Grimrock

Unfortunately not true. As per 'Stealing the Initiative' in the Contest of Generals battlepack if you finished deploying first you automatically gain priority. Reference section 4.1 'The Priority Roll'. Having priority in a round means you get to pick who goes first just like before. Also, this is something I really do like with the rules. Not this rule in particular, but referencing, clarity, and consistent wording in general are fantastic.

Yup, exactly my issue with combat ranges. And yeah, miscast is a thing. Roll a double 1 and you take d3 mortals and that wizard can't cast anymore that hero phase. Odds are low it'll have an impact for most casters, but with Nagash casting 8 spells a turn it'll probably happen way more often than you'd like. I mean Tactical Nuclear Nagash is still a thing (prime 8 arcane bolts and unload 9d3 mortal wounds on whoever is unfortunate enough to end up in combat with you), but you better hope you don't double 1 on the first spell. No way to reroll either which surprised me. I figured they would add a generic command ability that let a wizard or priest re-roll once in the hero phase but I guess not. They did add a pair of generic command traits for that but, you know, character model. Good times.

Generally? Nothing. Combat still works pretty much the same as it did before. There are some extra clarifications in the Core Concepts section like you can only get one ability that triggers on a roll. There's a special section that breaks down Strike First and Strike Last and how they interact with eachother. I think the damage section is a bit nicer too but I don't think there were any changes in how it works. Battleshock is pretty much the same. The only change I noticed is they made a difference between slain models and models that flee. Artefacts are bundled into the Enhancements system now, but they haven't really changed. You still only get one that can go to any hero and if your sub allegiance specifies one then you have to take that first. Edit: there is one more big change to battleshock, but it's in the rules for commands. A command can only be issued once per phase, so you can't toss out multiple Inspiring Presences anymore.

I won't repeat what @Ganigumo said about coherency as he summed that up very well. Tighter coherency makes it more difficult to move models without trays, it slows down piling in, and it makes it so fewer models can attack. It also has bizarre effects like how you can get more attacks with a 5 model unit than 6 (for example, a reinforced unit of Mighty Skullcrushers), so it might actually be desirable to pay for 6 models and just leave one model at home. I see absolutely no benefit to having coherency written in this way. Even conga lines won't go away as 25ml bases can still do them. I do have some other problems with the rules. A large part of them source from things they could have done to improve the game but chose not to. They didn't improve the rules on terrain, which is a massive missed opportunity. The rules in 40k are right there and hugely improve the gameplay experience, but they weren't ported over. They didn't port over the combat ranges for 40k either. They're a critical component with making the coherency work in 40k, but again they weren't used. They didn't fix the issue with low drops deciding first turn in matched play. It works with the roll off in the other two styles, why did they leave it busted in matched? Now players are just bound to chase after the Battle Regiment instead of creating interesting and diverse compositions. My other main complaint comes from the things they added to missions. The Grand Strategies and Battle Tactics sound like great ideas on paper, but in practice they're shockingly underdeveloped. Of the 3 Grand Strategies they provide in the book there is one that is totally situational and based on your opponent and their army (but you have to pick it before you see their army), one that is very difficult to achieve, and one that is mind-numbingly easy. Of the 6 Battle Tactics they provide, 4 are just some variant of 'pick an enemy unit and kill it', one is based on objective play, and one is to get near the middle of the table. These aren't incentives for creative tactical play that make the game more interesting or challenging. They're just basic things you should be doing anyway. I can only imagine that they'll add more of these to battletomes going forward (like they did with faction specific objectives in 40k), but the basic system could have been so so much better. Also I can hardly imagine an easier Grand Strategy than 'keep at least one battleline unit alive', so any faction based strategies would have to be shockingly trivial to warrant use. In the end I'm just not seeing anything that makes me go 'Wow, what a great change!'. Like I do think the rules for monsters and heroes are cool, but if they're just going to re-balance the cost for those units (ex. like the rumors say for Archaon) then I don't see the attraction. Sure you can do more cool things, but it's just more book keeping and more effort to remember just the right rule for just the right occasion. Mission tweaks are cool, but when the choices are so obvious and everyone can do them without thinking, then what's the point? The only thing that's actively exciting for me is Path to Glory, but that could've been a campaign book instead of a whole new edition. This is probably the most aggressive set of changes in an edition shift I've ever been a part of, and in the end I really don't see any improvements. The game isn't unplayable or anything, I'm going to try it out and see how it goes. I guess the one positive thing I can say is they've set a fairly solid foundation that could definitely be built on and improved. Maybe we'll see it start to get fleshed out with the GHB?

Oof, ok so hot take time. I've been through all the rules and... I'm pretty disappointed. They didn't fix battleshock, they didn't bring in the 40k terrain, they didn't bring in 40k engagement range. All the things I was hoping against hope for to give the smallest positive ray have just been totally left out. The book layout is great, comments and references are great, and the clarity in the rules themselves is pretty solid apart from a wonky issue or two. Play wise though I think this may very well be the worst set of rules I've seen for AoS. I'm not whining and saying it's time to quit and burn your models, but nothing I've just read gets me excited for the game. There's good stuff here and there, but the fiddliness of coherency is going to be a nightmare, not to mention the way that it arbitrarily nerfs bases bigger than 25mm. I can kind of see them aiming for smaller units and more objective based play, but then they do something like making 4/6 triumphs being about killing one variety of models or another and make one of the glorious triumphs just hands down easier to achieve in 90% of games. It's all just so... bleh. I'm going to need to try out a few games and get a real feel for it but I'll need to wait until the GHB is previewed or leaked so we can get the proper points values.

