Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Ben

TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Nico said:
Spoiler

 

As I have a suspicion from Twitter that the GH might be being amended sooner rather than later, here are my key suggestions as to changes. I've kept points changes to a minimum and only gone for the really key ones. @Ben @scrubyandwells

Command Traits

  • Tenacious should be +2 to wounds chracteristic.
  • Master of Defence should be on a roll of 5 or more.

Artefacts

  • Battlebrew changed to one use per game (cf. Quicksilver potion) or only works on to wound rolls and does D3 damage in subsequent hero phases for a double swig.
  • Relic Blade should add 2 to the damage.
  • Obstinate Blade should add -2 rend.
  • Talisman of Blinding Light should be -2 to hit for the entire of a Battleround.
  • Chaos Talisman should be clarified that it only works on wounds and not on mortal wounds (this is what it says literally).

Rules of One

  • Consider carving Arcane Bolt out of the first Rule of One. Wizards to need a buff wrt shooting and this shouldn't get out of hand. It will buff Tzeentch and the Fatesworn Warband will be useable again.
  • I don't suggest changing the first Rule of One so that it only applies to successful casts, as opposed to attempts. There should be a value attached to reliable mystic shield wizards, e.g. Arkhan the Black. 

Battleplans

Three Places of Power

  • Add a note to point out that heroes set up on an objective cannot score if they don't subsequently move that turn (e.g. Runesmiter using Magmic Tunneling or Cairn Wraith summoned onto the objective).

Escalation

  • That Battleplan could be amended so that in the fourth battleround - everything remaining from the 3 waves comes on irrespective of position of the enemy units (i.e. remove the 12 inch rule at that point). Or the equivalent. Then there would be a reasonable risk reward in playing to block the second and third wave. This avoids "non-games" such as the one that happened to Russ Veal at Blood and Glory.
  • Put into words the explanation of how this rule interacts with Battalions and special deployment rules, e.g. (I'm not suggesting this word for word, merely that this is an attempt to capture some of the nuances in this battleplan).

Let's take Gnarlroot and say there are 10 units in the army.

  1. You do count the number of units irrespective of battalions and things like Runesmiters (don't think about "drops" it just makes thing more confusing).
  2. There are 10 units, so this becomes waves of 4, 4, 2. I trust that's clear for everyone but please ask.
  3. For deployment, you can still deploy the first wave of 4 units using the battalion rules. In particular you can deploy part of a battalion as a single drop then deploy the rest as multiple drops thereafter (the only thing you cannot seem to do is deploy a single unit from the battalion, then the rest of the battalion as a single drop - see the hints that introduce Warscroll Battalions in each Battletome - it's not 100% flexible).
  4. So you could deploy a unit of Tree Revenants and 2 units of Dryads and an Ancient as your first wave as a single drop. You have to put all the Battleline units in wave 1 (unless you have an overflow of Battleline units into wave 2  - e.g. Ironjawz could have this problem since all their units will be battleline and they are often Multiple Small Units.
  5. You could put the Tree Revenants and the Ancient on the table and the Dryads in the Hidden Enclaves if you wish. 
  6. You don't have to deploy something even if you've paid for it (see the core rules, you can stop deploying when you like), so you can junk the formation and lose the points and the buffs (you might want to do this with Ghoul Patrol if you've messed up the unit count).
  7. Wave 2 would then be 4 units of whatever - in your hero phase you can deploy these to your Hidden Enclaves if you wish or onto the table.
  8. You start shooting yourself in the foot when the battalion requires that everything deploy together, Clan Skryre, Skyborne Slayers and Ghoul Patrol are examples. Here you have to keep deploying waves off the table to "fill up" the Engine Coven, battalion etc.. This is a major reason why Warrior Brotherhood is preferred to Skyborne Slayers.

Compendium Units

I'm assuming that the decision makers will want to cull much of the Compendium including named characters, Brets and Tomb Kings. 

Could you please spare the following from execution:

  • Battalions for armies such as Greenskinz (they have a start collecting box, so can hardly be seen as legacy), Moonclan, Gitmob, Spiderfang, Warherd (and release an FAQ that specifies more clearly that they are backwards compatible, e.g. Grot = Goblin, ).
  • The Goblin Warboss (Gitmob).
  • As a far lower priority, the Screaming Skull Catapult.

