Beliman

Maybe. But that post was 2 years old. There are a lot of other new members in this forum, and people had enough time to play a lot other games like warcry or 9th to see how S vs T work. Btw, it's just another thing to tall about.

With a new battlebox and nothing more, there is a bit of hope that GW reveals the nexr two battletomes for 2022.

No, you don't need to talk about that if you don't want. Nobody will force you to write here!!! Btw, this post will not change anything,. It's just to have some fun talking about our favorite and expensive hobby, and maybe even learn something new!! That's a really good question. I was one of the dudes that didn't want anything to do with SvsT, but after 3.0 and reading Orruks and SCE warscrolls, I'm thinking again and again about exactly the same thing: Dual-wielding Liberators. Why someone want to use them over sword+board? Not sure, but maybe S vs T (even some profile tweaks) could be the answer. Having a 110 p battleline unite that can threaten 20 Goblins, Zombies or even Orruks will change the persepctive of just having a "hammer" unit to do all the work. I don't know how this could be accomplished, but it could help other similar units like Prosecutors. Btw, @PJetski is doing an awesome work (just read SCE discussion)!! I'm going to use your S and T list to just see what happens.

Merry Christmas and happy holidays to everybody! Let's open a annual chat: after the first 3.0 tomes, and looking at other games (even GW ones), what do you think about another layer of complexity? I’m talking again about Strength vs Toughness/ Strength vs Resistance. The utility of this mechanic is clear, make all units a bit more different and unique just using their own stats/profiles. For a full analysis, @Enoby made an awesome job a few years ago (worth a read, believe me): So, what do you think about something like this?

I think that people are comparing 1:1 abilities and combos from completely diferent armies with just a competitive mind to judge. I'm not sure if that's the right thing to do.

Nothing for us in the balance update. We still have a lot of interactions that are not clear how they should be played/solved: When can we disembark? Our skyvessels can shoot after using Fly High in melee range because we have Disengage (FAQ), but what happens when other units retreat using other teleports and don't have any ability like Disengage (wardens, riggers, units from other armies...)? Do units in garrison count as being in the battlefield for abilities that "pick a unit on the battlefield" instead of range/LoS? How can an ability that "remove units from the battlefield" be solved if the target unit is not in the battlefield (garrisons)? Units inside a skyvessel have +1save/-1 to be hit (no cover), what happens to this units if the skyvessel is on a terrain feature that gives cover?

Voted for Sigvald. He is magnificent!

But how do we know that Gotrek is not OP? I mean, data shows only a fragment of the whole picture: KOs are doing right (not the best, not the worst armies). A few 5-0, some 4-1, but 80% of this lists had a Gotrek. The other lists that don't have Gotrek are struggling a lot more, but the data is so small that the numbers are just anecdotes. The thing is, KOs have good numbers in competitive and Gotrek will not take so many 5-0 spots. That's the result that I can see for so many other armies that are using/abusing Gotrek. Some of this armies can't even kill a Giant by themself and Gotrek allows exactly that, giving a tool (in other words, A LOT OF DAMAGE) to armies that are in need of update, but data will say otherwise.

Bloodstalkers, Salamanders and Sentinels had a point increase (maybe not big enough but it's not better than before) and Unleash Hell is not as strong as pre-patch unleash. Maybe not what people wanted, but it's still a nerf to ranged (to hit rolls) mortal wounds.

That means that we are going to see some more battlescrolls that focus on other things than GODS & HEROES? I mean, yeah, big monsters and gods are an issue, but waht about the small dudes like grots, prosecutors, some artillery, small mosnters (cigor)... I mean, yes, they can use diferent points, but I'm talking about new warscrolls!!

Can you explain a bit why? Didn't read all the FAQs and I don't know how coalition work now.

Nighthaunts and some other armies have the same description, and all of them count as one drop to set-up. Only Skavens have the Hidden Weapon Teams rules. But the rules makes it clear "Do not set up the WEAPON TEAM unit until it is revealed as described next." Edit: Nasty Skulkers (legends) have the same ability as Hidden Weapon Team

Disagree. You don't need one 5-0 to be "good" at this game. Fyreslayers are in the middle of the pack (some 4-1, a lot of 3-2), that makes them fine and not "unplayable". There are at least 5 or 7 armies that can't even get a 4-1 (poor Gloomspites!

