AoS NEW *rumor*

[Jason839]

If its not bolded (which its not) it doesnt refer to the keyword but a warscroll name. A ripper chief would not benefit unless i am mistaken. Glad to be wrong as it feels kinda janky but who knows.

Ripperdactyl is bold in the copy of the book I have on azyr. Typo in the paper book maybe?

 

[Putzfrau]

Ripperdactyl is bold in the copy of the book I have on azyr. Typo in the paper book maybe?

I was looking at the warscroll on the app, but my Azyr book also is showing it as bolded. Very interesting.

IMO book tends to trump app in situations like this, so sounds like bloat toads are back on the menu for ripper chiefs!

edit: it's also bolded in my warscroll cards, so i would say that about confirms it.

 

[LordBaconBane]

I was looking at the warscroll on the app, but my Azyr book also is showing it as bolded. Very interesting.

IMO book tends to trump app in situations like this, so sounds like bloat toads are back on the menu for ripper chiefs!

Official card is bold.

 

[Jason839]

It looks like a problem with the app. Free warscroll wasn't copied properly.

 

[Putzfrau]

Official card is bold.

Sweet.

IMO ripper chief should have its own toad. The blot toad chief or something. And it gives rend... or just brings back the old warscroll hehe

 

[LordBaconBane]

Sweet.

IMO ripper chief should have its own toad. The blot toad chief or something. And it gives rend... or just brings back the old warscroll hehe

Yup. I mentioned it before, but I wonder if they don't give it a toad because the kit only comes with one.

 

[Just A Skink]

Yup. I mentioned it before, but I wonder if they don't give it a toad because the kit only comes with one.

True. But you need to have more than one kit to have a ripper unit plus ripper chief, so at least 2 toads. It would be cool if the ripper chief had his own toad. It would also be good if the terradon chief had a rock.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

If its not bolded (which its not) it doesnt refer to the keyword but a warscroll name. A ripper chief would not benefit unless i am mistaken. Glad to be wrong as it feels kinda janky but who knows.

That has actually been revoked thanks to the flash eater corts FaQ. So far they are the only ones who have been directly change but president has been set.

 

[Carnikang]

That has actually been revoked thanks to the flash eater courts FaQ. So far they are the only ones who have been directly change but president has been set.

That is a precedent now. Where else might that be applicable? The Oldblood for Sunclaw perhaps?

 

[Erta Wanderer]

That is a precedent now. Where else might that be applicable? The Oldblood for Sunclaw perhaps?

That is the fear some of us have. orks are worried to, as they use non bold to bring mawcrushers

 

[Putzfrau]

That has actually been revoked thanks to the flash eater corts FaQ. So far they are the only ones who have been directly change but president has been set.

Isn't that in specific reference to battalions tho? The whole ghoul king on terrogheist thing had to do with the whole "subhead" section in the core rules about battalions.

 

[Just A Skink]

I do hope they don’t alter the Oldblood on Carno in the Sunclaw battalion. I think it’s a good boost for saurus. That battalion would be a little less appealing if it’s just on foot heroes.

 

[Dread Saurian]

This is the type of stuff that makes me feel like we are playing totally different armies.

I can't agree with any of that. It's unnecessarily exaggerated and paints a picture of an army that struggles to do anything when seraphon is essentially the exact opposite.

If you truly believe all of those things i'd argue it's not a book problem it's a perception problem.

We simply do not win be being a counter army. We win by taking entire armies off the table in 2 turns. We win by having more flexibility than entire factions, let alone armies. We win by having power in every single phase of the game, and the power in each of those phases is not insignificant.

I am tired of having to argue that the seraphon book is not a handful of garbage scrolls held up by kroak and a starpriest buff. I feel like i'm literally taking the least controversial stances and it's still a nonstop battle about anything that could suggest seraphon might actually be pretty damn good. I literally said carnosaurs were "borderline efficient" at 210 points which is such a massive undersell it genuinely blows my mind it's met with such firm dismissal.

Anyone who needs evidence to that should try to get more first hand experience using the army. IMO, it's extremely apparent as you play more games. If you aren't or can't get that first hand experience, then let's at least factor that in to the judgements being made. Or if your issues are entirely based on the list you play, we can at least acknowledge that. Warriors are clearly not the most op thing on the planet, but allowing them to shape your perception of the entire book does you a disservice (If thats what's happening, if not my mistake).



If you feel like we don't have a single option you can put into someone's backline that'll pull their attention id also suggest playing more games and seeing if you still feel that way.

I simply do not look at our army book and see what you see and I haven't had any in-game experience thats made me feel similarly. I've often flanked with knights or carnosaurs (why a carnosaur doesn't count is beyond me, but whatever) or salamanders or hell, even rippers to moderate effect.

I'm obviously in the minority here in my beliefs and that's fine. But I think when there's such a drastic difference in something as basic as the fundamental perception of the warscrolls, it doesn't leave much room for more discussion so ill still have to respectfully agree or to disagree and leave it at that.

