relic456

I forgot that we actually did build up to 1500 points lists so here's both. Keep in mind there have been points changes since then, and that the trait and artefact combinations weren't set in stone: 1000 NH (from a Notepad document) Guardian of Souls w/ Nightmare Lantern -General -Trait: Ruler of the Spirit Hosts -Artefact: Midnight Tome -Spell: Soul Cage Reikenor the Grimhailer -Spell: Lifestealer Chainrasp Horde x 20 Grimghast Reapers x 20 Bladegheist Revenants x 10 Chronomatic Cogs 1500 NH (from Warscroll Builder) Guardian of Souls with Nightmare Lantern (140)- Lore of the Underworlds: Shademist- Infernal Lantern (Artefact): Wychlight LanternKnight of Shrouds (120)Reikenor the Grimhailer (180)- Lore of the Underworlds: LifestealerSpirit Torment (120)Dreadblade Harrow (90)- General- Command Trait: Ruler of the Spirit Hosts- Artefact: Aetherquartz Brooch10 x Chainrasp Horde (80)10 x Chainrasp Horde (80)20 x Grimghast Reapers (280)5 x Bladegheist Revenants (90)5 x Bladegheist Revenants (90)Shroudguard (110)Chronomantic Cogs (80)Extra Command Point (50) I've played a ton of games so I don't think I could give a fair guess, but it's over 20. I've played against most armies at this point, Khorne is probably the one I played the most since that's what my brother plays. But also Sylvaneth, Stormcast Eternals, Beasts of Chaos, Idoneth, and Daughters of Khaine. I haven't played my NH in quite a while, I think the last time I did was when the new FEC tome came out. To potentially pre-empt some criticism, by no means would I consider either of these to be good NH lists, especially with recent points changes and additions. Those lists were built based off the wisdom at the time and contained what I and others considered to be the strongest units in the army. I think that the specific lists I played are irrelevant, because the point is that nobody was or has made big moves with NH. Lists ranging from Grimghast spam, LoG Myrmourn and Chainrasp blocks, and now Emerald Host/Hexwraith/Olynder have tried and failed to succeed at the competitive level with any sort of consistency.

Just to throw my perspective in to the mix. I'm a competitivly minded person who started AoS in 2.0 and chose Nighthaunt as my army due to some favorable early tournament results. I also clearly overvalued an army that has all fly and ignore rend, but that's my fault. I bought a 1k point army but haven't bought any other WH product since [Edit: It's been so long I forgot that I had bought up to 1500 points and Malign Sorcery], and it's entirely due to the games lack of balance. Even in kind terms, NH is not a competitive army, and it stings to look at my models and realize they were a waste of time and money. I'm not sure how to make the problem better, but knowing that NH had an extremely low chance of 4-1'ing a tournament (5-0'ing being borderline impossible) stopped any investment I could make in the game going forward. Thankfully, TTS exists now and I can play with my friends and others using any model or list I choose without monetary investment. This makes the game significantly more enjoyable because even if I take a risk on a unique list, I have nothing to lose. I have a hard time imagining going back to tabletop even post COVID because of all of the advantages of TTS. However, is that what GW wants for its players? Im no economics expert but I would think they would prefer to have my money instead. Why do I bring these points up? To underscore the emotional side of the balance discussion and how it might impact new players. It's an awful experience to slowly realize that the army you chose cannot hang competitively. It calls in to question the time and money you were previously willing to invest in this hobby. And player skill is irrelevant in this point, I have no illusions about becoming the greatest player in the world, but if the top minds in the game can't make Nighthaunt work (or BoC, or Sylvaneth), then what hope do I have? Why should I invest my time in to this army? I truly believe the goal should be that each army has at least one competitively viable list. I would take an IDK situation over the NH situation any day. Further, and potentially an aside, I take issue with the fact that so many armies have "trap" choices. Models that would never see competitive play without significant changes. Though I guess that's by design, since some entire armies don't see competitive play. It would be interesting to compare the % of an army with trap models and the win rate of that army's lists. A little ramble-y but hopefully you get the gist.

