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.

Any chance of getting the option to take a chaos lord without the summon 10 marauders ability? I really like my chaos lord but when you price in that ability he becomes too expensive and I have little use for bringing in 10 marauders on 4+.

Also, why do you keep making all my favorites more expensive :(

Hettar wrote:
Dwarf bolt thrower seems too cheap, should be the same a cannon or near about as it can quite easily do the same dmg

Not so sure about that, let's check some numbers:

Base stats:
Cannon 83% to hit and wound, -2 Rend, 3,5 damage
Bolt 89% to hit and wound, -1 Rend, 2 damage

DO vs 2+ armour
Cannon 1,5
Bolt 0,59

DO vs 3+ armour
Cannon 1,9
Bolt 0,89

DO vs 4+
Cannon 2,4
Bolt 1,2

DO vs 5+
Cannon 2,9
Bolt 1,5

DO vs 6+ and vs -
Cannon 2,9
Bolt 1,7

With an Engineer there is an even higher DO from the cannon since its hit/wound chance goes up to 125% and the Bolt Thrower goes up to 111%.


So the Cannon is definately better than the Bolt Thrower in the damage output, while the Bolt Thrower has 6" better range. Only if the Bolt Thrower rolls a 6 to wound will it reach slightly above Cannon damage.

Bottom line is that the Cannon should cost more, but maybe there is too large a gap right now?

coldgaming wrote:
Sorry if I missed it, but do you have an army building tool like www.scrollbuilder.com? For lazy gamers like me, I'd definitely use PPC if I could click my way into an army and not have to read the document/add it up myself.

It's perfectly fine not wanting to go through 9+ pages to look for a specific question Welcome to the thread, by the way!

There will be scrollbuilder files, but we need abit more stability in the costs first...which I am confident we are about to get very soon!

Deusvult wrote:
Any chance of getting the option to take a chaos lord without the summon 10 marauders ability? I really like my chaos lord but when you price in that ability he becomes too expensive and I have little use for bringing in 10 marauders on 4+.

Only if we do split the Command Abilities from heroes as some are for and some against. Otherwise unfortunenately no. But could you use him as one of the marked heroes instead?

Deusvult wrote:
Also, why do you keep making all my favorites more expensive :(

Haha that is entirely intentional, based on your opponents reports Out of curiosity, which ones do you mean?

Attilla wrote:

Deusvult wrote:
Any chance of getting the option to take a chaos lord without the summon 10 marauders ability? I really like my chaos lord but when you price in that ability he becomes too expensive and I have little use for bringing in 10 marauders on 4+.

Only if we do split the Command Abilities from heroes as some are for and some against. Otherwise unfortunenately no. But could you use him as one of the marked heroes instead?

Looks like we have one more in favor of splitting them...

Anyways, Deusvault, you could also bring in a chaos spawn or 8 warhounds. Maybe one of those could help your game needs better.

How ever with dwarf lord and a engineer the double dmg comes on a 4+ to wound rather than the 6 with a -3 rend which is higher than the cannon's -2

Hettar wrote:
How ever with dwarf lord and a engineer the double dmg comes on a 4+ to wound rather than the 6 with a -3 rend which is higher than the cannon's -2

That would be a nasty combo, even if factoring in the Lord's cost would make the Bolt Thrower cost more than the cannon, but of course also have better bodyguard power when the enemy closes in. That's still a non-issue, however, since the Lord's cmd ability only works for dispossessed units, which the war machine isn't The crew are, but they would only benefit in melee though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Still, I didnt factor in the 5+ to get better rend and dmg from the Engineer above. Only the hit/wound ratio. Will check that tomorrow

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Attilla wrote:

Deusvult wrote:
Any chance of getting the option to take a chaos lord without the summon 10 marauders ability? I really like my chaos lord but when you price in that ability he becomes too expensive and I have little use for bringing in 10 marauders on 4+.

Only if we do split the Command Abilities from heroes as some are for and some against. Otherwise unfortunenately no. But could you use him as one of the marked heroes instead?

Looks like we have one more in favor of splitting them...

Anyways, Deusvault, you could also bring in a chaos spawn or 8 warhounds. Maybe one of those coul help your game needs better.

I just really really dislike summoning in any form, especially one as feeble and random as this one. Though it might be a nasty surprise for Solaris if I bring some warhounds up behind his many bolt throwers.

In regards to Attilas question about nerfing units. You increased the cost of all of my favorite skaven units like the plagueclaw, the verminlord and even bumped up my beloved stormfiends a bit. And I was having such marvellous success with them too!

