pnkdth

1. Prices: I only buy 2nd hand and 3rd party + the prices from GW have lead to much fewer and less frequent purchases and other companies getting a much large slice of the pie now. 2. Rules bloat: I think this applies to 40k and not AoS. 3. Power level: Same as above, a 40k issue mostly. 4. Neglecting factions: Yes, this is frustrating. However, with Tome Celestial they're doing something. For the sake of BoC players I really hope their upcoming one will give them something to be excited about. 5. Models behind paywalls: A mixed bag since, usually, boxed sets come with heavily discounted models. Quite a lot of my stuff are due to good value boxes and patience. 6. FAQ: Yeah, FAQs for FAQs is not a good look. I want to see where battlescroll is going to take us. 7. FOMO: I can see it very much in Kill Team and 40k but again, I think AoS is spared from this. However, as stated in point 4 a healthy dose of patience cures you of FOMO. If you find yourself getting super excited and opening your wallet to easily I highly recommend talking to a professional. I'd recommend almost everyone to do so since there's so much hidden underlying stuff we're not even aware of controlling our daily lives for irrational reasons. So don't think I'm shaming anyone here, this is genuine life advice. Your mind and brain is a pretty hecking important part of your body. Take care of it! Point 2, 3, and 7: Is a big problem for 40k. I returned back to 40k during 8th when fan vids and communication seemed like, "woah, GW really have stepped up their community building game A LOT. This is awesome!", and while power creep were already a thing the bloated beast that is 9th edition made me go, yeah, no thanks. Each release in 40k right now are just introducing sillier and more over the top things (which fits the universe but not so much the game). - Overall, recent times have changed a lot of my gaming habits. I focus way more on skirmish games and, let me tell you, it is a heck of a lot easier to get someone to invest in 45-60 minutes in a game with about 7ish models each than "oh, you gotta dedicate months and tons of money just to get in the door. DONT QUESTION IT!". GW are acting as if they're a premium brand who deliver the best of the best when they do not. I still enjoy the rules and, especially, the setting a lot but it is no longer a centrepiece of my hobbying. Which is maybe exactly what GW needs. Some proper competition to step their game up. Not to mention all the new creative and innovative game design coming up from indie studios which will make the hobby a richer and better place for us overall. Like others say, the moment you stop leaning on GW for your hobby fix is the moment you become free to enjoy the wealth of amazing experiences there are to taste in the tabletop mini sphere. In many ways the hobby seem to go through the same phase as MMORPGs did when all of the suddenly gaming exploded with tons of new games and different genres. I no longer say, "I play warhammer" for example since there are many more games in the mix now and warhammer isn't even "my main" anymore as you would say in MMORPG terms.

Fair enough. After simmering down I'll chalk this post up to frustration boiling over after also being burnt when starting HoS. This time it was like, "not again..." 😆

Probably right but yeah. That said, HoS are looking good in comparison now, so there's that!

As per the title, we humble ask to be able to use fully developed rules as opposed to the half-baked ones in the Fury of the Deep set. We would rather not have to wait X amount of months till we see the full picture and instead enjoy the game in full. It might make sense then but for now it it is an overall nerf across the army which was not deserved or make sense. After the official release it is what it is. However, for now, I ask for a short reprieve. Thanks in advance and happy hobbying!

I hope you, the battletome, or both proves our rants and ravings wrong. There are still units left to unveil and there could be more (allegiance, sub-faction, etc). For now though, I think the reaction is quite reasonable but on the other hand I appreciate the optimism.

All that remains to do now is to take a massive hit of copium and hope FS get allegiance abilities which do something like +1 attacks/+1 save within a hero, buffed ur-gold rune mechanics, and some cool rules for sub-factions. The warscrolls are so hecking bland for the battletome to be interesting and fun either, 1) heroes, 2) allegiance abilities, has to unlock hidden potential. Plus, grimwrath, doom boi and magmadroths could add some additional spice. It ain't much but on the other hand GW have moved abilities previously on unit warscrolls off to allegiance abilities to prevent min-maxing with allies. So who knows, perhaps we'll get an army wide -1 to rend, army wide fire damage when attacking, or whatever. Do I think it is likely, no, but I'm doing backstrokes in copium now till I see the battletome in its full form. 😂

