Gistradagis

I feel like Bladelords will make it or break it depending on points. Hoping/expecting them to be 2 wounds on a 4+ save, but their attacking profile feels moderately elite only. A maximum of 5 damage from your whole unit unless vs hordes is kinda weird. But if they aren't too expensive, I can see them in play.

Well, I don't have much time, but I will leave one key thing: The Blessed Sons superbattalion no longer exists. It was transformed into the Blessed Sons sub-faction. On a different note, if you want to play mass Blightkings (the most popular Nurgle list right now), consider the Blight Cyst battalion, as it gives them a much-needed rend 1 to their attacks.

Sunday Preview – The Call of the Wind - Warhammer Community (warhammer-community.com)

People are going crazy over the rules, but they seem to forget this stuff is only for Hakuran. You're not going to see Bladelords or Dawnriders flying 16" into anything.

I don't expect much more lore cuz there's still many more factions to go; we simply got the short end of the stick and have no importance to the BR lore. Perhaps I'm just pessimistic, but it feels like a random throwaway battalion. Daemons are the least player "faction," because they are a worse anvil and a worse hammer than Blightkings. So unless this battalion solves both problems at once... Certainly hoping for warscroll changes though (cuz otherwise Bilepipper makes no sense here). Although I was hoping for smth related to Horticulus and Beasts/Nurglings, this could be competitive if it really ends up being a good battalion and the support heroes change radically.

Well that saddens me. Although I guess it somewhat still falls in option number 2, GW dropping the ball at overestimating the book's strengths couples with no real synergy added with the new units.

That doesn't make much sense to me. I had initially considered this a possibility, but summoning is already self-limited, so it wouldn't make sense to overprice the entire book for it. I mean, it's max 1 summon per turn, and pretty much impossible to do turn 1. Then you have to properly farm it by doing tons of wounds but never finishing off enemy units, which can be very counterproductive. Even more important StD units still create DPs and ignore this supposed tax. Long story short, I don't think this theory makes sense, same as the idea I've heard around that these costs somehow balance "cheap heroes" (where are they hiding in the book?). I think the simplest explanations work best here. Either: The new costs show their intention for AoS 3.0 to have a smaller board and higher costs across the entire game, like 40k's 9th. This would be supported or "dismissed" by the new stuff for LRL. The GW team simply dropped the ball incredibly hard and read the book's strengths completely wrong, designing a half-disjointed mess of grossly overcosted units.

Pretty much. As models need to pile in closer or as close to the nearest enemy model, if you have 2 units on either side of an enemy unit, at 2.9" (so that it counts as being tied in combat), then the opponent cannot pile in at all (or their unit would break coherency right the middle) unless they have super melee reach, as their models in each extreme would have to move in opposite directions. It's mostly a theoretical trick, cuz maps aren't that huge and you're basically using 2 units to tie 1 up, so it's quite inefficient. But it can work in a bind, or to tie a middle unit while your units fight something else on either side.

That IS true. The whole AoS 3.0 edition theory makes sense, cuz the same happened with 40k and points, but it does not explain the terrible internal balance of our book, and the amount of non-bo that we have. And, unfortunately, that can't be fixed with a General's Handbook or an FAQ.

Well, we do pretty much know that the DoK book was meant to come earlier, closer to BR: Morathi. So the theory does have some credibility; we did discuss it briefly after our book came out and we all were shocked about our points values.

How so? If anything, you'd get neither because the unit wasn't in the battlefield during your hero phase, and consequently didn't get their ability off.

I'll be very surprised if that's what we get, not to say disappointed. Although, with how conservative GW has been with the battletome, perhaps I shouldn't be surprised if this ends up being our fate.

I get the feeling there are many people misplaying Glutos, and consequently feeling like he's not really worth it. First of all, he's an insane ally. There is a reason we're seeing all these Archaon + Glutos lists, usually in Tzeentch. He's sometimes seen in Maggotkin, too (no Archaon though). Second, he's the best caster in our entire book, even if the mortal lore kinda sucks. Still useful for generic spells, realm spells, endless spells, and unbinds. Third, you want him in the thick of it asap. Being around the front line means that his -1 to hit aura will hit soooo many units. This, with his 18 wounds, 3+ save with a 5+++, and a melee profile that can easily spike and wipe a unit/hero. I bring this because I've seen many people just leave Glutos in the backline and basically pay 400 points for a -1 to hit aura and occasional magic, which would explain the problems. He's definitely a bit on the line when it comes to points (what a surprise, eh?); appropriately costed, but could just as easily be, say, 360 or 380. In his case, I am convinced we're probably paying an ally tax due to how good he can be in other armies.

