RuneBrush

I didn't think you knew, which is why I asked (also, please don't be sarcastic). In short, each GW design studio is autonomous of each other, with it's own management structure and generally everything is kept secret and not discussed outside the design studio. An AoS game dev won't be even able to get into the 40k design studio offices because everything is behind security doors with pass keys. If memory serves, this was put in place when GW was suffering from a load of leaks and the change plugged this. The other benefits is that it ensures that staff are working on what they're meant to be, plus those staff can actually enjoy the excitement of new releases from the other studios.

You do know they're two completely separate sets of individuals in different physical offices?

Chaos Dwarfs! OK, I'm being hopeful there 😂 Could see confirmation of the next GHb with a bit more on the upcoming battletomes and associated armies. More combat patrol style boxes would be on my "highly likely" list.

I think my answer would be "ish". I'm a big fan of physical books, there's something really satisfying about having a reference book to flick through when playing a game. Having rules distributed throughout a load of different places is certainly a pain in the bum - as you say we've some in White Dwarfs, some on WarCom, etc. Having these in a central repository of some kind would certainly be beneficial - even more so a living battletome. My reservation (hence ish) is that I just don't like having the requirement to have a phone/tablet when I game. As someone who works on a computer for work I love that my miniature based hobby gets me away from screens if that makes sense. I also think that in the case of organised events, there aren't enough sockets to keep devices charged which is probably more of a sticking point. Now one idea that I have muted around in the past is that we have a Filofax style generals handbook - so a mini-ringbinder with all the GHb bits in. Each army would have a collection of inserts that could be added into your own personal GHb. When a rules update comes along we can download (and print) the insert pages that have changed - could easily have them as freebies in White Dwarf too. You could easily have the pages available through the app as well.

No else I'd not have said it. The definition of lazy is literally "doing nothing" or putting zero effort into it. Does it "fix" the issues in the game? Absolutely not (and certainly not for my two armies), however a single page update was never going to be able to do that and it at least this gives us something and highlights that the game developers are conscious of the armies that are struggling. I'm assuming you mean the mods in this comment? No, we're not obligated to bat for GW and I'm not sure where you get that idea. This isn't a GW forum and with one exception I've never been given anything for free by GW to "buy me". I am however a glass half-full person and actually enjoy AoS, and try not to bash things I enjoy - this can be read as me defending GW 🤷‍♂️

The new Battlescroll rules aren't narratively based in the same way as only having 4 artillery units isn't. In truth I don't think anything that's related to balance is done with narrative games in mind. ---- Having both a Khorne and Nighthaunt army, I'm looking at these rules and going "they're better than nothing, but not really going to gear my armies up". Is it lazy? No, lazy would be simply not doing or acknowledging there's an issue. What I do think is that this is GW seeing if this type of addition could work to give lower power armies a bit of a step up. There are always going to be weaker and stronger armies in AoS, the real issue is that currently the difference between the top and bottom armies is too large. If this were able to be reduced (new battletomes, points updates etc), then Battlescroll could help those armies which naturally live at the lower of the pack compete - I don't think this was ever intended to make an army flick from 0-5 to 5-0 at an event though.

+++ MOD HAT +++ Come on folks, there's a whole thread talking about the new Battlescroll release, can we not discuss it in the rumour thread too please - bearing in mind many of you are commenting on it there too...

One of the challenges GW has is that in ever survey that has been put out, the vast majority of players have pushed for more frequent updates. Now they're implementing this request, many people (myself included) have found it somewhat overwhelming and making playing the game more complicated. It's a tricky one, people who play AoS multiple times a week are going to have a completely different view on things than somebody who plays once or twice a month.

I think this post actually highlights that what GW make should be considered art as it's highly subjective on what is good and what isn't 😉

In truth a bit disappointed. Was hoping for something that would allow me to dust off my first AoS army and actually give them a bit of table time, sadly don't see how this fixes any of the main issues. Personally I've always said, that khorne should be massively anti-magic and with an increasing damage output the more things die. D3 MW's if any casting roll is 8+ would be a lovely addition 😂 That said, I also think Blood Tithe really needs a complete overhaul. Losing all BT points each time you use any is just awful and you're punished if your opponent has low unit count armies. Bit of a shame as it's suggestive we're not going to get an update for a while. I believe the answer is that Khorne doesn't want your fancy magic casting antics in a Khorne army 😉