Thanks for the context, that's absolutely whack. Some interesting points being made. To say that playtesters can't show measurable improvement is wild to me. Yes, if a playtester is winning 4 or 5 games a day at an event, they can't start winning 6 games. But not every 5 win player is a playtester, and a skilled playtester is going to have an advantage (however slight) over those other players. So while a playtester's record might looks the same, I'll reckon that the playtesting advantage would be pushing other players down. It would be interesting to look at the win rates between historically strong players against playtesters (who were also historically strong) before and after they started testing. There are a lot of other factors at play so it's probably difficult to draw conclusions, but it seems logical to me. I do agree that the people winning the most tournaments should be contributing to the playtesting, but I definitely don't like that they then get to turn that extra experience around and use it in a tournament. Keeping armies out of tournaments until their FAQ solves this problem as well as others. There's also something to be said about perception. Even if the advantage is slight, it's still going to be perceived by others. I mean we're all talking about it because of that perception. Having your "heads" in multiple metas. I'm sorry but this one is the most silly to me. I'm sure all playtesters are smart individuals, with extreme mastery of the system, so to say that it's hard to keep the rules straight really sells you guys short! Is it that different from just playing multiple tabletop games, lots of people can keep 40K, Kill Team, and AoS straight just fine despite being very similar systems. "If somebody wants to make a claim that playtesters gain a significant advantage, I believe it’s up to them to prove it via data, not you lads defending yourselves with data." I think this is a really easy position to take when it's functionally impossible to do lol. Where would you even begin? Is there a list of playtesters publicly available, or would you have to rely on people self-reporting? Is taking the results of a playtester prior to their playtesting feasible? How long do people playtest for? If you've been a playtester for 2 years, how to you separate out the advantage from playtesting from just your general improvement over time? Playtesting is a privileged position, and like any other privileged postion there's always potential for abuse and maybe we should have systems in place to limit that possibility. If that means some people don't want to playtest anymore than so be it, I imagine there are plenty of people who would jump at the opportunity. To summarize, I think @Dan_Elkington worded it really well, it's very difficult to argue that a game is fair when you're going up against someone who has been thinking about and playing with the army for weeks (months?) longer than anyone else in the room. As a final thought for discussion, I wonder how the growth of the TTS scene will impact playtesters in the future. It would let them get significantly more games in and hopefully result in a larger sample size for GW to draw conclusions from. But would it make their advantage larger? Maybe.

We definitely have enough info to start running TTS games at least. Only one page I think was missing from the early cop, the one with Shining Company and whatever else on it. I might try and get one in next weekend.

Yeah likewise. Well have to wait for more leaks since it looks like the original poster has taken everything down now.

That close range profile is pretty sweet. I haven't run them through mathhammer yet though. They can shoot without having LoS if they have their unit champion and use the long range profile which is kinda cool. Extra attacks from the Cows, and can reroll hits with spells.

Check my post a little farther up, they're under the spoiler tag.

Awesome thank you! Angriffsbewegung kept coming up as "combat move" so I didn't know if it was charge or pile in. I edited a couple other instances where that came up.

Okay here we go. I don't know German and I did this just with Google Translate so I'm sure there are some errors and the formatting is pretty sloppy but you get the gist. If something isn't clear let me know and I'll see if I can clarify.

Balance is Rend, I'm almost done Google translating everything myself so I can add that as it's own reply when I'm done.

https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/10QPsHp0XOFdrwHMIGEUalu7UVgxbAIHc9zvHWqVE1Hc/mobilebasic?fbclid=IwAR2RWeZ9sxQMejzQ0hDJtmnBH2wATUeCqzP_kHvPVks22lcjhg9zSxF86CY I was typing them all up but this guy beat me to it haha

Don't have anything else to comment on in your post except this. The blog text says "During the first turn of the game, your Alarith units couple great saves with the ability to ignore -1 Rend attacks..." but the actual rule says: I'd probably side with the rules text and say they always have ignore -1 Rend. There might be a rider in another one of their abilities to offset this, since I don't see why you wouldn't activate this ability every turn. Or maybe it's a command ability?

I played my first 2k game with my brother yesterday. I did a little bit of prep but it still took about 2 hours just fiddling and setting things up. Mostly my own fault though since I took bits and pieces from various mods that I liked and bundled them in to one. Once we got started, the game took 3 hours almost exactly, with us calling it at the bottom of round 3. I was playing a new army (OBR), but he was playing one he was familiar with, so your mileage may vary!

Honestly not too sure, some of these workshop mods have been up for years. I have to say that TTS has single-handedly reignited my love for the game during this pandemic. I was really bummed about painting or buying anything since I wouldn't be able to use it for who knows how long, but now I can playtest and theoryhammer every possible army in the game. Building up my buy list now and excitedly looking forward to when things go back to normal! Strongly recommend everyone tries it out.

