AoS Cities of Sigmar Battletome 2023 Discussion

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

2 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:

Realised this while building Cavaliers : their 60x35 bases allow them to have a really small footprint, perfect for squeezing in to pile-in as much models as possible and move next to other units.

Interesting. I guess that means we can proxy old Pistoliers as Cavaliers, as well. They have the same base size.

[The Lost Sigmarite]

Just now, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Interesting. I guess that means we can proxy old Pistoliers as Cavaliers, as well. They have the same base size.

I have both and you definitely can. The only problem is that Pistoliers look like they're riding ponies when next to Cavaliers. 

[Doko]

2 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:

If we are having a discussion about fussilators and blossbarbs.

shouldn’t we first discuss the fact that dwarfen irondrakes cost 10points more then the fusilators?

i have discussed this before,and even i have sent many emails to the faq team of gw with the maths and explaining how irondrakes are garbage and must get a new scroll.

 

rigth now irondrakes have a similar damage output and cost to reavers or blisbarbs archers, so far good,now the problem,reavers and blisbarbs have bonus as run and charge or +1 hit of reaver but irondrakes only a huge penalty.

 

in fact irondrakes cost the same than these two units but have the half damage if move,less range and less move.

even they lost his +1 save to shooting.

 

as i have  said to gw in my emails,irondrakes need two options:

option1: change cost to 110 

option2: increase cost to 170 but change his number of shooting to 2 and change the bonus when dont move from +1 attack to +1 rend.

rigth now dont make sense to nobody how is posible irondrakes cost the same than blisbarbs when have half treathrange and half damage if move,and worse even with this book irondrakes lost EVERY BUFF AVAILABLE, they lost the rend of runelord,lost the +1 wound of longbeards and the multiples +1 hit as the hurricanum.

rigth now irondrakes are useless and havent any buff available(only the ward5 and -1 to be wounded)

[Doko]

7 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

Still waiting on my box to arrive ;-|

im from spain and i just got my box today(5 days later than release),seems out of uk this box is having problems.

also take attention when you get it,mine had missing the unit of cavaliers and some problems as one body of one human broken out of matriz or some bits with white stress marks.

i just send the pic with all the content to my store to ask to gw for my missing cavaliers so i can just put the pic here also

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

My order says it will probably be delivered on Monday. Sad, because I will coincidentally be in the UK that day on a business trip. There is some sort of irony in me not getting my box because I am in the homeland of warhammer at the time, but I suspect it's the Alanis Morisette version of irony.

[JackStreicher]

5 hours ago, Doko said:

im from spain and i just got my box today(5 days later than release),seems out of uk this box is having problems.

also take attention when you get it,mine had missing the unit of cavaliers and some problems as one body of one human broken out of matriz or some bits with white stress marks.

i just send the pic with all the content to my store to ask to gw for my missing cavaliers so i can just put the pic here also

I'll keep that in mind thx!

Well I won't be playing this friday. My GF has COVID and I am not intending on possibly spreading nurgles favours in our club  (meh, I need glory points to advance my army!)

On the plus side: I can propably play the next game with my new humans!

Edited September 7, 2023 by JackStreicher

[Satyrical Sophist]

8 hours ago, Doko said:

i have discussed this before,and even i have sent many emails to the faq team of gw with the maths and explaining how irondrakes are garbage and must get a new scroll.

 

rigth now irondrakes have a similar damage output and cost to reavers or blisbarbs archers, so far good,now the problem,reavers and blisbarbs have bonus as run and charge or +1 hit of reaver but irondrakes only a huge penalty.

 

in fact irondrakes cost the same than these two units but have the half damage if move,less range and less move.

even they lost his +1 save to shooting.

 

as i have  said to gw in my emails,irondrakes need two options:

option1: change cost to 110 

option2: increase cost to 170 but change his number of shooting to 2 and change the bonus when dont move from +1 attack to +1 rend.

rigth now dont make sense to nobody how is posible irondrakes cost the same than blisbarbs when have half treathrange and half damage if move,and worse even with this book irondrakes lost EVERY BUFF AVAILABLE, they lost the rend of runelord,lost the +1 wound of longbeards and the multiples +1 hit as the hurricanum.

rigth now irondrakes are useless and havent any buff available(only the ward5 and -1 to be wounded)

The FAQ team are for frequently asked questions, not "I want this unit to be better".

