New AOS Edition comes out in June

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**pm713**

It's still ridiculous though. I honestly don't see the point in them changing it that way.

**Strg Alt**

Kanluwen wrote:
Bolt Thrower, while in close combat, shot into close combat. Christ, they haven´t changed this stupid rule!

Yeah, they actually have. A ranged unit can only shoot whatever is within 3" of them.

If you'd charged the bolt thrower with the Wraiths or Chainrasp, the leader could have gone around massacring everything else assuming they weren't all stacked up.

This is still not good enough imo. If the crew is fighting for their life in cc, they shouldn´t be able to calmly reload their artillery piece and shoot at their adversries. It is only a game and therefore some abstractions have to be made. I understand that. But this rule is not a feature but a bug. Other tabletop games get it right. If I would be playing AoS in the future, this would be the first rule that gets deleted.

**auticus**

It is a rule that annoys me too for immersion reasons. The compromise was that at least now they can't calmly reload and turn their blasted machine toward a different target while the crew is being attacked by something in melee and target something 30" down range too so that you can at least lock them up a bit.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
One of my players yesterday told me he was watching a warhammer tv battle report and they had the rule where shooting THROUGH the forest had the obstacle rule on it as well... (meaning you get cover bonus if you're on the other side of forests and enemy units are shooting THROUGH it, the houserule that I was talking about my campaigns having for the past several years (only ours was -1 to hit not +1 to save))

I haven't found that anywhere though, but am hoping that is now a thing everywhere.

**Overread**

If they can't reload then surely firing off one shot in close combat is fine? It's a very small ballista so there's no reason they can't take a pot shot with it at close range.

**Strg Alt**

Overread wrote:
If they can't reload then surely firing off one shot in close combat is fine? It's a very small ballista so there's no reason they can't take a pot shot with it at close range.

The same rules should apply to all artillery models. No one should be able to claim some sort of bonus because he is operating a ´small ballista´ and not a big trebuchet.

You think of some sort of overwatch mechanic? Sure why not. Activate the unit and put an overwatch marker beside it. Artillery gets charged and can unload on their attackers. What wouldn´t make sense is if you shoot first at a target, get assaulted after that and fire again at the people who just charged you because the crew needs a lot of time to reload their artillery. It is still a medieval type of weapon which can´t fire repeatedly like an autocannon does.

**auticus**

Allegedly there's a way to use banishment to game the setup rules to insta kill most of the unit you are banishing.

**Kanluwen**

Strg Alt wrote:
Overread wrote:
If they can't reload then surely firing off one shot in close combat is fine? It's a very small ballista so there's no reason they can't take a pot shot with it at close range.

The same rules should apply to all artillery models. No one should be able to claim some sort of bonus because he is operating a ´small ballista´ and not a big trebuchet.

You think of some sort of overwatch mechanic? Sure why not. Activate the unit and put an overwatch marker beside it. Artillery gets charged and can unload on their attackers. What wouldn´t make sense is if you shoot first at a target, get assaulted after that and fire again at the people who just charged you because the crew needs a lot of time to reload their artillery. It is still a medieval type of weapon which can´t fire repeatedly like an autocannon does.

It's firing lightning bolts, not arrows. I think any kind of argument about "reloading time" goes out the window with that being the case.

**pm713**

Kanluwen wrote:
Strg Alt wrote:
Overread wrote:
If they can't reload then surely firing off one shot in close combat is fine? It's a very small ballista so there's no reason they can't take a pot shot with it at close range.

The same rules should apply to all artillery models. No one should be able to claim some sort of bonus because he is operating a ´small ballista´ and not a big trebuchet.

You think of some sort of overwatch mechanic? Sure why not. Activate the unit and put an overwatch marker beside it. Artillery gets charged and can unload on their attackers. What wouldn´t make sense is if you shoot first at a target, get assaulted after that and fire again at the people who just charged you because the crew needs a lot of time to reload their artillery. It is still a medieval type of weapon which can´t fire repeatedly like an autocannon does.

It's firing lightning bolts, not arrows. I think any kind of argument about "reloading time" goes out the window with that being the case.

There's no downside to a lightning bolt hitting next to you? Nobody can move out of the shooty parts way? This way is impressively dumber than earlier.

