EnixLHQ

Found it here: https://gfycat.com/discover/medieval-total-war-gifs

Battle reports are pretty easy to come by, but a lot of them feature Nighthaunt as an exhibition army and generally fumble over rules or generally don't do a ton of review, so you're going to have to do your research on the players to see if they even play the army. Your best bet for tournament play is to find articles first. Try looking for write ups of tournament coverage, and you may find clips in the story. You can start your journey down the rabbit hole here. Videos of tournament coverage will be rare, but interviews with players is out there. Try AoS Coach for that. Then, dive deep into some NH players Twitter or other social media. Like Ben's. You'll have to go back quite far, though. Lastly, get yourself some podcasts. Bad Dice, this site, has one but I've never followed it. But I used to follow Notorious Age of Sigmar and Rolling Bad. They had pretty good coverage in the before times, but like pretty much all coverage NH and LoG were afterthoughts to them and so only gave passing coverage. Notorious actually laughed at the topic of Nighthaunt. I haven't had time to get into it, but since I like Doug from 2+ Tough a lot I figured I'd follow his buddies over at Rerolling Ones. Doug, at least, is very balanced in what he gets in to from a book and lore perspective, but don't expect gameplay analysis from him. RR1s, though, I hear is all about that.

I suppose I could expand the tactics section of the guide to get into this a bit more, but the general gist of these other tactical styles is that when you don't have damage, defense, or overwhelming numbers there are a still a few tricks you can do. But, very importantly, they are very much tricks and taking risks that when they don't pay off feel very bad. Hammer and Anvil is very easy to read. There's nothing to it; just gum up whatever you can and make your opponent trade models with you for a while, and then sweep in with something that's very killy and mop up. Phoenix Guard and Crossbowmen. Mortark Guard and Mortek Crawler/Kavalos Deathriders. Zombies/Skeletons and Blood Knights. Almost every army is built for this, and even the ones that aren't still try to use it. The key here is that your anvil is just as important as your hammer. Lose either and your ability to take on the enemy army is vastly reduced. Envelopment is the same thing, but with a few more moving parts. Basically, as soon as you add in a skirmishing unit, or roaming kill unit, or you're Tzeentch and you were making your killboxes, this was the tactic. Box up or funnel your enemy into a disadvantageous position, but the means as to how aren't as important. Positioning is. Get your enemy into a nice range and then just nuke the square foot of space you can. Rinse and repeat. This tactic puts way more emphasis on the "hammer" than the anvil, because the point isn't to trade models at all. It's to nuke. So, generally, you will have multiple smaller anvils running around who will likely die in any encounter, but can shape up the enemy army into killable zones. Nighthaunt has none of the above. I mean, we had some anvils, but not really, right? Not with a 4+ Ethereal. We made some pseudo-anvils with Emerald Host, but still no longevity. So we can't rely on any anvil tactic. We can envelop, but we also lack the sheer firepower to nuke a killbox, so that tactic won't work. So of the major tactical styles left (there's one more, but we don't leverage flying as a source of damage, so no use talking about it) is Pincer. The idea of Pincer is that because we can't stick around to fight it out, and we can't usually wipe an entire enemy unit in one go, nor can we carpet bomb an area, so all that's left is to assassinate and control resources. Basically, most armies are fighters and barbarians. We have a few armies who are wizards and sorcerers. But us? We're rogues. We need to backstab or steal the BBEG's bag. We can do this through our mobility and MSUs. We have just enough staying power to distract enemy units and tie them up, and we have just enough kill power to selectively erase heroes and other small units. Pincer spreads out your units, seeks to control the board in terms of being where the enemy wants to be before they can get there, takes objectives early, and then runs a distraction campaign disorganizing your opponent until the points are in our favor. We don't fight in straight up brawls unless that's part of the plan for a larger move later, or we're sure our attack lands a devastating blow. I used to watch old tournament videos and recaps of Nighthaunt wins back when we were a force to be feared (somewhat) and that's what I consistently saw. Those players never tried to meet the enemy in the middle of the board and duke it out, they always skulked around the edges, teleported, and ran everywhere. There's been 3 or 4 NH tournament wins that were considered upsets because the NH player won without any models left on the table, they got enough points to secure the objective win and then ran out the clock by letting opponents chew on the ghosts until it was too late to score. By far the best NH win I saw was from Ben Johnson himself, who went 5/5 at Blackout back in 2018 with this list. It wouldn't stand a chance today (though now that I look at it...), but his tactics do. All 5 were major victories, he won all the extra kill points, and denied his opponent those points. He did it by being sneaky, appearing to play slowly (as in somewhat afraid to get into fights) but really setting up the board in his favor, abusing CP in a way we can't anymore, using terrain to completely block line of sight (yeah, we don't benefit from cover but you can't charge/shoot what you can't see at all), and then never attacking an enemy unit without at least 2 of his units in the fight. But tactical armies like NH didn't sell, so here we are. Technically, objectives were always handled this way. Only a couple battleplans said you had to camp them, and then in GHB 2020 we got a couple that said specifically a battleline or hero had to camp them. But, in all other cases you could flip them and then run away. What's changed now is that the designers are trying to point that out, among other things, and shake people up. They want a more tactical game, hence the loss of the uberpowerful battalions. Time to get our shenanigans on. And, no, we're not the bottom of the pile. I'd like to introduce you to Beasts of Chaos, oh and I see Sylvaneth trying to a get a word in, too. They're both talking over LoN who's just going to leave now.

