flamers rend-1.  More themey sense there.

4) I don't think the Amulet nerf was warranted really as whole armies get a 5+ ward sometimes, or units easily get it (like apparently Sequitors), but a special artefact on one hero is only a 6+?  Kinda lame.

1)Yes that is probably the only really worthwhile update, gw did.

I’m very happy for every bullgor and dragon ogor player.

They are probably far from what they should be, but at least they will play like a horde army at this point.

spamming them might be worth at this point.

 

2) nor was I.

I’d rather have seen those points added to the already points increase in sentinels.

 

3)they are much better then before.

now if clanrats and stabbas/shootas, would cost per model as horrors do right now per wound, the world would be a better world.

 

4) it is.

yet I am fine with the 6+ Ward.

It helps killing of giants and mawcrusher much faster, then the ridiculous stats this units had with the artefact before.

for a mawcrusher player, it is currently not an auto include anymore.

Yet it became pretty worthless for any 6 or less wound hero, which is very sad

 

Edited December 30, 2021 by Skreech Verminking

[Freejack02]

1 hour ago, Lord Krungharr said:

I don't think the Amulet nerf was warranted really as whole armies get a 5+ ward sometimes, or units easily get it (like apparently Sequitors), but a special artefact on one hero is only a 6+?  Kinda lame.

It was 100% warranted; it was THE best choice for nearly everything that doesn't take Arcane Tome - and that's including the initial 3.0 tomes released. When the artefacts list that has been tailored to your faction can't compete with the general Core options, something needs to change (imo). 

[NauticalSoup]

33 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

It was 100% warranted; it was THE best choice for nearly everything that doesn't take Arcane Tome - and that's including the initial 3.0 tomes released. When the artefacts list that has been tailored to your faction can't compete with the general Core options, something needs to change (imo). 

But shouldn't arcane tome have been nerfed as well then? It also outshines nearly every army book relic in the game, and really only faced competition from the amulet.

And a 6+ FNP is garbage on nearly everything except possibly the fattest monsters, it could've stayed 5+ for squishy foot heroes.

Edited December 30, 2021 by NauticalSoup
spelling

[KrispyXIV]

36 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

It was 100% warranted; it was THE best choice for nearly everything that doesn't take Arcane Tome - and that's including the initial 3.0 tomes released. When the artefacts list that has been tailored to your faction can't compete with the general Core options, something needs to change (imo). 

Having the best artefacts be in the Core Book is proof against Tome Artefact bloat/power creep and prevents "winners and losers" based on whether your particular Tome has good artefacts or trash artefacts.  

It's very easy to balance Tome artefacts when everything goes as long as it's not better than Amulet of Destiny.  It's a license to be cool and creative without power creep... or was.  

It's impossible for someone's Tome to leave them without any good artefact options if they always have the option of taking the "simple but extremely effective" core option that is Amulet of Destiny... or was.  

Amulet needed to be conditionally nerfed or restricted to make it less powerful on problematic super units.  Nerfing it like they did just returned us to the previous situation, where the quality of your artefacts is essentially random based on how your tome was written - and your only fallback option is now Arcane Tome.  So long as it isn't next...

The fact that the current situation is "fine" if you're lucky enough to have good artefacts in your battle tome does nothing to help those who dont - Amulet of Destiny fixed that problem, by making sure everyone had equal access to the best artefact. 

Edited December 30, 2021 by KrispyXIV

[Freejack02]

2 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:

But shouldn't arcane tome have been nerfed as well then? It also outshines nearly every army book relic in the game, and really only faced competition from the amulet.

And a 6+ FNP is garbage on nearly everything except possibly the fattest monsters, it could've stayed 5+ for squishy foot heroes.

Possibly, but that's much more difficult without retooling the entire item - it's simple to make a 5+ into 6+, much harder to nerf tome without completely changing the identity of the item. 

[Freejack02]

8 minutes ago, KrispyXIV said:

Having the best artefacts be in the Core Book is proof against Tome Artefact bloat/power creep and prevents "winners and losers" based on whether your particular time has good artefacts or trash artefacts.  

It's very easy to balance tome artefacts when everything goes as long as it's not better than Amulet of Destiny.  It's a license to be cool and creative without power creep... or was.  

It's impossible for someone's tome to leave theme without any good artefact options if they always have the option of taking the "simple but extremely effective" core option that is Amulet of Destiny... or was.  

Amulet needed to be conditionally nerfed or restricted to make it less powerful on problematic super units.  Nerfing it like they did just returned us to the previous situation, where the quality of your artefacts is essentially random based on how your tome was written - and your only fallback option is now Arcane Tome.  So long as it isn't next...

So would you rather have Amulet dominating the choice meta (and all tome artefacts having little to no relevance), or would you rather the single dominant item be changed and open up interesting possibilities?

