Mcthew

It so is! Yet, therein lies the problem with AoS. The new rules, concentrating on smaller units, god units, monsters, smaller board size etc (if the leaks are all true, which they tend to be), points AoS towards a skirmish game, which we already have in Warcry. It's all very odd, and disjointed. What are GW trying to achieve here? Whomever is at the wheel of AoS is not doing a very good job, in my opinion (sorry if that person is reading this, but this will be constructive criticism!). My view from the outside, is this (please feel free to add or disagree!): - Aside from a few issues, AoS 2.0 was a good rule set. What broke those rules was not the core rules but the faction rules that were (and still are) problematic and slightly broken. AoS 2.0 also improved the lore from being a shambolic rambling through Ages of Myth, Chaos and then Sigmar in 1.0, to something resembling a coherent story and setting. - So far, from the leaks and some of the questionable lore writing, AoS 3.0 while not universally panned, has been divisive. Broken Realms had its moments, but was disjointed in some areas. Certainly not the worst lore, not the best either, and could've been better. The rules for AoS 3.0 border on the gimmicky, and do not address the faults of AoS 2.0 but makes those faults worse in many cases, while adding more problems and more complexity. While it is early days, AoS 3.0 factions will need massive re-writes and updates and FAQs to make this workable, and if rushed then it will be worse (we know this because GW has a habit of writing badly-rushed rules). However, leaving AoS 2.0 factions as is will make many unplayable under AoS 3.0. - "But it's just a game!" I hear you cry. Correct, it is. Plastic soldiers and dice. But... It is also a premium game. GW price hikes have made this the most expensive tabletop hobby around. With anything in life, if I'm paying premium prices, I expect premium content. GW has no room to manoeuvre when they are selling core books for £40 and requires an investment of between £400-800 per faction. That is the equivalent of an entertainment system (TV and console) of which you can get longer and more use out of (a general view). - Hyperbole is great, if it's correct. So far their claim to AoS 3.0 being "the best rules ever" is bordering on the embarrassing. It is an unfounded claim, and would be fine if the rules reveal so far were true. The fact here and other forums are looking at them with dismay means that GW either have the reveal strategy wrong, or they are so oblivious to what good rules are, they are not competent at rules writing or play testing. Either way, it doesn't look good, certainly from a business perspective. But that's ok, because... - Cursed City has made people panic. The debacle over Cursed City, and the hangover of Indomitus, means that those sitting on the fence will try to get a copy of Dominion even with shonky rules reveals. And that's not good either. This is not a £50 punt on something nice. This is a £125 outlay for an already expensive hobby. (Could be more though, right? We don't have the prices yet). For GW I wonder if they realise how much of a gamble this either intentional/accidentally-incompetent strategy is? Apart from excluding new players who won't risk this amount of money on AoS, if GW get this wrong, the pretty pictures and average lore in the core book won't save AoS. Even the models won't. While they look nice and may appeal to the model-centric hobbyist, how many of those hobbyists buy boxes by the truck load? It is fair to say it is the players who buy the most models because the game demands it, and if the game is broken by ill-advised rules, then it breaks the business model. How many people did GW lose when WFB exited the building? It must have hurt GW, but at least they could entice some back with AoS. What if they now break AoS? - Why get so annoyed about it? Because I've spent a few thousand pounds over the years on a hobby that has been fun and rewarding. But it's also a culture, and for many a big part of their lives. And I guess it's not anger, but passion. Plenty of other games systems have died and not have had the passion directed to keeping them alive. AoS is different, because there is this (true) community behind it. When you have people who are messing with your stuff in a way that spoils that fun and threatens that community, they should expect push back and criticism. - Or... This might all be fine after the dust settles. The rules might actually work. The factions might actually play better, even if the Warhammer Community site is showing the contrary (really, they need to get that sorted out - it's hardly a "community" either). So, there you go. A little negative, but these are things Games Workshop have in their power to remedy. A final note, GW are a business. If we want GW to take notice, we must treat them as a business and show no loyalty if they produce rubbish product. Likewise, GW will be rewarded with higher sales if Dominion and AoS 3.0 is the best set ever as they continually say (although this claim might be redacted on the Warhammer Community site at a later date folks - they have that in their locker too!). (Just to add - I've returned to the fence of where I am with Dominion. I may still pre-order, but that depends on being able to pre-order this. It might well be out of my hands, as it has been with Cursed City. In some ways, I'm cool with that. If Games Workshop don't wish me to invest in their products, that's up to them. )

Mad. Potentially in one round, they can fire 3 times?!! What are they using? 19th century rifles? I mean, how many FAQs will need to land on day one release? Some factions/units will be utterly unplayable, like the FG Handgunners. Or GW won't, and it will be utter chaos until GW rush out new battletomes for each faction (and then another battletome 12 months later because they got the first 3.0 battletome wrong - please see HoS for details 😛).