**SilchasRuin**

Strg Alt wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:

-
Ghosts and Leader charged the Crossbowmen. The Leader augmented the close combat attacks of the Ghosts (42 attacks!) and the Crossbowmen were thoroughly slimed (wiped out). The Ghosts consolidated 3´´ inches to the left board edge and away from the Hammer & Board guys/gals. Wraiths spent the turn spooking around the fence.
Bolt Thrower caused only minor casualties on the Ghosts. Hammer & Board guys/gals advanced towards the Ghosts and failed the charge again (5´´ needed and Sigmarines rolled a 3´´).

consolidated 3´´ ?

Consolidated not just a 40k thing anymore?

**Strg Alt**

SilchasRuin wrote:
Strg Alt wrote:
NinthMusketeer wrote:

-
Ghosts and Leader charged the Crossbowmen. The Leader augmented the close combat attacks of the Ghosts (42 attacks!) and the Crossbowmen were thoroughly slimed (wiped out). The Ghosts consolidated 3´´ inches to the left board edge and away from the Hammer & Board guys/gals. Wraiths spent the turn spooking around the fence.
Bolt Thrower caused only minor casualties on the Ghosts. Hammer & Board guys/gals advanced towards the Ghosts and failed the charge again (5´´ needed and Sigmarines rolled a 3´´).

consolidated 3´´ ?

Consolidated not just a 40k thing anymore?

Why do you ask me? I only work here. Well, I haven´t presented the demo but my opponent who introduced me to this new edition didn´t cry foul. In 40K consolidation is allowed after wiping out an enemy unit which also happened in our case. AoS plays like 40K thanks to round bases and the deletion of the regiment formation. It could have been right or wrong.

**Overread**

Makes perfect sense. With the regiment formation consolidation happened automatically because you removed models from the block* but the two blocks remained locked together. Now that its round bases you have to move them yourself to retain the consolidation of the warrior block

*and from the rear of the block as well, so you always stuck together until either one side was dead or fleeing

**auticus**

Saw a battle report from the weekend. The new endless spells crank up the killing another notch.

Turn 1 concession. Lobbing purple sun through portals. They ended up ammassing 34 mortal wounds, 10 normal wounds, and battle shock removed 10 models in one turn on two units of 30 in the first turn.

That was with tzeentch. The portal spell allows you to mitigate short range spells with ease.

**NewTruthNeomaxim**

auticus wrote:
Saw a battle report from the weekend. The new endless spells crank up the killing another notch.

Turn 1 concession. Lobbing purple sun through portals. They ended up ammassing 34 mortal wounds, 10 normal wounds, and battle shock removed 10 models in one turn on two units of 30 in the first turn.

That was with tzeentch. The portal spell allows you to mitigate short range spells with ease.

To be fair, it is 160pts combined to even attempt that combo. Either spell unbound sounds like it would've utterly shifted that outcome and had the one player not conceded, couldn't they have moved the Purple Sun right back through that portal?

**CoreCommander**

The guillotine one is also pretty bonkers. IMO they've overdone it and not by a small margine...

**Overread**

The guillotine one can only move in a straight line though, so you can't change direction. It will do it worst damage in the initial turn, thereafter it will be a blocking element and distraction rather than a controlled attack force.

The point cost might balance things out; if not GW might well adapt the power of the spells a little here and there if they are proven to be broken. I think GW wants them to be mainstream rather than not; which implies that they will have to balance them to a point where they are attractive to take, but not so powerful that they are broken.

This might even just be done by introducing more protective elements against spells (not just countering but buffs that shield units from the full effect of magical based attacks or even just endless spell attacks).

**NinthMusketeer**

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
auticus wrote:
Saw a battle report from the weekend. The new endless spells crank up the killing another notch.

Turn 1 concession. Lobbing purple sun through portals. They ended up ammassing 34 mortal wounds, 10 normal wounds, and battle shock removed 10 models in one turn on two units of 30 in the first turn.

That was with tzeentch. The portal spell allows you to mitigate short range spells with ease.

To be fair, it is 160pts combined to even attempt that combo. Either spell unbound sounds like it would've utterly shifted that outcome and had the one player not conceded, couldn't they have moved the Purple Sun right back through that portal?

