AoS NEW *rumor*

[Canas]

"Fairly well known fact"?. That is a big yikes right there man.

Go look at the complaints certain writers have gotten fairly consistently when writing a codex for an army of which it's known they don't like it's fluff or playstyle and turning in one of the weaker rulebooks of that edition. Or alternativly, the similarly consistent complaints about certain writers writing overpowered rules for their favorite factions & playstyles. I don't think I know any other game where individual writers/designers get blamed of favoritisme so consistently. Usually it's just the leadwriter and whatever faction/class/etc. he favours/hates with the most complaints by far and the rest hovers somewhere in the middle without too many complaints of favoritism.

 

[Nart]

Even if Vanari can cast any spell, they are still limited to one per turn. If they don't cast power of hysh, their damage is minimal. And best spells are fairly difficult to cast, if they are not auto-cast by teclis. And they would be way easier to unbind.

What is confusing to me is, actually, how does the Aetherquartz work. Nothing says that used Stash is lost. But what is the point of syar then with their two stashes?

 

[Canas]

Even if Vanari can cast any spell, they are still limited to one per turn. If they don't cast power of hysh, their damage is minimal. And best spells are fairly difficult to cast, if they are not auto-cast by teclis. And they would be way easier to unbind.

Meh, given that the Horrors explicitly lost this ability I'd say it's still extremely good to have. It brings some much needed flexibility and allows you to bring a far greater arsenal of spells. Teclis "only" has 4 spellcasts, but like 10 good (endless) spells. This way the lower priority spells can be done by the battleline. Aside from that, there's bound to be situations in which power of hysh won't be as usefull.

Definitly seems to be an oversight though as they don't seem to use it in the battlereport in the latest white dwarf (terrible battle though, they seem to screw up multiple mechanics on both sides and the chaos player seem to only attempt to cast 3 spells during the entire battle, at least 2 of which fail. Hell at one point they seem to imply teclis outright prevents spellcasting and the sorceror lord doesn't even attempt his cast instead only using orecular visions)

What is confusing to me is, actually, how does the Aetherquartz work. Nothing says that used Stash is lost. But what is the point of syar then with their two stashes?

Somewhere they said they can only use it once per battle and that the stash is then "consumed". Not sure where it was though.

 

[Krissey]

Go look at the complaints certain writers have gotten fairly consistently when writing a codex for an army of which it's known they don't like it's fluff or playstyle and turning in one of the weaker rulebooks of that edition. Or alternativly, the similarly consistent complaints about certain writers writing overpowered rules for their favorite factions & playstyles. I don't think I know any other game where individual writers/designers get blamed of favoritisme so consistently. Usually it's just the leadwriter and whatever faction/class/etc. he favours/hates with the most complaints by far and the rest hovers somewhere in the middle without too many complaints of favoritism.

I don’t think Matt Ward works there anymore.... and there’s no ultramarines in AoS.

 

[Canas]

I don’t think Matt Ward works there anymore.... and there’s no ultramarines in AoS.

He's not the only one facing these complaints though he might've been the worst example. Nor did he exclusivly work on 40K (and judging by the internet, his WHFB work isn't necesarly any less problematic)

And regardless, a reputation like that is hard to lose, even if the offending writers have since left.

 

[Putzfrau]

@Canas I think you'll be surprised when you play against LRR. The people that have played games with and against are not reporting that it feels unfairly strong, but that its a very difficult army to get the most out of.

I still think teclis is going to be difficult to utilize correctly at the highest levels. So many points and only a 4+ save.

 

[Nart]

I'll be testing LRR against OBR in TTS today. Will write a short battle overview here.

 

[ILKAIN]

"Fairly well known fact"?. That is a big yikes right there man.

why "yikes"? its factual.

GW, across both AOS and 40K has had this issue as far back as I have been playing... just look at Tyranids. when the author was a player they had amazing rules hands down (like 4th). custom genes, wide range of effective weapons, in game rules that made sense to their lore like ranged weapons all being based on the STR of the model. when 5th rolled around all the fun stuff that was also balanced was homogenized into much weaker forms. the staple of the big guys (carnifex) had its price double and lost almost all of its customization options... to the point of being almost useless (this is where the distraction carnifex term originated, because it was no longer good for anything more than that, as opposed to todays usage where its both a distraction but something that has to be dealt with)

 

[Canas]

I'll be testing LRR against OBR in TTS today. Will write a short battle overview here.

They've already put the entire battletome in TTS? That's quick given that it hasn't officially released yet.

 

[Nart]

They've already put the entire battletome in TTS?

We have the full rules already. And quite a few models in TTS. I will bring some proxies of course. The aim is to test the strength, only this.