Yep. Missed it. Swift: Once per battle a single unit from this battalion gets a free At the Double or Forward to Victory, so a full 6" run or charge re-roll. My opinion on this is that we already have a lot of movement shenanigans and while this does provide some utility, I don't think I'd select it over Unified or Strategist, unless maybe Unified starts looking like a lost cause. A free CA is still a CA, and you're still limited to one unique CA per phase. That being said, in a Wave of Terror fishing list I wouldn't take as many Reapers and instead going for Bladegheists and/or gasp Glaivewraiths and putting them in this battalion thanks to their retreat and charge mechanic. That reminds me. Glaivewraith Stalkers are actually looking like a good utility unit to me. Small, cheap, every model in the unit is a champion, retreat and charge in the same turn. It's a hard shame that it takes reinforcement slots to make them into a damage unit, but they were never meant to do damage and they can potentially now do the what they were originally intended to do, which is to retreat over front lines to charge ranged or hero units in the back to tie them up. They were meant to be discardable anti-ranged options back when Stormcast was the only ranged threat with only 4 crossbowers to a unit. Maybe we'll see smaller ranged units now and these guys could tie them up for a phase or two.

I don't see Mourngul in the list of points. Is it listed elsewhere? I'm not seriously building any lists just yet, I want to wait a bit and see what the official release of the pre-order materials this Saturday ends up looking at, and what the Nighthaunt preview at WH Community points out for changes. I think it stands to reason that Nighthaunt has a fair few more changes ahead of us. That being said, I foresee things working something like this: With command points becoming so frequent, and also expiring every round, we will be looking at abilities like At the Double (run), Redeploy (retreat), Forward to Victory (charge), Unleash Hell (overwatch for Chainghasts/Krulghast/Black Coach with Soulreach), All-out Attack (combat), maybe Inspiring Presence (battleshock) as augments to any troop choices, since you will be using them. This means that you can assume your Reapers will be attacking with a +1, or your double-reinforced Chainrasp Horde won't be fleeing. Also, lots of Spectral Summons, KoS (both) buffs, and Lady Olynder model returns. Native command abilities are more powerful in the same vein that removing all the extra artefacts made our own artefacts more powerful options than the alternative. For example, the KoSoES's Lord of Gheists for +1 attacks now has no alternative. No Vampire Lord to give the better version, no universal command ability to usurp it. Similarly, the KoS on foot's Spectral Overseer for +1 to hit is not All-out Attack, and thus both can be used in the same phase (not from the same command source, and not to the same unit, but we have two pockets of +1 to hit on the field). Plus, our CAs are worded with "at the start of X phase" meaning we still have our flexibility in using them on our opponent's turn, which we should with all these command points. Unit roles have changed, thanks to the loss of warscroll battalions and new unit sizes. Hexwraiths, for example, are no longer long-range hunters or assassins. They are objective hunters and skirmishers, or health/screens in Emerald Host. The damage is very small, but against another cavalry it can be enough. Reapers will be doing a lot of heavy lifting solely on their 2" range, but that doesn't discount the 1" damage dealers we have. We're going into this like we're going to surround opponents every time, but in my experience we get surrounded just as much, and in these cases a pack of Bladegheists or, now even more so, Dreadscythe Harridans are going to be worth taking. Remember that your opponent is going to have these same concerns we do; if they want to get max damage they're piling in. Let them. Our base regeneration hasn't changed. But what has is how often we have access to it. Lady Olynder can use her CA in our hero phase for at least 1 and now we have the CA to use it reliably, Ruler of the Spirit Host is the same. Black Coach still has Nimbus, and Spirit Torment is still my MVP. Plus, there's now Rally, a new CA for the hero phase, every hero phase, that can return models for any unit that's not in combat (yeah, opponent gets this, too, but this is a bonus for us). The wildcard here is Spectral Lure. On one hand it is slightly more reliable, with our opponents who had access to battalions that increased unbinding attempts or potential no longer gaining those benefits, or their wizards getting cost changes, but at the same time our MSUs now being small enough that having a viable target for the spell might be rarer to come by. The concept of throw-away or distractionary units needs another fresh new look. I've always advocated for other tactical styles for Nighthaunt like Envelopment and Pincer, as Hammer and