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.

The funny thing is that Bonesplittaz are actually among the most well-balanced armies if Kunnin' Rukk is taken out.

 Galas wrote:
Warhammer has always have a bad problem of poor internal ballance in factions.

That the army of the God of War that despise magic and ranged combat its only viable with a specific Forgeworld Sorcerer and with Skaven Artillery its a big red flag that something is wrong.
I'm with Auticus in this. We need a good internal balance to make all units viable, not against the same foes and all the time, but don't make a One-Trick Faction like the Kunnin Ruk and the Beastclaw Raiders.

I want variety! I don't expect perfect balance, but even the posibility to run 3-4 diferent list will be a huge improvement.

And I think that GW should relax in the importance of Mortal Wounds. That today a army need to make a good amount of Mortal Wounds or its just bad means that something that was meant to be "special" and "deadly" has become a necesity.

Having mortal wounds should be a plus. Now, not having them its just very bad.

Khorne don't need ranged damage, he need more reliable sources to make his meele troops... reach meele. And protect them from ranged attacks.

Yup, they need something on the vein of Ironjawz. Added mobility. Like, my army isn't top-dog or anything but point for point my ardboyz are far more efficient than the bloodwarriors, since they have a means to actually reach meelee with their usual 2d6+4'' movement, and have very easy access to rend.

They need to do a retool of all the army. Just minor rules tweaks will do to bring them in line. Not necessarily MW but better quality/quantity.

I never like the "just lower point costs" that way we end with the scale creep in the number of models in a game.

Sometimes a slight reduction of costs its apropiate, but I always prefer if things that are undercosted are nerfed in their rules, and not just become more expensive. The same in the inverse, don't lower costs, just make them better.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The funny thing is that Bonesplittaz are actually among the most well-balanced armies if Kunnin' Rukk is taken out.

Not even then. The only time I find Kunnin' Rukk to be a problem is if you spam it entirely with Arrer boyz. They really shouldn't have been available as an option for it.

Khorne don't need any more help, at the local GW a guy run's Khorne and is nigh on unbeatable.

I'd be interested to hear a more detailed assessment on why you feel they don't need any more help and exactly how they are on par with the more modern books like stormcast, sylvaneth, and the orruks.

 Galas wrote:
I never like the "just lower point costs" that way we end with the scale creep in the number of models in a game.

Sometimes a slight reduction of costs its apropiate, but I always prefer if things that are undercosted are nerfed in their rules, and not just become more expensive. The same in the inverse, don't lower costs, just make them better.

The thing is, there's been months of people gaining experience with the current rules for a given warscroll, tons of data to figure out where the point cost should be. Change the rules and you make people have to learn the new ones and also throw the previous data away. It's much easier to adjust a.point cost to a scroll than adjust a scroll to a cost, and the latter will be wrong far more often.

 Rolsheen wrote:
Khorne don't need any more help, at the local GW a guy run's Khorne and is nigh on unbeatable.

Player, not the game?

I do have to say that AoS has proven to have a surprising degree of skill given the rules length. I was playing a few trial games of warmahordes mark 3 and it was jarring to go back to an 8th-ed WHFB level of complexity. If GW can nail the Stormcast-Khorne balance perfectly and have everything else along similar lines AoS could really be something.

I think the big problem with it is that GW isn't consistent. Stormcast and Khorne may get balanced well, but then something else will come along and not be balanced, and something else will come along and be underpowered. They are never consistent with it, so it ends up ruining the game because its a crap shoot if the faction you want will be cheesy or garbage.

Wayniac wrote:
I think the big problem with it is that GW isn't consistent. Stormcast and Khorne may get balanced well, but then something else will come along and not be balanced, and something else will come along and be underpowered. They are never consistent with it, so it ends up ruining the game because its a crap shoot if the faction you want will be cheesy or garbage.

As long as they attempt to balance this one things'll be better, the problem with 40k and WHFB is that.. well, there was never truly any sort of lookover after, you'll get some stuff that are really strong that end up breaking the balance until the next edition. If something is underpowered it's a lesser evil as that codex won't break barriers but it won't shatter the ceiling either.

The problem with 40k is that the balance has shattered the ceiling and the upper levels as well with specific codex.

The best thing about AoS is how much easier it is to maintain the balance with the living rules. Some factions are more powerful than others yes but not to a terrible degree. They could still take each other on. Only minor tweaks required rather than a complete overhaul like 40k would need.

Overall I agree however some of the builds are extreme and unless you are taking an extreme build you won't have much of a chance.

Blood Warriors and Bloodreavers can be very effective if used properly. Particularly with a Bloodsecrator or Bloodstoker nearby.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I never like the "just lower point costs" that way we end with the scale creep in the number of models in a game.

Sometimes a slight reduction of costs its apropiate, but I always prefer if things that are undercosted are nerfed in their rules, and not just become more expensive. The same in the inverse, don't lower costs, just make them better.

The thing is, there's been months of people gaining experience with the current rules for a given warscroll, tons of data to figure out where the point cost should be. Change the rules and you make people have to learn the new ones and also throw the previous data away. It's much easier to adjust a.point cost to a scroll than adjust a scroll to a cost, and the latter will be wrong far more often.