I would be surprised if any changes were made to any 2.0 battletomes until the next edition. That said we're swiftly approaching uncharted territory (every army having an up to date tome), so really its anyone's guess!

Oof, that's where you lost me. Common sense is so subjective that the term is almost meaningless. I can see both sides of the Tzeentch argument so it's definitely a "wait and see" for me. In a friendly game, I'll happily allow the Tzeentch opponent play it however they like. In a tournament setting, I'd ask how the TO will rule it and act accordingly, there are a few other interactions where that's a best practice anyways. My reasoning: I'm of the opinion that the adjudication of rules should flow from those with the most authority (GW Rules Team) to the least (the players in the game). Similar to REL in MtG, I think the highest authority to use is context dependent. I'm perfectly happy to arbitrate rules with my opponent in a friendly or home game. I have zero interest in arbitrating rules with my opponent in a tournament setting. Both of us stand to benefit from the outcome of the ruling and therefore cannot provide an objective opinion. Without an official decision from the GW Rules Team, the next highest authority would be the TO. If I disagree with how the TO wants to rule it, the right thing to do is accept the ruling and table the complaint until after the tournament.

The new GHB terrain rules at least partially address this, but I agree this is still an issue. My friends and I treat it as part of a game's strategy, so the guys playing shoot heavy armies tend to use smaller terrain while I try to use big blocky pieces since NH can really abuse them.

With Tzeentch on the rise, what are people's thoughts on Null Myriad? Losing the +1 Save and +1 Rend CA is steep, but 5+ / 2+ w/ CA ignore spells seems strong. A lot of Tzeentch's damage is coming from the high rend shooting though, so maybe the extra save is clutch.

@KhorneySteve I'm thinking about one of these at 1500 Allegiance: Ossiarch Bonereapers- Legion: Petrifex EliteArkhan the Black, Mortarch of Sacrament (360)Mortisan Soulmason (140)- General- Trait: Mighty Archaeossian- Artefact: Godbone Armour- Lore of Mortisans: Empower Nadirite Weapons20 x Mortek Guard (260)- Nadirite Blade and Shield20 x Mortek Guard (260)- Nadirite Blade and Shield10 x Mortek Guard (130)- Nadirite Blade and Shield3 x Necropolis Stalkers (200)Mortek Shield-corps (120)Bone-tithe Shrieker (30)Total: 1500 / 1500Extra Command Points: 1Allies: 0 / 400Wounds: 78 Or Allegiance: Ossiarch Bonereapers- Legion: Petrifex EliteLiege-Kavalos (200)- General- Trait: Mighty Archaeossian- Artefact: Helm of the OrdainedMortisan Boneshaper (130)- Lore of Mortisans: Drain VitalityMortisan Soulmason (140) - Artefact: Godbone Armor- Lore of Mortisans: Empower Nadirite Weapons20 x Mortek Guard (260)- Nadirite Blade and Shield20 x Mortek Guard (260)- Nadirite Blade and Shield10 x Mortek Guard (130)- Nadirite Blade and ShieldMortek Crawler (200)Mortek Shield-corps (120)Bone-tithe Shrieker (30)Soulstealer Carrion (20)Total: 1490 / 1500Extra Command Points: 1Allies: 0 / 400Wounds: 79

There was quite a bit of discussion of lists just like this I think about 5 pages back. I'll edit and update with the exact page if I get a chance to look.

Bruh, that hits really deep. Very much agree with you.

I think a base is considered part of a model, so this doesn't break line of sight. To expand on why you might want to do this, I would check out the "Climbing and Flyers" question thread. Since flyers ignore vertical movement while flying, this could potentially help a flying unit successfully charge a unit that has its back to terrain.

Yup you're correct, by adding the masonry you'll make your Hearthguard Berzerkers easier to hit. AoS does use true LoS, so as long as the attacking model can see any part of the attacked model, it can hit it. Most people who give their models cool bases accept it as a trade-off for putting a cool model on the table.

@Maglynn Nighthaunt recursion isn't very good compared to other Death armies and generally isn't a highlight of the army. The highlights are more around being mobile due to flying and deepstrike.

As far as I know, there is no rules reference that makes this illegal. It seems it's just because of convention that it doesn't happen.