Factions

Sylvaneth

  1. Consider increasing the cost of Gnarlroot Wargrove a tad.
  2. Reduce Spite Revenant cost to 80 points for 5 OR make them inherent Battleline.
  3. Reduce Tree Revenant cost to 90 points for 5 (there are units that are not a multiple of 20, like Fanatics). 
  4. Increase the cost of Free Spirits (rather than comping out its ability to do an alpha strike), e.g. double the cost at least.

Bonesplitterz

  • Change the model cap for Bonesplitter Arrer Boyz to 20. Also increase their cost to 10 for 140.
  • Increase Savage Orruks to 10 for 120.

Ironjawz

  1. Change Orruk Ardboys to inherent battleline. This would be the most beneficial change. 
  2. Implement the community suggestions on Ironjawz pricing: (these are from the email @scrubyandwells sent, I cannot seem to find the thread - sorry):
  • Gordrakk, the Fist of Gork - 620
  • Megaboss on Maw Krusha 460
  • Orruk Weirdnob Shaman - 100
  • Orruk Gore-Gruntas - 160 for 3
  • Ironfist - 80

Beastclaw Raiders

  • Huskard on Thundertusk increased to 400 points.

Fyreslayers

  • Fyreslayers could do with an allegiance pack please - more than any other faction. The Order allegiance pack is duplicative of many of their abilities. Perhaps double the number of units a Runesmiter can tunnel with an artefact. Command traits could make their Magmadroths tougher or faster or in some way worth their costs. A +1 to armour or reroll saves artefact like Oaken Armour would also be handy.

Everchosen

  • Reduce Archaon to 640 points.
  • Reduce Varanguard to 300 for 3 (or ideally 100 for 1).

Death

  • Nagash down to 840 or Allegiance Pack Deathlords please where he knows the full lore of spells.
  • Mannfred down to 420.
  • Neferata down to 400.
  • Clarify that Zombies can merge freely.
  • Morghast Archai down to 2 for 200 (Morghast Harbingers are viable as they are).

Chaos

  • Clan Skryre Battalion up to 300 points.
  • A Clan Moulder Allegiance Pack would be very welcome.
  • Rat Ogres become Battleline for Moulder.
  • The Glottkin down to 440.
  • Thanquol down to 460.
  • Screaming Bell down to 200.
  • Tamurkhan down to 420.
  • Drazhoath down to 340.
  • Slaughterbrute down to 180.
  • Mutalith Vortex Beast down to 200.
  • Daemonettes down to 100 for 10.
  • Pink Horrors down to 120 for 10.
  • Infernal Guard Castellan down to 80 (one of the worst command abilities in the game due to its range - not being a unit visible to the target).
  • Bull Centaurs down to 140 for 3.

Monstrous Arcanum

  • Rogue Idol down to 440.
  • Carmine Dragon down to 440.
  • Troll Hag down to 360.
  • If someone takes a Squig Gobba - they receive an extra Triumph Roll.
  • Skaarac down to 440

Thoughts welcome. Always happy to discuss.


 

 

I approve this message!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nico said:
  • Consider carving Arcane Bolt out of the first Rule of One. Wizards to need a buff wrt shooting and this shouldn't get out of hand. It will buff Tzeentch and the Fatesworn Warband will be useable again.

No! Imagine how dull a Tzeentch wizard and horror spam list would be!

 

2 hours ago, Nico said:
  • A Clan Moulder Allegiance Pack would be very welcome.
  • Rat Ogres become Battleline for Moulder.

Yes! If Skryre can have stormfiends as battleline, Moulder should definitely get ready ogors. Giant Rats, pfft! 

It might be pointless giving Moulder any sort of allegiance abilities, however, until they get a character other than the packmasters. They need something bigger...like a warlord on Brood Horror? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point. They could do to Throt what they did to Ikit (and ideally put him on a monster too) - make him generic.

