NauticalSoup

You get what you pay for 😛

I don't think GW is in the habit of confirming information about releases that don't exist, beyond the 'that's all for now' type throwaway comment we already got for Kruleboys.

It's always surreal seeing people attribute human behaviours like 'caring' to a corporation that is by all reports driven completely by profit motive. I know our collective memories are extremely short, especially here on TGA, but the game Age of Sigmar only exists because GW explicitly doesn't care about the community, and has no qualms about obliterating your hobby if they believe it would serve their interests. It's just... I don't think that's even harsh, or unfair. That's literally the point. Publicly traded companies report to the shareholders, and only to the shareholders. Customers are just the market from which they extract value.

The absolute meta build is - as many bosses as you are bringing units, a banner for every 5 guys (and at least one bravery banner is the most important) and a drummer for every five guys. Then max your shields. Put the shields on guys that don't have other jobs because they are gonna die first as ablative wounds. Ardboys don't have weapon choices so the two handers and two weapon arms are interchangeable.

Well - some judgement here, maybe. This whole line of discussion has a a very TFG early 2010s You Make Da Call thread vibe.

Wishful thinking I imagine.

Seems unlikely they would say there's no more reveals if there's more reveals. But I guess we can dream.

All a matter of price. If he's still good while losing access to one of his two core warscroll abilities then he'll have to be pretty undercosted. Given he's Lord grade I doubt he will be, and I'm sure other lords will have useful abilities.

Very unlikely, same for their buddy the Lord Imperitant.

I'm already overleveraged in PG... but maybe just a few more....

The most exciting part to me as a CoS player is Mortal Auxiliaries. It's potentially a huge shot in the arm giving us access to a lot of cheap options to supplement our elite stormcasts. SCE for the last while have done a lot of work in my CoS armies, now I can look forward to the reverse.

Given that most good monsters are usually the ones doing the charging it's a bit... ...rough. I know it's not realistic but I sincerely hope the Gutrippaz warscroll gets a reword in the book, because it really is a terrible ability. I would also accept its wholesale removal for a small points decrease 😛

Ah I see what you mean now. The leftover elf factions did end up souped together but I guess it won't meet your criteria for racial soup. So if your problem isn't with soup just with racial soup I guess that's just a personal taste thing? Not really much to engage with there - I disagree, Warclans is fab. Otherwise your argument doesn't offer a lot to content with, it purports some fanciful improvement in 'flavour and balance' as a result of book splitting. Hard to find much there, we have a very strong 2.0 soup book, one of the best Sigmar books GW has ever put out and it's hard to imagine how it could be improved by ripping it back into its component parts.

That's a pretty hot take when it's literally a racial soup book. One consisting not just of several races but several army subfactions that were previously their own discreet allegiances. And they can bring in units from other armies still to create probably the soupiest armies left in the game now that GAs are dead. Otherwise, claiming that GW could create more balanced and flavourful Orruk armies by splitting it across FOUR books instead of one is probably the greatest flight of fantasy I've seen on here in a while. With GW's track record you're inviting a discordant broken mess of releases at radically different power levels. Chances are the entire game design philosophy would have changed multiple times before you even get through the whole rotation.

Warclans has demonstrated in my view that there are really no disadvantages to soup books done well. Ironjawz were made much better and more synergistic and you were rewarded for mono-Ironjawz. Savage Orruks became much better and more synergistic and you were ALSO rewarded for mono-Savages. Big Waaagh was a beautiful bonus, the two halves merged into one functional coherent army that was also felt very rewarding to play. Being souped didn't diminish Ironjawz or Savage Orruks, it gave them many more options to play with both individually and together. And now you can play Kruleboys as their own army or you can soup them with the other Orruks - I fail to see how siloing things is anything but a step backwards at this point. Plus let's be realistic, with the sluggish pace of releases fewer books means more current rules for more players.

