same as with the cities go to the store page for a unit at GW bellow the pictures is a tab with rules on it most of them are in there
you get somthing like this https://www.games-workshop.com/resources/PDF/AoS_Warscrolls//aos-mawtribes-warscroll-Gnoblars-en.pdf
well they are grots they are saposed to suck they already did before they lost the 3 missle attacks 3 melee attacks. and don't get me wrong a lot of the ogars have descent fighting ability but the abilities they get are terrable. most of them are breavery based in a army that is eleat and normaly rocking 8 bravery before banners. they didn't toch yeties or cats at all and a few abilities got worse! how do you do that? this was the second worse army in the game and you nurfed them aaaaagh!
it doesn't even stop there both seag units are crap. so many of their abilities are so spasific that they are pointless like (and this is real) once a battle if a friendly unit lost models from battle shock (battle shock in a eleat high bravery army!) you can reroll hit wound and save rolls of 1. and the few good abilities they do have only activate on a 4+ in some conditions and so they are now crap. sigh it's just a shame so many armies have very good stuff and every thing im seing in this army is just sort of ok. what are you doing GW
well they used to cost 100 for 20 and all that has changed is a 5 to wound instead of 6 for their shooting and their hoard bonus has goten weaker. knowing GW they probably think this is a fair exchange and it will stay the same
I think he meant remove the allegiance ability from the GHB and have them be in their proper battletomes. As for the ogers: - Gnoblars seem to be mostly usefull as area-denial stuff against charges. That trapper ability is suprisingly nasty, but also weak enough that you don't really want to waste ranged attacks wiping them out before charging. I'm willing to be that's where most of their point costs comes from. Beyond that, their stats don't seem to be terrible. And the things they've updated seem to mostly have focused on allegiance abilities, spell lores, battalions, prayers & such. I wouldn't be surprised if that's all that was really needed. Though we'd have to see how those ended up first I guess. Imho just looking at the stats & abilities they seem relativly fine. -
true i say as much and the thing about grots was mostly a joke. but my problem is that everything thats not atttack stats and a few that are are baaaaaad they toched everything very gently the worst units like sky cannon(had and still has 1 shot that hits on 4+ and when you do do damage it's a d6) and iron blasters (only good when they don't move in a game mostly about movement) got bad fixis that don't help. they buffed blasters melee ....great. the units that they where taking to go at best 2 and 3 or 3 and 2 whent untoched. and ther good stuff and one not so good stuff that people hatted got nurfed. thunder tusks frost blast got worse when it needed to get more consistent it's a 400ish point model and stone horn still has a attack that has random attacks and damage. my problem isnt that they are weak (but they are) my problem is that ogars had several glaring ishues and they ignored all but one of them (credit where credit is due might makes right helps a lot) and replased so much of there stuff with hyper spasific or just bad abilities and a mess of breavery abilities. it makes me worried. for the oger players they are going to ignore half ther warscrolls becouse its usles and even if it's good that sounds boooring. and for us if they are so tone deaf with updating oagers then how is our book going to turne out. will it be like orks mostly realy good with 1 or 2 very powerful options (a good outcome) will it be like slanesh or flesh eaters a pile of broken nonsense(bad) , or cities with large chunks of it being meh-bad and a few things being descent-low key good (also good but i would prefer orks), or will it end up like sylvaneth and what ogers look like they will be mostly bad and all of their toys got taken away. i am concerned and feel very bad for 2 of my friends that play ogers gut bustas and BCR respectively who are taking the news badly
Gnoblars seem to be better in attack, while Skinks are better in range. Seems about right to me as in Fantasy they had similar profiles but Skinks had ranged weapons while Gnoblars were more spammable.
a 60 man used to be .08 points per wound better in melee then a club/sheild 40 man skink block and 10 points perwound better in shooting then pipe skinks. they had +2 attacks at 30 models so 180 attacks in a 60 man so they out performed us. now the horde bonus is only melee and only +1 attack so much worse
2 if you use clubs and javalins and in large units we hit on 3s with the club and 4s with the javalin. and they get 2 attacks on 5/5s. about the same when yo factor in gnoblars have 2 times the modles
As far as I can see you only get the bonuses to hit rolls in the shooting phase, and of the two different attacks you get in melee, one is slightly better and one is slightly worse, so there isn't that much difference
you are right my bad i don't know why 2 foot tall mushrooms are better at killing stuff then skinks but whatever. dang thats to bad why do javalins hit on 6s? that makes no sence and is dumb javalins are primarily melee weapons. skinks are 5' tall armored dinosaurs why are they so bad!
Incorrect, javelins missile weapons. Spears are melee weapons. Javelins are smaller, lighter spears principally designed for throwing at the enemy.
ya but they are just shorter spears why do they hit on a 6s the blow pipes i get they arnt disined to hit people you're beating them with a hollow reed but javalins you have better reach then a sword and they are easier to use.