[The Rumour Thread]

12 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

All I'll say on the potential Duardin Soup BT is that I feel for their players that dont want it. Besides both being Duardin they have about as much in common as Lumineth and Sylvaneth. It may work from a rules perspective but from Lore? It's not for me.

That being said if they do get souped and Malerion releases in a few years and ISNT souped with Daughters of Khaine that would be ridiculous.

 

It would require a rules rewrite in order for it to work, as currently there are multiple ways to mix KO and Fyreslayers, but nobody does so as there is a nonexistant synergy between them.

So the visuals don't work together, the lore doesn't work together, and the rules don't work together. I fail to see the advantages of soup.

 

[What would you like for AoS 3]

1 hour ago, Feorag said:

I'd love to see % caps on things like in whfb 8th.

0-50% characters

25%+ battleline

Stops the obscene armies that are majority characters and the 3 cheapest battleline units. 

I'll miss book batallions though as a BoC player they are very much needed, and I'll miss using the seeker Cavalcade for my hedonites! 

I'd like to see no shooting into combat unless you're part of it.

But other than those two changes I quite enjoyed aos 2.0.

 

 

 

 

As somebody who played WHFB. It does not.

Mandatory Core/Troops/Battlelines have not, in any edition of a GW game ever, managed to stop obscene armies or balance them. Either your Core is good and you happily take them, or they're bad and you'll only take the bare minimum.

What would work however is a special/elite/rare category that limits particular strong units.

[How does everyone feel about the new AoS 3.0 release?]

I can't say I'm optimistc to be honest. The high lethality and profileration of Mortal Wounds as a mechanic is more warscroll centered than rules centered, As such, I doubt a core rules update will adress anything about that.

The thing that could be interesting is the Path to Glory/Crusde rules, but if 40k is any indication, it will take a while before those are interesting.

[The Rumour Thread]

3 minutes ago, Still-young said:

Apparent contents of the boxes:

>Butcher's Herd

Shaman
6x Minotaurs
Ghorgon

Do I need more Bullgors?

[The Rumour Thread]

4 minutes ago, Tiberius501 said:

Yeah I’d of liked them to have been their own faction. But if they at least aesthetically fit in with the armoured Orruks, it could be cool mixing them in.

I will bet 20 quatloos on "Not fit in".

[Soulblight Gravelords replacing LoN book?]

9 hours ago, Feii said:

Oh there is if you count their official community facebook account as one.

I did miss that. Fair enough confirmation that its gone.

I expect the full confirmation to be in the Generals Handbook/AoS3 Core Book, where Legions of Nagash will likely no longer exists in the points tables/backgrounds.

[The Rumour Thread]

2 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

In the back of my mind they eluded to this book being AoS3 ready on one of the streams - that may be me misremembering though 🤣

The rest is down to us seeing things that haven't ever happened in other armies - points in multiples of 5 and no horde discounts haven't ever occurred in an AoS2 army

Several of the newer books, Daughters of Khaine for example, also lack Horde Discounts.

 

[Soulblight Gravelords replacing LoN book?]

Officially there isn't any mention of Gravelords replacing LoN.

Unofficially, LoN isn't available, the majority of its units have been updated in Gravelords, and Gravelords have taken 2 subfactions (Legion of Night/Blood). Which heavily implies that LoN is just gone.

[The Rumour Thread]

Just now, JustAsPlanned said:

Oh no 

Oh no no no

The new Wight King.... he got Karkadrak’d

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/05/16/sunday-preview-soulblight-space-marines-and-the-scions-of-mars/

Oh no.

At least the Cursed City undead characters showed up.

[The Rumour Thread]

3 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:

I 100% agree (even if, by an in-universe point of view, Daemons, Seraphon and KO should be strong - given their technology, magic, mobility and/or fire power. Alas for me the Legion of the First Prince isn't as strong as Daemons were in WFB 7th ed. ).

I have to say I cannot wait to see the rest of the Thunderstrike Hosts range for SCE as well as their rules - I hope they play a bit like Adeptus Custodes, aka a truly elite army. 

.... Also, if the Thunderstrike Hosts really are a Warrior AND Extremis Chambers reboot (aka SCE Wave 1 redesign), I want to see new Drakes for our heavenly legions 😍

Dragons in full plate stormstrike armor?

