GW News: LAS VEGAS OPEN 2025

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I do agree with some of the concerns about this, but there are clear cons of extremely wide units as well as the new pros:

• Wide units are going to be more easily hampered by terrain (if anything it's a big encouragement to put terrain in the middle of the battlefield where it can contribute to the game, rather than on the outskirts of the board where it won't)
• Wide units are going to get within range of more missile units and will be easier to shoot
• Wide units are more susceptible to being charged by multiple enemies at once, where their attacks will be divided - this is particularly important now that we know chargers get a bonus to their Initiative and get a significantly improved chance of striking first

There are definitely downsides, but just like the horde rule in 8th edition, they might be acceptable sacrifices for all the additional attacks gained. Ten model wide horde units in 8th seemed to be pretty popular. During the course of compiling and running the Best CC units in all of Warhammer tourney, it became undeniably evident just how potent a wide frontage can be.


As for easier to shoot, that really depends. A very wide but shallow unit is less effected by penetrating fire (cannons, bolt throws) and even templates like a breath weapon (unless you can catch them on the flank).

And of course, as you say, hopefully there may be some additional rules introduced to enforce limits on unit width to stop it from being exploited. We won't find out fully until the game is fully released and people start playing it.

Agreed. We'll know pretty soon after its release.

 

[Canas]

Well, if you can wound with that Strength 3 hit then it'll ignore all armour saves and has Multiple Wounds (3), so will kill standard Lord and Hero-level characters that don't have a Ward Save instantly or take 3 wounds off a Monster (which is much bigger in Fantasy than it is in AoS as most monsters have only 5 or 6 wounds). Of course the to Wound roll is the tricky part, but if you pull it off it certainly puts pressure on your opponent to make any Ward or Regeneration save their model has.

Right, I kind of assumed 3 wounds wasn't particularly impressive given that the other spell already does 2D3 at higher strength and with -2 AP, and it still only has a 7+ to cast.

Low wound count though in fantasy then.

Overkill is specifically related to Challenges - if one character kills the other in a challenge and inflicts more wounds than the character had remaining, then the leftover number of wounds is the Overkill Combat Resolution bonus.

That doesn't really change any of the potential issues a mechanic like this brings.

Anyways, who knows, maybe they'll manage to avoid the issues when putting it into practise, though knowing GW I'm sceptical of that .

I do agree with some of the concerns about this, but there are clear cons of extremely wide units as well as the new pros:

• Wide units are going to be more easily hampered by terrain (if anything it's a big encouragement to put terrain in the middle of the battlefield where it can contribute to the game, rather than on the outskirts of the board where it won't)
• Wide units are going to get within range of more missile units and will be easier to shoot
• Wide units are more susceptible to being charged by multiple enemies at once, where their attacks will be divided - this is particularly important now that we know chargers get a bonus to their Initiative and get a significantly improved chance of striking first

And of course, as you say, hopefully there may be some additional rules introduced to enforce limits on unit width to stop it from being exploited. We won't find out fully until the game is fully released and people start playing it.

You get a bonus for number of ranks to you combat score thing, so there's that as well.

 

[Lord-Marcus]

I'm really liking the new heroic deeds rule for FEC previewed today.

The throwaway line at the top of the article that all Kings have sworn banner to ushoran tells me that he's back under the control of the gash at least partially and is trying to bring all of the flesh eater courts to bear as a horde against the living

 

[Krox_v.2]

That doesn't really change any of the potential issues a mechanic like this brings.

Anyways, who knows, maybe they'll manage to avoid the issues when putting it into practise, though knowing GW I'm sceptical of that .

.

The Overkill challenge mechanic has been a part of Warhammer Fantasy since 5th edition at least. Given how long it was around, I doubt it generated that many balance issues.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

And.. well... Saurus infantry have needed a revamp for a long, long time. Not sold on the new style of shields but they will grow on me.

https://www.warhammer-community.com...hammer-age-of-sigmar&utm_content=lvo-seraphon

BUT DO THEY RANK UP!?

Not very well. A guy ranked them up on 30mm squares and its a very tight fit.

 

[Canas]

I'm really liking the new heroic deeds rule for FEC previewed today.

The throwaway line at the top of the article that all Kings have sworn banner to ushoran tells me that he's back under the control of the gash at least partially and is trying to bring all of the flesh eater courts to bear as a horde against the living

Sigh, why can't we have some undead that aren't aligned with Nagash. It's so boring.

The Overkill challenge mechanic has been a part of Warhammer Fantasy since 5th edition at least. Given how long it was around, I doubt it generated that many balance issues.

It isn't the overkill mechanic specificly.
Also, it won't necesarly lead to balance issues in the sense of overpowered units or something. Just in weird scenarios where you pull of a great manouvre like a rear charge, and end up losing combat anyway because that meagre +2 immeadiatly was cancelled out by the opponents banner and extra ranks or something.

Not very well. A guy ranked them up on 30mm squares and its a very tight fit.

Doesn't seem too terrible.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Not very well. A guy ranked them up on 30mm squares and its a very tight fit.

Doesn't seem too terrible.

Considering that they are based on 30mm squares and WHFB Saurus are normally based on 25mm squares, it's far from ideal. Even on the 30mm bases those tails are problematic. Cool models, but I can't see them working out for my army.

 

[Canas]

Considering that they are based on 30mm squares and WHFB Saurus are normally based on 25mm squares, it's far from ideal. Even on the 30mm bases those tails are problematic. Cool models, but I can't see them working out for my army.

