MotherGoose

Yea if it was actually a high priority target I'd get that, but it can be any chaff unit really. It's already needlessly complicated as is, just not thought out well.

The death battle tactic is just super lame imo - essentially pick a unit to kill. Prime example of the lack of ingenuity GW has with the system. They could be cool if implemented well, but I'm going to kill units anyway. In an actual battle my main goal would be to kill enemies, how does it become tactical to select one of them to kill when I want to kill them anyway?

I thought BTs were absolute rubbish the past two versions, so for me these are a step in the right direction. I'm hopeful there isn't any super easy ones to do like pick 3 units to jog on the spot in the first version, or move out of your deployment zone in the current version. When we tried removing them completely the games were quicker and didn't feel as lame. Now we likely can't really do that as it's the main way they're trying to balance the double turn this edition. I always think we should try narrative games instead as everyone says they're really fun. What's the best way to do narrative whilst keeping some of the matched play stuff like points and how to build armies? I've never really looked into it tbh. Is it 'fair' and 'balanced' like matched play is? They mentioned last week that they would be going into more detail on manifestations this week, I guess they got that wrong?

I was going to attempt the movement tray converter style things for my soulblight as I also love them in AoS, but will definitely be building a wood elf army at some point! The games play so differently to one another it's great to have both systems (if you can)

Yea points for upgrades would have potentially fixed the ethereal 3+ Legion of blood VLoZD too rather than just increasing the models points cost which skews them in other subfactions. I do think with just a 3+ or similar on a d6 for each roll there just isn't enough variance. It doesn't necessarily NEED to be S/T etc. - a similar system to MESBG would be great too and works well. The main downside to AoS is that it doesn't matter who/what you're fighting, your stats are the same. I just use fantasy style stats as an example as it fixes that issue and people know it better than other systems. I personally love how in TOW a human warrior or similar weak unit will have to get 5s to hit and 5s or higher to wound a vampire lord in combat, whereas it'll be easier vs other foot troops and things like goblins. In AoS its just 4+ 4+ vs everything, which greatly reduces flavour and the thematic feel IMO. Maybe I'm in the minority but just my 2 cents. 40k for me does it really well where they've reduced the need for learning lots of stats/rules but kept the flavour. AoS is a step too far that removes that flavour almost completely. On the flip side though AoS is the main game my group plays so it's gotta be doing something right.

I'll be a parrot again and say that whilst I want certain characters to be more impactful (vampire lord always pops up for me) I don't think it's possible with our rules. A vampire lord could be completely different to a skaven warlord in the old world due to the statistics they possess. When you're rolling 2d6 and there's nothing to change your hit and wound profile or even any change depending what you're fighting, everything becomes sort of the same. For instance, a vampire lord could be higher WS and S/T compared to a goblin lord, meaning that yes they would cost more, but they would also slap lesser 'mortals' in melee. They'd be harder to wound than your usual troops and would be harder to hit with higher WS. When it all boils down to 3+ 3+ you can't have too much difference. Doesn't matter if my 3000 year old vampire that's mastered all forms of combat and weapon is fighting a snail or kragnos himself, he hits and wounds on 3s. Elves used to be super high initiative and weapon skill to combat the low toughness, orcs used to be high strength and toughness to combat the low initiative etc. AoS simply isn't the game for this lore/racial standout sort of rules. It's harder to balance (I assume?), and I can't see it changing so drastically when they want it easy to learn and quick to play. The game is awesome fun and the models are amazing, once I accepted that my vampire lords were just the generic foot lord reskinned as a vampire and that heroes are more for buffing, with the god and centrepiece models being the true powerhouses and lure of AoS, I was much happier playing. I used to wish and wish and wish for the racial/lore style differences to return and every single time a new book came out was disappointed again, its best to forget it and play the game for what it is. I've been jumping back to the old world here and there especially whilst waiting for AoS 4.0 and its been great fun and scratches the itch of a more thematic 'battle' and lore based profiles perfectly for me. The two games are so different to one another it's great to play both - for those that haven't tried it and want powerful foot heroes I'd recommend it for sure. What I really think AoS misses on is point based artefacts/traits/powers. You could easily have a generic vampire lord be what they are currently, then give us the option to add up to 100 points of something. An extra cast, bonus to cast, extra attacks on the charge, more wounds - something at least to make them more fun rather than just the +1 attack ability that just feels like we are playing a card game and placing a +1 attack card down on our turn.

Similar to my games. I find most of the time by turn 3 or 4 if someone gets the double go we can usually talk out turn 5 and be done with it and either start a new one or discuss the game with hindsight. I wonder if the new mechanics for having turn 2 will change that or make the games longer even.

The trouble (in my opinion) is without drastically increasing wound profile in addition to attack damage they'd be too hard to balance and would potentially be a huge waste of points because (currently) foot heroes are so easy to snipe with magic and/or shooting, and extremely easy to kill in melee for the most part. Again, might sound like a broken record, but without different stats and profiles it's too hard to do. If we had S vs T then your chaos lord could have high toughness so he doesn't necessarily have to worry about weaker units and can happily go into combat. When you're playing with just two d6 rolls to get attacks in and nothing to really change anything based on what you're fighting against, you end up with what we have now. A naked ghoul can slap your chaos lord just as easily as he can slap archaon, just as easily as he can slap a clanrat or zombie. There's no change for what he's fighting against which makes dealing 5 damage incredibly easy when you throw a few more ghouls in the mix. If this ghoul was wounding your chaos lord on 5s or 6s then suddenly the damage massively drops down, add in WS vs WS and it goes down even more. This also adds to list building and more balanced armies as you generally have to take a variety of units with different 'jobs' like anti tank, anti horde, anti hero etc. etc. I'm also an advocate for how AoS do it as its so easy especially for newer players, it's just a shame to have to lose out on the fluff of the units (especially heroes like we say). However I realised years ago that if beastly fluffy foot heroes is what you *really* want from the game, then AoS is simply just not that game. I now play 40k and ToW to scratch that itch, and AoS for quicker games with crazy magic and awesome models.

