TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback

[Arkiham]

1 hour ago, CentralKarma said:

For match play, I'd like to see a dogs of war category added, to allow for units from outside your allegiance,  that wouldn't disrupting the ability to take allegiance specific battle line.

In a vanguard game you are aloud 1-4 heroes, 0-2 behemoths, 0-2 artillery and need 2+ battleline.  I want to see a 0-1 dogs of war.

For example, If i wanted to play a spiderfang army, i need the Goblin Big boss as my general and he unlocks spider riders as battle line.  My list would look something like this: 1x Goblin big boss on gigatic spider, 1x arachnorok shaman, and 1000 - 380 worth of spider riders.  The requirements filled would be 2 heroes, 1 behemoth, and 2+ battleline.  If i were to add a rock lobba, it would be come a 'destruction list' and spider riders would no longer be battleline.  With the dogs of war category, I could take the rock lobba, and it would count in that slot as well as against the artillery cap, but i wouldnt lose my spiderfang allegiance

This makes sense in my head..... hopefully its clear here....

 

slightly over powered though, allegiance tags are there for a reaons

[CentralKarma]

16 minutes ago, Arkiham said:

slightly over powered though, allegiance tags are there for a reaons

Maybe, but I really don't see it breaking the game too much.  

The issue I see the more I think about it, is it could lead to less list variety, which is the exact opposite of what I was originally wanting.  

[rokapoke]

@CentralKarma, I think it will ultimately lead to abuses of certain things in tournament play. As it stands right now, Sayl the Faithless is apparently a staple of most Chaos lists. Now you can use him while maintaining your Tzeentch allegiance! Or all Order armies will run a big unit of Kurnoth Hunters with bows, maintaining allegiance as they see fit. 

I think it's great to play "points only" among friends -- as you say, tossing in a unit of this or that without "breaking allegiance" is a wonderful idea when you know that your playgroup won't be seeking to go above and beyond -- but for true matched play, it's a difficult sell.

[Davariel]

@CentralKarma I like the idea of it but as others have mentioned it could cause balance problems.

It's a fun idea though, and I'm sure you could do something with it. You could just make the option narrative play only, or perhaps make a unit taken as dogs of war cost double its points in matched play (those pesky mercenaries demand to be paid well...), or impose strict restrictions on who can take mercenaries and what units can be taken.

Of course what would be really cool would be a new battletome devoted to mercenaries of the realms designed to be used with other armies like this... that's a bit beyond the scope of this thread though!

[Tokyo Nift]

Just a note, Kurnoth Hunters are rerollable 3+ saves right? Because if they're rooted in the woods they have +1 cover from the woods themselves?

[CentralKarma]

11 minutes ago, Davariel said:

perhaps make a unit taken as dogs of war cost double its points in matched play (those pesky mercenaries demand to be paid well...), or impose strict restrictions on who can take mercenaries and what units can be taken.

I like this.  Maybe limit it to non heroes/ behemoths/ artillery.  

I just remember, (I think it was 6th ed) having dogs of war/ mercenary units in the past, and it was kinda cool.

I agree with some of the others too, this is probably better for narrative/ causal match play.  Might not be great for tourney's.

Thanks to all that responded! 

[Nevvermore]

Allowing "Dogs of War" would defeat the whole purpose of having alligeance abilities in the first place...

[RuneBrush]

Personally it'd be better to have some units with a "Dogs of War" ability, that allows them to add the allegiance keyword at setup.  Possibly with certain restrictions - so some units might not ever fight with Chaos etc.  Would be much more controllable and not overbalance the game - the DoW ability could state they're not affected by buffs for example.  This would also be done outside of the GHb so wouldn't complicate the ruleset.

[Anyone seen Grimnir?]

BOBO will be using GHB 2 with all the changes. Tickets are on sale now, just PayPal £3 to qualityassured@hotmail.co.uk for a deposit to secure your place at the 2day warhammer party ? 

