• 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 Battle Tome update???

Whether or not this relates to us getting an update, I am sure it will happen eventually. Currently it is impossible to play Seraphon without accessing three different sources (Battletome, GH and FAQs) which is more effort than anyone should be expected to deal with when playing something for entertainment.
 
PabloTho said:
Whether or not this relates to us getting an update, I am sure it will happen eventually. Currently it is impossible to play Seraphon without accessing three different sources (Battletome, GH and FAQs) which is more effort than anyone should be expected to deal with when playing something for entertainment.
Click to expand...

So I play a few board games that have rulebook, expansion books(s), player record sheets, NP record sheets, collected FAQs and rulings not to mention the actual pieces have rules on them.

I play a few PC games where in the manual/tutorial writings are hundreds of pages.

Practically any RPG ever printed can have shelves of books and reference material.

I apologize for the apparent rudeness of my post but “there are too many words to keep track of” is a very tired argument.
 
PabloTho said:
Whether or not this relates to us getting an update, I am sure it will happen eventually. Currently it is impossible to play Seraphon without accessing three different sources (Battletome, GH and FAQs) which is more effort than anyone should be expected to deal with when playing something for entertainment.
Click to expand...

But that's exactly the same for any army in AoS. Even Stormcast, the most supported faction, have to at the minimum have the same three sources.
 
Darkfine said:
I apologize for the apparent rudeness of my post but “there are too many words to keep track of” is a very tired argument.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, however, when you have printed warscrolls that are mostly outdated because you (as customer) must refer to:
- the ones published on gw site
- the corrections in the new General handbook
- the modifies that you find in FAQ
- the changes in the "designers notes" (seriously, wft?)

Then you (as publisher) should really evaluate the possibility of a new battletome.
 
Darkfine said:
I apologize for the apparent rudeness of my post but “there are too many words to keep track of” is a very tired argument.
Click to expand...

I understand that added complexity is a bonus for some people, but it seems to me like one of the main purposes of the transition from WFB to AoS (and 40k 7th to 8th) was cutting back on the 'bureacracy' so to speak.

I'm all for adding new aspects to the game over time, but having to flick between multiple sources before I can roll the dice for a single unit because GW missed something in their last revision of it just slows down the game unnecessarily.

I guess I'm not poking at AoS itself so much as I'm poking at GW's sketchy quality control and playtesting.
 
PabloTho said:
I understand that added complexity is a bonus for some people, but it seems to me like one of the main purposes of the transition from WFB to AoS (and 40k 7th to 8th) was cutting back on the 'bureacracy' so to speak.

I'm all for adding new aspects to the game over time, but having to flick between multiple sources before I can roll the dice for a single unit because GW missed something in their last revision of it just slows down the game unnecessarily.

I guess I'm not poking at AoS itself so much as I'm poking at GW's sketchy quality control and playtesting.
Click to expand...

I agree on this for the change from Fantasy to AoS but 40K 8th Edition failed miserably in cutting down beaurocracy as it’s the same old media except new rules that are too much of a hybrid of AoS and previous editions of 40K and are recognisable as neither.
 
The Tome Is back on the website with no apparent changes. My LGS's Supply Rep said they had a documented shortage, and that's why they pulled it for a bit.
 
ILKAIN said:
The Tome Is back on the website with no apparent changes. My LGS's Supply Rep said they had a documented shortage, and that's why they pulled it for a bit.
Click to expand...
Well, one could hope. :D
 
ILKAIN said:
The Tome Is back on the website with no apparent changes. My LGS's Supply Rep said they had a documented shortage, and that's why they pulled it for a bit.
Click to expand...

Boooooo
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
I agree on this for the change from Fantasy to AoS but 40K 8th Edition failed miserably in cutting down beaurocracy as it’s the same old media except new rules that are too much of a hybrid of AoS and previous editions of 40K and are recognisable as neither.
Click to expand...


8th edition is the strongest 40k has ever been. Its infinitely better than the "can you remember what all four thousand detachments do?" in 7th, and has absolutely cut down on the bureaucracy.

8th edition has been a success, with tournament attendance and sales up across the board. If you personally don't like it its fine, but lets not pretend it's some unmitigated disaster.

In terms of bureaucracy, the removal of detachments immediately makes it better. Granted, if you want to take an 8th ed imperial soup army, yeah, you're using a lot of books. But you're also using 3 different armies, and if you used allies in 7th you suffered from the same problem (except worse because of detachments.)


Anytime you have regular balance updates, you have a lot to keep track of. That's just the nature of the beast.
 
And for every new person picking up 40k 8th there is people who may have stopped playing.

8th is more accessable yes but it is not a good ruleset as its open to as much abuse as 7th hence the chapter approved .


Its a shame they lizards arn't getting redone im finding they need some refreshing with all these new releases power creeping :)
 
skinkyone said:
And for every new person picking up 40k 8th there is people who may have stopped playing.

8th is more accessable yes but it is not a good ruleset as its open to as much abuse as 7th hence the chapter approved .


Its a shame they lizards arn't getting redone im finding they need some refreshing with all these new releases power creeping :)
Click to expand...

Sorry, but i disagree entirely. 8th is infinitely better than 7th and there isn't even close to the same level of abuse. More armies are competitive, more models are competitive, and the tournament attendance (and results) shows that.

