SwampHeart

I just don't see All Herd as remotely viable now given the CP purchase changes.

The FW team is now the design team for Bloodbowl, Necromunda, and other specialist games. That's why they aren't producing stuff for AoS and really haven't been doing a ton for 40k. GW has incorporated them effectively a silo studio to handle a range of small games.

I've painted 2k armies in less than a month to a standard that's gotten me paint nominations (player's choice because its all about pop, but you get the idea). 2k only seems daunting until you've built and painted a few armies and then you can see its really not a difficult process (time wise) to get there in a relatively quick time frame. Money is obviously a bit of a different story but that's the hobby in general.

No clue why, I play BoC and love the book. But I guess if your primary source of information on BoC is forums/social media you probably think the book is awful and isn't worth playing. But hey its not like a guy took 2nd with a list at Rend 4 filled with units that the majority of BoC players say are unusable.

These are supported by their own studios in house (its actually what FW does now). Just wanted to point that out because its relevant to understanding how many projects they're actually juggling vs. what people think they are.

I'm using ME for my Club Night games because it fits better in that scope and lets me get more people on the tables available. That said our store tournaments are and will continue to be 2k and most every Saturday pick up game is still a 2k game. Format is fun, has a ton of issues (just look at the GHB FAQ), and isn't any better than 2k as a tournament game. It has its uses and its been helpful in getting more players up to speed faster for sure but thankfully it won't be replacing 2k as the major tournament standard. On a more personal level I have 0 interest in the game, if I want to play small skirmish games there are loads of better options out there. Malifaux is fantastic, I enjoy Infinity, and if I want to keep in AoS Warcry is great fun as well. If I'm going to play AoS I want to, personally, play proper 2k games and practice for my next event or just enjoy getting to use my army as I've assembled it.

I use the TableWar large case, while expensive its hands down the best thing I've found for transporting the variety of minis an AoS army may have.

@Tasman @Grimrock I'm not telling you what to do. I'm just telling you that based on the expected outcomes BoC units out perform daemonettes at their points value. Daemonettes are a high value summon because you get a good wound to depravity return and when you aren't paying any points for them daemonettes are an exceptional unit. If you're having issues with hordes you should likely be taking any of the following: Blademistress on Exalted Chariot, Bestigors, Ungors, possibly Seekers. All of the aforementioned units are most cost effective at dealing with body counts than Daemonettes are for their points. Once you're able to summon in Daemonettes they become a very valuable tool set to deal with hordes later in the game after your first wave has gassed itself. If you want to take Daemonettes please be my guest, I'm simply stating that they are the least cost effective method the book has access to for dealing with large body counts. Yes they can be double piled in, yes you must take a drove for BoC options, neither of those are relevant to the core discussion of unit performance as it deals with models on the table. The battalion cost is less than the battalion cost for Epicureans (which is genuinely a requirement for Daemonettes to be actually useful when paid for) and the double pile in requires wholly within 12" and is usually better suited for a unit with a greater suite of re-rolls or specific damage potential. To be clear here as well, this isn't just me playing the game with math hammer. This is the end result of roughly 50 games played with HoS with a fairly huge variety of lists. I've run pure HoS, I've run mixed BoC/HoS, hero and infantry heavy. My sample size isn't gigantic but I've played against enough different army types at this point to feel confident in my assessment of Daemonettes vs. other battle line options. Daemonettes are, again, one of the best summons in the book. They have clear value, its just a question of how you include them in the list.

40 Ungors, at a lower cost, do 22 wounds with 10 more bodies with the same lack of support. Daemonettes can't be considered in the vacuum of 'only available battle line infantry unit'. 30 Gors do 29 wounds with a better save. Daemonettes are a very underwhelming choice and require a considerable amount of support to be made viable in the current meta.

Bestigors do it better though.

This is correct - for some reason they won't update/make available the FAQs on the app. You have to use the Warhammer Community site.

Many of the new scenarios have significantly smaller enemy territories.

You mean like they've been for the last few months with HoS, Skaven, and FS in the meta? I.E. they've been quickly unlocked and people have learned to deal with them appropriately?

Almost 100% sure the "update" was it being available in Japanese. Multiple people have tweeted GW/posted on their FB and nothing has come of it. I don't think they're changing anything about the book, its too new to warrant any real feedback.

If you're willing to scratch through Google translate, nothing has changed from the current FAQ to the new one in Japanese. EDIT* They're in English now with no updates.

You screen appropriately and deploy understanding their movement? Or you take things that also play in the activation wars (if you play Chaos you have access to a GBS and the Taurus at all times). Honestly at the top end most people have been dealing with them already (you can see their downward shift in dominance from their release until now, especially with things like Skaven and FS entering the meta). That said even playing against them with BoC I always found they were manageable.

I mean you quite obviously use the base the model is supplied with. But I also never use the base chart for current range models - unless its an older model that can actually be ambiguous its usually pretty obvious what you should be using.

Wounds taken aren't a modifier, they're just something you track over the course of the game. The wounds characteristic doesn't change, just wounds remaining.

Slaanesh doesn't have any ambiguous basing - you can use the Hosts of Slaanesh in the basing chart, nothing changed.

Why does it need to be updated just out of curiosity?

Everything that I wanted to see increase increased. Clan Rats stayed the same but I don't care about Death Frenzy clan rats, Plague Monks and all of the Verminlords increased. That paired with the WLC nerf are enough for me to see Skaven sit in a place I'm happy to play against them in.

Maybe? The article says they'll be doing points reviews with the rules reviews but only for books that have been published since the last points/rules update.

FeC has super rapidly dropped from its top, people know how to counter play it and especially with Slaanesh in the meta it just isn't what it was on release. Now with the Savage Strike change FeC are in the solidly good tier but they're not kings (and really haven't been since the first 2 months of their release).

DoK already got their point changes in GHB 2019, and the Savage Strike change is a big deal. Savage Strike now has a counter play option that simply didn't exist before.

You can change the URL to read the Slaanesh FAQ, there are no changes so I don't know why it was re-uploaded. We're missing the Skaven FAQ and the GHB FAQ at current. Don't know if someone was in a hurry to hit upload today or what but its a messy launch.