I had it in my head that in Apoc pretty much everything was simultaneous and you just resolved damage at the end of the round after both players had finished. I reckon alternating phases and resolving damage in one block would make a pretty brutal turn one and two 😂

In truth the discussion about the priority roll is one that I don't think there is a single answer/response because we all view it in different ways and have very different experiences of. Certainly there are some major downsides to having it in AoS, but it's something that genuinely does define AoS because there isn't anything else that does it in quite this way. For me, the issue isn't with the priority roll per-se. Instead it's the resultant double turn when combined with the amount of damage that one army can unleash (often at range) within an IGYG system. This is compounded when an army may take 45 minutes to take a single turn. The priority roll in Necromunda actually works really well, but it's an alternative activation system, where I pick a unit to perform their actions and then my opponent does (my leader units can also activate others within there activation so there is strategy required). Winning priority gives me an edge rather than winning me the game. One of the key points about the priority roll is that it does help to prevent the scenario where the player who doesn't go first simply gives up. There's a chance you may be able to pull something back if you get a double, especially as many games are objective based. What's the solution? I genuinely don't know. Removing the priority roll wouldn't remove some of the key issues (long turn time, high amount of ranged damage etc), but changing to alternative activations would require a huge rewrite of the game plus many warscrolls and battletomes (you'd no longer have "Your <xxx> Phase" just "<xxx> Phase"). Now one possibility would be a hybrid approach, so you roll priority, you then both complete each phase one at a time before going to the next phase. Winning priority would still give a huge edge, but would allow some reaction.

+++ MOD HAT +++ Just tidied up a couple of posts where members were taking shots at each other. Please don't do this, it's not acceptable on any level and won't be tolerated. Thread is otherwise a really good discussion and a great example on not being excessively negative - thank you!

As with Gaz, the usual disclaimer that I don't have special lines into GW, nor have any idea what's coming along 😉 From a personal perspective, I don't think AoS3 should have been released when it was. I know that's a bit of a sweeping statement, but I'm of the feeling that a 3 year version cycle is too short (it's a tabletop game, not a computer game), plus pandemic lockdowns meant a drop in games in the UK and playtesting being next to impossible (and at times illegal). A number of battletomes were also developed under the same circumstances and people learning how to do remote working in a team meant the battletomes created didn't have the same environment to be created in. One of the joys of AoS when it launched was that the core rules were so simple they existed on a few pages and most units were pretty simple and straightforward to use in a game. The generals handbook then dropped and we started off with the destructive "escalation" process, where each iteration of a battletome or rules tried to be more powerful than the previous one. New miniature releases are expected to have rules that make them a "must have", but nobody wants to limit them - let's be honest having an entire army of behemoths (dragons, mega gargants, magmadroths etc) sounds great on paper, but just isn't something people really want to be seeing placed down against them - and I include friendly and competitive games in that. The trouble is that if every new unit has special rules, you end up with the situation where everything has special rules - you've raised the bar of "normal". The solution is to simplify units, however you risk making them a lot more bland - Stormcast being a great example because there are simply too many units for one army. The AoS devs are between a rock and a hard place though. Unlike 40k you don't have a toughness mechanic, so everything has to work within a "to hit" and "to wound" attribute. Mortal wounds are now super common as are ward saves. With limited mechanics there will be a certain amount of recycled ideas and when an army is filled with "specials", the repetition becomes even more pronounced.

I suspect it comes down to sales vs cost. One thing GW has access to and we don't is the sales of physical and digital alongside each other. It may be that digital sales were tiny by comparison, so not worth the investment to make a digital product. Alternatively it may be that digital meant less overall sales due to piracy issues. Could simply be that they don't want to do it anymore 😂 It's certainly worth feeding back to GW that you miss the digital battletomes though, else they'll not know there's a demand for it.

The whole digital vs paper does come down to personal choice. I think everyone has their own view on what they actually prefer. I lean more on having a physical format - I can loan to a mate and they can loan to me and they don't run out of charge and I'm not a fan of reading on a digital device. I've certainly bought battletomes I'd not considered after reading through somebody else's copy. Bringing it back round to the original topic, the whole pricing of battletomes is a tricky one - I actually think these are one item that's increased in cost to the point where I'm unlikely to be picking books up on a whim. Physical books have really suffered due to the transportation problems in the world, so it's understandable there's a price increase, the sad bit is we all know that if things improve we won't see the prices reduce.