He could have. Also, the real TBF here is that its Tzeentch. Who expects a balanced game against Tzeentch?

**Skimask Mohawk**

Strg Alt wrote:

Why do you ask me? I only work here. Well, I haven´t presented the demo but my opponent who introduced me to this new edition didn´t cry foul. In 40K consolidation is allowed after wiping out an enemy unit which also happened in our case. AoS plays like 40K thanks to round bases and the deletion of the regiment formation. It could have been right or wrong.

Well, that's wrong. Consolidate happens at the end of the attack sequence regardless of wiping.

40k plays like aos due to adopting a lot of the same mechanics, just means whoever showed you didn't play any aos since it's always and still does only have 2 steps to the attack sequence.

**auticus**

Looking like more and more people are starting to accept (and embrace) that warhammer has turned into a version of MtG with models.

Seeing a lot of MtG comparisons (and responses have gone from violently rejecting this to cautiously agreeing now)

In MTG (and other card games like Hearthstone or Eternal), most decks break down into a couple archetypes: Aggro - which is play a lot of small stuff/spells fast and beat face quickly but has no staying power, Combo - where you try to get a specific combo off that's really strong or near-unstoppable, Midrange - where you just play a lot of strong stuff but don't have a real finisher/trickery, or Control - which focuses on preventing the opponent from doing anything until they can reach an endgame state.

To convert it to AoS terms, Aggro would be full Alpha Strike - something like Hammerstrike Stormcast or Murderhost, where you just run forward and try to do as much damage on Turn 1 or 2, knowing that if the opponent survives til later turns you don't have the late game power to combat them. Control would be something like Vanguard Wing, where you don't really have as much killing power on Turn 1 without outplaying, but you can lock down the entire enemy army while racking up points and getting everything positioned as you want it.

Currently I would say most armies in AoS fall into Midrange. They just try to have a good mix of stuff that can all affect the board, not as much all in on one trick. Death lists are a bit more Combo, where you try to stack as much stuff onto one or two units and rez them repeatedly and buff them into the stratosphere.

A lot of times in the card game world, Aggro beats Combo by killing them before they can get their trick off, Combo beats Control by setting up the board/gamestate in such a way that it can't be stopped, and Control beats Midrange by killing/removing all their strong things. Aggro vs Control is a bit more involved, because the Aggro player will try to rush down the Control player before they can get to the point where they can remove things, while the Control player knows that if they can sacrifice health early and stabilize later, it's a guaranteed win.

It'll end up similarly in AoS, I think. Alpha v Summoning will come down to how T1 goes - if the Alpha Strike army can kill all or most of the enemy Heroes on T1, the Summoning player doesn't have much of a way to start getting more stuff. But if those Heroes survive properly and get the Points to Summon, the Alpha Striker will be overwhelmed and won't be able to turn off the tide of bodies before it scores everything. Very interesting gameplay.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
And also a lot of talk about how the game is essentially going to be alpha strike / lots of damage vs summoning now. Things we discussed early on in this thread.

**NinthMusketeer**

Thats a five paragraph way of saying "turn 1 wins are OK".

**auticus**

Correct. Because thats how card games go, thats the game design that is attractive to the real fans of AOS, and that also speeds up tournament play which is good.

I was listening to a youtube over the weekend where the speakers were talking about how they are glad that the game is so lethal and the game can end T1 or T2 because they can get in many more games this way and tournaments won't have sandbagging as much. They lamented hordes getting a bonus because they wanted to see hordes go away and to keep model count very small, so that games would go even faster than they are now, and allow them to transport 10-20 models a lot easier than more than that.

Another one made mention to how he just started AOS and liked it because it reminded him a lot of Magic and he was a huge magic player, and this was right up his alley.

The whole time I was remembering being slagged for being stupid enough to compare it to magic for the past couple of years lol.

**Davor**

NinthMusketeer wrote:
Thats a five paragraph way of saying "turn 1 wins are OK".

Didn't everyone say they wanted a faster game?

A joke if it didn't come out that way.

**NinthMusketeer**

auticus wrote:
Correct. Because thats how card games go, thats the game design that is attractive to the real fans of AOS, and that also speeds up tournament play which is good.

