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.

I took the survey as well. Said I'd like to see realm-specific scenery and at the end I noted I'd like to see the return of the Tomb Kings and the Sisters of Sigmar from Mordheim added to AoS (there's always a chance right? ).

I wrote in that I'd like to see Wanderers come back in a big way, with a Treelord sized Kurnothian Avatar accompanied by massive wolves.

I have a feeling the inclusion of the realm specific terrain is a sign we are getting some and I couldn't be happier about it. Very cool.

 Eldarain wrote:
I have a feeling the inclusion of the realm specific terrain is a sign we are getting some and I couldn't be happier about it. Very cool.

I'd rather see realm specific npc/wandering monsters/critters - but terrain is a nice second place!

 Overread wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
I have a feeling the inclusion of the realm specific terrain is a sign we are getting some and I couldn't be happier about it. Very cool.

I'd rather see realm specific npc/wandering monsters/critters - but terrain is a nice second place!

I would be perfectly happy with that too. Really happy with how things are getting filled in/fleshed out. The RPG should be wonderful in that regard too.

 Overread wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
I have a feeling the inclusion of the realm specific terrain is a sign we are getting some and I couldn't be happier about it. Very cool.

I'd rather see realm specific npc/wandering monsters/critters - but terrain is a nice second place!

They may have already started with the wandering monsters...

 nels1031 wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:
Thats a relief.

Indeed!

Only reason I took the survey, to be honest. Just to make sure they weren't trying to sneak a discontinuation past us.

Ah, the clever ploy of GW is revealed! Very sneaky way to get additional survey takers.

I used my chance to make my desire for return of high- and dark-elf known, or at least a consolidation of the existing model range.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
So a GT near me just finished up. The two FEC players won 1st and 2nd place (no surprise)...

Out of interest, what's so bad about Flesheater Courts? I keep reading they're overpowered but it's generally treated as self-evident and never explained.

 Overread wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
I have a feeling the inclusion of the realm specific terrain is a sign we are getting some and I couldn't be happier about it. Very cool.

I'd rather see realm specific npc/wandering monsters/critters - but terrain is a nice second place!

Both would be cool. The best thing about having the different realms is that you can have a different feel to your game depending on the setting. Comprehensive rules and terrain models would go a long way to support that.

That said, my top priority is a complete line of themed terrain for AoS in the same way 40k has. The initial batch of AoS terrain wasn't all that coherent or repeatable, and the Azyrite ruins aren't the kind of size I'd expect from GW.

Maybe Warcry will help with that.

Out of interest, what's so bad about Flesheater Courts? I keep reading they're overpowered but it's generally treated as self-evident and never explained.

First and foremost it is the amount of summoning. Some are estimating that FEC can summon over 700 points per game.

Its amount of summoning combined with some very steeply undercosted units that do much more damage than their points cost, giving the army a lot of extra free points combined with a lot of undercost units that are in essence more free points (since if for example a 200 point unit operates as a 350 point unit and you take say... 4 of them you are running as a force 600 points stronger than what you paid for. The amount you are undercost dictates how turbo-efficient you are... 600 points in 2000 points is over 25% more efficient than your points cost)

So combine the two. Free points from mass summoning + turbo efficiency with certain unit costs = paying 2000 points for an army that is operating as if it were 3000 or more points.

If AOS armies represented cars, then FEC is definitely in the turbo charged elite need for speed category. When they are paired up against most of the rest of the game running stock sedans, they are running on easy mode.

But this is also by design to appeal to spike players, I feel. Because certainly anyone with elementary school math designing the game would have seen this months before release since it took the community less than a minute to find it.

Thanks for the information, guys. I didn't realize GW was handing out mass free stuff again in this edition. What do you know.

Not everyone gets masses of free stuff or overly strong buffs. Just some factions. Many of their latest work sits on the line of free stuff but not game tilting. Like the khorne book, or the goblin book. Those are pretty well reigned in but fun and do give you some buffs. Then there is the skaven and FEC book. Those are on a whole other level. The fyre slayer book appears to be positioned fairly high up there too with the berzerkers being given a deep discount for what it does, but whether or not its on par with skaven or FEC or simply just tier1-lite remains to be seen (we don't have the book yet we only have the point costs and war scrolls to go off of)

Funnily enough, as a FEC player myself I don't find things undercosted at all, I find them all overcosted based on what they do. It's essentially just an attrition army that has no punch other than rolling buckets of dice. Ghouls die to a stiff breeze, Horrors have no Rend and are just bags of wounds, Flayers can fly and have some rend so aren't bad, and the monsters are nasty. There's regeneration, which means you have to really focus to get them down.

The real abusive things you see are spamming Archregents (each of whom can summon up to 200 points), or Gristlegore which can take Zombie Dragons and Terrorgheists as Battleline.

The rest is basically just an army of chaff with very little rend and very little mortal wounds outside of terrorgheists trying to roll a 6 to hit in order to get the auto 6 mortals

I think there is general agreement that ghouls are one of the few units where the 'costed to account for returning models' holds true. For a 10pt/model unit they are simply bad. But they come back in droves. Horrors are the same but could potentially use a 10 point bump upward. Dragons (mounted and unmounted) are reasonably costed for what they do as well. The ghast courtier IMO is undercosted on strict performance but since he eats one of your leader slots it is appropriate.