[The Rumour Thread]

edit: doublepost.

[The Rumour Thread]

1 hour ago, Kaleb Daark said:

remember scrolls of binding?

That would work.  Like Storm of Magic and Monstrous arcanum - which had it nailed to a tee.  We could easily have scrolls of binding to bind monsters to armies, much in the same way as the endless spells.  Where the enchantment be dispelled, then the monster could react depending on how aligned to the binding army it was.  i.e. Lumineth binding a thirster was never going to end well when it broke free of the spell, but a fireslayer binding a magma dragon... 

And then Forgeworld would have a proper reason to bring back its monsters again.

*Stares lovingly at the Monstrous Arcanum book*

It is a crime that the Khemric Titan was never made.

[The Rumour Thread]

2 minutes ago, Vomikron said:

Oh god. If it’s destruction Sylvaneth I’m checking out of the starter set.

Outcasts are spite-revenants & Drycha, who are order like the rest of the Sylvaneth. Honestly, the chances that current factions switch Grand Alliances are lower than the return of Tomb Kings.

[The Rumour Thread]

6 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:

@Whitefanghas also liked this post now as well, Half Orruks it is!!

Half Orruk, Half Skaven?

[The Rumour Thread]

battalion

1 hour ago, Ganigumo said:

How so?
Both scenarios add core battalions, but only one of them also invalidates parts of battletomes so I don't see how keeping both around is messier. We have both army specific and "generic" endless spells and it isn't a problem, this is basically the same thing but for battalions. Realm artifacts also worked literally the same way.

Removing warscroll battalions and replacing them with core battalions invalidates parts of our books, and doesn't actually solve any balance issues in the short term, since by equalizing power disparity across battalions the disparities in other parts of allegiances (like warscrolls, and subfactions) are amplified. The meta will be shaken up, but the game will still only be as balanced as the battletomes, which will take years to correct.

Adding core battalions is literally just that. Its no messier than realm artifacts or Endless spells. From a balance perspective core battalions are a buff to armies with bad battalions, while not tearing down armies with good battalions. Functionally this puts a floor on how weak an armies' battalions can be, which raises up armies with bad battalions, which still only results in a meta mixup, but you aren't invalidating parts of people's allegiance in the process.

The goal of adding the Core battalion is to even out the benefits armies get from battalions in regards from direct battalion bonusses and artefact generation & deployment control. By making only core battalion available to everyone, you even out this playing field directly.  If you keep faction battalions allongside core battalions, you keep the problem that some battalions are stronger than others.

[The Rumour Thread]

1 hour ago, Ganigumo said:

We should always take what community says with a grain of salt unless they're being super specific, but this sounds like we might not be losing battalions.

I've had a hunch the core battalions might be an additive rule for a while, even after Smorgan's video saying they were gone. The wording between them being replacements or additive isn't hugely different and given his other video where he was talking about how command abilities got increased range didn't mention if they were changed to wholly within (which they almost certainly are) I wouldn't be surprised if he glossed over it or made an assumption.

For reference a hypothetical writing of the rules:
 

  Reveal hidden contents

Core battalions only
"Only core battalions are available for use in matched play and are useable by any allegiance"
Core battalions + warscroll battalions
"Core battalions are available for use in matched play and are useable by any allegiance"
Literally a 1 word change.

 

Saying that existing battletomes will still work is just saying that no models and allegiances will be invalidated in 3rd.

If we're getting a big change regarding battalions, I would expect that change to happen at the dawn of the 3rd edition. Keeping both Core battalions and faction battalions around would be messy.

[The Rumour Thread]

Just now, Iksdee said:

I do wonder whats happening with Nighthaunt models in Gravelords. Any news on that?

They have their own fancy Battletome: Nighthaunt.

[The Rumour Thread]

Just now, Deakz28 said:

I’m going to hazard a guess at the info is mostly true but the leaker is just guessing with the mostly obvious and therefore is also not fake info! Hoping malekith is indeed a true part to this! 

Malerion/Malekith and dark elves have been around the corner for the past... 5 years now?