Deusvult wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Attilla wrote:

Deusvult wrote:
Any chance of getting the option to take a chaos lord without the summon 10 marauders ability? I really like my chaos lord but when you price in that ability he becomes too expensive and I have little use for bringing in 10 marauders on 4+.

Only if we do split the Command Abilities from heroes as some are for and some against. Otherwise unfortunenately no. But could you use him as one of the marked heroes instead?

Looks like we have one more in favor of splitting them...

Anyways, Deusvault, you could also bring in a chaos spawn or 8 warhounds. Maybe one of those could help your game needs better.

I just really really dislike summoning in any form, especially one as feeble and random as this one. Though it might be a nasty surprise for Solaris if I bring some warhounds up behind his many bolt throwers.

Sounds like you need to use your Chaos Lord as a counts-as Wulfrik the Wanderer...

I feel the skaven pain but i knew the increases were were needed, the warbringer is hands down one of the best vermin-lords, the storm-vermin got off lightly and i'm sure the stormfiends did too so lets count our blessing's lol.....also join me in boycotting nurgle units in your skaven army as the third skaven civil war is imminent as the great horned rat will tolerate no rivals when it comes to the worship of his children.........

For the record, I vote against splitting command abilities from heroes. As the game unfolds, I am confident that the various factions will get heroes with abilities that are not command abilities. This will give them the synergy that the Bloodbound and Stormcast have. By splitting abilities you are essentially creating new warscrolls. If that becomes cannon, then why not add all of the Cygnar and Khador lists from the Warmachine warscrolls you made. While we are at it, I have a bunch of heroes I would like to create from wish lists for the various armies I play. Or we could just stick with the official stuff and deal with the fact that old armies will take a while to be updated, This is not a new problem, Every time WFB went through a change some books were done first and their armies were perceived to be better and people with other armies would complain. I'm not saying that complaints were unjustified, just that the answer was not to go out and create units that don't exist. The community would not put up with it in a tournament setting. And just so I don't get flamed I understand how other people feel about not having heroes with abilities that are not command abilities. I am a super fan and I own 1 of each Fantasy army. I would love to have a bunch of heroes for my other armies. When GW was selling the idea of AOS to me (I own a store) one of the selling points was that the rules for each unit released for AOS would be included in the box, and this would allow GW to release new figures for armies without requiring a new army book. So they could keep people interested by not having to wait for their armies' turn in the 4-6 year army book cycle. Well, we can see how they have implemented that plan, as in not at all. They should have released 8-10 heroes from different armies to keep everyone interested. Instead we get this crap! Focus on just two factions and two army repacks. Not at all what I signed up for.

Smellingsalts wrote:
For the record, I vote against splitting command abilities from heroes. As the game unfolds, I am confident that the various factions will get heroes with abilities that are not command abilities. This will give them the synergy that the Bloodbound and Stormcast have. By splitting abilities you are essentially creating new warscrolls. If that becomes cannon, then why not add all of the Cygnar and Khador lists from the Warmachine warscrolls you made. While we are at it, I have a bunch of heroes I would like to create from wish lists for the various armies I play. Or we could just stick with the official stuff and deal with the fact that old armies will take a while to be updated, This is not a new problem, Every time WFB went through a change some books were done first and their armies were perceived to be better and people with other armies would complain. I'm not saying that complaints were unjustified, just that the answer was not to go out and create units that don't exist. The community would not put up with it in a tournament setting.

First off, I do not see how it is creating new warscrolls. In fact, it is really just balancing because many models are simply not worth as much when they are not the general. It is much more along the same lines as making a better weapon option cost more. Synergy doesn't come into play at all because it is not about synergy or relative power level between armies; it is about not limiting models to only see play as the general. The fact that you have every army works against you; you can always play the new up-to-date armies while most people cannot afford to do so. You raise eventual updates but this even applies to the newest releases; why should you pay the same points for a Mighty Lord of Khorne when he is not the general and thus does not get his command ability? I think it would fly very well in a tournament setting because models that weren't competitive outside of a general role could now be taken without paying for the command ability. The release argument also suffers from the fact that a new release is not inevitable (Brettonians say hi) or guaranteed to be timely (how many years have armies waited to be redone in the past?). And finally, what is the downside to splitting them? Players can easily say "no split command abilities" if they like and the system still works perfectly well. This is unlike screening or summoning where it affects points values and gameplay dynamic across the board.

