WoollyMammoth

I don't mind the Grand Alliance system, but I think that its trying too hard to be forced into 4 boxes. Already with ally system they are set into individual boxes, but the option to pick and choose is still available. It's also still a bit of a problem, specifically in order, where you have such a wide variety to pick and choose the best items. Both LVO and Adepticon had mixed order lists in the top 10. It's not dominating the meta, its not a competitive problem, its more of just the fact that it kind of sucks if you are a fan of Warhammer Fantasy or of a 'grand alliance' that is only a fraction of the size of order. Things like Morathi being a snake-daemon who bathes in blood being an order army. Also I hate skaven in Chaos. I would prefer if they just split order up into a couple groups and made skaven its own thing like death, and then I think that things would have more balance from a lore and size perspective. Order is the 'good guys' while chaos/destruction/death are the 'bad guys'. I think its time to break the good guys into multiple groups too.

On twitch today Phil Kelly said new factions super soon, keep an eye on MalignPortents.com. Could be a reference to the new death changes, but it sounds like new models. My local GW store manager said he 'saw an incredible new Black Coach'. I asked where and he said .. not on something public.

@Arkiham AoS armies are 1/3 the size and the special rules for each army are typically straightforward (and no stratagems). There are already armies for these races so they are simply getting updated, meaning what we already know about these armies are simply changing. The scrolls are all free so its not hard to take a peek and see all the things that are going on when an army gets updated. As far as the core rules, at least 1/4 of the pages are useless to most players, they could simply clean it up. Adding a note about B2B measurement and making a shooting rule like "units engaged in the shooting phase may only target units within 3" of them" would add more strategy to the game without making things overly complex.

40k is vastly more complex than AoS and honestly, its turning me off. In order to win any game of warhammer you have to understand how to win, how to get the objectives. You have to understand the strengths and weaknesses of your army and how your units are likely to perform in various situations. Lastly - perhaps most importantly - you have to know your enemy. You have to understand what your opponent wants to do with their army, and you have to know how to stop them from doing it. In AoS its not hard to learn the armies and what they do, what they are likely to do. You need a screen unit vs Khorne to force them into a bad combat when they fly across the table turn 1. For Kunnin Rukk, you need a plan to kill their Orruk Warboss asap and end their double shooting. For Tzeentch you need a way to mitigate their Skyfires asap before they can do too much harm. For Skyre you need to beat down on the Stormfiends before they can freely do 18D3 mortal wounds to you. Etc, etc. For 40k, things are much different. To start, armies have about 3 times the units on average than AoS armies, so there is a lot more variety and things to understand. Next, you need to understand the special rules of all the armies. With 2+ books coming out a month this is insane to keep up with. Then there are the stratagems. Hundreds and hundreds of stratagems you have to read, understand, and be aware of how your enemy is going to use them to stop you from doing what you want to do, pull off their own combos and sucker punch you. Add on top of all this complexity the fact that 40k players are about 3x more likely to show up for a game with zero painted models. So you take your beautiful models you spent eons painting, and get blown out hard by some silly netlist of gray plastic models. AoS players tend to take more pride in their painting. Sure there are gray models abound but often there is at least a few fully painted units and monsters, compared to completely barren gray plastic i see with most 40k armies. Maybe this culture is changing with the new simplified ruleset appealing to more hobby-focused gamers, but right now I see mostly the same as usual. I got the Death Guard starter because it was dirt cheap, and a few supplemental boxes, but at this point some of them are unopened and I have little interest in getting more. Sure AoS has its problems, but most of them stem from inattention compared to 40k that got two new armies, a new ruleset and 10 new army books in the last 6 months. If they start to give this kind of love to AoS, and support their incomplete armies like Elves, Death, Free Peoples, Grots, etc, then most of the problems with AoS will be gone. After xmass we are very likely getting Deathrattle, combined Nurgle, and maybe even High Elves. Next year we might get a core rule update where they cut out the fat and write some new clarity like B2B measurement and more complex rules for shooting.

@shinros I was thinking that the reason death has not gotten anything is because they were going to do a whole campaign where death becomes the main protagonist and suddenly 5 new death armies drop in 6 months. I was also hoping this is not the case because getting too much is not a good thing either, it would be too much to keep up with and too expensive to start 5 new armies in a single year. One new death army every other year would be amazing. @RuneBrush Its about time for a core update. The 4 pages include silliness like wound count, sudden death and triumphs - which most of us have been ignoring for years. The scenery rules could use some updates and the core rules could use a little bit more meat.