Iron drakes currently are surprisingly effective. They are just a massive pain in the butt to get into range. I just wish they had the castellite keyword, or were eligible to use suppressing fire with. It feels like if they could use the orders more they wouldn't need much else. I wish the Advance in Position order worked with them, or at least Misthaven/Living City. I do wonder whether early drafts might have been too easy to abuse, and these are the "Safe" Iron Drakes. 

Moving Irondrakes aren't as far below non flaming weapons Fusiliers than I expected. Damage numbers in the table below have been standardised to 100 points of unit. Assuming 10 Iron drakes, 20 Fusiliers, 20 Fusiliers with a Warforger, 10 Blissbarbs, 88 Blissbarbs and 5 Seekers and assuming pretenders for triple AoA. 

If you had Irondrakes at 110 points they would be far and away the most efficient unit in the army. Not included in the table below are scourgerunner chariots, they are surprisingly efficient, a unit of 3 with a fleetmaster to all out attack for the bonus shooting is pretty close to fully buffed up Fusiliers, and actually beats everything here against vs monsters. 

Save	AoA Irondrakes Moved	AoA Irondrakes Stationary	AoA Fusiliers	Flaming Weapons AoA CT Fusiliers	AoA Blissbarbs	88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers for Rend	88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers and Shardspeaker for Rend	AoA Irondrakes Moved at 110 points	AoA Irondrakes Stationary at 110 Points
0+	0.64	1.27	0.78	2.59	1.22	1.04	1.85	0.93	1.85
1+	0.75	1.50	0.78	2.59	1.22	2.01	2.81	1.09	2.19
2+	1.39	2.78	1.56	3.39	2.43	3.05	3.77	2.02	4.04
3+	2.03	4.05	2.33	4.19	3.65	4.10	4.73	2.95	5.89
4+	2.66	5.32	3.11	4.99	4.86	5.14	5.69	3.87	7.74
5+	3.30	6.60	3.89	5.78	6.08	6.18	5.75	4.80	9.60
6+	3.82	7.64	4.67	6.58	7.29	6.26	5.75	5.56	11.11
7+	3.82	7.64	4.67	6.58	7.29	6.26	5.75	5.56	11.11

[Morathi is my Goddess]

The absence of any lore or art or painting or photo guides for dwarves or eleves in the book too. I dont think its possible to be any more certain that a 2nd human wave and ultimate removal of the dwarven and elven side by the next book is coming. Super sad to see but hopefully I'll get at least 18months of play with the dark elves before that time comes.

Edited September 8, 2023 by Morathi is my Goddess

[Doko]

36 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

The FAQ team are for frequently asked questions, not "I want this unit to be better".

Iron drakes currently are surprisingly effective. They are just a massive pain in the butt to get into range. I just wish they had the castellite keyword, or were eligible to use suppressing fire with. It feels like if they could use the orders more they wouldn't need much else. I wish the Advance in Position order worked with them, or at least Misthaven/Living City. I do wonder whether early drafts might have been too easy to abuse, and these are the "Safe" Iron Drakes. 

Moving Irondrakes aren't as far below non flaming weapons Fusiliers than I expected. Damage numbers in the table below have been standardised to 100 points of unit. Assuming 10 Iron drakes, 20 Fusiliers, 20 Fusiliers with a Warforger, 10 Blissbarbs, 88 Blissbarbs and 5 Seekers and assuming pretenders for triple AoA. 

If you had Irondrakes at 110 points they would be far and away the most efficient unit in the army. Not included in the table below are scourgerunner chariots, they are surprisingly efficient, a unit of 3 with a fleetmaster to all out attack for the bonus shooting is pretty close to fully buffed up Fusiliers, and actually beats everything here against vs monsters. 