As mentioned, hopefully all your fears are unfounded and everyone can get some more games in with the new book soon. Playing through different builds has genuinely been the most fun I've had playing age of sigmar. Almost everything feels viable and depending on the army and skill level of my opponent there's an army option for almost any kind of "social contract" you want to make with your opponent. Hopefully people can go out and play games soonish and everyone gets to experience that same feeling

Problem not enough mindless charging. Solution. More carnosaurs

 

[Erta Wanderer]

Isn't that in specific reference to battalions tho? The whole ghoul king on terrogheist thing had to do with the whole "subhead" section in the core rules about battalions.

maybe so but GW rules tend to be general not specific

 

[Killer Angel]

We have very few options that can be put in someones backline unsupported and draw more attention than simply being stalled by a single screen until something more important can come wipe them out. I mean sure, that screen is some attention. But it's not exactly a high stakes effort to fight off a flanking manouvre.


Not counting the carnosaur cuz it's a 200+ hero on a behemoth making it a "big" unit with a high pointvalue. Any hero at that scale will draw attention by sheer virtue of being a 200+ point hero on a behemoth, even if it is a terrible one.



Try comparing a flanking with our stuff with say a flanking using paladors, or a mournfang pack, or a lone unit of gore-grunta's, idoneth eels. Stuff like that will smash through without breaking stride if your opponent only sends a basic screen to stall them. They can pretty much continue charging into fodder indefinitly without ever slowing down. And all of them are generally only a secondary threat (or there's simply several units of them and together they form the main threat).Our stuff in contrast is liable to already get stuck on the first screen and lose a couple wounds when its not supported, getting dragged down after running into only 2 or 3 screens.

We don't really have any option in this catagory of secondary medium level threats that can function independently from the main army. Usually around a 150 points, can be buffed but only needs those buffs to deal with major opponents. We basicly just have 200+ point main threat combo's and <100 point cannonfodder which barely scores a wound while screening, and very little in between. And imho that is a major designflaw.

Those armies don't have the same options we do. Every army doesn't do everything exactly the same. We achieve the same result with units that don't necessarily fit into this hyper specific niche you' seem to have constructed (i'd argue somewhat arbitrarily, the result is whats important not the point cost or 'non hero status' of the unit.)

And at what point in a game are you needing a flanking unit to run through "2 or 3 screens" ?

With every argument it doesnt feel like i gain a deeper understanding of your point, but instead the gap between the game i feel like i'm playing and the game your describing grows even larger.

I never once since this book came out have needed specifically an unbuffed 150 point unit to be able to charge through 2 or 3 screens. It is simply not a scenario i've ever found myself in, and i've played a ton of games with the new book. Like, a lot. I have never once thought to myself "if only i had gore gruntas or palladors or mournfang." We have salamanders, who all those units wish they were, and carnosaurs/stegs but for some arbitrary reason those can't count.

i have found myself wishing for eels, but honestly who hasnt. That unit is insane and there are literally no other units in the entire game like it. In isolation, it's arguably the single best warscroll in the entire game. Salamanders give them a run for their money, but yeah. Eels are wild.

Just my two cps.

Let's be clear: Seraphon is a strong army.
We can performa at a great level in every single phase of the game. Very good movement, solid magic (beside Kroak a Slann is no slouch, plus worldwide dispel and bound endless spells), good shooting and good melee.
this was not self-evident when seraphon 2.0 arrived, but we'll talk about it later

To have all of this power, however, we NEED combo, synergies and peculiar builds. Seraphon IS NOT an easy army to play, it requires a mid-high level of competence to exploit its potential.

Why? well, because many of our warscrolls are mediocre. Or at least, that was our first impression looking at Seraphon 2.0, and that impression is not baseless.
Compare skinks to plague monks. Take a look at the eels.
While we require active synergies, many armies have plenty of good stuff merely by existing, as for example Ossiarch, that enjoy a combo of good warscrolls and solid passive bonuses.
There are armies that are good and don't require a high level of competence.
As a consequence, usually we select a portion of the battlefield where we are going to concentrate our buffs, thus having a local strong superiority. Other armies can simply afford to deliver punches anywhere, because the single parts don't require that much of a work, except waiting for a particular general bonus to trigger.

Now, the twist: are our warscrolls really mediocre?
i don't think so. we shine when we buff our units via magic and/or synergies... AND THAT'S HOW AoS IS SUPPOSED TO WORK.
Since its beginning, when bonuses were stackable, AoS has always been a game where the victory was not achieved by the single unit(s), but by the ability of the player to pump the army.

So, i'd say that our warscrolls are not bad.... they are right; it's just that we look at Eels and we see that those are crazily good by themselves.
The fact is that Eels and similar warscrolls, go against the core spirit of the game.
It's not that we are bad. it's them that are stronger than they should be.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

So, i'd say that our warscrolls are not bad.... they are right; it's just that we look at Eels and we see that those are crazily good by themselves.
The fact is that Eels and similar warscrolls, go against the core spirit of the game.
It's not that we are bad. it's them that are stronger than they should be.

uh they are both normal. there are just as many very good warscrolls as there are buffable ones even in the same army. having a powerful warscroll is not wrong or if it is you are going to have to have a talk with IJ BS IDK FEC OMT BCR CoS Skaven SCE KO SoB OBR Sylvaneth DoZ LRL. thats more then half of the armies in AoS and all of them have (or had before creep got them) very good warscrolls that don't need buffing to work. buffable units are just as common they are both valid. sometimes a unbuffed unit breaks the game(keepers eels ect.) sometime a buffable unit does(Hearth guard, old stanch cast stardrake, plague monks).

