Loss of TK range

[Thomas Lyons]

On December 21, 2016 at 3:12 AM, RuneBrush said:

If we're being realistic, Tomb Kings would require almost a complete reworking from a model perspective.  The only models that you could feasibly resurrect with no changes would be the Necrosphinx.  

 Yes, I agree that the Necrosphinx/Warsphinx kit is fine but the broader claim is simply not true..  Both the Tomb Guard and Necropolis Knights/Sepulchral Stalker kits look great as well.  The Tomb Guard in the Tomb Guard Kit are the same proportions (which are good!) found mounted on the Warsphinx and on the Necropolis Knights.  Those three kits (5 units) are fantastic and would make a wonderful core to an army. With a couple non-finecast clam packs, GW could have a nice tight release for TK with nice plastic models.  

[Mengel Miniatures]

On 12/28/2016 at 1:06 AM, Thomas Lyons said:

 Yes, I agree that the Necrosphinx/Warsphinx kit is fine but the broader claim is simply not true..  Both the Tomb Guard and Necropolis Knights/Sepulchral Stalker kits look great as well.  The Tomb Guard in the Tomb Guard Kit are the same proportions (which are good!) found mounted on the Warsphinx and on the Necropolis Knights.  Those three kits (5 units) are fantastic and would make a wonderful core to an army. With a couple non-finecast clam packs, GW could have a nice tight release for TK with nice plastic models.  

Add in a plastic Liche Priest and some new chariots and you got a solid faction. (It's just not TK without chariots)

[Oppenheimer]

I'm surprised to see so many people not upset by the loss of TK. I think they are a great addition to the Death army. They add range and compliment existing models, like Nagash and the Mortarchs who are TK themed. I'm very sad they are gone. They still are very poplar in my local GW.

[Thomas Lyons]

6 hours ago, Oppenheimer said:

I'm surprised to see so many people not upset by the loss of TK. I think they are a great addition to the Death army. They add range and compliment existing models, like Nagash and the Mortarchs who are TK themed. I'm very sad they are gone. They still are very poplar in my local GW.

I'm sad, but I saw this coming and bought all of the models I would ever need for TK.  

[Nico]

Quote

I'm surprised to see so many people not upset by the loss of TK. I think they are a great addition to the Death army. They add range and compliment existing models, like Nagash and the Mortarchs who are TK themed. I'm very sad they are gone. They still are very poplar in my local GW.

In the UK at least, the following things seem to be true:

1. Death win by far the fewest major events.
2. Death are by far the least popular Grand Alliance.
3. Death have the fewest units by miles and this has gotten significantly worse since FEC.
4. Death have fewer units than Order have battalions. I've now checked this - see below - it's 41 Warscrolls to 55 Battalions or thereabouts.
5. A surprisingly large proportion of Death units are redundant (inferior versions of other Warscrolls) or universally perceived to be junk (take a bow Black Coach, Fell Bats).
6. Summoning was rightly nerfed hard.
7. Death have negligible shooting (TK archers are a shadow of their former selves). Catapult or nothing. Ushabti are not viable.
8. In a smart move, GW gave Death the best Allegiance Pack by some margin (over Destruction, then Chaos, then Order) in order to balance the game pretty well.
9. However, this does mean that the Allegiance Pack looks very strong in isolation (which of course it it).
10. Since the GH, Death have become either Tomb Kings alpha strike or the New Nurgle #WardSave.
11. Both of these styles of play are poorly understood and widely detested. The alpha strike is very strong, but susceptible to good target selection/Fanatics/massed pew pew plus bunkering. The Ward Save army (with optional Mourngul) is strong but again very dependent on your opponent choosing targets badly or being Ironjawz/Khorne Bloodbound (so they cannot focus fire as shooting is negligible). Since the Ward Save army is a grindy/regenerative/brings models back/negative style of playing, it can be extremely dispiriting to opponents (in the same way that bouncing off Sylvaneth can be dispiriting). Many players refuse to push the retreat button against the Mourngul (that's how I beat one with a Bravery 4 Army plus Gordrakk at Blood & Glory*) and are far too subject to the magnet under the 12 inch line during deployment.
12. Thus despite the points above, Death are perceived to be overpowered and have been variously nerfed in the FAQ and face the prospect of TK being banned. This more or less boxes them into either VLoZD plus Mourngul or FEC until such time as they get an allegiance pack (spells) or a Battletome.

