Zanzou

If they truly hold to their word and continue to support regular Wyldwoods then I will end up having to give GW credit for not doing a greedy play for once.. 😅Maybe even GW realized that having to spend > 300 dollars for a single faction "spell" and then have it be useless with their next piece would be unreasonable.

People on about rerolls and I'm still just sitting here completely floored at GW leaving kurnoth bow warscroll AND points the same... Unbelievable. Anything other than the looncurse points would just be speculation and frankly if they bothered to split the warscrolls apart without lowering the bow cost, I don't have much faith in their judgement...

For all of my potential wyldwood complaints, everything they’ve done with the new hero from model design to the rules is totally fantastic. My hope with the Kurnoth warscroll split is that the bow users will see a point reduction since they did not get the 3 attacks we were all hoping for. That could at least help them see some play again. As of now, sword users are way too strong to turn down for the same point cost. Last hope is that they find a way to keep sylvaneth positioning strategy alive and well rather than just make them completely independent of positioning like they did to the tree-revs. Don’t get me wrong, they needed a buff but I’m not sure about buffing everything in the army to be just another stand-alone force.

I think that's fair. My fourth option is to pray to the godly Everqueen that they maintain an optional use of old wyldwoods BUT update the rules to deal with awkward frustrations, and let the new terrain option be a nicer version to fulfill the same gameplay role with less headache as @feltmonkey might be describing. Accusations of playing broken things or using [insert x/y/z] to your advantage will not go away anytime soon. These days there are units that can obliterate enemies with a single roll of the dice from insane mortal wound counts, broken units that can attack twice at the start of the turn, etc etc. "Don't hate the player, hate the game" is said for a reason. If something is truly broken or anti-fun GW needs to update the rules regarding it, or the tournament host/ player agreement changes the rules. They could definitely completely overhaul the way wyldwoods actually work without removing them from the game completely.

Which I agree is totally fair they make new alternative ways to play Sylvaneth for people like you. To remove the "wyldwoods" rule from sylvaneth completely though is unfair to the other half. If they're so annoying GW could just reinvent the rules for them.

Disagree for so many reasons. -First of all 7 years is normal for console lifespan. I just recently bought what I needed for this army at christmas time because I didn't think it would be dead in a couple years, as it is a new army. -It is not a video game. Physical collecting, building and painting takes time and is a long term hobby. To expect people to throw out things from being playable in games after finally having time to finish it in such a short time is absurd. If you got it day 1 of launch then good for you, but it's not unreasonable for people to get it 1 to 2 years after launch. -I'm 100% ok with rule changes, I'm not okay with discontinuing rule support for something you released under your AoS brand with rules a couple years ago. -Didn't invest in the models because their "rules were good" or a flavor of the month, I invested because they were literally the core way this army operates. They don't even have to be "good", they just need to continue to be supported in some fashion, even if they change the rules. -We all know the monetary investment for Warhammer is usually exponentially higher in the long run. At least those of us in the working class would know that :). -Calling it a new version of the game rather than an expansion is disingenuous and incompatible with the way GW does constant small releases and expansions every year or so. -Saying that people can just play with them with the old battletome, while true, is about as appealing as playing Warhammer Legends with people who want to play current warhammer -> It doesn't happen.

That would be kind of atrocious to me. They tell us we basically have to buy a ****ton of this terrain to be viable and then would delete the terrain completely 2 years later? Even as a big Sylvaneth fan, justifying buying new terrain for them if they're throwing out my previous investments into them is a major turn off and with that big slap in the face don't know if I'll bother with the new rules... As long as they continue to make the old wyldwoods an acceptable option in play then I won't complain.

There is nothing that says it's optional. If it was optional to protect, I don't think they could call him a "solemn guardian" anymore. "Sworn protector" is in the second sentence as well.

I'm just curious, why are you guys convinced that wyldwoods suddenly are not a thing anymore? Is there any source that's said they are going?

I very much agree that they all need a boost (they either should have 2 wounds per model, or more reliable offensive threats), but I disagree that spite revenants are "much worse". 140 points for 10 spites, 160 points for 10 tree-revs. Enemies having to take a worse dice roll for battleshock tests on top of -1 to bravery can instantly cause damage that wouldn't normally be there. That also has synergy with drycha's AoE damage spell. Spite-revenants have no rend, but 50% more attacks. Both units have a 4+ to hit which isn't that good. Tree-rev's have a 3+ only on the wound roll. The spite-revenant battalions seem to tack on instant mortal wounds, if you are willing to invest. I agree though, with 5 wounds for either unit, they are a squishy joke. It's almost always preferable to play any other unit or even to take an ally.

