We have learned that Forbidden Power has a lot of new things for AOS. One of which is the ability to take mercenaries outside of your allegiance. So you could decide to be running a Death army with a side of Destruction. We can say "I really want some sweet broken DoK in my already busted FEC army". We have seen something similar with 40k, and those guys call it "soup". It is for many people a plague unto 40k because it brings the min/max and cranks it up past 11 (if you are not familiar with that term, an amplifier has knob with an output value of 1-10, turning it to 11 means going well beyond max).
I'm a bit concerned. This may better belong in the balance thread, but since this is its own topic I decided to make its own thread here.
If they are indeed letting us take units outside of our allegiance, thus allowing us to smash apart the balance issues that already exist... how are you planning to deal? Competitive players I imagine will embrace it as another tool to min max powerlisting. What about beyond that? Try for the social politics to try and curb it? Disallow it?
I realize "wait and see" is the common response to this, but we're pretending that its as has been described: letting us take units from outside our allegiance whereas before our alliances had to stay in the same grand allegiance.
Do we know it is anything? All I saw was a mention of things like Fyreslayers being used. I assumed a specific list of mercenary options rather than a freeform pick.
Also, AoS version of soup already exists in the form of Grand Alliances. Order and Chaos are analogous to Imperium and Chaos respectively. The difference is that in AoS an army actually has to give up better allegiance options in exchange for that flexibility (DO YOU HEAR ME OVER THERE 40K?) which eliminates the problem nicely without similarly preventing people from building what they want.
Stuff from outside the alliance can fill a roll otherwise difficult to find, but since they will be unable to benefit from any allegiance abilities as well as almost all army-specific synergies I imagine that the only problems to crop up will be 'that one unit in that one army' rather than an entire category of balance issues.
I'll have to think about it, but lets say every army could bring in anything else as allies. What broken options would that create? I imagine almost all of them would involve bringing in a unit that is already overpowered on its own, in which case the issue is that unit rather than the concept.
Yes it will always be the units that are busted, but in GW games there are always units that are busted.
We don't know much about it. But if its typicaly GW shennanigans I would expect stuff like throwing in blood thirsters and what not with your army, or bringing in busted FEC elements etc.
I think it will be a non-event. The fact that its an expansion, rather then baked into the rules like how I believe 40k soup is implemented(could be wrong, I'm not into 40K, so correct me if so), means that its entirely optional. And if its truly problematic, it will probably be disavowed in competitive circles. The realm spells are still somewhat controversial, so I think most events will wash their hands of any additional tomfoolery.
From what we know, it seems like it will mostly be a boon to narrative players in my opinion. My original plan for my Fyreslayers was that they were contracted out by a Darkling Coven sorceress and it was a mix of FS and DC stuff. Then armies started getting Allegiance abilities and alliance restrictions, and the Darkling Coven went back to the end of my hobby queue. Depending on how its implemented, it could be fun.
Although I know as much as the next dude, I'm personally getting a WHFB 8th Edition "Storm of Magic" vibe from this "Forbidden Power" expansion. That introduced some fun(ymmv) rules and neat models to the range, but quickly fell out of use, aside from the occasional side game. It was never a consideration in competitive circles, and really wasn't a compulsory buy for most casual gamers.
One thing that Forbidden Power mentioned that I liked was the terms "Line of Sight blocking terrain" and the ability to use the terrain as "chokepoints", which implies a new layer of complexity may be coming to how models and terrain interact on the table.
My guess is that there will be limitations on this and I would be surprised if it weren't a bit thematic for the mercenaries who can. I could see certain Fyreslayer and Daughters of Khaine selling their services, but what has Legion of Nagash skeleton to do with gold? Orruks would maybe allow themselves to be sell-swords.
They call it a "Mercenary System" so it implies it is a system which implies certain limitations and perhaps complexity. I would also like to quote this part:
With Forbidden Power, you’ll be able to recruit renowned sell-swords to your cause regardless of Grand Alliance.
Renowned sell-swords does imply that these are very specific units in certain factions that are going to be available. Perhaps some weird mercenary battalions. Will be at least interesting to see more revealed.
One thing that Forbidden Power mentioned that I liked was the terms "Line of Sight blocking terrain" and the ability to use the terrain as "chokepoints", which implies a new layer of complexity may be coming to how models and terrain interact on the table.
I like those as well. Battlefield management is something that is sorely lacking in AOS.
The ruins shown could definitely block line of sight between man-sized units by virtue of the size & height of the platforms. This is cool to me because is brings the height of models into the equation; tall models could see over it but also be seen in turn.
Also note it might purely be a "campaign" feature that only appears in Forbidden Powers games. Once the dust settles and its past the few weeks of launch it might well fall into the background of odd games; major events GW organises and the odd casual game.
Heck from Malign Sorcery lets not forget that only Endless Spells have seen near universal acceptance whilst Realm Rules are very hit and miss (some clubs use all, some parts, some none, some vary a lot).
NinthMusketeer wrote: Do we know it is anything? All I saw was a mention of things like Fyreslayers being used. I assumed a specific list of mercenary options rather than a freeform pick.
Also, AoS version of soup already exists in the form of Grand Alliances. Order and Chaos are analogous to Imperium and Chaos respectively. The difference is that in AoS an army actually has to give up better allegiance options in exchange for that flexibility (DO YOU HEAR ME OVER THERE 40K?) which eliminates the problem nicely without similarly preventing people from building what they want.
40k has a lot of ways to neuter those issues...the problem is that tournaments don't exercise them and GW has built in too many workarounds.
For example: did you know that Auxiliary Detachments exist? They subtract Command Points and are 1 unit per slot...but since you can just take a full Detachment instead, nobody bothers with them.
Stuff from outside the alliance can fill a roll otherwise difficult to find, but since they will be unable to benefit from any allegiance abilities as well as almost all army-specific synergies I imagine that the only problems to crop up will be 'that one unit in that one army' rather than an entire category of balance issues.
I'll have to think about it, but lets say every army could bring in anything else as allies. What broken options would that create? I imagine almost all of them would involve bringing in a unit that is already overpowered on its own, in which case the issue is that unit rather than the concept.
My hope is that "mercenaries" will be limited to:
-Fyreslayers
-Freeguild(they're a guild! they want loots damnit! )
-Ogres
-Kharadron Overlords
One problem with story crafting which armies can and can't hire is that in the Realms there's so much faction diversity most can be seen to be hirable under the right argument.
It would actually be shorter to list armies that would NEVER EVER ally with anything else and that would probably boil down to stormcast and chaos.
Its my hope that the mercenary rules are not official matched play rules and that they can be plugged in and out as needed without inciting holy rapture for excluding them.
I'm pretty confident it won't be a problem. It says 'renowned' sell swords, not allies of convenience. The allies system is already pretty flexible but it is not used much because the allies miss out on allegiance abilities. Now there is also the danger of being hurt by your own faction specific endless spells.
Dok could already ally in 4 ballista, but nobody does it.
Even a gkot becomes a lot less scary when it loses feeding frenzy.
I have been trying to think of a unit that would be game breaks ng if allied into another army, but I can't think of any.
Witch Aelves are still dangerous in another army, but a lot more fragile. Hearthguard lose a lot of their defensive buffs. Eels can't strike first.
A grey seer with warp lightning vortex is probably the most dangerous option, but even that is better in a Skaven army.
Hopefully this mercenaries thing will be like the Firestrom campaign and subsequent FAQ that just gave everyone an extra allegiance ability.. where the community rejects/ignores it and the tournament scene bans them at events. OR it just stays out of matched play completely.
Soup in 40k is mostly a problem because of how detachments and CP work; detachments are based on number of units rather than cost of units so the Mechanicum or the Guard can get an entire Battalion (+5 CP) for under 200pts. AoS awards CP much more uniformly and defines allies by percentage of points rather than number of units, so what you're allowed to take is a lot less flexible and you don't get disproportionately rewarded for taking a few small units anyway.
AoS is also much more heavily reliant on having a support stack to make your units do their jobs; as far as I know there aren't any single powerful giant death machines that can wreck armies without any in-faction support the way a Knight-Castellan can in 40k.
Picture if you will a faction that mostly is a tanky faction and now they have a bunch of points they can spend on daughters of khaine.
Or FEC broken units that do shed loads of mortal wounds.
How about a stormcast army that can now bring in a chaos war mammoth. Because lulz.
Are there workarounds? Sure. If everyone has access to the same bent stuff, that could be their way of "balancing" the game by removing the grand allegiance requirements for allies.
I wouldn't be surprised if your synergy keywords suddenly bleed into these units as well.
Slaanesh keyword giving you extra attacks... and now you bring in some FEC ghouls with extra pile in or a mortal wound popping gristlegore suddenly able to get bonus attacks. That would seem like a bent thing that would fit the design paradigm.
Of course - at the end of the day we know jack and squat about what their intentions or design will be.
But based on a largely failed in terms of balance track record, I am pretty scared to see what this is going to do in regards to casual and narrative games sharing tablespace with adepticon jockeys.
auticus wrote: Picture if you will a faction that mostly is a tanky faction and now they have a bunch of points they can spend on daughters of khaine.
Or FEC broken units that do shed loads of mortal wounds.
How about a stormcast army that can now bring in a chaos war mammoth. Because lulz.
Are there workarounds? Sure. If everyone has access to the same bent stuff, that could be their way of "balancing" the game by removing the grand allegiance requirements for allies.
I wouldn't be surprised if your synergy keywords suddenly bleed into these units as well.
Slaanesh keyword giving you extra attacks... and now you bring in some FEC ghouls with extra pile in or a mortal wound popping gristlegore suddenly able to get bonus attacks. That would seem like a bent thing that would fit the design paradigm.
Of course - at the end of the day we know jack and squat about what their intentions or design will be.
But based on a largely failed in terms of balance track record, I am pretty scared to see what this is going to do in regards to casual and narrative games sharing tablespace with adepticon jockeys.
I think it is pretty safe to assume that the new units will follow the current allies rules. That means no synergy bleeding, no allegiance abilities etc. So DoK units would lose their mortal wound save and blood rites. Fec units would lose feeding frenzy. A chaos war mammoth is hardly game breaking. Also the article specifically says that renowned sell swords will become available. I don’t think DoK, war mammoths, fec or Slaanesh daemons fit that bill.
It’ll probably be like Dogs of War from fantasy. Everyone remember those? They had a few units who would work for literally anyone, and some who were faction specific. I expect it’ll be something like that. And I doubt they’ll gain the keywords of the main army. That would be asinine. There is no reason to expect that.
I'll make you a deal, auticus. If the new mercenaries system works like you claim it will (Any army can bring in units from any other army as mercenaries, and those mercenaries receive all allegiance abilities of the faction that hired them), I will personally buy you a full, tournament-quality army of your design and paint it to your specifications. I will even pay for a custom Battlefoam case for the whole army and pay for shipping.
I feel confident that I won't have to do this because the way you seem to think the mechanic will work is just stupid. That's not even how soup works in 40k. So when we finally see how mercenaries actually work (my guess is specific units from specific factions can be used as allies by any faction, possibly having to pay a slightly higher points cost for using mercs from a different allegiance, and there is no way mercenaries will receive any benefit from allegiance abilities), all I ask is that you create a thread stating that you jumped the gun on this one and overreacted based on an assumption that makes no sense. Deal?
Edit - Just one qualifier for the deal: No Forgeworld or third-party kits, and I'll be painting with Citadel paints.
timetowaste85 wrote: It’ll probably be like Dogs of War from fantasy. Everyone remember those? They had a few units who would work for literally anyone, and some who were faction specific. I expect it’ll be something like that. And I doubt they’ll gain the keywords of the main army. That would be asinine. There is no reason to expect that.
From what's been shown(they showed off a Magmadroth and some Berzerkers), I think it might get rules for making a 'mercenary company' or something like that.
I highly doubt(and really hope) we never see a Dogs of War styled list again. I wouldn't mind some units though--they'd be a great way to do stuff like the Underworlds Warbands in fact!