No, but they are. Truly. The best. Ever.

Does this count for both players? If so, you can use up all your CPs in your own phase, and then get another CP in the enemy hero phase. So on that basis, where is the big win for going 2nd in a turn? An extra CP for going 2nd is hardly an incentive to avoid double-turns if we're now handing them out like sweets. Thinking about, it makes going 2nd even more difficult. After all, you're having to second guess the use of CPs, whilst taking the initiative means a better chance at using all your CPs rather than losing unspent ones. Unless... are CAs effects now restricted to turns rather than rounds or until the next hero phase?

Ah. Gloomspite players, please join the Khorne players currently sobbing in the corner.

If I wanted to play a shooting game, I'd have invested in 40K. But I didn't. Actually, if I wanted to play a well thought out shooting game, I'd have invested in 40K. What we have now is amateur-hour shooting game masquerading as fantasy. This is not what I thought AoS would be. It's nudging it further into a system that doesn't really know what it wants to be. Is it steampunk? It's not even High Fantasy really. It might have been easier to call AoS 2.0 "Age of Nagash", and 3.0 "Age of Teclis Kragnos." Might have helped to know it was evolving from 'swords and sorcery', to 'blasters and buffoonery.'

You're right, it's context, and in reality on the tabletop it benefits only a handful of scenarios, or specific units. And that's the problem. This is a general command ability, and one that (as you might see from the previous posts) only appears to have one major use, outside of someone foolishly charging a non-shooting unit leaving the shooters able to pick you off. It is, as it stands, a completely unnecessary general command ability to include. So it begs the question, why include it? It makes more sense for it to be a specific CA for a faction, such as LRL, or maybe plague claws in a Pestilens faction. KO can use this as any of them can shoot, so it effectively buys a second round of shooting for a unit who may have already shot in that round. But for most other factions it is a pointless generic command ability. That GW has called this out as an example of the best rules writing, is problematic, when it is that divisive. It will also make the game dull if everyone is running KO or LRL lists because they are the only remotely competitive armies around. Even beers and pretzel gaming becomes dull if you're shot off the board by round 2 or 3. I am a KO player, by the way. And this, so far, is just plain embarrassing.

So since yesterday's reveals, depression has sunk in. As with many rules changes, there are winners and losers, but there seems to be more losers with the new CAs. Taking that away, the new CAs are really some of the most poorest rules writing yet in the history of AoS, in my opinion. There's not a lot to get excited for, and really for me, I wanted to be. Will I get Dominion? I've put in an interest for it at our local hobby store, but it's now looking unlikely I'll pre-order. I just don't like how the rules for AoS 3.0 are shaping up. All the weaknesses feel more exposed, and more have been inflicted. Some new rules felt unnecessary, and the hyperbole of the being the best ever, is a shocker. Do GW even know their own customer base? Do they even play the game? It makes you feel like they don't. For me, this might be the end of buying GW products. Not a knee-****** reaction, but a reality: I play AoS because my eldest son does. It's something we like doing together on a weekend morning or afternoon. It's something that we can discuss on walks, in the car, wherever, really. AoS 4.0 is unlikely to come out for another 4 years, and by then he'll have likely moved on to other distractions as I did at his age. AoS 3.0 was going to be the last edition I would buy and invest in. It makes no sense to me now to buy Dominion for the models as they will be AoS 3.0 models for AoS 3.0 rules. Likewise for the battletomes and General's Handbooks etc etc. What will that save me a year? Well, I've worked out that this year it would probably save me upwards of £400 minimum to not invest in AoS 3.0. And about £600 for each year thereafter. So my bank manager will be pleased if AoS 3.0 is as bad as the Warhammer Community reveals. But how many other AoS players will leave for other games? Maybe it's a good thing though. GW dominance has created a sense of arrogance. AoS 3.0 might just show players there are better products out there to invest in. And an epic fail might be just what GW needs.

