Yoid
-
Posts
206 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Yoid
-
-
26 minutes ago, Enoby said:
Some rules from a supposed leak, my thoughts in bold:
- The players receive an extra command point if their General in on the table in the Hero Phase. Command Points not spent at the end of the Battle Round are lost. Very nice for invaders, especially with the heroic inspiration hero command. 2 extra command points a turn? Yes please
- Redeploy: A reactive Command Ability that is used in the enemy movement phase, and that allows moving a unit D6". Interesting for us; both can be used for and against. It does give units like Hellstriders a niche use as a portable blockade
- Run and Movement Phase Command Abilities: A Unit that has rolled a Run roll cannot then be Commanded to "At the double" (where the run roll counts as a 6) - the decision has to be made whether to roll the dice of At the Double. A Player can no longer roll the dice, get a poor result and the choose to spend the command point to make the roll count as 6 - it's either/or, not both. I guess it's a nerf, but hardly noticable for us.
- Charge Phase Command Abilites: Forward to Victory is a Command aBility that allows charging units to reroll the charge roll. Unleash Hell is a reactive Command Ability that allows a unit near to the charging enemy unit to shoot the charging unit. We know this already.
- Pile In: Models no longer need to pile in towards the nearest enemy modely. "The new wording is: When you male a pile-in move with a model, it must finish the move no further from the nearest enemy unit than it was at the start of the move." As such you can move around the edge of a unit when piling in. Good for the Masque and nice tor piling around if needs be
-Attack Sequence: Hit Roll and Wound Roll modifiers are capped at +1/-1. The cap on negatives hurt but was expected. Importantly they do not mention saves - this means Lurid Haze's save bonus and the command ability save bonus can be combined
- Slain models: A minor change that has a large impact on some armies: slain models are now not removed until all wounds caused to its unit have been allocated and all attacks that inflicted damage on the unit have been resolved. I don't think this really matters for us, unless I'm misunderstanding
- Wards: Some abilities allow ward rolls. Wards offer protection against wounds and mortal wounds before being allocated to a model. A successful ward roll negates a wound or mortal wound, and that damage has no effect on the model. Just simpler wording
- Contesting Objectives: Unless rules take precedence, Monsters count as 5 models, and non-monsters with a wound characteristic of 5 or more (heroes), count as 2 models when Contesting Objectives. Pretty nice for the twins and the KoS. Does make summoning a keeper more valuable
- Miscasts: Wizards who roll an unmodified cast roll of "2" miscast their spell. They suffer D3 mortal wounds and cannot attempt to cast any more Spells in that Hero Phase. Contorted Epitome nice against this, but more importantly there's a very low but quite funny chance that the enrapturess will cause 2d3 MWs
- Spells: Arcane Bolt and Mystic Shield are now both cast on a "5". The effects of both speels have also both changed slightly, although very similar, they have a shorter range but are both more powerful. Need more info
- Pitched battle Profiles and Unit Size: Unit Maximums have now been removed but Reinforced Units have been introduced, as well as a limit of Reinforced Units in Marched Play. "Single" has been introduced as a keyword for Pitched Battle Profiles. "Single" Units cannot be Reinforced. Need more info. But generally MSU is good for us
Really interesting.
The run 6inch CA is still good with us despite the nerf, as many of our units can run and charge or run and shoot (Daemonettes, Seekers, Blissbarb Archers, Viceleader, Dexcessa, Syl'Eskke.) With the increase in command points is gonna be easier to make Daemonettes automatically move 12 when needed or Dexcessa to automatically move 18. Is quite powerful.
The cap to hit and wound is good in general. I feel bad for Glutos and Dex/Syn because now reactive shoot dosn't have a penalty agaisnt them, but I prefer that to other armies stacking +2 or +3 to something. It encourages spreading the buffs and engaging with more things at a time instead of hyperbuffing one unit. That will probably encourage more back and forth in the combat phase. And we dosn't have +1 to hit (except in a once per battle artifact) so we get good value out of the generic CA.
Pile in change are really good, with the new coherency rules units cannot spread like before, so is fine to simplify this, wich was a nightmare to most new players to learn.