Everything else varies between overpowered to downright broken.

Others have covered that and the summoning well, another huge factor is one of the best command abilities in the game on an army that rarely needs CP for anything else outside 1-2 for summons the first round. Being able to fight again, immediately, is extremely strong. Couple it with units that have ridiculous offense and it gets exponentially worse.

The danger of FEC largely comes from the terrorgheist and the undercosted archregent. The terrorgheist has a bite with three attacks that does 6 mortals on a six. There is a mount trait which let's you reroll that. With the FEC allegiance ability you can can do that twice in a turn. If you are running gristlegore you can do that before anyone else fights. Also if it dies you can make it attack again. Finally before you you remove the mini it does D3 mortals to each nearby unit.
I haven't even mentioned the other attacks, it's 3 inch reach which means you better park your heroes 6 inches back,the summoning, the magic which can give it a 5+ mortal wound save and it's ability to heal itself. A gristlegore terrorgheist has a max damage potential of over 100 damage in a single round of combat. There isn't much in the game that will survive that.
There were three tournaments last weekend. FEC won all of them. A FEC army has gone undefeated in Every single tournament since the book came out.

I would agree that those two are the worst offenders on the OP terf.

Only thing that concerns me is that the lead time for GHB and CA tend to be a few months which means we probably won't see any point changes to FEC where it might be required.

You are correct on the timing there Eldarsif.

FEC is released too close to GHB, so I'm afraid many of the points costs will not be changed because of poor timing.

There was a playtester that tweeted last week in response to someone complaining about those books that mistakes were made with skaven and FEC and they learned from those mistakes with fyreslayers.

So at least they are recognizing that those books (skaven and fec) are mega bent.

I'm actually more curious about how they will be rectifying those books long term.

There was a similar situation with Tzeentch being busted a year and a half ago. They had to effectively change mechanics (at least with respect to pink/blue/brimstone horrors and do a huge points cost adjustment to bring them in line.

When do you think the General’s Handbook will drop?

Should be around July normally (was there right along soulwars box last year iirc).


And it's a book, so it's printed at least 4-6 months in advance, so it'll miss rectifications of the most recent battletomes. I'm really curious about the books that are going to be released in this "fast battletome drop" season for AoS.

If they keep dropping one to two a month as they are now then I'd wager we'll see Chaos and Destruction finished, Death is already finished and then its just mopping up with Order.

There's a few wildcards - eg a few armies that have 2.0 tomes but don't have terrain and/or endless spells as well as a few armies that are likely to be combined which will bring the number down.

There's also at least one new army coming this year to up the numbers. But by and large I figure by Christmas most of AoS will be running 2.0 Battletomes.

I think this time next year the Generals Handbook will be able to make a much more meaningful step toward addressing balance because by then (even accounting the 4-6 months lag time) much of the game will be running on the same edition.

Granted I am biased as I am mainly an FEC player so I like seeing my army in the limelight as opposed to the dumpster, but the real issue is Gristlegore. The other courts aren't that bad; nasty but not OP. Gristlegore is the main outlier. I would not mind seeing it nerfed because I don't like Gristlegore anyways (I like Hollowmourne, the Horror one, and Blisterskin, the Flayer one)

The other courts are mostly strong and I'm fine with mostly strong. I don't like bent. The summoning and gristlegore stuff is IMO bent.

Summoning and second turn are the two big bugbears that AoS has to contend with.


Whilst both can work both can easily be very broken.

I also think the second turn is just mechanically the wrong idea for a game where player turns basically locks one player into getting to play the game and the other only able to react in the form of dice rolls. Doing that for two turns in a row means one player gets hammered and can't actually respond to it. Sure it swings back to them, but by that point they've taken two turns of losses to enemy attacks - not as crippling if their enemy is close combat focused (since those alternate anyway and you can at least fight back); but if their opponent is magic or ranged based then its a harsh hammering without any retaliation.

I am super surprised if GW will ever disclose what percentage of people were pro double turn vs those against double turn are... It was asked in their grand survey.

Oddly enough, a few rules were called into question:

Battalions as one drop
First priority when deployed first
Double turn

But summoning wasn't being looked into however.

I think summoning as a mechanic works - its more the potential for it to get out of control for several armies that is brought into question. Ergo not the act of summoning itself but its effectiveness on the tabletop.

 Elmir wrote:
I am super surprised if GW will ever disclose what percentage of people were pro double turn vs those against double turn are... It was asked in their grand survey.

Oddly enough, a few rules were called into question:

Battalions as one drop
First priority when deployed first
Double turn

But summoning wasn't being looked into however.

If they are smart they won't disclose much. They will just say they have taken the survey into account for future editions etc. and they can hide behind it when making changes without actually disclosing the survey results.
Summoning mechanics are new, if they put them into question, they would have to revise battle tomes that are being printed and worked on right now. The time to question summoning will be when 3.0 is being made.