Beliman

That's really easy to do for the Combat Phase: Remove 13.3.1 Allocate Wounds from the Attack Sequence (only for the Combat Phase) and write a new sub-phase at the end (after strike last) of the Combat Phase (12.0). Shooting is a bit tricky because there are armies that doesn't have any shooting and the Ranged Phase doesn't use Alternative Activations like the Combat one. Changing the Shooting Phase to be like the Combat Phase could work, but it will change the meta in to something a lot more shooty, and that's something that I don't want to see (before you ask, I'm a KO player).

Disagree. I only play casual games, even I go to tournaments just to see friends and participate with the AOS community. And the worst experience I had (besides being destroyed early game by a 2" bad set-up) is when you need that turn to stay in the game but the dice thinks otherwise and my opponent take a double turn and the game ends abruptly. That kind of gameplay reminds me of a certain videogame:

Da Curze of da early 'dition books! I hope to see more warclans (at least 1 more), more battleline if (unlocked by warclans and general), less abilities with restrictions (skare taktikz, poisons & elixirs), more swamp-lore interactions (bonus to cast), more Command Traits (two tables: magic users and bosses) and at least 2 more artifacts (with the same trending of "Once Per Battle") with an option to take more artifacts (like Greyfyrd). /WishlistOff

100% this! That remind me of some Horus Heresy mechanics (old War40k editions). Appart from clunky rules, rare interactions and too much USR, the Horus Heresy has a really good (and diferent) base stats/profiles that can make a unit stand out over others without new abilities.For example, Rend (AP) completely ignore armor (Ex.: Ap2 means that Saves of 2+, 3+, 4+, 5+ and 6+ can't be used to block this attack). Sounds crazy, but it creates units with dedicated roles. 80% of (Space Marine) troops have 3+ saves, so, you will always have 3 options: Dedicated AP3 weaponry, but it's a bit expensive, restricted range and with some conditions (1 every 5, only unit captains, etc...) A bucket of low-quality attacks. Easy to shoot (hit/wound) weaponry. Cheap or even free, can be used by everybody. AP 2 or better weapons. Expensive, with some conditions (a few melee weapons, only terminators, canons or heavy vehicle weaponry, special relics, Legion specific weaponry, etc...). I know it's not the same, but the point is that base stats and weapon profiles are a good start to build a unit with enough personality. Look at poor vampires, they have 4A with 3+/3+/-1/1D3, and then look at Killaboss with his 4A with 3+/3+/-1/2... Not fair! Common GW, it's your game, believe in it!

From your battlereports/testers, it seems that Vulkites are not bad (nor amazing): They are not a powerhouse, and can't compete with other hitters like Goregruntas (like the testers said) or chew Megagargant wounds. Testers said that the best options to go for a 5-0 (even if the vulkite build did an amazing job in their tests) is going for RF+HGB retinue.

Sorry for the offtopic: That's not true. Maths and numbers are not enough to know what a unit can do. There are a lot of uncategorized stats that can't be reflected in Mathammer. You need data to back up your arguments because I think that you are overeacting. Honest Wargamer (102 tournaments, 10276 games) has put the Fyreslayers on the middle of the table (since 3.0): That's not Tier 5 unless Gloomspite is Tier 10... That's what I'm talking about. You never showed any data, only damage output using AoS Stathammer (btw, awesome tool). And that's just false because damage output is not enough to know if a unit is good or bad. You need to know what they can do on the table, how easy can you buff your units and if there is any set-up needed to make the play, their movement and how easy is to teleport/move your other units, how many threats can you put on the table (and how many tech-pieces), the type of meta of your gaming group, allies and any interaction between your units and that allies, etc... @Baron Klatz Thanks for the little piece of lore 😍!!! I hope to see this represented as a chronology in the next battletomes. @Kaizennus 100% agree. There are a lot of new wargames outside of GW that have simple rules but still have the feeling to be a wargame. Pretty sure that sooner or later AoS will go in that direction.

That's exactly what I'm waiting for. I only play KOs and Kruleboyz, and appart from a few exclusive miniatures (let me buy that Orruks /sadface), it seems that I'm not going to spend a lot this year...