Contesting objectives changes are really good. Good value on Dex/Syn with the 12inch flying movement. Not as good for the KoS/Shalaxi but still good enough. A hero counting as 2 is not that big, but if he is nearby a unit of say 10 daemonettes making it count as 12 it got some value. This affect regular non-hero chariots and exalted chariots too.
Misscast: Uhm... not sure how to feel about this. I guess is good as a nerf to armies that spam magic... but is another nerf to Synessa as a caster. Pretty small, but I still think she need some help to not be fully dependant of Cogs. She still have around 50% chance to fail her spell and they added a 1/36 chance of suffering D3 MWs.
Spell Changes: Mystic Shield is probably +1 save within 12inch. Arcane bolt with reduced range is peculiar. Maybe it deal D3 damage now, or the value needed to improve the damage is lower.
Unit Size: Sound like units only have two sizes now. Base Size and Reinforced Size. (Something like 5-10 twinsouls or 10-20 Daemonettes. But we may see weird stuff like Daemonettes being strictly 10 or 30) With a limit on the number of Reinforced Size units you can take. Single sound like Unique, like the named heroes and such, but we may see more regular troops going into single, some extremely elite units. Our army dosn't have much of that kind.-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, Enoby said:
One pretty nice thing to note is that daemonettes can still screen in a straight line with the new rules. Their base size means the models at the end will be within 1" of the model next to them, and also within 1" of the model next to that one due to the small base size.
This potentially makes them a more useful screen than warriors if we need something to stretch across the board.
Also, chaos warriors have become very questionable in units of 10. The halberds will reach but do tiny damage, whereas the other weapons just won't do anything. It's not a buff, but it does mean Painbringers have a niche of almost always doing more damage than chaos warriors, even if there's double the number of warriors.
A screen of 5 32mm cover more space for a screen. Thats because to do the trick of coherency in Daemonettes you got to put them completely together without any space between bases. That is good for fighting as Daemonettes dosn't got to bother with double ranking. But for screening, a unit of 5 Painbringers can space themselves 1 inch between models and as they have 32mm will effectively cover more space in a straight line as a frontline barrier. Same can be said about Chaos Warriors, but they loose the reroll to save.
Painbringers are better now with the +1 to save CA, you can easily make them 3+ rerolling (3+ not rerolling in the shooting phase) in any sub-faction. The +1 to hit CA is also good because now combine with the Viceleader/bladebringer reroll 1s. I still think they need a 10 to 20 points reduction, but they gained a lot more synergies. +1 to hit CA in Twinsouls is really good. Probably usable by the champions not even needing a hero nearby.
As an opposing note, Dex/Syn/Shalaxi/KoS roaring is gonna be really important to stop the enemy CAs (+1 to hit and +1 to save)-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, WHYGW said:
Typical fifth-round heroes and buffers are vulnerable to Shoting, whether MW or not.
GW didn't give them the means to protect them in this edition either. Compared to the strength of shooting, Save+ and Hit-1 are not enough to protect them.
Save +2 with finest hour and then healing later with Heroic Recovery. But i get your point.
-
1
-
-
To be fair, all out defense is now usable in the shooting phase and gives +1 save. That is something. You can save your CPs to just +1 save most of your army in the opponent shooting phase. The problem is MW spam and reactive shooting.
-
24 minutes ago, Enoby said:
If buffs cap, these new command abilities look very nice for us:
So, a couple of things to note:
1) If buffs cap, then use lacking +1 to hit etc doesn't matter because we have crazy CP generation from Invaders (with the new general ability and hero ability, we're looking at about 6-7 a round, depending on turn order). If CP resets then we can go ham every fight phase
2) Note the wording "That unit must receive this command" this is not on all of the shown command abilities so it suggests something different. This could well be what Synessa's "If this model issues a command to one friendly unit" refers to. Of course, we don't know yet - it may well be that a unit leader can issue commands to their own unit (if this is the case, why have the restriction?). But if not, then Synessa is looking nice at being able to give commands to anyone they feel like
I am concerned about MW shooting from Kruelboyz, but that's one army. Also, overwatch sounds strong until you realise that people are getting like 2-3 command points a round. If they spend it on OW, they're not spending it elsewhere. Also the Masque has a niche use of tying up a unit to prevent OW.
