[The Rumour Thread]

I love that the game went from mono pose models to these centrepiece diorama filled with characters cool enough to be on their own... 

And we still see things we would like to be different 😂 

 

[The Rumour Thread]

16 minutes ago, Vasshpit said:

Good luck to our brothers and sisters over there from the midwest of USA!!✊🤜💥🤛

That being said, there's a LOT of chit chat about 3.0. Is there even anything that remotely points to this even being a thing this year or is all this chit chat pure speculation?  Because either I missed something or everyone's got an inside source or what?....

No it’s because they had a similar structure with 40k. A series of campaign books that culminated in a new edition. 
broken realms has te same ring to it. 

also it fit would in the current schedule. All armies have been updated with aos rules. We’re now starting a new round of books with the secon KO, Tzeentch etc. So it kinda makes sense. 

[AoS Power Creep]

49 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Ultimately I think you are selling yourself short when you say you won from a single roll. The reality is that when 'one roll wins the game' there have been a massive number of non-random decisions leading up to that point, YOU got yourself to the position where that roll could win the game. Were there random factors? Absolutely! But you managed those, made decisions, and reacted appropriately. The situation where one roll will decide things does not arrive out of nowhere.

Except with a double-turn.

I genuinely don't know if your joking or not 😅

I mean the unconditional support and faith in my warhammer skills give me a nice fuzzy feeling though  
 

[Tale of X online gamers]

3 hours ago, Lowki said:

Happy new year everyone!

WIP:

First painting for this year, did some oil washes, the armour (on one side) and the base. Next is to mount Reikenor himself.

 

 

That’s one creepy candle wearing ghost Pegasus. 
And absolutely brilliant statue on the base. Very atmospheric 

[AoS Power Creep]

7 minutes ago, Drazhoath said:

That’s right...but Fantasy never needed FAQs every year just because so many rules are not clear or interfere with another.

That’s an unfair comparison Imo. Because problems start due to new additions to the game. Wether it’s nee army books or version updates. 
 

and aos releases 6 books a year. That took WHFB at least 4 years 😂

[AoS Power Creep]

17 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

army can give you first turn, take very little casualties, and then have 90% of more of their own army to delete your entire army off the board in the double turn from T1 to T2.

Indeed. In the, admittedly short, time I thought about this would be to make turn one priority a roll off. Maybe with the lowest drop player getting +1 or winning ties. 

yhay way it the shooting armies goes all in for that giving away of turn 1. They still can lose the priority. Be horribly out of position when you give them that turn 1. 

[AoS Power Creep]

3 minutes ago, tom0tom said:

 

+1 I also like the idea. To me any mechanics which would keep the double turn (random needed ,  not playing chess :)) but mitigate it would be welcome. Also less massive mortal wounds and easy hero sniping, and the game would be more balanced and well... almost perfect!

By the way when I started playing aos I was a little bit puzzled that a) the hit roll is the same when you shoot on a close target and on a target far away and b) you can shoot and fight. Obviously aos is not meant to be a realistic wargame but still it’s strange no? This has probably been proposed many times but as power creep is also a consequence of massive shooting armies maybe a -1 to hit (or to wound) from a given distance and a -1 to hit in combat for a unit which used its shooting abilities (or, other option, a model can only shoot (on any unit within range) or fight) would maybe also help reinstating the balance. 

I reckon it’s just to keep it simple. Warhammer fantasy battle ended with 300 pages of rules (at least in my memory) 

And AoS started with just four. But I agree that if they want to add depth to  things this would be a good one. 

[AoS Power Creep]

39 minutes ago, Enoby said:

I don't hate the concept of the double turn - 'you go I go' has issues too - but it needs some tweaking to stop it being to easy to wipe with.

Thinking about it. What would peoples thoughts be on a system where turn 1 and 2 the priority is set? 

but starting turn three the priority roll sets in. 
it could nicely represent that the battle gets more hectic and unpredictable as it goes on.

- Would prevent an early double turn ending the game early as people argue is a problem. 

- would allow for some late game turns and twists, as others argue is part of the value.

- would also reduce wait time as turn three both armies are usually starting to fade rapidly. And you get two solid turns of play minimum before a double turn could happen.

The priority turn 1 based on drops would have to go. (Which is really the only core rule I have an issue with anyway). Change it to a +1 on the roll off who decides turn order for the first two turns. 

