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.

Voss wrote:
Its not really a matter of 'excuses,' its just how the industry functions.

Even people who complain about it accept it anyway, and keep playing.

The ones still talking about it are those who did. The ones who didn't accept it are playing something else. I know, because I see them doing just that. They put their money elsewhere, lost sales for GW.

Which, despite that and in spite of the rules, GW has thrived like never before. Which shows them that those people who left really don't matter in the end, and the things they do wrong still get them record-setting profits so there's no need to fix it.

The community size is what keeps people in. Its the safe investment. They may enjoy Kings of War or 9th age or conquest more but they don't want to spend $800 on a new army only to have no one to play.

GW is too big to fail.

Wayniac wrote:
Which, despite that and in spite of the rules, GW has thrived like never before. Which shows them that those people who left really don't matter in the end, and the things they do wrong still get them record-setting profits so there's no need to fix it.

They're only setting records because they went from Kirby-era doing nothing to Roundtree-era responding to customers. Just because they have a lot of sales doesn't mean they couldn't have more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 auticus wrote:
The community size is what keeps people in. Its the safe investment. They may enjoy Kings of War or 9th age or conquest more but they don't want to spend $800 on a new army only to have no one to play.

GW is too big to fail.

I don't think that's true. While undoubtedly an immense factor in GWs popularity I feel that if GW did not produce a viable product it would fail. And at the end of the day GW produces really nice miniatures, and a ton of them.

So, since I finally got Chaos Warriors- and I mean, newer and better one...

I'm curious as to what I should get for AoS to go along with Slaves to Darkness. I'm not a huge fan of Archaon, or the Varanguard (Cool models, but a bit much).

Semi related. Which God book makes best use of Warriors/Knights in case the new book is terrible?

With the current rules, Knights are worthless. I don't mean that in an exaggerated sense. They are worthless. They have no role, they do no damage, they can't really do much of anything.

Warriors with shields are good at holding objectives. So... any army where they struggle to hold objectives could use warriors to sit on something.

Kinda figured. I've had limited success with Knights, Daemon Mounted Lord and Blades in Nurgle but that is approaching Rube Goldberg levels of complexity for what other factions pull off more easily.

Of the four, Khorne Knights are probably best. Adding on additional attacks is probably the best call. Slaanesh Knights got access to battalion rules now though (in October WD), but not much has been said if they’re viable.

Generally speaking, Nurgle. The Harbinger of Decay gives them a 5+ FnP which makes them crazy durable. And knights have a good combo within Nurgle as well (see below). Knights are tricky because their stats are such that they make poor cavalry, use them like monstrous infantry and you'll have more success. And don't take the lances.

 auticus wrote:
With the current rules, Knights are worthless. I don't mean that in an exaggerated sense. They are worthless. They have no role, they do no damage, they can't really do much of anything.

Warriors with shields are good at holding objectives. So... any army where they struggle to hold objectives could use warriors to sit on something.

Not so--Nurgle uses them with a CL on Daemonic plus Blades of Putrefaction to deal MWs on 5+ to hit.

But I would not be surprised to see new warscrolls, which will change things.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
So, since I finally got Chaos Warriors- and I mean, newer and better one...

I but wait hold on they aren't out yet


As for advice right now I'd work on building a solid core of the models that aren't being replaced but are highly unlikely to vanish. Things like sorcerers, chariots, manticore, warshrine etc... You might even consider some of the current warriors and knights to bolster the new ones to be-released.

Otherwise its hard to say because Chaos hasn't got a battletome yet (which is why their rules are currently bad). You might consider a warcry warband. They already have their stats (rules download tab on the gw store page) and they are unlikely to change - its most likely that they will functionally replace marauders as a cheap chaff/mass unit. However their individual natures also shine through; so the Iron Golems have the best saves and are the most tanky; whilst Untamed Beasts are a faster hard hitting group etc....

TGA down for anyone else?

 lord marcus wrote:
TGA down for anyone else?

Happens from time to time. It’ll be back in a day or so.

 nels1031 wrote:

 lord marcus wrote:
TGA down for anyone else?

Happens from time to time. It’ll be back in a day or so.

Glad it wasn’t just me.

It's back up for me.

Was for me as well. Clear your cache - should fix it. Does for me.

 Eldarain wrote:
Semi related. Which God book makes best use of Warriors/Knights in case the new book is terrible?

Worries dispelled, eh?

Anyways, quoting myself from another thread just to throw it out there:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
Is this the new normal?

Around the start of AoS 2nd edition the game had been on a trend of improved balance for some time. Yes it was terrible by the standard of any other wargame but it was still a trend of improvement. 2019 has seen a backslide of that over the course of the year, not so much in the frequency of units/abilities that are imbalanced but more in the degree. DoK would stack buffs to get re-rolls on everything, but now we have a 110 chaos sorcerer who does that on his own. LoN would summon back slain units with the general, Slaanesh summons back that much then more off any hero. Kurnoth hunters get a 3+ re-rollable save in the combat phase if they don't charge and stay in their woods for cover, Mortek guard get that whenever they want.

I feel like GW is just cycling through another period of 'who cares about well-designed rules' and will swing back to 'oh, that affects our sales' eventually. For me GW balance is generally tolerable because the games & miniatures are so much fun, but the situation is rapidly becoming something where I just don't want to engage in matched play at all.

So yes, this is the new normal.

^^^^^^

I endorse Ninth's message.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Semi related. Which God book makes best use of Warriors/Knights in case the new book is terrible?

Worries dispelled, eh?