First of all, a GW year is Spring - Spring, so this whole 2017 discussion is arbitrary. Last GW year was Tzeentch and we saw a lot of new stuff like Silver Tower, Khorne update + unification, Stormcast update + vanguard army + unification, and of course the big Tzeentch drop which was far more than an update + unification; an entire new army of stuff to go with it. All this not to mention an entire reboot of AoS, starting the new Allegiance direction for the game, and releasing the GH which skyrocketed the hobby into a new renaissance, and then ending with a jaw dropping Kharadron Overloard release. This year (The Year of Nurgle) started off with big things for 40k, and they got two new armies. With a massive reboot of the game that gets at least 60% of their business, its understandable that AoS would take a sideline. Despite that this is not AoS related, the Sigmar-ification of 40k has created mass appeal to many die hard fantasy-only players, so this is a good thing for most of us. While 40k is still going strong, releasing their new armies and new books, they still started major drops for AoS. They are experimenting and trying new things on their long journey to make AoS more balanced and constantly interesting. First off the GH:2017 is a big deal, reflecting that fact they will be updating the meta every year and constantly updating points and sometimes even scrolls. They also made a big step toward getting a lot more people on board with the new Allegiance direction, and expanding all 3 ways of play with more variety and options. This was quickly followed by Blightwar which was a combination of: starter set for new players, two new models and allegiance for Nurgle. On the topic of starter set, this is one of the most important aspects of the game; getting new players or existing players to start new armies/games. The last year has been a revolution in how to get started, starting with small model packs and the new Skirmish game, moving into mid-range army starter sets, now with colored plastics and using the box for terrain. Then this ties in with Path to Glory and getting into campaigns, boosted by the new Firestorm. Then there are large starter sets, always with incredible value, providing a ton of beautiful models so you can dive right in. Last we have a revolution of 'Getting Started' boxes, where GW is providing discounts for the first time. There have been so many amazing new discounted box sets, I can't even count them. All of this benefits the entire AoS community in many important ways. Now we are getting Shadespire, which is a combination of several things. First off, it might just be a fun board game. Basic board games appeal to a wider variety of audiences and might serve as another gateway into AoS, or a way to play your miniatures with people who might not be interested in playing a full tabletop game. Secondly, its providing us with something like 100 new models over the next few months which will have full integration into AoS in some way. They are also pushing the competitive aspect of it, which means it might be a way for some of us to scratch a more competitive itch, or remove some of those kinds of people from the AoS pool. Technically this year is not even half over. Maybe not before Jan, but we are likely to see a lot more before spring. Deathrattle and Nurgle battletomes are all but guaranteed, which would put us in the 2 new-model armies a year par that seems to be the case for both AoS and 40k. We could even see some big surprises such as an elf reboot or an entirely new Death army. More Shadespire is sure to come as well, releasing new models for armies like Skaven & fyreslayers. maybe it will have a small impact; maybe a large impact. For example, the release of the 5 Wulfen models had a big effect on Space Wolves in 40k. There is only anything to get down about if you hyper focus what you want on one specific thing. For example, if you have restricted yourself to only playing High Elves in 2k point matched play AoS; and refuse to do anything else - then you are focusing on one tiny part of the hobby (though you have fresh new battleplans, and a huge array of new Order models to ally with). You are one paint stroke in a massive painting that GW is trying to make here. You just have to accept that it may be 5 or even 10 years before GW comes back around to you - or maybe not at all. Some players like Tomb Kings have to pick a new thing or they will simply fade away. But, if you just love AoS, beautiful models, good games, etc. - and are willing to experiment with new armies, new ways of play, and even some new games - GW is raining content down on you on a regular basis to where its literally impossible to keep up with. We all have our favorite thing, and it sucks if that thing is getting nothing for a long time (everyone knows how I feel about Death) but its absolutely insane to call the last few years anything other than an unbelievable godsend for Warhammer fans and the entire world of tabletop gaming. If you cannot see this, you really have to get out of your shell and start taking a wider look at what is going on around you and what this hobby has to offer. There is an amazing variety of things to do and people who are interested in trying it with you, and its only getting better with literally every week that passes.

thats such a cool idea

@Tanka Not every chaos mount is daemonic. Juggernauts are kind of like machines made by daemonic forges, but lack the inherent daemonic properties of an actual daemon. The lore suggests they are daemonic but none of them have a daemon keyword, so they are simply not daemons. Ghurk is clearly not a machine, he is some kind of daemon prince-esque monster. The lore simply suggests he is "mutated" but he looks like a daemon so its pretty silly.

