Age of Sigmar - Slaanesh Replaced? plus big book, stormcast archers, dismounted celestan

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.

**Zywus**

Regarding statements like "the community can fix this" and "tournaments can impose restrictions for balance.

Really, why bother. Even if it's possible to get some structure in this shamble of a system it's hardly less work then just starting from scratch. So many additions and restrictions would be needed than any participant would more or less have to learn an additional system anyhow.

Why not run tournaments under a gamesystem that work in the first place?

**Skullhammer**

I actually like these rules short and to the point and as i dont play asshats the spammy stuff wont happen (or more than once anyway). Its fast easy and does open up options on the tt.
sure its not fantasy as was but its now fantasy as is. The old is dead and gone its a whole diffrent game now.

**pretre**

RoninXiC wrote:
Pick ANY part of the mini. Meassure from there.

And no part of the mini can exceed the move value. So no turning shenanigans.

**Manchu**

chiefbigredman wrote:
The
whole 9 realms that are being reported elsewhere is total rubbish

Not according to WD75. So anyone who was thinking of taking that rant seriously, please reconsider.

**namiel**

gradam01 wrote:
You could try to do multi-unit battle scrolls by wounds per model. 1 wound can go up to 20 models, 2 wounds up to 10, and 3 wounds up to 5. We'll have to see the rest of the battle scrolls, but you may be able to balance it this way.

20 wounds of night goblins vs 20 wounds of chaos warriors..............

If they just had a ppm value then everything would be ok. That would be the balancing this game needs. To just say "any number of models" is foolish. Once everything comes together ill be looking for comps online

**Prestor Jon**

Manchu wrote:
A model's base isn't considered a part of the model -- it's just there to help the model stand up -- so don't include it when measuring distances.
So how do you measure for movement in this game?

repost of the rules from WD including the movement phase, rules don't specify the point from which you measure but they state that no part of the model can move farther than its move characteristic from its warscroll

Boss Salvage wrote:
pretre wrote:
Img'd up

Spoiler:

Good call, cheers for that

- Salvage

**Boss Salvage**

Zywus wrote:
Why not run tournaments under a gamesystem that work in the first place?

Bingo! WHFB 8E is already fairly excellent and well-established in its tournament circuits

- Salvage

**Plumbumbarum**

GrimmT wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Red Viper wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Based on that evidence, and using Occam's razor as a guide, you can reasonably conclude that this is shaping up to be a steaming pile of horse gak

Not quite yet. It very well could be... be we really need to see some Warscrolls first.

It sounds like GW is trying to emulate Wrath of Kings, I have no idea if they can pull it off. Unlike some people in this thread, I genuinely hope they do.

I'm firmly in the "wait and see" camp.

A lot of GW defenders criticise their fellow gamers for the flak they give GW, but it's because they LOVE the games so much, that these people react in such an angry manner. People genuinely want the AOS to be a cracking game, only a tiny minority want it to crash and burn.

Sadly, the evidence points to this going downhill, and that's why people engage in nerd rage.

I see more nerd rage from the neckbeards who are already gak talking a game system that even isn't out yet than I do people raging about how good the game is...

I'm looking forward to the game and already have a copy held for me at the LGS and I honestly don't care wether or not anyone on here gets it or not, my store already has its orders booked up with people who are coming back to Fantasy because of AoS. Just seems a lot of people on here like to complain just because they can't deal with change. Ah well, I'll enjoy AoS while everyone keeps crying on this thread pretending that their whining will make a difference.

/rage away now fellas.

So a setting and a game I have lot of money invested in being blown up out of a blue and replaced with something entirely different, leaked rules and rumors of no balace at all are not enough as a base for critique? You must be the guy that thanks the waiter for spitting in the soup and a chef for keeping a burger down his pants to warm it.

Congratulations on the worst post Ive seen in a while. FYI, I dont have a neckbeard, dont nerdrage as I dont care for a while already and I'll tel you this - your game system is most probably going to end up as pathetic garbage. Hahahaha.

**judgedoug**

pretre wrote:
boredbeard wrote:
@angelofvengeance: ...100% credits to Grot Orderly, Sir.

Well, them and the guys who posted it 5 pages back.

Every image I have seen so far on every website and twitter feed has come from the same source

**Bottle**

I'm excited for AoS! It's been a roller coaster ride of emotion, but I am now ready. Embrace it all! Circle bases, no points EMBRACE IT ALL!!!!!

(And if you did want to balance it for a game, easiest way is to say a number of scrolls and a model count limit. "Let's play 5 scrolls each and no more than 50 models. Cool?")

**Dullspork**

Thud wrote:
Dullspork wrote:
Thud wrote:
TL;DR: I work at the studio, AoS is controversial, Jervis has a Space Marine hat as a paperweight, everything will become awesome, we totally tried to make an awesome game.

That's not what I read. To me it was more... "Yup, this is going to piss people off and a lot of you will go away now. We're trying something new and we have our fingers crossed that people will like it. If they don't then we all lose our jobs."