Ok, page 251, triggered effects. If two or more effects are triggered on a 6 then the rolling player has to pick a single effect to trigger. I believe this was written to prevent people from double dipping on effects, ie. you have two abilities so a 6 to hit gives extra attacks and a mortal wound in addition. Unfortunately as written that means if I have a defensive effect (players must reroll sixes to hit for example) and my opponent has an offensive effect (mortal wounds on a 6 for example) then my defensive effect will never work. The player rolling just gets to ignore my effect because they have their own bonus and pick their triggered effect instead of mine. Absolutely magical writing on GW's part.

I don't believe Archaon was overpriced at all, but he's absolutely going to be a beast in the new rules. With the monster and hero buffs he can just wander around tossing buffs on himself like mad. Being able to give himself +1 to hit or save whenever he needs, using heroic recovery along with the khorne head for 2d3 heals, arcane bolt and smash to do 2d3 mortals before combat even starts... and that's all without needing a single other model to buff him and before he gets any bonuses from his mark. Plus the 3 missions we've seen all start with an 18" no mans land so he's pretty well guaranteed a turn one charge and the smaller board means he can reach out and touch people a lot easier. Honestly the only thing I see balancing him out at all is the fact that he takes up half of your army and only counts for 5 models on objectives. He's going to be ridiculously hard to kill for most armies and he's just going to smash anything he comes into contact with. At this point I'm actually worried about using him because he's so strong, it's just going to be an auto feels bad moment. Either your opponent has a counter to him and when they kill him you just lose half your army, or like most armies they won't stand a chance and he gets to run roughshod over them for 5 turns. Also for what it's worth, it sounds like pretty much everyone is getting a points hike. It's possible slaves will see a proportionately smaller increase than some other armies, but I'm not going to hold my breath for it. With the prevalence of reroll saves in the army All out Defense is going to be reallly good.

Tactical nuclear Nagash is going to be hilarious. Have him prep up 8 arcane bolts in the hero phase, move, charge, and then stomp for an average of 18 mortal wounds before combat begins. Kabooooooooom. Either that or just always keep 5 or so bolts on tap as a massive deterrent to charging him. Like who would charge him if they're going to eat 6d3 mortal wounds before they even get to attack? Then if they don't get used and your turn is next just dump them at the beginning of the battleshock phase to mess with a unit somewhere or kill a hero.

Eh? Where did you get the idea that I think everything should succeed? And why use charges that start 3" away from the opponent as your primary example? In a quite a few armies if you can move to 3" away then you're already starting your move within 9", so there's hardly any incentive to move at all. I'm speaking for the common case in turns 2/3 where you're attempting to cover ground with charging and not starting beside your opponent. Sure if you can get to 3" away then redeploy isn't going to do much, but in a lot of cases you'll end up around 5-7" away after your movement. If you're not running a cavalry army or something with a lot of speed buffs that's going to happen quite a lot, and that's where we'll see redeploy make a huge difference.

You have incentive to stay back sure, but odds of making a 9"charge are about 30%, and even with a cp reroll (assuming it still exists?) odds are still dicey. If your army primarily does their damage in melee then staying 9.5" back means you do absolutely nothing more than half the time. So you have the choice of probably doing nothing, or moving closer and probably doing nothing. Doesn't sound like a feels good moment to me.

I think the biggest balance point is they have to concede territory to do that. Sure they get away and you don't get to charge, but they're also sacrificing the objective to you and that's how you win the game. There's a very good chance that a primarily ranged army is going to end most games with a wholly disproportionate number of models left on the table, but simultaneously lose most of the time because they couldn't take and hold objectives. I mean, it's going to feel pretty bad for the melee armies just flailing around and barely holding onto objectives all game, but in the end they'll probably win so... maybe it's ok I guess?

Yeah Archaon is going to be expensive but... man oh man he's going to be an absolute nightmare. Opponents turn? He's got a 2+ save and he's healing 2d3 or throwing out mortal wounds. Archaon gets to go? +1 to hit, +1 to wound, 2d3 mortal wounds before combat starts, plus any other buffs he can get from his army (which can be all over the place in a chaos army). The only balancing factor I can see is he's only one model and takes up half of your army, but he's going to be nearly impossible to kill for most armies and he will just nuke everything he touches. Can't tell if I'm looking forward to playing him or nervous about how bad he might make my opponent feel. I guess we'll have to see how it all turns out.

The only thing I'd expect to see is them cleaning up what 'slain' is to avoid splitting from battleshock losses. Other than that I don't expect a full rewrite until the next battletome comes out. Might see some point hikes if the unit becomes too oppressive?