Pretty much, yes. If you're playing pure Hedonites (and usually even if you aren't), he's one of the only reasons your army will hold on long enough to properly get victory points and DPs. Keepers now pretty much suck unless summoned, and they offer little advantage/synergy, so they are a bad replacement (whether you manage to make them work as a beatstick is another matter entirely). Syl'Eske has some more synergy, but it's a bit odd and more circumstantial. Glutos is amazing because he supports you in every single way you need. Your low bravery is aided with his +1 to bravery within 6 (and later on no bs tests), his 2 casts 2 unbinds with natural +1 mean he's a reliable caster (even though the mortal lore kinda sucks), and his melee profile can easily crush entire units as long as you don't get too arrogant with him. Last but definitely not least, his -1 to hit within 12" is just plain busted. He's also not a monster, so Look Out Sir means he's not all that easy to kill, even from outside the 12". Put simply, Glutos is one of the very few units in our book who's pretty much appropriately pointed, and is great both in offence and defence.

Definitely an interesting read. I certainly felt like the initial review was a bit too generalised and didn't consider how the book itself would stand in actual games. While the introduction comparing Hedonites as Sylvaneth 2.0 is a bit overdramatic, it's definitely true that we'll be a bit of a joke as a faction until our points are addressed. Fortunately, like the article itself mentions, our problem is much easier to solve than Sylvaneth's. Unfortunately, repricing won't come until Summer at the earliest.

Archers are a bit too much unless you really need them as battleline. Otherwise, you can easily avoid them. Blissbarb Seekers, on the other hand, are quite better. Despite their low output of damage, they are amazing at farming DPs, and it's usually worth it running one unit in most lists. Slickblades might be the best unit in the entire book, not counting heroes.

I mean... many people actually feel the opposite way. Myrmidesh just need the standard points drop the entire book requires to be "Chaos Warriors but Hedonites," which would be great. Meanwhile, Symbaresh are a bit odd and their design is somewhat flawed (you're forced into a decision turn 1 that'll shake how the unit works, and be completely out of your control), while being just as grossly overcosted. People bring their great "statistical damage," but most armies either have screens they don't care about, or robust anvils that will shrug almost all of the attacks from Symbaresh units, who have no MWs and 0 rend. You made a fairly good comparison, which brings me to ask: do you see many people running Chosen? The only reason I can see Myrmidesh being played is because, if (hopefully when) we get the points decrease, Nobles of Excess with a Lord of Pain as general will become a real list, and so we'll see some anvil and hammer play with these 2 units in the battalion, with some heroes and shooting peppered in.

I feel like we can ask for much more. Perhaps it's due to how gross the overcost is, but I feel that most of the units could easily go down like 40 points each. Blissbarb archers at 120 would already be somewhat pricy for weak archers that will die/run against anything. Seekers are great but also a hefty investment in points with their bad save and now that amazing damage (slickblades can do a good amount of damage, but let's not fool ourselves, it's the standard for any unit meant for damage dealing). Same for Myrmidesh and Symbaresh, who could and should be closer to 100-120 respectively, Sigvald being 200-220, or the Lord of Pain, who was like 100 points on the box he first showed up in, and now he's suddenly 50 points more expensive because "reasons." Stuff like Glutos is priced well, though. And I do feel that our summoning is already self-limiting enough, and not broken. So I do not subscribe to the idea that our entire range somehow has baked in a "broken summon mechanic," because it's not true.

Oh, I agree with most of that, but that is why I'm talking about synergy in the forms of stuff that works on "HEDONITES" for example. Because it doesn't limit us when building lists, and simply creates more playstyles and consistent, well-rounded play styles. I say that we have bad design/synergy because we have stuff like the Carnival battalion, which has a huge cost and forces us to take heroes that do not work well (or rather, at all) with the unit you're getting. Or how Speed-Knights takes half your points but has no battleline or heroes. There's many cases of this type of 0 synergy or non-bo that I feel the opposite of freedom, because I simply feel that the book is punishing me for trying to play it. I can't use either battalion if I want to have a half decent game against any given army. Or how our factions don't really have interesting choices for us to make. We use Godseekers because it helps us summon + charge, and that's pretty much it. So what I would really want is for our army to not feel so disjointed, and that our book rewarded us for good list building, rather than say "here's like 8 new things, but only 3 are usable."