As a cities player, hard NOPE on this sentiment. I play Big Waaagh and Cities of Sigmar, soup only plz, would never have touched the new orruks if they were siloed off from my other two orruk subfactions. I have enough SCE to play SCE but they've only hit tabletop in CoS since the option was presented.

Just so ya know while the jury is still out until GW gives a ruling, a lot of us think the praetor roll meets all the criteria for being a ward - and since you only get one ward per wound inflicted that would mean it cannot be used alongside Yndrasta's save. Given how frustrating stacked damage cancellation is I would expect this to be changed eventually anyway even if the original intent was to allow them to stack.

Ultimately it's a matter of framing. If you're comparing unit effectiveness you're pretty much always talking comp, it's fundamentally a meta discussion about how to build the best possible armies that will win you the most games, which is how a unit that might be perfectly adequate in casual play can get described as 'useless'. Only has to be marginally worse than a contemporary to be bad in that context. And all these units could have radically altered warscrolls anyway so any current comparisons are about to be obsolete. New Seqs might not just be Liberator+ now, who knows.

To wheel back at least tangentially to the topic at hand, while it was disappointing to hear about the poor compensation of a key creative, it wasn't altogether surprising. Not to suggest it isn't bad, but underpaying people in this space is business as usual across nearly the entire entertainment industry. Much more surprising and upsetting to me is the managerial insanity and dysfunction that obliterated Sophie Williams' career with GW. I link it below in case anyone missed it.

She's not in poverty because she's married to someone who makes more than her whose income she has access to, right? Sounds like she's making a poverty wage to me, if that's all that's giving her access to those luxuries. As has already been stated, you're buying into some pretty nasty classist propaganda if you think being categorized as earning a 'poverty wage' is a personal attack This just seems like tedious semantic quibbling when you seemingly already agree that these are very poor wages by any name

Part of the problem and part of the 'solution' when you don't have good monster hero access. I expect Gotrek to get nerfed because he's supposed to be a gimmick piece, which will end up exacerbating the problem because he's the only answer a bunch of armies have for dealing with super units.

If anything it might actually be more true. My 3.0 experience listing very far into a somewhat unpleasant herohammer/godhammer edition which significantly devalues regular combat troops, and they were already pretty iffy in 2.0.

This, at least, we agree on. The differences between the two more expensive units will probably be moot if they aren't *significantly* better than Liberators.

The reason Liberators have always been 'superior' to Sequitors is (first of all not true, because at the start of 2.0 Sequitors were very strong before they fell behind the rules curve and got an unnecessary points nerf, but putting that aside) that Liberators are cheaper. That's it. The literal only reason. The Liberator is one of the worst units in the entire game, and it speaks volumes about SCE's 2.0 book that such a worthless unit is still the best battleline option just so you can squeeze out a few more points for something that actually does work. You could probably take away the Liberator's attacks entirely and it would STILL be the superior battleline choice because SCE battleline is useless, so the best option is just to pay for as little of it as you can. And 3+ saves are fantastic, I bring as many good saves as I can fit... on units that matter. Units that produce and which your opponent will want dead. And those units tend to reduce 3+ save battleline chaff to bubbling soup with damage to spare. At the price SCE pay for wounds and attacks don't expect to see even a buffed up 2+ save to take you far in the batteline slot. In fact 3+ save Liberators at 115 will be (probably) identically tanky to my Ironbreakers who in 3.0 fold to the monster mash same as everything else.

I'm surprised to hear people valuing a single point of armor save over +1D. That's a 33% increase in durability compared to a 100% increase in damage output- and I can tell you that a 3+ save isn't exactly going to keep your guys from melting like butter. I've played with Ironbreakers a long time now and at the end of the day you still just get vaporized by stuff, especially MWs. And I can't imagine wasting many buffs on basic line infantry whose job is to stand in the path of threats and die, so the potential to go up to a 2+ probably isn't significant in the majority of situations. Double the damage on the other hand turns any MSU battleline option that gets passed over into a much more credible threat.