Reuben Parker

If you look at my original post I broke it down with the blade innate exploding 6s they’re still worse than greatswords. 36 attack - 30 hits - 15 wounds 36 attack - 24 hits - 16 wounds Marginal yes but it’s adding up all those small little %s over a game that can eek out a win.

I understand that, I was making the point that buffs debuffs of different types can change which is better in addition to that spell so picking one buff and saying it makes the blades a better choice isn’t a particularly valid argument was my point.

Buff / debuff works both ways though. Anything that gives + to hit helps greatswords more. If opponent has a to wound debuff or re roll hit 6s debuff greatswords are massively better, where as minus to hit makes the greatswords worse. But if you prefer the look there’s no arguing with that rule of cool trumps all.

Why are people saying the greatsword isn’t worth it for Mortek blade 36 attacks - 30 hits - 15 wounds greatsword 36 attacks - 24 hits - 16 wounds. marginal but better so they should always be equipped. the stalker special weapon is pretty garbage as you nearly always want the +1 dmg rend form which will make the dual swords way better.

Let’s keep positive! 1) no two books can ever be “balanced” or equal to each other 2) this ogre book gives everything ogres could want outside of some easy win button rules. Both factions together lots of MW output Faster better morale builds with good magic / shooting / skirmish objectives So not just pure melee 3) maybe play styles / builds need to be altered 4) don’t trust online reviews it’s often cookie cutter and lacks deeper thought. Even if ogres can’t straight overwhelm certain armies with the new objective rules and things like skal to steal backfield there’s builds that can win on points.

Yeah that’s nice! in terms of the boulder head list I personally think it pairs well with a Skal allowing ethereal amulet on the FL and a bunch of small cat units just to screen.

Anyone thought about 4 iron blasters in underguts with a tyrant guard(for survival) tyrant with the trophy rack. the damage output actually becomes very good for 480 points of shooting that is also good in melee. Obviously the big drawback is your sacrificing double spell butcher so not sure which is better for hitting backfield heroes / hard to kill things.

The base build seems fine to me. You could always drop the tyrant and ironblaster and add 2 slaughtermasters. With fatty builds that I’m putting together I would try to fit in a battalion to allow a second artifact (ethereal amulet on FL). It’s hard with the points in the gluttons though although they do being a nice brick of bodies and ability to clear hordes.

As it’s rolling in everchosen I really hope they get either a good sub faction of their own or just sweet rules as I would love a viable super elite varanguard army (as previous incarnations were just terrible on the table top). currently have Archaon and 6 varangaurd but would love to be able to field 12 of them in a list and it be good.

Catapults including +1 attack buff average 11 wounds no rend less if LoS. they’re good but not insane against characters with 4+ saves who can sit in cover long strikes in hammers of sigmar seem more threatening still. also if they get tagged in combat they can’t shoot at all due to minimum range. They seem good but not OP to me. However wizards will hate them.

I think even in a mainly gut force a Skal maybe useful, a cheap battalion that adds backfield pressure (take 1 large unit of cats with the hunter in ambush) then several small 2 cat units for screens / zoning / objectives. Although I could be biased as I try to put Skal into everything!

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/age_of_sigmar_base_sizes_en.pdf if you have older models like me and need to rebase this is the resource

Yes that’s fine and I love me my cats having 20 of them. However they’re more screens and glass cannons so wouldnt really stand up as an entire army. Plus the hunter is ok as a one off general to unlock battle line cats but even at 120 they are not a great deal (still better than when they were 140 and without the ability to bring cats along in ambush natively) 2 cats to use up opponents melee activation plus a unit of yeti coming in from 6” pile in (run to 6” don’t charge) works as a great combo though.

Based on models I own I might try a little combined arms force to start. FLoSH 2 Slaughtermasters Hunter General 12 gluttons 9 yeti 10 and 4x2 cat skal not sure what sub faction to take at the moment though with such a mixed force.

Even if you buff the catapult with +1 attack at full health it averages 11 wounds with no rend. For 200 points plus a hero buff it seems good but not great. Especially as if it gets tagged in melee it can’t shoot at all due to its minimum range.