 

Save	AoA Irondrakes Moved	AoA Irondrakes Stationary	AoA Fusiliers	Flaming Weapons AoA CT Fusiliers	AoA Blissbarbs	88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers for Rend	88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers and Shardspeaker for Rend	AoA Irondrakes Moved at 110 points	AoA Irondrakes Stationary at 110 Points
0+	0.64	1.27	0.78	2.59	1.22	1.04	1.85	0.93	1.85
1+	0.75	1.50	0.78	2.59	1.22	2.01	2.81	1.09	2.19
2+	1.39	2.78	1.56	3.39	2.43	3.05	3.77	2.02	4.04
3+	2.03	4.05	2.33	4.19	3.65	4.10	4.73	2.95	5.89
4+	2.66	5.32	3.11	4.99	4.86	5.14	5.69	3.87	7.74
5+	3.30	6.60	3.89	5.78	6.08	6.18	5.75	4.80	9.60
6+	3.82	7.64	4.67	6.58	7.29	6.26	5.75	5.56	11.11
7+	3.82	7.64	4.67	6.58	7.29	6.26	5.75	5.56	11.11

hnnnn are you reading the same numbers and table that you have posted?

how is posible that you consider actual irondrakes as surprisingly effective when reading YOUR table show how irondrakes if move have only half damage than blisbarbs,and if dont move only a 10% more damage, so you consider a good balance that? in my mind a good balance would be same tradeoff, 50% less than blisbarb if moved and 50% better if dont move,that is called a good balance and not a penalty of 50% worse and only 10% better if dont move.

in fact as i said irondrakes must cost 110,seeing your table is closer to balanced, against save 4 for this cost irondrakes moving are around 40% worse than blisbarbs and if dont move are a 40% better,that in my dictionary is called a perfect tradeoff and balanced.

 

so thanks for your table,maybe i gonna steal it and send it to gw to further claim as irondrakes must cost 110 to be balanced.

 

also irondrakes MUST HAVE MORE DAMAGE per points spend than blisbard or fussilers for a reason: irondrakes have 16" treathrange where blisbarbs have 30+ and fussilers also 30+(with order etc). so from a balance perspective is imposible that two units with 30" threathrange have more damage than a unit with half range.

and i dont know because you count blisbarbs with aoa when that numbers are of unbufed blisbarbs because they have 4+1 hit in their scroll and so aoa is useless for them,but you could count the +1 wound that they get easily

 

you got a good idea that i gonna also send to faq team,if the order to move 3" used on irondrakes also count as dont move would make them less useless

Edited September 8, 2023 by Doko

[Satyrical Sophist]

2 minutes ago, Morathi is my Goddess said:

The absence of any lore or art or painting or photo guides for dwarves or eleves in the book too. I dont think its posisble to be any more certain that a 2nd human wave and ultimate removal of the dwarve and elven side by the next book is cominy. Super sad to see but hopefully I'll get at least 18months of play with the dark elves before that time comes.

I'm relatively hopeful that they'll be something they can be used as in other armies. Probably lumineth, but deepkin are a possibility as well, even assuming no Malerion faction. I'm not sure I'm taking the lack of art as proof though, if they were making new city dwarfs and elves I don't know if they'd spoil how they looked this early. It's possible that if won't work out, but who knows? It does feel like another wave is coming. I'm hoping that it's humans first, then second wave finishing off humans and adding some of other species. I do want city ogor as well.

 

3 minutes ago, Doko said:

hnnnn are you reading the same numbers and table that you have posted?

how is posible that you consider actual irondrakes as surprisingly effective when reading YOUR table show how irondrakes if move have only half damage than blisbarbs,and if dont move only a 10% more damage, so you consider a good balance that? in my mind a good balance would be same tradeoff, 50% less than blisbarb if moved and 50% better if dont move,that is called a good balance and not a penalty of 50% worse and only 10% better if dont move.

in fact as i said irondrakes must cost 110,seeing your table is closer to balanced, against save 4 for this cost irondrakes moving are around 40% worse than blisbarbs and if dont move are a 40% better,that in my dictionary is called a perfect tradeoff and balanced.

 

so thanks for your table,maybe i gonna steal it and send it to gw to further claim as irondrakes must cost 110 to be balanced

You're welcome I guess! I have read the table thanks yeah. I don't think GW are likely to read it the same as you will though. As I said, I think Iron Drakes suffer from movement issues, it's definitely their weakspot, and might make them not worth using. 

What I was surprised by was how comparable to fusiliers without flaming weapons they were when they move, and when they remain stationary they are pretty close to fully buffed Fusiliers. If you figure they are going to have to move around 1.5 turns that's pretty close to the chance of flaming weapons failing. They are doing that with no support, so if you aren't wanting to go all in on building your castle, dwarfs might actually be an ok idea, Hammerers end up working quite well as a hammer. Appropriately enough I suppose.