The "This unit must receive it" is just weird ruleswriting to explain that you cannot buff other unit that is not the one being activated. Nothing more. You can issue the command from anywhere, but just that unit can receive it in that specific moment.
Reactive shooting is a direct buff to synessa, she ignores the penalty, so she can shoot an additional time if the enemy charge nearby. That plus the monster stomp make her deal a ton of MWs before the enemy got the chance to activate and fight.
Having some Blissbarbs backing our units got more value now too.-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Tiberius501 said:
I really felt like Mortal Wounds weren’t common enough in the game. Glad another army gets it as an army rule to do them on 6’s.
I was pretty hyped about this new edition but the fact that they’ve managed to mention mortal wounds in every single article so far has really killed it for me. Seriously hoping they’d put a dampener on it but seems like they’re just giving every single unit in the game mortal wounds.
From what we know, every single Stormcast Eternal and Kruleboyz actually deal MW thanks to their allegiance abilities.
What I don't like is that the new Coherency rules are a big nerf to most of the mele units in the game, wich got the effect of work as a buff to every shooting unit too. They don't got to worry about ranks and coherency when they can project the range of their weapons.-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Adammck66 said:
Are Dexcessa and Synessa's loadouts on the model and rules mixed up?
Dexcessa apparently has a scourge but not on her model, whereas Synessa seems to be holding something that could resemble some kind of whip on her lower arms?
The Scourge is the staff. it was described in the first reveal article of the twins.
One use the sceptre to shoot and the other use the staff to melee.
The other stuff is just adornments. Is the same with the wings. Lepidoptera means related to butterflies, but one is obviously a peacock and not a butterfly.
I build my Synessa without the hanging thing in the hands and she looks much better to me. Im reducing the adornments and clothes to minimum so she show more of that incredibly sculpet body.
The model got incredibly detailed thighs, but once you put the crotch clothing they are no longer visible, what a waste. -
New coherency rules represent a buff to some units and a nerf to others. Or said in other manner, some units are nerfed and the ones that dont are now more valuable. Specially Twinsouls, since they got 2inch range they can mantain coherency while still fighting in units of 10. Painbrigers got to stay at 5 man squads or they loose half their manpower. Slaangors benefit from it too, but I don't think is enough to make them playable. In fact they are better in Minimum Size Units to have more gilded weapons and to not spill wounds between them since they are so weak. Slickblades got 2inch range, im not sure but i believe you can turn them sideways and fight in two ranks (except for the mounts in the second row). Daemonettes are gonna be hard to maneuver and pile in around the enemy units while keeping coherency. Fiends are a big looser because if you deploy 6 you can fight only with 3 until one of them die, maybe sideways the back row can use the stingers that got 2inch reach.
This rule is really good because vastly reduces the power of big blobs. There will be less charge->delete situations and more back and forth, with more minimum sized units engaging and making the game interactive.
The really big bad thing about this. Dosn't affect shooting at all. Is a big big nerf to mele/big big buff to shooting. At least Blissbarb Archers and Blissbarb Seekers become more powerful.-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, PrimeElectrid said:
It’s not “anywhere on the battlefield”. It’s units within 10” (trivial to mitigate) and making a 9” charge (47%). Their only value is in multiple units which if priced over 200 is not feasible.
By anywhere on the battlefield I mean they dont have to move like regular troops and charge. They deal AOE mortal wounds when dropin. Remember, not to a single unit, to multiples. They fall like comets or endless spells. Even if they don't charge/fail the charge do MW to multiple units. Sometimes they will fail, but more often than not they will hit (is a 3+ after all).
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, PrimeElectrid said:
Functionally, Evocators are exactly the same as this “living nightmare.” The only thing that changes is a) people learned to screen b) TOs keep choosing Total Commitment 3) fights first/last came out.
You also continue to overlook that a 9” charge is a low likelihood and still only 47% with a reroll.