You also raise good points but IMO foot heroes in AoS are completely the opposite of what they should be. Not to say they should all be amazing, and it's impossible to differentiate them too much without more stats like WS and S/T profiles so it's just a bit of wishlisting. Currently foot heroes work more like you're playing a buff in a card game. A vampire is a +1 attack buff being played on your grave guard for instance, rather than actually being a beast like they 'should' be. But when you're confined essentially to two d6 rolls on their combat effectiveness, they just can't be different enough to other heroes. I'd like a vampire to be stronger, faster, tougher than a human warrior lord or goblin warlord or even a skaven for instance, but those days are gone and now they're just generic 4 or 5 attacks 3s 3s r1 d2 or similar across the board, same hero different skin. Gone are the days of racial differences and matching lore to profiles etc. For better or for worse is a matter of opinion and what you personally prefer really.

Especially now his 16" d6 mortal prayer has become an ability and can only be used in combat, he sort of wants to go into combat but will die to a stiff breeze

Yea I'm with you there I miss the days of beastly vampire lords. At least we have ToW to scratch that itch. AoS armies the last few years have always been sort of like different skins on the same things.

Yeah lol... my understanding is that to chant a prayer you make a chanting roll. If that roll isn't a 1 you get the roll in points, but if you roll over the required target for the prayer you're chanting you lose that many points and the chant is successful? So let's say I roll a 5 when attempting the witchbane curse. I get 5 points but immediately 'spend' 4 of them so am left with 1.

Aren't their combat stats both sort of similar to what they're current warscrolls are like? Slaughterpriest d6 mortals got nerfed to be only in combat but its also free no longer a prayer so I feel like he's way more scary to be in combat with than the weirdnob.

Going to be hell for nighthaunt who are hard enough to rank up currently with their tiny bases and awkward models. Similarly for boingrot bounders and some others I'd imagine too

Huge missed opportunity with Ushoran for that last part. Not a fan of how they rewrote his lore. In terms of characters returning, I'd just like to see magic focused vampires again. Mannfred used to be an incredible wizard, now he's 'just' a 2 caster with no buffs, same as all the other 2 caster wizards in the game, or worse. Necrarchs aren't represented whilst the other main bloodlines are. Vyrkos to some extent filled this niche with reroll casts, but they took that away. My fear with AoS is they're focused too much on 'balance' and competetive play, all my armies (I have 4) have seen vast reductions in choice and variety to the point when I'm making armies I just have the same items and traits every single time. They've made unique characters incredibly hard locked (soulblight in particular) to the point you HAVE to use them in their subfaction. Traits and items have been cut in half or worse, magic choice is all disappearing. Playing some Old World has really made me miss the customization and choice/variety even more tbh.

Have the prices for ushoran etc. Been leaked? I heard somewhere he will be £70, any credit to this rumour?

I'm gonna go with new sanguinary guard or priest for that rumour engine.

What's their scroll like? I've not seen much

They're pretty tiny really. I've got the osgiliath terrain and it looks alright with zombies but absolutely tiny next to orcs, stormcast, even blood knights etc. The proportions just look too off

IMO they don't really have room for much else now that wouldn't be directly competing with units they already have. They've opened up the possibility for a mounted hero on a smaller style bat mount like the new cav, but to be honest they've got so many heroes now I'd rather just have new units. Fast skirmish unit to get into archers quick and disrupt charges etc. like dire wolves? Other than that I can't think of much that they 'need', but there's plenty of options for cool models still.

I think ushoran has a skull in his fur that solves one I thought was already solved from the ghouls baboon thing. The ghoul dude with the staff solves that one. Varghulf foot I'm pretty sure is one too. Probably more I've missed. Edit: tomb king bone dragon solves the bone wing I think?

Didn't the cities of sigmar hero with the little gremlin playing a flute solve a rumour engine? I seem to remember a hand on what looked like a flute or similar...might be completely wrong though

One thing I'd love from 10th 40k is the card system for setting up games, been really fun and different.

Pretty much my thoughts and I'd love for the udpate to be that in depth.

Whilst I'd love for 8+ kits I'm tempering my expectations. They're an army that really need a full refresh as, currently, they're sort of bodged together from mostly older kits from fantasy when they weren't even their own thing. Varghulf needs to be replaced, however I also think the flayers and horrors are starting to show their age too, the trouble is they share a kit not just with each other but also two different courtier heroes and a soulblight unit. New crypt ghast also needs to be done if these leaks are replacing the standard ghouls, if they're a new 'elite' ghoul then maybe not... The warbands also stand out like a sore thumb now compared to the rest of the range, and id love to see some of the baboon ghouls as a proper unit, a bit like dire wolves. Same goes for the vlozd/gkot if I'm honest, I love the terrorgheist but I have to admit I've never been a fan of the ghoul king on top or the vlozd. However replacing one doesn't seem likely. That's before even thinking about actual 'new' units rather than updated ones. Then obviously we need a named character or two, perhaps the big centrepiece that most armies seem to get.