 

The fact that some TOs are hitting Death again by suggesting that reinforcement pools need to be written down is astonishing! Maybe DoT would justify some kind of restraints in 6 months' time.

 

*Game One here:

 

[Dave Fraser]

I just hope certain podcasts who're repeatedly knocking compendium scrolls don't get their way and force TK out the game. 

 

They are a super strong list but I'm not sure they're the best in the game.

[Nico]

Quote

I just hope certain podcasts who're repeatedly knocking compendium scrolls don't get their way and force TK out the game. 

I'm acting on the assumption that this will happen. If TK disappear from the GH, then hopefully this will be simltaneous with a new Battletome for Death (ideally revitalising Deathlords or bringing in something completely new).

It's pretty subjective as to what is objectionable. Some people find that routine mixing within the Grand Alliances is objectionable. Some people hate the old named characters like Karl Franz. Some people hate Kairos (take first turn, shoot him with a high volume of attacks - only works for some armies). Some people really want Archaon to have to ride big derpy, bad rend Dorghar rather than small elegant Dorghar (hoping that DoT will change this dynamic in a big way - mine is poking its 3 heads out of the box on the shelf in anticipation).

I'm pretty live and let live other than deliberately using old versions of the new warscrolls for broken combos - that's pretty much just the Old Ghoul King with the ridiculous command ability (I recall it's a +1 to hit and +1 to wound aura buff) coupled with the new FEC Terrorgheist for 6 mortal wounds on a 5 to wound. There may be other examples. This is because it's actively confusing to (newer) players and taking advantage of the fact that the points for the Old Ghoul King shouldn't be the same as the new one. 

The anachronistic named characters seem more obviously objectionable than other things. However, many players love their Bretonnians and have painted them really well, so they would be a joy to play against. The only balance issue I can think of with Bretonnians is probably their stacking of pew pew buffs on cheap infantry pew pew being ultra boring (although this pales into significance compared to Arrer Boyz Kunning Rukk.  

Quote

They are a super strong list but I'm not sure they're the best in the game.

I can recall them winning 2 Major Events since AoS came out and having done 68 seconds of research one of the ones I thought they had won (London's Calling 2015) was actually won by Steve Follows' Bretonnians (he beat TK even back in the early days when any single unit from a Bullgor Stampede could autodelete every unit within range  - yes we all missed the chance of a lifetime to win big with Beastmen). I think Dan Ford won the Warchief GT recently @Dan.Ford - well done Sir!

When TK do beat you, it's often brutal and likely to be quite a crushing defeat and potentially you might have to watch their units grow back to full strength repeatedly. This gives them a reputation of being incredible.

However, they are predictable, dependent on a few particular characters; and don't have any significant damage output from pew pew (as opposed to bravery debuffs - Order have more bravery debuffs than Death do...).

[Lord marcus]

I just want my Egyptian style skeletons back.

[James Ramsay]

2 hours ago, Nico said:

I'm acting on the assumption that this will happen. If TK disappear from the GH, then hopefully this will be simltaneous with a new Battletome for Death (ideally revitalising Deathlords or bringing in something completely new).

It's pretty subjective as to what is objectionable. Some people find that routine mixing within the Grand Alliances is objectionable. Some people hate the old named characters like Karl Franz. Some people hate Kairos (take first turn, shoot him with a high volume of attacks - only works for some armies). Some people really want Archaon to have to ride big derpy, bad rend Dorghar rather than small elegant Dorghar (hoping that DoT will change this dynamic in a big way - mine is poking its 3 heads out of the box on the shelf in anticipation).

I'm pretty live and let live other than deliberately using old versions of the new warscrolls for broken combos - that's pretty much just the Old Ghoul King with the ridiculous command ability (I recall it's a +1 to hit and +1 to wound aura buff) coupled with the new FEC Terrorgheist for 6 mortal wounds on a 5 to wound. There may be other examples. This is because it's actively confusing to (newer) players and taking advantage of the fact that the points for the Old Ghoul King shouldn't be the same as the new one. 

The anachronistic named characters seem more obviously objectionable than other things. However, many players love their Bretonnians and have painted them really well, so they would be a joy to play against. The only balance issue I can think of with Bretonnians is probably their stacking of pew pew buffs on cheap infantry pew pew being ultra boring (although this pales into significance compared to Arrer Boyz Kunning Rukk.  

I can recall them winning 2 Major Events since AoS came out and having done 68 seconds of research one of the ones I thought they had won (London's Calling 2015) was actually won by Steve Follows' Bretonnians (he beat TK even back in the early days when any single unit from a Bullgor Stampede could autodelete every unit within range  - yes we all missed the chance of a lifetime to win big with Beastmen). I think Dan Ford won the Warchief GT recently @Dan.Ford - well done Sir!

When TK do beat you, it's often brutal and likely to be quite a crushing defeat and potentially you might have to watch their units grow back to full strength repeatedly. This gives them a reputation of being incredible.

However, they are predictable, dependent on a few particular characters; and don't have any significant damage output from pew pew (as opposed to bravery debuffs - Order have more bravery debuffs than Death do...).

I've found the Lack of shooting for death the biggest problem. I use catapults with my TK and are so frustrated how rubbish they are but then remember there is nothing else.

Im just not sure if they ever pull their weight and should drop them for something else.

[Thomas Lyons]

4 hours ago, Nico said:

I'm acting on the assumption that this will happen.

I am really, really hoping they don't.  Dan made an offhand comment during our show a couple weeks ago that TK would be gone if he were making the decisions (thus making it clear he isn't).  I'm sure that we'll see them increase in cost, but we won't likely see them disappear from this iteration of the GHB.  I tend to agree with @Vincent Venturella that GW will likely take a hands off position and just let them disappear over time.  With them not selling them, and the prohibition of non-GW models in major events, TK's remaining presence will likely fade within a few years (barring a handful of standouts who are committed to them).  My hope is that @Mengel Miniatures' TK project will at least keep them standard here in U.S. events for awhile.  Only time will tell on this though.

[Mengel Miniatures]

I personally don't understand the people out there calling for the TK's removal. I'm sorry you have a tough time beating them sometimes, learn to counter it. Calling for their ban in response to losing against them is somewhat childish and over simplified in my mind. Everything has a counter, learn it.

I haven't run the Necro Knights once in a single games of AoS. I came in 7th at Adepticon last year with TK and won the MI GT with them, but I have lost plenty of games as well. My game ratios with them is probably about a 60/40 win/loss ratio. I don't think that's over powered. The people calling for a TK ban should be calling for a Stomrfiend/Kairos/Sayl ban, a Skyre ban, and a Kunnin Ruk ban too. They're just tough to play against, nothing should be banned. Learn to play nice with everyone. 

Sorry, rant over.

[James Ramsay]

TOs here in the UK hate everything compendium. 

[Nico]

Quote

I am really, really hoping they don't.  Dan made an offhand comment during our show a couple weeks ago that TK would be gone if he were making the decisions (thus making it clear he isn't).  I'm sure that we'll see them increase in cost, but we won't likely see them disappear from this iteration of the GHB.  I tend to agree with @Vincent Venturella that GW will likely take a hands off position and just let them disappear over time.  With them not selling them, and the prohibition of non-GW models in major events, TK's remaining presence will likely fade within a few years (barring a handful of standouts who are committed to them).  My hope is that @Mengel Miniatures' TK project will at least keep them standard here in U.S. events for awhile.  Only time will tell on this though.

I agree. Hopefully you're right. I took it as a bad omen that GW were prepared to hammer all of the older Destruction (and Bullgors and probably a few more) factions by killing their battalions in the FAQ (i.e. as you know, but to clarify for other readers, these are battalions that make use of updated Warscrolls in the Destruction Battletome and keep these armies competitive with the new stuff until such time as they receive a Battletome). To be fair to Destruction they're were just catching up with Order the day before the FAQ came out (the upper tables of Blood & Glory was swarming with all manner of Tusks and Horns and Arrer Boyz including two of my South London Legion club mates for that matter). They then received various nerfs - although Kunning Rukk was buffed*. Now Order are back out in front again. To be fair it's hard to assess the strength of Order when this is skewed quite a bit by the popularity of Stormcast Eternals and their popularity amongst tournament players.

If you're an Order player, you received brand new Battalions in your Order Battletome (admittedly not especially amazing ones - although some people are doing inventive stuff with the Dragons and Dragon Princes etc.). The Greenskinz one seems particularly strange as they've released an AoS start collecting box for Greenskinz - so you couldn't even say that they "aren't AoS". 

The independent events will probably move against TK and Compendium first.