Nobody is bringing a 300 point unit to watch them come down where they can only tag a screen within 10”, fail the 3+, then fail the charge, and die to a couple of spells.
Evocators need to fight to deal the damage. These guys are still an instant button to deal MW anywhere on the battlefield as needed.
I already pointed that their average damage is good even when not dropping (a regular charge like in moving and charging)
If they cost 150 or even 180 pts, I can tell you they gonna do, that is why it need to cost 200+ points. 300 may be too costly, but you are taking an extreme value of the range I given you, you could have said 200 instead, you simply choosed to not do so.
If they are too cheap you can bring enough of them to erase the screen simply by the drop damage, so screens won't be a problem. That is one of the many reasons you cannot point them too cheap.
Again, them having a wekness (can be screen) wich is true for a lot of units in the game cannot be a excuse to give it free damage and survivability. Otherwise you need to give free damage and survivability to every army, not just Stormcast. Because then we got a balance issue. And we are talking about balance issues/imbalance here. That top 5% players dont pick them for tourneys because there are better options dosn't mean they are automatically balanced. In fact that would mean bad internal balance within the battletome that need to be toned down by making the other units more costly, not this one more cheap, or the full battletome become more powerful than many other armies again.
I think they are gonna be cheaper than they should because Stormcast in Starter Box usually are, so im not gonna be surprised if they cost 150 or 180 at the end. But in no world that is balanced and fair for the other armies that need to pay way more points for similar performing units.
Edit: And Evocators still cost 210 points. That could be a good point cost for Annihilators too.-
1
-
-
I mean. The new Annhilator profile prove that they can do powerfull 3 "human sized" monster warscrolls that feel cool. Slaangors with that combat profile would feel right. And the mortal wounds on the charge is like the correct version of the MW after combat that Slaangors are stuck with. Like that warscrolls should be slaangors except for the 2+ save that they change for the 8inch move. Is even more "Slaangors done right" than the many other units.
-
1
-
-
People that say they should cost 150pts. That is insane.
As pointed by many, these dudes fight like an elite unit already (10 attacks 3+/3+ -1 2Damage is the equivalent of 20 attacks 3+/3+ -1 rend 1 Damage. Don't forgot they got very elite stats, is not like they hit and wounds on 4+ or have no rend or have 1 damage) They got 9 wounds, yeah, close to the regular 10 wounds of the base unit (wich usually go by 100-120pts having a 4+ save) They got 1 wound less, but a 2+ save. Regular dudes suffer 1 of each 2 wounds (2 out of 3 if rended). This guys suffer 1 of each 6 wounds (1 out of 3 if rended). That is the equivalent of having a lor more wounds, and that should not be for free in points either.
Yes, we are talking about a 150-180 pts units... without the mortal wounds.
The mortal wounds i refered for free because they average on dealing them. Is not like a single dice roll on a 4+.
They deal 1-2 MW on average to multiple units arounde them when descendind. If they cost 150 pts you could fill a list with them and effectively eliminate the entire army of your opponent just by droppin without even playing the game.
They deal 3-4 MW on the charge on average. That alone cover the combat profile of many 100pts units, without taking in consideration these guys have a combat profile of an elite 140 pts unit later.
If they succeed in the drop and charge shenanigans they deal 5-7 MW to the unit they charge plus 1-2 MW to other unit nearby. We are talking about 6-9 MW without even fighting. That instant damage alone should cost a lot of points.
They deal an average of 5-6 damage with their combat profile to a 4+ save.
You need 54 damage to kill them on average, or 324 damage to kill them if they somehow reroll ones (maybe a command that the champion can self issue). If you got rend -1 you need 27 damage. At -2 we are talking about 18 damage and start feeling obtainable.
Their damage outpot when doing a regular charge is 8-10 wounds, this is a solid 180-200 pts in some armies.
Their damage output if they do the full combo is 10-13 and 1-2 extra MW to a second unit for a total of 11-15 damage.