The hunter command ability didn’t seem to be limited, so ambushing cats stacking a bunch of attacks even striking first with the correct sub faction command ability maybe a useful foil against none super units. As I have 20 cats I always want them to be good TT seem fairly terrible unless there’s a trait that adds to the ice roll but I’ve always been a stone horn person myself. Still hoping all the monsters have had around 100 points lopped off. Stonehorn 5+ shrug exactly what I guessed GW would do and overall probably better than the old warscroll.

Size is only mainly relevant in terms of damage potential compared to frontage so that same profile on a 25mm base would more scary. As you say and I said earlier in regards to this topic it’s all about the overall army composition and points. Will it be a good army...I would say yes as I think most of their recent books have been good. Will it be OP we will see and similar to Fyreslayers it maybe very battleplan dependant, hermdar lords of the lodge on a mission with just a couple of objectives is super good on spread out multi objective battle plans not so much. From what we have seen previewed my gut feeling is their weakness will be model count and speed to play objectives

Stalkers using precision aspect are 5x 3+ 3+ -2 2 damage, which is amazing damage output from an ogre size model

The interesting thing I think is that the run away best army at the moment are SCE and if you asked people to list “broken” armies they wouldn’t be at the top. So what people hate playing against and feel is OP maybe not that insane at top tier play https://thehonestwargamer.com/aos-stats-21st-october-2019/

Not sure they will be OP as others have said we need to see points, number of models and speed for objective play. However the part I don’t like is that +1 save in a faction that has multiple units that can re roll all saves may render the other subfactions obsolete. Looking at the ogres who I also have the subfactions all seem good. Im primarily a tournament player but I still have to play armies / lists that I enjoy. As such I only want to play reapers if it’s using mainly the big stuff (I have lots of horde / number armies already) and may well be the ivory host who have the most rules for those models.

........ it specifically mentions mount traits and all getting rather than one (so one is for all factions and all is just for that sub faction), I would count that as confirmed! Most of the subfactions seem interesting. Mass spells seems good leadbelchers maybe good then big fatties and the yeti, cat one fighting first and plus 1 to wound trait seems like it could have play (yeti currently being the best unit in the old book in terms of power to points).

Orruk book I’m my opinion is really good. All 3 allegiances are very playable and I can see potential for competitive builds a number of ways within those 3 allegiances. it’s made me excited for the new combined ogre book as well(having both armies already). Then because I’m a hobby butterfly I will probably get drawn into new death and oh what’s that slaves to darkness is around the corner and I have Archaon and a bunch of varangaurd going unloved (assuming they get wrapped into the book). for ogres I will need to expand my collection though especially on the BCR side which currently is stone horns big Skal and Yetis. TT becoming priests is cool and then on the guts side a firebelly probably needs to be got now.

Ivory host not really due to rules seen but if I do bonereapers it will be all the big dudes and this sounds like the sub faction who will hopefully have the most harvester and catapult rules. Will be interesting if they have cities of sigmar style battalions tied to certain sub factions (although unlikely to be the case).

voted for playing mixed as long there is a good combined allegiance. I love the new Orruk book as all three allegiances I feel are very playable so hopefully mawtribes will be the same. Nice to see buffed ironguts as well as I still have loads from the oldhammer cookie cutter list spamming units of 3 ironguts and wiping out front ranks on the charge :). Also just echoing some others not sure why the hate for the warlord traits. The frostlord one seems very good and the butcher one certainly seems interesting (especially as with cities of sigmar out tournies will feature even more endless spells). Also the hunter ambush one may well be good (once we know full rules) I was always a fan of Skal and have 20 cats that still need a home.

As they have the 2” reach special weapon you only have a frontage of 4 which is similar space to 5 ardboyz whilst doing around twice the damage. So they’re far more efficient in terms of footprint to damage output which is huge. Tables now have a lot of terrain then faction terrain and endless spells so often frontage can be very small. If your wanting a heavy IJ focus they’re a cheap battline and have a cheap battalion. I love ardboyz as well that’s why I stole the ardfist brutefist list idea from another post.