The main difference is that the Old World Dogs of War army has a few key points to remember
1) Allies in Old World weren't the same. Armies were pretty much mono-faction entities unless you played doubles games (ergo took two full armies). So by default most armies didn't have any allies to draw from.
In AoS we already have allies to draw from. Some forces not so much, some a lot. It's a bit imbalanced to say the least, but the alegance abilities at least keeps a cap on it being abused
2) The Dogs of War army had its entire own roster of models that were unique to it. They appeared as a single army with the entire Dogs of War range, but they were all unique models. So as a mercenary force they already had their own unique visual identity.
3) Dogs of War were limited on what parts could be hired by which factions. So whilst the whole faction was a mercenary force, only some factions could buy some units from it. This meant that the Dogs of War army could have things few or no other army could hire; at the same time it prevented some arimes getting access to certain hired units. Whilst this was mostly an extension of the games lore, it also, again, mean that there were some limits on what could be joined to what.
So the old Dogs of War had limitations built into it and the army itself was built from the ground up as an allied force designed to bolt into other armies.
40k style soup already exists in AOS in form of grand alliances don't they though? It's not like you can soup necrons and orks in 40k. Instead you have couple grand alliances(imperium, chaos, eldar) who have factions who can ally with each other. doesn't sound that different to me from what AOS has. Or can't free guild and stormcast be fielded together right now? That's 40k soup style. If storm cast could be fielded say with chaos or nagash legions that would be equilavent of say necrons and ork allying which isn't possible in 40k.
auticus wrote: Im not claiming it will or will not be anything. I am just concerned for what they could be doing with it.
This is how you develop ulcers. I would just suggest not worrying about the future and just enjoy the present moment white it lasts.
That won't help my fall campaign event.
Yes but do you need to be planning that now beyond "hey guys I'm running a campaign hope to see you then" It's a wargame not a DnD campaign so its not as if you need vast amounts of planning.
Besides if its anything like the rest of the optional bolt-on rules you can easily say "campign - using endless spells, realm rules set in Ashquay and no mercenaries rules"
My campaigns are not just weekend tournaments using standard matched play rules that require little prep, so yeah they require some decent amount of planning. They go on usually for 3-4 months.
If they drop a crap bomb on the game with some busted mercenary rules, that will need taken into account. If they drop them on the game, they are matched play official, and I have not had time to vet them, and I exclude them, I take all kinds of hell.
I've attached the past two campaigns (from 2017 and 2018) and the one I'm currently working on.
tneva82 wrote: 40k style soup already exists in AOS in form of grand alliances don't they though? It's not like you can soup necrons and orks in 40k. Instead you have couple grand alliances(imperium, chaos, eldar) who have factions who can ally with each other. doesn't sound that different to me from what AOS has. Or can't free guild and stormcast be fielded together right now? That's 40k soup style. If storm cast could be fielded say with chaos or nagash legions that would be equilavent of say necrons and ork allying which isn't possible in 40k.
Correct. In AoS the allegiance abilities for the soup lists are notably worse, to compensate for being able to freely mix and match.
auticus wrote: My campaigns are not just weekend tournaments using standard matched play rules that require little prep, so yeah they require some decent amount of planning. They go on usually for 3-4 months.
If they drop a crap bomb on the game with some busted mercenary rules, that will need taken into account. If they drop them on the game, they are matched play official, and I have not had time to vet them, and I exclude them, I take all kinds of hell.
"Hey, folks! Since I didn't have time to go over the new [insert latest GW campaign] rules during the planning stages, we won't be using them in the upcoming campaign. I'll go over them ASAP and we'll see whether or not they're viable for the next campaign I have planned. I know some of you were really looking forward to using [latest GW campaign], but in the interest of making the best campaign event possible, I have to plan these things out months in advance. Thank you for your understanding, and see you all next week!"
NinthMusketeer wrote: That is really easy for someone outside the community to simply say, and far harder to enact in practice. I know from experience.
I'm aware that it's hard to enact in practice--but there comes a time when either you need to drop the hammer or just get over it.
Yeah. Excluding people, like, real people, in person, that are physically in front of you, in your store, with a bunch of other people around, is not easy.
But even then I agree. Theres a reason tournaments ban rules that are released like 1 month before the tournament. And nobody thinks thats unreasonable.
The end goal is to have both systems meet in the middle and become interchangeable. Anyone thinking otherwise is delusional. So if there's something you dislike about 40K that you're hoping doesn't find its way into AOS? Brace for impact.
Auticus you are safe - the Mercenaries is for open/narrative play games! The Matched play focus is instead on providing a 1K point rules system designed to balance the game alittle better for that scale of battle.
Also the new Apoc game for 40K is coming with some creative movement trays for the models so they might find a use for AoS, but also might spell a bit of a glance at the future for AoS (I'm sure we'll see an apoc style game system for it released in time)
Well its good in terms of your campaign; but its bad in terms of it won't now win you a free army from EnTyme
EnTyme wrote: I'll make you a deal, auticus. If the new mercenaries system works like you claim it will (Any army can bring in units from any other army as mercenaries, and those mercenaries receive all allegiance abilities of the faction that hired them), I will personally buy you a full, tournament-quality army of your design and paint it to your specifications. I will even pay for a custom Battlefoam case for the whole army and pay for shipping.
I feel confident that I won't have to do this because the way you seem to think the mechanic will work is just stupid. That's not even how soup works in 40k. So when we finally see how mercenaries actually work (my guess is specific units from specific factions can be used as allies by any faction, possibly having to pay a slightly higher points cost for using mercs from a different allegiance, and there is no way mercenaries will receive any benefit from allegiance abilities), all I ask is that you create a thread stating that you jumped the gun on this one and overreacted based on an assumption that makes no sense. Deal?
Edit - Just one qualifier for the deal: No Forgeworld or third-party kits, and I'll be painting with Citadel paints.
Overread wrote: The Matched play focus is instead on providing a 1K point rules system designed to balance the game a little better for that scale of battle.
I chucked when I read they wanted to support 1k scale tournaments. The unit and mechanic balance is so wonky at 1k; like a 3k+ points battle it can't be taken seriously even by GW standards. 1k is for friendly games, not competitive.
Most likely when GW says "tournaments!" it includes everything from your major competitive international even all the way down to the "tournament" which is just the local club having a few games linked together over the weekend.
Ergo its more likely that they hope to encourage it at "some level" but not just the super competitive end of the game.
That sid the big aspect for AoS is that a lot of the points are quite high for a 1K point game. You don't get to put a huge amount on the table and that can mess with balance on it own because it makes for more lists that have a limited focus and can't deal with as wide a range of issues.
Matched play won’t just be receiving new battleplans, but rather a whole new way to play, aimed at making smaller games viable for tournaments and competitive events. Balanced around the 1,000-point mark, Meeting Engagements offer key twists on normal Warhammer Age of Sigmar gameplay, is fast to play and takes up a smaller space than a fully fledged game. This makes it ideal if you’re building up an army, fancy a new challenge or just want to squeeze as many gamers into your club as possible!
Sounds like it's a bit more than just choosing to play a 1,000 point game, but some actual rules changes to help balance the game at the 1,000 point level.
My point being that there are individual elements in battletomes and warscrolls that would need to be addressed; a central set of rules will be unable to resolve that. For example, Nurgle summoning is widely regarded as pretty reasonable at 2k. But it doesn't summon half as much at 1k, it summons the same amount. Tzeentch does not get half the fate dice at 1k, etc. Durable units that heal, and big models in general, are more valuable because it is harder to bring the proper offense to bear needed to get rid of them quickly--a GUO with endless gift will be nearly impossible to kill for most 1k armies, Nagash/Archaon can rip through a 1k army on their own, and so on. Saying no one unit can occupy more than X% of the army helps but only to a point. Just imagine trying to overcome LoN regeneration.
You’ll be able to bring these epic battles to your tabletop with loads of new rules. An in-depth campaign system allows you to quest for the Stormvaults and obtain powerful artefacts that level-up between games (more on that later in the week!) and take your battles to Stygxx, a Realm of Battle with its own sorceries, command abilities and special rules for you to master.
Also included in the book are two new army lists that let you bring the forces from Forbidden Power to any of your games. Perhaps you’ll field the Lethisian Defenders army – a combined force of Stormcast Eternals, Idoneth Deepkin, Kharadron Overlords, Fyreslayers and Excelsior Warpriests that excels at grinding defensive warfare, complete with allegiance abilities, prayers, artefacts and more.
Or perhaps you’ll field the Legion of Grief – a new Legion of Nagash led by Lady Olynder herself who allow you to combine the terrifying might of the Nighthaunt’s full roster with Bravery-manipulating game mechanics, gravesites and more…
And if two new armies wasn’t enough, Forbidden Power features a new system that allows armies of any Grand Alliance to take Mercenary allies from the Fyreslayers or Flesh-eater Courts – offering you a great excuse to grab a Magmadroth…
As much as I love my Order buddies I would love to see a few Destruction tomes visited in the near future. So much exciting stuff to be done with Orruks, Ogors, and more.
Quasistellar wrote: So. . . Are they going to bring back the Excelsior Warpriest? Devoted of Sigmar book incoming?
Battletome confirmed!
We know there's a Freeguild book being worked on, to the point of Nick Kyme(I think it was?) joking about wanting to write a blurb about a farmer who gets pressed into service...and being told publicly to check his DMs by Ben Johnson.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ghaz wrote: It was supposedly confirmed at Warhammer Fest that each Grand Alliance would receive at least one more battletome each this year.
From the Q&A apparently. They've asked people to stop filming them, but you can take notes.
I'm down for this to be honest. We've had 2 Order books, both of which have been revamps. We've had 3 Chaos books(Hedonites, Blades, and Skaven)--two are new while one is a revamp. We've had one Death book(Flesh-Eaters) and one Destruction(Gloomspite). Both are kinda/sorta revamps but with some new stuff that makes them different to previous iterations--and Gloomspite umbrellaed three subfactions into one effectively.
Ghaz wrote: It was supposedly confirmed at Warhammer Fest that each Grand Alliance would receive at least one more battletome each this year.
Aye, the Death Grand Alliance has people wondering because Death is currently the only complete Grand Alliance (going by the webstore listings) in terms of Battletome coverage. That said GW hasn't given one single hint at what another Death faction could be so whilst its curious info there is nothing to get people excited about yet. And that makes sense since right now its all about Forbidden Powers and Warcry.
Personally I'm expecting Warcry to come close to Slaves to Darkness which should complete most of Chaos unless GW wants to do Everchosen (I've also read mixed views on if Tzeentch needs a Battletome update or not). Destruction should hopefully get at least two tomes this year which would hopefully complete them (assuming that the unit both ogor groups and orruk groups into single books like they did with Gloomspite; though of the two orruks could be kept separate which would take it to 3 books). Order is the big questionmark with what they will do in terms of the Aelves, but otherwise things like Free Peoples and Dwarves are pretty safe stable bets to get a Tome and there's a few more in there to update to newer versions (seraphon to name one).
All in all its looking very strong that AoS will be nearly complete on Battletomes come the end of the year.
The fun question will be will they either switch design paradigms midstream, or change design paradigms after finishing, thus starting the cycle all over of needing updated books.
Depends on what big paradigm they have left to switch around. Hard to say as someone might get a good idea that they want to immediately implement.
The big implementations so far seem rather concrete:
- Summoning is a thing
- Endless Spells
- All abilities are wholly within
- Natural Dice Rolls
- Abilities are more often than not Command Abilities
The mercenary paradigm seems rather universal so it may affect things less than any individual army related paradigm. Depends on how freely mercenaries can apply themselves to grand alliances.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kanluwen wrote: To be fair, Death is only "complete" because they put a vast majority of the stuff they would need to release into Legions of Nagash.
I personally feel they should apply similar constraints to many existing factions just to make it so that they are not trying to throw out endless amount of factions as they tried in AoS 0.0. I mean, they could make larger factions like the Nagash one but keep them open enough for their own specialty tome later down the line. Otherwise they are going to have a lot of small factions without diversity where they need to make ton of new models which will slow down the faction release in an unrealistic manner.
With design paradigms its hard to say what will happen. They typically involve wholesale changing of directions and can be any of a hundred or more directions.