That is my sentiment as well. The only light I can see at the end of the tunnel is if some of the abilities have been moved into allegiance abilities, sub-factions, or tied to FS hero warscrolls (which has happened in new tomes). However, with the new warscrolls I can't see how they'll help the overall lacklustre and bland as heck warscrolls we've seen. We still have to deal with the idiotic change "wholly within 9"" for H.Zerkers, Auric still won't kill anything, and everything is less than it used to be... But it is something to hope for, I suppose. Maybe. What really would be icing on the cake is if they actually go with the lofnir magmadroth spam buff, complete with the fake enthusiasm I've come to expect from previews and warcomm articles about we should all be excited to field yet another braindead unit spam list cause just look how shiny those new cool rules are! Even if this kind of list would be interesting it would also somehow be worse since that would mean FS would be reduced into one trick pony monster spam army. My track record in AoS is cursed. First HoS and now FS. 😆

Hats off to GW for summoning the courage to do something about the disruptive presence of FS in the meta. The army really needed to be taken down a notch. Let's hope the next battlescroll includes buffs to LotFP, SoB, LRL, DoK, DoT, and Seraphon.

A perfect storm of play style + lore + idea for a project. If one of those falls short the entire project is cancelled/army shelved. Somewhat related to interesting rules but equally I can enjoy what others consider bland warscrolls if the army as a whole play in an interesting way. Since I consider the entire GW range my smorgasbord the more models there are the better. The downside is that I am very adept at shooting down my own ideas and projects which has lead to a hoard of random kits and models... Which has turned out to be a blessing after having discovered smaller scale skirmish games (Frostgrave, Malifaux, and Reign in Hell. Also started looking at Stargrave, Infinity, and more). In short, hobbyist first, gamer second but the distance is not far in between.

Yeah, I see him as another option the existing line-up. Not blown away but I can definitely see the potential an out of sequence charge or increasing damage. Besides, using the fight on death might halt a no-brainer charge or obliterate a unit which normally would be able to rely on their damage to reduce attacks back. Anyways, it is going to be interesting to see the rest of the warscroll and, hopefully, a fresh tome.

If it is a priest + if it is tougher (hinted by the magma cloak) it will stick around longer thus granting the 4+ ward for Hearthguard Zerkers for longer. Assuming, of course, hearthguard zerkers and vulkites will remain as they are in the eventuality of a new tome.

Add to that, being a hero he will grant the Hearth Zerkers their 4+ ward too. Most FS players will already be used to slingshotting characters ahead for this alone so the range is unlikely to pose as much issues as some think. It will limit its use, absolutely, but isn't a deal breaker. The wording also mentions chanting which could mean it is also a priest. He could also be a very tough cookie to remove (since they specifically mention the magmadroth cloak).

On the flipside, a block of 20 vulkites could suddenly hit back with a lot of teeth or be setup for a charge to snag an objective/important fight. Similarly, 15 strong block of Hearthguard Zerkers mid game could break the back of any unit who thought they had their number or make them land an important charge. D3 Hearthguard, oof. Being able to fire off these abilities regularly would be way too powerful and you will always take some attrition damage. As a mid game game changer though, I like the look of these.

Exactly, the THW data on SCE is going to be wonky until they reset for current events. As for SCE, they seem to have a few builds being cooked up with high potential so it is going to be interesting to see which ones will end up being the favourites. Stardrake spam, I imagine, would actually be quite fun to pilot + get you a solid outing even if you aren't a regular tournament player despite its copy/paste format so I expect the list to make regular appearances. As you mention, probably won't stomp the top of Tier 1 all the time but much like many other Tier 2 & 3 stompers it won't stop people from noticing the total win rates and stats building up below the top placings. That said, there might pop up a certain build which undermines this kind of list to the point no one takes it but on the other hand SoB showed us that plenty of people are happy as can be with a reliable 4-1 result. - To further illustrate but what I mean by 4-1 armies having a huge impact on the larger game consider the image below and LRL. They have a rough 50/50 shot at tier 1, resting comfortable along many other armies. However, when you look at Tier 2 & 3 you notice how they suddenly shoot up in win rate %. LRL is a popular army to hate on, I know, and this examples extends to all of the offenders at the top (LotFP, Seraphon, DoT, DoK, SoB, and so on). Whether SCE will be added to this list remains to be seen. The most interesting army of them all has to be SBGL though who somehow managed an approximate 50% across all tiers.