Hettar wrote:
How ever with dwarf lord and a engineer the double dmg comes on a 4+ to wound rather than the 6 with a -3 rend which is higher than the cannon's -2

Checked this out today, and it seems they do fit slightly different roles:

From the numbers below I do believe the cannon and bolter are actually pretty good valued compared to each other right now. If you take them without an engineer, you have a better bang for your buck with the bolt thrower overall - but with an engineer you have about the same value from them both. If you fire at a larger unit (10+ models) the cannon becomes an absolute steal with an engineer, and also a better alternative to the bolter overall. So I'd say they fill slightly different roles - one is better against single targets and the other against larger units. for their current cost.

-----------------------
NUMBERS FOR THE INTERESTED
DO = the average damage from armour 2+ 3+ 4+ 5+ 6+ and armour - added together.

Cannon average DO: 2,43
Bolt Thrower average DO: 1,78

Cannon (Engineer): 3,13
Bolt Thrower (engineer): 2,59

Cannon Optimal DO (firing at 10+ models, with engineer): 4,69

Average Cannon = 137% better DO than Average Bolt Thrower but costs 144% more.
Engineer Cannon = 121% better DO than Engineer Bolt Thrower but costs 122% more.
Optimal Cannon = 181% better DO than Bolt Thrower but only costs 122% more.
-----------------------

Sounds like you need to use your Chaos Lord as a counts-as Wulfrik the Wanderer...

I already have a wulfrik the wanderer, but I don't like him or his lore.

Attila, could you kindly give me the pts costs for the chaos lords ability so I can take it off for my personal games?
As a favor one Swede to another?

Deusvult wrote:

Sounds like you need to use your Chaos Lord as a counts-as Wulfrik the Wanderer...

I already have a wulfrik the wanderer, but I don't like him or his lore.

Attila, could you kindly give me the pts costs for the chaos lords ability so I can take it off for my personal games?
As a favor one Swede to another?

Of course! I'll check and let you know tomorrow in a pm. If by chance I forget just send me a pm reminder

In reply to Ninth, hi Ninth! Ask yourself, "Does the warscroll exist without the command ability?" If the answer is no, then any warscroll we make using PPC that allows you to take the hero without the command ability is a new, never before existing warscroll. Remember, I am coming at this as someone who runs tournaments. I want to be able to use the PPC and for it to become one of the balancing systems that is most used. For that to happen though it needs to change as little as possible.You want to split command abilities because otherwise you have to choose whether or not to include the hero even though he may not get to use his ability. Well, I would like to have the option to run Blood Warriors without armor. They are the same situation. You want to remove something because you MAY not use it by choice. I want to remove something because I definitely never use it (can't make saves, terrible luck, I would rather just save points). While both of us want these things there is a sizable part of the gaming community that would see PPC as illegitimate because it changes warscrolls rather than just costing them. Further, I predict that any balancing system that does that will not be accepted by the community, and the minute that this one does I would have to start looking at Azyr Comp and other systems for my leagues and tournaments.

Yet the post right above yours is providing a split cost for someone who was requesting it. You say the wargames community won't like it but there are a number of people in the discussion who have already voiced opinions to the opposite. It's not the same as removing armor as there is no way to have blood warriors without armor in game. In other words, you ask if the warscrolls exists without the command ability, my point is that it does when that model is not the general.

And let's be realistic; PPC will never see majority use because AoS itself does not. The community has fractured and a large portion moved to other games. Just look to the poll about AoS dying or gaining steam to see evidence of that. I think the goal here is to create the most enjoyment for the most number of people, and personally I think more people like the idea of split command abilities than not.

[edit] Rephrased some stuff. Also, perhaps a decent compromise would be to include the command ability costs on a separate list for those players who want them. Then the core costs remain the same but those who wish to have the costs split up have a means to do so.

PPC provides very good customer service with new warscrolls being invented and priced by their staff of experts.

Personally I'd say that the Chaos lords command ability is peculiar in that it is sort of a summon and as such is different from other command abilities. PPC has its own version of summoning separate from the regular game so it has already changed AoS somewhat, also PPC has separated some abilities from their warscrolls, for example the Soulgrinder can opt not to take the phlegm bombardment while the warscroll says it is automatically included...