I like the double turn, but I think that its a little OP in certain games, so I wish that there was a mechanic to prevent it from being way too OP, especially for new players. I think its a mistake to just house rule it out, because that only brings back issues with the old "whoever goes first wins" problem that the double turn is trying to prevent.

The Dreaded Double Turn In AoS, the biggest point of contention is the dreaded double turn. Many a player has said "oh then he got the double turn and so I lost". You might argue all kinds of things about this, but the fact is, in some cases, its hard to deny. Personally I'm for the initiative roll. I think that it is interesting and adds more complexity to the game, though I don't think its 100% perfect as it currently is. Experienced players know how to prepare for the double turn, to see it coming - to avoid those kind of mistakes that make the double turn seem overpowered. Here is a great article on that: https://aos-tactics.com/2017/01/08/how-to-optimise-for-the-double-turn/ Regardless, there are many players who despise the double turn, whether they often devastated not knowing how to manage it, or just hate the concept. Armies start 24" apart, so the first turn is usually spent setting up with limited options. Most spells are capped at 24", a lot of shooting is limited to 24" effective range, etc. This means you are severely limited first turn. For many armies, and especially new players, the first turn is a big fat nothingburger. Worse, if you move up even 1", you are putting yourself in range of a lot of your opponents abilities. Many people run forward the first turn (often hoping to win the initiative) and basically put themselves in range of most everything their opponent can do. Therefore, Player 2 gets a full turn of shooting and abilities - maybe even charging - the first turn .. whereas all Player 1 did was move. Then when Player 2 gets the double turn, the score is basically 2-0 by the time you are ready to throw your first punch. This is typically the standard scenario with most new players, leading to the idea that AoS is a just a silly game of "whomever wins the first turn roll wins." Personally I feel this hurts the game overall. Not necessarily because the initiative roll is bad, but because most players walk into it like a brick wall and have to get bloody enough times before they start to realize what is going on. I'm not saying we should make the game easier or more simple, but maybe its time to take a look at initiative and improve it without having to take away from the game. The First Initiative Roll The initiative roll is never so massively important as the first one. As the game goes on, everyone gets into brawls. With the turn taking in close combat, some turns have so many combats that you can forget who's turn it is. Very rarely are you desperately trying to get the double turn at the start of turn 3 or 4 - and if you are relying on the double turn to get ahead at that point, it is usually because you are in a bad situation and you are hoping for a double turn to save you. Typically in these cases if you reflect back to what happened in turn 1 and 2, you could have made better decisions. Comparison to Warhammer 40k Sometimes you have an awesome first turn and everything just goes for you. You make insane charges and everything is just working. In this case, your opponent will desperately need a turn to react. If you lose initiative you are really screwed. I have seen this many times, where the first player just has a phenomenal first turn, and there is so much the opponent needs to do to react - but the double turn comes down and, in many cases, solidifies the victory, compounding the success of one player to the extreme. This is not the case in 40k. If player 1 has a great turn, the player 2 can always react and do something. Sure, the player 1 is at an advantage, being able to take two turns between the player 2s single turn, but at least player 2 can react between and try to mitigate, as well as focus the biggest threats. Notably, 8th edition 40k did not adapt the initiative roll. Maybe they wanted to make the games different, maybe the way shooting and combat works, it just wouldn't work. But frankly, if the initiative roll was revolutionary, making the game much better, more fun or more competitive, then they would have added it into the new 40k. The fact is, the initiative roll does not make the game unarguably better (at least in its current, raw form). Deployment The concept of deployment is simple, when one player has an army with lots of little throw away units, they can 'scout' what the opponent is doing and force them to show their hand, thus setting up your counters in perfect place to give you the advantage. Unfortunately, in AoS things can teleport around the map - this is an alternate form of deployment which happens after deployment, therefore you can dictate the flow of battle even if you finish first and are given the opportunity to dictate who goes first. Far too often going second is a total win-win with no drawbacks whatsoever, where even if your opponent goes first they are doing little more than moving into range of your abilities, and even if you don't get the double turn, you will still have had two good turns to your opponents one good turn by the end of round 2. Then there are battalions. The solution for the new handbook is to make them more expensive, which does help a lot, but there is still the big issue that many armies don't have battalions, or any worth taking. This allows certain armies to fully set up and force the other to go first. With armies like Sylvaneth and Stormcast, they can force the first turn knowing full well they will have complete control over movement when they get their turn. For example, a Stormcast army could use a stormhost to deploy their entire army off the table and then force their opponent to go first against an empty table, then set up 2/3 of their army with a chance to charge and then a chance to get a double turn. The New 2017 Meta There is a clear push in the new handbook to prevent first turn charges. Things like Sayl and a Vampire Lord on Abyssal Terror are totally nerfed. These were some of the best opportunities for melee heavy armies to get a first turn charge and put them in good position against a double turn. There are still plenty of options for 9" deployment, but that gives you a very low chance to get things going when you are forced with the first turn. Solutions The most obvious solutions to the double turn is to simply prepare for it. Create lists with a lot of good options to deal with the double turn. if you are forced to go first and don't want to, forfeit all your best laid plans and turtle the hell up, move back, cower in and behind cover and make sure your opponent is not going to be able to take the game from you. But there could be other solutions, improvements to the rules to make things go smoothly. Here are some ideas: First Turn/Deployment - Add a first turn initiative, with modifiers based on certain factors (-1 if your army contains more units, -1 if you have units off the table, -1 if you have a summoning pool) The Double Turn - Create defensive options/skills/abilities for armies that activate when forced to deal with a double turn - Each player gets a +1 to their initiative roll for each unit lost in the previous round - Don't start initiative until the start of turn 3 These are just some ideas. The initiative roll is so massive in AoS right now, and the new changes make it even harder to get something going before faced with a double turn. Personally I like the idea but I think there needs to be some more tweaking of the concept to get it just right.

