Kramer

Reading the fyreslayers threat, I came away with the impression most people didn’t mind the number but that they are visually too similar. which I personally agree with and would add that there is too much competing between the same roles as well. On the flip side I also think that at tabletop level more AoS armies have this problem and more could be done with the paint scheme.

Yeah that’s so weird. A 300 pts support character that only supports on a 4+.... unless you spend another 300pts. a MW shooting attack that gets better against hordes? if they made the tusks better vs hordes as well. Then suddenly you have a horde killer. That would give it a purpose in my mind. Especially with the -1 to hit. It could fight a horde for two turns, better than a stonehorn could if done right. and suddenly you have role for it. But I’ve taken this stand too many times 😂

Just need to find someone like @Greybeard86 or me to play against. And you never have to paint more than 20 of any model. 😄 I finally know why your posts in this thread occasionally grind my gears btw outside of COVID times I would say this with a smile on my face while handing you a drink. So please take it in the tone it’s intended in. but this ‘invalidates’ like 90% of my lists as armies. 😂

Good to hear. I’ve now played all warscrolls as well. except yhetees and gorgers but the model quality plays a role as well. the big exception was the thundertusk. I love the model. But there was never any place for it. Now I finally made a list I’m excited about with them in it, that I’ll only ever play on TTS I expect 😂 In general I think mawtribes might be the best book they made. Lots of play styles, only 3 warscrolls that have no role. And two that are too expensive to compete. And all five can be taken without hamstringing yourself too much. I think that book will age pretty well.

Hadn’t thought about that. But that does happen a lot. Personally I don’t think on purpose. Just GW overshooting trying to balance things. But it does happen. Probably a lot examples but thundertusks went tabletop extinct in a single update 😅 truly the mammoths of the mortal realms.

Does this mean I also have to put down the cake? because I’m with you. Personally 1-5 is too small for my taste. But I agree with the reasoning.

Yeah absolutely. If that’s the way allies work (through battalions and sub factions) there is no need for grand alliances. except for GA armies. Which I would miss it they would go away.

this makes me hopeful for a new Warcry warband. maybe something from death or destruction? Since khanite shadowstalkers opened that door?

Personally I think 10-15 is a good number. I have a couple of reasons why I like them, but also some strong opinions on why more is a bad for the game. The positive of 10-15 is that you have enough options to play around without it getting boring imo. The current smaller factions feel much more cohesive to me than the bigger ones. It makes it less of chore to 'collect' the whole army. Kinda ties in to the collecting, I rather collect and paint 2 distinct armies than one massive one. What I consider the major negative about bigger factions is that GW already struggles to give everything a role in smaller factions.Which is even more noticable in the big armies. Lumineth will be an interesting one regarding this. As now they have a quite tight roster, which could double with the addition of Tyrion. I think it's likely that some units will rarely see play as two units will compete for the same role and one wins. As a side thoughts: The current bigger factions feel more like two or more looks combined. Which is not really fair because most of those are old world armies brought into AoS. But if I had the choice I would have kept Ogors split, but have done a Barak Thrying style subfaction in both books. Where both halves mingle but still keep the flavour of either Beastclaw raiders or Gutbusters. same for cities, gits, etc.

A couple of recent topics already touched on this but were never about this. And because I was curious, I would love to hear your opinion and why? I feel there is a lot to say for all options but in the end its down to personal preferences. So share them if you would. (ill post mine in the first comment to the thread)

Such a cool idea. one of the big things I always took for granted is that knowing an army i s maybe the most important part of playing. knowing how much work Ard boys with the warchanter actually does. Or how much distance the lumineth riders can cover. How difficult to kill hearthguard actually are. that knowledge and experience informs the decisions the player makes and the list is the thing that offers the options. so playing the others army against them is really fun as it takes that away. Or at the very least makes you rely on second hand knowledge of having just played that army. Would be also very cool test of skill to pit two players together with the same army they never played before. To take away that experience element. but again it sounds really fun. I love when people shake things up. I might suggest this when I next play a TTS game.

That sucks and I truly feel for you. But don’t let yourself be put behind just because two of them like a more min-maxing playstyle. there’s nothing wrong with that, but they should also adjust their playstyle to yours. At least once in awhile. And I use playstyle but for a lack of a better description of what someone wants from the game. so if you occasionally tussle with their them for tournament prep. After the tournament they should also play that (narrative) campaign with you. Or at the very least a more matched list to yours.

Dead: vampire devine : witch hunters although it seems more likely to be a both 40k and AoS preview. But I don’t know what’s happening in the far far future

Oh yeah! I love my converted claw lord as well can we see your conversions? Such great models to convert as well. but yeah a Skryre/moulder/eshin would be amazing.

hahaha, i'll take your word for it. I agree. But just for the sake of the argument, why smaller faction could make sense. It's harder to design a cohesive force if you have that big contrast and variety in an army. Kairic acolytes, tzaangor, horrors. We know they belong together, you have a paint scheme that ties it together, and basing. But will someone outside of the hobby see that they are one army? That's easier to do with only 10 warscrolls vs 15 or more. Then from a rules perspective a small factions also make sense. It makes it easier to give everything it's own role and stuff within a faction won't compete as much for the same spot. And from a business sense, I suspect armies with a specific theme sell better, and will lead to morge players having multiple armies vs. one big army which they keep adding 1 from every unit to.