Well,what someone does in a one-off game is fine with me. You can't use one or two people's anecdotal stories to justify a change like that though. Ninth knows what I am about to say, but to be clear, I have been involved with the biggest 40k/WFB tournament in San Diego for about four years now. As I am the sponsor, I do not make judge decisions, but I do hang out with them during the tournament and I hear them field all kinds of questions and decisions. I am also an active tournament player myself. Ninth, I know you are not a tournament player, so a change like this seems simple. But wait till you have to listen to the whining that will come when someone is beaten using rules that let you split command abilities. I know you don't want to listen to it, one of the reasons you don't play in tournaments. I don't want to listen to it either. And believe me, all you guys who want to play split lists don't want to hear the whining from people who you beat with a modified list. I did not know about the Daemon weapon that was given an optional attack when it should be mandatory. But I would argue that needs to change too. Yes, we have changed some rules, but the changes are based on the question "Can you play this game without the rule change?" We aren't trying to write AOS 2nd Edition. We are just trying to balance the existing warscrolls. Things like summoning were so broken the game was unplayable without the change. Things like measuring base to base are acceptable because players don't want to risk damage to their models or bases by piling them on top of each other. But you can play the game just fine without splitting command. So if you want to split command in your own personal games, and you have an opponent that will let you, then have fun. But coming from the background I do, I would never allow it, and for my own league I will have to add a line that if a thing is not optional on the warscroll itself, it's not optional. I am a firm believer in not changing the rules as written. That way, tournament players can be angry at GW and not the tournament organizer. It is better for the longevity of your tournament.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and it is the same as taking armor off Blood Warriors, in both cases you are creating something that is not an option on the original warscroll.

I'm answering this in the other thread, since this is still the wrong thread to discuss large-scale changes and game design. This thread is for comparing and discussing individual warscrolls and the prices.

Looks like the chaos warshrine lost its mark options somewhere in the recent update.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Looks like the chaos warshrine lost its mark options somewhere in the recent update.

Fixing that for the massive list release coming soon

I'm about to make the massive update later today or tomorrow, where all lists and the comp pack turns 1.0.

Reading through some old posts I noticed a request to make Sylvaneth Wyldwoods purchaseable by Wood Elves, and I think I will add that before the list update.

I'm thinking 50-75p for a Wyldwood (basically two Citadel Woods that can kill non-sylvaneth models charging/running through it, and puts out mortal wounds if spells are cast nearby). Does it seem like a good value? Should there be a max amount of Wyldwoods that can be bought?

Honestly I think the rule that allows Wildwood benefits from normal woods combined with a point cost to the battalion that includes wildwoods -wood- be a fair way to balance that.

Made an announcement in the general discussion about the big update today, just linking it here.

Any reason why I can't take mutalith vortexbeasts for my WoC anymore?

Deusvult wrote:
Any reason why I can't take mutalith vortexbeasts for my WoC anymore?

I've always found that model to be quite ugly, so I decided to remove it from the list

Dammit, been going through each list multiple times to make sure I didn't miss anything in the transition to the new format...but I bet more stuff like this will pop up in the coming days.
I'll make the correction quickly right now.

Looks like the box on the plague furnace is mis-sized.

Side note: the point increases on Nurgle units are ridiculous and totally unbalanced. The point decreases are fine.

[edit] Removed falsely identified typo.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
Looks like the box on the plague furnace is mis-sized.

Side note: the point increases on Nurgle units are ridiculous and totally unbalanced. The point decreases are fine.

[edit] Removed falsely identified typo.

I think your "false typo" is not false at all, but one that I have managed to type everywhere instead. I blame not speaking English as my main language for it Whenever the next release is, I will change "Troops" to "Troop" where appropriate.

The Plague Furnace is a victim of MS Word tables, since the cell to the right of it is a large one, so is the Furnace. Will see if I do something about it later on.

Side note: Pffffft

Hey Attila, I don't think that stormcall javelin prosecutors can take grandweapons, they can take tridents however if you would mind adding in that option?

Attilla wrote:
The Plague Furnace is a victim of MS Word tables, since the cell to the right of it is a large one, so is the Furnace. Will see if I do something about it later on.

If it's a table you can probably get around that issue by merging cells to make the larger boxes, while the smaller ones remain split. Alternatively (and perhaps more easily) make separate left-side and right-side tables.

Deusvult wrote:
Hey Attila, I don't think that stormcall javelin prosecutors can take grandweapons, they can take tridents however if you would mind adding in that option?

Doh! Yeah, will add to next version. Luckily, the points cost for the upgrade is the same. Thanks!

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Attilla wrote:
The Plague Furnace is a victim of MS Word tables, since the cell to the right of it is a large one, so is the Furnace. Will see if I do something about it later on.

If it's a table you can probably get around that issue by merging cells to make the larger boxes, while the smaller ones remain split. Alternatively (and perhaps more easily) make separate left-side and right-side tables.

Yeah I know, I meant that there are more pressing matters to attend to I might see to fixing them for next version though.