It's all made-up BS anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

Oh. I didn't realize that it had already been debunked.

**RiTides**

Where is the "save" or "armor" characteristic on those warscrolls?

Spoiler'ed for size:

Spoiler:

**Boss Salvage**

namiel wrote:
20 wounds of night goblins vs 20 wounds of chaos warriors..............

Psst - Swedish comp tells you 20 8E Chaos Warriors are 12 comp points, while 20 8E Goblins are 1 comp point. There is no reason that can't be adjusted to 9E Chaos Dudes vs 9E Goblinoids given a handful of playtests

- Salvage

**pretre**

RiTides wrote:
Where is the "save" or "armor" characteristic on those warscrolls?

Spoilered for size:

Spoiler:

On the right side of the dark blue circle on the left.

**judgedoug**

Move-Save-Bravery-Wounds circle

**RoninXiC**

I put my miniature on a 10" base. Enemies cannot physically move over my base but are too far away to be in melee with the mini.

**namiel**

Boss Salvage wrote:
namiel wrote:
20 wounds of night goblins vs 20 wounds of chaos warriors..............
Psst - Swedish comp tells you 20 8E Chaos Warriors are 12 comp points, while 20 8E Goblins are 1 comp point. There is no reason that can't be adjusted to 9E Chaos Dudes vs 9E Goblinoids given a handful of playtests

- Salvage

wouldn't it just be easier to put a ppm value on these things? Each scroll comes standard with a unit champ and at min size for x points like in 40k then y points per model beyond the minimum

**Chopxsticks**

Did anyone take from the Wizards section of the rules that if no opposing wizard is within 18" of your casting wizard they cant dispel the spell its casting?

**RiTides**

Thanks pretre / judgedoug, for some reason I didn't think to look in the circle image, only the line text

Doesn't look so bad, right? Will be interesting to see how it shakes out.

**Wonderwolf**

RoninXiC wrote:
I put my miniature on a 10" base. Enemies cannot physically move over my base but are too far away to be in melee with the mini.

They can move on top of your base though. No rule I see prevents them from moving physically over/on your base.

Indeed, shoving your own models really, really, really tight together might help get more models from large units into the 3" sweet-spot (not recommended for nicely painted minis). There're apparently no templates anyway.

**Enkiel**

RoninXiC wrote:
I put my miniature on a 10" base. Enemies cannot physically move over my base but are too far away to be in melee with the mini.

after a few games, let us know how many people still wanna play against you.

**Chopxsticks**

Wonderwolf wrote:
RoninXiC wrote:
I put my miniature on a 10" base. Enemies cannot physically move over my base but are too far away to be in melee with the mini.

They can move on top of your base though. No rule I see prevents them from moving physically over/on your base.

Indeed, shoving your own models really, really, really tight together might help get more models from large units into the 3" sweet-spot (not recommended for nicely painted minis). There're apparently no templates anyway.

I would rage if someone shoved their mini over the top of my decorated bases. That being said, if I put a standard infantry guy on a 10" base I would probably deserve to have my stuff ruined..

**unmercifulconker**

Since distances are now measured from the model itself, say you have pikemen who are pointing their pikes out and you go into combat, would you be in range 3" away from the pike tip and therefore in combat? I know it doesnt really create complications ruleswise as the pikemen are too technically in range then but wouldnt it just look wierd when you have guys punching you in the face when they are at your pike/spear tip?

**RiTides**

I'm sorry that this has probably already been thoroughly beat to death, but in filtering the thread for Salvage's posts I can't see any analysis of it other than the below comp solution, and he's my go-to source

If you don't want to do the below (add comp system) is there any reason not to take literally as many models as you can in a unit?

Spoiler:

Boss Salvage wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
Before you good even begin playtesting games to develop point costs for Swedish comp you would first have to determine unit sizes for every non character/monster unit. All the warscrolls we've seen for multi-model units from the AoS set have no model limit for unit size. If a given warscroll/unit can have anywhere from 2 to 100+ models then how do you choose a unit size to playtest and award points? If you have to essentially redesign the entire game in order to comp it, your time is better spent just picking a different game to play.
The final 8E Swedish Comp pack lives here. If you have a look, you'll see that units acquire Swe points based on their size - once they pass outside of the final bracket (so like "35+") you take a hit per model added, not just a range of models.

In other words, naw, it's mostly ok already. Time will tell what a unit of 100 Things does vs a unit of 20 Things - in 8E size certainly mattered, but only to an extent. Oh, and I've played almost the entirety of 8E under tournament-imposed unit caps (either 450 points or 60 models), so no stranger to size control

EDIT

Two examples related to stuff people have been shouting in here:

Skullcrushers of Khorne
3 -24
4 -34
5 -44
6 -55
Each model in the unit after 6 -15
2nd unit -5 (-10 if more than 6 Skullcrushers in the army)

So a unit of 15 8E Skullcrushers kicks you down to a comp score of 11. You're not fielding much else besides those if you need to hit 10.