In the end I still feel priority roll combined with more rewarding choices through scenarios is more fun. But that’s very much down to what you want from the game i suspect. 

[The Painting Contract - January 2021]

11 hours ago, mrteige said:

Plans fell through today so I ended up painting on the Fomoroid. Now I need to do some work on the rocks, do a lot of highlights, a bit of washing and then its basing time.

 

What a frocking badass

a bit of a weird compliment. But those bandages are so good 😅

[AoS Power Creep]

3 minutes ago, NinthMusketeer said:

Those have bell curves of probability and multiple factors affecting them involving player choice. The double turn just happens. I would legitimately consider it an improvement to ditch initiative in favor of rolling d6 at the end of the game; on a 3-4 the result stands, on a 5-6 player A wins a major victory, on a 1-2 player B wins a major victory. Players like me don't have to deal with the double turn while players like you can still have a game result overturned completely at random, and everyone wins.

well you're very sarky about this. I'll leave you to it then.

But from my standpoint a succesfull Hand of Gork can win a game just as much as a Priority roll can. But at least everybody gets a chance at that. Hell I lose, and win, more games to a succesful 9+ charge than anything else. 

[AoS Power Creep]

1 hour ago, NinthMusketeer said:

There is a certain amusement factor in the argument that 'yeah the double turn can break a balanced game, but it can also even out an unbalanced one!' As if that is a merit and they aren't just rewording the double turn being a completely random mechanism.

Then you must also laugh at people who make a strategy around the completely random (except teclis the cheat) magic mechanics.  
there is a lot of choices, tactics and in both but in the end it’s all a dice game, so it’s random. So I have no trouble with random mechanics. Makes the game less predictable and therefore more fun  

Again except teclis, which is why I feel it’s a bad rule. But I haven’t played lumineth yet so maybe it’s not all that bad. 

[AoS Power Creep]

14 minutes ago, Sarouan said:

To be honest, while the discussion on the Double Turn mechanism being relevant or not is interesting, I don't believe it actually has direct ties with the power creep in AoS. Either it ends the game earlier like Kramer said, or it allows the disadvantaged player to make a comeback. On that matter, I'd say it helps more against an army deemed "overpowered" than a classic I Go You Go system, because it still gives the opportunity to the underdog to go back in the game. I do understand the overpowered player may not find it "fun" to lose in such a way, as much as the underdog player may not as well in a classic I Go You Go system. Either way, it's more a matter of perspective rather than the mechanism being actually good or bad.

It's always easy to blame the Double Turn for the cause of your loss, in the end, and that indeed shows in some famous Youtubers videos.

Way more succinctly put what I tried to write.
After you read my previous posts. Forget them and read this 😂

[The Rumour Thread]

1 hour ago, Acrozatarim said:

Lumineth also had an unusually tiny number of warscrolls with their initial release, iirc, even by small faction standards.

Yeah is that true? (genuine question)
To me as someone who isn't all to interested in them it doesnt feel like it. But maybe it's more the variation rather than the amount. It has cavalry, defensive and offensive infantry, ranged, big centrepiece model, named characters, support characters. It's only missing a generic combat character, i feel. (10 warscrolls right? Not counting endless spells)

If I look at other AoS specific released armies I collect or am looking at:
DoK 5 kits + a morathi as the centrepiece. but all but one have two build options. (harpies, snakes, witches, cauldrons, warlocks but some of them old models)
Stormcast: ungodly amount of kits. 
Kharadron: 3 ships, two units of infantry, "cavalry" with two builds, 3 support characters and a named character.
(not really interested in, but quick counting on release AoS armies comes to: Ironjawz: 8 warscrolls, Fyreslayers 13, (but 6 of those are just the same mounted vs unmounted hero), Was Sylvaneth released specific for AoS? 13 warscrolls for them. 

So yeah smaller than I thought but it's definitely the most rounded off the small factions. But the factions converted from the old world are massive in comparison. 

[AoS Power Creep]

1 hour ago, Overread said:

onestly even if its only doing that in set matches its still not a good mechanic. Even if it is just speeding up the win its doing so in the most insulting way to the one on the losing side. They aren't just losing to a better player in a better situation in the game, but they are doing so without question of having a chance to retaliate. 

Come on, first off it isn't insulting. That's just being hyperbolic about it. But this argument is glass half full or empty isn't i?. You see it as an insult. That GW has added a mechanic that says: Here you go, when you're already losing, here's a mechanic that can make you lose faster.
To me the mechanic shouts: Here you go, when you're already losing, here's a mechanic that can get you back in it. 

