mikethefish

Who are you trying to convince - us or yourself? 😉

I've played KO all through first. The book might not be great, but I am interested to see what they do

I gotcha - and you very well might be correct. I'm just pointing out that we are talking about two different situations here.

I disagree with this premise. Past products mean nothing. After all, until a few months ago, everyone KNEW that each 2nd Ed army was ABSOLUTELY going to get new Endless Spells, and faction terrain. Then we had Cities, Orruks, Mawtribes, etc. Games Workshop creates warscroll/dataslate weapon options, based on how many boxes the customer is expected to buy. Thunderers and Storm Fiends were altered because the average player is expected to buy 1-2 boxes or so. This is not the same situation for Arkhanaughts - a battle line box that players are expected to purchase 3 boxes, minimum. I've said this multiple times - I don't believe that the Arkhanaught's weapons configuration will be changing in the slightest.

I disagree with this premise. Past products mean nothing. After all, until a few months ago, everyone KNEW that each 2nd Ed army was ABSOLUTELY going to get new Endless Spells, and faction terrain. Then we had Cities, Orruks, Mawtribes, etc. Games Workshop creates warscroll/dataslate weapon options, based on how many boxes the customer is expected to buy. Thunderers and Storm Fiends were altered because the average player is expected to buy 1-2 boxes or so. This is not the same situation for Arkhanaughts - a battle line box that players are expected to purchase 3 boxes, minimum. I've said this multiple times - I don't believe that the Arkhanaught's weapons configuration will be changing in the slightest.

I mean it's still going to be a fun time, right? I don't really play 40k either, but I still like to keep abreast of what's going on. And the drive? Pshaw - just grab a few podcasts, you'll be fine

They will release him eventually sure, but it will be more like a year, not a few months

Perhaps just as important, it doesn't look as if it will be on the exorbitantly expensive side of GW's pricing scale

Good catch on that. Definitely 40k Orks.

This is nonsense. What you are saying is that just because the actual category doesn't exist in AoS, that it would be impossible to duplicate a particular unit's battlefield role. In other words, just because a unit of fast-moving cavalry isn't called "Fast Attack" in AoS, doesn't mean that it doesn't fulfil the same tabletop role that an equivalent unit would do in 40k. The same amount of unit design space exists in AoS as in 40k, despite AoS's fewer army list construction categories.

It wasn't just an arbitrary decision - no tournament organizer wants to go to the drastic measures to exclude armies (and by extension, the people who play them). The Iron Hands win ratio was VERY skewed, to the point where it was becoming a fairly serious problem.

What's the problem with those claims? They happen to be true.

No evidence of that.

Wild speculation. Calling it now - the new book will NOT limit Arkhanaught Companies to only equipping one of each special weapon (to match the box). It will remain the same as it's been so far

Oh yeah, these forums are definitely better than social media. In other news, water is wet 😉

Indeed, I kinda wish they were similar to Gloomspite, where instead of being combined with Troggs and Spiders, the Deepkin instead have like giant crabs, or Fishmen as allied subfactions

So I get that Facebook Groups are toxic sometimes. However... The whining by Skaven players over the new Plague Monks is so shrill and absurd, that it's driven away any sense of rationality and sympathy I may have had for them. Certainly it's petty of me, but the whining is just that obnoxious. I officially hope the warscroll is completely unusable, and that the entire lot of them have wasted untold amounts of time and money of a pile of now competitively useless miniatures.

You might be right, but to be fair, coral and barnacles do grow in the Chamon sky, according to the KO book. In fact, if you look at the artwork of the sky docks in the KO book, there is a docked Frigate that is in DIRE need of a hull scraping.

It's going to make the Ravagers Merc company way more useful.

With the new categories/key words, they could easily be conditional Battle Line. Only if Ravagers, or only if there is a Ravager general - something like that

On the other hand, Ironjawz were new this year in the GHB, and saw massive changes in the army book. We really have no idea what is coming.

One point that the "random turns suck" crowd always seems to ignore is, if the Double Turn is such a godlike effect in AoS, then why do the same people keep winning the big tournaments over and over again? I mean, if Double Turns always determine the winners and losers of each game, and Double Turns are so utterly random, then why do the same crop of people keep reliably winning the big tournaments? It should just be a random dice-shoot, right? The top-tier tournament crowd is a pretty small fraternity. You keep seeing the same names year after year (some flux of course, but there are definite repeat winners). Could it possibly be that the Double Turn, while very strong, isn't THAT god-tier powerful, and people are resorting to hyperbole just because they don't like a particular game mechanic? Surely not (insert sarcasm here)

Meh. Not worth it. Please delete.

Well... basically everything you stated is wrong. Ok ok, it's not "wrong" per se' since we are all talking opinions here (just kidding a bit) but certainly I disagree with everything you have stated in the above post. Here is my alternate take... I've played GW games since 40k Rogue Trader, and in all those years, there has been a common denominator - their games tend to slog, and are very predictable. By that, I mean most competent players can predict the outcome of, let's say a game of 40k (we'll pick on this one, since it uses a traditional turn sequence) by turn two at the latest - and frequently after deployment (or even army list creation). I can do this pretty easily, and I admit I am not exactly 40k's version of Sun Tsu here. Most competent players have this ability, if they are being honest with themselves. Their games are just designed to be this way The usual dynamic is that two players will start a game. Player A starts to lose. He then loses a bit more, and then continues to lose until finally...he loses. Not much chance of stopping it. The game state of 40k is very resistant to change. It's not impossible, of course (dice exist, after all), but the rigid, linear nature of the game play is WILDLY resistant to losing players altering their fate. Other games solve this problem in different ways. Warmachine, for example, solves this issue with it's "caster kill" mechanic. So that no matter how far behind a player gets, he's still in the game, since he always has the option of assassinating the enemy commander, and winning the game. For Age of Sigmar, GW solved the problem with the Double Turn mechanic. This gives losing players at least a shot at coming from behind and pulling out a win. At the end of the day, if a winni g AoS player gets the double turn, he just wins that much faster and maybe both folks can get another game in. If a losing player gets a double turn, it gives him a chance to pull things around and make a decent game of things. It's an elegant mechanic, and works well for AoS. Random turns are the single greatest rule that GW has added to this game, and quite frankly, they'd be fools to change it.

I'd probably be rather play War Cry, to be honest - barring some cool narrative event/scenario that someone is running Skirmish with.