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.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Darkling covens have the new Battle Brew artifact; a weapon that gets +1 attack for the rest of the game if the bearer causes wounds in the combat phase. It stacks.

Executioners are Battleline now as well. Puts them in good place for top Battleline in the game

Also, that new Battle Brew will only go on a Sorceress on foot or Black Dragon, neither are particularly good in combat

I was wrong about that; I was thinking that Darkling Covens could ally in Eldritch Council but they cannot. I was also thinking bonus attacks when its actually just bonus to the damage profile.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EnTyme wrote:
Just bought the book through the app. Good to see Varanguard have been reduced to 300 points. Now you can run an Everchosen army of Archaon and 3 Varanguard units and have 400 points left over for allies! Not exactly a good objectives army, but I could see it being fun to run if you have the models.

If you stick to mortals of one god you can run pretty much whatever you want on Everchosen using plaguebound, fatebound, bloodbound, or pleasurebound. The first three were already strong then got reduced cost in GHB2 even.

I view that in the same way I do people who run a 350 point primary Dark Angel detachment with 1650 points of mixed Space Wolves and Inquisition in 7th edition 40k and claim they're running a "Dark Angels list". To me, the Everchosen battalions are mixed Chaos armies with an Everchosen general, not Everchosen armies.

Huzzah! They fixed the app's Warscrolls bug!

No more multiple clicks for rules info!

Baron Klatz wrote:
Huzzah! They fixed the app's Warscrolls bug!

No more multiple clicks for rules info!

No way! I believe it when it works in my next game!

Well it's working great for me. Hopefully i'm not an isolated case.

so, ignoring the content in 2nd edition apart from death grand i will just say, no way in hell.
models goes to the basment in hopes for better unerfed times in 3rd edition.

I kinda wish they made Skywardens a battle line unit. Even they had conditions, like a minimum size of 6. Does anyone else agree or is that just me?

Everyone feels Kharadron should have a battleline-if unit, there's just different ideas as to which.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Everyone feels Kharadron should have a battleline-if unit, there's just different ideas as to which.

Gunhaulers--Battleline if your wallet is huge?

But for real, I think that a secondary Battleline unit might have to wait until Overlords get expanded a bit more or we just pull something like the Skywardens if you have Brokk.

Endrinriggers would be too good to be battleline. Skywardens might be as well, but I could see it happening. Thunderers would make a decent battleline now that they can't just be spammed with crazy amounts of khemist augmented shots at 36 inches. Other than that, there's not really a unit left that could fit. Gunhaulers would be a crazy interesting battleline though.

 Hulksmash wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Yeah, the FEC changes basically means I won't play the army. I was trying my damndest to not go with just 100+ ghouls and roll a bucket of dice, and nothing worked before, only for it to now be even more of that and on top of that no Nighthaunt allies means no Mournghoul, which was really the only thing keeping FEC as even a low-tier competitive army (not that I had any myself). So basically, Death, the weakest grand alliance already, got weaker.

This is an unjustified assumption because we haven't seen the allegiance abilities yet. Also, we know for sure that death got stronger thanks to discount skeleton hordes at the very least.

But feel free to freak out and ruin your own enjoyment

"I know you're complaining about FEC but Skeletons!!!!"

As a whole though reading through most of the changes, granted without full disclosure on the FEC stuff, FEC basically went monobuild. Ghoul horde. Done. Which is sad as the only death battletome actually out.

I think Wayniac understands this is a total reboot and he'll have to build lists from the ground up but being annoyed about FEC is justified.The only adjustment we got was a horde bonus which even Tzaangor got (and benefit from far more at a 16% discount vs. 10%). Overall it's a complete change to the meta which is fine. But some of us do lament not being able to play something other than monobuild at a tournament. Basically it just pushes me personally to not paint them till maybe next year as I'll have other projects jump them in the que now as I can play narrative games with unpainted stuff with buddies but painting is reserved for tournaments due to my limited time.

So I want to revisit this with the benefit of hindsight. With the GHB2 out, we can now see that FEC still have a variety of options, if not more than before, and are far from being reduced to a mono build. If anything they got stronger. I raise this in a (perhaps vain) attempt to head-off jumping to conclusions next time around. There was a self-inflicted punishment of freaking out over an event that didn't even exist, and that's what I'm talking about when I say people are ruining their own enjoyment.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I raise this in a (perhaps vain) attempt to head-off jumping to conclusions next time around.

First time on the internet?

FrozenDwarf wrote:so, ignoring the content in 2nd edition apart from death grand i will just say, no way in hell.
models goes to the basment in hopes for better unerfed times in 3rd edition.

It is third edition.

 EnTyme wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I raise this in a (perhaps vain) attempt to head-off jumping to conclusions next time around.

First time on the internet?

I know, I know... But hopefully there's at least a few lurkers out there who will worry themselves less in regards to a future release.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Yeah, the FEC changes basically means I won't play the army. I was trying my damndest to not go with just 100+ ghouls and roll a bucket of dice, and nothing worked before, only for it to now be even more of that and on top of that no Nighthaunt allies means no Mournghoul, which was really the only thing keeping FEC as even a low-tier competitive army (not that I had any myself). So basically, Death, the weakest grand alliance already, got weaker.