@Spiky Norman Ghurk Glott is clearly a daemon, in the same way a mortal who turns into a daemon prince is a daemon (and has the daemon keyword). Any model riding on a daemonic mount has the daemon keyword (Harbinger of Decay, Hellstriders/Lord of Slaanesh on mount, etc) even when the rider is mortal. Whether or not a Maggoth is a daemon is debatable, it could be some kind of ugly mortal beast. But if Ghurk is not a daemon .. I don't know what is.

I really hope so. Feb is such a long time away though Yeah its super lame. It sounds like they will make heralds wizards, which is super needed. Nurgle overall needs a ton of work. - Glottkin is weird. Why is he not a Daemon? Why doesn't he have DR? Does anybody even know how Horrific Opponent even works?? He needs much more given the fact he can't take artifacts or allegiance. - Plaguebearers do nothing. They need more rules. - Drones are armed with a bunch of wet noodles. They are pretty good near a Nurgle hero, but the mortal wound thing should just be innate so its not so clumsy. - Daemon Prince getting +1 save is lame. He should have DR. - Nurglings do nothing - GUO & Beasts desperately need rule updates almost as much as model updates. - Epidemius is actually pretty cool but his model is terrible - Blightkings are decent but desperately need support for survivablity and damage. Its such an awesome kit with a million options reduced to "blighted weapon". They can do so much more with the rules. Why are there shields with no shield rules?? - Gutrot is cool but he lacks any synergy - Sorcerer needs to get close but lack DR and only has a 5+ save - Lord of Plagues is terrible - Its awesome that you can take a Verminlord Corruptor, but he is consistently disappointing. Festus and Harbinger are great, and the Maggoth Lords are cool, but its not enough to hold up an army. The entire army needs to be seriously rewritten to be relevant. 40k Nurgle daemons are a boatload more fun, and there is a million CSM 'daemons' for synergy. The DG codex is amazing with a million awesome, fun things. There are a few ways to make a decent army in AoS, but so much of it is complete trash atm. I have most of the models, and want to use them, but they are simply not fun to play. I'm hoping for some serious changes with a new tome.

@Kurrilino This is probably accurate, the new novel excerpt talks about a stormcast in weathered armor, wearing an orruk skull as a shoulderpad. Most likely stormcast will split into legitimate sub-factions at some point, maybe even chaos eternals or death eternals. I'm waiting for Torglug to show up as a stormcast - this is likely the year of nurgle.