GW has posted monumentally higher sales numbers, so I don't think its fair to imply that people are leaving the game at the same speed they are joining it.

8th is the healthiest 40k has been since 5th edition, and as someone whos played since 3rd, i'd argue this is the best 40k has ever been.

If anything chapter approved proves its NOT open to as much abuse... considering they are making active balancing changes. I don't understand how the existence of a balancing document somehow indicates a game is more abusable.

I also don't understand how Seraphon need a refreshing considering they are stronger than they were in 1.0, just got an incredibly strong mechanic in 2.0, and have one of the most diverse range of models under 1 allegiance ability. Perhaps that will shift after Kroak got nerfed, but we'll have to wait and see. I wouldn't be opposed to a refresh, the new SCE and Nighthaunt books are awesome and the models are beautiful, but i dont think we're on the short list of allegiances that need one.

Sorry to get so argumentative, but comments like that can really create a negative (and in my opinion, untrue) opinion of how healthy the community is. 40k is more popular than ever, and any opinion to the contrary is just that, an opinion.
 
Last edited:
Aginor said:
Need? No, probably not.
But....Want? Yes. :D
Click to expand...

Totally agree! Especially if it means updated models, the latest releases are jaw dropping and I can't help but hope some of those dated seraphon models get a bit of a face lift.
 
Putzfrau said:
Sorry, but i disagree entirely. 8th is infinitely better than 7th and there isn't even close to the same level of abuse. More armies are competitive, more models are competitive, and the tournament attendance (and results) shows that.

GW has posted monumentally higher sales numbers, so I don't think its fair to imply that people are leaving the game at the same speed they are joining it.

8th is the healthiest 40k has been since 5th edition, and as someone whos played since 3rd, i'd argue this is the best 40k has ever been.

If anything chapter approved proves its NOT open to as much abuse... considering they are making active balancing changes. I don't understand how the existence of a balancing document somehow indicates a game is more abusable.

I also don't understand how Seraphon need a refreshing considering they are stronger than they were in 1.0, just got an incredibly strong mechanic in 2.0, and have one of the most diverse range of models under 1 allegiance ability. Perhaps that will shift after Kroak got nerfed, but we'll have to wait and see. I wouldn't be opposed to a refresh, the new SCE and Nighthaunt books are awesome and the models are beautiful, but i dont think we're on the short list of allegiances that need one.

Sorry to get so argumentative, but comments like that can really create a negative (and in my opinion, untrue) opinion of how healthy the community is. 40k is more popular than ever, and any opinion to the contrary is just that, an opinion.
Click to expand...

I havent denied the community is doing better but that is because 8th is more accessable to everyone as the basics of the game are simple but it still has small complexities to it.

However it is a horrible rule set in my opinion But then again my experience has been vs pre fix assasin spam then pre fixed imperial soup then most recently the new DE ( you want to use a strat nah thats not happening)

At the same time i was a avid HH player so i never expeirenced these 7th uber formations.

With regards to lizards if you remove the tourney player style list that by nature are very optimised they are not to great. So yes i do feel they need a refresh and i would say an update to basic troops other than skinks would be a start, again my opinion is formed off who i play

Im not trying to be negative i still play lizards i love giant dinos and dinos riding dinos
 
skinkyone said:
And for every new person picking up 40k 8th there is people who may have stopped playing.

8th is more accessable yes but it is not a good ruleset as its open to as much abuse as 7th hence the chapter approved .
Click to expand...

To be fair, every edition have its portion of overpowered units / broken combos/ abusable mechanics... and they change with each edition.
It's in the nature of GW 's games.
WHFB, 40K,AoS: you won't find a single balanced edition in any of these games.

What matters is to have an entertaining system, and 8th edition is fun to play.... with a ton of things that need to be fixed.
 
skinkyone said:
However it is a horrible rule set in my opinion But then again my experience has been vs pre fix assasin spam then pre fixed imperial soup then most recently the new DE ( you want to use a strat nah thats not happening)

At the same time i was a avid HH player so i never expeirenced these 7th uber formations.

With regards to lizards if you remove the tourney player style list that by nature are very optimised they are not to great. So yes i do feel they need a refresh and i would say an update to basic troops other than skinks would be a start, again my opinion is formed off who i play

Im not trying to be negative i still play lizards i love giant dinos and dinos riding dinos
Click to expand...

I think "horrible" might be a little extreme.

There are more viable lists in 8th edition, right now, then there ever were in 7th edition 40k. Just in the last few months we've had Knights, tau, Death Guard, IG, Blood Angels, Dark Eldar, Eldar, Chaos, thousand sons, and nids all be some kind of good. Even armies like Ultramarines, orks, and Dark Angels have had varying levels of success.

8th has a massive variation in good lists and good units. There are a handful of glaring problems in the edition right now, but compared to 7th ed 40k, its a godsend.

Seraphon troops certainly aren't the most exciting units, but i think they have pretty good diversity overall.
 
Last edited:
So as someone about to go buy a battle tome at my local store, should I hold off? How long to updates usually take?

- Never-mind, I kept reading the thread. :/
 
We were one of the first to get a battletome, so I reckon there should be an update anytime specially after AOS2 hit the shelves. But that's just wishful thinking I guess. Next on the pipeline will be MOAR SCE, and for Christmas..... what do you know! SCE! LoL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top