The only argument that I feel would be valid is that they are slow. Yes, they are slow and weak to MW. Otherwise they would be unbeatable. You cannot make a unit cheap just because it have one weakness, you still got to count full points of his other features. If they are pointed too cheap people are gonna buy these guys as if they were endless spells that cannot be unbind attached to bodies than can capture objetives and obliterate the battlefield.
If they arent costed between 200 and 300 pts, they are gonna be a big balance problem. The new evocators when evocators were a living nightmare if you remember that time.
Edit: They reroll charge rolls when dropin, so the combo is even more reliable.-
3
-
2
-
-
The new Annihilators rules feel like a mockery to the poor Slaangors.
-
These Annihilators deal a lot of MW for free, and even without that they got very good combat profiles. Only way of them being balanced would be to cost between 200 and 300 points. We will see.
They feel like a nail in the coffin of Slaangors. Like, their profiles and rules are basically what Slaangors should have been, minus the high save (compensated with the plus movement).-
1
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, CarkFish said:
Yes, I played ossiach bone reapers
I took lurid haze with siggi and a kos, then too the 6"attack battalion with 3 units of slickbkades
2 units of CW's and a unit of blissbarbs
I REALLY struggled to kill anything ... Siggi rolled an 11 for his first charge out of deepstrike and fought twice .... 22 attacks and he managed 3 damage to the stupid ossiarch bone mauler fat guy thing.... Then it healed
My keeper did good work nearly wiping a unit of mortek guard
But I just kept getting smashed in every combat, didn't get distraction off once which hurt my battalion shenannigans ....
I took an early lead on points, we played the random objective one... I was 11 -0 up at the end of BR 3 ...
The early lead is all that made it close, by the end of round 4 he had all 4 objectives and we were at 11-16 .... I called it when he got first turn in BR5
The army is fun, and I definitely felt my own bad play was more of a factor than anything else.... I'm reworking the list to play DOK this week
What did you summon? Maybe if you summon small screens of Daemonettes you can keep the enemy away from the objective, make your early lead slightly bigger and then win on points at the end by a small margin.
-
6 hours ago, LoopyZebra said:
I have two questions on the new edition (apologies if they are answered earlier):
1. Do we have a release date for the Dominion box?
2. With the introduction of the new Stormcast, can old Stormcast be used from a lore perspective? Is there any mechanical downside to using old Liberators, Judicators, etc.?
The lore difference between old Stormcast and new Stormcast is that the new are equiped with a new type of armor that allow them to pierce the Chaos Cloud extended in the sky of the realms. So the new Stormcast work like the old did, going down to the realms in lightnings and then back when they die. Old Stormcast are stuck in the mortal realms, forced to fight the long war and are in danger to die forever if they are killed. They can and should fight together. We don't know what production value Sigmar got for the new armor, if he will be able to update all Stormcast equipment eventually, or how many crusades the old Stormcast would need to do marching to realmgates in order to finally go back at home and update their equipment to regain their inmortality.
This will probably be reflected in the new Stormcast rules, but if they are pointed accordingly the mechanical differences may not be downsides.-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Enoby said:
For those interested in size
The model is so cool. My store dosn't let me grab her until monday.
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Il Maestro said:
Whilst I agree with a lot of your points, it comes back to the label - it might seem like being punctilious, but ‘matched play’ and ‘competitive play’ are not synonymous. And I think you’d find that people don’t actually use those two groups interchangeably, but rather when they’re making the distinction between the two groups are describing ‘competitive’ as those focused on winning, buying and selling armies on a whim as meta-chasing, or min-maxing unit compositions for efficiency amongst other ‘games’ concepts.
Most of which can be true for any singular event/game, but it doesn’t preclude even those games from being narrative. Why should a suboptimal charge be the only way a narrative can be told? Why must an efficient list be any less narrative than a themed one? Not that you were suggesting that, as you outlined. But these seem to be the general motivating themes behind labelling someone as competitive rather than narrative.
And to me, when it seems to be used as a negative labelling device, all I hear is, ‘I’m not as good at winning the game as you, so I’m taking the moral high ground of saying I didn’t want to win anyway.’
That is true, matched play and competitive play are not the same. Is just harder for me to clearly determine the differences between both, is easier to differentiate them from narrative play or open play.
