Koala

Yes, Return the old Underworlds warbands! I think i actually still lack those two... Now just give me the chosen axes as well and i am happy

So we are back at whining? There is a new edition of 40k coming, of course they do useless blurb articles to hype it up! I must say, however, that i am highly surprised by two KillTeam boxes within three weeks ( aka two "40k" weeks). Sure, new edition. But still... As a KillTeam fan i would feel like only one box can be seriously bought/played within that time frame. ( Also the only new thing in the KillTeam box is the 6 inquisitorial retinue guys...)

Yeah, but all that is beside the point when designing starter armies. They are supposed to be painted by people without any experience or (expensive) equipment. Thats why stormcast are so powerfull. Basecoat (primer works for most of it anyway), shade/drybrush and they already look decent. There arent many armies that can be that easy to paint. I recon just Orruk, OBR and Chaos Warriors - and the latter basically are Stormcast with spikes and stuff... Old Imperium had that too, Dawnbringer looks too detailed by a lot.

I honestly could not care less. The original was an insane sculpt at its time and still looked great today, even though it did not really fit the new aesthetics of AoS Nurgle. And this is a proper update. 10/10 will buy.

Tbh Chaos Dwarfs were the most AOS faction in old Fantasy times. So not too much Change is needed. I mean LRL absolutely stole their headwear style!

Those Humans look like they are going to be multipose and easy to paint. Love it. Just how core units should be! Still have nightmares about those Hedonites and their random details (mostly coins) everywhere...

I do not see the need for a FAQ. They simply cannot get any (Hedonites) enhancements since they lack the necessary keyword.

Well this sounds nice. All depending on units statlines and points, obviously. ( The last book mainly suffered from high cost, as most people here will remember) But that temptation mechanic on the old keeper was my favourite (although mostly useless) rule in the book. As a faction mechanic it is both unique and flavourful. We shall see if it turns out a no brainer desicion ( offering temptation - accepting/denying) or Not. I sure as hell will do some nice Mephisto impersonifications when playing

I agree. If GW does not deliver top models the law of the free market demands we get them somewhere else This is obviously a tinfoil hat theory but: It seems to me that GW is closely monitoring which lines get a lot of alternative 3d designs and adjust their plans accordingly. E.g there were a lot of alternative Imperial Guard (esp. Death Korps) and Seraphon sculpts. So it makes sense for GW to update those ranges with new and different models. (Market demand) This is not a 1:1 of course: i do not think there were many chaos warriors sculpts out there since the old ones were pretty okay themselves...

Man, i really dig the looks. Dinos with (slight) tech enhancements? AoS at its finest! 24" corrosive spit (with a bad hit dice and d6 DMG)? Sounds like you want SOMEONE to be frustrated:(

As per usual we need to distinguish between Design and Balance. It is possible to have a badly designed, balanced unit... And the opposite. I feel this is a design debate, not a balance one. And design is subjective. ( That said: i do agree that "chaff" units that mainly Deal MW are weird and should be an exception instead of the norm)

IMHO people do too much speculating about WHY GW is acting in a certain way. I mean, we do not even know if there IS an actual plan at all A few things i am sure about: - the budget necessary to properly enter the hobby is north of what most of us would consider "cheap". - the entry level products are considerably cheaper than the rest - the performance of WH stores (shops run by GW, they got rebranded to "Warhammer", just to avoid misunderstandings) is judged by how many starter boxes they sell ( aka they are specifically told their job is to recrut new hobbyists, not to cater to an existing Community) - people always complain about GW stuff being too expensive - and yet, GW sees rising sales...

Mathematically one Option is +50% ATK, the other+50% AV. So "whatever fits your style". Since most players currently seem to use them for agressive (ambush) plays the preferred option is dual weapons. But it is still too early to make a final judgement on this. ( Anway, i personally would guess we will not see 20+ units of Gors this edition. 32mm bases and 1" attacks are badly punished by unit coherency rules...)

Stopit! This thread is about creating elaborate theories about future releases based on useless information (and random emojis by Whitefang). How dare you come here with logic and references to empirical accuracy! Btw i say next release (after Seraphon) is silent people. Because there has been a big silence about the release, and If THAT isnt a huge hint....