For random games, we usually don't use any hourserule. But for tournaments, we abuse the Impassable label for terrain and Garrisons to try to break LoS and stop some monsters to land on a tree or a house and this kind of stuff. For everything else, we just make it clear how are we going to play some meh rules, like disembarking from an skyvessel.

If I'm honest, I didn't even read Nurgles strats and tactics. It seems that they are easier to accomplish. I didn't want to split mortals and demons for nurgle abilities or count how many allies are allowed for both armies too. I think both armies are close in power level but I feel that Nurgle abilities are more fun (a lot to track btw...) and better designed to match their background.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I always assumed that White Dwarf's rules are just another feature to push sells. They are not there to break the game or save/ upgrade the faction. The rules are just for people that "want" all options to play with their army. Sometimes this rules are meh at best (early stormhosts), sometimes they are a bandaid for a mechanic (gloomspite) and sometimes they are awesome (SLGL).

WD Rules are not about switching battletomes from 2.0 to 3.0. They are just a bandaid that can be undone with less than 3 months. And if you are lucky enough, with a Warscroll of a named character for your army.

Completely agree. SCE (and maybe Orruks) are the Ryu (street fighter), Mario (Smash) or Goku (FighersZ) of Warhammer Age of Sigmar. Easy to learn because their rules/abilities/framerates/interactions/complexity are not that the same as a character/factions/whatever from the last season/end of edition/whatever.

Maybe their rules are a bit more lore-friendly but I don't think they pack a lot more than SCE: Yes, they have more artefacts of power and command traits. Their Allegiance Abilities are 100% more awesome than SCE (imo). They feel that they have better rules overall but they don't have any Prayers, Mount Traits or Unique Enhancements. Their roster is smaller and they don't have all the tools that SCE can have (ex.: 10" movement units or ingame teleports). I'm not saying that SCE are better, it's just that I don't feel that SCE are far away from Maggotkin.

Just to point it out. Save rolls are part of the attacking sequence: Roll to hit Roll to wound Roll to save Count dmg After that, the dmg of the weapons turns to a wounds pool that must be allocated to your models. Ward save triggers exactly at this moment: Take in mind that some 2.0 descriptions can be a bit diferent and the timing is written as: "each time you allocate a Wound or Mortal Wound..." or "When you allocate a wound or mortal wound...".

Imho, we are between two big releases. They are building hype for Eldars/chaos in the form of rumour engines. I suppose that anything else will be "hinted" near holydays or just at warhammer-day (or warhammer-fest, whatever is called the january announcing event). I suppose that appart from the big release we are going to see Tau codex reveak (miniature should be previewed early) and something for AoS (fyreslayers vs idoneth box maybe?).

I haven't read the books but I don't feel the show is bad. I think their main target are teenagers and that's why some of the clothes, colors or the fighting scenes are done that way and it seems a bit odd sometimes. But that's the way it goes. Let's hope that wircher 2 have more budget than the first season...

I'm still reading their warscrolls, but they don't seems to have a lot of teleports (unless you build exactly around it with a subfaction and specialist units) and their Mortal Wounds output is tied to a lot of conditionals (artefact, disease build up, wheel, etc...). And I think that their ranged dmg is really meh overall (ranged profiles) unless you commit to magic (mirrors, 3 sorcerers within 3" of each other, etc...). Not sure if it counts, but they don't have artillery nor fast cavalry (8" flyes I think, not sure if there is something faster) nor priests.

Yeah, I know. Not sure if "one of the best armies" are the right words. They are just an army that is stomping a lot of other armies just because interactions, rules and my main issue with them: the result of becoming a 2.0 army using/abusing 3.0 rules (Heroic Actions, Monster Rampage, damage check, body count for objectives, Ward5+, etc...). Imho, they are really, really bad for the game. They don't belong in 3.0 and they are just a big wall of bricks for a lot of armies, but that's just an opinion from a random dude in this forum. (Anecdote: one week ago, another gargant player won a 16 man tournament).

Na, they got some "bandaids" that didn't work (it got worst) in 3.0. They don't even have a 3.0 battletome and I'm not sure that the rules team is the same as the ones in the WD...