AoS NEW *rumor*

Big models that affect armies pretty heavily from my personal assumptions. Healing and a possible damage/hit buff from him, and if he is on a large base, perhaps a wide aura to affect a good part of the Army. Sylvaneth need something, perhaps this will provide a slight buff to make them a bit more viable.

They didn't mention it coming in Kragnos, but I'm betting it's in the book too.

 

It's decently large, but no giant centerpiece.

 

meh, could be worse I guess, at least it's probably not a god then

Though I think I'd rather see some units in the small updates instead of a constant stream of heroes. Especially for smaller factions like the Sylvaneth. They got more heroes than units...

 

Alarielle is the perfect centerpiece model. It just needs something to make it more playable. Hopefully this update makes the dryads better so you dont need to spam kurnoth hunters anymore and you can spend those points on alarielle

 

I have absolutely no idea how accurate this video is, so please take it as rumor and not fact. But I found this video bouncing around on Reddit and *IF* it's true, AoS 3.0 is going to be massively different...



Basic rundown is that battalions are supposedly being changed to be more free-form and have less specific unit "taxes" to make them better balanced across all factions. Could be good, provided that their effects are good and not super-generic.

Buffs and penalties are getting the 40k treatment and are capped at +/-1. Mystic Shield is changing to be +1 to save instead of re-roll 1s. Meh. Some armies are annoying with stacking penalties to hit or bonuses to save, but it's not really game-breaking. No word on if this means than rend is included in this limit or if it stacks with the -1 save penalty cap.

Charge reactions: when your unit is charged you can spend a CP to either:
Hold: +1 to save.
Stand and shoot: Overwatch with a -1 to hit.
Fall back: d6 movement, but only if you were charged from within 9 inches.
Sounds like a big buff to shooting, as a 40k-like overwatch rule just means that there's little to no reason to not have shooting units over melee ones. However, it also buffs armies with big charge bonuses like Orruks and most of Chaos, as you're opponent can't run away if they're charged from outside of 9in. This will probably help with the rumored smaller board sizes, as otherwise the game turns into a 40k 9e melee fest once again. However,CP are going to be more important than ever because:

Probably one of the biggest changes: CP is supposedly changing to work more like the OBR bonus points where CP resets to 0 at the end of every battle round and is accumulated again at the beginning. So basically a *massive* buff to going first, although the double-turn is still probably a thing. If you go second, you're basically getting hit all through your opponent's turn with 0 CP to react to anything. Unless they change it so that CP is accumulated by both sides at the start of the battle round, not on your turn, this really makes going first more appealing than hoping to get the double-turn in a lot of situations.

And finally, whoever goes second in turn 3 gets to remove an objective of their choosing from the board. This seems weird. The guy doing the video was saying it was a direct response to how many games ended due to the priority roll for turn 3. Which does seem to often decide the game, to be sure. But it seems that GW is really trying to encourage stretching games out for the full 5 turns.

Again, 1000% rumor. Just thought it would be interesting to share.

 

Some of the guys in my local community think it's bs...

 

Wouldn't be surprised at all, just thought it would be interesting to share. Also, edited my post to include a rundown of what he talks about.

 

I just find no battalions hard to believe, considering battalions are featured in all latest books, boxes, and magazines

 

I think the idea was that battalions would still exist, but would be less specific in their requirements. The example used is how the Tzeentch battalion was like "take a hero and basically any 8 of the units in your army" while other battalions are "one of this hero, two of this battleline, and 1 of this other random unit." He thinks that the battalions are going to be more along the lines of the Tzeentch version where you get more freedom in what units you take.

But of course, absolutely no idea how credible this is. It almost sounds more like a wishlist than a ruleset. The charge reactions in particular are something I've heard more than one Youtuber say they wanted back from Fantasy.

 

It sure would be a bait and switch that would come with an Edition change.

I'm not keen on the rumors about the changes. It feels a lot like wishlisting for TOW mixed with AoS.

Good news, we may get a sneak peak of what's to come with the Soulblight Gravelords battletome. It will likely be the last battletome of the edition, and will probably give us SOME insight in what's to come with how it's worded or something like an absence of points for the battalions.

 

Honestly it kinda surprises me they haven't moved to that yet. I have been expecting that since I first saw a flexible battalion. But they seem quite inconsistent currently. With certain factions having rather flexible battalions, with flexible unit count & unit types, while others have no wiggle room whatsoever.

Honestly, aside from the battalion change all of thus seems to come rather out of nowhere. This seems a lot like wishlisting yeah...

 

Agreed. It would be nice to see more battalions that make use of keyword combinations that cover more than just one specific unit for that slot.

 

More or less matches up with some other rumors I've heard. I wouldn't be surprised if it's all true. Wouldn't be surprised if none of its true.

A lot of it is pretty heavily influenced by the new 40k edition which makes me feel like the changes make sense.

I'm pretty sure he uses the OBR example to say the command point accumulation would happen at the start of the battleround and be wiped clean at the end of the battle round. But again hard to say for sure obviously.

I'm not sure how I feel about everything but it'll certainly be way different.

 

Really hoping this isnt true, I already play 40k and my interest in that game has dropped drastically because of how they changed the game. If they change AoS to be the same rules-set ill probably quit.

 

I don't think it's the same, just both systems obviously take cues from the other. 9th edition 40k has the smaller board, more set/global command point generation and structure, capping debuffs, etc.

They seem to use whatever system came out most recently to influence the next one.

 

I think we'll figure it out soon enough. Maybe it's the (next) Saturday surprise?

 

Thats the problem I have. AoS was never designed to play the way 40k does, and vice-versa. When they took mortal wounds and added it into 40k it made the game much worse, with armies like demons ans gray knights and ctan, designed around dumping large amounts of mortal wounds a turn on people in a game with very little protection against it. Rumor is they will be taking the cant shoot heroes unless closest enemy rule from 40k and adding to AoS. Think about how many times you have to kill the heroes to have a chance of winning. Now you cant do that. The game just became much worse. They cant mix and match popular rules and expect the games to be good. they were never intended to be designed that way.

 

I find the rumour video believable only because it's Smorgan, not just some random YouTuber.

I can't wait to stand and shoot and then parting shot...

 

I heard 3.0 is not until later this year (Septemberish type time frame) but who knows. We are in the "speculate wildly about everything" phase so i imagine 3.0 will be rumored to come out every time between next week and 10 years from now.

Did 40k really get worse with mortal wounds? I'm not sure if i agree with that. Before mortals you were dealing with 2+ rerollable cover saves imperium biker blobs and 2+ invul save screamer stars. And it's not exactly as if the armies you listed are running over every other army in the game. They've mostly been pretty bad honestly.

If they are going to have the level of shooting they have in this game, i dont hate giving heroes more protection because at the moment it just punishes bad armies because the good armies are the ones that can snipe your characters. Seraphon would actually be one of the armies that benefits the most from that rule probably.

I just think it's hard to say that they were never intended to be designed that way when both games are always in flux. They were designed to change and change they are. I'm not sure if these changes are necessarily great ones (that is yet to be seen), but I think painting them as unequivocally bad for the game is a hard argument to make.

 

The problems with 40k, as it is now, are because of previous releases in older editions. MWs are just D weapons on Wraithguard, but that's besides the point.

But this is about AoS, not 40k. I do hope they don't take too much from 40k, I would rather the old WHFB rules get some integration honestly....