Edited December 30, 2021 by Freejack02

[NauticalSoup]

2 minutes ago, KrispyXIV said:

Having the best artefacts be in the Core Book is proof against Tome Artefact bloat/power creep and prevents "winners and losers" based on whether your particular time has good artefacts or trash artefacts.  

I don't care for this notion. It's totally arbitrary - nearly everything in your army identity comes from your army book. If that's a bad thing or a risk, why limit yourselves to enhancements? Why not troops and allegiance traits? It literally only prevents winners and losers if everybody's tome artefacts are bad and not worth taking since if books actually have ones that beat out amulet/tome they're still a winner and you're still a loser. Otherwise it does nothing to close the gap - you both take an amulet, the guy with the better carrier gets more value.

[KrispyXIV]

8 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

So would you rather have Amulet dominating the choice meta (and all tome artefacts having little to no relevance), or would you rather the single dominant item be changed and open up interesting possibilities?

I'd think that a competitive scenario would be more interested in setting up a level playing field than ensuring everyone's narrative and flavorful artefacts see play, but I suppose I'm more interested in seeing everyone has good artefact options than hoping my limited set will happen to be ok.  

Good Amulet sets up a more level playing field for competition.  Bad Amulet flatly does not. 

There are plenty of things that work differently based on the "carrier", Amulet could have been one of them. 

Edited December 30, 2021 by KrispyXIV

[Freejack02]

9 minutes ago, KrispyXIV said:

I'd think that a competitive scenario would be more interested in setting up a level playing field than ensuring everyone's narrative and flavorful artefacts see play, but I suppose I'm more interested in seeing everyone has good artefact options than hoping my limited set will happen to be ok.  

Good Amulet sets up a more level playing field for competition.  Bad Amulet flatly does not. 

There are plenty of things that work differently based on the "carrier", Amulet could have been one of them. 

As long as faction variety exists, you're sacrificing the competitive "level playing field" in some way. True, amulet being too strong does create a more even field for every faction, but it also waters down what makes armies unique. We already lost interesting battalions for the sake of competitive fair play (and because GW can't balance them very well), I'd rather not homogenize everyone's artefact choice while we're at it. 

It's not a perfect solution, but if we're talking in terms of expected GW effort - it's much more likely that they would just nerf amulet instead of changing faction items to be on par with it. 

[KrispyXIV]

10 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

As long as faction variety exists, you're sacrificing the competitive "level playing field" in some way. True, amulet being too strong does create a more even field for every faction, but it also waters down what makes armies unique. We already lost interesting battalions for the sake of competitive fair play (and because GW can't balance them very well), I'd rather not homogenize everyone's artefact choice while we're at it. 

It's not a perfect solution, but if we're talking in terms of expected GW effort - it's much more likely that they would just nerf amulet instead of changing faction items to be on par with it. 

That's a Slippery Slope fallacy, and also a "let the perfect be the enemy of the Good".

Yeah, you can't arrive at a perfectly fair playing ground while also having varied and diverse factions that play differently from one another.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't balance things where you can without compromising identity.  

Having the "Gold Standard" artefacts be in the Core Rules is a dead simple and easy mechanism for doing that.  It allows for easy design ("do not cross this level of effectiveness"), easy comparison and evaluation ("is this ability worth giving up Amulet in my list, based on the specific synergies and implications?"), and ensures everyone always has at least one - if not more - valid choice ("Nothing in my book does much for my niche list, at least there's always amulet.")

I'm not saying Amulet wasn't too strong - in some cases it absolutely was.  What I take issue with is the idea that it was too strong because it was in the Core Rules.  The Core Artefacts SHOULD be strong choices if you don't have good options in your Tome for your list.  Having both Amulet and Tome meant I always got to make some choice - removing Amulet means now it's mostly just Tome.  And once Tome is gone (by the same logic), I could be left with nothing but "feels bad in comparison to my opponents awesome artefact" crud depending on what list I'm running. 

That is a far greater sin, in my opinion, than the best artefacts being Core. 

Edited December 30, 2021 by KrispyXIV

[Freejack02]

10 minutes ago, KrispyXIV said:

That's a Slippery Slope fallacy, and also a "let the perfect be the enemy of the Good".

This is not a "slippery slope fallacy", what I stated was simply fact. Unique battalions existed, then were removed, causing varietal list-building to be decreased. I'm aware the playing field can't be perfectly balanced; it's impossible without making all factions identical. The problem is the amount of effort GW has to put into these changes - I think most people here know they're going to do the minimum amount of work when it comes to rules. 

 

10 minutes ago, KrispyXIV said:

I'm not saying Amulet wasn't too strong - in some cases it absolutely was.  What I take issue with is the idea that it was too strong because it was in the Core Rules.  The Core Artefacts SHOULD be strong choices if you don't have good options in your Tome for your list.

