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.
Not really if the rumored/suggested point values for alot of the other shooty armies goes up...i have yet to see an artillery heavy list do well anyway
Not really if the rumored/suggested point values for alot of the other shooty armies goes up...i have yet to see an artillery heavy list do well anyway
Mesokhornee wrote: Personally i cant wait to see peoples reactions when skyfires etc get their points raised to some absurd level and then people realize i can still nuke out almost any unit/hero/monster in 1 turn without them
Not really if the rumored/suggested point values for alot of the other shooty armies goes up...i have yet to see an artillery heavy list do well anyway
You're the special snowflake that can do what no one else can then
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/03 21:56:25
In case you haven't seen this, the General's Handbook 2017 is coming in August.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
I bought GHB last year and never got a single game in beyond using the starter set to show someone the basic game play. That said, I'll probably pick this up sooner rather than later.
Does GHB17 replace the original or do you have to have both in order to play?
privateer4hire wrote: I bought GHB last year and never got a single game in beyond using the starter set to show someone the basic game play. That said, I'll probably pick this up sooner rather than later.
Does GHB17 replace the original or do you have to have both in order to play?
Tried to ask on the Facebook page. Didn't get a direct answer, but here's the reply I got:
Warhammer Age of Sigmar wrote:Hi <REDACTED> - there's going to be a General's Handbook every year. This one is packed with almost 100% new content, so you'll want to hold on to the previous General's Handbook for all the battleplans and ways to play inside.
EDIT Finally got a direct answer to your question:
Warhammer Age of Sigmar wrote:Hi <REDACTED> - sorry for not being clear! You'll only need the General's Handbook 2017.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/25 16:02:42
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
I know they announced new allegiance rules for stuff like Fyreslayers, Slaanesh, etc., but does anyone know if the 4 Grand Alliance allegiances are going to be the same?
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
auticus wrote: I'm excited enough to hold off my work on azyr 2nd edition so that I can include the siege stuff etc without having to update my own rules.
My only plea and hope is that they reign in some of this broken stuff and maybe expand on what they have laid out already.
I'm really happy about the time of wars for every realm. Thats huge for me.
I'm hoping they adopt the 40k point structure so we can be rid of the silliness that all upgrades are free. Add in renown as a counterpart to power and everyone's happy.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I'm hoping they adopt the 40k point structure so we can be rid of the silliness that all upgrades are free. Add in renown as a counterpart to power and everyone's happy.
I am really hoping that they do NOT do this, as it's so nice to be able to assemble a box of minis as they come, without having to buy multiple just to have extras to switch in and out depending on whether or not I want upgrades on the unit in this particular game.
So for me, it's not silly, it's nice and easy (plus cheaper).
Which is nice if all the options are relatively equal, but thats not the case. Take Judicators, where one weapon option is essentially non-existent because its so much worse than the other.
NinthMusketeer wrote: Which is nice if all the options are relatively equal, but thats not the case. Take Judicators, where one weapon option is essentially non-existent because its so much worse than the other.
Which is why I appreciate their putting different points for differently kitted out units.
Javeline flying guys or hammer-throwing flying guys.
Build 'em the way you want and pay the points for whichever unit you take.
I don't like the nickel and dime addition/subtractions you have to do with 8th edition 40k.
NinthMusketeer wrote: I'm hoping they adopt the 40k point structure so we can be rid of the silliness that all upgrades are free. Add in renown as a counterpart to power and everyone's happy.
I am really hoping that they do NOT do this, as it's so nice to be able to assemble a box of minis as they come, without having to buy multiple just to have extras to switch in and out depending on whether or not I want upgrades on the unit in this particular game.
So for me, it's not silly, it's nice and easy (plus cheaper).
Which is why they should preserve the current point structure in a manner like how power works in 40k, so that people who just want a basic structure without having to fiddle with details can play that. But for those of us who play in tournaments having these things be exact is a very big deal, something that can't be fixed by splitting up a few profiles. To name another example, the vampire lord on zombie dragon. Both the chalice and shield options make the model dramatically more powerful, but to deal with that via entries would require 4 different costs before even getting into the weapon options. Or look at Grundstock Gunners, where each model picks an individual weapon and those weapons vary dramatically in effectiveness.