GW have shot themselves not just in the foot here. These are certainly some of the most divisive rules yet (and Khorne players must be weeping right now - there's nothing for them to be excited about; I'd be looking on eBay to see what I could get for my Khorne army right now). For me, the Rally CA is one of the worst GW has ever put out. So how does this work with models with more than 1 wound? Does that mean my Kurnoth Hunter with 5 wounds is not only revived, but all his wounds are healed because my unit commander has effectively said: 'C'mon lad, it's just a flesh wound!' Awful. Slain is slain. It's not 'boss, I've sprained my ankle.' What are GW thinking??? Or, like Unleash Hell, is this is another example of amateur rule writing? Honestly, GW need to save themselves with the next two Warhammer Community articles. They need to get this better, because these are poor rules, not the best rules. By using such hyperbole they are looking foolish (as they've obviously not play-tested this properly). If anyone from GW is reading this, a plea: Shooting rules next (which need to include you can't shoot out of or into combat); and some kind of explanation for the Rally rule. Errata is not enough when you're not getting this right from the beginning for a £125 starter set or £40 core book. These are premium prices. The product so far is less than premium. I was on the fence with Dominion, now I've hopped off it. GW have 2 more articles to get me interested again, otherwise it's just AoS 2.0 for me for the next 4 years.

Interested to see what else is to come. Expecting/hoping for better terrain rules, which I think would not nerf shooting but improve the experience for non-shooting armies. Also interested to see how mercenaries fit in. Given that Kragnos can be used in any Destruction army but means you can't run mercs must mean that mercs are about to come back, but better than previous rules?

Agree with this. A Freeguild general on foot behind 40 guard shouldn't be targeted, nor a Clawlord in a pack of 40 clanrats. Look Out Sir isn't enough (or maybe Look Out Sir should increase modifiers based on bodyguard unit size?). For terrain I'd like to see a standard 5+ save on mortal wounds from missile and most spells. That can build on existing MW saves. For example a Chaos Warrior gets 3+ MW save if also in cover (terrain MW save, plus their Runeshield MW save).

Completely agree. Enough with the cruise missile strikes. LoS is poor in AoS. Even the haphazard rule of looking from your model is unworkable. We use a laser pointer but that doesn't help when your opponent says they are flying and shooting. And mortal wounds on shooting when the unit is behind cover is utterly ridiculous. Do you even have something like that in 40k??? I play as KO, or DoT, Skaven or CoS/SCE and I have heavy shooting armies. I try to be fair but it's too easy to shoot units that have one or two models out of cover in a 20 man unit. The all or nothing approach to terrain is a bit embarrassing really. Will it change for AoS 3.0? Hoping that terrain rules will nerf it a little as the new table sizes leaked will make shooting even stronger. But like others, I'm sceptical LoS will be finessed.

Gotta admit I had hoped for some kind of Kurnothi god that Alerielle unleashed by accident. Currently, it doesn't quite hang together, but throw in a macguffin and you can explain anything. Again, it feels like design by committee: "Hey look what I've built?" "Cool... But what is it?" "Beastman Kurnothi God." "Right. But how about Destruction getting a demi-god monster? You know what would be cool? A new Orruk god-monster!" "... But it's got hooves..." "Which unleashes earthquakes!" "... And a beastman head..." "And he hates other monsters!" "But Destruction are monsters??" "Ha! Right! I knew you'd love that idea! A Destruction god he is! And we'll call him Hoofsmasha the Terrible!" "Can't we give him my original name at least?" "What? 'Dave?'" "No, no. That was for my named Knight-Arcanum. No, how about 'Kragnos'?" "Sounds a bit too Kurnothi if you ask me. But ok, you can have that. I still think Hoofsmasha is better..."

I laugh. But not surprised. Rules don't often follow lore or even models. And sometimes I wonder if the writers have even seen the model. How quick will FaQs come out for BR book 4? Or will they wait until AoS 3.0?

Gotta admit the 8 things about the rules left me a bit cold (and annoyed again by presentation - no, GW these were not an amazing 8 things at all). The main things have been leaked already, the other stuff is hardly revolutionary. So nothing about better terrain rules, no improve LoS for shooting, but we have a potential where you have a heavy monsters army; or no monsters/no 500 points+ heroes just lots of level 1 or 2 heroes with hordes. Not that interesting, but again more might be revealed. I liked the new orcs though. Like others have said, more LotR less comic. SCE are ok, but again only a handful of complete units, unless 3 is the new 5? More likely to get Dominion than not. But hardly blown away as GW thinks I should be even with upcoming models.