I disagree. The only reasone these are different is because they are. Build an army from these and nothing will have changed. More dynamic sculpt yes, but that goes for all underworld warbands if i'm honest. Since the thread about the fyreslayer range i've honestly been looking at army pictures with that reference in mind. And honestly there are a lot armies that 'suffer' from the same. And i'm starting to blame paint schemes and the size more and more. Still a very limited range, don't get me wrong. But it's become less of an issue for me. For example, today I saw an army shot of a KO army. New player did a slow grow league. And it looked awesome, cohesive and really well painted. But the shot was from a tabletop distance, and I could make out three distinctive things, foot troops, balloon troops, boats. I could not tell without zooming in, which boat was which. What heroes where in the list. Nor how many were thunderers and which were arkanauts. Same with an all Sacrosanct army. Only on the second I saw it, I realised there were 2 incantors hidden in there 😅. Again fyreslayers are definitely limited in variation, but more variation in the paint scheme would go a long way as well.

Is that actually mega gargant size? I always thought it was just a random monster skull. I have it in a box somewhere waiting for a different project, but that would be exciting.

I also like how some heroes that are taken twice in armies got an alternative sculpt. Like the KO khemist when every army took at least two. or the beast of chaos shaman. Although he’s actually really good 😅 so what heroes do people take multiple off? also cities warband could be really cool. But mix it up IMO. did you know fyreslayers already got one?

Oh I agree. But we were having this conversation and he/she referred to the list as having X out of 14 units. So I ran with that. just trying to figure out where those lines are because I genuinely find it fascinating. @yukishiro1 and me don’t agree on this subject but I do find the opinion interesting. So I’m not trying to convince anyone. Just riffing of what is argued. Agreed. Which is why it wasn’t the best example of the game itself discouraging variety, the warscrolls made it the worst offender. (Or possibly the high tide ability overshadowing everything else but different side of the same coin I guess) Oh Cities is quite good for variety and gitz probably the worst. Don’t feel the game really encourages mixing of the 3 races in there if I’m honest. It’s just that humans have the best wizards and irondrakes the most output for example. But between cities and gits fall most bigger factions. No interaction between beastclaw and gutbusters. Very little between the mortal and daemon sides. You can mix warherd, brayhed and thunderscorn but you don’t gain anything from doing so. Etc and in my mind that was what we were speculating about; how can the game encourage taking more variety? (and the tldr of my opinion was, that if you just create interaction where, for example, the lord of change command ability works on tzaangor, mortal and daemon, for competitive play people will still sniff out which combo is the strongest and hyper focus on that. Which would create new lists but no more variety. At least that’s what I feel would happen. it could be done through more through battalions or battlefield restrictions/reward but to me that would hurt themed list which I would find a shame. Again speculation on my part.)

Yeah, I suggested the same in another thread. It's not only practical but also very thematic imo. Battles becoming more and more frantic and less organised as it goes on. Also allows some great scenario play. But most importantly everyone gets 2 turns before there is a chance to get doubled, and by that time armies are so much reduced that it will also have reduced wait times.

Well great news then. If this now constitutes a faction that allows encourages you to build varied lists then there is indeed no reason to complain. And i'll bow out. But a couple of questions before then because I do enjoy this discussion with you, and i am very much not convinced. Mostly because while you said before that a varied list uses '1-2 units of most warscrolls'. In the list I shared, which ended up doing great i think, still doesn't achieve that. 5 out of 14 warscrolls. And more importantly most of the lists I could find were more spammy towards the eels and still relied on doing the same trick as before. Except now they had turn 1 protection from the turtles and didn't need fight first across the board because fo the net launcher. So for me Idoneth isn't 'fixed' when you look at it with the goal of this thread in mind. It's definitely better though. Even your list is 7 out of 14 and not most of the warscrolls, but yeah I would consider this varied even though it doesnt meet your own requirements But back to the questions, are we discussing different things? Because this whole conversation started when the conversation was about the game encouraging more varied lists. But to me it starts to read like you are more after more units being an option in lists. Not necessarily being in the list at the same time. (I found it hard to explain the difference so for example Tzeentch not just being effective as mono daemons/mortal/tzaangor but being better off for being mixed. Hope this is more clear) second question is what do you feel the new rules for Deepkin do to encourage you to take a bigger variety of warscrolls? And how could that be applied to @Greybeard86's Gits for example. Because that's the tough one to fix. Idoneth, KO, DoK are relatively easy because they have a small amount of warscrolls. But for gits to get spiders, squigs, trolls and the actual gits to be able to mix is a lot harder. And I had a great third question but didn't get around to reply yesterday, and now i've forgotten it. I'll be back with that one hopefully.

REally good point. The great advantage of endless spells was effecting the priority choice a bit. Bound spells where the last nail in that coffin.

Why stop there. Why not an upgrade kit for the behemats for a priest model and endless prayers 😍 and yes that green foot of gork/mork endless spell should have been a thing.

I’d swear I have some very, very similar bits to that. I’ll have a look tomorrow. But close enough to the point I’d be willing to wager they repurposed that top left axe for something (or the otherway around) (probably wrong of course. But still 😅)

Could have been a concept but it ended up being dropped too close to the deadline to design new ones from scratch? still find it so incredibly weird that not every magic wielding army got some. For khorne’s sake, two armies without magic wielders got them