Never happend to me to ear "narrative play" as an excuse to have a moral victory, but I believe it, there is people for everything in this world. Legitimately playing for fun while being bad at the game is ok tho.-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Il Maestro said:
I really wish people would stop spreading the false dichotomy of ‘narrative’ and ‘competitive’ players - they are not mutually exclusive beings. There are top-level players that know more lore than most GW employees, and there are those that play only Path to Glory with friends that don’t even know their own factions history properly.
Literally every army you see on the table is narrative, because it’s been made with the same book that is an entirely narrative creation. Now, that’s not to say that Tzeentch Archaon vs. Tzeentch Archaon is going to be the title of the next Black Library best-seller, but accidental match ups don’t make the people playing them any less narratively inclined. And I don’t buy that wanting to win or being specific about rules makes you less narrative either - how many of you would play chess with your brother/sister but let their pawns move like queens for narrative reasons?
Wanting to play competitively and wanting to win doesn’t preclude you from being narrative. Hell, even selling your army and minimally 3-colour painting the next ‘meta’ choice doesn’t preclude you from being narrative. Would you ever make the distinction between a guy that plays football in the park every other week with his mates and Cristiano Ronaldo as the ‘enthusiast’ vs. ‘competitive’ player because he’s played for a bunch of different elite teams? Of course not, he’s just arguably the best in the world, and the bloke down at the park isn’t.
To me, the continued assertion that you must identify as either a ‘narrative’ or ‘competitive’ gamer just feels like a group of players trying to create a pejorative label for those that like to be their very best in order to excuse their own lack of understanding and expertise of the game. And, ironically, those same ‘competitive’ gamers would more than likely bend over backwards to help you understand and learn the game better so that we could all improve together.
Not a rumour, just my 2 cents worth on choosing words correctly, because even accidental labels have meaning.
Well. Narrative play, Competitive play (matched play) and Open Play are not the same type of games. Even if a player can like all three equally (or dont).
You don't need to know the lore of your army to be a narrative player (of course people can know it and enjoy expanding it). You can simply forge your own lore and still enjoy narrative play.
Narrative dosn't mean creating custom rules for cheating (like in the chess example). Still, I can see a master of chess letting a unskilled player got a tactical advantage of some form to create a fun game. It won't be narrative per se because there would be no narrative involved, it would be more akin to Open Play, wich focus in accesibility.
Narrative play means the main focus of enjoyment comes from the emergent narrative of the game, it includes a lot of things, like choosing to perform an unadvantageous action (charging an enemy hero with yours just for the purpose of having a duel despite that not grantin victory points) but may also exclude this and include other things (like making a list with monsters for the purpose of performing the new titanic duel kaiju style, or selecting an artifact for your hero that match his personality despite being a bad artifact). Notice a narrative action may also be advantageous for the game, I just want to point what is defined as Narrative Play in a comprehensive way.
A Narrative player is gonna be worried about rules and balance and scenarios and everything, because those are the tools that allow he to enact this narrative situations anyway. If your supposed unstoppable daemon is easily stopped because his rules dosn't match his point cost, then bad luck. (*cries in Dexcessa/Synessa canon lore*). Of course you can work your own warscrolls or whathever, but that may be a completely different part of building narrative that you don't enjoy or whathever. Is like wanting a model that dosn't exist and needing to convert it, wich is different from enjoying just painting official models.
I don't mean this as a complain to your points, I get your defense agasint the tribalism of Narrative vs Competitive players. But when you stated we should not ignore the meaning of labels I tought that it was a good idea to actually explain what certain labels really mean.
About the Dominion box. I like the idea of these new armies coming to the game and see them as my rivals sometimes, but they are not for me, so this two days gonna be a little boring until they start talking about the 3.0 ruleset again. I really want to see the new Command Abiities.-
4
-
-
I think this edition have a bigger focus on Open Play and Narrative Play with faction battalions now being narrative and the rework of Path to Glory. So having an army of 2000+ points is not going to be an issue as you can play other formats. People that passionately collect an army usually have more than 2000 points anyway because they want to have variety and different builds. Only meta-chasers gonna be worried about their list being now 2100-2200 pts instead of 2000, and they are gonna jump into the next meta thing anyway the moment they can, so they gonna keep selling their armies to buy new armies, is not something that hurt GW sales too much.