That's fair enough, and I do understand what you mean, but from personal experience I feel like we're being forced on doing the opposite. Due to our very poor synergy, most of our lists are pigeonholed into very specific tactics to have an actual chance at winning, usually living or dying by summoning, or abusing activation wars NPE through Seeker Cavalcade. I'd call that the opposite of list building freedom. And one reason this is happening, in my opinion, is lack of synergy. We're not going to run Twinsouls, because it's not worth it. Not only are they overcosted, their only real sensible combination is with a Lord of Pain but, due to a lack of real synergy, the 2 units don't make much sense together (they already re-roll hits at least half the game, so having a LoP with them isn't particularly good or efficient). They are also a unit that really wants to get the charge, so being able to get run & charge for our stuff through some combination or ability would be great for more lists and possibilities but, again, no synergy there. I see what you mean, but that is precisely why we need good synergy. Buffs that affect "HEDONITES" for example, as that does not limit our options in the way that LRL temples do, and actually rewards you for playing, well, Hedonites (as opposed to how many lists just run StD's Chaos Warriors, for example, since they are simply better and more cost-effective, and have the same synergy as some of our other units: none). And Death Stars are difficult when our army has kinda crappy shooting that's only good for farming DPs. In regards to your last point, that's kind of the problem. Our lack of synergy and non-bo cripple us. Our units don't work particularly well together, so we can play whatever we want simply because there's no reward in doing otherwise. We can play any list in the same way you can play Grand Alliance Chaos. You'll lose most games, but you can certainly play what you want.

But that's not synergy, it's basic wargame strategy. What would you oppose it to, putting archers in front of the anvil unit and not using cavalry for its mobility? And this isn't being achieved by any element of the book, it's smth 99% of armies will do as it's straightforward strategy. "Forced" synergy is such an odd concept, too, when you consider that buying a battletome to play is literally purchasing rules for playing an army that synergises with itself. What's the point of these units being together in a list as Hedonites specifically if there's nothing especial about it? If you don't have any strategy, combo, synergy, that rewards you for playing your army together? I feel like you're describing something quite different from synergy; the idea behind the concept is the sum being greater than the separate parts due to how well they work together, specifically because it's them working together. An example of LRL snyergy is the Cathallar taking the -1 to bravery for using their drug magic and throwing it onto an enemy unit, among other shenanigans. The two work better due to being together, and having real synergy that rewards having them together. Your first example works in every army ever, including Grand Alliances, because it doesn't reward any synergy, but basic planning.

I'd say the criticisms about the thematic oddness and synergy regarding the book are fair. A battletome can be thematic and not ridiculously strong, it's not a black or white situation, so it doesn't make much sense to me when people say "I prefer our book having no synergy whatsoever," when that should be an objectively bad thing. It IS odd how many non-bos we have, and how the book almost seems to punish you for trying to be original or run the new units. On a personal note, I'd also agree to those complains, although moderately. For example, battalions. I like Nobles of Excess, even though it'll be unusable until both Myrmidesh and Symbaresh go down like 40 points. But Carnival punishes you with a steep hero tax that doesn't work with its key unit/theme, while Speed-Knights forces you to spend half your points on it, while still having 0 leaders and 0 battleline, which is baffling to me. It's really odd because they feel so easy to fix. Make the tax less punishing, or have the Lord of Pain actually synergise with Blissbarb Archers. Have Seekers be battleline. Done. I also believe part of the problem is the sensation current lists give. Due to how ridiculously overpriced 90% of our range is, most Slaanesh lists win or lose by summoning (undercutting the importance of what list you want to play), meaning that you're kinda forced to play a slow and methodical game as Slaanesh and counter-punch by round 3, or launch a hail mary turn 1 attack hoping half your army isn't wiped immediately. On a more positive note, certain lists have been giving me some success. I'd say that a seekers-heavy godseekers plays the fast game well enough, and hellstriders can be a good option. You get a relatively low drops list with everything but heroes in a Seekers Cavalcade, and can abuse its effect to take an advantage with activation wars (as sad as it is to win through NPE abuse, ofc). Some Lurid Haze also seems to be working, with it being Siggie's more natural house and, perhaps ironically, also rewarding some slower play with typical Chaos Warriors as battleline, and trying to farm DPs rather than caring too much about scoring in rounds 1-2.

It's a good build. Seekers are the best units we have right now (heroes apart); slickblades are great damage dealers, and blissbarb will produce a healthy amount of DPs and still be safe thanks to their threat range, wounds and speed. You can certainly go all in and build a Cavalcade list (our only good battalion other than Sybarites), but you can't go wrong with a couple units of slickblades and one of blissbarb in almost any list.

Absolutely. I use a unit of 20 together with Sigdaddy (and Glutos) in a Lurid Haze list, but also have a unit of Slickblade which I prolly won't ambush ever since their one advantage over Marauders is their crazy movement.

Oh, you meant ambush. Fair enough, but do consider that it's more limiting than a teleport, and consequently can be screened out.