Peasant Bowmen
10-13 -2
14-18 -2
19-23 -3
24-28 -4
29 -5
Each model in the unit after 35 -1

Flipside, a massive unit of 224 8E Bret Bowmen sets you back to a comp score of 10. A far cry from the 1000 archers cited, and no idea how that storm of arrows matches up against the 'Crushers - in 8E though my moneys on the juggers, but in 8E both 'armies' are illegal, due to necessity of taking 1 hero + 3 units. One can assume an event could dictate minimums as well, warscrolls or whatever.

Anyway, numbers and balance and comp and things.

- Salvage

**-DE-**

Put your shooters over 3" high above the ground. You're now immune to close combat and can shoot with impunity.

**Red Viper**

namiel wrote:

wouldn't it just be easier to put a ppm value on these things? Each scroll comes standard with a unit champ and at min size for x points like in 40k then y points per model beyond the minimum

I thought GW would have each scroll with a fixed unit size. That would simplify making army lists.

Since GW didn't do it, I still think it'd be the easiest way to balance the game.

Eventually (and hopefully) standardized unit sizes would be accepted per warscroll.

I'm sure some the ETC or Swede geniuses already thought of that. Until a standardized method becomes accepted, I know that's how my group is going to play. We'll tweak the unit sizes as we play games.

**Thud**

RiTides wrote:
I'm sorry that this has probably already been thoroughly beat to death, but in filtering the thread for Salvage's posts I can't see any analysis of it other than the below comp solution, and he's my go-to source

If you don't want to do the below (add comp system) is there any reason not to take literally as many models as you can in a unit?

Spoiler:

Boss Salvage wrote:
Prestor Jon wrote:
Before you good even begin playtesting games to develop point costs for Swedish comp you would first have to determine unit sizes for every non character/monster unit. All the warscrolls we've seen for multi-model units from the AoS set have no model limit for unit size. If a given warscroll/unit can have anywhere from 2 to 100+ models then how do you choose a unit size to playtest and award points? If you have to essentially redesign the entire game in order to comp it, your time is better spent just picking a different game to play.
The final 8E Swedish Comp pack lives here. If you have a look, you'll see that units acquire Swe points based on their size - once they pass outside of the final bracket (so like "35+") you take a hit per model added, not just a range of models.

In other words, naw, it's mostly ok already. Time will tell what a unit of 100 Things does vs a unit of 20 Things - in 8E size certainly mattered, but only to an extent. Oh, and I've played almost the entirety of 8E under tournament-imposed unit caps (either 450 points or 60 models), so no stranger to size control

EDIT

Two examples related to stuff people have been shouting in here:

Skullcrushers of Khorne
3 -24
4 -34
5 -44
6 -55
Each model in the unit after 6 -15
2nd unit -5 (-10 if more than 6 Skullcrushers in the army)

So a unit of 15 8E Skullcrushers kicks you down to a comp score of 11. You're not fielding much else besides those if you need to hit 10.

Peasant Bowmen
10-13 -2
14-18 -2
19-23 -3
24-28 -4
29 -5
Each model in the unit after 35 -1

Flipside, a massive unit of 224 8E Bret Bowmen sets you back to a comp score of 10. A far cry from the 1000 archers cited, and no idea how that storm of arrows matches up against the 'Crushers - in 8E though my moneys on the juggers, but in 8E both 'armies' are illegal, due to necessity of taking 1 hero + 3 units. One can assume an event could dictate minimums as well, warscrolls or whatever.

Anyway, numbers and balance and comp and things.

- Salvage

Yeah, make your army consist solely of long range shooting, but keep the model count as low as possible, always be outnumbered below the threshold, pick the assassinate sudden death victory condition on turn one, kill your opponent's hero (which, as far as I can make out, cannot join units) and win the game. Narrative: Forged!

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

After reading the above, is that the game broken already...before it's even out?

That's gotta be a record for dakka

**Manchu**

RoninXiC wrote:
I put my miniature on a 10" base. Enemies cannot physically move over my base but are too far away to be in melee with the mini.

Bases don't count as part of miniatures.

**Wonderwolf**

Chopxsticks wrote:
Wonderwolf wrote:
RoninXiC wrote:
I put my miniature on a 10" base. Enemies cannot physically move over my base but are too far away to be in melee with the mini.

They can move on top of your base though. No rule I see prevents them from moving physically over/on your base.

Indeed, shoving your own models really, really, really tight together might help get more models from large units into the 3" sweet-spot (not recommended for nicely painted minis). There're apparently no templates anyway.

I would rage if someone shoved their mini over the top of my decorated bases. That being said, if I put a standard infantry guy on a 10" base I would probably deserve to have my stuff ruined..

Probably.

Still, I have that mental image of a guy placing his 167-model strong unit of unpainted-grey-orks in a half-sphere around his opponent's custom-painted vintage Sisters of Twilight on Dragon in metal and pressing really, really hard so they are all in 3".

It's a surprisingly tough game for "collectors" to get into