[BURF1]

On 2/10/2017 at 9:34 PM, mrstimpson38 said:

I'd like to see a reserves roll system for reserves much like in 40k. And a deep strike ability for units like Khorne Daemons to allow fluffy mono-Khorne lists to deep strike in some daemons without a wizard. It's a simple enough to system in 40k, and feels like it would fit nicely into AoS.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk
 

No, this is literally the only thing stormcasts have to make them unique, there's no reason Khorne should be deepstriking. Khorne should get some non-wizard summoning options but leave deepstriking to the stormcasts, especially since they nerfed it.

[BURF1]

On 3/5/2017 at 3:13 PM, Mossback said:

A 4+ save is only a 50% chance of success. Rolling again still is only another 50% chance. To even get the second roll you have to forgo any further movement for the turn, basically bunkering down. 

A 4+ rerollable gives you a 75% chance of success. It's better than a 3+, slightly worse than a 2+

[mrstimpson38]

No, this is literally the only thing stormcasts have to make them unique, there's no reason Khorne should be deepstriking. Khorne should get some non-wizard summoning options but leave deepstriking to the stormcasts, especially since they nerfed it.

 

There are plenty of things that make Stormcast unique, but if you need me to call it something else then that works for me.

 

Rule That Allows Daemons to Burst into Realspace Without the Need of a Wizard Much Like How the Khorne Daemonkin Handle the Situation.

 

And there we go. Whatever it's called, Khorne units could use some fluffy summoning options.

 

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[BURF1]

Just now, mrstimpson38 said:

 

There are plenty of things that make Stormcast unique, but if you need me to call it something else then that works for me.

Rule That Allows Daemons to Burst into Realspace Without the Need of a Wizard Much Like How the Khorne Daemonkin Handle the Situation.

And there we go. Whatever it's called, Khorne units need some fluffy summoning options.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk
 

 

The difference between summoning and deepstrike is not semantics. Summoning requires a summoner, deepstrike just happens. The range of summoning is based on the location of the summoner the range of deepstrike is only limited by the position of the enemy. Only the units specifically included in a list can deepstrike, anything can be summoned.

Being deliberately obtuse is generally not enough to push 'make my faction OP' request through.

[mrstimpson38]

I don't want Khorne Daemons to be OP, I want Khorne Daemons to be able to warp into Realspace. They've been doing that in the lore since the dawn of Warhammer. Asking for a fluffy way to do that isn't unreasonable.

Obviously summoning and deepstrike are different. My point, which is quite obvious from the post you've quoted, is that it can be named whatever they like it to be named. As long as it fits the lore, and allows Khorne Daemons to be placed onto the table after the start of the game without the use of Wizards, then it could be called Chaos Farting for all I care.

Discussing semantics is pointless when I clearly don't care what they call it.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

[Norbie]

I have seen several people saying the points cost of kurnoth hunters should go up. I believe if this happens it will nerf the entire army. Sylvaneth doesn't have much in the way of variety and hunters are the only hard hitting unit they have. Sure, Durthu hits hard, but he is over costed. Someone stated earlier that several Sylvaneth units are over costed so I believe it all balances out once it's all said and done. There are plenty of ways to deal with greatbow kurnoth hunters. Also, it's worth noting they don't have a way to increase their piddly 50% chance to hit. They are good but they are needed to keep the army competitive. 

[TerrorPenguin]

24 minutes ago, Norbie said:

I have seen several people saying the points cost of kurnoth hunters should go up. I believe if this happens it will nerf the entire army. Sylvaneth doesn't have much in the way of variety and hunters are the only hard hitting unit they have. Sure, Durthu hits hard, but he is over costed. Someone stated earlier that several Sylvaneth units are over costed so I believe it all balances out once it's all said and done. There are plenty of ways to deal with greatbow kurnoth hunters. Also, it's worth noting they don't have a way to increase their piddly 50% chance to hit. They are good but they are needed to keep the army competitive. 

I guess the idea would be that stuff which is over pointed would go down to balance it out. The bow hunters seem appropriately pointed to me, it's the scythes that are out

[Nevvermore]

2 hours ago, Norbie said:

I have seen several people saying the points cost of kurnoth hunters should go up. I believe if this happens it will nerf the entire army. Sylvaneth doesn't have much in the way of variety and hunters are the only hard hitting unit they have. Sure, Durthu hits hard, but he is over costed. Someone stated earlier that several Sylvaneth units are over costed so I believe it all balances out once it's all said and done. There are plenty of ways to deal with greatbow kurnoth hunters. Also, it's worth noting they don't have a way to increase their piddly 50% chance to hit. They are good but they are needed to keep the army competitive. 