$50 for a general's handbook?? That's a 25% increase and they were already getting too expensive for a yearly update when they went to $40. A $50 dollar tax every year just to be able to play the game... that's rough man.

Thanks for giving the source haha, I was pulling my hair out trying to find it. So looking at the scenarios I'm only seeing one huge glaring issue, the table setup is entirely up to the defender. That's super abuseable as a player could bring a primarily ranged army and just set up with no line of site blocking terrain in the middle of the board. Or try to organize the terrain to give fits to anyone moving units melee units around on the table. I'd hope that they have stipulations for tournaments and having the organizer setting up the terrain in advance at least.

Not sure where the image is coming from, but is there any confirmation on whether normal battalions are legal in matched play?

Honestly I'm expecting units that benefit from 10+ models (like reroll saves for chaos warriors) to get bumped up to a minimum size of 10 models. Same with blood warriors and only getting access to their command options at 10 models. At least I'm really hoping they do, I've got 20 sword and board too and I have no plans to buy any more until they get a full resculpt.

Well understrength units have existed since the first generals handbook and they've never been discounted. No guarantee they won't be, but it would be a little surprising. I don't think it's supposed to be an advantage as such, just a way to deal with the fact that the old boxes came in weird numbers to fit rank and file (like 16 or 12 models). The only benefit I can think of is you can get around coherency issues by taking a unit of 5 large ovals instead of 6.

Yeah, and only if you want to spend the reinforcement point to get them there (that would mean you can't reinforce a different unit like savage orruks). It is possible (and I would say probable) that they update some of the minimum unit sizes in the generals handbook, so we'll just have to wait and see where everything ends up.

Yeah I'm hoping they add in a variation of 40k's melee range rule to compensate. Something like you're in range of an enemy if you're within a half inch of a model from your unit that is in range of an enemy. If not then... well I guess we'll just have to see how it goes. At least we do have access to marauders. For reavers, I was thinking that we could still use them to screen using the dog bone formation (straight line with a triangle on each end). It's risky because a single casualty guarantees you lose half your unit, but if you're up against a primarily melee army it won't matter much. Against melee if reavers are attacked they're pretty much guaranteed to get wiped anyway, so might as well just set them up for the best screen. Either that or we just migrate to flesh hounds. 30 more points for a better save, more attacks, faster, better frontage for screening when turned sideways, and a dispel/unbind thrown in for good measure. As long as the battalion rules are accurate the only real downside is they look ridiculous turned sideways.

Honestly I'm not really seeing how the reinforcements makes too huge of a difference. I guess it can protect against some types of spam, but it's super dependent on what the base unit sizes are. I could easily still take 4 units of 40 marauders or a big blob of flamers in eternal conflagration (assuming battleline if rules work with it). It messes with fireslayers sure, but I'm not sure what else.

I'm a little confused on this one, is any incremental increase a reinforcement? ie. increasing a 5 man unit to 10, or a 3 man to 6, or a 20 to 40? This would have a really weird impact on units that start at 5 models but only get access to things like banners or leaders at higher model counts (like blood warriors or chaos warriors).

Yeah, that article was kinda depressing. I did notice one thing: Chaos runeshields protect against mortal wounds, and you have multiple ways to improve armour saves through Oracular Visions and the spell Demonic Power, among others. I'm wondering if that was maybe just a mistake? I mean they spelled the name wrong to start, so I don't have a lot of faith, but it's possible that Daemonic Power is getting an update. Maybe it'll change from reroll hits and wounds to something simpler like +1 to hit, wound, and save. Also this line made me wonder a bit: Chaos Knights are simply one of the best Battleline units in the game. I've been thinking that knights might be fun in the new edition due to units of 5 ignoring the new coherency issues. Their base toughness coupled with All Out Defence adding +1 to save now could make them pretty hard to shift. They still hit like a wet paper towel, but at the very least they could be good for grabbing and holding objectives. Especially if most armies are going towards a more MSU approach.

As far as I can read the rule, yes you do. Nothing in the rule says anything about the models having to have been on the table at the beginning of the game, it just says roll a dice for each slain model from the unit and for each 6 you return a model. Unless the rules for 'slain' change drastically, it'll include the blues as well. You could be down to a single brimstone and roll 99 dice, on average bringing back 16 pinks and almost completely rejuvenating the unit. I mean the odds of starting a hero phase with a single brimstone are marginal at best, but if you ever pulled it off... hoo boy. Oh, and it doesn't specify which hero phase you do it in, so unless there are other rules elsewhere you can do it at the start of your opponent's hero phase as well. Just need to be outside of 3" of enemy models. Pink Horror meta here we come.

Well considering that Khorne has had the best "wizards" in the game for quite some time it probably makes sense for them to nerf prayers. On the plus side our best combat prayers (+1 to hit and +1 to save) are now available via command abilities, so it might not be quite so terrible. Even then in the short term it looks like a huge nerf to the faction when combined with the hits taken through new coherency rules and the various buffs to ranged units. In the long term I'm hopeful it'll mean Khorne gets a significant improvement in the next battletome. Maybe we'll move away from being so buff reliant and towards having warscrolls that properly represent the combat monsters we're portrayed as in the fluff.