Typically it will manifest as a rule some book will get that is very powerful and then other books will start picking that rule up too, with no counters to it being present until a year or so down the life cycle.
auticus wrote: With design paradigms its hard to say what will happen. They typically involve wholesale changing of directions and can be any of a hundred or more directions.
Typically it will manifest as a rule some book will get that is very powerful and then other books will start picking that rule up too, with no counters to it being present until a year or so down the life cycle.
I would also add that a paradigm change is the first signal to a new edition.
The recent Warhammer Tv video pointed out two foci for Forbidden Power, the first was a run of Endless spells with a Death theme that didn't require Death faction to use. This smacks of a rerun of the everyone is now a necromancer of late End Times.
Second it was implied that cetain powerful beings were released from the stormvaults but no reveal of who they were was given. I can guess though. Likely amongst others a number of od warhammer world chartacters that never made the transition to Age of Sigmar but had a resurge of attention due to total War Warhammer.
just guessing here but unlocked from a prison is a good way to get Kemmler, Sigvald and Crone Hellebron - amongst others - back in the active game
I don't think its an "everyone is a necromancer" but more that we'll likely see them do endless spells themed to faction and now spells themed to realm with the first realm being death after the necroquake.
Death=/=Undeath in Warhammer. Living people with no association with the undead have always had access to spells of death, going back to WHFB. Any faction can summon a purple sun, for example!
Its a nit pick but my problem with all the Forbidden Power endless spells being Death is that Death already has the most endless spell when compared to the other realms.
4 out of the the 13(14 if you count the Bailwind) spells from Malign Sorcery were already from the realm of Death; Purple Sun, Malevolent Maelstorm, Suffocating Gravetide, and Soulsnare Shackles(this last one really should have been Chamon if you ask me).
After Forbidden Power
No realm: 3
Realm of Fire: 1
Realm of Metal: 1
Realm of Light: 2
Realm of Shadow: 2
Realm of Beast: 1
Realm of Life: 1
Realm of Death: 8
Honestly it sounds like they might not even all have the same content. GW has left the door open for the content being "anything".
We might see one that is more terrain than spells or even see models appearing in them in the form of wild magical beasts of no fixed alliance (if they do the latter I hope its GW models not overseas china ones - only because GW's overseas casting is good but not "as good" as their in house in terms of detailing).
We might see one that is more terrain than spells or even see models appearing in them in the form of wild magical beasts of no fixed alliance (if they do the latter I hope its GW models not overseas china ones - only because GW's overseas casting is good but not "as good" as their in house in terms of detailing).
That is true for the terrain and endless spells, but all the recent Underworlds warbands are also cast in China and obviously they are maximum precision models indistinguishable from anything UK made.
I agree GW might experiment more with future kits (and I admit it's a bit of an assumption for now that they'll make one for each realm). With Warcry already including some random critters you could very well be right.
Venerable Ironclad wrote: Its a nit pick but my problem with all the Forbidden Power endless spells being Death is that Death already has the most endless spell when compared to the other realms.
I think that's just a side effect of GW's ongoing narrative approach to writing the background. I mean just for comparison, think about how much background focus Ulgu and Hysh got compared to Aqshy, Chamon and Ghyran that have been written about since the Realmgate Wars. GW is doing Soul Wars and Necroquake for now, so it stands to reason the models would tie into that.
Not exactly a fair approach, but then we don't have light elves, shadow elves or actual AoS era Order humans yet either. GW doesn't seem to be in a hurry to establish anything approaching parity.
Ya it was just a nit pick and ultimately, I do commend them for following their setting and narrative. I can put up with some greater focus on death for this set, but I might start to have issue if they are still focusing on death with their next batch of endless spells.
Yeah, as much as I am partial to Death and would like to see more armies (or any new models, really) released, faction overload is a thing that doesn't really help anybody.
I don't think GW will dwell on the Death side of things for much longer, though. I may be reading too much into it, but with Forgotten Power all the pieces are there to move on. Stormvaults are all across the Mortal Realms, with a variety of themes, so GW can take that wherever they like. There are now cracks in the spells holding Slaanesh, so Ulgu and Hysh could come into focus with freeing Slaanesh being the next thing. Conflict between Teclis and Sigmar is foreshadowed by Sigmar tweaking Teclis's knowledge engines and perverting their purpose.
With the talk of how we'll get at least another battletome for each Grand Alliance and what's been hinted at for the Forbidden Power story I think Death gets a new Mortarch with accompanying army and that will be it for Death for the foreseeable future, with some more elves following afterwards. In the grand scheme of things anyway. A little interlude with something new for Destruction, hardly a faction overflowing with Age of Sigmar era models, wouldn't go amiss.
I will say though that the approach to these narrative/campaign books is exactly what a lot of people wanted out of End Times. Intervals between them being so long that you can actually build an army for it and play it before the next one comes out. I like that.
Some concrete info. Mercenaries work like allies so only 400 points in a 2000 army. You can only take one mercenary company in each army. From the two lists so far you can't rake rune fathers, terrorgheists or zombie dragons. If you include mercenaries you don't get a command point on the first turn, so it is effectively a 50 point tax. Both companies get small bonuses and negatives. The flesh eaters can't retreat for example.
It doesn't look like anything particularly earth shattering in terms of balance so far. The ghb will probably introduce some more mercenary companies.
As a side note the new scenery piece costs 100 points and counts as an ally.
If this video's opinion proves accurate then I think its in a really good spot. The Endless Spells pretty much will enter mainstream use in matched play; whilst the Forbidden powers will settle in with being a mostly campaign system with some neat lore bolted on.
Terrain item at 100 points is a steep cost, but good to see it with a price that makes it a choice rather than an auto-must-have. In addition being what it is I'm sure it will see table time as just terrain too on many boards.
It would appear that most of this is mostly campaign use, which i enjoy. The tourney folks seem to be making a hard pass on it as there is nothing busted, which is also good imo.
From what i hear and understand, this is a solid narrative release.
For narrative players... New mercenary companies allow you to add a selection of narrative-led, thematic units to your army. Perhaps you’ll employ the Maneaters of the Gutstuffers, or a Gargant from the notorious Grugg Brothers.
auticus wrote: It would appear that most of this is mostly campaign use, which i enjoy. The tourney folks seem to be making a hard pass on it as there is nothing busted, which is also good imo.
From what i hear and understand, this is a solid narrative release.
And in exchange, you have to kill off a model within that unit. Small potatoes if, say, you're dropping a blob of 1W models.
Totally different thing if dropping a unit of decent W, decent save models.
Also, since it's an Endless Spell? Your opponent can seize control of it.
Yep and the 1 model loss is likely less than you'd lose to a turn of being shot at crossing that distance normally. For armies like Skaven able to take 30 and 40 unit blocks easily it will be a powerful model; for armies like Stormcast it might not be as advantageous to take; though even then against some ranged heavy armies it might actually be a boon for any force to have.
And yeah its a predatory Endless Spell, however units have to embark before it moves. So in theory if you move a large enough blob of your own troops with it, your opponent shouldn't easily be able to get their own units close enough to take full advantage. Though they can likely send it far off to useless corners or try and steal it for their own use for a turn.
Considering it does no damage and has no aura I'd treat it as a one-shot transport spell. If you can get more out of it great, but otherwise I thing summon and move then either distract or unbind it (or scar your opponent somehow to unbinding it so you can cast it again). If need be just aim it off-table to unsummon it.
auticus wrote: Taking positioning and maneuver even more into the rubbish pile every year. Tap your card to do X damage to your opponent style play.
Eh... Pulling it off well is easier said than done. By default throwing a unit off on its own is a recipe to get it killed, so there is that to overcome, plus the mechanics of where you put the unit & what you go after. It opens up new tactical plays even as it allows for ignoring others.
It's also important because not all armies move at the same speeds. Naturally fast armies might not even use the spell because they've got built in speed options of their own; whilst armies that are traditionally slower can potentially use it for their own gain in new tactical options.
It's also something that might not be used just to leap into combat; I can see it working well mid to late game to suddenly throw a block of units to contest or secure an objective.
If you go back into my history you'll know how I feel about deepstrike teleport into combat. I find it brainless. I don't find it very tactical at all, but thats just my perspective and opinion.
Will you get that unit auto killed by doing that? Well years of having to deal with this type of tactic in some form or fashion tells me its never as cut and dry as that.
It will always depend on the unit but the units that are doing this type of thing are either going to be throwaway crap units you don't care about anyway, or alpha assassin type units that are going to come in and remove a high value target with the skill of blowing your nose and drawing breath and rolling 2d6 and getting equal to or higher than the casting cost.
Had it been "move a unit outside of 9" and thats its movement" it could still charge, like anything else in the game that can do this, but because now you can also move on top of that, its a crutch thats already being salivated over. Had it just been that, I'd have said nothing about it.
The other uses I agree with, those would be fun. The teleport into combat without needing to worry about maneuver or any risk to getting there, basically an almost fool proof delivery system, is brain dead and easy mode, as it has always been in its various incarnations in gw games stretching back to ye olde days of 40k old where you could do it. And in those instances, those teleport into combat units weren't guaranteed deaths, as I feel they are not guaranteed deaths in this game. Especially with double turn being a thing where they can potentially go twice in a row.
Double turn is always a contentious issue with AoS - interestingly those who I see support it either have a very casual approach to the game (its far more about the social than winning at all); or they often claim that "they've hardly ever seen it happen more than once". Ergo they don't mind it because they've not really experienced it.
It's also interesting to note some who change their opinion - often supporting it when they've not seen it happen to them or when it happened and they got the double turn. Only to go against it when they are on the receiving end of a double turn.
Honestly when you look at the double turn objectively its not a good thing for a balanced game of combat; esp when there is nothing you can do to prepare nor really influence if you do or don't get it. It's pure luck of the dice and can lead to big swings in the game.
I really hope GW retires it out to narrative/open play and removes it from Matched play. That would be the ideal; it keeps it in the game so to speak; but just removes it from the matched play side of it.
auticus wrote: If you go back into my history you'll know how I feel about deepstrike teleport into combat. I find it brainless. I don't find it very tactical at all, but thats just my perspective and opinion.
Will you get that unit auto killed by doing that? Well years of having to deal with this type of tactic in some form or fashion tells me its never as cut and dry as that.
It will always depend on the unit but the units that are doing this type of thing are either going to be throwaway crap units you don't care about anyway, or alpha assassin type units that are going to come in and remove a high value target with the skill of blowing your nose and drawing breath and rolling 2d6 and getting equal to or higher than the casting cost.
Had it been "move a unit outside of 9" and thats its movement" it could still charge, like anything else in the game that can do this, but because now you can also move on top of that, its a crutch thats already being salivated over. Had it just been that, I'd have said nothing about it.
The other uses I agree with, those would be fun. The teleport into combat without needing to worry about maneuver or any risk to getting there, basically an almost fool proof delivery system, is brain dead and easy mode, as it has always been in its various incarnations in gw games stretching back to ye olde days of 40k old where you could do it. And in those instances, those teleport into combat units weren't guaranteed deaths, as I feel they are not guaranteed deaths in this game. Especially with double turn being a thing where they can potentially go twice in a row.
Well, you just spoke of several tactical considerations to make. This is in addition to the consideration of casting it verses another spell, and points were spent on it. The poetential for it to be turned back at you is also there. It isn't free and there is a tangible cost. In other words, getting to ignore certain tactical options is itself a tactic (in this case).
Compare to, say, FEC summoning. Yes there is technically a cost (CP for mounted guys, camping the throne turn 1 for the archregents) but there is no actual choice because paying that cost is overwhelmingly more advantageous. This spell is a choice.
There is also a fun factor; getting to 'break the rules' is entertaining when it isn't overused
Keep in mind you won't be moving hordes with this, the embark/deploy zone is too small. So any unit worth moving will be elite enough to feel the loss of a model. But I agree it would be better if it did not allow a subsequent move.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also GW "fixed" FEC summoning by just giving it to everyone. Hands up, who is NOT running a Mercenary Archregent in their tournament army now?