 

[Canas]

I know everything's been leaked, just surprised how quickly they've implemented it in TTS based on grainy pictures of leaks in a language you might not necesarly kno. Would've expected people to want to wait till they have the official rules themselves so they can check everything themselves and don't have to rely on grainy pictures.

 

[Grotpunter]

why "yikes"? its factual.

Please supply the clear evidence since it is "factual". I dont care about WHFB or 40K. We are playing AoS.

There have been accusations that rule writer X made fluffy and narrative books where as rule writer Y made purely competitive and OP books. This conspiracy theory has been shot down multiple times too.

 

[ILKAIN]

Please supply the clear evidence since it is "factual". I dont care about WHFB or 40K. We are playing AoS.

There have been accusations that rule writer X made fluffy and narrative books where as rule writer Y made purely competitive and OP books. This conspiracy theory has been shot down multiple times too.

sorry I don't have clips of my AOL cha rooms from the late 90's and early 2000's lol

please provide proof that its a conspiracy theory.

 

[Putzfrau]

Almost every book since AoS 2.0 dropped has been competitive with like, maybe one exception.

I don't know if it's really fair to hold GW to a book writing problem they had over 20 years ago. It was a different time then. Also, most people here weren't even playing the game 20 years ago so i don't know why it's even being brought up.

Tyranids from fourth edition 40k? Really? I don't know if the busted carnifex spam lists is really what I would consider good book writing, but GW did them dirty in 5th i'll give you that.

Regardless, that wasn't even the last time nids were good. Sean Nayden won the LVO with his infamous Lictor Shame list in like 2015. They were very strong in early 8th with flyrant spam, and they've had middling success since then.

 

[ILKAIN]

I dont care about WHFB or 40K. We are playing AoS.

I did provide evidence (not proof there is a difference), and provided well known examples of its occurrence

you dismissed it because it was 40k instead of AoS (which are both under GW and the claim is against GW... not AoS) and admitted as much with this single response. Dismissal of evidence without providing counter evidence is called "A Priori Dismissal"... might wanna work on that.

 

[ILKAIN]

Almost every book since AoS 2.0 dropped has been competitive with like, maybe one exception.

I don't know if it's really fair to hold GW to a book writing problem they had over 20 years ago. It was a different time then. Also, most people here weren't even playing the game 20 years ago so i don't know why it's even being brought up.

Tyranids from fourth edition 40k? Really? That wasn't even the last time nids were good. Sean Nayden won the LVO in 7th ed with his infamous Lictor Spam list. They were very strong in early 8th with flyrant spam, and they've had middling success since then.

because I WAS playing 20 years ago. because it did happen, and it established a reputation that GW has yet to shake. and because dismissal of past offences is tantamount to revisionist history in the confines of evaluating a game that has existed for 30+ years, especially when there are still potential issues with this.

 

[Putzfrau]

because I WAS playing 20 years ago. because it did happen, and it established a reputation that GW has yet to shake. and because dismissal of past offences is tantamount to revisionist history in the confines of evaluating a game that has existed for 30+ years, especially when there are still potential issues with this.

yet to shake TO YOU. Let's not pretend like just because you have this issue that everyone does.

I've been playing since 3rd edition 40k and whatever edition that was of WHFB, and i do not share those same beliefs. I think GW has gotten massively MASSIVELY better at writing books, and Age of Sigmar 2.0 is the pinnacle of all that progress. Almost every single book has been strong, unique, and my biggest complaint is they should have never created changehost, and they should have been better about keeping shooting as a less prominent piece of the game. Every army that depends heavily on shooting is impossible to balance properly, and it shows with KO. That army has been yanked around more than any other and they waffle wildly between absolutely busted and completely unusable. However, even with that said I do think the new KO book has a nice balance to it. It doesn't feel overly strong, but still punishes some armies too much and other armies too little.

And GW really did sylvaneth dirty. I feel bad for sylvaneth players, it's the one blemish amongst mostly good releases.

You can't say with a straight face that GW is the same company they were 30 years ago. Their design philosophy is totally different, and it shows. It does your argument no favors to bring up evidence from 30 years ago, because that's just simply no longer relevant to the conversation of today.

 

[Canas]

Please supply the clear evidence since it is "factual". I dont care about WHFB or 40K. We are playing AoS.

It's the same set of writers, you honestly think they suddenly leave behind their flaws as a writer when they happen to work on an AoS project?