Odd that the Warlord on BH is not Moulder when the BH is Moulder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I built and played a Fatesworn Warband - it was ok. I still foresee Judicators being better than arcane bolt Spam since Judicators can move 5 and shoot 24, whereas Horrors can move zero and bolt 18. Even if you summon one in range - that's a chance of doing one third of a Snowball at a good effective range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could teleport Thanquol next to a unit and do an average of 7 mortal wounds to it (for only 820 points). Or you could hit any unit with the temerity to stand 3 inches off their backline with 6 mortal wounds on a 2+ from  340 point Huskard on Thundertusk....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Completely overhaul Path  to Glory - perhaps even use Bottle's template for Hinterlands campaign. Make this the definitive "Beginners Format". Keep to small model count (again, Bottle's campaign rarely goes beyond 10 models per side, which is perfect for learning each individual model's abilities, usefulness, etc.).

2. Add artifacts/command traits/bonuses for playing the Grand Alliances. Make them less competitive overall than individual Battletome - focus on these should be to differentiate the four Grand Alliances (i.e. Death should have recyling, Destruction speed, Chaos and Order buffs vs one another)

3. Lore - Add some lore development to the book, perhaps even a narrative to frame each section that tells a full story. The GH should be the introduction to the Warhammer : Age of Sigmar world. The lore is an important part of that.

4. Develop a more in-depth narrative/map campaign for use. This could be changed each year to provide content for customers buying new editions (going off this, perhaps change up all included scenarios and even matched play rules, giving new formats/game modes a chance each year).  

5. Keep to the 4 rules concept (Keep it simple, stupid).

6. Personal opinion on this last point, but I would like to perhaps see a retrospective feature added - detailing the previous year for Age of Sigmar and perhaps offering a preview of the year ahead. Developers/creators could comment on the game, and explain their overarching vision for the year ahead. Could also have community highlights and such - again, not sure this fits, but it's something that I would enjoy reading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nico said:

 

Factions

Sylvaneth

  1. Consider increasing the cost of Gnarlroot Wargrove a tad.
  2. Reduce Spite Revenant cost to 80 points for 5 OR make them inherent Battleline.
  3. Reduce Tree Revenant cost to 90 points for 5 (there are units that are not a multiple of 20, like Fanatics). 
  4. Increase the cost of Free Spirits (rather than comping out its ability to do an alpha strike), e.g. double the cost at least.

 

 

 

I would agree with all four of these points, but would reduce Tree Revenants down to 80 points for 5.  I think 90 is still a little too steep for what they realistically do on the battlefield (in a vacuum they can't even reliably beat a unit of skeleton warriors).  I am aware that built in to their cost is their waypipe ability and a small consideration for wyldwoods, but 100 or even 90 still feels steep to me.

Edited by Craptrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revenants just need to be 2 Wounds, they'll have all the same problems at -10 or -20 points.

Edited by Bjarni St.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bjarni St. said:

Revenants just need to be 2 Wounds, they'll have all the same problems at -10 or -20 points.

If they were 2 wounds apiece I feel like they might be under-costed at 100 points.  120 might be more appropriate at that point I would think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't argue with that but 100 v 120 isn't a big shift. They just cannot function as a combat unit with 1 W each, with mediocre Bravery to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brayherds:

Points:

  • Reduce Bestigors from 140 to 120 (in relation to other factions to expensive)
  • Reduce Beastlord from 80 to 60-70 (He always dies before he can use his command ability - to weak for his points)
  • Reduce Bray Shaman from 100 to 90 (savage dominion is worthless unter matched play - but the extra movement is nice)

Others:

  • Ungor Raiders should always be battleline (it´s almost impossible to have a (effective) pure brayherd army)

Most of the time i play 1000 points game and it´s difficult to have a working army -  so at least they should be cheap to field ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers @scrubyandwells

I don't think Tree Revenants should have 2 wounds and moreover the GH amendments aren't likely to change unit stats like that (FAQ answers or clarifications might change how rules on a Warscroll work). I agree that they aren't a great unit, but I'm aware that many people consider Sylvaneth to be overpowered at the same time, hence the modest suggestions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The retrospective idea is great.  A section in the back where they talk about what worked, what didn't work, and why they changed what they did and the effects they hope it will have on the future.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nico Why all the changes to the Order artefacts with no mention of the lame-duck Chaos options?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chaos Allegiance and such, I'll have a go.

Unpredictable Destruction is basically fine as a cover-all bonus, and I think I said this before, but it's a bit too much hassle for how rarely it works. It's nowhere near as good as Destruction and Death allegiance but it's up to the devs whether they're intended to have parity and then if others need to come down and this to go up.