One of the issues with airbrushes is that people view them as a one-stop solution rather than another tool in your repertoire. If you're doing it right, nobody knows it's been done with an airbrush, because it'll be combined with other techniques and traditional brush skills. Would 100% agree that they're not for everyone either. But I digress and this thread has gone wildly off topic 😂

On a related note, one thing that I'm surprised about is that we've not seen events writing their own Battlepacks. When I read the 3rd edition rules, I got the impression that we'd see a variety of Battlepacks being used at events, including home grown ones. We did see it at Facehammer last year, but that's been it so far.

In your opinion. Let's not forget this is an AoS forum please, it's a little rude to slate the game system we all enjoy 😉

It's quite a nice little store in fairness and like you say, it's a lovely city. Salisbury is one store I've not gone to often, though it's about the same distance as Bath by bus. Swindon is a little closer for me in fairness (which is one store that still has multiple staff members), but only been there once since they told me they didn't want any forge world models in my armies on parade entry back in 2017 😂 I'm not bitter about that of course.

Noticed that Bath has their anniversary up last weekend until next week too. May have to get a mate to pick up a cheeky model 😉

I can certainly see things changing on the 3d printer front that removes the faff. I'd hazard you're looking 5~10 years rather than 2~3 when we see every hobbyist with access to one in some form. The point where the printer does the full clean and cure without you needing rubber gloves and alcohol is the point when they become viably mainstream. It will come and hopefully sooner rather than later 😊

I think where 3d printing sits within the hobby is still in limbo. How many years is it since 3d printing became available and yet GW and other companies continue to thrive? An increase in access to this facility hasn't changed the status-quo. From a home perspective too, 3d printers are still faffy, they require a lot of effort, plus loads of clean up or chemicals. Print as a service is growing in popularity, but not mainstream enough to really offer an alternative to going into a shop and picking up a box of models which is one of the things GW does really well. One thing that 3d printing does offer is an amazing range of customisation options - alternative heads, weapons, wheels, shields etc. The things that GW doesn't sell, but allows you to personalise your miniatures and make them really unique. Software like Blender are also become more learnt so we'll likely see the choices available increase too. Although arguably flawed, GW's game systems are also recognised throughout the world and more importantly, people want to play them. My local club has a pretty eclectic mix of individuals - but almost without fail each week somebody will be looking for a game of 40k, by comparison I've yet to see anybody ask to play a game using one page rules. This may well change in the future, but at the moment GW games have the benefit of being recognised and very well known, which will allow them to continue to charge premium prices for their products.

The last couple have been £20 - however we have seen some of the limited run versions hitting £25 so be prepared for that! Stock level seems to vary from store to store based on what they're sent and the popularity of the models - going on a Sunday I'd expect them to still have the shaman but no Inquisitors. Generally they're OK with you buying more than one of each (likely down to the store manager) - though they're likely to be a bit more reluctant if they only have 5 and you want to buy multiple. Previously if they've run out of stock, they have had a list that you can put your name on and get the stock in afterwards - but you'd need to go back to the store to pick it up. This seems to take anything from a week to two months 😂

Very conscious that we're deviating from the original topic on this, but I do think it's a good conversation to have 😉 From your comments, you're looking at innovation as a commercial entity whereas I'm looking at it from a hobbyists perspective. If I wish to innovate I can do what my teenage self did and sit down with a pad of paper and a pencil. I can create a custom battleplan, a warscroll or even a brand new set of rules using miniatures I have in my collection. I can break every laid out concept that GW has ever written - Khorne could become a farmer, Sigmar could go on a wild rampage and kill everything in Azyr etc. If I wrote a scenario of some kind I could play it with friends and iterate it to improve it. The only thing it has to cost me is time, there's no financial impact because I'm not a business, nor am I undertaking this as a commercial venture to make money. I grew up in the 80's where largely life could be pretty dull unless you made your own entertainment - there were 4 TV channels in the UK and that was it. In contrast we now have so much entertainment on hand that the need to innovate and be creative no longer exists as it did - things like computer games provide the dopamine hit you'd get from creating something. There is also a lot more demands on our time at all hours of the day - life is basically more complicated. So where am I going with this? Yes, innovation in business is reducing. The money involved in new innovative ideas is so large now that companies don't want to risk it not working. Within the hobby innovation is also reducing because we have less time and inclination to innovate and the current generation aren't encouraged/forced to innovate or create in the way previous generations were.