Anvil is not our style, but now any hangers on are going to be forced to see things in more of this direction. No more 40 unit anvils. No more high mortal-wound hammers or daggers. Time to start thinking about out-juking, out-maneuvering, and out-sniping your opponent. This includes using spells like the one that turns heroes into monsters as disctrationary "yes, please unbind this" spells to let our native ones through more often. Reconsider the Krulghast Cruciator. I mean, look at what it does. His ruleset heralded the change in ward saves. His keyword highlighted TOTEM importance. He might hold other clues for what's to come, like a more reliable shooting phase, or a change in how our defenses work. But, as of right now, his 12" 4 attack, 3/3/-2/1 is already likely to hit. With All-out Attack, which can be used for shooting, that's a 2/3/-2/1. With a Spirit Torment there's some rerolling 1s to hit in all phases. You can make him hit every time if you want to, and then everyone around him has a 5+ ward. This can be huge, and I'm highly suggesting he be included in every list right now. Battlelines, battlelines, battlelines. Say it with me, "battlelines." What does GW want us to focus on right now? Battlelines. They might as well write it on neon pink stickers and slap it on the cover of every book that's coming out in the next 6 months. Why? No clue, honestly, but it's written on the whiteboard in permanent marker. So let's join in why not. Chainrasps, Spirit Hosts, Reapers, and Hexwraiths. We can have some fun with that. And finally Core Battalions. sigh Okay, I see a lot of use here. I'll set aside my smoldering rage for a bit and accept the Core-only meta and start looking into how we can abuse these standard-issue battalions. Unified: Well, if'n everyone's going to be looking to go second nowadays, our opponents might be trying to capitalize on this to ensure priority and the choice to go second. So can we. It requires a Commander and 2 Troops. Can take a max of a Commander, 2 sub-commanders, 5 troops, and either a behemoth or artillery. So, how about a Spirit Torment with Ruler, a Kulghast Cruciator, 2 Reaper units (reinforced once each), 1 Spirit Host unit (reinforced once), 1 Hexwraith unit, and the Black Coach? 945 points, one drop. The Hexwraiths and Black Coach will be doing harrasment, Spirit Hosts hold an objective or help fight for one. Both leaders stick together to reinforce each other and buff their Reaper palls. For a total of 1070 points you can reinforce the Spirit Hosts one more time to make sure that blob isn't going anywhere. That's 1055 or 930 points to spend on additional stuff. Expert: Once per battle, free All-out Attack or Defense. Only to one unit from this battalion, though Hm. Magnificent: 1 extra enhancement. Hmmm. It comes with a better ability in the Warlord battalion, so maybe. Slayers: Same as Expert, but instead of Defense as the second option, Unleash Hell. Strategists: Okay, I see this getting some use. Once per battle you can opt for an additional CP in your hero phase. Requires a Commander, 2 sub-commanders. If you want the additional enhancement then bring 1 troop. Maxes out with 2 Commanders, 4 sub-commanders, 2 troops (with the lesser version maxing at 1 commander, 3 sub-commanders). I would suggest this being your other battalion to use along side Unified for the extra CPs and getting your heroes out on the field. Minimum 3 heroes, so with the rest of our ~1000 points what would we'd like to see? A couple Dreadblade Harrows? How about Olynder, Guardian of Souls, KoSoES, and another Hexwraith unit? We'd lose Ruler, and we'd have a cap of 4 heroes so we'd have to drop maybe the KC or put him in the Strat battalion, but gain Emerald Host subfaction potential for Olynder wounds (or KoS if you actually want to play Emerald Host as intended). This would make a list that looks like this: Subfaction: Emerald Host Unified: Spirit Torment, 2x Reapers (reinforced once each), 1x Spirit Host (reinforced once), 1x Hexwraith, 1x Black Coach Strategist (Warlord): Lady Olynder (General), GoS, KC, 1x Hexwraith Total: 5 drops, 2 enhancements, 2 CP a round with 1 more one time, for a total of 1975 points. And I'd might play this like this: Spirit Torment with one Reaper blob, the KC with the other Reaper blob, GoS with either of Reaper blobs, Black Coach with whatever Reaper blob didn't get GoS, Olynder and both Hexwraiths in the Underworlds, Spirit Hosts in the Underworlds. Unified doesn't state that reserves isn't a valid location. Try to go second, but be prepared to go first. If first, drop Spirit Hosts on an objective. If second drop them near a contested one. Push up the field with your on-field units. Drop an Olynderbomb in the back field. Pay special attention to the designer's emphasizing that objectives are taken, not held, and move away from the ones I control and try to push back my opponent into safe distances. This is very cursory, as I don't have the full book to digest anything and I could be wrong on a number of points.