You are right, but in most cases the problem is with the rules, like BloodCrushers hiting like a wet sponge in the charge. When a Warscrol fails to represent the fantasy a unit should impersonate, just touching their point costs will not help them.

They might well upgrade some units in small ways as they did that with the tzeench book.

Ah yes, Blood and Skullcrushers. In my last game, my Skullcrushers failed their Murderous Charge roll and thus got bogged down fighting some Liberators and a Lord something or other instead of crashing through them. What I would hope for is that it's changed so that it's automatic, and the Brass Stampede just increases the amount of damage instead. The steam tank's Steel Behemoth rule is a much better way to do it.

Same for Gorefists for Blood Warriors. We have no shooting attacks except for a Korgorath's tentacles and the Slaughterpriests prayer, so we're already at a disadvantage. So when we get into combat, there's no time for messing around.

I think a lot of that is that different writers do different lists and because of that you're going to get some writers be more cautious and others more OP and the two don't mix very well.

Speaking of units in need of a upgrade, how the feth does Scyla only do 1 wound with his Brutal Fists? His fists are the size of Bloodreavers!

 EnTyme wrote:
Speaking of units in need of a upgrade, how the feth does Scyla only do 1 wound with his Brutal Fists? His fists are the size of Bloodreavers!

Yeah. Thit its the kind of problem that its not solved with just lowering points and making things cheaper (Or more expensive).

I don't want my Skullcrushers to be cheaper! I want them to be expensive and feell like abominations of flesh and metal stampeding trought enemy lines and munchin Skulls and Bones like Khorne-flakes!

Yeah, make things worth their price rather than keeping them mediocre with a points decrease!

Here's what I would like to see:

Skullcrushers automatically inflict D3 mortal wounds on 1 unit within 1" after a successful charge rather than what they currently have. The Brass Stampede is D6 mortal wounds instead...or something.

Bloodwarrior Gorefists automatically inflict a mortal wound if they make a save, rather than needing another roll afterwards.

Some sort of battletrait that rewards us for fighting in melee. Since we don't do shooting, our combat should be outstanding.

Compared to the mortal wound on charge abilities of other units like chariots or mournfangs juggernaut cavalry are pretty standard. Each model has 4-6 attacks apiece with good hit/wound values. They have 4/5 wounds each with a 4+ save. These guys ARE brutal melee combatants, if they are doing poorly it isn't a problem with the warscroll. A point cost change is entirely appropriate here rather than a minor change to the warscroll; that's exactly what I meant when I said that altering warscrolls as a baseline is a poor choice. If an ability is downright bad (Gorefists do come to mind here) or game breaking (Knight Azyros) a warscroll change can be appropriate but it should not be the go-to method. That doesn't even get into the trouble of the community being on different pages with updates, the hassle of re-learning rules instead of just writing a different number, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Some sort of battletrait that rewards us for fighting in melee. Since we don't do shooting, our combat should be outstanding.

Something like giving units free movement from taking casualties at range alongside a chance for bonuses to hit (or another benefit) for taking casualties in melee would be a very Khornate way to addressing the faction's issues.

Well, this is more a diferent point of view in the unit.

In the TGA forum, someone says that the problem with heavy cavalry in Age of Sigmar its that its more like a tank unit made to soap damage.
To me, thats its totally against the nature of what heavy cavalry should be. A less movile force that light cavalry made to hit like a truck with charges for the flanks (Ok, in AoS we don't have flanks, etc... but you understand me) but that can be grilled down in a long meele battle.

To me the damage output of Skullcrushers and Bloodcrushers its nowere near I imagine them. The same goes with the Demigryphs knights. I don't want them to be made cheaper, I want them to be beasts in combat and to punish the player that its outplayed by the Demigryph/Skullcrushers owner with a charge that creates total destruction.

But I agre with you, changin the point costs its the easy way to do this kind of things, and the most secure. Its just that I don't like how all the GW games end with things costing less and less points and the number of miniatures per battle just go up and up.

And you are correct that the Bloodcrushers rules with the charge are similar to other units, but in general I feel that the charges of chariots and heavy cavalry in Age of Sigmar are not strong enough.

Having played with/against both Juggernaut varients in 8th WHFB I would say that their performance was translated very well into AoS. They were good on the charge but the distinguishing feature was that they did much better in prolonged combat than conventional cavalry; they were often part of the main line both tanking and putting out solid amounts of damage. But more to the point they are beastly in combat; compare their stat lines to the infantry and cavalry of other factions. They may not seem too great when compared to Stormcast or other Khorne models, but these are both factions well away from the average when it comes to elite troops.

For those not following the New and Rumors thread, looks like preorders open next weekend!

The next two weeks are going to be hell.

Just the waiting...

 Future War Cultist wrote:
The next two weeks are going to be hell.

Just the waiting...

I'm considering pulling a Cartman and cryogenically freezing myself, but there aren't any mountains nearby.

 EnTyme wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:
The next two weeks are going to be hell.

Just the waiting...

I'm considering pulling a Cartman and cryogenically freezing myself, but there aren't any mountains nearby.

You know what's better than a mountain? The ice cream freezer at your local store:



You'd have to pay for the ice cream though.

So now we know what the Allegiance Ability shall be.

Table of contents for Blades of Khorne, from the Age of Sigmar FB page: