Beliman

Warmachine and Artillery should (somehow) be linked, because we have weird things like Beast-skewer Killbow being an Artillery without the Warmachine keyword and then we have Ironclad and Frigatte that are Warmachines but not Artillery. I understand that one is a positional role and the other is a keyword, but it feels weird when a fleet of KOs can't use the Grand Battery Battalion. Btw, Warmachine seems to be one of the main/generic keywords without any rule attached to it: Heroe: Heroic Action, Look out sir and Issue Commands Monster: Monstruous Rampage. Wizard: Casting/Unbinding/Dispelling and Spell Enhancement Priest: Praying/Dispelling and Prayer Scriptures enhancement Totem: Issue Commands Warmachine: ------

Completely agree! Even if I'm a Marvel fan, the only God of War that I really enjoyed is GoW 2018, that says a lot about me, but it is what it is. But to continue with this conversation, Dark Souls/Elden Ring is exactly what I miss in AoS: their gods are this entities that can't destroy entire civilizations anymore (even if they did in the past), they are a shadow of themself, decaying gods, aberrations that don't understand that their time has already ended, waiting to be killed by a tarnished/hollow. That's how gods should be: (almost) dead. What can I say, I play KOs. But remember, Trust aethermatics, not supersitions!!!

Killing one unit with a swing is fine to show the audience how badass the villain is, call it Sauron-swing, or Thanos stomping Hulk&Loki. But let's be honest here, 1vs1 on foot is what we usually see as a confrontation between the villain (or the big fighty-dude) and the Hero/ine on a lot of action/fantasy/sci-fi movies, and that's something that it's hard to see on the tables (unless both player agree on doing it):

I don't know if it will help, but I don't play RPG and I collect Soulbound. Soulbound books are awesome, full packed with world-building and information, and that's exactly waht AoS needs. Soulbound helped me in having some type of apretiation to the AoS Lore, because otherwise, I would be just bored. I don't like myths-like stories of Gods doing Godly things, unless they are driven by grounded people. And let's be honest, that's not the case for most of the AoS mains story unless you are in to Soulbound. AoS's gameplay doesn't help too because there are a lot of named and interesting characters in the backgrounds but we only have a few minitaures and most of them are 500+ points characters that can remove entire units with a swing, and that gets old faster and doesn't have that "cinematic" view that you look for in a wargame.

@Feinar what rules are you using for Kislev? I know about "Manuscritos de Nuth" is a 6th (fanmade) edition that it has everything from 3d to 8th units converted to 6th edition rules, but I don't know if there is anything like that for 8th edition.

yes! FAQs already here: We can move after disembarking! I really likei t. Our master-assassins (aka, BigHammer-Admirals) can threat anyone that is not well aware of our flying mechanics!

AVEMUS FAQS!!! Kharadron can disembark and move!! https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/#warhammer-age-of-sigmar

New hearthguard miniatures for 40k!! https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/07/04/exo-armour-turns-leagues-of-votann-elites-into-mountains-of-muscle-and-guns/

Take in mind that Ruinstorm Daemon Brutes are not from khorne. They are generic "elite" demons to pain/convert as you like.

I hope that's the case! Yes!! Another one from my check-list: [ ] Chaos Dwarfs for Blood Bowl [ ] Chaos Dwarfs/Furnace Kings for AoS [ ] 2d Wave for Kharadron Overlords [ ] 2d Wave for Fyreslayers [ ] First wave for AoS Dispossessed. [✓ ] Squats for 40k

All Heresy leaks were from phase 1, 2 and 3 from testers. The final books have some tweaks here and there as everybody expected. Not sure abour S2D leak, it seems a final copy of the book, still strange to see how it happened. Btw, leaks seems to be a big problem for GW, I can see why they want to cut ties with external testers and return to the Faithful group. I hope that AoS 3.0 doesn't take a hit because of that.

@Koala I think that you misunderstood my post. I just pointed out what's the diference between Commands and Reactions. And don't say they are the same, that's a lie. About DS armies, fluff reasons and strike first/last, I suggest to not compare on 1:1, as I said, it doesn't work. It's the whole game that needs to be made with all this mechanics in mind. If you give this mechanics to only a few random units, that's when some of them can turn to be NPE or toxic for the game. E.g: double-tap, ignore LoS, mortal wound without ward saves, etc... Btw, fluffy reasons only work if they help players to understand the game or how their armies should work, not to make it more teddious. E.g: Nurgle being slow and resilient is "fluffy". Being faster than Khorne or slaanesh is not fluffy.

Horus Heresy 2.0 have some type of mechanic that prevents any Deep Strike to be an NPE (looking at you outflank-plasma dudes!): Reactions. A Reaction is similar to a Command, but you can only use them in the opponent's turn. That means that if you are being double-turne'd, you can still Unleash Hell, All out Defense, All out Attack, etc... but the best part is that the enemy can't do any Command. It's a mechanic made to help the opponent that is receiving the agression and it feels rewarding for the player even if it's a game with more lethality than AoS (appart from auspex+overwatch, but that's another point). Initiative and simultaneous combat are still there, so it's not just one mechanic that fix all this issues. But the whole point is giving enough tools to stop an NPE to happen.

With simultaneous combat and attack first/last, I think the game could feel completely diferent and fun to play. Attack first and attack last could change a lot how the game is played, but I'm pretty sure that the balance of the game will be worse. Even that, I think that attack first and last should be a fully integrated mechanic and not a feature for a few armies/units.

Reading the Chaos Mainres leaks, I've seen something that made me smile: Marks of Chaos have abilities (again)!!! I'm really curious if that will be the same for Slaves to Darkness units.

It's a bit strange because a ward save is just another "defense-characteristic". A lot of other games are already using a similar mechanic: War40k: Save and Invulnerable Save. And it's from the same company!! Conquest: Last Argument of the Kings. Defense (basic save) and Evasion (save that ignores rend). Malifaux: Defense (basic save) and Willpower (Bravery & Save for magic attacks). Infinity: ARM (damage reduction) and BTW (Bio-technological shield, protection vs damage from special weapons). Imo, mortal wounds are special damage, like monster/cavalry charges (but not all for whatever reason), spells, breath attacks, poison attacks, etc... but I have the feeling that AoS doesn't know how mortal wounds can interact with save-stacking, other high-rend attacks, etc... they are just there being the "best type of damage that you can do", and they play with other attributes like big numbers of models/wounds, etc... to make the line more blurry instead of making all damage sources a bit more balanced between them. As you said before, there are more mortal wounds than high rend

100% this. [Caution: wall of text] But I want to point out that maybe the problem is more rooted in AoS than at first glance. The main tools that AoS has to remove enemy models are Wounds and Mortal Wounds. And AoS 3.0 has a save stacking mechanic that we can split Wounds in two categories: High Rend and Low rend. I don't know were to mark the line between this two, but it's not important for what I'm trying to say. Then we have Mortal Wounds. But IMO, there are some holes in that design. Let's look at their "perfect" target And their "perfect" counter The main structure is build around a pyramid (who has more blue arrows= good, who has more red arrows= bad), and that makes some things plain better than others. Nothing wrong with that, if it's equally distributed between armies. But that's not the case for AoS, instead, we haves some weird tools to normalize all this interactions: High number of wounds (models) can counter mortal wounds. +attacks and/or +damage buffs counter high number of wounds/models (anything basically). Mortal wounds are more limited than other type of wounds, but there are armies that can reliable generate a lot more than others Same for Ward Saves, some armies doesn't have any, but others can have 5+ for their basic units. Save stacking needs resources and a plan to do it, but some armies already have high number of tools to do that.... ... unlike Rend, that only a few can generate "extra rend" buffs. There are a lot more points that we can talk about, but what I'm tryng to say is that we are using a system that make some of them better than others and they are not equally distributed, and the tools to mitigate this "unbalance" are a lot more scattered around armies/buffs than it should.

It is already uploaded: https://www.warhammer-community.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/wPam4zTb77A1AG1b.pdf Only one FAQ to go:

@Bosskelot I tried Dota2 (played DoTa when it was a mod for a few months) and I moved ASAP to LOL. Manaburn, Dodge, moving your team-mates, etc... was unfun for me, even if I mained Jax (note: a character that had 45% to IGNORE all physical damage for 6 seconds). Imho, the main problem was Riot's engine at that time. After the new engine was released, we started with champions that had crazy abilities (I'm still following the game). Warhammer doesn't have a tech problem, we play with dice, models and tapes. And we already know that there are A LOT of diferent, fun and flavour mechanics that are being used by other wargames, so it's up to GW to make their own rules to be as fan, flavour and thematic as possible.

#1 Ratogres #2 Yoshi knights Saurus Knights #3 Monkey ninjas Gutter runners

@zilberfrid 100% with that. Another point to add, is the so called "counter" armies (not based on Lumineth Realmlords, it's just an example): Player A: My army is build around that 3 dudes with 5 wounds each. I set-up them behind this walls and I can start buff/aura/spells my other units, really thematic. Player B: Answer 1) Sorry dude, my archers already killed all 3 because I can ignore LoS, or have reliable mortal wounds or any combination of both. Answer 2) Oops, they can't cast anything, I have +3 unbinds with infinite range (and/or free autodispell). Btw, I can auto-cast my own spells and you need double 6 to unbind them... Doesn't matter wich answer Player B is going to take, player A will not have a nice or fun game. Note: I know that in 90% of other games, you need versality and adaptation and not just one gameplan and stick to it like a madman, but remember that we play a game that some armies have just 3 troops and a bunch of heroes.

Without any doubt

Always look for the english version!!

Agree, but I don't have a clue about what the designers are trying to do with KOs. Remember that you can move again with the units that disembarked (in the same phase), because leaving a Garrison is not a move anymore, and our "leaving a Garrison" is not at the end of the Movement Phase, like all others. Not sure if that's completely intended, take in mind that a lot of abilities that let you move after being teleported, are being handicapped or removed. Note: Btw, I hope that it remains the same!!

I think it all depends, you expect some other type of weakness for any other strength that your army has. Abilities that ignore the main core rules doesn't help in that context. Let's look at KOs. We have a lot of shooting and the best movement in the game using our main gimmick (Fly High). But we are not the best at shooting and our foot-troops move 4" without ships. We don't have Priests, Mages or Monsters and we need our tricks to play around this things (mainly, one-use artifacts like Spell in the Bottle, Voidstone Orb, Ventplates, etc...). Imho, KOs have a bad gameplay design because they are a bit too much dedicated to do only one thing, but they are one of the best armies to illustrate my point.