• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

AoS Second Edition

Those guys are scary as hell
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
To be honest I think there is happy medium to be found. The old WFB way was quite unfair because some of the armies were simply forgotten. It was okay if you were playing Orcs & Goblins for instance but much less so if you fancied Bretonnia. Additionally, the infrequency of the FAQs was brutal. On the other hand, I think that the yearly updates via the GHB might be a bit too much (at least for my liking). While you want to avoid stagnation, you also want to allow for sufficient time so that players can settle in a bit. Of course it is difficult for me to judge because I don't really know how significant the changes are from one GHB to another. Are they equivalent to a FAQ/errata or are they small changes or significant changes or drastic changes.

My preference would likely lie somewhere in between.
Click to expand...
GHB has relativly "big" changes, but so far none of it is properly massive.

Biggest changes so far:

- Point values
- Additional artifacts if your faction didn't have any yet (at the time)
- Maybe a battalion or 2
- Allegiance abilities if your faction didn't have any yet.

For the Game as a whle they're more impactfull than mere errata, but generally not a major overhaul of a mechanic. Magic now being the first "big" change in 3 GHB releases. For specific factions it's a way of giving some love to the small factions like say bretonnia so they don't fall behind as hopelessly cuz they can still get new allegiance abilities without needing a new armybook. So I'd say it's pretty much what you're looking for.
 
I'd like to see army customisation beefed up a bit - the points system should really be expanded to cover things like extra spells, drummers/sergeants/bannermen for units, artefacts, etc., give us things to play around with when building our armies.

Also have a little present since I felt like goofing around:

upload_2018-6-6_18-19-54.png
 
@Canas you are not lying! Hopefully their points are stupidly high to help balance them out!
 
I don't mind the Evocators and Sequitors much (depends on their cost of course, they are strong) but the ballista sounds outright broken unless it is, like, 350 points or so.
 
Aginor said:
I don't mind the Evocators and Sequitors much (depends on their cost of course, they are strong) but the ballista sounds outright broken unless it is, like, 350 points or so.
Click to expand...
That thing is going to be hilarious up close (or well close... 18" is not close...) a potential of 24 -2 rend hits. Add in some bonus to hit rolls 'to make it reliable and it'l wreck basicly anything…

The sequitors just seem like better liberators and the evocators have a weirdly high mortal wound output.

Also, why don't the stormcast ever get anything that's squishier than 4+....
 
I also noticed the Sequitors' bonus is not against Chaos Demons but all Demons, so also against Seraphon.
 
little-myth said:
There is a Crow on this ones base
View attachment 44244

Quite looking forward to what happens. With the whole any number models, I have noticed the minimum and maximum with previous warscrolls being different when compared to the handbook also.
Been trying to get others to join the hobby but I can't seem to make them budge, even when telling them that there is free rules and that.
Click to expand...
It's expensive for ahobby
 
Killer Angel said:
while true, we must look also at the negative aspects of the Old Way.
Few books and years of waiting took the game to a stagnant level, where a new edition was running and some armies were still stuck with their old, surpassed manual. And if your codex was not competitive, your army would have been condemned to fall behind for years.
It was terrible.

With the current system, every army receives something helpful with every release. For example, Dispossessed (an army which still lacks a battletome) received additional abilities and new artefacts with the GHB17. Sure, there are still top-tier and low-tier army, but the game is in constant evolution and everyone knows that each year, something will be given to their own army.
Click to expand...

I think @Killer Angel has hit the nail on the head here. Probably the one thing AoS has over Fantasy is that the effect of powercreep on older armies is considerably less due to the living rule set. Nowhere is this greater seen than in Fyreslayers - they were one of the first brand new armies in AoS and were pretty strong when they first came out, but when the new army formula came in to introduce allegiance abilities, artefacts, army special rules and traits, such as in the Kharadron Battletome, the Fyreslayers became a bit weaker as they were being outclassed by these new armies with all their fancy new abilities. However, this then changed when the general’s handbook 2017 came out, which gave the Fyreslayers allegiance abilities, artefacts and command traits. This then pushed them back again to being on the competitive level of the newer armies. If the old system had still been in place, Fyreslayers would have probably been in the same place as a fantasy army like Tomb Kings - strong at the start but victims of powercreep.

As Killer Angel says Dispossessed is another case of this, although their case is a bit different because they are an old army that haven’t been even given a tome yet. Nevertheless, because they’ve been given their own allegiance abilities, command traits and relics, they are probably a middle-Tier army, whereas before they would have been probably Bretonnia-level.

Imagine if this had been the case in Fantasy - if it had been, I imagine GW might well have changed the Tomb Kings’ magic to be more like that of Vampire Counts once the VC book was released and they had found they had mastered the idea of Undead Magic, which may well have boosted the Tomb Kings quite a way forward, perhaps to the point of being stronger than VC in places due to cheaper Skeletons and tougher monsters.

