Flippy

To be very clear - I don't have any personal problem with this. Maybe I would even play against such "army"... once, and then I would just (very) politely refuse a game, as such lists usually make for a dull one. From the moment I started AoS people point out how the Gargants are always a DPS check, which kind of proves my point.

Yes, I agree. This is the only justification and it is also obviously a purely business-driven one. Command corps 0-1. Blissbarb Archers 0-2 base size units for each 1000 pts. This is already generous. All sharks... 🙄 Sharks 0-2 for each 1000 pts. Maybe more for Fuethan sub-faction.

So would I and I'm not a fan. But it is what it is. I've noticed that this is a common sentiment here, which I do not share. This ain't Panzer General, and the Steam Tank (and the likes of it) is like a salt - fine in a pinch only, to add some flavour.

In casual battlepack? Seriously, though, I can see some (just some) space for thematic-driven list compositions in the army book (such as your Beastclaw Riders), specifically if the army book is a conglomerate of sub-factions with strong themes. Other than that, the lose of wacky lists charm is a sacrifice I make gladly.

I'm a long time proponent of 0-X type restrictions on units. This approach has so, so many benefits... it allows to introduce units with flavourful and powerful abilities while avoiding the risk of overuse. It usually goes very well with the faction fluff and the universal "feel" of how almost every army is supposed to look like. It enforces the use of standard units, which in turn can be made weaker (which just makes sense). Like, seriously, how can one justify multiple command corps? Nine-sharks-IDK? Blissbarb Archers spam?

I just bought some and this act of reckless spending may just turn the tide. Have hope!

You could just provide some thematic lists in the army book, with nice pictures, some lore and explanation of how it's supposed to perform in game. If I remember correctly, my WHFB 5ed. HE army book included such example list.

The Forgotten Nightmares Idoneth rule is so strong! Seriously though, the Sylvaneth are hardly an elven (elvish?) army. I have a friend who collects and plays Sylvaneth and we discussed recently how the elvish flavour is now all but missing from this army - for better or worse. My personal view is that currently, if you would try to play something similar to the Wood Elves of old (Elves, not forest spirits) you should pick Idoneth.

It used to be almost every second evening, for an hour or two. With such consistency I've almost finished a nice OBR army in less then a year. Nowadays I've slowed down a bit, so it's more "weekly" or twice a week. BTW, I also have a 3-year-old daughter , and a 10-year-old son. All the painting (save some holidays) is done when they are asleep.

I would give you a hundred additional positive reactions for this comment if I could.

Why is that?

A fair question. I was really glad with the previous roadmap (for the army books). It revealed (to some extent) when will a specific faction receive at least some attention. “Attention” usually turned out to be a single foot hero, but that’s a different matter. I would like a similar approach for every year. They can keep their surprises, but some general outline (e.g. new edition confirmation and date, some information on factions that are supposed to receive major updates in the next six months) would be very welcome.

That’s a low bar to clear for modern GW. Every show they do tends to be well rounded. Still, from the AoS perspective this one was weak - the river wardancers / seguleh seem to be the only real, functional unit for AoS (maybe ghosts as well). And, unfortunately, they are not only partially bland but also introduce the new river temple without any particular “wow” effect. This leaves us with a cool DoK hero and a band of named CoS characters that might be interesting for those who are already into their story (they remind me of the Cursed City minis; was not the fan of this stuff). And that would be ok, not every show is about AoS. I can also live with the neglected factions being neglected again and a lot given to those who already have. But… the lack of any sort of roadmap at the beginning of 2024 is a cardinal sin. It’s the least we should expect.

Weak show overall. I don’t really care for HH. As for the 40k models (apart from some Kroot)… they have a strange trait - I know they are new but I would swear that I’ve already seen them before. Underworlds, more zombies, meh. Warcry: Idol of the Old Ones (terrain) is the best part and wins the show. Nighthaunts are very much like every other nighthaunt. River wardancers are fine, especially the masked ones. Krethusa is really good. Callis and Toll are nice. So: 1st place: Idol of the Old Ones 2nd place: Kroot Rampagers 3rd place: Krethusa No roadmap, no Idoneth, no OBR 🙁

A gameplay can be streamlined (e.g. remove or limit the impact of battle tactics) but you can still add some complexity to other aspects of the game, namely list building stage. More equipment & mount choices, artefacts and spells. More generic characters that you can heavily customise.

I really like Warcry, but the initial focus on Chaos warbands was holding the game back. The recent approach with the Hunters of Huanchi serving double duty (not just random addition to Seraphon, but an integral element of the army book) is much, much better.

Sure thing. And it just regularly happens that the likes of Archaon, Katakros or Alarielle not only meet on the fields of battle (it’s just eight huge realms after all) but do so in the company of large warbands instead of massive armies. Top-notch design.

Isn’t that true for AoS as well?

The models are brilliant. And many TOW models are, well, not very brilliant. It’s not only about the models quality apparently. It would please me very much if executives in GW came to conclusion that bigger & flashier models are not necessarily the best way to drive the game.

You are all very kind for AoS here… I would say that it has a real problem. The game is almost 10 years old and yet all it takes to reveal some glaring weaknesses is a joint army book for several TOW factions. Hopefully the designers will notice that there is a lot of good stuff to borrow from old Warhammer.

Realmshaper Engine done. I’ve just received Scales of Talaxis Warcry set so it seems I will be stuck with terrain for some time.

My rough estimation is that „most of the chaos dwarfs players” means 6 or 7 individuals worldwide. GW can really get creative here.

Now they "balance" armies by granting easy tactics to under-performers. Which means you are left to play with weak or over-costed units but you get some free points to artificially increase the win rate. Atrocious.

It's not just about hiding. Your AoS Chaos Lord is now effectively a token used to score VP via some arbitrary movements and actions ("run from one quarter to another to take and hold an objective"), which inevitably shifts the focus from the units themselves to these predefined actions. Maybe there is some value in this, but I feel that right now the battle tactics cart is before the horse and I would welcome the old "killpoints" approach.

Why is that a bad thing? I like this approach more than the current alternative; it makes the game more about the models and less about some abstract and arbitrary victory conditions. In AoS the faction „power” is now tied more to available battle tactics than to models and their point value - an awful design choice, if you ask me.