Anyways, quoting myself from another thread just to throw it out there:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
Is this the new normal?

Around the start of AoS 2nd edition the game had been on a trend of improved balance for some time. Yes it was terrible by the standard of any other wargame but it was still a trend of improvement. 2019 has seen a backslide of that over the course of the year, not so much in the frequency of units/abilities that are imbalanced but more in the degree. DoK would stack buffs to get re-rolls on everything, but now we have a 110 chaos sorcerer who does that on his own. LoN would summon back slain units with the general, Slaanesh summons back that much then more off any hero. Kurnoth hunters get a 3+ re-rollable save in the combat phase if they don't charge and stay in their woods for cover, Mortek guard get that whenever they want.

I feel like GW is just cycling through another period of 'who cares about well-designed rules' and will swing back to 'oh, that affects our sales' eventually. For me GW balance is generally tolerable because the games & miniatures are so much fun, but the situation is rapidly becoming something where I just don't want to engage in matched play at all.

So yes, this is the new normal.

It's true. New book both excites and depresses me. My primary opponent is Petro Mortek spam Reapers so having something even close to their nonsense is nice but the game doesn't seem in a great place if this is what is required to compete. My gobbos don't seem to have anything to contend with the Bonereapers.

Stone trolls are the gloomspite counter to bonereapers. Their MW shooting not-attack can put damage on characters (forcing use of boneshaper/Katakros heals on them) while rend -2 does a number on armor saves. The ideal formation would be a line of stabbas with trolls behind them. That way they must suffer nets and swinging on chaff while also getting beat upside the head.

That works pretty well against most things, for that matter...

I have also seen Mangler Squigs mess up Bonereapers units. I don't know if that was luck or the Gitz player knew their units really well while the Bonereaper player was still learning theirs or what though. Looking at its warscroll seems pretty dangerous to me.

Might have just been the evils of dice but I've tried Stone Trolls fighting over the gobbos with 10 Fanatics hidden too and it all bounces off the Guard.

Trying for a Hand of Gork to get some Trolls or Fanatics into Arkhan or Katakros maybe.

The best I've done with the Mangler is Runeblade and Fight another day. He's sitting on -1-2 to hit constantly because of Katakros and that damn terrain piece.

Eventually some Morteks get a hold of him and one shot him. Unreal how much offense they can pump out of such a tough unit.

Honestly I think Ossiarchs would be fine if GW got rid of Petrifax or adjusted its save bonus. A +1 save is just impossibly hard to pass on. Kind of a shame because its the most likely one people iwll pick and yet there's some fun alternative forces like crematorians.

Of course some like the one that counters mages is "more" for set matches if you know you're going against a magic heavy army.

The +1 to save is the best bonus even in a vacuum, but it is particularly good on bonereapers since they already have a 4+ base anyways and their main battleline unit has easy access to re-rolls. On top of that the 'cost' to a sub-faction is generally a sub-par artifact & command trait but those of Petrifax are excellent and would see use even if they were on their own. On top of that their command ability is excellent (and a hilariously huge upgrade from the crematorians one). If the petrifax ability just dropped the +1 save entirely with nothing to replace it, it would still be worth taking.

Hell, the inverse (+1 to saves but general gets no command trait & the army loses its first artifact) would still be overpowered!

I've played three games thus far, two without using Petrifex Trait and one with it. 2x 1000pt games against Khorne Mortals, different lists but same player. The first game was an absolute slaughter, by the end of it I was down 6 Mortek Guard and had just about wiped the guy. His list was a melee-buff-focused khorne mortals list with only one priest.
In his second game, it was a different list against my same list since he wanted to play it again. Took a very different list, with Hexgorgers, Wrathaxe and two priests. Prolific use of Blood Boil and Judgements tore my army apart, and that sort of damage it wouldn't matter if I was Petrifex or not.

Third game was 1500pts against Flesh-eater courts. I forgot how to play against Feeding Frenzy, and lost just about half my army to a single terrorghiest top of turn 1.

Ossiarchs are slow, and weak against heavy mortal wound output. High quality, but low wound count. And it certainly seems like it'll be hard to play, so I'm hoping to get more practice in with them to better learn how to play the army. Their style is very different from how I'm used to playing my other armies. And probably just learn how to play better overall

There is little Ossiarchs can do against ranged MW output, unless the source can be killed by crawlers. In melee you just need to use the harvester-guard combo though.

Yep, I'd agree whole hearted with that. Though as always, Royal Terrorghiests are the exception and are the counter to everything. I've only got one crawler, but I'm playing a rematch vs the same FEC player and hoping it'll do work... and hoping that I play better and remember that dragons are fast

Yeah obviously if something is game-breaking it's just that. The FEC Terry can put out enough MWs that even cancelling half of them isn't enough.

Ossiarchs might actually have one of the few armies that could reliable run minimum units in multiples and do better than running them as fewer larger units.

They've a strong enough save to keep units alive from regular attacks, whilst at the same time going against a high MW model or army; spreading out the number of units means the other army has to use more units to attack with to cut the Ossiarchs down. Dealing 20MW to a unit of 20 Mortek is deadly; but if you had those as two units of 10 suddenly half those attacks are wasted. Taking two turns to take out the same number of units.

Well if you have a harvester behind them 20 Mortek guard will take 48 MWs to remove (6+ deathless minions, 4+ revive). The advantage being potential return shenanigans (if he, say, kills 10 you could remove them from the back and make a daisy chain 20" long over to an objective, squishy character, etc) and buffing them with spells or command abilities (notably the rend increase petrifax have).