[The Rumour Thread]

15 hours ago, Nico said:

Try them before you write them off. I think they are a hidden gem in the Stormcast army. They are the only Dracoth Cavalry that actually function reliably as a unit of 2 models . This is entirely down to their automatic and doesn't even need to hit the target (like the Screaming Skull Catapult) -1 to hit debuff, which (a) is colossal - reducing the output of a 4+ to hit unit by a third (double what mystic shield does); and (b) stacks with the other unit of 2 Tempestors; and (c) stacks with any other -1 to hit debuffs that you might happen to have.

2 units of Fulminators can counter Kunning Rukk Arrer Boyz by having a 35/36 save. 2 Units of Tempestors can send them back to rolling to hit on sixes (including the Bellowing Shout or Broken Spirits Spell) and not exploding at all - save you about an hour of your life and it's an autowin for you. The only downside is that they are slightly out of range turn one.   

If you take 2 Fulminators, they will disappoint you so much - nothing is more reliable than 3+, 3+, -1 rend, 3 damage. Concussors are great, but very pricey.

Their Dracoth shooting attack is also very strong. 

That said, the buff from the new battatlion is good for the Dracoth (it does make Prime Time more reliable and he's normally very hard to buff since from memory he rocks up in the movement phase not the hero phase).

(I would warn that the Lightning Echelon battalion is very weak however, splitting the Fulminators into two units of 2 is a disaster and the charge through mechanic is incredibly hard to pull off because of the difficulty of getting over enemy bases.)

 

Eh... I suppose. You're still paying 80 more for essentially a squad of Crossbow Judicators with a better statwheel (and the Judicators are actually better shooting if they stand still), which makes me :\

I'm getting the box this weekend for the deal mainly. I currently have 2 Concussors and 2 Fulminators and was thinking of making the new ones into Fulminators just to run the 4 man killing squad, but maybe having another type could be good. 

[The Rumour Thread]

The Stormcast one requires Tempestors, which immediately makes me want to ignore it. 

[The Rumour Thread]

This does make that second rumor mill post with the staff feel like it could be an Aelf model. Still probably Tzeentch, but could be related to the box in some way.

[Events UK: Blood and Glory]

29 minutes ago, AAUBURGER said:

Any place we can see the lists?

You can see the top 5 on the Warhammer Community site here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/11/29/top-5-lists-from-blood-glory/

There's also a writeup from Ben Johnson here: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2016/12/02/blood-glory-the-winner/

I'm very happy seeing these lists. A decent variety in armies, models, and list archetypes. 

[The Rumour Thread]

The box set is likely just due to having overstock of those - my FLGS has 3-5 of the old Island of Blood boxes on the shelf, I'm assuming GW has more. Why waste the models when you can rebox them with new rules and bases and call it a day? I think that's more than fair, even if it does feel a smidge lazy

[TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback]

35 minutes ago, Andreas said:

Yes but is it fun?

I know fun is subjectiv but I think it would be fun so see arrowboys outside a 40man cunning ruk unit but if they just raise the points it will only reinforce that this is the only way to run them. Until you can not run them at all.

Or you just raise the points of the Rukk until it becomes a serious decision to bring rather than an autoinclude.

30 minutes ago, Squirrelmaster said:

Maybe a more nuanced points system? A unit could be, say 80pts for 10, 200 for 20, 360 for 30, 560 for 40. Rather than just a flat number of models x points-per-model.

Again, simplicity is the saving grace of AoS. If you need a formula to make a single unit, you're just causing issues.

[The Rumour Thread]

1 minute ago, polarbear said:

I wonder if there was a change of schedule behind the scenes and the AoS Tzeentch stuff wasn't ready to go yet in its entirety, so they moved the 40k Tzeentch up, hence the big AoS release gap and strange reappearance of Tzaangors. Who knows though.

I saw on another forum that the battleforces are going to be limited? Ugh! Tough decisions ahead...

