EMMachine

Skaven is really a weird one. We had a big update for Gloomspite Gitz a month before the Skaven Battletome, but only got the Warlock Bombardier with the Campaignbox. They have so much potential for new models but maybe GW doesn't really know what to do with them. In fact Gloomspite Gitz was the last army of the already existing ones that had a big model update with the Battletome Release, all other Armies after that got a Battletome and at best a Hero, Endless Spells and/or Factionterrain. (okay Slaves to Darkness got a Small Model update with the Start Collecting Box but even they basicly wait for a bigger update for their old plastic and Finecast Models.

I think you got @Spiky Norman sentence the wrong way. He didn't say Ally Rogue Idol in a Grot List. He said, ally Grot Shamans into your Great Waaagh to get more casters.

I think subfactions do have another problem. Most of the time they are simply additional rules for an Allegiance with the only restriction stat command traits and artefacts are fix. The subfactions were meant to give a little lore flavored rules. The problems are that there isn't much lore for some of the subfactions in the first place and it's not really flavorful that for example every Celestial Vindicators General has the the same Command Trait and each Army has the same Artefact. Flesh Eater Courts has a interesting aspect that you either get the feast rule or the rule of your Grand Court or rules like with Cities of Sigmar or Hedonites of Slaanesh where every subfaction has his own set of command Traits / Artefacts maybe lore (but here you are mostly forced to take a subfaction) I would say, Battlelines as well as battalions are partly a medium of saying "an army of this faction / with this subfaction / with this general should be structured that way. This way it makes sense having a Melusai Army when having a Melusai General or having Corsairs as battleline if the Fleet Master is Battleline. It gives the army flavor (which wasn't the case in WHFB for example where every army had there fix set of Battleline units). If elite units can be used as battleline they often trait strength for numbers (you can have Grundstok Thunders as Battleline but 5 of them are more expensive than a 10 man Arcanaut Company. (so they have a disadventage when holding objectives) But there are also cases were lore isn't even buildable (for example the Extremis Chamber, or that you need a Lord Arcanum to make Sequitors Battleline, while in the Lore there is often a Knight Incantors Leading because a chamber has more Knight Incantors stan Lord Arcanums.) In case of the Tree-Revenants we would need the rest of the list because looking at the household for example 1 Household would be 1 unit of Tree Revenants, 1 Treelord and one branchwych, and a glade has most of the time 3 Households (but the battalion is actually a wierd one looking into the lore). I think the problem with killing of the Grand Alliance System is, that it is the only thing that partly keeps Legends und Compendium units alive that don't have the keywords to fit into the Allegiance Rules of the Battletomes, and it is basicly a mechanicsm to create your own faction with your own lore by combining warscrolls of different battletomes with the disadvantages of having weaker allegiance rules and only real Battleline units are useable.

My guess for the pre-order date of Sons of Behemat is 10th October 2020 because it is the preorder-date of the Sons of Behemat Audiodrama. (At least it has worked with the Realmlords because of the Novel Release.)

5th of September is not really possible anymore because it would have been mentioned in yesterdays Preorder next week (which is the Blackstone Fortress release), but I really think, we will get the announcement for Lumineth for the preorder next week on August, 30 so the release will be September 12.

Let's see what the Broken Realms books will bring, that were announced in the stream today. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/08/22/warhammer-preview-online-shadow-iron-broken-realms/ It sounded like something that we want.

I have the feeling, what we basicly need would be some sort of "Adventure" Books like those for Dungeons and Dragons where you get most of the information you need for a region as a Dungeon Master (so basicly Soulbound).

Bringing back Points per Model and Equipement would just bring another problem, that I already see in other forums. 40k has Powerlevel and Points (where Powerlevel is basicly what the points that AoS has right now. The community is basicly split into two groups. The people that play with Points and literially state that Powerlevel should be removed because it is unbalanced and the people that like Powerlevel and don't want to spent hours to write there list. Points is not better balanced (it never was) The difference is, that with powerpoints units with much special equipment has the preference while it is getting way to expensive with Points. It would basicly ****** up all existing lists and people would simply leave out all special equipment to get more models on the table. While it would be easier with units where you can build heroes from (like in case of Flesh Eater Courts. It will basicly be an element to max out armies even more and and GW wouldn't be able to change points by 10 anymore in some cases where the unit for example has 3 or 20 models. And how do you get 6 points more or less in a game where all Points are at least values of 10? I thing I would wish for would be if all subfactions were structured like Hedonites of Slaanesh or Cities of Sigmar, so every Subfaction would have their own list of Command Traits and Artefacts instead of 1 of both they are forced to get. That's not really immersive (but that is more a Battletome thing than a edition thing).

The funny thing is. Battalions are normally a way to show how a faction should look in the lore, but reading the lore it is sometimes hit or miss, if the battalion is a good representation or not.