Going 5-0 only matters to tournament players. I've seen excuses been made for 4-1 armies because "they're not a true 5-0 army thus not a problem" yet outside tournaments such armies can be utterly devastating. A fleeting glance at THW data app and you can see just how dominant a certain set of armies actually are because the moment you don't bring tuned competitive armies all day all the time these 4-1 sleeper armies start laying down the hurt. What I mean is it isn't enough to just nip 5-0 armies at the buds, you gotta trim many of the 4-1s too. The secret sauce to a healthy game is an appealing game for novices/intermediates where people who attains mastery or expert level are rewarded for their efforts. Otherwise the competitive scene will dry up and the meta will become too predictable. That said, all they need to do is to remove the conditional battleline and the unit is fixed. The issue is not just its power but what happens when you have an entire army of monsters + abilities to excel in every important aspect of 3.0. Which is why I call them SoB 2.0. They're looking to be yet another list you can cruise control yourself to victory with (while beating way better players than yourself).

It might be an overreaction but it probably isn't. Also, I don't think I've seen the community be especially forgiving towards a spammy build that started to cruise to 4-1s+ (or absolutely shredding one of a nation's best players). From my POV I see them as SoB 2.0 since their warscroll has absolutely everything you need to win in 3.0. Exceptional movement and board control (extra move/charge), excellent combat profile, great shooting (which can easily delete key pieces or soften up bigger threats into nothing), 4+ ignore spells, lots of wounds on 3+, monster keyword for abilities and bonus objectives, and SCE abilities. Point is, this unit has redundancy built on redundancy and will never struggled to score or contest an objective for max points. Stardrakes should have never been able to be battleline for example, not even as conditional. There should not be a single unit who can do it all, much less one you can take as the core of your army... Well, ok, they can't cast spells. I guess that's something.

True, the game has been a roller-coaster since the time of WHFB. However, the game has always benefited from the community calling GW out on their nonsense. I do not think we'd see stuff like the dataslate or battlescroll if the community hadn't started aggregating data and shown in black and white just how terribly balanced the game actually is. THW and the data blokes are ever increasing the quality of the data too which is going to put more pressure on them to create a more balanced game. It is not great for a fairly young game to be known as the game where alpha stikes have become so problematic a double turn is always an auto-win. I would also caution anyone from using these kind of "P2W" lists (buying and spamming the new overpowered stuff before the nerf hits) in games where fun and dice rolling is the name of the game. You're likely to end up being 'that guy' either as because of bringing optimised meta lists to non-tournament games or for scaring off new players. Since most of us established players know how wonky the balance is it also comes down to us to act accordingly. I mean, if on one hand 'the rule of cool'/pick the army you like is super-important yet the type lists fielded are super-competitive we end up sending mixed messages. In our heart of hearts, can we really claim it is a fun aspect of the hobby to roll some dice and have your army be obliterated before you get to do much of anything? My point is, you can accept it, speak out about things you don't like, and not feel like you have to walk away just because you have issues with the system. It is how the game becomes better (and it has gotten better IMO) rather than a dystopian P2W whaling operation. As a disclaimer; I'm not accusing anyone, pointing fingers at anyone in particular. It is all examples.

At this point all I'm expecting for is a few units for StD as it seems pretty strange to move an entire faction to Legends only to bring them back so soon™ after. Could be a part of a narrative campaign, perhaps? If not as a full campaign, but taking place in upcoming tomes. Khorne, NH, and Skaven are being mentioned as being involved in the FS vs IDK conflict. Could signify upcoming releases, at least I hope so, since all the above really deserve attention.

I've noticed a few people thinking the FS release will be a soup release. I thought both FS and KO (especially KO) was quite popular till they fell out of favour in the meta. Should be a relative small task for GW to simply give them a fresh 3.0 release and they'll be back in people's minds again. Are there been whispers of other beardling releases?

Agreed. Good design consider the whole ecosystem, not just the rules contained within. Takes two to tango in this hobby and if one part is miserable it stops being a game and starts becoming a chore. In this regard, I think game balance trumps lore-representation every time. Mostly cause the lore often exaggerate the deeds done by X faction and power levels go up and down depending on perspective. In other words, a happy medium should be the desired outcome. - General point about warscrolls, I do not think a large number of them means a good battletome. The question I think it has to answer, "does this book contain enough units with specific roles to achieve its overall design and themes?" By design, I mean everything from allegiance abilities, sub-factions, spell lores, relics and by themes I'm referring to lore-representation and aesthetics. This means as relatively thin of units battletome can be really good in terms of design. For example, I'd argue FEC is a fantastic tome. It is showing its age but each unit has a clear place and no matter the court you choose it allows you to capitalise on a certain aspect of the army. FS is a similar example but an example of where the book is too thin. Which could easily change by simply buffing the Magmadroth + having the new hero add additional synergy to vulkite berzerkers (assuming it does). It would still be quite thin but immediately three of their warscrolls would become much more interesting + each of the heroes can add even more distinct roles to each choice. More is not always more but just more of the same with a slight difference (which also what leads to bloat and having units which are just there and forgotten).