This is an unjustified assumption because we haven't seen the allegiance abilities yet. Also, we know for sure that death got stronger thanks to discount skeleton hordes at the very least.

But feel free to freak out and ruin your own enjoyment

"I know you're complaining about FEC but Skeletons!!!!"

As a whole though reading through most of the changes, granted without full disclosure on the FEC stuff, FEC basically went monobuild. Ghoul horde. Done. Which is sad as the only death battletome actually out.

I think Wayniac understands this is a total reboot and he'll have to build lists from the ground up but being annoyed about FEC is justified.The only adjustment we got was a horde bonus which even Tzaangor got (and benefit from far more at a 16% discount vs. 10%). Overall it's a complete change to the meta which is fine. But some of us do lament not being able to play something other than monobuild at a tournament. Basically it just pushes me personally to not paint them till maybe next year as I'll have other projects jump them in the que now as I can play narrative games with unpainted stuff with buddies but painting is reserved for tournaments due to my limited time.

So I want to revisit this with the benefit of hindsight. With the GHB2 out, we can now see that FEC still have a variety of options, if not more than before, and are far from being reduced to a mono build. If anything they got stronger. I raise this in a (perhaps vain) attempt to head-off jumping to conclusions next time around. There was a self-inflicted punishment of freaking out over an event that didn't even exist, and that's what I'm talking about when I say people are ruining their own enjoyment.

Uhh... like what? I haven't seen "a variety of options". Can you point me to where you've seen this (legit question, I really haven't seen any options other than doing what was done before or going Flayer spam with Deadwatch, which was a thing before too although completely gimmicky)

Yeah, the abilities don't offset the increased pricing for 1/2 our non-behemoth/non-ghoul models. I like that we have traits now, that's cool. But the shift of leaders having to go on characters hurt too. Overall a couple of the lists I was playing with aren't possible anymore due to point increases (at least not efficiently).

The only way we're "better" is because some armies are worse. But looking at my current builds my Sylvaneth army lost a single unit of Hunters but is unchanged otherwise and my mixed destruction thanks to allies went Ironjawz and got stronger. My lizardmen to a massive leap forward. So looking at my other stuff FEC got worse, other stuff I have on the desk got better and the other stuff has more playable options for lists.

The goal for both 40k and AoS now with yearly updates in the form of GHB and CA has me building a single army of each per year to play for that year. That way I make it pretty and add a thing or two over the year but know that that army might not transition to the next year. I'm just hoping death in some form but FEC in particular makes the cut one year so I can finish what I've build but not painted.

Well I played a game against the local FEC player using my tournament list and he won with;
-King on Terrorgheist (artifact that nerfs bravery)
-King on Dragon (artifact that heals 1d6 once/game)
-Varghulf Courtier
-Haunter Courtier (general, trait that makes him a wizard with black hunger and +1 cast/dispel)
-Ghast Courtier
-Horrors x3
-Horrors x3
-Ghouls x40
-Abbatoir battalion
-delusion that gives non-general heroes re-rolls

We've also discussed a more horror-heavy version of the list, ghoul-patrol based lists (really strong now, actually), deadwatch based lists, and royal menagerie lists. I'm literally seeing the viability on the tabletop in front of me, so I'm pretty sure it's there.

Clan Skryre's battallion is still rather affordable. The only problem with it is that nearly every engincoven requires stormfiends. Even the one that is for acolytes requires 2 units of acolytes and one unit of stormfiends.

The battllion itself hasn't changed since GH1 however, hopefully some stuff like that gets a second look now that they made all battallions more expensive.

I remember GW saying they had AOS planned out for 5 years.
GHB updates every year were to correct imbalances so that we did not remain stuck with it during the entire edition...

You guys think there will be a change to the core rules after those 5 years? and have a "second edition" in two years?

FEC is one of my favorite armies in the game currently. They are very mobile and have a lot of attacks and just seem very well rounded. They also have the best fluff ever written by GW.

What I think would really benefit the game is if they'd come out with a Masters set of rules. More advanced. They can leave the over simplified rules side-by-side and then let a more advanced game be played "officially" instead of houserules having to be made for it.

 auticus wrote:
What I think would really benefit the game is if they'd come out with a Masters set of rules. More advanced. They can leave the over simplified rules side-by-side and then let a more advanced game be played "officially" instead of houserules having to be made for it.

I agree completely.

That way they could make different advanced rules for different settings. Like competitive, really big games etc. ..

 auticus wrote:
What I think would really benefit the game is if they'd come out with a Masters set of rules. More advanced. They can leave the over simplified rules side-by-side and then let a more advanced game be played "officially" instead of houserules having to be made for it.