As for favoritism shown so far in AoS:
- SCE getting all the releases and being good at everything, and being involved in all the fluff when AoS started, though they seem to have fallen from grace, and fallen quite deeply (when was the last SCE release actually?)
- Undeath getting all the releases and being good at everything from malign sorceries onward and being the only grand alliance which forms an even vaguely united front for some reason.
- Destruction factions being fairly consistently underwhelming, both in terms of fluff & crunch. The only destruction that seems to have gotten genuine love seems to be the gits. Everything else was unceremoniously turned into soup battletomes which don't necesarly have much of a connection between their subfactions, with greenskins especially losing a decent chunk of models.
- Lumineth, see aforementioned criticism in the last few pages of this topic.
- Dwarves getting relativly little love in any of their factions, few models, underwhelming updates.
- Sylvaneth have gotten similarly little love since their inception, though at least they've been in one of those boxed sets.
- Cities of sigmar, it's just a soup battalion with whatever left-overs they could be bothered to maintain. Has had exactly 0 new releases since AoS. In general AoS lacks a faction of "normal" people. Plenty of superpowered demigod factions, or daemons, or creepy soul-eating elves that summon a mystical sea for their fishmounts. But "normal" people are so hidden you'd be forgiven for thinking they don't exist
- Seraphon: slightly better than CoS in terms of new releases, at least we got a terrain piece, though we're severly lacking in terms of fluffy abilities and they don't seem to really know what they want to do with us. So we get 2 wildly different subfactions, which we're already seeing lead to balance issues (Coalesced salamanders are fine, Starborne ones are super powerfull can't nerf one without nerfing the other in the current set up....)

Now before you go of on the tangent of "yeah but they're competitive". Yeah, in terms of competitiveness AoS has been doing a decent enough job. But with respect to favoritism it isn't just a matter of competitiveness, there's also dissapointing fluff, underwhelming updates (no new models, or just a number's tweak ruleswise but little to improve boring or problematic rules) as well as certain factions gaining cool fluffy abilities while others have essentially competitive rules but don't represent their armies in the slightest. For example when I think Seraphon I don't think Salamander spam, I'd think steggagedon (or at least 75% of a steggagedon, i guess we'l always need some footsoldiers to be cannonfodder), guess which of those two is a competitive list and which one is a jokelist.

 

[ILKAIN]

yet to shake TO YOU. Let's not pretend like just because you have this issue that everyone does.

I've been playing since 3rd edition 40k, and i do not share those same beliefs. I think GW has gotten massively MASSIVELY better at writing books, and Age of Sigmar 2.0 is the pinnacle of all that progress. Almost every single book has been strong, unique, and my biggest complaint is they should have never created changehost, and they should have been better about keeping shooting as a less prominent piece of the game. Every army that depends heavily on shooting is impossible to balance properly, and it shows with KO. That army has been yanked around more than any other and they waffle wildly between absolutely busted and completely unusable.

And GW really did sylvaneth dirty. I feel bad for sylvaneth players, it's the one blemish amongst mostly good releases.

you realize my commentary was a supplement to another player with the same issues right? so no, not JUST ME lol. additionally... even along your way of thinking... BoC?

but that's not the issue nor the complaint. the complaint isn't the company doing a faction dirty, its that if a project lead or author of a codex/battle tome is a player or fan of the assigned faction, that faction is better done than a book in which the lead/author is not a player or fan of the faction. this is not a phenomena restricted to GW in any way. I have been a project lead on multiple programs for DHS, and a leader of soldiers in combat. the amount of effort or motivation/passion put into a project/mission is ALWAYS determined by the enjoyment of the project by the workers. checking the box means sure, you might get a job done that "accomplishes the mission" but if your team wasn't happy with their assignment, they will not produce as good a product as a team that is.

its a HUMAN trait, just one that is more noticeable in a closed situation of a single company whos history is documented across 30+ years.

 

[Putzfrau]

Now you're just complaining to complain. This is a ridiculous conversation.

If you seriously think all of those things then it's quite obvious your problem is simply with Age of Sigmar, so i'd suggest finding a game that is more suited to what you're looking for.

I can't take anyone seriously who complains about Cities. That book is simply an incredible collection of rules that did so much for saving a ton of the generic garbage left over from WHFB.

Destruction is probably the single strongest allegiance right now. Warclans is one of the best, and most thematic books ever released, and while mawtribes could have done a better job with the on-foot side of things, it still is a ton of fun on the tabletop and one of the most interesting armies in the game.

Seraphon have one of the largest model ranges and best books out at the moment. There's hardly anything to complain about unless its saurus warriors...

I'm sorry dude, but I think you're being unnecessarily negative and nitpicking issues just to nitpick. I dont think anything you stated is fact, and i disagree strongly with almost every single opinion you listed.