Alternatively, they would work very well as a daemonic hero/unit kitbash or even a really twisted and far gone mortal hero/unit.

Imagine living in a region and when faced with an outside threat your liege shuts the door and leaves you to die. You watch your family, friends, people die or worse. Desperation and anger sets in and you do what you have to survive. After awhile, you manage not just to survive but you're thriving again. Once the storm is over he opens the doors again, expecting you to fall in line or face judgement as if he never left. How could you show anything but contempt and, dare I say it, righteous fury towards such a ruler? Where was this joker at your time of need? Logically, Sigmar's reasoning was sound (it was that or be overrun and lose completely) but when you're on the wrong side of his equation it would be hard to remain pragmatic about these things. I also think this extend to the points on Crusades as, much like 40k, the battle is about choosing the lesser evil and ruthless pragmatism. Sprinkled with humanity with all its flaws and aspirations. Never underestimate the power of short-sighted self-interest. The various factions have different goals and to expect them to unite around each other might seem like a great idea from someone, like us, with a bird's eyes view of the entire setting. The people within the setting are not able to 'meta game' and somehow just know what happened in X or Y battle or what took place in key events. I would also add 'limitless' in theory but everything you suggest cost resources and what if the failure rate is similar? Add in the politics of who gets what, who pays for it, who stands to gain, and the inflated egos who refuse to act on their political rivals idea just in case it might work. Then add the additional intrigue of the gods and got a situation were it is also important for them who gets the glory and emerge at the top. "We are like butterflies who flutter for a day and think it is forever", as Carl Sagan so eloquently put it. My point is perspective, from mortals to gods who each have a mortal and immortal view on the passing of time while leads to contradiction goals and mindsets. TL;DR for both: Perspective and context matter to those stuck in it. Everyone think their idea is the best and no one is the villain in their own story.

That's tabletop gaming in general though. GW have created a bit of a monster though with the sheer amount of armies/size of their systems they produce. No matter how meticulous they are with changes every time they do change something they will break another, either through wording or accident. Add in the competitive community's willingness and dedication in breaking the game into a new meta once these changes occur and you got a perfect storm. A truly balanced and relatively harmonious game would not last very long, I think. It would be talked about as one of those great games of the past yet with no one playing it or picking it up. In this regard, they might be onto something with the different seasons changing things up (plus with more realm rules, we as players can change things up at a whim too). But yeah, they certainly do change things up and sometimes this result in rather painfully obvious power creep (thankfully most in 40k). At least these new Battlescrolls seem to temper and deal with the worst offenders in the meta. In this regard, I think GW has taken a significant step in the right direction. In tandem with actually reaching out THW and the people running the AoS data for tournament I might have to return to my annoying optimistic ways. 😂

There is the aspect of certain units being clearly favoured and the meta will ensure most armies gets locked in the choices they can make. This will happen regardless to varied degrees but I'd argue S/T becomes yet another layer in limiting players. I remember elven armies in WHFB appearing incredibly weak and it felt really strange to use elven warriors as chaff units or bait. As in, why is my centuries old sword master who's honed in skill over the course of decades having an issue to wound this goblin? Stepping away from S/T has allowed AoS to represent different units achieving their brand of death and destruction not just in sheer force but also represent skill and equipment. Some use superior skill, some are a devious, others use brute force. So while S/T can add a superficial layer of identity I think the way AoS does makes it easier to simply balance units around quality of hits/wounds, rend, and number of attacks. In my ideal world, they'd purge the vast majority of MW inflicting attacks and put more rending attacks in the game. It would have a very similar effect to S/T and allow more room for quantity versus quality attacks.

A common trap in asymmetrically balanced games unfortunately. Grass is always greener. This update is also "the first..." and I am very much pleased with the approach of applying incremental tweaks rather than knee-****** sledgehammer nerfs that some of the more vocal parts of the community demand. The low tier armies could have gotten more attention but on the other hand many of their issues require a battletome update since lower the points only get you so far. Overall, I'm quite pleased with how things have turned out and, frankly, they did more than I expected. Especially the changes to Unleash Hell, limiting heroic recovery, and removing the Amulet of Destiny as an auto-include.