Yes, they should be strong, not stronger than everything else. Competitive choices, not superior. IF future tomes were tuned to the levels of 5+ amulet than the have-nots get left further and further behind. Some tomes not having strong choices is a separate problem that GW should address, but I don't think making over-bearing items in the Core Rules is a good solution to that. 

It makes more sense to prune the longest branch than to try and make the rest of the tree grow to match it. 

Edited December 30, 2021 by Freejack02

[KrispyXIV]

1 minute ago, Freejack02 said:

It makes more sense to prune the longest branch than to try and make the rest of the tree grow to match it. 

I prefer the metaphor of drawing a clear line in the sand that says, "This is the high bar for all artefacts.  Everyone has access to this in competitive play.  Other artefacts may be competitive depending on your particular list, Allegiance,  and unique circumstances. "

There's always going to be a "longest" branch, and if you keep pruning it you'll end up with nothing left (if targeting the longest branch is your standard).  

It's much easier - and more fair - to acknowledge that not all choices are equal, but everyone has equal access to some of the highest quality choices available.  

If you have something that can compete, excellent.  If you don't, at least you have one s tier artefact. 

Without amulet though, some books no longer have access to any s tier artefacts. 

[Freejack02]

I can agree with both perspectives I think, I just see it as a more expected approach for GW to do exactly what they did - nerf what a lot of players saw as the outlier in artefact choice. I think the "haves vs have-nots" will always be a problem in a game with such long release windows, and I can agree that your argument is a perfectly good one. 

[KrispyXIV]

9 minutes ago, Freejack02 said:

I can agree with both perspectives I think, I just see it as a more expected approach for GW to do exactly what they did - nerf what a lot of players saw as the outlier in artefact choice. I think the "haves vs have-nots" will always be a problem in a game with such long release windows, and I can agree that your argument is a perfectly good one. 

Ultimately, it needed to be nerfed.  Its done, and something needed to be done.  I'd just have preferred they went with one of the more in between options - 5+ ward if you have less than 10 wounds, 6+ ward if 10 or more, etc.

What I dont want to see is Arcane Tome go away because it's cooler and more interesting than many in battletome artefacts.  Arcane Tome is fine - please make more battletome artefacts that are as powerful and interesting listbuilding options as Arcane Tome.  

People like it because it's well designed and interesting - at some point, that is a feature, not a bug.  Dont "fix" it because it makes all the bugged stuff look bad.  Theres no conceptual problem with stuff in Core being good - the PROBLEM is that not all battletomes have options competitive with the Core Rulebook. 

Amulet of Destiny was actually "too good" in some scenarios, and I'd hate to see the same logic that essentially got it "removed" also result in Arcane Tome getting removed, when I think they could have simply done a better job tuning Amulet of Destiny.  It was too good, they could have made it less good without making it a non-option.  

This wasn't the ideal resolution for Amulet.  They could have done better. A scenario where it was a good option, but not a busted one, is a real possibility that could be achieved.  But not if the goal is ensuring that Core artefacts aren't ever (or even generally) preferable to battletome ones...

Edited December 30, 2021 by KrispyXIV

[Beliman]

1 hour ago, NauticalSoup said:

But shouldn't arcane tome have been nerfed as well then? It also outshines nearly every army book relic in the game, and really only faced competition from the amulet.

And a 6+ FNP is garbage on nearly everything except possibly the fattest monsters, it could've stayed 5+ for squishy foot heroes.

I don't think so.

There are some armies that can't rely on their magic or their lore is not powerful enough. Other armies (as my beloved KOs), the Tome is just another tool (Duardin mage or Hashut follower?).

[NauticalSoup]

3 minutes ago, Beliman said:

I don't think so.

There are some armies that can't rely on their magic or their lore is not powerful enough. Other armies (as my beloved KOs), the Tome is just another tool (Duardin mage or Hashut follower?).

I did say NEARLY every lol

Includes armies with no lore, or lores that aren't accessible with tome like Ogres.

[Beliman]

14 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:

I did say NEARLY every lol

Includes armies with no lore, or lores that aren't accessible with tome like Ogres.

Oops, sorry.

In my defense, it's still a good argument.

[dirkdragonslayer]

I don't know if the Arcane Tome is OP, but I certainly like it for my faction. Make any Troggboss a discount Troggoth Hag and give them the flaming sword generic spell to make them good in melee. Need a faster Shaman? Arcane Tome on the Loonboss Riding Squig, and due to keyword shenanigans he can take spells from Lore of Moonclans. It's just incredibly versatile.

My experience is limited to my own faction though, I don't think anyone else near me uses it.

[yukishiro1]

What they did to Amulet is definitely the lamest, most boring solution possible...but I'm actually ok with that. Generic artefacts probably should be somewhat lame and boring. 

[Carnith]

Shame we have no access to Holy Mantle, a priest keyword adding ability.