Mutton

Back in the old days when squigs went wild they would bounce around the whole battlefield, chomping on anyone they ran into. That was fun. As for something more modern, as others have mentioned the Warcry initiative roll is brilliant and I wish they'd implement something similar into AoS proper.

It's also telling that DoK is one of the least played armies. I'm certain 90% of that is due to how expensive they are to collect. #Put20aelvesinabox

Give me some kind of Castlevania-themed army and I'll finally be in on Death.

I've gone into some deep discussion on this topic before, so I'll just reiterate some points. A huge problem with battleshock is that it's a mechanic of the game that's unevenly littered throughout the factions. The worst performing factions often have extremely low or modest Bravery with seemingly nothing to make up for it (now whether or not low Bravery is the sole reason they're under-performing is unlikely, but everything contributes). From what I've gathered, Bravery as a characteristic is low priority when it comes to arbitrating the "value" of warscrolls. Looking at various warscrolls throughout the game, it often feels quite arbitrary and exclusively lore-specific that some units have nigh-unbreakable Bravery 10, or are slapped with crippling 4's, 5's, and 6's. I see people saying that we take away Inspiring Presence...but the second you do that, all of the low tier factions with Bravery issues are suddenly dead in the water. They RELY on it. Battleshock is a design issue where there are simultaneously too many ways to ignore it, so most of the game doesn't even play in that space, but there are still some factions that absolutely need the ability to ignore it. I don't know how to solve it. You bend one way and Bravery doesn't matter at all and it becomes the vestigial hand of AoS (close to where we are now), or you bend the other way and chop the legs off of everyone who isn't undead or a daemon.

Log Entry Day 196: Still no AoS news. Things are dire. I'm starting to forget how the Activation Wars work and the names of all the Fyreslayer units...

I'd like to see Morathi and Malerion join an uneasy alliance to form a single (more complete) faction.

Putting them on 32's would actually give YOU a disadvantage since a marauder's 1" attack can go over 25mm bases, but not 32's. For friendly, casual games, you'll likely find a mix of people who will or will not care too much about base size. In tournaments it's expected that everything is on its proper legal base. It might be more of a pain, but I'd just go with what GW recommends and save yourself the trouble and having to explain yourself every time you go for a match. There's always the chance base sizes change in the future, but who can say when?

Carry on my wayward Sons.

1) This doesn't change anything about bases, except it gives larger bases more of a chance to hold an objective. Currently, it's so easy to pile in 30 25mm dudes onto an objective and automatically hold it for 1-2 turns, even if you have say, 10 32mm guys on there. It only helps larger based models (which already need the help due to the inherent detriment of being on large bases, such as weapon range and model pile-in). 3) Unit strength already exists in the game. Battleplans and Mawtribes already do this. Saying "Monsters count as 5 guys" is no different than saying "Mawtribes monsters count as 10 guys." I'm not sure how this can be considered a complicated, "extraneous" rule. Non-hero monsters already suck in this game, and this is a way to give them some kind of holding power on objectives. Otherwise, we continue to run into the situation where an enormous Ghorgon is sitting on an objective, but oh no, two goblins are there too, so I guess the goblins get it. 4) What? How exactly? Counting units instead of models actually HELPS elite armies. As said before, it means giant hordes of 30 models can't rush in and stand on an objective forever. It means elite armies, which tend to have smaller sized units, but more of them, can compete. The game already benefits hordes in many ways, from model count on objectives to warscroll bonuses and max-sized point discounts. Counting whole units as one brings hordes back down to everyone else's level for winning games.

A couple of different suggestions on making non-horde units more viable for winning objective-based battle plans (aside from rewriting warscrolls). 1) A cap on the number of models that count towards capturing an objective. For instance, you could say, a maximum of 10 models count towards capturing an objective. This would create more situations where smaller numbered units can contest hordes. 2) You could say that an objective can't be captured if it has any enemy models also in range (I've never liked the idea that even though we have dudes still fighting, you have one or two more dudes, therefore you "capture" the point). 3) Monsters count as 5 models (This would lift up their usefulness and wouldn't step on Mawtribes' toes). 4) Count units instead of models in range.