I mean, the new models are a tad bigger. Expecting them to be on 25mm is a bit optimistic.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

I mean, the new models are a tad bigger. Expecting them to be on 25mm is a bit optimistic.

Important distinction: I was expecting them not to rank up on 25mm bases, but I was hoping that they would.

 

[Canas]

Important distinction: I was expecting them not to rank up on 25mm bases, but I was hoping that they would.

Fair enough, still optimisitc though

Anyways, my point is more that they seem fine for old world stuff as I assume they take this into account for their new (old?) lizardmen rules and put them on new bases and what not.

Also, didn't they mention somewhere that you could play with round bases or something to make it so models could be used in both games without needing to constantly rebase them?

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Fair enough, still optimisitc though

Hoping for something but knowing that it will not come to pass is the opposite of being optimistic.

Also, didn't they mention somewhere that you could play with round bases or something to make it so models could be used in both games without needing to constantly rebase them?

Maybe. Since I don't play AoS, and I have no intention to play TOW, it makes little difference to me.

 

[Krox_v.2]

Fair enough, still optimisitc though

Anyways, my point is more that they seem fine for old world stuff as I assume they take this into account for their new (old?) lizardmen rules and put them on new bases and what not.

Also, didn't they mention somewhere that you could play with round bases or something to make it so models could be used in both games without needing to constantly rebase them?

Only thing I saw was that the TOW rules have been written that in friendly games, retaining the old square base sizes didn't matter so much, whereas for tournaments and such, it would probably be best to rebase them. Nothing regarding round bases, though I'm sure one could find or make movement trays to accommodate round bases.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Only thing I saw was that the TOW rules have been written that in friendly games, retaining the old square base sizes didn't matter so much

Pretty much the same thing was said when AoS first dropped. Eventually the old base sizes will be phased out. Players can always choose to agree to allow old base sizes, but I think it will be increasingly frowned upon as the game matures.

 

[Canas]

Only thing I saw was that the TOW rules have been written that in friendly games, retaining the old square base sizes didn't matter so much, whereas for tournaments and such, it would probably be best to rebase them. Nothing regarding round bases, though I'm sure one could find or make movement trays to accommodate round bases.

I thought they mentioned something about movement trays and some other accommodations for round bases. Explicitly mentioning that you didn't need 2 collections to play say AoS Seraphon and ToW lizardman, at least where compatible models are concerned (e.g. named characters might not carry over, but saurus warriors should)

 

[Lord-Marcus]

FEC army box will be up for pre-order within a week to two.

 

[Krox_v.2]

I thought they mentioned something about movement trays and some other accommodations for round bases. Explicitly mentioning that you didn't need 2 collections to play say AoS Seraphon and ToW lizardman, at least where compatible models are concerned (e.g. named characters might not carry over, but saurus warriors should)

https://www.warhammer-community.com...t-diary-on-bases-and-the-barons-of-bretonnia/ I'm going off what's in this article. It doesn't mention anything about AOS and round bases, though I have heard rumors myself of a similar sort, though seeing that picture of the new saurus warriors on 30 mm squares has me doubting them now.

 

[Krox_v.2]

Pretty much the same thing was said when AoS first dropped. Eventually the old base sizes will be phased out. Players can always choose to agree to allow old base sizes, but I think it will be increasingly frowned upon as the game matures.

It seems that they might be somewhat accommodating of those players who don't want to rebase their armies, based on the following quotes from that article:

1. Do I need to rebase my old army?
2. If you’re playing at home there’ll be no requirement to rebase anything. For casual play, the size of base will make a minimal difference to gameplay. The rules will be written assuming the new larger base sizes – so if you’re planning to play competitively, you might want to upgrade to larger bases,

If you don’t want to rebase your older models individually, you are welcome to pop them onto a movement tray with the right footprint. In practice, movement trays are a useful tool, even if your army is on the right base size, as it speeds up gameplay and makes for more accurate unit manoeuvring.

Q: Can I take my old armies to organized play events?

A: Sure! But organized play events (tournaments, campaign events, etc) will probably require armies to be based appropriately for the new game (or on an appropriate movement tray). Organized play requires some standardization and this is the best way to do it.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

It seems that they might be somewhat accommodating of those players who don't want to rebase their armies, based on the following quotes from that article:

1. Do I need to rebase my old army?
2. If you’re playing at home there’ll be no requirement to rebase anything. For casual play, the size of base will make a minimal difference to gameplay. The rules will be written assuming the new larger base sizes – so if you’re planning to play competitively, you might want to upgrade to larger bases,

If you don’t want to rebase your older models individually, you are welcome to pop them onto a movement tray with the right footprint. In practice, movement trays are a useful tool, even if your army is on the right base size, as it speeds up gameplay and makes for more accurate unit manoeuvring.

Home games are a very different story. GW has very little power there.

The real question is how will the majority of games played at GW stores or FLGS be handled? At the onset, I suspect no one will have an issue with old basing standards. As time goes on (assuming the game survives), things will likely shift towards the new official sizes.

If someone doesn't want to rebase, I think specialized movement trays will be the way to go or...

Spoiler: something like this

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

For any fellow War of the Worlds fans out there, GW are now going to make Red Weed for basing. Yes, really.

 

[Killer Angel]

For any other War of the Worlds fans out there, GW are now going to make Red Weed for basing. Yes, really.

That calls for Necrons' tripods!