But as @NIGHTBRINGER says, it is still a bit of a demand that you pay £20 a year for these updates - I think it would have been better for a balance to have been struck by making it only contain Amy updates and make it free to download, although the terms ‘Games Workshop’ and ‘Free’ aren’t often seen together... :rolleyes:
Killer Angel said:
Apparently, a fanboy of Sigmar wrote them. :meh: :vomit:
Click to expand...

We’ve found our Bruce Quarrie of Warhammer! :p
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
I think @Killer Angel has hit the nail on the head here. Probably the one thing AoS has over Fantasy is that the effect of powercreep on older armies is considerably less due to the living rule set. Nowhere is this greater seen than in Fyreslayers - they were one of the first brand new armies in AoS and were pretty strong when they first came out, but when the new army formula came in to introduce allegiance abilities, artefacts, army special rules and traits, such as in the Kharadron Battletome, the Fyreslayers became a bit weaker as they were being outclassed by these new armies with all their fancy new abilities. However, this then changed when the general’s handbook 2017 came out, which gave the Fyreslayers allegiance abilities, artefacts and command traits. This then pushed them back again to being on the competitive level of the newer armies. If the old system had still been in place, Fyreslayers would have probably been in the same place as a fantasy army like Tomb Kings - strong at the start but victims of powercreep.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this analysis with the caveat that some factions are still very badly underrepresented (due to a lack of models in the faction) while others get all the toys (SCE). AoS needs to either combine obsolete factions or remove them entirely. Imagine fielding the Aleguzzler Gargants faction vs. SCE.

I still feel that massive discrepancies exist between AoS factions BUT at least AoS has a built in system that can correct these discrepancies on the fly. It is very clear that GW have a completely new and improved attitude now under the new CEO leadership than did during the time of WFB.

Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
Imagine if this had been the case in Fantasy - if it had been, I imagine GW might well have changed the Tomb Kings’ magic to be more like that of Vampire Counts once the VC book was released and they had found they had mastered the idea of Undead Magic, which may well have boosted the Tomb Kings quite a way forward, perhaps to the point of being stronger than VC in places due to cheaper Skeletons and tougher monsters.
Click to expand...

That would have been great. I think the TK would have benefited greatly from a few very minor tweaks.
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
I tend to agree with this analysis with the caveat that some factions are still very badly underrepresented (due to a lack of models in the faction) while others get all the toys (SCE). AoS needs to either combine obsolete factions or remove them entirely. Imagine fielding the Aleguzzler Gargants faction vs. SCE.
Click to expand...
A lot of those obsolete factions only really seem to be mentioned as allies for other factions. E.g. bring some gargants with your grot army. I don't think GW intends on making them full-fledged factions. The reason they're still left as their own faction is probably due to the whole ally mechanic. They want several "proper" destruction factions to be able to bring the gargants, so they need to be their own "faction" to be able to say "these other destruction factions can ally with the gargant faction".

Having said that, there's several others where it's much less clear. E.g. the various human or aelve sub-factions based on the old armies could probably be rolled into 1-2 factions instead of 4-5 of em without conflicting with the whole allies thing.
 
Canas said:
A lot of those obsolete factions only really seem to be mentioned as allies for other factions. E.g. bring some gargants with your grot army. I don't think GW intends on making them full-fledged factions. The reason they're still left as their own faction is probably due to the whole ally mechanic. They want several "proper" destruction factions to be able to bring the gargants, so they need to be their own "faction" to be able to say "these other destruction factions can ally with the gargant faction".

Having said that, there's several others where it's much less clear. E.g. the various human or aelve sub-factions based on the old armies could probably be rolled into 1-2 factions instead of 4-5 of em without conflicting with the whole allies thing.
Click to expand...

Certainly Ironweld Arsenal should have their war machines returned to Dispossessed and Free Peoples respectively, as it hits them hard that they have to take what were their own war machines as allies if they want to use them.
 
I wonder if the endless spells will require you to "channel" them to keep them alive. There is a Nurgle spell that once cast it goes till you move or cast another spell. Totally worth it the enemy unit is -1 to hit,wound, and save. Or if it's one spell per wizard. If not we can hide behind the wall, set up the gears and still have 2 spells with the Slann. Any one hear of a price for it?
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
Certainly Ironweld Arsenal should have their war machines returned to Dispossessed and Free Peoples respectively, as it hits them hard that they have to take what were their own war machines as allies if they want to use them.
Click to expand...

yep, other Order armies could have used artillery as ally even without taking cannons away from Dispossessed and Free people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top