Fred1245

While some players may choose to deliberately cheat, most people who intend to go to events will understand that they're going to NEED to play coherency correctly so are going to do so.

So we can plunk Archaon on an objective and it's literally impossible to take it without killing him? Cool. Cool cool cool.

People aren't generally going to 'get used to it' AT tournaments. Most players will be familiar enough for it not to be an issues. Especially at big events.

We absolutely will not. Tournaments are sighing in relief at the idea of games getting smaller and faster. Having 3+ hour rounds isn't something anyone wants (or can have, venues have closong times after all.)

I very much disagree that a 15% bump would not make DoK dog...stuff unless everyone else got about the same bump.

I also want chorfs but I want them to end up being their own thing that has nothing to do with Chaos Dwarves. 'Yeah, turns out the leaker thought it was short for 'Chaos Dwarf' when really Chorfs are just the new Cat People line.'

I'm going to say it here now: I think stand and shoot is nowhere near as strong as the d6 flee. Unleash hell is very showy. Ooh Such shoots, much Damages! Pretty colors! But ultimately it's an anemic last stand for the majority of archer models. You'll get some extra casualties you wouldn't have in AoS2, but end up still trapped in combat and still probably being killed the majority of the time. The D6 flee is game deciding. I guarantee good players will win at least 1 game per event with this ability alone.

1. So were the old ones. Just in a more stupid way. Half the factions in the game had 0 good battalions and 90% of the list total was garbage. 'Oh, it's so exciting to pay 140pts to get a command point that's slightly worse than a regular command point for taking models I was gonna take anyway!' Said no DoK player ever. 2. In tournaments (the only place the rules actually matter. Don't @ me.) you are on a timetable. The less rules of your opponents you have to memorize the better. You simply don't have time to cover every tactical vector something like Changehost has and your opponent is only obligated to explain what a rule DOES not what he plans to use it for. So yes, nominally you can ask your opponent to explain his rules, but that's not always going to be enough to prevent getting 'gotcha'd'. (The 'how much information is my opponent required to give me in order to qualify as good sportsmanship' debate is a serparate issue. Again don't @me. And yeah, I would have been totally happy to see them removed too. This is a fair compromise.

Those are Feel no Pains, aka 'death saves' aka that thing we already have. AoS already has invul saves in the form of treating AP-3 or higher as being massively more valuable than mortal wounds.

Battalion effects were MASSIVELY more complicated than this for 2 reasons. 1. These all have the effect of taking an existing ability you have (command ability or enhancement) and making it free once per battle. With the exception of the one drop battalion, you already know exactly how these function just by knowing how CAs and Enhancements work. Previous battalions could end up being basically anything and would often require specific faction knowledge to even know what they DO. 2. They are consistent across factions: I've played against the changehost dozens of times and I still don't know exactly what it does and if my opponent was using it correctly or not. With these I can look at his army and know EXACTLY what his bonus is and EXACTLY when he can do it just based on knowing the core rules. Remember, it's never been only YOUR battalions you need to know the rules for. Whatever else they do these cut down on a lot of complexity, minimize the amount of bespoke memorization players need to do, and help curb unfair play(both intentional and unintentional).

They WERE one of the strongest armies, possibly even straight broken after Broken Realms Morathi. The new book nerfed Every. Single. Aspect of the army except bloodwrack shrines and Morathi herself and offered nothing in return. It was a joke of a book that gets overlooked because it wasn't as bad as the Slaanesh rewrite was.

I was referring to the specific scenario the previous commentor presented. He specified that it did affect saves. It's been a while since I saw the article in question that mentioned the caps and wasn't sure if saves had been specifically mentioned. As it turns out, I AM aware that if the rule doesn't cap saves, saves would in fact not be capped. Thank you.

That's actually something it doesn't stop. As long as you have a 25mm base, you can still do that no problem. As a rule it really only effects large units of large models.

Wouldn't that mean rend would be capped at -1?

What it's gonna end up being is that nothing on a 32mm base or bigger is going to be in a unit larger than 10. 40mm larger than 5. This rule sort of works in 40k because of 2" coherency. In sigmar it's just going to punt a bunch of stuff out of the game.

Coherency is measured from the base.

2" coherence would make it fine.

Nothing about the cauldron matters but the +1 save aura and blessing of Khaine anyway. Changes to prayers mean it an't fight until turn 3, changes to witchbrew mean it can't buff, changes to the army mean the slaughter cauldron CA went from ' highly situational' to 'largely useless'. Morathi would have to go to 1000+ points to not still be a better option for anything but a 'turtling stalker' build which doesn't work anymore because they nerfed invocations.

Also our invocation got massacred. Now enemy priests can push it off the table on a 4+ from 4 feet away. 80pts, 67% chance of failure.

Most people call in a FNP or a death save or a ward save anyway.

Playing other games. The DoK book was so uttely disappointing that I decided to wait out until 3rd to even try it. If it's still bad in 3rd I'll see you guys in 3 years when they get another book.

. ZSo with the new rules for invocations...what exactly is the point of DoK's fist thing? You're paying 80pts for a 66% chance at -1 damage, that your opponent has a 50% chance at getting rid of before you can actually use it. That's 80pts for a 67% chance of literally doing nothing.

For regular movement/objectives/deployment you are absolutely correct that the difference isn't huge. From my experience making the transition in 40k, any ability that has a 'outside of 9"' clause is radically different to use. The smaller board feels downright claustrophobic in those cases. Since most armies now have abilities like that, keeping a consistent board size is pretty important. Again, this is only for tournament play and tournament practice.

You're handicapping yourself significantly if you do that and then intend to play in tournaments. The smaller board size actually has an incredibly significant impact, especially on teleporter/deepstrikers. Playing practice games on the larger board would have dubious value, potentially even being actively detrimental to success. If you routinely play/care about tournaments, then you're locked in to what the tournament standard is except for absolute fluff games.

This is actually not correct, at least without a ton more qualifiers. Space Wolves were a top tier army in 5th until GK came out and was possibly the most OP faction 40k had seen up until then. 6th edition marines were decent but in 7th marines were a top tier army from when their codex came out to the end of the edition(battle company and all the many flavors of marine death stars) then in the indexes marines were crazy OP until multiple stormraven nerfs then marines were the best by default due to being the first codex. So some flavor of marine has been top tier since at least 5th.