Alright, this is of course abstract "armchair" advice but: While screening is mostly associated with cheap throwaway units, in Warhammer it more often than not means "offer a suboptimal target". If you play an agressive elite army you might find that you can not necessarily protect yourself from everything. But at the same time your guys are better 1v1 ( 'cause elite). So if you can make sure you only have few/weak enemies in contact you should be fine. This is why chaos warriors, while expensive, are a powerful "Screen" unit. Most other screens will bounce off them, and the heavy stuff should be concerned about those knights with lances in the back... Charging the side of the enemy unit furthest from reinforcements might help here ( we all want to go through right the midde, it just feels right. It is not) . Or not piling in towards the mentioned reinforcements. Terain might help ( i know most AoS players feel it is just eyecandy and annoying but it is HUGELY impactful in the elite vs horde balance) Or maybe not charge at all. If they offer a cheap screen between you and their heavy hitters then those are also screening FOR you... Can you end up with matchups/battleplans where your specific list feels lacking? Absolutely. AoS is far from perfectly balanced and favours certain playstyles. But this applies to every list ( and yeah, some are better than others). Actually specific tip: ( Not THAT specific) Play a few matches just for/with missions. No charging/attacking except when necessary for said Missions. That might be the tactics as per GW rules. Or your own ( just not "kill'em all, waaaaagh", which , quite frankly, is how EVERYONE approaches the game at first). You will probably loose the match but you will learn to see the game differently. And then see options that, in the heat of the match, you did not see before.

Thats an interesting one. Remember Tzaangors? In AoS 2.0 the answer was "yes, always use the newest warscroll/points", but then they changed the Name and Keywords of the units in the Battletomes to allow different point cost... so currently it is No? When someone has the Battletome they could tell us if they have the Hedonites keyword! I would guess the intention should be to allow Hedonites access to the new warscroll but i would suggest waiting (or asking the opponent ahead) for a FAQ.

I recon i will have a few games with the new book before voicing complaints. AoS 3.0 clearly wants to reduce the amount of models on the battlefield, so i always expected the points to rise. At least there are nice new rules/stats to justify this. BoC were a bit bland before. Who knows, maybe Cygor will finally be a valid tech choice against caster armies

Man, what an impressive morning. Beautiful Seraphon models, even more to come. Looking forward to them! Really interesting design in Warcry Warbands. It feels like Warcry has taken over the " creative outlet" spot from Underworlds. Which means Underworlds was UnderWhelming. But still nice sculpts and i guess they will give DoK players some much needed variety in models. Bit sad for the 40k Primaris Crowd. New unit is... primaris with a different weapon. Yawn. ( But i have to point out the "GW favours 40k" whiners have been delightfully proven wrong. Yay for AoS!)

So first of all you clearly never read the "old" Slaves to Darkness Battletome. It had horrible, unfluffy rules but enough different units that some of them were broken ( 13" Charging Barbarians... Deepstriking. Because reasons) The fact you think it was just slightly tweaked just shows how much the new rules allign with how we always expected the army to play. Well done GW! Since i have not read ANYTHING out of the (few) previews that didnt sound reasonable and fluffy i am optimistic about the final product. I would also like to use this moment to give a general statement about the tone of dialoge - not a specific comment on your post: It is perfectly fine to disagree with the direction of rules writing in certain books (or in general). And you might or might not be able to find reasonable arguments for this opinion. But self - victimizing and hyperbole is exactly the kind of toxic behaviour that has plagued most gaming/online forums. - of course AoS is one of the three main systems for GW - this does not mean that at any given time those three systems get exactly the same amount of attention. - the same applies to any (sub) faction - the rules are written by hobbyists - often their rules will work well, sometimes not so much. Usually because of bad ideas or bad testing, never due to bad intentions. - noone is out there to discrininate YOUR pet peeve faction (!) - GW does indeed want you to spend money for their product - therefore they want you to be happy with/about it. - If you are unhappy try to reasonably communicate the why and how to them. ( Read: not here and not this way!) - please always remember this is a hobby and people visit this forum to share (or increase) their positive hobby energy. ( I should probably put this in my sighature as Well as: tabletop gamers hate two things: the state of the game and change)

Alright, this is mighty offtopic, but: I really do not get the AoS3 box Design. Different logo and colour cheme (Red), i get that. But i have quite a lot of problems recognising the units from afar. They just blend in too much with the scenery. On a shelf with similar boxes around them? No chance. Just a lot of detail. IMHO the clean "Apple" design of AoS2 was just soo much better. OK, sorry for OT, carry in speculating ( my money is on BoC/Gitz next week)

I do not want to be THAT guy but i guess people are just people. There is a small but vocal group in the hobby that will complain about EVERYTHING GW does and whenever GW does anything ( including nothing). I guess most of the OW fans are waiting for more substance aka are silent. That could look like the complainers are in the majority...

Shameless copypasta from dakkadakka:

People here are overcomplicating things. Dwarves with halberds were called Chaos Dwarfs. And without their big hats those would have looked wrong on them. ( Because long weapon short wielder is a bit odd).

I can recognise most GW and AK colours by taste. 'Nuff Said.

It is also something hardly related to people leaving AoS right NOW as double turn was already there when they joined AoS ( and we assume they enjoyed it). Which does not dispute that some current developements have negatively influenced the experience of the double turn. ( EG I am a vocal opponent of killieness especially in ranged combat as this molds the game into an alpha -strike - activation - battle which i DO Not like)