The person forcing it on the other makes the decision about what murder unit he's' sending forth and what high value target is going to be murdered with impunity. Additionally the indirect "tactic" is to choose to go second so that not only can the murder unit go off, eliminate the high value target, it can then have a chance at the double-turn to murder the second-best high value unit without the opponent getting to do anything about it.
If I'm running assault heavy combat army, this is the dictionary definition of a no-brainer. This is auto include every single time.
The other person has to choose to not run armies without chaffe screens or accept that whatever his high value target is going to be will be murdered in the opening round of the game with the effort of rolling 2d6 and beating the casting cost and then the disspel not working.
While pedantically speaking those are "tactics" because they are choices, those are the same tactics you use in CCGs where you tap your card that has the special rule "murder whatever opponent card you wish when tapped". We have moved another step towards battlefield and model position isn't really that important since there is now another way to bypass that and just go where you want into combat.
Had the spell counted for that unit's movement like everything else that does similar things, I'd have no problem with it.
I didn't even realize this until one of the players in my group pointed it out and discussed houseruling that so that it counted as movement. However, the majority are fine with it, it is the direction games have gone in, so it will not be houseruled out. We are doing alternate activation anyway in our campaign so that does help immensely this kind of **** since you can react to it and makes it more dangerous to employ, so my comments are more directed at the non houseruled double-turn RAW game.
lord_blackfang wrote: Also GW "fixed" FEC summoning by just giving it to everyone. Hands up, who is NOT running a Mercenary Archregent in their tournament army now?
Not matched play legal.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
auticus wrote: The person forcing it on the other makes the decision about what murder unit he's' sending forth and what high value target is going to be murdered with impunity. Additionally the indirect "tactic" is to choose to go second so that not only can the murder unit go off, eliminate the high value target, it can then have a chance at the double-turn to murder the second-best high value unit without the opponent getting to do anything about it.
If I'm running assault heavy combat army, this is the dictionary definition of a no-brainer. This is auto include every single time.
The other person has to choose to not run armies without chaffe screens or accept that whatever his high value target is going to be will be murdered in the opening round of the game with the effort of rolling 2d6 and beating the casting cost and then the disspel not working.
While pedantically speaking those are "tactics" because they are choices, those are the same tactics you use in CCGs where you tap your card that has the special rule "murder whatever opponent card you wish when tapped". We have moved another step towards battlefield and model position isn't really that important since there is now another way to bypass that and just go where you want into combat.
Had the spell counted for that unit's movement like everything else that does similar things, I'd have no problem with it.
I didn't even realize this until one of the players in my group pointed it out and discussed houseruling that so that it counted as movement. However, the majority are fine with it, it is the direction games have gone in, so it will not be houseruled out. We are doing alternate activation anyway in our campaign so that does help immensely this kind of **** since you can react to it and makes it more dangerous to employ, so my comments are more directed at the non houseruled double-turn RAW game.
I just don't see it being an auto-use option for assault armies, I think there are drawbacks to its use that make it a tactical choice rather than just flinging it out like its nothing. Consider, for instance, that to move a significantly sized unit you will need to deploy them in a U-shape so that the spell can be placed in the middle and have them be wholly within 3". That is a dead giveaway to the opponent of what's being planned, allowing them to react accordingly. Anything with a base more than 3" can't go with it at all so almost all monster options are off the table, and many deathstar units will be too big as well. What this is actually for is flanking/objective snagging, not alpha-striking. Double turns break the game anyways, so that largely irrelevant.
That depends largely on the murder unit and what its target is. If the target is to take an undercost murder unit and slay heroes, you don't need a big unit to do this.
Every instance I'm seeing people talk about the use for this has little to do with flanking/objective snagging and everything to do with getting murder units in contact turn 1 and hopefully go next in turn 2 for double the fun.
People talked about how summoning would be a non-issue, too.
At any rate, it's a problem with the undercosted unit and the double turn respectively. Saying something is OP with a double turn is saying nothing at all.
Overread wrote: Double turn is always a contentious issue with AoS - interestingly those who I see support it either have a very casual approach to the game (its far more about the social than winning at all); or they often claim that "they've hardly ever seen it happen more than once". Ergo they don't mind it because they've not really experienced it.
It's also interesting to note some who change their opinion - often supporting it when they've not seen it happen to them or when it happened and they got the double turn. Only to go against it when they are on the receiving end of a double turn.
Honestly when you look at the double turn objectively its not a good thing for a balanced game of combat; esp when there is nothing you can do to prepare nor really influence if you do or don't get it. It's pure luck of the dice and can lead to big swings in the game.
I really hope GW retires it out to narrative/open play and removes it from Matched play. That would be the ideal; it keeps it in the game so to speak; but just removes it from the matched play side of it.
It's a bit like people who enjoy or hate Monopoly. People who are lucky and more often than not win at Monopoly are going to like the game whereas others will hate it.
I would also add that the Double Turn is a genuine problem that GW has tried to address time and time again. All those "This unit model gets to attack as it dies", Endless Spells, and other features, are there to counteract the problems of the Double Turn. Despite that the Double Turn remains problematic and GW will continue to find "solutions" to the problem.
Overread wrote: Double turn is always a contentious issue with AoS - interestingly those who I see support it either have a very casual approach to the game (its far more about the social than winning at all); or they often claim that "they've hardly ever seen it happen more than once". Ergo they don't mind it because they've not really experienced it.
It's also interesting to note some who change their opinion - often supporting it when they've not seen it happen to them or when it happened and they got the double turn. Only to go against it when they are on the receiving end of a double turn.
Honestly when you look at the double turn objectively its not a good thing for a balanced game of combat; esp when there is nothing you can do to prepare nor really influence if you do or don't get it. It's pure luck of the dice and can lead to big swings in the game.
I really hope GW retires it out to narrative/open play and removes it from Matched play. That would be the ideal; it keeps it in the game so to speak; but just removes it from the matched play side of it.
It's a bit like people who enjoy or hate Monopoly. People who are lucky and more often than not win at Monopoly are going to like the game whereas others will hate it.
I would also add that the Double Turn is a genuine problem that GW has tried to address time and time again. All those "This unit model gets to attack as it dies", Endless Spells, and other features, are there to counteract the problems of the Double Turn. Despite that the Double Turn remains problematic and GW will continue to find "solutions" to the problem.
The hell of it all is that GW has done that ever since I started full stop gaming with their products. Typically they patched the rules to fix bad Army Book/Codex design, but it wasn't uncommon to add bad Army Book/Codex rules to counter bad core rules on their part.
At any rate, it's a problem with the undercosted unit and the double turn respectively. Saying something is OP with a double turn is saying nothing at all.
The core of it for me is another magic the gathering mechanic further whittling away at a wargame’s battlefield tactics by letting you bypass any need for maneuver and just letting you point and click a unit into combat with no effort at all. Tap your red card and deal x damage to your opponent.
The undercost murder units busting the game with it and double turn are just exasperations of the problem magnified.
Another thing is that the double turn means one player has to spend two whole game rounds doing nothing but roll to save and remove their models from the table. It's just really not fun to be standing there doing that. Especially because for most players its likely going to remove the effective power of most of their army, most of their choices, reactions, plans, ideas are being taken off the board.
Honestly I wish GW would just abandon the idea, I can't think of any other game that allows a double turn like this without there being some means to cost it or counter it. Eg I'm sure there's Magic the Gathering spells that let you take a second turn etc... but they are countered by counterspells and stealing spells and blocking etc... and they are all standard tools in a deck - so a player has a chance to tackle the issue. Plus they are best of 3 matches and are over quick. So the pain isn't the same.
Come to 40K and you could be spending 30 minutes or more just watching your opponent play. That's a lot of time doing nothing
My biggest issue with Double Turns especially are armies that can deal damage with units and have an effective spell casting phase. Double Turn of such double whammy is just excruciating to endure, both in time wasted doing nothing and units lost.
My FLGS had a tourney recently where Priority Order was skipped and the classic alternate system was used. It was much more relaxing and allowed people to actually think about possible moves in future turns without being screwed over by Priority Order.
Do we have any idea what that boat spell costs yet for points? I’m thinking it could make for a potent Nett-bomb. Drop 30 daemonettes in it (yes, with small bases you can get 30 around it), have them pop out, move, charge, use a KoS to keep up, make the unit they hit ASL, then give them a second round of combat. That unit can 100% wipe out any target they hit that isn’t Morathi or a fleshy abundance’d unit of Marauders (but they’d hand over 30 DP points, so who cares?). You can safely toss that 300pt unit into any character and watch him/her melt under a hail of 118 attacks where 6’s explode to 3 hits, 6s to wound deal MWs, and hit/wound on 4+ w/ -1 armor saves. Lethal? Yes please.
So two 30-daemonette units, 2 Keepers, Daemonette battalion (only requires two units to unlock), Chronomatic Cogs, 2 Enrapturesses, Fane, boat spell (Charon from Greek mythology), and...before boat spell I have 180 pts to play with. I figure that’s giving me either a unit of Hellstriders or a Chariot to be battleline, depending on boat cost. It seems like not a lot of drops, but that can potentially hit 30+ depravity points in a single turn to summon either more units or another KoS.
Can we not have another thread devolve into whining about the Double Turn? Either houserule it out like the rest of us, or learn to deal with it, but please stop turning every thread into a discussion about it.
Yeah if the bridge is 80 points and it lets you teleport murder units into combat with no effort, thats pretty much to me going to be one of the only endless spells that you will see in a lot of games.
Eldarain wrote: Does this book reveal which Ancient Evil is locked in the Lethis Stormvault?
Hot off the presses. ***Do not click if you want to go in fresh to the The Forbidden Power lore***
Spoiler:
After a cataclysmic battle that leaves both Lady Olynder and the Celestant-Prime battered and bloodied at the entrance of the Stormvault, the doors slowly creak open. A chorus of wails and tormented spirits sweeps out, fleeing in abject terror of the entity that they were locked in with for centuries. And as the cacophony of screams subsides into the silence of the night, an aroma wafts over the combatants, both held still in anticipation of whats to come. Is it friend or foe? Can either army stand against the entity that watches them from the darkness? Is that beef stew?
Before the Celestant Prime can gather his wits and face this new foe, he’s engulfed in a shot of burning soup. Lady Olynder suffers a similiar fate, sending both their armies and allies into a hasty retreat.
The Halfling Hotpot has entered the Mortal Realms.
GW fooled us all by telling us that the Hotpot was for Blood Bowl, but its the new power player in the Mortal Realms.
At any rate, it's a problem with the undercosted unit and the double turn respectively. Saying something is OP with a double turn is saying nothing at all.
The core of it for me is another magic the gathering mechanic further whittling away at a wargame’s battlefield tactics by letting you bypass any need for maneuver and just letting you point and click a unit into combat with no effort at all. Tap your red card and deal x damage to your opponent.
I think that is a vast oversimplification that both overstates how powerful it is and ignores the tactical options it creates. "Bypass any need for maneuver" glosses over the unit needing to be wholly within 3" of the boat when it is summoned, and the wizard needing to be within range to summon the boat at the proper location, and that said unit still needs to be maneuvered using the boat move and its subsequent move; a speed boost does not mean there is no maneuvering. Even if every unit in the game could fly an infinite distance there would still be maneuvering. "No effort at all" ignores that it costs points and needs to be cast. What unit is actually slamming into a front line and wrecking everything using this spell anyways? It isn't game winning, it's a tool in the toolbox.
Eldarain wrote: Does this book reveal which Ancient Evil is locked in the Lethis Stormvault?
Hot off the presses. ***Do not click if you want to go in fresh to the The Forbidden Power lore***
Spoiler:
After a cataclysmic battle that leaves both Lady Olynder and the Celestant-Prime battered and bloodied at the entrance of the Stormvault, the doors slowly creak open. A chorus of wails and tormented spirits sweeps out, fleeing in abject terror of the entity that they were locked in with for centuries. And as the cacophony of screams subsides into the silence of the night, an aroma wafts over the combatants, both held still in anticipation of whats to come. Is it friend or foe? Can either army stand against the entity that watches them from the darkness? Is that beef stew?