We still get our subfactions, right?

And I was looking forward to bringing the Mourngul out, too. Overall I think we're in a good spot for the transition period. We can still field decent units, and with KC's ward save we can make a couple core battalions into frontliners pretty easily or prop up another hero. Unleash Hell is a problem, though. I hope Ethereal changes. The endless spell points could represent that we will retain control of them after casting given their close nature. But I hope it signals new warscrolls, too.

Thanks for coming by and filling us in on that. I think the discussion about it is all done now, and I'm on the same page with it all. The only thing I'll gripe about right now is that I think it was a fumble for GW to have released half the story like that. They could have been more up front about the battlepack and its restriction in the same breath as the AoS 3.0 rules. Even a preview would have been nice. Without it, disputes like this happen. I'm sure battlepacks in the future will allow warscroll battalions again, but I am also sure they will only allow 3.0 battalions or have heavy restrictions if they do. My fear, though, is that those battlepacks will be viewed as inferior or non-standard, or not the competitive gold standard, and thus regulated to "fluffy" tables.

I'm behind on my content, so I just got around to this, but Doug does into the detail I was looking for.

Saw the leaked image and the new article. Giving more weight to the article, it sounds like it's one battlepack out of several, but it will be the one by which tournaments will be played for a while. So it sounds like warscroll battalions will be removed from tournaments and other competitive play for now, but other packs might exist or come later that include them. The article flat out says why with some battalions being way too powerful, but doesn't it just feel...dry? Bare? An overcompensation? I imagine subfactions will still exist, and we'll have our allegiance abilities, but doesn't the lack of warscroll battalions feel sterile and flavorless? Or does it sound like there's a truly even playing field now and we won't miss the loss? Do you think we stand more of a shot now? I'm very conflicted.

I wondered this, too. Wild guess, but it looks like a commander is just a leader, the hero you choose to lead the battalion. If you include another hero, though, it's a sub-commander due to having less than 10 wounds. If it had more than 10 then it'd have to be the commander, not because of of the wounds, but because a sub-commander can't have more than 10.

I have the rules. Had them since this morning and been over them about 5 or 6 times. I literally don't see any language saying warscroll battalions are out. Can anyone, anywhere, cite where it does? Because what I see is this: *26.0 BATTALIONS Battalions are formations of specific units that give you access to additional abilities. There are two types of battalion: warscroll battalions and core battalions. The battlepack you are using will say whether you can use battalions and which types of battalion you can use. Battalions are picked after you have picked the units for your army.* And *When we republish a warscroll battalion, the new version takes precedence over versions with an earlier publication date or no publication date.* It's right there...