I'm not too concerned with them being out performed by blissbarb, especially given those numbers are achieved with pretty much the optimum damage using a total of 1490 for one, and 1620 for the other. That's even before you factor in widespread speculation that Blissbarbs are going to be nerfed.

There are definite points in cities favour, a 4+ save is a lot more durable than a 6+, particularly if it's either unrendable at range (fusiliers) or the unit can get a 5+ Ward in combat (Iron Drakes).

[Doko]

3 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

There are definite points in cities favour, a 4+ save is a lot more durable than a 6+, particularly if it's either unrendable at range (fusiliers) or the unit can get a 5+ Ward in combat (Iron Drakes).

yup that would make sense from balance perspective,but blisbarbs have 1 extra wound than irondrakes and fussilers and also a ward5 in every phase since turn 1 with luck or turn2 for sure(slanesh sumon points passive) 

so in truth blisbarbs are more sturdy than both irondrakes and fussilers with a 10% more wounds and ward5 for only 2 less save

[Satyrical Sophist]

13 minutes ago, Doko said:

yup that would make sense from balance perspective,but blisbarbs have 1 extra wound than irondrakes and fussilers and also a ward5 in every phase since turn 1 with luck or turn2 for sure(slanesh sumon points passive) 

so in truth blisbarbs are more sturdy than both irondrakes and fussilers with a 10% more wounds and ward5 for only 2 less save

I'm not really sure why I'm replying since I don't think you are doing any of this in good faith and have a history of getting rules wrong and cherry picking points, but I'll give it a try! 

Anyone here play Slaanesh? I don't think the blissbarb build gets depravity so high normally, they don't have much of a way to trigger euphoric killers unless you let them. I've generally seen lists running the Masque, or the close combat mounted guys for early points)

That said, allowing it, Iron Drakes shooting Blissbarbs with a 5++ do the same expected damage to Blissbarbs after the ward as the Blissbarbs do back. Fusiliers do less total damage than Iron Drakes to Blissbarbs (4.38 rather than 5), but take considerably less back (3.05 to 4.19 depending on how generous you are with letting Blissbarbs not bother with the rend debuffs they can't use).

 

As I said though, I think Blissbarbs are probably too good and I hope they get a nerf in the next points change, along with other slaanesh units getting a buff. I think the game is better when spamming all one unit is not the right call.

 

[Doko]

as i said in other post,idoneth reavers are so good as blisbarbs for only 10 extra points, so we can compare to reavers if blisbarbs are broken.

and i have very good faith but some things dont make sense how is posible,and irondrakes are a good example.

irondrakes 160 points for 8'8 rend1 damage with 15" treathrange or 4'4rend1 damage with 19" treathrange

blisbarbs 160 for 8'8 rend 1 damage with 30"+ threathrange

reavers 170 for 8'8 rend1 damage with 24" treathrange or 10 rend 1 damage at 15" treathrange

 

So call me bad faith,but my brain dont get how is posible  that seeing these stats irondrakes have same cost that other units with the DOUBLE threathrange.

and this is ignoring how irondrakes makes half damage also with enemy in melles,so even if they remove the rule for dont move and put baseline the shooting 2 even then irondrakes would have same stats and cost than these units  but less range.

[Beliman]

4 hours ago, Doko said:

So call me bad faith,but my brain dont get how is posible  that seeing these stats irondrakes have same cost that other units with the DOUBLE threathrange.

Take in mind that numbers are just numbers. A few weeks ago, you did some maths for Grdunstock Thunderers and the result was that they were a bad unit for their points and damage (even fully buffed). 

So, Grundstock Thunderers are still the most KO used unit, doing the most damage and defending objectives in most KO games.

That's my point: numbers are good to understand most of the units, but they are not the whole picture. I'm sure that Grundstock Thunderers would be shelf'ed in any other army.

Edited September 8, 2023 by Beliman

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

Take in mind that numbers are just numbers. A few weeks ago, you did some maths for Grdunstock Thunderers and the result was that they were a bad unit for their points and damage (even fully buffed). 

So, Grundstock Thunderers are still the most KO used unit, doing the most damage and defending objectives in most KO games.