So maybe that's just it. Personal preference, and nothing more and nobody to convince or persuade.

45 minutes ago, Enoby said:

For me, it's less of a discussion about how good of a mechanic the double turn is, and more about how people seem to not have fun when it happens. 

 

I agree with this. We really enjoy it though. It's a fun and exciting dice roll. One that gets you talking before and after it happens. So I would miss it if it was gone. 

 

47 minutes ago, Enoby said:

Tangentially relating to power creep, I think the double turn excentuates it. The more offensive power an army has (especially at range), the more they'll benefit from a double turn. 

Yeah agreed.

In general I think the only bad thing is the wait time if you get double'd. We often play 1,5K games. So it's a bit better but still that part isn't good. And I wouldn't mind if in 3 years time we think of the mechanic as a halfway station and we have a hybrid system in place that negates the wait time but still mixes things. That would be cool. But going back to an I Go You Go mechanic would be such a step back in the dynamic gameplay imo.. Gorka/Archaon/Sigmar/Morka/Nagash forbid that it turns into a game where you know half way through the game who's going to win. That would kill the game for me. 

1 hour ago, Neverchosen said:

Of course it is just a game system, and people will have their preferences and there is not a right or a wrong answer. But the idea of exchanging turns, alternating activations, or randomized turn order are no more or less representative of reality and I personally like the changing tactics provided by AOS' system. I do think it would be cool if there was more thematic methods of countering the turn order. Archaon's rules spring to mind, but a lot of people find them overpowered. I like in 40k the rule for attempting to steal turn priority at the cost of a command point, that would be an interesting command ability for certain generals. I think the issue is that it is very hard to balance turn priority manipulation into an army's special rules or a character's profile without making power creep an even greater issue. As such I am fine with keeping priority manipulation/knowledge purely with the game's big bad. 

Yeah that would be cool. In my mind the advantages and disadvantages of the priority choice should be in the scenarios. And I feel GW are trying it more and more. With the blades edge battleplan, scoring more points if you hold them both turns in a battleround. Somebody on here suggested defensive bonuses if you get doubled, all kinds of cool stuff is possible. 

 

[AoS Power Creep]

On 12/30/2020 at 8:12 PM, Overread said:

One thing I notice EVER so often when watching battle reports on youtube - whoever gets the doubleturn nearly always wins.

One thing I notice EVER so often when watching battle reports on YouTube is that they play for it (and complain about it being deciding) 

MWG has a habit of this. Look at the batreps of doom and darkness. He and his opponents only play for the double if they know they would otherwise lose. 

and that’s the big point for me. 
As a community we tend to talk about as if losing to the double is only because of it. Most of the time it seems to me that player would also have lost  with a I go You go system. 

@Overread as a favour. The next few batreps you watch. Remember this conversation and just pause it and see if it actually made a difference. Or if it just likely sped the result up. 
 

on a separate and anecdotal  note. I was in such a painting frenzy last week I even watched a warhammer fantasy battle batrep and even I, who never played that edition, could see who would win top of turn 1 three times in a row 😂

[The Rumour Thread]

3 hours ago, Fulkes said:

I mean if I need to shave a stunty

Harsh bro!  
 

I don’t think lumineth got released with a quarter of the army anymore than stormcast was. 

But I agree that it’s likely to be a fast second tome.

 

Edir. Second thought regarding the lumineth teases. I think a few Warcry warbands must be on the horizon as well. And they opened the floor to order allegiance and unseen models with the khanite shadowstalkers. 
so a ‘teaser warband’ of teclis warriors wouldn’t be a bad marketing strategy. 

[The Rumour Thread]

@eciu @Beliman @Fulkes @SleeperAgent

Are you reenacting the start of the war of the beard or something? 🧔⚔️💥🪓

[The Rumour Thread]

I went from disliking the idea of a series of Morathi books with faction rules. 

but I’ve come around. It’s great fun. 

First reason is that the alternative is they keep the rules until the next ghb and release them all together. Because you’d need to work that far in advance if you’re updating most if not all. so why not let people enjoy it in the mean time. 

secondly, where else would you put a update like the slaves to darkness got? It’s fun and thematic (even though apparently riddled with flaws) but not game changing by any means. it could be in a white dwarf I suppose. But I’d rather have it with the lore book. 

lastly and more importantly. Because it ties the lore progression to the game progression. How cool and amazing is that! 
And yes it’s absolutely possible to look at this cynically and judge it to be a cash grab. But we don’t know the motivation behind it, so I’m going to be positive about it. 