Wall of thext incoming I agree, but I don't think that @JackStreicher is talking about that. NPE or having better number/stats than other units is something that I expect, that's why erratas and FAQs can clean this mess (or not). But Lumineth had a LOT of rules that come directly from their Lore. Just look how many layers they have/can use: Battle Traits: Aetherquarz, Absorb Despair and Lightning Reactions (with three tables: traits, artefacts and Spell Lore) Vanari Battle Traits: Shinning Company (with two tables: traits and artefacts). Scinari Battle Traits: Deep Thinkers (with two tables: traits and artefacts). Hurakan Battle Traits: Move Like a Wind (with three tables: traits, artefacts and Spell Lore). Alarith Battle Traits: Enduring as Rock and Tectonic Force (with three tables: traits, artefacts and Spell Lore). Great Nations (crossover with Settler's Gain and specialist cities for each temple that has rules). Not going to lie, it's crazy!! You can see how GW tried to build Lumineth and then look at Kharadron Overlords: Battle Traits: Aether-gold and The Code (but we lose The Code if we take any Skyport). Skyports (crossover with Tempest's Eye) [Note: I still think that Lumineth Sunweapons should do mortal wounds on To Wound rolls, that will not change their fluff and it will be a lot better for everyone. I don't think that any ranged unit should ignore LoS, ever... that will not make Lumineth really diferent from their Lore. But that's just some minor things that are not part of this thread] My point is that Lumineth have a lot of lore-friendly rules going on, and their Lore seems to be more polished than others: They have some backstory like the Clone-Wars, a lot of small stories, and their characters are the ones that push the story onward. And talking about characters, they are the perfect tools to explain their history, to make the army feel more "alive" and to spice your lists (appart from that wombo-combo... my third complain about AoS btw). Let's see how many of them can be used on the table: Teclis Ellania and Ellathor Lyrior Myari (Underworlds) Sevireth Eltharion Avalenor And then look at Kharadron Overlords: Bjorgen (Underworlds). Brokk Dagnai (Cursed City). Let's be honest, even if we have a lot of names on our backstories like Brokrin (Iron Dragon and Profit's Ruin) or Borri Kraglan (just give me a Female Admiral model!), we can't play with them! And we don't have enough tools to customize our AoS heroes, so we usually end with a lot of clones (everybody knows that Barak-Urbaz is the most rich skyport because they were the first ones to sell the Spell in the Bottle with WLV to their Khemists 😅). I understand the frustation, Necrons are at the same spot of 2.0 Nighthaunts and it sucks. In AoS, we have some discrepancies too, like lances that are 1" and sword/axes that are 2", Cannons doing the same dmg as an arrow, or Swords that have better To Wound rolls than aether-powered Drills (?).

I was talking about the specialist army. Kharadron, sylvaneth, hedonites, etc...

I can confirm this!! 🤣

Sorry for the wall of text: I think that it's all a matter of taste, but I have some complains with the philosophy of AoS. I get that the game wants to be more "arcade" (I will use a bit too much that word), more about playing and less about reading our battletome, try to look for the wombo-combo, hit hard and next game. The Core Rules are good (a lot better than before) but I think that they are not perfectly coherent. I really like the opportunities that the "passive" player have to interact with the "active" player, but this rules doesn't go with the flow of the game, instead, they are a "STOP because I need to do that!". I like the direction but not sure what can be done to make all of this actions a bit more integrated. That's my first complain. Warscrolls seems to be a lot less dense than before, but there are still good and fluffy rules inside some 3.0 warscrolls that remember a bit of old "joke" rules from early AoS: My second complain is that all this stuff is more like a "side-ability" that only a few units have (Guttrippaz Scaretaktikz is a good of example as a niche ability instead of a defining one). Imho, the miniatures should look how they play, this abilities are the soul of our units. If something has a lot of armor, it should take physical hits better than others, I don't mind to see a lot of 2+saves for SCE (chunky boyz) because they look like they can stop a train! At the same time, I expect canonballs to do more dmg than 10 archers. And if this abilities are the flavour of our units, the Allegiance Abilities are the "soul" of our armies. Battle traits should explain the behaviour of our army on the table. As a KO player, we had The Code since first edition, and one of the first battletomes with subfactions: Appart from losing some redundant options from 1.0 to 2.0 we won a LOT of new Artifacts & Traits, and that's what makes our heroes more unique. And that's exactly my third complain: All of them are really restricted, they are not customizable option for our heroes, instead, they are just a tech-part of our wombo-combo. The first 3.0 battletomes have a lot of "Once Per Battle" artefacts, and the writters removed a lot of old options (less spells, prayers, etc...) in the new books.. The game becomes more Arcade (again), but without being easy to learn and fast to play (heroic actions, monstruous rampage, etc...). I just want to remember that Dwarfs in Fantasy (I know, it's another game, but just try to understand my point) we had full Runic System to build Artefacts for our Heroes: Conclusion: Don't get me wrong, I like AoS. But I think there are some wasted oportunities here and there. And the community seems to be completely affected by this choises: look at the specialist army forums from TGA, half of them are close to death (see Kruleboyz)! What do I have to talk about? Lore seems to be missing (there isn't a lot to talk about and I'm buying all Soulbound books...), the rules are good but we already talked about them hundred of times (we are still waiting for FAQs btw), customization is non-existance and has become just a part of a wombo-combo (and it gets old really fast) and I'm afraid that the next book will amplify this feeling. That's a good picture of the state of the game.