Command Traits need an overhaul. Terrifying Presence is pretty much outright bad and Spiteful Destroyer doesn't quite have a home but is still a potentially powerful bonus. The real problem though is that there is very rarely a reason not to take Dark Avenger/Lord of War, and that's only against alpha strike lists where you want Cunning Deceiver. I guess some people might prefer Great Destroyer for some reason but then why do we have three Command Traits that basically do the same thing slightly differently?

Artefacts... oof.

Daemon Weapon is underwhelming and very clunky in design. If given a table that does 1 to wielder on 2, 1 MW to enemy on 4-5+, 2 on 7+, 3 on 10+ or something like that (I'm spitballing) it could be worthy but the current iteration is pretty much worthless.

Chaos Runeblade only has marginal uses and is very much underwhelming. +D3 attacks might make it interesting enough. It sees some use, but mostly because the other options are even worse.

Beguiling Gem is so bad it wouldn't even be good if it wasn't limited to one use. 3" range, one model gets -1 to Hit in combat only? Four pages over, in the same book, there's the Cursed Book artefact. How is that right? Even Order has a better version of this item, and that's only two pages away!

Chaos Talisman is pretty good against Order (autopick unless you're building your army around Crowns of Conquest), pretty mediocre against everything else. Favour of the Gods is complete trash, this isn't WHFB where characters have 2-3 Wounds. Why do we only get a decent protection item vs Order?

Crown of Conquest is useful in non-Khorne horde armies, don't really have a problem with it. It being "spammable" can make it look abusive but is battleshock immunity really that abusive when so many armies can practically ignore it entirely for seemingly very little opportunity cost? I declare this item fine!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the above post. 

To sum up - Chaos allegiance pack is the third best after Ward Save (I mean Death) and Destruction, which is where it should be given how strong Chaos are (lots of choice and strong units/combos mostly through Skaven, Bloodbound and Sayl). 

They have got at least 3 Traits and 3 Artefacts worth considering, which is more than Order can say.

There are some real duds in there like the Gem, but the Order ones are way worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2016 at 1:26 AM, Malakithe said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned but adding points to more battalions would be nice. Maybe not all of them but a hefty amount from the RGW books.

Also Vulkite Berserkers need to be cheaper or their minimum unit size set to 10.

 

Decrease the cost of Vulkite Berserkers but increase the cost of their heroes buffing save rolls of units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nico said:

I agree with the above post. 

To sum up - Chaos allegiance pack is the third best after Ward Save (I mean Death) and Destruction, which is where it should be given how strong Chaos are (lots of choice and strong units/combos mostly through Skaven, Bloodbound and Sayl). 

They have got at least 3 Traits and 3 Artefacts worth considering, which is more than Order can say.

There are some real duds in there like the Gem, but the Order ones are way worse.

 

The biggest problem with these skills they are really only good for Khorne armies.  If you play Nurgle or the other two (lesser) Gods the abilities are terrible.  They should have skills for each God since each of their play styles are so different or give more variety of options.  

Chaos armies are also at odds with it themselves in terms of synergy.  Daemon vs Mortal and Khorne vs Nurgle are just some example of this divide.  They have fractured these elements so much it is challenging to make them work together in GHB.  It is regretful you simply can't have synergy bonuses for having a single god themed army or an entire daemon or mortal army.  I hope these changes are coming down the road.

Order does have the worst allegiance skills but this is warranted considering how well all their lists work together.  Also, Order was given powerful uncosted warscroll abilites against Chaos for some reason.  An example of this is free doubling of wounds against chaos daemons or rerolling ones to hit.  Abilites targeting grand alliances are a terrible idea, because it is hard to cost and it imbalances specific games. The weak order allegiance skills seem to help offset this imbalance when playing a chaos army.  

I do feel the Death 'ward save' is far to good as a free skill.  Also, the destruction allegiance skill is not imbalanced, but really slows down gameplay with an additional movement step.  I would have rather just allowed those units to run and charge if within range of their general.

Edited by Broxus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/11/2016 at 5:26 PM, Ben said:

Let me know what your feedback is and can I get a volunteer to collate/manage the feedback 

It's a massive thread, and I'm sure my thoughts have already been mirrored by others, but ...