It's basically already confirmed to be happening from the Heelanhammer podcast.

[DantePQ]

What's confirmed ? Kurnoth Hunters points increase or Hunter points increase and balancing overcoasted Sylvaneth units ?

[Nico]

Quote

I guess the idea would be that stuff which is over pointed would go down to balance it out. The bow hunters seem appropriately pointed to me, it's the scythes that are out

You mean the way they reduced the costs of Mannfred, Neferata, Morghasts Blood Knights and Hexwraiths to offset the savage and punitive points increases to Tomb Kings?

Oh wait. The problem is that those wanting nerfs are very vocal about it, while there's limited passion for chipping 5-10% off the cost of the slightly overcosted units.

[TerrorPenguin]

5 hours ago, Nico said:

You mean the way they reduced the costs of Mannfred, Neferata, Morghasts Blood Knights and Hexwraiths to offset the savage and punitive points increases to Tomb Kings?

Oh wait. The problem is that those wanting nerfs are very vocal about it, while there's limited passion for chipping 5-10% off the cost of the slightly overcosted units.

My hope is that for something like the generals handbook, they are looking at everything as a whole rather than units in isolation. 

I could be way off though

And yeah I hope deathlords becomes a thing again. Or in fact, just Death. 

[Thain]

Officially remove the "bases don't matter" line from the rules. Almost no one plays that way to begin with.

[Bjarni St.]

On 3/11/2017 at 2:19 PM, Norbie said:

I have seen several people saying the points cost of kurnoth hunters should go up. I believe if this happens it will nerf the entire army...

In a "balanced" 2k(ish) army fielding maybe 3-4 warscrolls' worth the current cost of Kurnoths is a non-issue. Sylvaneth have a high core tax and either weak or expensive characters. Where we get into problems is with 15+ Kurnoths in usually mixed Order armies forming just abominable gunlines. That DOES need looking at.

You're not wrong that if Kurnoths go up a lot Sylvaneth are in a bit of trouble. That's something they'll have to address simultaneously.

[DantePQ]

I'm fine with Kurnoth Hunters going up if other units are tweaked accordingly, because Sylvaneth doesn't have many other units and apart from Battlines there is nothing really interesting considering units. 

And heroes aren't that great either as you can't spam them so for examole another TLA isn't that great. 

Edited March 14, 2017 by DantePQ

[Valien]

It's a big thread, and a lot of my thoughts have been already stated but some of the most importance..

1) Meta!!A lot of games (video games etc) use this pretty tool that makes the game change once in a while with buffs/nerfs,changes that makes it feel alive and much more interesting.Making the Warscrolls a living update pool  with frequent changes gives you the chance to use all of your favorite models since the meta will change and not just sticking to "Kunnin Rukk" lists.

2)Base measuring

3)Initiative. Some ppl hate it some love it when theyre lucky. I dont know how i really feel about this one but i think it would be more "fair" if the initiative had the chance to change in each different phase. Roll at hero phase, do your things,   roll in movement, move them as you like etc. It would unlock some better and with more depth decision making.

4)Movement. I would love to see some bonuses/penalties when crossing difficult terrain,forests,rivers

Edited March 14, 2017 by Valien

[Thain]

On 06/03/2017 at 6:17 PM, CentralKarma said:

perhaps make a unit taken as dogs of war cost double its points in matched play (those pesky mercenaries demand to be paid well...), or impose strict restrictions on who can take mercenaries and what units can be taken.

Maybe only make certain units into Dogs of War? This would be fairly easily accomplished just by adding a new keyword to existing units... and would allow some of the "orphan" units to be more useful. Colligate Arcane, Ironweld Areaenal, Deathlords, Deathmages... All these are "Allegiances" that aren't almost impossible to play as full armies. Heck, Firebellies are an Allegiance of one model!   

You could restrict some of them even more by making the keyword conditional. So something like a Necromaner could be "Dogs of War (Deathrattle and Deathwalker)" and only usable as a 'hired gun' by those Allegiances and not the others.