To me this new heroic actions and monstrous rampages feel like elements of emergent narrative. The table is gonna feel more cinematic, and this dosn't seem aimed to competitive players, is more like a trick to make competitive and narrative players to meet in the mid of both styles. Of course you have the core battalions that focus on matched play, but i feel like this editions is gonna have the same attention to narrative than to competitive (a thing they already said with path to glory) instead of the usual focus on competitive and narrative/open being secondary.-
6
-
-
27 minutes ago, Gunvor said:
I think there is a mistake here, as far as i understood the rules is that the 4 choices a monster can do on a rampage are exclusive. So lets say you have 4 monsters in your army, monster 1 performs an ability, monster 2 cannot perform the same ability in the same phase as it has been exhausted.
"If you have more than four monsters, you’ll have to be strategic about which of your vast horde you send on a monstrous rampage, as you can only carry out each ability once per phase."He is talking about rounds. A round is two turns (yours and your opponent) That's why he refers to 8 abilities (the four in your turn and the four in the enemy turn) and up to 16 if your opponent got 4 monsters too (you both play the monster abilities in each charge phase).
Technically this would be extremely difficult, as you need an enemy monster nearby to perfom Titanic Duel and a piece of terrain nearby to perform Smash To Rubble. Roar and Stomp would work most of the time.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Scurvydog said:
1. So far we have seen shooting rules and some new hero rules, none of these help out the suffering low wound support heroes on foot. I thought the new heroic abilities might be some incentive to bring more of the smaller cheaper heroes, with general getting more range and unit champion issuing commands, the smaller heroes got even less reason to be there. The few armies like Ironjawz relying so much on 5-6 wound foot slogging heroes seem to still be in trouble in the MW sniping meta.
MW spam is still a problem, but to be fair, you can declare Finest Hour in the opponent hero phase to have a +1 save in your important foot hero. Then if he survives you can use Heroic Recovery in your hero phase to heal the wounds you suffered. That is a nice defensive tool added to the new edition. And we still got to see the reactive CAs.
-
16 minutes ago, Grimrock said:
For example, maybe the Blissbringer in a unit of Fiends isn't specifically called a Champion because they can't talk/issue commands.
I think the Blissbringer is capacitated to communicate with the other fiends, maybe even more than a mundane mortal that use words. And remember they only issue commands to their own units, is not like Fiends were talking to Chaos Warriors or whathever. (I bet something like a Fiend got a way to
whipencourage friendly warriors into performing better anyway.)
I can see them removing champions from certain units in the future in the same way than banners, musicians and icons are slowly dissapearing (new slaanesh mortals only have champions as an example).
You still need heroes to issue commands into non-hero monsters and chariots.
I think inspiring presence will be reworked to be a buff to bravery but not an inmunity, and this may be a CA exclusive to heroes. -
11 minutes ago, Dankboss said:
Honestly, I'd rather it stays as is. It's another rules area that GW will have to balance and they will mess it up at some point, guaranteed, creating another area of haves and have nots.
You know they will, eventually.
I think they will expand more into adding one heroic action and monstrous rampage into the set of allegiance abilities of each army. We may see some of these abilities tied to sub-factions too.
And by the lore of Stormcast Eternals I think they will have some form of rule that buff heroic actions reworked into their allegiance abilities. Something like performing two each turn instead of one.-
3
-
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
I bet is one of the already shown Kruleboyz, probably the troll rider.
Really excited for the Grand Strategies. At last a secondary objective system that matter. Fulfilling or denying it is gonna matter a lot in most games. Talking about the one we know, is gonna change the value of certain decisions. You may want to retire your last battleline from an objective because keeping it alive grant more victory points. The enemy may choose to chase them instead of camping an objective because it is worth more too. While not moving them/not chasing them may be a big risk big reward gamble.