Before the Celestant Prime can gather his wits and face this new foe, he’s engulfed in a shot of burning soup. Lady Olynder suffers a similiar fate, sending both their armies and allies into a hasty retreat.
The Halfling Hotpot has entered the Mortal Realms.
GW fooled us all by telling us that the Hotpot was for Blood Bowl, but its the new power player in the Mortal Realms.
A twist worthy of Shamamlammalon himself!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
auticus wrote: I'm fortunate to have a group that allows us to bypass double turn, and even explore alternate activations.
The alternate activations really save the game for me.
Important to keep in mind that alternate activations is a very different game, units/tactics can behave differently in the base game than in alternate activation. The boat, for example, has a dramatically different impact and use in alternate activation that it does in the base game. Thinking on that I can see why your stance on it is so different than mine; it is WAY stronger in alternate unit activation.
Important to keep in mind that alternate activations is a very different game, units/tactics can behave differently in the base game than in alternate activation. The boat, for example, has a dramatically different impact and use in alternate activation that it does in the base game. Thinking on that I can see why your stance on it is so different than mine; it is WAY stronger in alternate unit activation.
I've been using alternate activation for the past couple years. It actually bypasses things like this because you can react after they try it. The stormcast teleport trick is one thing I have a lot of experience with and alt activation makes them harder to pull it off since the rest of the army can just move away unit by unit instead of them just piling the whole army into an area and then alpha assaulting.
The boat does not seem stronger with alternate activation. It is not as useful in terms of wanting to direct alpha strike someone with it because not only in alt activation do you NOT get a double turn, the opposition sees where your unit has gone and can react accordingly instead of standing there taking it in the face.
In either case, the murder unit will be murdering what it wants. The difference is after the murder unit launches its attack and kills its target, the other player immediately gets to activate a unit to respond as opposed to have stood there watching half or more of their army get destroyed, so it can either attack back, or move units out of the way. And there's no double turn. With RAW the murder unit gets to attack what it wants. And then potentially gets to do what it wants again without being attacked a single time, so I'm not seeing how alternate activation makes this scenario more powerful for the murder unit.
The below quote is from me a few posts up. Bolded emphasis mine.
I didn't even realize this until one of the players in my group pointed it out and discussed houseruling that so that it counted as movement. However, the majority are fine with it, it is the direction games have gone in, so it will not be houseruled out. We are doing alternate activation anyway in our campaign so that does help immensely this kind of **** since you can react to it and makes it more dangerous to employ, so my comments are more directed at the non houseruled double-turn RAW game.
I wouldn't be posting a complaint about something based on houserules. That would be rather insipid of me.
"Bypass any need for maneuver" glosses over the unit needing to be wholly within 3" of the boat when it is summoned, and the wizard needing to be within range to summon the boat at the proper location, and that said unit still needs to be maneuvered using the boat move and its subsequent move; a speed boost does not mean there is no maneuvering.
Those things are not overly difficult to accomplish. That falls in the realm to me of "not needing to maneuver". If it makes it better, turn "not needing to maneuver" into "very easy to maneuver".
Its still easy mode to pull off minus the dice roll to cast the spell which is up to random chance, but these spells are always given such ridiculously low casting values that failing a casting roll is very rare.
Almost every single conversation I'm seeing on this boat is to use it to point and click a murder unit into whatever you want without repercussion, and then hope for a double turn to basically double the murder unit's output into the top two value targets in the opposing army. I don't have to position my unit correctly other than to put it in range of the spell. I don't have to worry about my opponent countering with counter maneuvering. I just make it happen and it happens. The removal of a counter-maneuver short of use screens and if you are playing an army without screens, thats your problem, is the thing that bothers me most.
Well, that’s why I mentioned the Daemonette-Bomb; you get a command trait to hand them a double-tap in a single turn. God forbid you actually get a double turn with that, you’re potentially smashing 4 units with no fear of repercussions because the opposing units will be D-E-A-D before they can even do a damn thing. And that’s ignoring the damage output of everything else around them. Honestly, if i was facing that combo and knew what it did, I’d be frightened. If I didn’t know what it did and didn’t prepare, I’d be calling over a neutral part and asking “can they really F-ing do that?!”
I wouldn't be frightened. I'd shake your hand and say good game and go find something else to do with my time, because thats not an entertaining or fun game to me. (assuming we weren't playing in a tournament where all bets are off)
From a tournament context thats definitely a powerful tool that they've introduced, and I will be highly surprised if its not something that is used fairly regularly. With a lot of armies that have cheapish murder units.
So, you’d refuse to play me if I brought an endless spell, a general and a max sized unit of a basic troop?
I know it’s tough, but that’s like refusing to play against an opponent deep striking Bloodletters in 40k. Feels just kind of final to refuse a game based on that.
This is what I love about forum discussions, talking about rules in a vacuum without any context or counter actions taken into consideration. The 3 inch requirement on that endless spell is a big deal. Don't act like its easy to bypass, the number of "auto-kill" units that fit in a 3inch bubble with an obstacle in the middle are not numerous, and of the ones that do several are not going to be happy about missing a model. Especially on turn one, protecting something you don't want attacked is really not all that difficult, proper screening is a thing (a tactical thing at that) and any decent player is going to severely limit your turn 1 options with this spell. As several other reasonable voices have already stated on this thread, the utility of this spell in the most competitive circles is probably going to mostly be in objective shenanigans and getting slower support units where they need to be in armies that have diverse movement ranges or taking advantage of a gap in your opponents battle line mid game, all things I see as tactical. I am sure when this first hits the tourney scene you will see a decent amount of alpha striking with it killing off carelessly placed characters and units, and people will quickly adapt and learn. It is in the random games at the local gaming store that this thing is going to get a bad rap, where people who only play casually and are not particularly good will continuously get stomped by this type of thing, as they likely would have gotten stomped anyways by someone playing a "competitive" list in a casual setting.
Double turn works very similarly. In a casual game without a lot of preparation and lists built explicitly with the mechanic in mind, I am sure it often seems like an unimaginable obstacle that simply cannot be overcome. Like with all things in a casual setting, however, house rules are easily implemented. But in a competitive setting (watch some tourney streams at top tables) you will repeatedly find people get double turned and shockingly manage to win. You will repeatedly find people carefully maneuvering units specifically with the understanding that a double turn could occur and I have personally played several games in a non-competitive setting at that where a double turn occurred appearing to swing things one way only to immediately be followed up by another double turn swinging the balance, again, into the opposite direction. Is it possible to build a list entirely around the maximization of the double turn? Yes, of course it is. Is that list going to decimate some people, yes it will. But over the course of a tournament that player is going to fail to get some double turns and their completely all in list is going to get stomped. Or they are going to run into someone who efficiently and methodically screens their most important units and that double turn list finds itself having thrown everything it has into the opponent with a double turn now staring right back at them without having accomplished anything. The game has some serious balance issues right now with Skaven, FEC, and DoK and power creep, no doubt about it, but if you notice multiple tourneys of late have seen older books or non OP lists taking top 3 spots, because for once GW has a game where the fundamental game rules are not the issue, allowing the best players to often find ways to beat up on even the OP stuff in the game.
I was fully ready to panic when I heard they were going to release mercenary rules. But it looks like they are going to be a non factor in competitive play, and these endless spells, while some of them will see utility, none of them are overpowered. So lets take a deep breath and wait to see what the generals handbook has in store for us and see if it is able to bring Skaven, FEC, and DoK back into line. There will always be a litany of models and rules that confound casual players and cannot be overcome without skill or proper list design. Anything that does a lot of damage in a short time, is super fast, or is like the double turn, something intrinsic to the game, but that too often I see completely ignored in first turn play even though everyone knows it is coming only to treat it as some random one off event they just can't believe is fair or possible. If you just want to throw dice and drink bears house rule it out, and for everyone else just plan for it, don't panic and make poor decisions after it happens, and you will be shocked how often you are able to recover afterwards. I am no great gamer and have myself lost to several double turns and alpha strikes, but I have seen streams of great players calmly and efficiently overcome these using skill and tactics, so I know it can be done. I don't know almost any competitive players (many of whom do not take lists specifically engineered to capitalize on double turns) who dislike the mechanic. That tells me as much as anything that it is not broken, just misunderstood.
tripchimeras wrote: This is what I love about forum discussions, talking about rules in a vacuum without any context or counter actions taken into consideration. The 3 inch requirement on that endless spell is a big deal. Don't act like its easy to bypass, the number of "auto-kill" units that fit in a 3inch bubble with an obstacle in the middle are not numerous, and of the ones that do several are not going to be happy about missing a model. Especially on turn one, protecting something you don't want attacked is really not all that difficult, proper screening is a thing (a tactical thing at that) and any decent player is going to severely limit your turn 1 options with this spell. As several other reasonable voices have already stated on this thread, the utility of this spell in the most competitive circles is probably going to mostly be in objective shenanigans and getting slower support units where they need to be in armies that have diverse movement ranges or taking advantage of a gap in your opponents battle line mid game, all things I see as tactical. I am sure when this first hits the tourney scene you will see a decent amount of alpha striking with it killing off carelessly placed characters and units, and people will quickly adapt and learn. It is in the random games at the local gaming store that this thing is going to get a bad rap, where people who only play casually and are not particularly good will continuously get stomped by this type of thing, as they likely would have gotten stomped anyways by someone playing a "competitive" list in a casual setting.
Double turn works very similarly. In a casual game without a lot of preparation and lists built explicitly with the mechanic in mind, I am sure it often seems like an unimaginable obstacle that simply cannot be overcome. Like with all things in a casual setting, however, house rules are easily implemented. But in a competitive setting (watch some tourney streams at top tables) you will repeatedly find people get double turned and shockingly manage to win. You will repeatedly find people carefully maneuvering units specifically with the understanding that a double turn could occur and I have personally played several games in a non-competitive setting at that where a double turn occurred appearing to swing things one way only to immediately be followed up by another double turn swinging the balance, again, into the opposite direction. Is it possible to build a list entirely around the maximization of the double turn? Yes, of course it is. Is that list going to decimate some people, yes it will. But over the course of a tournament that player is going to fail to get some double turns and their completely all in list is going to get stomped. Or they are going to run into someone who efficiently and methodically screens their most important units and that double turn list finds itself having thrown everything it has into the opponent with a double turn now staring right back at them without having accomplished anything. The game has some serious balance issues right now with Skaven, FEC, and DoK and power creep, no doubt about it, but if you notice multiple tourneys of late have seen older books or non OP lists taking top 3 spots, because for once GW has a game where the fundamental game rules are not the issue, allowing the best players to often find ways to beat up on even the OP stuff in the game.
I was fully ready to panic when I heard they were going to release mercenary rules. But it looks like they are going to be a non factor in competitive play, and these endless spells, while some of them will see utility, none of them are overpowered. So lets take a deep breath and wait to see what the generals handbook has in store for us and see if it is able to bring Skaven, FEC, and DoK back into line. There will always be a litany of models and rules that confound casual players and cannot be overcome without skill or proper list design. Anything that does a lot of damage in a short time, is super fast, or is like the double turn, something intrinsic to the game, but that too often I see completely ignored in first turn play even though everyone knows it is coming only to treat it as some random one off event they just can't believe is fair or possible. If you just want to throw dice and drink bears house rule it out, and for everyone else just plan for it, don't panic and make poor decisions after it happens, and you will be shocked how often you are able to recover afterwards. I am no great gamer and have myself lost to several double turns and alpha strikes, but I have seen streams of great players calmly and efficiently overcome these using skill and tactics, so I know it can be done. I don't know almost any competitive players (many of whom do not take lists specifically engineered to capitalize on double turns) who dislike the mechanic. That tells me as much as anything that it is not broken, just misunderstood.
In regards to the combo I found and posted, the models are on 25mm bases; it’s pretty easy to get a unit of them around the boat right away (trick: grab an empty base the size of the boat for setup and place the models around it to ensure they fit). The trick is having a big enough unit that losing one doesn’t hurt, but they can make the spell cost worth it. Hence a 25mm unit between 20-30 models with a lot of attacks. Daemonettes fit the description to a T. I won’t consider myself a top player. Like...at all. But I think this is a power play and I would absolutely take it to a tournament. If I can melt Skarbrand/Archaon/Alarielle/etc with a single Nett-Bomb (do the math, law of averages smokes anything except big fleshy abundance unit/Morathi). Daemonettes are already great. Add a movement booster to them like this and watch the curses just spew from your opponent’s mouth.