That's my point: numbers are good to understand most of the units, but they are not the whole picture. I'm sure that Grundstock Thunderers would be shelf'ed in any other army.

I personally think that Irondrakes have other problems than their damage output. With their current shooting stats and access to the Shieldwall order, I think they can in theory play a role in Cities.

However, they have a certain developer-intended downside that the rules writers were very sure to really enforce this time around: They are supposed to have to move into position and stay still before they get access to their full damage output. Their short 15" range and new inability to get 2 attacks after set up clearly express this, in my mind. They also lost all their previous synergies (extra rend, +1 to wound from Longbeards).

It seems to me that the ceiling for Irondrake is pretty clear: You get that pretty solid 2 attacks, 3+/3+ shooting profile with maybe a +1 to hit from the Runelord. That's not bad. They Unleash Hell a lot better than fusiliers and their access to the Shieldwall order makes them receive a charge better, as well. This unit could, in theory, be worth using, even with the downside that you can only expect them to do their full shooting damage from turn 2 onward.

But the unit/power pair is not worth using at 160 points for 10 Irondrakes and 100 points for the Runelord. They will have to go down significantly to be worth considering. Not to 100 points or whatever (they are not Darkshards), but they definitely need to be cheaper than Fusiliers to be worth considering. And even then, I think with their movement restriction they won't be used in tournament lists.

[The Lost Sigmarite]

Yeah Irondrakes feel like a unit you bring for a casual game at the FLGS or at the local tournament. But for a GT ? Not really. I don't think you'll see Dwarfs in competitive Cities list, maybe a 20-dawi block of Hammerers with a king ?

I wonder how far you can racemix humans and dwarfs. It's something that I would like to do eventually...

[Beliman]

2 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

But the unit/power pair is not worth using at 160 points for 10 Irondrakes and 100 points for the Runelord. They will have to go down significantly to be worth considering. Not to 100 points or whatever (they are not Darkshards), but they definitely need to be cheaper than Fusiliers to be worth considering. And even then, I think with their movement restriction they won't be used in tournament lists.

I wasn't defending Irondrakes. What I'm trying to say is that points can go up and down because there are other reasons than raw stats (damage and defense). 

If we just use numbers, even without the double attack for not moving, Irondrakes have better output than Grundstock Thunderers (both at 160p, but Grundstock Thunderes have more resilience with Supressing Fire and 3+save).

For anyone interested, Grundstock Thunderers are really good because they have awesome synergies with the Skyfarer keyword (use Skyvessels and can be buffed by an extra -1 rend), Celestium-burst grenades (remove Wards) and their 18" range.

Edited September 8, 2023 by Beliman

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

6 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:

Yeah Irondrakes feel like a unit you bring for a casual game at the FLGS or at the local tournament. But for a GT ? Not really. I don't think you'll see Dwarfs in competitive Cities list, maybe a 20-dawi block of Hammerers with a king ?

I wonder how far you can racemix humans and dwarfs. It's something that I would like to do eventually...

I like a unit of Ironbreakers with a supporting hero. 3+, 4+ save is a proper anvil.

Hammerers are good, too, especially since the Warden King can pull them out of strikes last from shield wall into regular combat by activation chaining.

[Myrdin]

Reason why Irondrakes and some other stuff got fundamentally worse is very simple: Its to "gently force" the players away from these old models and subfactions. Eventually phase them out completely, but before that ensure people start using them less and less. I mean the push for HUMAN only keyworded Cities is clear to anyone is willing to look.

I`ll just repost this from my last post since now with the discussion about Irondrakes on this makes even more sense and points towards what I just said.

Look at the orders where its very obvious: The Castelite one is universal oder and the Counterfire a Human only.

That make NO SENSE!

In fact it would make perfect sense for the Castelite one to be Human specific and the Counterfire one to be universal, since both the Dark Elves and the Dwarves have plenty of shooting of their own. THAT would make all the sense in fact.

But since its not that way you can tell it was either a huge oversight (it would change the dynamic of the 2 subfacitons a lot if they could use this order) or intention to clamp down on them, and make sure people slowly phase them out. Sure it could be an oversight but I believe this is intentional. Just think about the utility of Counter Fire if it was a universal order instead of purely human one. And vice versa, the fact the Castelite one is unusable by anything other than specific human units.