Thundertusks still have bad warscrolls, so nothing changes. Bring the Huskard down to 240 and we'll talk. Though the big bummer is no drops for Gutbusters. Tyrants, Butchers, Firebellies, Ironguts, Leadbelchers, Ironblasters, and even Gluttons themselves can all afford to come down.

What's important about the Petrifex change is that now Bonereapers have to choose between a +1 save with Katakros OR their Bludgeon CA. Having both ultra defense and ultra offense was the real issue. Also, it's a crime that Kroak remains at 320.

It is a bit insulting that 'Ardboyz are better elite troops than Chaos Warriors. Seriously, all they needed was some rend. I think GW continues to forget that just because it's on a 32mm base with 2 wounds, doesn't mean it's automatically good.

In the U.S., I'd expect a long period of waiting depending on where you live. It's a cluster here, always has been. Places are reopening, only to immediately shut back down. Some states are reaching their peak infection levels. Government is lying to folks in order to jump start the economy. I don't anticipate any (trustworthy) tournaments here for a hot minute.

That's some Body Snatchers nightmare fuel.

There have been online tournaments via Tabletop Simulator, and people have been playing consistently throughout the lockdown. We know exactly what things need to be tweaked. For instance, Tzeentch shooting is still a problem and Seraphon have been dominating the scene---they're incredibly strong, especially with Kroak at their side. On the flip side, we know there are things that could be improved from the interim armies. For instance, any of the Gutbusters from Mawtribes could use help, as well as several underused Cities units. People have continued to play, albeit through a screen rather than face to face.

I understand the need to release newer points a week or so later, as has been done in the past. I'm sure they're always pretty busy with the constant release schedule. My criticism this time around is that they had an entire 4-5 months of nothing happening to get these points done. I don't think there's an excuse when there was almost half a year of zero releases to get in the way. Anything could have been shuffled around to allow them to have these points ready.

I never, ever, EVER want them to take the subscription service route for AoS. The market is already bursting with subscriptions. These kinds of things (especially what they're doing with 40k) are designed by companies to leech money off of people who wouldn't normally be spending it---to convince them that spending more on a better deal is worthwhile. AoS is also the better game for introducing new people to the hobby, but those people are going to be less inclined to hop in once you tell them about more bunk subscription services. Call me crazy, but I think it's shocking they charge us money to use Azyr as it is. Look at Corvus Belli. They provide the apps, army building, AND all of the rules for FREE, and they're financial ants compared to Games Workshop. GW is a massive, inconceivably wealthy company that really doesn't need to nickel and dime us for every service or piece of content. Already we're all paying for yearly book updates, battletomes with army rules, the Azyr app, additional rule supplements, and then also miniatures, paints, brushes, and everything else. I.e., say "no" to subscriptions.

If I buy the digital GHB on Warhammer Digital, is it a file I can use anywhere? I have a Windows PC, an Android phone, and an Apple tablet.

What I wouldn't give for a rewritten DoK tome. Giants first though.

Warscrolls should be changed at intervals, there's no reason they shouldn't be---they've done it before. If we're changing units to make them more viable, I don't see an issue. There are units that are totally broken and useless, and no amount of points drops will ever get them to a table. With the current GW mantra, things like Blood Stalkers, Cygors, Lotan, etc., are all doomed to the shelf for YEARS until they get a new battletome (again). It doesn't have to be that way. Most of these could be fixed with a mere hour of dedicated thought. I think the biggest problem is GW doesn't hire enough rules writers to do all of this stuff. There's so much to keep track of. I do think GW struggles to find things to put into the GHB. That said, I'm excited for more team-play rules.

I've tried at great length before to understand how the navigation works on 4chan. I think it's unfathomable.

One thing I'd like to see in AoS3 is the introduction of a "minimum damage" rule like some things in 40k---e.g., "this D6 damage weapon does at least 3 damage." Or for something like the new Blast rules, where units above X number of models automatically take the maximum number of hits/damage. Also, get rid of drops as a first turn deciding factor. It's a terrible mechanic that only limits army creativity. Battalions are already insanely good.

The last one had online updates as well, both points and FAQ.

The GHB book is done earlier than most people imagine. Remember it has to be written, edited, sent to print, printed, shipped to warehouses, then made to order. It's a lengthy process, and if they were to try and include every new tome coming out, it'd never be done. It's also time to give the newer released tomes time to breathe and nail down what exactly needs changing, if anything.