People talking bout free boat rides while I'm just sitting here here bravery bombing with Big Giant Head, Grim Garland and 20 banshee screams at effectively 2D6+4 in FEC.
True; but you get first crack w/it.
And in regards to putting a blank base in for spacial awareness; why not? It’s the same as pre-measuring. I’d honestly laugh at anyone trying to prevent me from measuring (quickly) how to space out my unit. If you can premeasure, you can do this; cuz that’s all it is. Just because less than a handful of people online would get bent out shape about it doesn’t make it wrong; I’m pretty sure most opponents will say “why didn’t I think of that” and steal the trick.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
lord_blackfang wrote: People talking bout three men in a boat while I'm just sitting here here bravery bombing with Big Giant Head, Grim Garland and 20 banshee screams at effectively 2D6+4 in FEC.
And hey; I’m talking about thirty girls in a boat!
timetowaste85 wrote: So, you’d refuse to play me if I brought an endless spell, a general and a max sized unit of a basic troop?
I know it’s tough, but that’s like refusing to play against an opponent deep striking Bloodletters in 40k. Feels just kind of final to refuse a game based on that.
I don't play random games in the first place, so you and I had we lived in the same city would likely never play anyway. My AOS games are all heavily house ruled because the game as written is not a game I'd every play for a couple of reasons I have already discussed in the past. My preference for games is based on classical wargames - where maneuver and battlefield management are priority to list building and point and click teleporting murder units into combat with whatever you want. If I want to play that game I'll break out my magic cards. The setup and putaway in magic is much lighter than breaking out models and having to put them away. Thats not personal attack, thats my preference in tabletop wargames and what I'm looking to get out of them.
Second - yes. If you are playing in a manner that is going for the one-two KO turn 1, thats not a game that I enjoy. I wouldn't spend my time driving to the game store, unpacking my models, deploying my models, having you get the double turn, winning the game, and that be that. Thats a giant waste of my time. Its not that you brought an endless spell, a general, and a max sized unit of basic troops. Thats pretty disingenuous to try and equate what I said with that conclusion. If you were playing to point and click murder units at me with the effort of breathing and having a working heart beat to one or two turn table me, I have no reason to want to play that game.
If for whatever reason we were in a tournament facing each other, that would be a different matter. For a one off game that was my leisure time, thats not very leisurely to me.
Hey, if you have to deny a game because your opponent had the audacity to not be in your clique of buddies and dared to bring a max sized troop unit, an HQ and an endless spell and didn’t want to just throw the game, I’d say that’s more your problem than mine. You’re right about one thing though; it’s a good thing we aren’t playing in the same places. Because it definitely sounds like you’re promoting a bit of casual-elitism. If I play an opponent and they aren’t asking for a “beginner, I’m just learning” game, I’m not going to insult them by dumbing myself down so they can curbstomb me to feel better about their “skills”. I actually had more respect for you on here until you said “that endless spell is too good with your army, I’d walk away from a game with you if you brought it”. The take-my-ball-and-leave attitude is silly.
In regards to the boat in alternate unit activation, it isn't about a killer unit, it is about slinging an anvil unit forward then having it charge and pull as many enemy units into 3" as possible. One activation and you can entirely gut the opponent's movement capacity for the whole round since all of those units are now locked in melee. Even without charging you can run it and have it create a big line in front of the enemy. The latter, come to think of it, would be great to use in regular turn function as well, though not quite as strong.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
timetowaste85 wrote: Hey, if you have to deny a game because your opponent had the audacity to not be in your clique of buddies and dared to bring a max sized troop unit, an HQ and an endless spell and didn’t want to just throw the game, I’d say that’s more your problem than mine. You’re right about one thing though; it’s a good thing we aren’t playing in the same places. Because it definitely sounds like you’re promoting a bit of casual-elitism. If I play an opponent and they aren’t asking for a “beginner, I’m just learning” game, I’m not going to insult them by dumbing myself down so they can curbstomb me to feel better about their “skills”. I actually had more respect for you on here until you said “that endless spell is too good with your army, I’d walk away from a game with you if you brought it”. The take-my-ball-and-leave attitude is silly.
I think you guys misinterpreting each other. From what I see, Auticus means that he does not want to play casual games against people going for round-1 wins, you are saying that bombing with 30 daemonettes is not a round-1 win tactic. They don't actually apply to each other.
timetowaste85 wrote: True; but you get first crack w/it.
And in regards to putting a blank base in for spacial awareness; why not? It’s the same as pre-measuring. I’d honestly laugh at anyone trying to prevent me from measuring (quickly) how to space out my unit. If you can premeasure, you can do this; cuz that’s all it is. Just because less than a handful of people online would get bent out shape about it doesn’t make it wrong; I’m pretty sure most opponents will say “why didn’t I think of that” and steal the trick.
So you'd let me have a treeless Wildwoods base to make sure that I would have stuff wholly within?
You say "it's the same thing as premeasuring", but it's not. You've got a prop in play that could bump things or move stuff around or do any number of things that might give you an advantage from "oops" moments.
I'm sure someone out there will have no problem with it, but I've seen too many people attempt to game the system with crap like that. Big reason why I am soooooooooo glad templates are gone.
lord_blackfang wrote: People talking bout three men in a boat while I'm just sitting here here bravery bombing with Big Giant Head, Grim Garland and 20 banshee screams at effectively 2D6+4 in FEC.
And hey; I’m talking about thirty girls in a boat!
No, you're talking about an exhaustively tiresome measuring/setup process before placing a spell and a strategy that is intended for an early game alpha strike.
If the prop bumps models then you point it out and have them move them back, anything can bump models around. Or do you ban hands for their potential role in cheating?
timetowaste85 wrote: Hey, if you have to deny a game because your opponent had the audacity to not be in your clique of buddies and dared to bring a max sized troop unit, an HQ and an endless spell and didn’t want to just throw the game, I’d say that’s more your problem than mine. You’re right about one thing though; it’s a good thing we aren’t playing in the same places. Because it definitely sounds like you’re promoting a bit of casual-elitism. If I play an opponent and they aren’t asking for a “beginner, I’m just learning” game, I’m not going to insult them by dumbing myself down so they can curbstomb me to feel better about their “skills”. I actually had more respect for you on here until you said “that endless spell is too good with your army, I’d walk away from a game with you if you brought it”. The take-my-ball-and-leave attitude is silly.
If you say so. You're obviously a competitive player looking for competitive games. Hats off to you. AOS is not the game I'm interested in doing that with. I'm not looking to play a game that can be decided in turn 1 or 2. That spell with a lot of armies is not something I'd be interested in playing games with, and I realize I can do the same tactic myself. Any game where you have the ability to teleport units into combat with no reaction from your opponent is not a game I'll be playing period.
If that offends you, I dont' know what else to say to you. I am allowed to dictate where my free time goes, and its not going to games where I'm having no fun at all and am miserable, regardless of the social shaming techniques employed to try to make me feel bad. I have a trophy room full of whfb era wins and several GT top 10s to know that I can git gud in any environment with the best of them, but distilling my game down to the top 10% to prove a point or have a good game is not a good time for me any longer. I spent over a decade doing that in the past and it burnt me out.
In AOS I'm looking to play a casual game with casual lists that are not tourney cut throat lists designed to win efficiently. I do play those games, just not in AOS. So if I'm an AOS player looking for a casual game with a casual list and you are there with what I perceive to be a tournament list, we aren't going to have any fun playing each other. You will win that game in a couple of turns 10 out of 10 times, there's no point in wasting the hour setting up and tearing down the game to come to that obvious conclusion and I'm not interested in building and painting tournament powered lists in AOS that I have to constantly change out every year to keep up with GW's bad balancing so that we could have a fun game.
NinthMusketeer wrote: If the prop bumps models then you point it out and have them move them back, anything can bump models around. Or do you ban hands for their potential role in cheating?
If someone's got a prop and they bump it, then it can lead to a whole other argument regarding intention or "did it really though?". Very rarely will someone not acknowledge if they bumped something with their hand.
The claim is that it's "the same as premeasuring", so just premeasure and be done with it. You're already going to be stretching out what should be an easy placement thing into a more tedious exercise with that nonsense, don't throw more moving parts into the mix.
I don't "ban" anything, you understand that right? For me, if I'm playing in a more competitive event--I expect things to be moving quick. If you can't eyeball it--I'm going to ask you not to do it.
Also--those gauges actually are set up to not bump stuff as much so it isn't really an issue.
Auticus, if you’re looking to play a Warscroll-only game w/ no tomes, I’d go for it. If you want to play a game w/no endless spells at all, I’d go for it. If you told me I can’t use the boat because it’s too good in my army, but anybody else could, or didn’t deny other endless spells or something (that could be too good for somebody ELSE’S army), I wouldn’t be. And as for the ASL/exploding stuff? They’re inherent rules to my book. So yes, it’s a strong combo with minimal stuff; but it’s inherent stuff to the book. Short of denying all battletomes and only playing Warscrolls, it would be a breakage of the game. I’m paying for those abilities inside each unit.I have this combo; and somebody else has an awesome combo that can counter it (throw Morathi or Fleshy Abundance’d marauders/plaguebearers in front of me). I’ll play in a battletome-free or endless spell-free environment. But I wouldn’t cut out part of my battletome unless everybody else’s was shaved down as well. And I don’t think that’s unreasonable. Fair for one is fair for all.
I don't "ban" anything, you understand that right? For me, if I'm playing in a more competitive event--I expect things to be moving quick. If you can't eyeball it--I'm going to ask you not to do it.
Also--those gauges actually are set up to not bump stuff as much so it isn't really an issue.
My point being that having a free base to put models around is just a tool to expedite movement and make things faster. When it comes to having a unit wholly within 3" just eyeballing things may not cut it, so you can wait while they employ the measuring tool, or wait much longer while they pre-measure manually without it.
Also, you said before you had a problem with models being bumped slightly out of position but now you are saying to just eyeball things? That doesn't make sense. Do you care about the exact measurement being precise or do you not?
I wouldn't ever tell a person that they cannot use something but other people can. I don't tell people how they can play.
My games are all campaign based. In our campaign we have houserules. In our campaign we use alternate activation, so that spell doesn't bother me as much because I can react after you have done your thing.
I'm speaking in general in a no house ruled environment, if I'm going to play AOS then I'm looking to play a game that is fun and engaging for both parties.
That bridge spell is all about teleporting murder units directly into combat and cutting that army's heart out as fast as possible. Thats not a playstyle that I enjoy in the least. The time setting up and tearing down exceeds the time that that game lasts.
I never made mention to cutting anything out of anyone's battle tome either.
I'm playing the same army as you are in this campaign season as well.
The only combo to that is running certain lists. I will always oppose that type of gameplay and never participate in that style of game, where you have to run specific counters or auto-lose. I'm speaking from both ends of the table. I have no interest in winning games either based on the fact my opponent didn't bring the exact correct counter list.
Those are both wastes of time to me because I'm not looking for a game won in the listbuilding phase.
I don't "ban" anything, you understand that right? For me, if I'm playing in a more competitive event--I expect things to be moving quick. If you can't eyeball it--I'm going to ask you not to do it.
Also--those gauges actually are set up to not bump stuff as much so it isn't really an issue.
My point being that having a free base to put models around is just a tool to expedite movement and make things faster. When it comes to having a unit wholly within 3" just eyeballing things may not cut it, so you can wait while they employ the measuring tool, or wait much longer while they pre-measure manually without it.
Also, you said before you had a problem with models being bumped slightly out of position but now you are saying to just eyeball things? That doesn't make sense. Do you care about the exact measurement being precise or do you not?
It doesn't make things faster though. All it does is make it so you're placing a base down and doing measurements around the base. Why aren't you just placing the unit starting with the first model and going from there?