  1. For units with a "large" block purchase size (i.e. 10 or more), allow purchasing of models over the minimum size in blocks of half that size.  I can't really see it being that uncommon or unreasonable to want to have a unit of 30 Moonclan Grots (blocks of 20), 15 Chaos Warriors (blocks of 10), etc, and dividing by 2 is easy. :)
  2. Flesh out Path To Glory fully, as it only really covers a few factions.  Personally, I'd go with putting a formula in the book which tells you how to generate the tables, with a few pre-made ones for the more common sides, and "official" tables on the GW web site under the faction for the others (this would make it easy to deal with new factions, etc).
  3. Optional "battlefield conditions" rules (think a shorter/simplified version of the "Treacherous Conditions" table from Necromunda, or the ones published in WD for 6th Ed WHFB).  This could take into account the realm the battle was taking place in.
  4. Optional rules for common "generic" scenery items.  For example, hills (+1 Bravery when in combat if higher than the enemy), walls & defended obstacles (+1 Bravery if defending), woods (cannot be seen-, run-, or charged through), rivers (when crossing other than at a ford/bridge, they cannot be run through and each inch moved counts as 2, with there being a possibility of being swept away for models ending their move in the river), etc.
  5. Personally, I'd like to see magic item/command trait lists for the factions. These could be short "flavour" tables (e.g. 3 entries instead of 6), and allow selection from them, or the one from the appropriate Grand Alliance.  This would expand the list a bit, whilst keeping the total in check, making it easier to balance them.  Again, these could be put on the web site instead of the book, although I think this might be present in the newer Battletomes (e.g. Ironjawz), and a compendium for older ones rumoured for release soon..?.
  6. Following on from the previous one, I wouldn't mind seeing each Grand Alliance or faction get their own generic spell (to try to keep things balanced, this would be selected at the expense of Mystic Shield or Arcane Bolt, so each wizard knows 2 of the 3 options only).  I'm not sure if/how well this would work in practice though (in terms of balance), so it may not be a good idea.

Honestly, only the first one is a big issue for me (although #3 would be nice, too).

Fixing the other gripes I have would likely be more game-changing and unpopular (shooting out of combat, "sniping", casualty removal from "conga lines" with limited engaged models), and beyond the purview of the GHB, so I'll leave them out. :)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rules priority.

Many warscrolls and battalions allow stuff to be used in narrative and open play which aren't usable in matched play due to the restrictive rules. this is a waste of rules often making models unviable in matched play due to it.

These aren't too common to come by but it's noticeable, a few examples (there was more but ive forgotten them :| )  , Lord kroak, zombies, Fatesworn Warband.

Allowing some units to "break" the rules isn't going to break the game, the advantages they'll gain aren't too major due to other restrictions placed upon the lists.

For instance, the fatesworn warband, ok it's potentially a lot of spells, but heroes are limited to 6, are more expensive than units and outside of those spells have limited viability,  "d3 mortal wounds? ok only 37 wounds left in the unit and it's my charge"

Zombies merging, is this really an issue? 

Kroak may be an issue but then increase his point cost to counter it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Zombies merging, is this really an issue?

The rumour on this is that this will be clarified in the way that helps Death players.

Quote

These aren't too common to come by but it's noticeable, a few examples (there was more but ive forgotten them :| )  , Lord kroak, zombies, Fatesworn Warband.

I specifically suggested carving out arcane bolt from the Rule of One (but obviously not mystic shield). Wizards need a buff (as do Tzeentch) relative to shooting (although changing the rule of one to only successful casts is a bad fix - since it punishes elite wizards, who have a value as a reliable mystic shield at least).

Spells that hard counter shooting are needed as a priority (e.g. that make it -2 to hit friendly units within a distance with shooting only) - could be on a difficult cast roll. The mechanics on Batswarms and Neferata just don't work (or are suicidally risky) versus Kunning Rukk etc..

I think Kroak is about right where he is - powerful as he can reroll initiative rolls and for an extra 100 points he can get on the Balewind, but only one AOE attack per turn, so not crazy - summoning is fine as it is - it's an option but not an auto-include. I've slowly moved towards seeing rerolling/changing the initiative rolls as a benefit to the game - certainly the options that are available feel like they are costed as if they can do this.

 

 

Edited by Nico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...