I was listening to a youtube over the weekend where the speakers were talking about how they are glad that the game is so lethal and the game can end T1 or T2 because they can get in many more games this way and tournaments won't have sandbagging as much. They lamented hordes getting a bonus because they wanted to see hordes go away and to keep model count very small, so that games would go even faster than they are now, and allow them to transport 10-20 models a lot easier than more than that.

Another one made mention to how he just started AOS and liked it because it reminded him a lot of Magic and he was a huge magic player, and this was right up his alley.

The whole time I was remembering being slagged for being stupid enough to compare it to magic for the past couple of years lol.

If by "real fans" you mean "some fans" I agree. I will reiterate that when GW publishes unbalanced games popularity inevitably drops.

**auticus**

When I say "real fans" im' referring to the people that are gushing about it, who have been gushing about it since the first GHB came out in 2016. To include the guys that get very nasty when you start talking about houseruling. My twitter feed is literally filled with a solid twenty or so posters that post several times a day on how great everything's been and is and how huge their communities are. (And I believe them, they are all in the uk which makes a big difference too save for a couple of US celebrities and I'm not sure what their local scene is like since they seem to primarily travel to big regional tournaments)

It would seem its only unbalanced if you aren't showing up with a summon spam list or a mortal wound spam list. (bringing the cliche knife to the gunfight)

That goes back to my other thread about why we accept this to be ok and even embrace it.

**Galas**

Man... its FaceHunter all over again!

**FrozenDwarf**

can some one give a quick description of what they have actualy stuffed the main book whit?
core rules are only 20 pages so what are the remaining 300p?

**auticus**

Fluff. Maps. Scenarios. Realm spell rules.

**Lemondish**

Strg Alt wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Bolt Thrower, while in close combat, shot into close combat. Christ, they haven´t changed this stupid rule!

Yeah, they actually have. A ranged unit can only shoot whatever is within 3" of them.

If you'd charged the bolt thrower with the Wraiths or Chainrasp, the leader could have gone around massacring everything else assuming they weren't all stacked up.

This is still not good enough imo. If the crew is fighting for their life in cc, they shouldn´t be able to calmly reload their artillery piece and shoot at their adversries. It is only a game and therefore some abstractions have to be made. I understand that. But this rule is not a feature but a bug. Other tabletop games get it right. If I would be playing AoS in the future, this would be the first rule that gets deleted.

Well, in that case, they should just add overwatch. A ranged unit won't be sitting still watching a group rush at them with swords. That's equally as

stupid, man. They'll fire at the immediate threat.

pm713 wrote:

There's no downside to a lightning bolt hitting next to you? Nobody can move out of the shooty parts way? This way is impressively dumber than earlier.

Not when you arrived to the bloody battle via lightning bolt, dude.

It's like many of you want a grounded, realistic, medieval wargame but you forget that GW makes models of giant flippin' flying sharks, gorgons with wings, and a giant walking zit.

**auticus**

There are still physics of battle. It doesn't matter if a gorgon or a dragon are involved. They would still adhere to the realm of physics and believability.

There are no dragons in literature or movies that breathe fire all over a swirling melee and only hurt the bad guys, for example.

Gorgons, demigryphs, dragons, etc, would still follow the rules of their fictional reality.

I wouldn't mind if a couple units had some fluff rules that let them defy this, because it would be defined by their fiction, but not as a universal.

I'm also not opposed to an overwatch mechanic. I think that adding a viable honest-to-god overwatch mechanic would be good.

**Skimask Mohawk**

Just played a 1000 game using endless spells. I took cogs for daughters of khaine, he took geminids for his legions of nagash. We had a total of 4 potential casts a turn and we summoned a grand total of 0 endless spells either through failing the cast or dispelling or in my case past turn 1, the spell being strictly worse than mind blades. We did each get a double turn though, and I dont think even a clutch geminids would have made up for the carnage those turns created.

Maybe it's different when you have more wizards tk throw more spells around with and a 6x4 to really take advantage of cogs, but I'd really rather cut the double turn instead of having a balancing mechanic that needs to be casted, not dispelled and then effect you.

**Galas**

My group has stopped using the double turn. Even the 2-3 guys that were reluctant to that, agree after 2 weeks of gaming without it. It makes the game objetively better. And we are a group of 10-15 people.