It really should not be this hard for you to understand that "eyeballing it" would, in this context, mean continuing placement from your initial placed model for the unit.
In regards to the combo I found and posted, the models are on 25mm bases; it’s pretty easy to get a unit of them around the boat right away (trick: grab an empty base the size of the boat for setup and place the models around it to ensure they fit). The trick is having a big enough unit that losing one doesn’t hurt, but they can make the spell cost worth it. Hence a 25mm unit between 20-30 models with a lot of attacks. Daemonettes fit the description to a T. I won’t consider myself a top player. Like...at all. But I think this is a power play and I would absolutely take it to a tournament. If I can melt Skarbrand/Archaon/Alarielle/etc with a single Nett-Bomb (do the math, law of averages smokes anything except big fleshy abundance unit/Morathi). Daemonettes are already great. Add a movement booster to them like this and watch the curses just spew from your opponent’s mouth.
I would not consider deep striking a unit of daemonets into combat turn 1 much of a power move to be honest. No one is going to leave their characters just out their alone with that spell in play if they are something you have a unit that can melt in one round of combat. Slaanesh is already one of the faster armies in the game to begin with, and I question that they even need this spell. Also despite the damage output of its units it is too fragile of a book to be an all out offensive powerhouse long term, I don't think that is going to be the best play for it. Any army with any amount of screeners or cheap units is going to laugh at you if that is your play. The truly brutal single models in this game like the Terrorgheist character are not going to care about a "nett-bomb" to begin with, and the armies that excel at deep striking right now (like deepkin) do not need to be able to get to 3 inches next to you in movement to get in a turn 1 charge. Which has us circle around to, competitive lists have to be able to deal with deep strike turn 1 charges already, this is nothing but a guaranteed deepstrike charge on a non-big based unit. If you have a list that has no answer to this, you have a list that is already not going to compete in competitive play. As with so many things, out of context and removed from reality something like a turn 1 charge of 30 daemonettes into Archaon sounds AWESOME. In reality what it looks like is only a 60-70% chance you get the spell off to begin with (and that's assuming opponent doesn't have a dispel scroll) and even if you do get it off you are not running the daemonetts into archaeon or whatever you are running them into a screener, which means you just traded a unit of 30 daemonetts (I am taking your word on them being able to fit in that 3 inch bubble, I haven't done the math) for something like a 100-150 pt unit in all likelihood. This is the problem with theoryhammer and panicking about new crap like this. How it works on paper is rarely how it works on game. Same goes with crap like Thanquil and warpfire throwers, when the book first came out people went crazy over the damage potential, yet thus far they are not in the competitive lists. Because good players are never ever going to let those units get shots into anything that matters, and their limitations prevent you from forcing the issue. This is the same. This is going to be something that is best used defensively, objective control, and as a psychological tool to keep your oponent thinking about it. Not as a broken instant kill there best stuff button.
I don't "ban" anything, you understand that right? For me, if I'm playing in a more competitive event--I expect things to be moving quick. If you can't eyeball it--I'm going to ask you not to do it.
Also--those gauges actually are set up to not bump stuff as much so it isn't really an issue.
My point being that having a free base to put models around is just a tool to expedite movement and make things faster. When it comes to having a unit wholly within 3" just eyeballing things may not cut it, so you can wait while they employ the measuring tool, or wait much longer while they pre-measure manually without it.
Also, you said before you had a problem with models being bumped slightly out of position but now you are saying to just eyeball things? That doesn't make sense. Do you care about the exact measurement being precise or do you not?
It doesn't make things faster though. All it does is make it so you're placing a base down and doing measurements around the base. Why aren't you just placing the unit starting with the first model and going from there?
It really should not be this hard for you to understand that "eyeballing it" would, in this context, mean continuing placement from your initial placed model for the unit.
Because chances are if you eyeball it you won't get a perfect circle around a theoretical base. You'll get several models bases inside the base area for the ship, so either you'd be happy with the model bumping others very slightly or you'd force your opponent to deploy the ship outside and thus prevent them performing a perfectly legal action that would have worked had they used a demo base (or even just the model placed on early).
In regards to the combo I found and posted, the models are on 25mm bases; it’s pretty easy to get a unit of them around the boat right away (trick: grab an empty base the size of the boat for setup and place the models around it to ensure they fit). The trick is having a big enough unit that losing one doesn’t hurt, but they can make the spell cost worth it. Hence a 25mm unit between 20-30 models with a lot of attacks. Daemonettes fit the description to a T. I won’t consider myself a top player. Like...at all. But I think this is a power play and I would absolutely take it to a tournament. If I can melt Skarbrand/Archaon/Alarielle/etc with a single Nett-Bomb (do the math, law of averages smokes anything except big fleshy abundance unit/Morathi). Daemonettes are already great. Add a movement booster to them like this and watch the curses just spew from your opponent’s mouth.
I would not consider deep striking a unit of daemonets into combat turn 1 much of a power move to be honest. No one is going to leave their characters just out their alone with that spell in play if they are something you have a unit that can melt in one round of combat. Slaanesh is already one of the faster armies in the game to begin with, and I question that they even need this spell. Also despite the damage output of its units it is too fragile of a book to be an all out offensive powerhouse long term, I don't think that is going to be the best play for it. Any army with any amount of screeners or cheap units is going to laugh at you if that is your play. The truly brutal single models in this game like the Terrorgheist character are not going to care about a "nett-bomb" to begin with, and the armies that excel at deep striking right now (like deepkin) do not need to be able to get to 3 inches next to you in movement to get in a turn 1 charge. Which has us circle around to, competitive lists have to be able to deal with deep strike turn 1 charges already, this is nothing but a guaranteed deepstrike charge on a non-big based unit. If you have a list that has no answer to this, you have a list that is already not going to compete in competitive play. As with so many things, out of context and removed from reality something like a turn 1 charge of 30 daemonettes into Archaon sounds AWESOME. In reality what it looks like is only a 60-70% chance you get the spell off to begin with (and that's assuming opponent doesn't have a dispel scroll) and even if you do get it off you are not running the daemonetts into archaeon or whatever you are running them into a screener, which means you just traded a unit of 30 daemonetts (I am taking your word on them being able to fit in that 3 inch bubble, I haven't done the math) for something like a 100-150 pt unit in all likelihood. This is the problem with theoryhammer and panicking about new crap like this. How it works on paper is rarely how it works on game. Same goes with crap like Thanquil and warpfire throwers, when the book first came out people went crazy over the damage potential, yet thus far they are not in the competitive lists. Because good players are never ever going to let those units get shots into anything that matters, and their limitations prevent you from forcing the issue. This is the same. This is going to be something that is best used defensively, objective control, and as a psychological tool to keep your oponent thinking about it. Not as a broken instant kill there best stuff button.
I have already watched a game where this was used via proxy of the boat since its rules were released. What you are saying is dependent on the army having screens, which not every army does. Additionally it forces every army to deploy a certain way even if they have screens so its a heavy handed implement forcing your opponent to do something. In this case its forcing an army that has screens, and its forcing them be deployed in a certain way to counter.
If an army has no screens, is low model count, etc... this is a pretty solid way to heart attack them from the beginning.
You're coming at this from the powergamer standpoint, where everyone is running powergamer lists. Casual lists are a whole different world and this teleport into combat spell kicks those lists in the face. Though you are correct, in the powergamer arena you have to deal with all kinds of powerlisting shenanigans. But you are ignoring the casual lists which are not built to withstand listbuilding I-Win boxes. (which is what makes them casual lists)
Additionally - I wasn't aware that dispel scrolls existed in AOS. I must have missed that one. Where are those, that would be quite useful?
I have already watched a game where this was used via proxy of the boat since its rules were released. What you are saying is dependent on the army having screens, which not every army does. Additionally it forces every army to deploy a certain way even if they have screens so its a heavy handed implement forcing your opponent to do something. In this case its forcing an army that has screens, and its forcing them be deployed in a certain way to counter.
If an army has no screens, is low model count, etc... this is a pretty solid way to heart attack them from the beginning.
You're coming at this from the powergamer standpoint, where everyone is running powergamer lists. Casual lists are a whole different world and this teleport into combat spell kicks those lists in the face. Though you are correct, in the powergamer arena you have to deal with all kinds of powerlisting shenanigans. But you are ignoring the casual lists which are not built to withstand listbuilding I-Win boxes. (which is what makes them casual lists)
Additionally - I wasn't aware that dispel scrolls existed in AOS. I must have missed that one. Where are those, that would be quite useful?
On Dispel scrolls there are multiple models that come with a built in rule that allows them to auto dispel 1 spell, dispel scroll I use as shorthand for all of those models. Off the top of my head the wanderers mage as well as one of the mages for stormcast have it. Both are often seen in competitive lists as allies as a result.
As for the rest of it, the people I have always played with like strategy and see list building as part of that strategy so we have always gone for competitive builds. Now if I am going to a local gaming store or something and know I might play random people, or am playing someone new I am always going to bring a "soft" list with me so we all can have fun. But if you aren't a power gamer and are a casual I don't get why any of this matters? You yourself have stated repeatedly in this thread you play almost exclusively with house rules and against a set group of friends you know well. That's great, but why does any of this matter in that case? If you guys do not want to adapt your lists to deal with deep strike then don't use deep strike. If you want to play almost exclusively narrative campaigns and just use stuff that fits that mold, do that, enjoy. Balance in a game only maters if you are actually playing that game. And what I am telling you is that there are all sorts of things to mitigate the effectiveness of this ability, meaning that in all likelihood it is going to be a common competitive sighting, but by no means a broken one. If you actively choose not to take the things that can eliminate or mitigate its effectiveness, then that is your choice, but do not then say that X thing cannot be beaten, because it can, you are just actively choosing not to do so. Every army in the game has access to screeners of some kind, some are better then others, but they are all there. And if I am missing a book that doesn't have access, guess what? That's what allies are for. The very mechanics that you say make this spell so damn good already exist in multiple top tier armies, meaning that it is not going to change the meta one iota, and competitive lists that are going to have ways to deal with it, if they didn't those same lists are going to get steamrolled by the likes of deepkin and stormcast. In non-competitive play why does it matter? If you play a balanced list you are going to have ways to stop this spell within reason, and if you are playing a themed army that has no answer to deepstrike, I would explain that to your opponents and not play games where there is more then a small amount of deep striking... There is always going to be the one guy in a gamestore who likes to bring power builds to casual games because he wants to feel big and powerful and that jerkoff has plenty of options to choose from already if you are taking something without chaffe. So what I am saying is, this spell changes nothing meaning it is not broken. In competitive play it is not going to change what you are taking, in non-competitive play I really don't think it matters. So why do you care about it. Ban the spell, or change how it works, sounds like you are already doing that for everything else.
To those who want to play the game as intended, but want to just take a middle of the road balanced list you have tools you can use as previously stated. A balanced list should have some screaners, and it should have some chaffe, and it probably shouldn't be entirely dependent on a single unit to win. If that is true someone using this spell in moderation will obviously present you with a challenge, but not one you can't overcome. To me that makes it good, not broken. If this spell is that OP I can't even imagine what people must say about souscryers...
What units are people suggesting to sling forward anyways? 30 daemonettes has been raised but I have I hard time seeing that as being overpowered verses just an effective tactic. I guess what I am looking for is an example of a the spell in question actually being overpowered. Taking an already OP unit and delivering it is just exploiting that unit; were the unit non-OP the combo would also be so it logically follows that the spell is not the issue.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I guess what I am looking for is an example of a the spell in question actually being overpowered.
I saw 4 powergamers on Twitter talking about how they used the spell in conjunction with 6 Battlesmiths and they one shotted Archaon, double turned into the next table and wrecked both of those armies. All during the "list building" phase.
In other words, the crux of what OP was originally doom mongering about in regards to the new mercenary rules didn't pan out, so he's moved on to the next thing to doom monger about. The cycle continues!
timetowaste85 wrote: So, you’d refuse to play me if I brought an endless spell, a general and a max sized unit of a basic troop?