Okay, I think I see where the disconnect was. I'm referring to this AoS 3.0 PDF as Core Rules. I'm assuming that the document we'll be getting soon with the pitched profiles, PtG, and battlepacks will be called something else. GHB is usually what this is called, but it may not be called that this time since that is usually the publication that comes 6 months later. When AoS 2 came out it operated with GHB 2016 pitched profiles that came out before second edition dropped, and then each battletome came with its own pitched profile. The designers said that's not going to be happening in 3.0, so I imagine we'll get a GHB 2021 or equivalent very soon to accompany 3.0. And then going forward battletome releases won't change that. No idea how they're going to handle that, though. Probably as supplements to the current GHB. As for the warscroll battalion issue, I've been going through the three rules threads here and a few on other forums and what I'm seeing is that it's getting quoted over and over that there are no warscroll battalions anymore, but no one can actually source that as a fact yet. It's been challenged but unanswered. Bad news travels fast, even if it's not quite accurate. It will take a pitched profile release with no points listed for the battalions, or a battlepack with restrictions in it, to exclude them right now. That hasn't happened just yet. There's also a lot of hate surrounding that, too. People asking why sell us the entire Broken Realms series to get the extra battalions only to then take them away. One guy went off about pre-ordering all four books and feeling like he was mislead into doing so, that he'd been told he'd need them in print along with his battletome to play in the new edition, but is now being told that at the competitive games he wants to play (that he argues *is* the game [and that the other modes are just fluff]) won't include them and all this money was thrown away. And I get his point; we just got brand new subfactions and the Sorrowmourn Choir. We're not going to be able to use these in a matched, competitive battle? At all? I'd argue that is most of the flavor of AoS being stripped away. I'm hoping this isn't the case. I'm *really* hoping it's more about limiting their use, instead. Unlimited core battalions as long as you can field them, but also having a warscroll battalion as an option. Warscroll battalions tend to be a lot of units, so would be the bulk of an army, and taking one would then be a strategic choice compared to maybe getting two or three more core battalions with the same units.

Not trying to speak harshly, either. Sorry if it seems that way. Just trying to understand as much as possible, which will be important when I update the guide. I am confused somewhat about our back and forth about the battlepacks. From today's download I can see section 1.1, and follow it to 28 where it says what to expect in a battlepack, like the battleplan, whether or not there are restrictions to army selection, maps, and more. But I don't see where a complete premade battlepack is. Is there one somewhere else? Are these are included in the pre-order hardback or as a part of Dominion? I'm expecting them to be a full A to B to C kind of thing, like what they have for tournaments. If I'm mistaken please correct me.

I'm walking back on this one (and editing that in the post). I misread 13.3.3 and thought that this overrode Ethereal. It does not. What battlepack where? I did a quick google for "matched play battlepack" and came up dry. And as has been pointed out to me in the past (rather harshly) you can't site sources like Goonhammer for rules interpretation. Bell of Lost Souls agrees with you, but also point out it's a rumor and that we'll have to see. Either way, the battlepack isn't out yet, and until it is it's not superseding anything. Everything else you mention here is speculation, which is what we're trying not to do right now. Speculation tends to be negative for us as an army since we're already primed to believe everything new will nerf us, while the stuff that has actually come out, like these rules, actually seem to balance the field in a good way. RAW was and is the way to handle the rules, but you can't do that while also injecting speculation. My word of caution here is simply this: The game designers went out of their way in each of the reveal videos to say that 3.0 rules were written with existing battletomes in mind, and they will continue to work and play in any game using 3.0 rules. They then added text in the 3.0 Core Rules that everything that was valid before is until it is superseded by publication date. This means that until books get updated, their existing rules are still valid. They have to be, otherwise no one could play anything right now. Like I said, if you were to play a game today, what materials would you have access to? These 3.0 rules and your current battletome. So warscroll battalion up (and with current points) to your heart's content, even if it's matched play. If it's true the first battleplack(s) we get say no warscroll battalions, then that's what the rule is going to be when it/they get released. If that's tomorrow, then my entire point here is moot tomorrow. But it could be next week, or next month. Everything beyond that is speculation. We can speculate that the reason for this kind of call is to remove the more powerful battalions from matched games until they can be balanced in a new book. Or that they want a very sterile matched tournament scene where they are better able to balance around abilities and artefacts since they said they want to use the FAQ system far less than they do now. Or, that it was simply made that way for testing purposes and there will be new language in the final release that will allow warscroll battalions with caveats attached, like maybe only 1 per 1,000 points or something. None of this makes any difference, though.

Let's not go running off like that. Nothing in this book says warscroll battalions can't be used, and says exactly the opposite in a few areas. Namely, in 26.0 where it says the battlepack will determine which of either kind can be used, 26.1 and 26.2 where they continue to be named, and in the sidebar where it says when a new republished version comes out it takes precedence over any earlier versions. You can certainly use them with 3.0 rules and 2.0 books/battleplans, as was mentioned in the designer's preview videos officially by GW writers. Until a battlepack comes out you have GHB 2020's battleplans which don't have limiting language. Same applies to stacking artefacts. The rules are pretty clear here in the new edition. Artefacts are considered enhancements (27.3.3), they must go to a hero, an a hero cannot have more than one. Unique enhancements (27.3.7) are different and will include rules explaining how they are to be used. Unique heroes will have "unique" in the Notes column (25.6.1) and will be subject to Enhancement Restrictions (27.3.1) where enhancements cannot be given to unique units at all unless specifically noted. And finally, universal enhancements can be used by any army (27.0) and include Arcane Tome (27.5.2). So, intended or not, giving one of our heroes Arcane Tome, and the other Midnight Tome is perfectly legal, and since the universal option is less powerful without access to our spell lores why wouldn't it be made available? We can't tackle these rules like we used to in 2.0, where every instance of a rule is negatively recursive (if language is lacking, so is the rule). Try to give the language as written a fresh perspective and not tack on negatives that aren't there.