Definitely don't understand the random focus you guys have on the squig's foot here. It's supposed to be airborne, jumping over a mushroom, and his foot grazed the top of a mushroom as he is jumping. This doubles as a support to be airborne. How is that strange to anyone???

I thought it was strange too, but at the same time we haven't seen if there are any changes on the tree-revenant warscroll or what his new battalion synergy with the tree-revenants might be.

I get your initial point but again you bring up isolated DoK units that I think have no special cross-faction synergy with the rest of the opponents' army, they are just strong by themselves. Which, if scary to you, means those units themselves might be a little broken since it's not even a special combo. I don't know much about Daughters of Khaine but they are definitely winning a lot of tournaments right now however skaven and FEC are up there as well so this may just be a recent battletome issue... Again if an ally is just too strong in and of itself with no special cross-faction synergies, then that's not a problem with allies that's a problem with the units, imo.

Nothing "forever". Anything released with the "Age of Sigmar" series of warhammer should be supported throughout "Age of Sigmar", end of story. As a customer buying "Age of Sigmar" models it is a completely reasonable expectation that they are actually playable in Age of Sigmar games. The Poisoned Wind Mortar Weapon team doesn't even have a warscroll now , so they failed anyone who bought it with that expectation. You do realize that merely keeping their "Age of Sigmar" models doesn't REQUIRE them to never release new models, right? A growing company could easily take their earnings and invest in expanding their range. The problem is that wouldn't be as easy money as throwing out their last sprues (and rules)and pop in next year's quick sell. EDIT: My main point is still about supporting their age of sigmar warscrolls, older models in their inventory aside.

First. I know GW is a company, actually that was my entire point. Money is the objective. What's the problem? Second. No objections here -> They write rules for their miniatures as you said. Third. Wrong, I 100% disagree. It was GW's own choice to re-release those "AGE OF SIGMAR" models on shared sprues. The miniatures could still be made, but if they decided they couldn't "afford" to upkeep the model with a shared sprue and they actually cared about the health of the game, they either have to support what they sold or else they should never have released something for "AGE OF SIGMAR" that they would have to pull the rules for and stop producing. GW wanted to profit from their plastic crack without having to do any of the support work for it. I appreciate the amount of info you provided with your points. As for your first point though, that just means GW is guilty of what I've been claiming for years. I think it's disingenuous to suggest that for a healthy game GW was fine to only start supporting all of the armies post 2.0. You are assuming that GW is going to stick with the 2.0 rules so it's ok if armies are behind and they only start to play catch up now. Seeing GWs track record as you have explained so far, they are more likely to go ahead with AoS 3.0 before making sure all of their "AoS" armies are on even footing. There is no end to it unless GW finally starts investing their resources towards SUPPORT in existing products instead of rushing ahead to sell new things.

The problem is that they were pushing to new expansions/versions of AoS as you say (2.0) before bothering to support nearly half their range in 1.0 or 2.0. It's all about money. A healthy game would have one complete supported version of their game before pushing onto other things. Investing a year to update the rules so that EVERYONE who owns armies with Age of Sigmar is working with the same ruleset is simply a no-brainer. Everyone would be on equal footing, everyone would be having fun. However that wouldn't be immediate profit-making so they invested their resources elsewhere. I am not even talking about models here, I am talking about warscrolls, points, proper allegiances, proper allies, battletomes, etc. Removing warscrolls from new models like Poisoned Wind Mortar team because they had released them twice on mixed sprue boxes is another thing that would only be done by a company prioritizing money. It would be one thing to cease production of those models but to even remove the warscroll for it, despite releasing it in a "AoS" boxset? That's just scummy, saying "buy our other stuff if you want to play properly". The mixed quality of the actual outdated models themselves is a separate issue, but still an issue.