*As an aside, Hand of Gork (known as Hand of Broken when combined with Kunning Rukk Arrer boys) will only work in the actual movement phase (following the FAQ answer). This could be seen as a marginal nerf (against the large buff of defensive buffs that only work in the shooting phase no longer helping against arrers in the hero phase but then switching back on like a lightswitch in the shooting phase).

Previously, Sedge and I had discussed that it would work in the deemed movement phase in the hero phase but then not in the actual movement phase. So they now move 5+D6 in the hero phase, 10 or 15 in the movement phase, then shoot 18 - so that's a cheery 33+D6 inches to 38+D6 effective range. Previously it was even worse, since they could run in the hero phase and double or triple the entire distance travelled (not just the movement characteristic), so 2*(5+D6) or 3(5+D6) in the hero phase, then move 5 in the movement phase, then shoot 18. That's a minimum of 33+2D6 (43.5" average); and the maximum is 38+3D6, so average maximum of 48.5 inches, absolute maximum of 56 inches.   

[Nico]

Quote

I personally don't understand the people out there calling for the TK's removal. I'm sorry you have a tough time beating them sometimes, learn to counter it. Calling for their ban in response to losing against them is somewhat childish and over simplified in my mind. Everything has a counter, learn it.

I haven't run the Necro Knights once in a single games of AoS. I came in 7th at Adepticon last year with TK and won the MI GT with them, but I have lost plenty of games as well. My game ratios with them is probably about a 60/40 win/loss ratio. I don't think that's over powered. The people calling for a TK ban should be calling for a Stomrfiend/Kairos/Sayl ban, a Skyre ban, and a Kunnin Ruk ban too. They're just tough to play against, nothing should be banned. Learn to play nice with everyone. 

Sorry, rant over.

I don't think anyone could look at the painting and modelling and wonderful background and custom Battletome and Lore (I could go on) of your army and then ban it from anything. Roll out the red carpet more like (and learn stuff from painting guides like I do).

It's interesting that the position seems to be different in the US on this one. Were they much more popular under 8th Edition in the US?

[Dan.Ford]

On 30/12/2016 at 0:04 AM, Nico said:

In the UK at least, the following things seem to be true:

1. Death win by far the fewest major events.
2. Death are by far the least popular Grand Alliance.
3. Death have the fewest units by miles and this has gotten significantly worse since FEC.
4. Death have fewer units than Order have battalions. I've not checked this, but I wouldn't be surprised in the least.
5. A surprisingly large proportion of Death units are redundant (inferior versions of other Warscrolls) or universally perceived to be junk (take a bow Black Coach, Fell Bats).
6. Summoning was rightly nerfed hard.
7. Death have negligible shooting (TK archers are a shadow of their former selves). Catapult or nothing. Ushabti are not viable.
8. In a smart move, GW gave Death the best Allegiance Pack by some margin (over Destruction, then Chaos, then Order) in order to balance the game pretty well.
9. However, this does mean that the Allegiance Pack looks very strong in isolation (which of course it it).
10. Since the GH, Death have become either Tomb Kings alpha strike or the New Nurgle #WardSave.
11. Both of these styles of play are poorly understood and widely detested. The alpha strike is very strong, but susceptible to good target selection/Fanatics/massed pew pew plus bunkering. The Ward Save army (with optional Mourngul) is strong but again very dependent on your opponent choosing targets badly or being Ironjawz/Khorne Bloodbound (so they cannot focus fire as shooting is negligible). Since the Ward Save army is a grindy/regenerative/brings models back/negative style of playing, it can be extremely dispiriting to opponents (in the same way that bouncing off Sylvaneth can be dispiriting). Many players refuse to push the retreat button against the Mourngul (that's how I beat one with a Bravery 4 Army plus Gordrakk at Blood & Glory*) and are far too subject to the magnet under the 12 inch line during deployment.
12. Thus despite the points above, Death are perceived to be overpowered and have been variously nerfed in the FAQ and face the prospect of TK being banned. This more or less boxes them into either VLoZD plus Mourngul or FEC until such time as they get an allegiance pack (spells) or a Battletome.

 

The fact that some TOs are hitting Death again by suggesting that reinforcement pools need to be written down is astonishing! Maybe DoT would justify some kind of restraints in 6 months' time.

 

*Game One here:

In the above quote i believe you are correct and it ecko so many of the majority of death players.

After the destruction of the old world, Age of Sigmar depended on the T.O's , Club's and podcasts and Mo, to make AoS work and keep the ball running until GW new they had a market to work with. GW has done alot of great things, a lot. Hell its on another level.

But if 'we' did not support it , i believed they would of turn all resourses to 40K etc.

The way i see it for example is Chaos Dwarfs would have be a dead army if it had not been for the T.O's and Clubs in the Old world, it had nothing to do with GW.

Which means its the T.O , Clubs and podcasts that will 'keep' or 'kill' Tomb kings not GW .

GW tells us play the game we want, i want see AND play with Tomb Kings on the table at Tournaments. (At present i think they still are for Heat 1 GT)

 

[Nico]

Thanks Dan! That means a lot coming from the person who taught me how to play TK in the first place and one of the most successful Death players in the UK scene.

Quote

After the destruction of the old world, Age of Sigmar depended on the T.O's , Club's and podcasts and Mo, to make AoS work and keep the ball running until GW new they had a market to work with. GW has done alot of great things, a lot. Hell its on another level.

But if 'we' did not support it , i believed they would of turn all resourses to 40K etc.

The way i see it for example is Chaos Dwarfs would have be a dead army if it had not been for the T.O's and Clubs in the Old world, it had nothing to do with GW.

Which means its the T.O , Clubs and podcasts that will 'keep' or 'kill' Tomb kings not GW .

GW tells us play the game we want, i want see AND play with Tomb Kings on the table at Tournaments. (At present i think they still are for Heat 1 GT)

This is a great summary. The nominations for Community Champion reflect this.

I added @Ben 's role "for showing not only that the Legion of Azgorth are a real army, but also that they are an awesome, fun army that can look great on the table and win painting awards." to his nomination for this very forum. His passion for them has no doubt inspired others and contributed to GW/FW making a new model for the Legion as well as giving them points (you cannot get much more real and supported army than that). I don't think many people are clamouring for FW models to be banned now.

TK are definitely still legitimate for Heat One. Hope to see you there.

Let's end the year on a bright note - Battletome Deathlords/Soulblight/New Death Concept in late 2017 perhaps - so Death can move away from the 5+ Ward save crutch and be a bit more varied.

DoT is going to be amazing. Fimirach army from Forgeworld hopefully. Battletome Duardin to revitalise Fyreslayers and Dispossessed and bring in Steamhead.

Cheeky Shadow Aelves in November/December 2017....

[TerrorPenguin]

8 minutes ago, Nico said:

DoT is going to be amazing. 

Ok, I know I'm going to regret asking this as it's probably obvious, but what's DoT?

[Nico]

It's new. Disciples of Tzeentch.

Happy New Year!

 

[Oppenheimer]

@Nico What's wrong with Ushabti? I run them whenever I want some Death ranged.

I agree with skeleton archers without the buff of Khalida's cmd ability are pretty terrible.

[Nico]

The Righteous Nerf (while justified on Skeletons) really sucks for Ushabti (and Morghasts).

They are reasonably tough and cheap, but the speed and accuracy is dismal. I tried buffing them with VLoZD (12 strong unit) and they didn't shine.

[Sleboda]

On 12/22/2016 at 0:27 PM, mmimzie said:

That said skeletons in different clothing is really silly and pointless to me, and is why i enjoy the loss of brets and tomb kings as they aren't really different enough for my taste to be different armies.

Not trying to be critical of you, but I wanted to comment on that a bit.

Looking at them as skeletons in different clothing is missing the point. The difference comes in the background, the subtle tweaks, etc. Honestly, we could say that Empire and Chaos Mortals are just humans in different clothing as well.  Heck, Archaon was a priest of Sigmar, right?

Or elves. All just the same stuff in different makeup?  Not really.

The TK story was rich and interesting.  They were a very different army from VC, and really only the author's failure to write solid rules for them kept them from being truly distinguished. Skeletons that had better profiles, could drill for formations, were not mindless, etc. all would have fit the narrative, but instead we got "skeletons in different clothing" - or so it seems to appear to some gamers.

I'm just saying that if you look just under the skin, the fact that you see bones on both is not a reason to think they were the same as VC.

I miss my Tomb Kings.

A lot.

[Lord marcus]

15 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

Not trying to be critical of you, but I wanted to comment on that a bit.

Looking at them as skeletons in different clothing is missing the point. The difference comes in the background, the subtle tweaks, etc. Honestly, we could say that Empire and Chaos Mortals are just humans in different clothing as well.  Heck, Archaon was a priest of Sigmar, right?

Or elves. All just the same stuff in different makeup?  Not really.

The TK story was rich and interesting.  They were a very different army from VC, and really only the author's failure to write solid rules for them kept them from being truly distinguished. Skeletons that had better profiles, could drill for formations, were not mindless, etc. all would have fit the narrative, but instead we got "skeletons in different clothing" - or so it seems to appear to some gamers.

I'm just saying that if you look just under the skin, the fact that you see bones on both is not a reason to think they were the same as VC.

I miss my Tomb Kings.

A lot.

I am on the same page

[mmimzie]

1 hour ago, Sleboda said:

Not trying to be critical of you, but I wanted to comment on that a bit.

Looking at them as skeletons in different clothing is missing the point. The difference comes in the background, the subtle tweaks, etc. Honestly, we could say that Empire and Chaos Mortals are just humans in different clothing as well.  Heck, Archaon was a priest of Sigmar, right?

Or elves. All just the same stuff in different makeup?  Not really.

The TK story was rich and interesting.  They were a very different army from VC, and really only the author's failure to write solid rules for them kept them from being truly distinguished. Skeletons that had better profiles, could drill for formations, were not mindless, etc. all would have fit the narrative, but instead we got "skeletons in different clothing" - or so it seems to appear to some gamers.

I'm just saying that if you look just under the skin, the fact that you see bones on both is not a reason to think they were the same as VC.

I miss my Tomb Kings.

A lot.

The reaso. I say skeletons in different clothing. Is we'll have a second skeleton faction in the death rattle subfaction, and also both will be inder the death faction. While they may have different motivations they would be small.

 

Also from the prospective of many gamers. Simply put when getting into a game or army the fluff is usually secondary to game play or looks.

 

Lastly, fluff wise they are kind of samie to the other death factions where each faction is mostly mindless, with heros with wills of thier own, and all bowing to nagash as desth compels them. Tomb king being skeleton serving a boss skeleton is super similar to death rattle style, and as such the lore is pretty samie as well.

I can get you miss them but from w momey aspect i dont see them being super worth keep around. Unless they kill the faction off and thing bring them back in a big cool release.

[CoffeeGrunt]

Seeing them as "another skeleton faction" just shows a lack of imagination on how they could be handled, though.

Anyway, I hear a lot of complaining about my Death army locally, but it's mostly oriented on how annoying it is to kill, especially as I actually use Retreating, something my opponents always seem averse to doing. I think it's because most of them are 40K players, and so are used to a game where you're never allowed to retreat and pretty much kiss goodbye to a unit in combat until the combat is over.

Death need more options though, that much is certain, and the loss of the Compendium would be a hammerblow to the list variety you could run unless they alleviated it with a few Battletomes that actually introduce new models, units and battalions.

I'm currently trying to write a 2K list for an upcoming tournament, and hoh boy, not using Compendium is real tough to avoid.

[Thomas Lyons]

On December 31, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Dan.Ford said:

In the above quote i believe you are correct and it ecko so many of the majority of death players.

After the destruction of the old world, Age of Sigmar depended on the T.O's , Club's and podcasts and Mo, to make AoS work and keep the ball running until GW new they had a market to work with. GW has done alot of great things, a lot. Hell its on another level.

But if 'we' did not support it , i believed they would of turn all resourses to 40K etc.

The way i see it for example is Chaos Dwarfs would have be a dead army if it had not been for the T.O's and Clubs in the Old world, it had nothing to do with GW.

Which means its the T.O , Clubs and podcasts that will 'keep' or 'kill' Tomb kings not GW .

GW tells us play the game we want, i want see AND play with Tomb Kings on the table at Tournaments. (At present i think they still are for Heat 1 GT)

 

Fully agree.  The good news is that @Mengel Miniatures and a handful of others have been working to breathe some (un)life into TK from both a fluff and support perspective.  After I finish my current Nurgle project for Holy Wars next month, I'm transitioning to my Tomb Kings, of which I have over 10k points (at current GHB values) unpainted.  My hope is that, just like the Chaos Dwarf players of prior editions, that Tomb Kings can continue to be present and active on the tournament/narrative event scene.