27.5.2 UNIVERSAL ARTEFACTS OF POWER Amulet of Destiny: This amulet subtly influences the fate of the one who bears it. The bearer has a ward of 5+. A new artefact you can give a KoS that's leading a Shroudguard so they all get a 5+ ward. Also, many of these universal artefacts are similar to what we already have. Arcane Tome, for example, is Midnight Tome but without access to any spell lores. Similar, but not the same, meaning that a few of these can be taken together to expand what we can do, like giving out both of these artefacts to get two more wizards on the field.

22.3.2 COMMAND MODELS Some units can include uniquely named champions, standard bearers or musicians. These are known collectively as command models and the warscroll may include upgrades that apply only to them or abilities that can only be used if they are part of the unit. So even the Glaivewraith Stalkers benefit from this one. Deathbeat Drummers are now command models, and thus can be used to issue command abilities. And, since all Glaivewraiths can be Deathbeat Drummers, this particular unit is never without this option.

18.1.2 CONTESTING OBJECTIVES A model must be within 6" of an objective in order to contest it. If a friendly unit has models within 6" of two or more objectives, you must pick 1 of those objectives for the models from that unit to contest. Unless noted otherwise, each Monster counts as 5 models for the purposes of contesting objectives, and each model with a Wounds characteristic of 5 or more that is not a Monster counts as 2 models for the purposes of contesting objectives. Mourngul = 5 models Olynder, Kurdoss, Reikenor, Knight of Shrouds (both), Guardian of Souls, Spirit Torment, Dreadblade Harrows, Lord Executioner, Black Coach, and Krulghast Cruciator = 2 models I don't imagine this is too different than other armies, but for us who usually will always have a hero near by we get an extra model count for objectives.

14.3 WARDS Some abilities allow you to roll a dice to negate a wound before it is allocated to a model. Abilities of this type are referred to as wards, and the dice roll is referred to as a ward roll. Up to 1 ward roll can be made for each wound or mortal wound before it is allocated to the model in question. If the ward roll is successful, the wound or mortal wound is negated and has no effect on the model. Huzzah for this one. "Ward" is now the ability type, and the type will now link back to this wording. The name of the ability is now just flavor. This means our Deathless Spirits ability is now a ward. This means the Kulghast, despite not saying "mortals" on its ability, will enhance the ability to save both mortals and normal wounds because it is enhancing a ward.

3.0 Core Rules are out now. You can get a copy here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/06/14/download-the-new-edition-warhammer-age-of-sigmar-core-rules/ I just got the book and probably won't be able to really digest it until later tonight or later. Let's see what you all think. (I lied. I got in it pretty deep right away and spammed this thread with a few highlights.)

Love your take on this so far, @The_Dudemeister. I can't wait to see what else we can use. I'm looking forward to fielding mixed units. We traditionally wanted to bring a lot of a single type of unit, like a bunch of Reapers. Maybe now it'll be better to mix that up as much as possible.

There's a lot of language here sounding like we're the target of some kind of nerf conspiracy, as if some rule designer caught Olynder in bed with their significant other and this is their retaliation. That's not the case, I'd argue the Gitz got hit way harder than us based on what's been revealed so far. But that's just it; what's been revealed so far. Forming such a strong opinion so early isn't going to do much else than disappoint you when the rules are finally set in stone for the next cycle. Either you'll think the negatives are worse than they are, or more likely, you'll think the positives aren't enough. Trust me, I've been there. Proof is in my post history in this thread. I desperately want NH to play well. We're just going to have to wait and see (and be ready to send in feedback).

Leaks are leaks, though, and aren't usually accurate. Even if these are, we don't know the rest of the rules yet, nor have our updated book. All it takes is a sentence somewhere to change things. Looks grim, but when does it not for us? On the bright side, if you can call it that, is that everyone else is being affected by these changes, too. Our strategies will have to update, and by the end of the reshuffling, we may yet be a force to reckon with.