[What would you like for AoS 3]

I am unsure about sinking if sinking more into the double turn will improve it. The way they talked about it I got the same feeling as a coding project I did with a group. We coded a feature, which didn't really work the way we wanted it, and so we kept adding more code to it in attempts to fix it. In the end, we had a massive code abomination that still didn't really work the way it should. I hope I'm wrong though, I would like AoS3e.

On what I would love to see, increase in points and smaller max unit sizes.

GW has balanced units by reducing their points through AoS, to the point where some mediocre units cannot realistically be reduced further. Resetting that to a higher standard would make fix that and allow them to rebalance units into the future.

Smaller max unit sizes as those give a particular advantage on objectives, as well as with bufs and sustained combat. It could also allow certain horde units like Clanrats be actual hordes, compared to other units.

[Warhammer Fest Prediction Bingo]

On 5/2/2021 at 9:58 PM, PraetorDragoon said:

Guesses then.

Monday: Soulblight remaining reveals. Big vampire mostrosity, foot vampires, dire wolves, bats, and spells. Also the reveal of BR: Kragnos cover, with Kragnos himself. Rumour forums melt in anger as we get Kragnos' grand alliance revealed.

Tuesday: Sisters of Battle. Codex reveal + some additional sisters. Beastsnaggas.

Wednesday: New books, Horus Heresy, some AoS, some 40k, etc. Rampant speculation on the AoS tie-in novel.

Thursday: More on the House of Faith, Idoneth Warband, new Blood Bowl Team for chaos dwarves, Warcry voodoo chaos goblins.

Friday: Previews for the next 3 codex cycle, including Eldar who are finally getting more plastic aspect warriors and the exodite subfaction.

Saturday: Warhammer 40.000 Live Action movie about Rogue Traders.

Right lets see.

Monday - Was correct.

Tuesday - Only got sisters correct. Beastsnaggas were on Friday.

Wednesday - No AoS books.

Thursday - Only got the Idoneth Correct

Friday - We got beastsnaggas and a tease for Grey Knight & Thousand Sons codexes. Completely wrong.

Saturday - AoS3e instead.

I got some correct, and a bunch wrong. Such is life.

[The Rumour Thread]

Swamp Crabs, obviously.

[The Rumour Thread]

Because we are doing it.

1. Want: New Tomb Kings. Give me mummified chariots.

2. Expect: Media/Eisenhorn release

3. Don't want: Age of Sigmar: Immortal.

[The Rumour Thread]

12 minutes ago, Clewzy said:

Arkhan the black comes back as the Arkrab the Black

 

Just imagine a giant ossiarch bone construct crab. With a fancy hat.

[The Rumour Thread]

1 minute ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Maybe it's because I am not invested into 40k fiction at all, but I feel like ending the week with the reveal of an Eisenhorn TV show would not exactly be going out with a bang.

I still remain hopful that we will see more AoS. After all, the Stormcast hammer banner and Ghal Maraz coin are still unaccounted for. Unless they were hyping up that auto battler phone game.

Well, if you're primary a 40k fan then ending with a new edition for AoS might not be that much of a bang for you either.

Live action adaption would be a big thing for GW (just look at the mainstream popularity of an IP when it gets one of those), and certainly worthwhile for them to hype it up that way.

[The Rumour Thread]

9 minutes ago, Bluesummers said:

I am a bit worried that saturday reveal won't be about 3rd edition... I mean there aren't many rumours going around comparatively to when 2nd AoS or 9th 40K got announced.

There aren't many options for the Saturday reveal to be honest. It is billed as a mystery to generate wider interest. Faction/expansion/codex previews would be under the respective system. Which leaves either 1) Summer big release, or 2) something non-game related.

For big summer release, we have either Old World or AoS3e, or potentially a Horus Heresy soft relaunch. For non-game related we can have the rumoured Live-Action Eisenhorn adaption.

Old World I would expect some more buzz about (like sketches for the 2nd faction) and it will take the Summer big release slot, which will rule out an AoS3e this year. (Old World would require a bunch of releases, and would compete in hype with AoS3e, so not smart marketing) Horus Hersey relaunch would run into a similiar problem, and I don't know how big it is. Which leaves AoS3e and Live Action adaption. Personally I suspect the latter.