This is exactly what I have been going for since I started fantasy. This is awesome and gives me focus and direction. I'm going to read through this whole forum carefully in the next few days. I hope the new AoS 'skirmish' game fits into this nicely, because I probably don't want to try and learn and promote Hinterlands. People are raving about Shadow Wars, and I'm currently building a Genestealer Cult warband that would probably fit right in with Inq28. I have a ton of models that are or are close to exactly what AoS28 is, and I'll be organizing and finalizing them for show here soon. Though I keep leaning more and more toword the hobby, I tend to make models built around GW game systems so I can enjoy them on the table (I love to take action shots!) First, I'll show one of my most popular conversions, and some lore behind it. It's a little big for AoS28 so I'll get it out of the way first: Ancient Nehekhara was a beautiful but harsh, unforgiving land. Few creatures could survive the unforgiving, sun-bleached sands. The people who resided in this ancient kingdom had to travel quickly, often upon horses bred for durability and speed. The lords of the kingdom would ride great decorated chariots - the size and extravagance of the chariot denoting the stature of the lord. However large and extravagant a chariot might be, all pale in comparison to the most prized of all mounts - the rare and legendary beasts known as the Vhuul. The Vhuul were great muscular beasts who roamed the desert on dark nights. Some claim they are descendant from the great dragons of Naggaroth, others that they are corruptions of the beasts now known as Dracoth. They are carrion beasts, roaming for those animals and creatures the desert has claimed. They say that the eating of dead flesh grants great unnatural strength, but also binds the living soul to the will of Nagash. If so this great strength could be seen in the dark elegance of of Vhuul. There are claims that some of the ancient peoples of Nehekhara were able to capture and even train these creatures as loyal mounts. By the height of the Nehekahara empire, however, such an idea was already legend. Few of these creatures remained and their bones were entombed, later to be resurrected as the great skeletal guardians known as the Morghast Archai. After the time of Nagash, the great Vampire Lords would try to re-create a Vhuul as great constructs of flesh and bone. These creatures came to be known as Abyssal Terrors. Though great and powerful flying mounts, they were Vhuul only in concept, the actual beasts having gone extinct in a lost age. In this new age, by some corruption of the will of Sigmar, the Vhuul have returned, seen wandering the great bone seas of Shyish. Neferata sensed the essence of these beasts immediately and began enforcing her will upon them, organizing a coven of the beats to act as loyal bodyguards. While she herself now rides upon a Dread Abyssal, the greatest and most loyal of her vampires may be gifted one of these Vhuul, the greatest prize awarded for service to the Queen of the Damned. Neferata still looks like the beautiful young woman she was when she ruled Lahmia, though her sunless existence has given her pure white skin, and her eyes have turned yellow. Long black tresses frame an exquisite face that is still capable of inspiring worship, though it is incapable of expressing pity. - Warhammer Wikia

@Bjarni St. The first army i ever started was Necrons. They have been sitting in my closet for 5 years and now I'm trying to sell them actually. Its not because I don't like them but more because my painting and general hobby skill has progressed far enough that it hurts me to look at them. Despite that they do look cool, they were painfully boring to play. Walk, shoot, walk, shoot, walk, shoot. You can do some things but, last I knew that was the most effective way to play them regardless. @Storm Helanhammer 170, they talk a lot about how the painting levels for 40k tend to be lower than AoS http://heelanhammer.com/ep170/ That's not to say there are not great painters all over the place. I've seen some really cool stuff in my area.

I knew the announcement was going to be 40k. They tried to trick us by announcing it in the middle of SCGT, but I knew. They are clearly trying to transition more softly in order to avoid their mistakes with fantasy. Regardless, I'm sure the new "matched play" rules will still be convoluted w/ lots of special rules and split profiles which you have to keep jumping back and fourth between pages to know whats going on. I don't like 40k. Its not that the game is not fun, its that - Shooting is always the least interesting kind of tabletop, and 40k is 99% shooting. - The constant rule updates mean that people are always having to buy new models to adjust to the meta and so the game promotes unpainted or poorly painted models. I'm not saying there aren't amazing 40k painters out there, but the average painting level of AoS is much higher, and the chances of playing a "totally gray army" at a local game is much more likely with 40k. - I don't love the lore and art direction. I really like 10% of the models and the lore, whereas with fantasy I really like 90% of the models and the lore (if not more). - I don't like space marines, and about 75% of players are space marine-types, which makes the game fairly visually repetitive. The idea of just buying what I want and painting it is appealing, but we all know that is not going to be the case. I'm sure it will be with 'open play' but finding someone else to play open play is going to be very difficult, and even so the games are going to feel silly where nothing really matters. Honestly, unless tomorrow they come out with space death or something, I don't see myself ever getting into 40k. Even if there is an army which is really appealing to me, there is always going to be 3x more cool armies in AoS that I would rather make. Last weekend a GW employee told me that a new elf book was coming and then some kind of new Tomb Kings. Meanwhile, deathrattle is getting reboxed and the rumor engine has a blatant skaven tail. I have no idea whats going on anymore.

beautiful

- Abhorrant on Zombie Dragon -