[Warcry - Kharadron Overlord discussion]

On 12/20/2020 at 12:23 PM, Lucentia said:

Hey KO fans, I just received the KO warcry box as a birthday gift, now, I don't really play KO or have too much interest them myself but I'm certainly not about to turn down a nice gift like this and it's always nice to have more warbands available for people to play with. 

Does anybody know if there's a particular combination of models/weapons I can build from the KO box alone which will result in a neat, fun to play, 1000pt warband?  Glancing at the cards it looks like it's impossible to make a 1k warband using all 8 models from the kit at once, which is unfortunate, but if anyone more familiar with the KO than I am has any insight I'd love to hear it!

The skywarden captain (custodian) is really good as a leader Imo. hard to kill, fast, pretty good damage. And super useful 2” range. 
 

the aether canon decimated my Orruk brutes yesterday. He was quite lucky with his rolls but damn the damage potential is great. 

not in your box but I think the arkanauts with pikes are amazing. Again two inch range, extra activations and combat potential. 
 

the thunderers are great for their triple in general. But the canon, the fumigator (no minimum range) and the rifle are my personal stand outs. 
 

if you keep rolling 6’s on you drill cannon like my mate that is great on a skywarden as well 😂

[Painbringer's armies]

7 hours ago, Painbringer said:

And here's Varanguard knight #2. One more to go and the first unit is done.

Congrats on the kid. 
and painting archaon is a pretty good result in any year 😅

[Tale of X online gamers]

7 hours ago, flamingwalnut said:

Glad to see this topic still going. Realized I kinda dropped off the whole forums for a few months there. Hope things are going well, love the paintjobs I see! (Makes me almost want Lumineth, then my rage against Teclis and dwarf pride comes barreling in. lol)

Keep it up, friends! Look forward to seeing more progress! 

Keep a hold of the dwarve  pride! Can’t let them fancy pants pointy ears win. 
GW is just waiting with the dispossessed dwarfs because they know we can endure  

 

10 hours ago, Lightbox said:

So due to a busy and difficult december this little guy has slipped into January which is a shame but on the bright side he's coming along well! Got the various bits of plantlife and foliage on him to do but otherwise we're certainly nearing the end (just don't ask about where I am with the base...)

It already looks so cool. really enjoying the work in progress pics and not just seeing the end result. 
 

 

[The Rumour Thread]

7 hours ago, Fulkes said:

Yeah Dwarves are known for their booze, not their cooking.

Well that’s going in the book. 

[AoS 2 - Ogor Mawtribe Discussion]

1 hour ago, Gutlord said:

Nice one dude,

I'll make sure I scout through my bits box for that beast skull banner and get my charges re rolled 😄 

I'm also assuming that the abilities still apply when you start losing models....as in if you lost 2 gluttons in the previous turn, the rule of '1 in 6' still applies?

Yeah absolutely. When they are on the table they are on the table. Of course when you allocate enough wounds to the  banner bearer and he dies... then so does the ability he offers. Which is why you might consider two of each to help with that. 

[AoS 2 - Ogor Mawtribe Discussion]

12 minutes ago, Gutlord said:

Alright fellow tyrants.

Just a quick question to which the answer has probably already been given in this thread at some point. I have looked through FAQs and have had no joy so I'll turn to you guys.....

Say I have a 12 man block of gluttons, do I get 2 standard bearers (1 tribal banner and 1 beast skull)? Also will I get 2 bellowers that stack and reduce the enemy bravery by 2?

Any light shed on this will be greatly appreciated. Cheers 🍻

Bellowers don’t stack. Not even from multiple units. As the wording is: within 6” of ANY bellowers. Meaning the effect gets triggered once. 
but yes, one in every six can be a bellower, so you can take two in a unit of twelve.

Regarding banners better news. For every six gluttons you have in a single unit you get one tribal banner and one beast skull banner. so both banners per 6 gluttons. 
Which means in a unit of 12 you could get both banners twice. 

The wording also allows you to have one model carry both banners at once. Which is a bit gamey IMO although it looks better. So that’s something I would discuss with regular opponents. 

[AoS Power Creep]

8 hours ago, Beliman said:

ra/Koala

I want that for my orks