Almost everyone uses the matched play rules. Those rules are less about being just "competitive" these days so much as they are the defacto rules that make sense. It's more fun to play with proper points. As such I don't see the harm in opening allies a tiny bit (Maybe to 600 points out of 2000?), because right now a lot of small-faction armies all are played with nearly the exact same load-outs and it is boring. Sylvaneth is a great example where fighting would be more interesting if we'd see more wanderers on the table from time to time, and it fits thematically extremely well. For example, seeing the spellweaver actually having a use with the sylvaneth would be cool, etc. EDIT: Also if an army becomes "broken" with 600 points of an ally, imo that means either the army or the ally are simply imbalanced.

I think that's probably the appeal to a lot of Chaos players TBH.

Yeah, I would never ever pay for virtual models in the same way that I pay for physical ones. In a virtual space you're selling a game, and only a game. If they decide to monetize like the physical one all I can say is good luck to them.

The problem with games workshop is they only think of what's the best immediate return on investment, and they almost NEVER make decisions based on the overall health of the game. (Leaving armies unfinished while releasing new ones for years upon years, removing support for many models some of which were brand new in comparison to the ancient metal ones they still sell, etc.)

Or they could literally just stop discontinuing things that they've released with "Age of Sigmar" literally on the box. That would be greeeeeaaaaat. It was their choice to release an AoS product with shared sprues, a reasonable customer expectation is that they will continue to support anything "AoS" throughout, you know, AoS!! EDIT: Specifically talking about the removal of their warscrolls at LEAST, if not the models.

Am I missing something with this? GW discarded modern plastics with "Age of Sigmar: Spire of Dawn", modern new-looking molds reboxed for Age of Sigmar and yet they totally removed the warscroll for the poisoned wind mortar weapon team sadly . The packmaster is completely gone, they reverted the new rat ogres they made with that box back to the ancient old and ugly rat ogres from a billion years ago. I don't need to mention to you guys the elves that are gone from that box now either.

The melee sylvaneth guardian unit... A mostly melee 3-wound unit 5+ save for 80 points and lacks the movement abilities of the tree revenants... good lord that will never see play like that. However one rule made me wonder could this buff every tree-revenant in your army? This says "each friendly unit with this ability" has a chance to fight before everyone else. Tree-revenants also have the "Martial Memories" ability but it gives them different effects. Could be a silly question but could this buff their "martial memories"? I wouldn't be so sure, their limited edition battletome took very much longer to sell out than the other factions seem to have.. Beasts of chaos, nighthaunt, etc.

You're right, I hadn't fully read drycha's swarm ability before now. Yikes. It still seems so weird to me that these units can do so much for such little points (verminlords also have amazing defence and great offensive attacks), and if the issue with insane MW count spells is that widespread, then that would be an issue with AoS as a whole now, definitely not just the corruptor... point taken.

I was considering using a Verminlord Corruptor but reading his abilities I felt like I would be "That Guy" for even placing him on the table! Does anyone else think the "Dreaded Plague" spell he has needs to be rebalanced? Here's my thoughts on the problem and the solution: PROBLEM: The spell isn't that difficult to get off, has a not bad range of 13 inches and can be buffed easily to go off on a 4 or 5+ on a 2d6. It does a number of wounds equal to 50 percent of the target unit size on average. So it does an average of 20 instant wounds in one cast against a unit of 40, does an average of THIRTY wounds in one cast against a unit of 60, 40 against 80? Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with punishing large mobs but 20-40 instant wounds for one spell cast at a decent range seems a little much. Especially because the spell is even still pretty good against small units (Being able to do 5 mortal wounds against a unit of 10 means there's no downside to bringing this spell). SOLUTION? I feel like it should be re-tuned so that first the "dreaded" version of the "plague" spell does the same amount of wounds as the regular "plague" spell, which is much more balanced, but instead add other benefits for the dreaded version. The regular "plague" spell does a number of wounds equal to 33 percent of the target unit size. On average it would do 3 wounds against a small unit of 10, 7 wounds against a unit of 20, 13 wounds against a unit of 40, 20 wounds against a unit of 60. These wound numbers seem much more balanced considering the corruptor is very strong already at only 260 points for reasons other than this spell (look at the rest of his warscroll!). I think the "dreaded" version of the spell could instead add another minor debuff, such as: -1 to run/charge, or -1 to save rolls as they are in poor health from the plague. For the health of the game it seems better to avoid doing flat-up insane numbers of mortal wounds and instead augment gameplay with other modifiers. Especially because of his point price! What do you think??