So after the Dominion unboxing, anyone feel blown away or hyped by the new set and rules?

This. 10 wounds is better than 9, but worse than a KoS. Some good things. Lots of bad things. Model looks good but will I field one often? Doubtful. Not something I'll be adding to my HoS force.

Also loathed to bring up LRL, but it encapsulates the problems of GWs business model which relies wholly on the loyalty/addiction towards the hobby. (Which is not pleasant really, because that leans towards exploitation). LRL are a heavily invested new faction, great for players who like aelves/elves/cows/Monkey Magic/competitive play/overpowered factions. But for everyone else it shows what you don't have - and boy does that suck. Because you cling on to the belief that GW will show your faction some love, pray they don't nerf it because they want you to buy the new models, or they have someone who can't write interesting and playable rules, turn what you love playing into a dull mess. But... And here's the rub... While LRL have their time in the sun (and admittedly it is blindingly bright for them at the moment) they will experience the fall probably in the next 2 years, and quite dramatically given the rules have them flying higher than most factions with models to match (aside from the cow-fu stuff that is 😆). Honestly though, it's this, and what happened to Petrifix OBR, and everything else that GW turns their hand to at the moment that gives me pause whenever I think about buying a new faction. I don't know if it's just me but it feels like it's being sold like the addiction they know it is. And we gobble it up without a thought to investment. Which leaves a sour taste. The more this community moves to preserving the good of AoS, ignoring the hype, the next new thing, homebrewing proper rules etc the better for the hobby, rather than for GW - who might supply the game and models... but remember, it is us, the players, that keeps the game alive.

Thanks for this thread. Without venting too much, I think that toning down power is a good thing, if it is done for every faction. The main problem is that AoS 3.0 battletomes don't consistently show that. (I say AoS 3.0 battletomes in that it's unlikely you'll see another edition until AoS 4.0 appears on the horizon, so that includes Soulblight, Hedonites and Lumineth.) The disparity of rules writing between the 3 is stark. One of these tomes is definitely more powered than the other 2 (no guessing which). This doesn't bode well for AoS 3.0 which would need to nerf much of their rules within months of release which would make GW appear incompetent. I echo what others have said that the lore, rules and models are showing a disconnect in AoS, more so recently. And I have not felt more disinterested by new releases recently than any other time during AoS because of this. It is not unusual, sure, but it's gotten more obvious in the last year or so.

The timing of this isn't good though, do you think? I know HoS players are a fraction (or a faction!) of all AoS players, but dropping a sub-par AoS 3.0 warscroll on the same day as a major AoS 3.0 reveal could be a big mistake. Nothing dampens ones enthusiasm for new rules by demonstrating that you're not very good at writing them. But... this could all be a ruse, and the Newborn might have an amazing warscroll. Hoping for the best then...

Not sure if I'm looking forward to the reveal so I can laugh hysterically (with some relief that I'll no way buy a £60 level 2 hero that can be taken out turn 1, not to mention not needing to buy BR book 4)... Or in the hope we're wrong, that HoS are not hated by the current writers and the Newborn reflect their origins in the warscroll. Not that confident really. I'll reserve my "just what the heck is going on at Games Workshop" moment until later though.

9 wounds has gotta be wrong then - and by extension this leak. Either that or the rules writers really hate HoS. Which is also possible.

Wow. That's really quite underwhelming - if it's true. (Slaanesh must be pretty feeble if this is the best it can spawn). Anyone got an idea of scale for this model? Was expecting same size as a KoS? But at 9 wounds... feels like its about the same size as a Drycha. Might wrong though.

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but reading through the Soulblight battletome, it seems to hint at mercenaries and allies more than soup. I do wonder if AoS 3.0 will either drop allied unit/points limitations but beef up limitations on who is allied to whom (and how faction abilities work with allies). It might even allow unlimited mercenary units as hinted by Nagash's shiny and much reduced warscroll 🤔. No need for soup then, if you can pick 2 or 3 other starters on the menu?

Absolutely right. And lest we forget that Barak Thryng already allows duardin units to be part of a KO force (1 in 4). This isn't soup, but it's better than allies, and reflects a kinship at least with this Skyport and other duardin, which does not exist elsewhere in the KO skyports. The KO lore is explicit in that at times they are hostile to other duardin races. To combine them all in one battletome is a bad, and quite lazy idea. But that hasn't stopped GW from doing it before, nor will that stop them doing it again.