I just hope we get ample model replacements. I have good chunk of Dark Elf counts as for my army and would hate to simply shelf them and never use those miniatures again. Keeping my hopes for return of Greatswords, Demis and Pistollers with new models, and some prep for those Dwarf/Delf replacements.

[Myrdin]

18 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I like a unit of Ironbreakers with a supporting hero. 3+, 4+ save is a proper anvil.

Hammerers are good, too, especially since the Warden King can pull them out of strikes last from shield wall into regular combat by activation chaining.

Yeah hammerers. That -2 Rend 2 dmg is pretty nice in fact. But they lack command group (not even a unit champion) and dont have any usefull ability on their lonesome, besides the one that requires the Warden King.

But I think they could work as a unexpected small hammer (...ah the unintentional pun ) unit. Heck you might use the Soulscream Bridge to get them in there if need to be. At least until we get a Human replacement for Greatswords.

I was in fact considering a full squadrom of copters and a Rune Priest with that +1 to hit for missile units. But copters loosing that 4" move did hurt their usability quite a lot. And not being able to take 2 (same with Scourge runners) but either 1-3 is also kinda weird.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

5 minutes ago, Beliman said:

What I'm trying to say is that points can go up and down because there are other reasons than raw stats (damage and defense). 

Absolutely agreed and I have been tooting the same horn in this thread multiple times.

 

14 minutes ago, Myrdin said:

Yeah hammerers. That -2 Rend 2 dmg is pretty nice in fact. But they lack command group (not even a unit champion) and dont have any usefull ability on their lonesome, besides the one that requires the Warden King.

I am working under the assumption that this is a mistake and will be errata'd. Otherwise, you are right, this is a significant downside.

[Beliman]

2 hours ago, Myrdin said:

Its to "gently force" the players away from these old models and subfactions. Eventually phase them out completely, but before that ensure people start using them less and less. I mean the push for HUMAN only keyworded Cities is clear to anyone is willing to look.

I hope that the next Cities of Sigmar wave is focused on Duardin/Aelves units. Even ignore that Duardin/ Aelf/ Human keyword for any synergy and just focus on their organizations:

• Ironweld with Humans engineers.
• Castelite with Duardins Custodians.
• College Arcana with Aelven wizards and AoS'ied Swordmasters.
• Shaddy humans for Darkling Covens (tweak the lore a bit to make it possible).
• Pirates Humans/Duardins (the return of Long Dron) for Order Draconis/Serpentis.

Even throw other minor races as new Cities fo Sigmar units like Half-kin™ (halflings) and Ogors (we already have one!) and re-writte racial orders to be based on this organizations (pretty sure that the Order Serpentis don't use the same training methodology than Castelites).

Edited September 8, 2023 by Beliman

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

9 minutes ago, Beliman said:

I hope that the next Cities of Sigmar wave is focused on Duardin/Aelves units. Even ignore that Duardin/ Aelf/ Human keyword for any synergy and just focus on their organizations:

• Ironweld with Humans engineers.
• Castelite with Duardins Custodians.
• College Arcana with Aelven wizards and AoS'ied Swordmasters.
• Shaddy humans for Darkling Covens (tweak the lore a bit to make it possible).
• Pirates Humans for Order Draconis/Serpentis.

Even throw other minor races as new Cities fo Sigmar units like Half-kin™ (halflings) and Ogors (we already have one!) and re-writte racial orders to be based on this organizations (pretty sure that the Order Serpentis don't use the same methodology of training than Castelites).

I'd love that, but I expect they will put out another wave of Freeguild designs first. Because realistically, there is probably a stockpile of new designs that are already done but just didn't make the cut for this wave of models.

I hope they figure out a good way to deal with elves and dwarves. They need to get a re-imagining in the same vein as the Freeguild if they are to stay part of the book long-term. But how would that even work from a release perspective without giving Cities three battletomes next edition? I don't think we can realistically wait around another 6 years until they finally update Dispossessed.

I don't really know what will happen. Maybe we will actually see new Grungni and Malerion factions in the near future. That could at least be an excuse to replace the old WHFB models with a smaller contingent of dedicated Cities elves and dwarves (maybe more integrated into the Freeguild?).