I'd back that. I think something like this could really work out well, actually. I think the main "advanced rules" I'd like to see is per-model point costs, and something akin to the Command Points thing. Perhaps a rework of Battalions a bit to be more similar to the way detachments work, but then again, I don't really want to make AoS just like 40k.

I'd probably be ok with some tweaks on LOS, shooting-in-melee, and character targeting but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Character targeting really isn't that bad; the problem is individual units that are undercosted and really good at sniping. Note how skyfires and kurnoths, both perfect character snipers, were very dominant until GHB2. Availability of sniping is also an important counterbalance to squishy characters that have powerful abilities. If character sniping didn't exist, several armies could build nearly unbreakable frontlines. Imagine dealing with four Bastiladons lined up that have re-rollable saves the whole game thanks to the 80 pt skink hero behind them, for example. Or FEC with endless replenishment you can't stop. 40k, comparatively, has squishier characters and shooting as the dominant method of inflicting damage. Shooting in AoS is more rare and more costly (when costed appropriately...).

I think a decent number of players come into the game putting down their general w/command trait, who also has a good support ability from his warscroll, and then gets further buffed by an artifact, then being upset when that character is sniped and their army is crippled. I see it all the time on the tabletop, but its a symptom of poor army design rather than an inherent flaw in the system. The eggs generally need to be spread out rather than all in one basket.

Yeah, I'm not too put off by the current shooting rules, really. I wouldn't mind better LOS rules, but I know that's not going to happen (e.g., cylinder type or whatever, True LOS has always bugged me). The character-targeting one is the lowest on my list of gripes there, honestly. It does sometimes feel weird to not be able to "lock down" shooting units by engaging them, but I think that's just something everyone is just sorta expecting from carry over from most other games.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Character targeting really isn't that bad; the problem is individual units that are undercosted and really good at sniping. Note how skyfires and kurnoths, both perfect character snipers, were very dominant until GHB2. Availability of sniping is also an important counterbalance to squishy characters that have powerful abilities. If character sniping didn't exist, several armies could build nearly unbreakable frontlines. Imagine dealing with four Bastiladons lined up that have re-rollable saves the whole game thanks to the 80 pt skink hero behind them, for example. Or FEC with endless replenishment you can't stop. 40k, comparatively, has squishier characters and shooting as the dominant method of inflicting damage. Shooting in AoS is more rare and more costly (when costed appropriately...).

I think a decent number of players come into the game putting down their general w/command trait, who also has a good support ability from his warscroll, and then gets further buffed by an artifact, then being upset when that character is sniped and their army is crippled. I see it all the time on the tabletop, but its a symptom of poor army design rather than an inherent flaw in the system. The eggs generally need to be spread out rather than all in one basket.

Although in general I would agree with what you are saying, Last week I played a game where ALL my characters were dead turn 1, before I got to do anything, 3 of them were not in line of sight and bubblewrapped the other ones destroyed by artillery (damn you stormfiends)... Although I am not in favour of making characters untargettable, some help from nearby troops could help... Maybe having a better save shooting through units, things like a look out sir, an invul save for being in terrain.. that kind of stuff.

 minisnatcher wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Character targeting really isn't that bad; the problem is individual units that are undercosted and really good at sniping. Note how skyfires and kurnoths, both perfect character snipers, were very dominant until GHB2. Availability of sniping is also an important counterbalance to squishy characters that have powerful abilities. If character sniping didn't exist, several armies could build nearly unbreakable frontlines. Imagine dealing with four Bastiladons lined up that have re-rollable saves the whole game thanks to the 80 pt skink hero behind them, for example. Or FEC with endless replenishment you can't stop. 40k, comparatively, has squishier characters and shooting as the dominant method of inflicting damage. Shooting in AoS is more rare and more costly (when costed appropriately...).

I think a decent number of players come into the game putting down their general w/command trait, who also has a good support ability from his warscroll, and then gets further buffed by an artifact, then being upset when that character is sniped and their army is crippled. I see it all the time on the tabletop, but its a symptom of poor army design rather than an inherent flaw in the system. The eggs generally need to be spread out rather than all in one basket.

Although in general I would agree with what you are saying, Last week I played a game where ALL my characters were dead turn 1, before I got to do anything, 3 of them were not in line of sight and bubblewrapped the other ones destroyed by artillery (damn you stormfiends)... Although I am not in favour of making characters untargettable, some help from nearby troops could help... Maybe having a better save shooting through units, things like a look out sir, an invul save for being in terrain.. that kind of stuff.

If something like that is happening, it's a problem with the units you are facing. It sounds like you were facing Skryre, which has all sorts of balance issues with OP models, Stormfiends being the most obvious.

There's a reason I'm converting up a ton of acolytes to use in a Skryre army. Sure there will be stormfiends, but they won't be the focus.

I have to fully agree with character targeting though. I already can't beat the local death player because of how many different characters he brings that just keep bringing everything back to life and buffing the amount of attacks they all get. If I couldn't snipe down a courtier or two the whole thing would have me just declaring him the winner at the army building stage.

Every campaign I run in AOS will always have a Look Out Sir houserule.