It's more than that. You're picking a particular command trait and intentionally trying to set up a quadruple smash. This type of thing (a 4+ part combo) isn't happening by accident. People have different goals for their gaming and combining an intentionally built combo list and a list built based on what the person wanted to paint, thought looked cool or had cool background fiction is probably a bad idea.
so he's moved on to the next thing to doom monger about. The cycle continues!
You really can't have any form of discussion about things that rub you the wrong way, it has to be all cheery. And then the public shame game starts to come by to ask you "who hurt you?"
timetowaste85 wrote: So, you’d refuse to play me if I brought an endless spell, a general and a max sized unit of a basic troop?
It's more than that. You're picking a particular command trait and intentionally trying to set up a quadruple smash. This type of thing (a 4+ part combo) isn't happening by accident. People have different goals for their gaming and combining an intentionally built combo list and a list built based on what the person wanted to paint, thought looked cool or had cool background fiction is probably a bad idea.
Except that I’m not. The KoS (basic greater Daemon of Slaanesh) has a specific command trait. All heroes also get an ability (KOS just more likely for it to go off), and all Slaanesh models have explosive 6’s. Using an ability that all heroes in the book get, plus a command ability on the KoS that existed since AoS came out that has remained unchanged isn’t “picking it on purpose”. And I’m not fishing for a double turn; I’m just saying it’s possible. Would you say Morathi can’t turn into a big snake after only being able to take a max of 3 wounds in a turn? No, because that’s part of her ability. I don’t get the asinine attempts to limit this. It’s a three part combo, one part of which EVERY player can use, and the other two parts just utilize my army’s special rules. And honestly, I don’t even NEED the boat spell to do it. Would anyone have an issue with a 20-seeker unit that can move 16, run 2D6, charge 2D6+3? Then swing with 80 attacks that explode on 6’s? Cuz that’s a regular unit of them after I cast chronomatic cogs. Plus a flying KoS that moves just as fast (fire cloak and run/charge command trait) to keep up? Slaanesh is an army that has always been a glass cannon. I’m just trying to focus more on the cannon aspect of that.
timetowaste85 wrote: Except that I’m not. The KoS (basic greater Daemon of Slaanesh) has a specific command trait. All heroes also get an ability (KOS just more likely for it to go off), and all Slaanesh models have explosive 6’s. Using an ability that all heroes in the book get, plus a command ability on the KoS that existed since AoS came out that has remained unchanged isn’t “picking it on purpose”.
Wow. I didn't know you were locked into a specific command trait. I thought you could still choose one and that was an option. Thanks for the correction on that.
That command trait is “pick a Slaanesh unit to fight again”. It’s the only command trait he has besides the basic ones that every general gets, like smite and shield. It is a locked one. Now, I get my general’s ability too, which I picked “run and charge” in a Godseeker Host. So the Daemonettes have inherent run and charge, have inherent exploding attacks, and the keeper has an inherent “fight again” ability and an inherent “always strike last” ability. The only additive I’ve thrown in is an Endless Spell that every player (you know, except Khorne ones) can use. The basic jist of it feels like I’m being told “your inherent abilities are too good, so don’t use them”. I mean...it’s just shocking the amount of unhappiness I’m seeing on here over it; we wanted the armies to all play differently, so we have them. But we also get spells that all of us can use. Is it my fault that my army just happens to have good synergy and I’ve chosen to use two endless spells (both of which can technically benefit my opponent later, if they so choose)?
Maybe I should take three 40-man horde units of marauders instead like I was thinking; big units and they still get the exploding 6’s because Slaanesh. And 120 of them is only 600 points. Add in two keepers (I freaking love Keepers and have since 6th edition fantasy, so I’m NOT backing down on using my favorite Daemon) and a 20-woman cav unit of seekers and it’ll be below 2000, use no endless spells, and have so many attacks it’ll drown opponents in blended units.
Honestly, I feel like the hate I’ve caused on here makes this book sound better than Flesh Eaters.
I guess the true “Forbidden Power” is the damn Slaanesh book!
timetowaste85 wrote: That command trait is “pick a Slaanesh unit to fight again”. It’s the only command trait he has besides the basic ones that every general gets, like smite and shield. It is a locked one. Now, I get my general’s ability too, which I picked “run and charge” in a Godseeker Host. So the Daemonettes have inherent run and charge, have inherent exploding attacks, and the keeper has an inherent “fight again” ability and an inherent “always strike last” ability. The only additive I’ve thrown in is an Endless Spell that every player (you know, except Khorne ones) can use.
I was just wrong about this. I thought things were less locked in and you carefully arranged things. Like how if I did a staunch defender, castellant, 20 liberator/sequitor block. that would require picking some very specific things and deploying them very close to one another and not attacking with them (as there's a not charging condition). This looks like stuff you can do whenever and always.
I mean...it’s just shocking the amount of unhappiness I’m seeing on here over it
I think that might be a bit unfair. Surely you see that if someone picked an army based on what they wanted to paint, back ground fiction, what was present in a battle in a novel and it was an objectively weaker army that they might not want to play a game they saw as a foregone conclusion. Maybe they're wrong about that and if they tried the game it wouldn't be. Though I've seen first hand what happens when a gaming group does start having regular foregone conclusions.
During the tail end of 2nd edition of Warmachine/Hordes half of our group were hard core tournament guys who did road trips to every major event in North America (and did reasonably well). The guy who was hosting the club days (ie actually renting the room we played in) was a super casual player and he'd unpack his army, they'd deploy and suddenly the game would be over. Set up and tear down was longer than the actual game. And the tournament guys just would not stop always playing their tournament lists against the bad lists played by the half that were casual. Now there are zero warmachine games at the venue. People really need to get on the same page.
I only have one game worth of experience against the new slaanesh stuff and it wasn't anything like you described. The person had a variety of small units and tried all sorts of interesting things. I don't recall any 20 strong units of anything. That might be bad list construction but we had a fun game.
As for the Forbidden Power endless spells being available to everyone, I think it's probably reasonable to assume that it will combine the best with certain factions and not others? Maybe that's an issue, maybe it's not?
auticus wrote: You really can't have any form of discussion about things that rub you the wrong way, it has to be all cheery.
Nah, doesn’t have to be all cheery. I’m fairly negative on some aspects of summoning, current state of DoK, FEC and Skaven and maybe a few other bits of minutiae. Quite a bit we agree on, in fact. Those are all known quantities and largely easy fixes. But to make a thread to whine about a concept that you knew nothing about (Mercenaries) at the time is pretty damn bogus. You didn’t focus on how it could be fun for narrative players or to change things up for a stagnant casual group. Straight to the negative. Once the cold hard facts came out, you moved onto the next thing (a situational spell) and cranked it straight to 11 on the negativity.
Case in point:
auticus wrote: Taking positioning and maneuver even more into the rubbish pile every year. Tap your card to do X damage to your opponent style play.
Thats a dramatic oversimplification and takes out any nuance of the games mechanics. Boiling down the mechanics of the game to just tapping a card, instead of maneuvering and counter maneuvering by the opponent, to even be able to try to get this spell off successfully, in addition to attempting the objectives of whatever the scenario calls for is incredibly disingenuous. Chill with the hyperbole, its not constructive.
auticus wrote: There is another stormcast battletome confirmed?
... I'm sooooooo sick of 95% of their design team and space going to god damn stormcast and Khorne. Holy crap we still have armies that don't have battletombs and while you can play them, they haven't even bothered to update their rules (looking at you Tomb Kings) and they are extremely overcosted (points and money). Why can't I play my High Elves army that theyre STILL selling the boxes for? They're split into 6 different factions and none of them have faction rules (I don't count the stupid prince dragon one). I get that they want to sell new models but come on, make them usable.
So you'd let me have a treeless Wildwoods base to make sure that I would have stuff wholly within?
Yes. Because you know what's alternative? Lots more time wasted as the guy measures with tape measure everything. No matter the shape if premeasuring is allowed you can measure the shape 100% accurately with tape measure compared to using template. HOWEVER insisting on tape measure will mean lot more time spent.
Do you want to sit waiting for premeasuring to be done or have it done quickly for same result?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
timetowaste85 wrote: Hey, if you have to deny a game because your opponent had the audacity to not be in your clique of buddies and dared to bring a max sized troop unit, an HQ and an endless spell and didn’t want to just throw the game, I’d say that’s more your problem than mine. You’re right about one thing though; it’s a good thing we aren’t playing in the same places. Because it definitely sounds like you’re promoting a bit of casual-elitism. If I play an opponent and they aren’t asking for a “beginner, I’m just learning” game, I’m not going to insult them by dumbing myself down so they can curbstomb me to feel better about their “skills”. I actually had more respect for you on here until you said “that endless spell is too good with your army, I’d walk away from a game with you if you brought it”. The take-my-ball-and-leave attitude is silly.
Why you think you have authority to decide who other person plays with? Persons time is persons own. Nobody is required to play with anybody they don't want. You aren't entitled to play vs him or whomever. If you disagree show what law forces anybody to play vs you even if they don't want. Even in tournament nobody can force anybody to play. At most he has to give automatic win but if it's not going to result in fun time that's easily price worth paying for. And outside tournament there's even less requirements.
NinthMusketeer wrote: If the prop bumps models then you point it out and have them move them back, anything can bump models around. Or do you ban hands for their potential role in cheating?
If someone's got a prop and they bump it, then it can lead to a whole other argument regarding intention or "did it really though?". Very rarely will someone not acknowledge if they bumped something with their hand.
The claim is that it's "the same as premeasuring", so just premeasure and be done with it. You're already going to be stretching out what should be an easy placement thing into a more tedious exercise with that nonsense, don't throw more moving parts into the mix.
Same bump can happen with premeasuring. Actually much more likely with premeasuring because you are measuring within mm's lot more so your tape measure is going to be between models touching bases lot more...So if you want to avoid bumps you should be endorsing templates rather than premeasuring.
I don't "ban" anything, you understand that right? For me, if I'm playing in a more competitive event--I expect things to be moving quick. If you can't eyeball it--I'm going to ask you not to do it.
Also--those gauges actually are set up to not bump stuff as much so it isn't really an issue.
So let's see...you expect things to move quick yet insist on slower method? In competive enviroment nobody eyeballs it. They MEASURE it. They don't eyeball "do these fit or not". They MEASURE it. That takes lot more time and lot more bumps with gauges than with template.
The ultimate impact on my local area is that the competitive guys largely ignored this release because the only thing they want out of it is the boat, and so someone created a digital copy of the boat's scroll and people are proxying or converting their own boat.
However the boat is in fact in probably 4 out of 5 of the competitive lists down at the shop right now.
The release overall sold like the old realmgate campaign books did. IE: almost not at all.
What size base is the boat on? I plan on converting/building my own, crewed by a Daemonette using a spare pole arm from Shalaxi as the oar. It looks fairly big; not chariot sized, but Stormcast hero on Dracolyn from the starter set/Korgoroth base sized?
Given the rules there, I could enjoyably add a unit of pistoliers and a freeguild general (A soul-captured Karl Franz and his last unit of pistoliers slaves) to my Slaanesh army. Could be fun for casual games; trading a command point for a backfield disruption.
Yeah; it’s a good way to make it “fluffy”, and add a back-field “oh crap” distraction. I guess that’ll mean some whip wounds on the horses and Deathclaw.
timetowaste85 wrote: What size base is the boat on? I plan on converting/building my own, crewed by a Daemonette using a spare pole arm from Shalaxi as the oar. It looks fairly big; not chariot sized, but Stormcast hero on Dracolyn from the starter set/Korgoroth base sized?
Have there been any big tourneys post-forbidden power? Curious to see how prevalent the new content is, if present at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
auticus wrote: The ultimate impact on my local area is that the competitive guys largely ignored this release because the only thing they want out of it is the boat, and so someone created a digital copy of the boat's scroll and people are proxying or converting their own boat.
However the boat is in fact in probably 4 out of 5 of the competitive lists down at the shop right now.
The release overall sold like the old realmgate campaign books did. IE: almost not at all.
Tbf the alternate-by-unit structure your community uses makes the boat a lot stronger.
We only got two copies at my flgs, I got one of them and am using the new content in our path to glory league--the awakened artifacts are a fun addition.
)
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif){kind=icon}
