AoS Let's talk about nerfs and buffs from 3.0

As far as I can tell, the "battlepacks" are just a new, more gimmicky name for the different play types. "Contest of Generals" is matched play, while the other "battlepacks" are open play, narrative games, etc.

 

Ahhh cool, didn't realise the big book was leaked. Cheers

 

They finally released the "preview" for us. It is honestly the worst one yet.

The "big winners" section only list combo's that are already currently in our tome. E.g. "Knights are awesome cuz you can give them serpent venom for mortal wounds and a +1 to hit from Koatl's claw."

So you know... clearly we benefit greatly from the new rules.

As for the endless spells, are they going to release another set of cards for them? Cuz honestly it kinda annoys me that those of all things got their rules changed.

 

I saw that the minimal size of thé table was 44 but they didnt precise what was the deploiement area ? Have you some informations about it ?

Also it's the minimal size, do you recommand to play on bigger table ? Who has thé most interest to do that ?

 

Hmmm, yes that does seem pretty underwhelming. No mention of summoning at all. Actually, I can't think of many mentions of summoning in any of these articles, did I miss something?

 

The slaanesh preview mentioned it as an advantage cuz they can summon a horde of daemonettes without paying for the reinforcement cost.

 

Sounds like they didn't actually have much to say for us. At least we know the Starpriest's ability isn't changing.

 

The only thing that caught my eye is they mention the Slann being able to "seize control" of endless spells. There's a few ways to interpret this, it's either fluffy nonsense, they don't know their own rules well enough to realize bind endless spell is a Skink lore spell, or (hopefully) we're getting some rules to replace the disappearance of our bound spells.

 

"Meet slann. He is a big winner in this edition. He has 7 wounds and 4+ save. He can cast 3 times and unbind 3 times. Or he may chose not to cast spells at all. Order now here"

 

At least the others actually mentioned how the new rules interacted with that faction.

Ours doesn't even do that. It just goes "the new rules for AoS 3.0 are so amazing for the Seraphon you'l literally not use them in your best combos"

I'd hope that our replacement for bound spells is something more inspired than simply giving bind endless spell to the slann...

 

Well we might get good mileage out of slann being able to control our opponents endless spells if they are going to be more prevalent in games. It would also be cool if we got an extended range on being able to control endless spells.

 

Personally I think the article would have been the perfect time to show off how our mastery of magic is unique after basically taking our gimmick and spreading it out, much like they did with OBR.
But instead there's little to no mention of it. They just rattled off the factions we have, what they are, and what units are SUPPOSED to be seen often in them.

Note they didn't make any mention of how the Basti's 1+ save is now much worse considering how rend interacts with the armor save roll.

Who was it they had talk about our faction again?

 

What's on the up? Bastiladons!(horribly fake shocked faces)
No shit gw it's one of our best units no one in their right mind would dispute that bastis are still amazing

 

Yeah, and the old rend immunity thing was 100% counter-intuitive. Modest points increase, double shooting it incurs less of an opportunity cost because we have even more CP than before.

 

That's been nearly every preview so far. "Oh, this faction is so great because they can use the new generic command abilities! This unit is a winner because they can use all-out attack! That unit is a winner because they can use all-out defense!" But the worst is how they reference rules that either have been removed or are just flat-out incorrect. Slann can't take control of endless spells, and they referenced an older version of the Nighthaunt rules. Whoever is writing these articles clearly doesn't even know the basics of the armies they're talking about.

 

Well, it's both subtler and more annoying than that. Whoever is writing these articles has not been tasked with knowing the basics of what they're talking about. I came into Warhammer in general and AoS in particular just as the fantasy game was transitioning to AoS 1.0 to 2.0 and when the Warhammer Community website was new. If possibly faulty memory serves (I am ancient of age, so it very well might not), these "preview" articles very closely map onto those that announced the changes to the the then extant factions during that transition. They're not white papers. They're sales copy. Games Workshop imagines (perhaps quite correctly! who knows?) that the audience for these articles are for people shopping for a new army to drop X drachmas in a complete vacuum on so they're selling every one as hard as they can, regardless of rules support. If it was me, I'd just put up pictures of the coolest models from each faction and say, "Look at this dude! He SHOOTS BATS OUT OF HIS EYES!" and have done with it.

 

I'm sure it's more of GWs general philosophy with the articles vs the writer not knowing. Jack Armstrong is a ridiculously good seraphon player.

Regardless, GW must be aiming for that surface level info someone who's never played is looking for. All the articles have been a waste of time for anyone who's played more than a few games.

 

I would say the people in this forum are not the target audience of the articles.