That seems likely, though it's mostly conjecture. The talk of Tzeentch has been going around for a while, and from the sprues it looks to me that Magnus was supposed to share at least one with a Lord of Change. Perhaps they were finishing up some mortal Tzeentch stuff but it needed redoing. Or, if it was rules rebalancing, I'd say they should take their time  

[TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback]

31 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

The problem is that "fluff-friendly" is not as intuitive as it seems on the surface. 

Consider an alliance between  Sylvaneth and Fyreslayers.  There might have been mention here or there of individual battles where they fought on the same side, maybe, in Black Library or Realmgate Wars books, but I don't remember any prominent ones.  There certainly isn't any particular ideological similarity, beyond sharing a vague xenophobia, and a distaste for Chaos.  It would be disingenuous to make the claim "there is a strong fluff-based justifaction for a joint Sylvaneth-Fyreslayer army".  But other than the usual Allegiance ability and Battleline factors, there's no restraint on combining them in an Order army.

Alternately, consider an alliance between Stormcast Eternals and whatever Death faction Mannfred belongs to.  We've had quite prominent fluff stories of alliances between Stormcasts and various undead (see also that swordmaker's ghost in Chamon).  And yet, you're looking at Open Play if you want to try to recreate what I would consider to be a very fluff-friendly mixed Stormcast/undead army.

Basically, you'd be hard-pressed to come up with a fluff-based justification for a mixed Sylvaneth-Fyreslayer army that couldn't also justify a mixed Stormcast/undead army.  Or a mixed Bloodbound/Bonesplitterz army.  Or many other combinations where you could imagine short-term coincidental goals.

While that's true on a faction level, it's obviously much easier to group people together based on what demi-god or god they follow. Yes you can argue that there are fringe situations where alliances happen (in 40k, you could use Desperate Allies or Come the Apocalypse to represent this), but on the whole in the fluff, the Fyreslayers and Sylvaneth both ally themselves with Sigmar. While the Stormcast and the undead have teamed up (in some pretty decent books, at that), it was a tenuous alliance at best. The Stormcast are loyal to Sigmar (duh) while the undead will never (can never?) go against Nagash's will. 

I could accept there being allowances for certain armies or alliances, but honestly as I said above, the simplicity of Sigmar is one of the big driving points, and I think it would be more of a detriment to have an Allies matrix or 0 restrictions than it would be a boon. The simple Grand Alliance organization is easy to understand while still retaining mostly fluff sentiments, which seems as good as you could ask for.

[TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback]

53 minutes ago, KHHaunts said:

yes this was mostly applicable to cross alliance combos. However the majority of the subfaction specific allegiance abilites seem far more powerful the the grand alliance ones.

There is pros and cons to be gained from synergy. Again its may be more applicable to competitions but id would be great if that was left upto the comp and the actually GW rules were a little looser to accommodate "Friendly competitive" play with all sorts of bizzare armies with intresting outcomes. The list building is more than enough to ensure a bit of army structure.

I think there should be an option for cross-alliance combos - but with a cost. I would like to see a Mixed-Alliance section like the one for Order/Destruction/Death/Chaos. No Allegiance Ability, and the Command Traits and Artefacts are not as good. I think it should be an option for people to take but you should also be incentivized to take something more fluff friendly. 

But even that I'm hesitant about. I like that there's lines drawn and at least some pressure to be fluff-friendly. There will always be people powergaming and ignoring fluff, but I don't want it to be encouraged and become the norm like it is in another game I can think of.

 

 

As an aside, I think the thing I want to ask them most is to not change certain things. I worry about adding too much and ending up with the bloat that WHFB 8th had and 40k currently has. Just sort of remind them that the simplicity of Sigmar is what a lot of people love about it. 

[TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback]

A big thing I'd like to see for a V2 is rules for a smaller competitive game mode. My FLGS has been having a lot of fun with Kill Team over regular 40k lately, and there isn't really rules for anything similar in AoS other than houseruling. Something like Mordheim: AoS edition. I'd love to have a game where you can show up with only like 10-15 models and play a game. 

One of my favorite parts of TGH is that they have sections for different game modes, adding another like this would be awesome of them to do.