Have they been regularly tweaking the trial points for GHB II on Warscroll Builder or did they just put up one set of trial points? I'm wondering because it seems like if they have been frequently changing the points it would be more likely to be representative of what's actually in GHB 2017.
From Warhammer Community, the table of contents for the General's Handbook 2017 and information on Allies:
Allies are an exciting new addition to matched play games. We’ve all had that struggle when building our armies having to choose between focussing on one faction to take advantage of Allegiance Abilities and battleline units, or using the full Grand Alliance to get access to a wider selection of options. Each faction now has a list of other factions it can ally with, fitting the theme of each force; if your army is made up of the multitudinous hordes of the Clans Verminus, you can ally in the specialised troops of the other great clans, while the Deathlords can rule over any of the other Death factions (the clue’s in the name).
We’ll be going deeper into the allies for each Grand Alliance in the coming weeks, but to tide you over, here’s your allied contingent allowances for matched play games:
With between 200 and 500 points, you’ll have plenty of space to experiment – that’s enough for an Aleguzzler Gargant in an army of Ironjawz, a furious Spirit of Durthu aiding a warband of Wanderers, a vicious Chimera alongside the Khorne Bloodbound or a fast moving pack of Vargheists to aid your legion of Deathrattle skeletons.
Allies are particularly useful in light of the new Allegiance Abilities. We’ll be going into these further with future previews, but armies like the Hosts of Slaanesh or the Dispossessed will be able to make full use of powerful unique skills while having a range of choices available when writing lists for matched play. Similarly, you’ll be able to combine powerful allegiance-specific battleline units with allies to make for focused lists made up of the models you want to play.
This is a major change for all matched play games, whether you’re looking to compete at a tournament or just use some new tricks in battles with friends.
We’ll be taking a closer look at Death in the new General’s Handbook tomorrow, so make sure to come back so you don’t miss it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/26 14:13:56
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
YES!!! I like the allies mechanic. Limited enough in points at the standard level (400) to ensure it's not to badly abused but also allows me to add a bit of flavor to my destruction, dwarf, or undead armies without losing my faction benefits.
Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)
They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016)
Encouraging to see the entry for page 113. Hoping that'll be some official errata-type updates. Also excited to see some new battalions included. Hopefully they'll also use this as an opportunity to update some of the current problem battalions (like limiting the use of Arrer Boyz in Kunnin' Rukk).
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
I picked up the Open War cards for 40k, and was hoping they'd do something like them for AoS, and looks like they did. That's a day-zero buy for me.
Also, I agree that it's good odds on a Nurgle and possibly Deathrattle battletome before the end of the year, judging by the lack of Allegiance Abilities here, plus Nurgle for 40k and Shadespire later this year, which seems pretty death-flavored.
I am completely stoked for this. I still enjoy AOS to 40k and some friends and I are talking about getting back full swing into AOS when GHB2017 comes out.
Also I really want to see what they give my poor Flesh-Eater Courts; alas my kingdom hath been overrun by barbarians, but the people remain strong that one day we will receive aid and push back the villains!
NinthMusketeer wrote: Which is why they should preserve the current point structure in a manner like how power works in 40k, so that people who just want a basic structure without having to fiddle with details can play that. But for those of us who play in tournaments having these things be exact is a very big deal, something that can't be fixed by splitting up a few profiles. To name another example, the vampire lord on zombie dragon. Both the chalice and shield options make the model dramatically more powerful, but to deal with that via entries would require 4 different costs before even getting into the weapon options. Or look at Grundstock Gunners, where each model picks an individual weapon and those weapons vary dramatically in effectiveness.
We're on the same page I think. I realize for games to stay alive that tournament play has to be heavily supported. I just appreciated their having easy to choose options for us non tournament players.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