Maybe I'm alone, but I'm really curious about Fyreslayers (more than before). They have a lot of fluffy rules that can be good on the table (unless you want to win the top5 meta-chasers, something that I really don't care). Another thing to be happy is that there are some new options to try on the table that can work better than before

HGB are really costly now. I think that going full HGB will be a bit over-the-top. But with just 5-10 to protect a fully kitted Runefather (or blenderson) or even the dude with 4+Rally can be a pain in the ass. Flamekeeper with Vostarg can be good. There are crazy-ton of things to do if someone kill your vulkites, improving their dmg, rend, attacks, charge, durability (4+save with shields), etc... Not sure if it will do something in competitive play but I think that can surprise a lot of people and take some 3-2

Basically yes, that's the problem. No opponent should be easy, and appart from some SCE builds (mainly dragons), all other top6 armies are 2.0. That's the issue that we still have to deal with. /sadface

Ur-runes for all Duardins! I don't care kf it's strong or not, but it's awesome!

Fyreslayers reviews on youtube!! Let's go!

IDK had 41% winrate vs top 6 armies and increasing to 50-71% to all others (top7). 71% vs the low tier armies means that IDK were destroying them even more than the top 6... That's the opposite of being in the middle of table.

Thralls have 4+ save... Vulkites with shields should be 3+ 🤬

One month ago, the Honest Wargamer updated a full indepth statistics. Idoneth had 41% winrate vs High top-tier (armies that had more than 55% winrate in tournaments) and 50% winrate vs middle armies (45-55% winrate). To my surprise, Idoneth had more than 70% of winrate vs low-tier armies (less than 45% winrate). There are some issues here, because an army that it's "middle-tier" (btw, top 7 without their last wins), can faceroll "lower armies" better than the top 6. I'm not saying that IDK are the best of the best, but I can't see them as bad as some people claim.

I'm with you. Currently, all other 3.0 battletomes have 3+ allegiance abilities. 2.0 Fyreslayers have just one (Ur-Gold runes).

I get the point, there are armies that can use more than one build to have a nice and fun game (Soulblight, Cities of Sigmar and maybe NewNurgle). But take in mind that 90% of the competitive lists have the same 2+ wombo-combo units: WLV+ironclad x3 (or more) KoS Slaaneshy lists Longstrikes-Anvils Sentinels/Teclis-bomb Double-tap medusa/Morathi Tzeen-chaon HGB spam etc... And I still think that SCE have good units that don't feel bad to be played outside of drakes (Judicators, Anihilators/Paladins, Incantor, etc...).

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Example: You play Lofnir with 3-4 magmadroth and 1 unit of HGB. The enemy needs to take care of your buffed Magmadroths and be careful of your striking-first HGB's.

Being able to use it in any other Lodge than Hermdar seems a buff to me. Yes, it can be a nerf, but to say that, we need to know how the other lodges work

So, it seems that Tides of Death have 2 abilities for each turn. One of them is passive and the other needs an Isharan unit on the table. I don't understand why WC talks about "choosing a ritual", it seems that there is no choise. Maybe I'm missing something? Edit: yep, I'm a ******. Only one ritual in the first turn. Thx @Kadetonand @Flippy

I got confused by the name!! I don't think Fjul will be any good...