[Satyrical Sophist]

1 hour ago, Myrdin said:

Reason why Irondrakes and some other stuff got fundamentally worse is very simple: Its to "gently force" the players away from these old models and subfactions. Eventually phase them out completely, but before that ensure people start using them less and less. I mean the push for HUMAN only keyworded Cities is clear to anyone is willing to look.

I`ll just repost this from my last post since now with the discussion about Irondrakes on this makes even more sense and points towards what I just said.

Look at the orders where its very obvious: The Castelite one is universal oder and the Counterfire a Human only.

That make NO SENSE!

In fact it would make perfect sense for the Castelite one to be Human specific and the Counterfire one to be universal, since both the Dark Elves and the Dwarves have plenty of shooting of their own. THAT would make all the sense in fact.

But since its not that way you can tell it was either a huge oversight (it would change the dynamic of the 2 subfacitons a lot if they could use this order) or intention to clamp down on them, and make sure people slowly phase them out. Sure it could be an oversight but I believe this is intentional. Just think about the utility of Counter Fire if it was a universal order instead of purely human one. And vice versa, the fact the Castelite one is unusable by anything other than specific human units. 

Which order are you calling the Castelite one? Do you mean Advance in formation? Because plus 3 move is very useful even not getting the fortify part at the end, I think the movement boost might be even more important if you want to run a heavy dwarf base, since jumping to 7 movement is really important to them.

I might be wrong, but I think if you want to have a second castle then Iron Drakes seem like a better choice than Fusiliers, they marginally underperform non flaming weapons command trait Fusiliers when moving and massively over perform when staying still. Since you can only have one flaming weapons cast a turn, it feels like any shooting you want separate should probably be either Iron Drakes, or possibly scourgerunner chariots.

 

Speaking of other shooting units, the Steam Tank Commander's output isn't actually too bad, and with overload and AoA expects to do a total of 5.6 sounds to. 3+, 7.8 to a 4+, 9.9 to a 5+ and 12 .1 go a 6+, which seems like it has a very good chance of triggering suppressing fire.

18 minutes ago, Beliman said:

I hope that the next Cities of Sigmar wave is focused on Duardin/Aelves units. Even ignore that Duardin/ Aelf/ Human keyword for any synergy and just focus on their organizations:

• Ironweld with Humans engineers.
• Castelite with Duardins Custodians.
• College Arcana with Aelven wizards and AoS'ied Swordmasters.
• Shaddy humans for Darkling Covens (tweak the lore a bit to make it possible).
• Pirates Humans for Order Draconis/Serpentis.

Even throw other minor races as new Cities fo Sigmar units like Half-kin™ (halflings) and Ogors (we already have one!) and re-writte racial orders to be based on this organizations (pretty sure that the Order Serpentis don't use the same methodology of training than Castelites).

I'm hoping for something like this 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

11 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:

I might be wrong, but I think if you want to have a second castle then Iron Drakes seem like a better choice than Fusiliers, they marginally underperform non flaming weapons command trait Fusiliers when moving and massively over perform when staying still. Since you can only have one flaming weapons cast a turn, it feels like any shooting you want separate should probably be either Iron Drakes, or possibly scourgerunner chariots.

Personally, I think every option for a second shooting unit in Cities is currently kinda bad. Which is also why I don't think Greywater is actually as good as it appears at first glance.

The second block of Fusiliers is not so good becuase it either makes you really immobile by having to keep both blocks near the same Alchemite or it misses out on a lot of the buffs that make the first Fusilier block good (+1 to wound from command trait, mortals from the spell). You can't have two Fusilier blocks operating independently to good effect.

Irondrakes, I already talked about above. Overall, I think they are too expensive right now for what they can theoretically do. The same applies to the Fusil-Major and Cannons.

Having a Steam Tank or two is genuinely a defensible option, but not for their ranged damage output alone. They shoot OK, though. Same for the Scourgerunner and possibly the Gyrocopters.

Everything else seems like incidental shooting, not real damage dealers. You can slap a unit of Darkshards in a list as a ranged screen that does, like, 3 damage per round. Or you can run a unit of Wildercorps Hunters just to push them onto terrain near an objective so that the opponent has to come down there to remove them. But none of the units not mentioned above have the potential to deal serious ranged damage.

In my opinion: Be happy with the good shooting you can get out of that first Fusilier unit, build the rest of the army as melee.