Looking at WH40k I could see the following stuff. The Battleshock role only states if the unit misses or succedds Battleshock, 1 model goes automaticly and all others have to role if they flee too. Modifications to coherency for larger units, to prevent congalines and bring the unit closer together. Generals Handbook more in the Form of the gaming Book, so all rules needed for matched Play are in one Book (after Pitched Battle is basicly updated every year) + maybe sprit into a bundle of two books with the second book being Stuff for Open & Narrative Play. Standardized Rules for Prayers and Prayermodels (Fyreslayers + Khorne) Similar to Spells and Endlessspells (because a Wizard can know x spells from different scources and only can bring 1 while a Priest with x sources can basicly bring them all. The Idea itself from a loreperspective isn't a problem. The way it was used in WHFB and 9th Age still gives me knightmares if a simple champion could basicly tank all 40+ wounds of Archaon instead of killing the entire unit like it should be. Things like that killed the immersion that I stopped playing 9th Age entirely. (okay, I'm not really playing AoS at the moment, only building and painting models and reading the lore but still). Instead of alternating activations it would basicly fit better if the player has to roll 1 dice for each of the Endlessspells and on a 3+ he controls if while on a 1 or 2 the opponent controls it. That way the opponent woundn't strate get halve of the endlessspells or all of them im case of only 1 being on the field. Exactly this. Having 1 PDF on Warhammer Community that is Updated over time would clean up the mess that is Generals Handbook + Errata for newer Battletomes + Errata for Generals Handbook if the same Warscroll is used in an old and new faction because the Point Change of the Errata is conflicting with the Generals Handbook. And that way they would clear the problem too, that writing the Points somewhere (or an Armybuider) would basicly be a copyrightinfringement. I think the main problem is, that unit size is combined with the Matched Play Points. I think than they had to nerf high movement range units because some Armies basicly need the double turn to get them in combat. Isn't that called simply hidden agenda in AoS?

I don't use the Subscription instead i'm Buying the Books (even though it is most likely more expensive than the subscription). I don't like subscriptions because as we see now it is a lazy way for a constant stream of money without doing anything for the product. With buying the books GW has to do something to get their money.

I don't think, that we really need a one trick pony army that only can be played 1 way. It really would make more sense giving the Freeguild more Cavalry units, so it could be 1 playstyle of the Freeguild, like it is partly shown in AoS Lore (with Sons of Breton or The Knights of the Furrow for Order). Or the Order of the Fly for Chaos, that basicly use the same traits that Bretonia had in the old world.

A Battleround for Knife to the Heart is basicly Structured like this (when you look at it like in a computer program): At the Start of Battleround 3, the condition for Major Victory will be enabled, but you can't win at the start of turn 3 because the Check for Victory Conditions was at the end of last Players Turn 2. There is no check for Victory Conditions until end of Player 1 Turn 3 when Objectives are checked again. Until the end of Turn two the Major Victory Condition is disabled you you can't win with a fast Army in Turn 1 or 2. Edit: If GW wanted that you win in Turn 2. They would have enabled the Major Victory at the end of Turn 2 (when the Last player checks Objectives) not at the Start of Turn 3.

Well core rules Page 10 "Battleplans" "Objectives" paragraph 4 is the only point where the Check if you are controlling a Objective is mentioned. And it is at the End of a playerturn. After it is the only point were in the entire turn where the ccontrol is checked (and Knife to the Heart uses the Standard Objective Rules) the Check for a major victory can only be at the end of a playerturn, not at the start of a round.

The Major victory criterion is enabled in turn 3 but checking for victory is at the end of a Player turn (when you look who controls objectives). So you can't automaticly win after turn two. Only if at least the first Player has ended his turn 3.

A unit can't be part of two different Battalions that require the unit. It can be only part of a second battalion if that second battalion requires the Battalion the unit is included. This is stated in the corerules in the part "Battalion Abilities" Sentence 2

The funny thing is, that they will sell the game in the Bookstores "Thalia" in Germany. Dreadfane back than was sold on "Müller" a drugstore, that also has toys, Music, videogames, and other stuff. Dreadfane and Space Marine Adventures were both german.

It's a warscroll ability of Nagash and Arkhan. Since it is the newest version of Nagash, Arkhan and the Morghast. Arkhan and Nagash can Heal Morghast even in a Legion of Nagash Army.

Looks more like an Audiodrama to me. The picture is a CD case.

Maybe they want you guys play open and narrative play instead of matched play? I mean, mercenaries as well as Amboss of Apotheosis Character rules are both in the narrative section of the Generals Handbook. They have to took away stuff in matched play that are not on sale anymore (because GH2019 is oop) or make it only allowed in Matched Play if the opponent agrees to it.

Let's see if AoS 3.0 has the same rule as WH40k 9. Edition, that larger units (need to models next to them to be in coherrency). In 40k it is when you have 6 or more models in the unit, but many units in 40k are just 5-10 Models.

In the Scenarytable in the Generals Handbook 2020 and the pdf "Warhammer Age of Sigmar Scenery Warscrolls" in the Warhammer Community download Section it is called "Wyldwood" The name of the Sylvaneth one is "Awakened Wyldwood"

Yeah right, Kharadron had it first but than. Maggotkin was still Battalions (and Legions of Nagash was another form of mess) It should have been. The problem is, that GW doesn't really know what they want. If a subfaction simply has a forced Command Trait/Artefact like most Allegiances or if they have their own set of Allegiance Abilities like Cities of Sigmar or Hedonites of Slaanesh (the last variante would actually be the better one. Lethis has actually another problem, because even it is a City it didn't have any of the Cities of Sigmar units in it (it was Fyreslayers, Deepkin and Stormcast for the most part) + the worst set-up you can create for Battalions. The realm woundn't have been a problem because the city states in which realm it is. But Legion of Grief should have a more elegant way if it and Legions of Nagash would get an update.

That's from White Dwarf 455, isn't it? If we look at the Tome Celestial until now, it was quite backward to games development. I mean GW started to create subfactions inside the allegiance back in March 2018 with Battletome Daughters of Khaine, but still used Factionbattalions in the White Dwarf 453. Hopefully they aren't Allegiance Abilities and more subfactions for an Allegiance Ability. The problem with the first one is, that they won't be able to use Battalions because they aren't part of the Battletome, but they could if the faction would still use the normal battletome.

Yeah, thats a thing in my case too. I played 40k since 4. Edition and WHFB in 7. + Start of 8. Edition and my group in that time was very tournament oriented and forums were basicly the same. So as a new player you basicly think that it is the only existing way to play. Even a campaign was more some sort of league with maxed out armies. Including the three ways to play simply show, that there is more than one way.