 

[Canas]

Personally, I don't think the Troglodon fits to give saurus a bonus. Although I do wish saurus had a bit more love. Trogs obviously seemed focused on helping the slann specifically, or perhaps casting in general.

Even though a +1 to cast makes sense, if just feels repetitive. What about a CA to give a slann (since it is an oracle of the slann) or perhaps any caster within 6" (or 8"?) an extra cast? Or, if that's too powerful maybe just access to an extra spell? Or maybe even give a slann access to whatever skink spell the oracle knows? That way you either move out the Trog to use the "any range" casting or you keep it really close to grant more versatility.

Making it synergize with other casters in short range would probably not be a good idea; you're liable to end up seeing your big behemoth just standing in a corner alongside the other casters because all of our other casters are squishy cowards who don't want to be anywhere near danger. Which imho doesn't exactly fit the style of a behemoth. Not unless you make it an artillery style behemoth like the squig gobba from forgeworld and it has something else to do than stand back and look pretty.

Those armies don't have the same options we do. Every army doesn't do everything exactly the same. We achieve the same result with units that don't necessarily fit into this hyper specific niche you' seem to have constructed (i'd argue somewhat arbitrarily, the result is whats important not the point cost or 'non hero status' of the unit.)

The hero status isn't the most important part, though it helps, as heroes are force multipliers with their buffs, can carry artifacts, can have traits etc. making heroes inherently valuable to kill. The important part is that it's a 200+ model. It's by definition valuable because its a decent chunk of your total point value (on top of the aforementioned bonus value it simply being a hero brings). If your opponent seperates >10% worth of his army from the main body it's nearly always worth formulating a proper response to that.

And yeah, obviously the exact point limit is arbitray, there's no real reason why it should be 200+ and not 210+ or 190+. But you need to pick something. And most point ranges do fall in certain classes. E.g. a unit of ~100 points tends to be basic battleline or a minor support hero, ~150 tends to be more elite troops that can function independly or the more powerfull heroes, 200+ tends to be where the behemoths, the most powerfull heroes & most elite units are. 200 also seems to be more or less the minimum for combo's to start (e.g. 1 MSU knights + any relevant buff hero is already 210+ or so). Hence I took 200+ as a cut-off point

And at what point in a game are you needing a flanking unit to run through "2 or 3 screens" ?

I need it because of what @Killer Angel says

As a consequence, usually we select a portion of the battlefield where we are going to concentrate our buffs, thus having a local strong superiority. Other armies can simply afford to deliver punches anywhere

Achieving local superiority isn't hard for us. However, we are hyperfocussed on creating local superiourity in one specific spot, and sacrifice nearly all combat effectiveness in every other area for it.

While focusing on local superiority is fine, we shouldn't be completely harmless everywhere else.
Imho, those places where we are not currently focused should at least retain the ability fight back. But right now, whereever we don't have local superiority we basicly only have bodies to be fed into the meatgrinder and our opponents can pretty much attack with impunity, even their own fodder won't have terribly much to fear.

We're basicly complete feast or famine when it concerns local combat prowess. Either there's at least 200-300 points worth of seraphon locally for a big scary combo or behemoth, or it's sub 200 points worth of cannonfodder that'l struggle to do more than a handfull of wounds against even basic opponents in a single round. There's no in between, like the aforementioned eels/palladors/etc. who might not achieve direct local superiority against the more powerfull foes, but can at least threaten them, and who will utterly crush basic units & screens with ease.

So, i'd say that our warscrolls are not bad.... they are right; it's just that we look at Eels and we see that those are crazily good by themselves.
The fact is that Eels and similar warscrolls, go against the core spirit of the game.
It's not that we are bad. it's them that are stronger than they should be.

Might be, but it appears like GW themselves seem to think differently/have forgotten. There's very few armies that seem to be as reliant on active synergies as us. Most seem to rely much more on raw warscrolls and passive synergies.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

Might be, but it appears like GW themselves seem to think differently/have forgotten. There's very few armies that seem to be as reliant on active synergies as us. Most seem to rely much more on raw warscrolls and passive synergies.

hmm who else khorn, parts of cities, DoK, uuuuh death? i think that's it not many armies out there that need 3 or more overlapping heroes to work. most work off of 1 maybe 2 or just run in power pairs.

 

[Killer Angel]

Might be, but it appears like GW themselves seem to think differently/have forgotten. There's very few armies that seem to be as reliant on active synergies as us. Most seem to rely much more on raw warscrolls and passive synergies.

Pretty much. I believe that AoS, as a game, has evolved in its mechanics.

 

[Erta Wanderer]

Pretty much. I believe that AoS, as a game, has evolved in its mechanics.

didn't SoB just come out though? there are almost no buffs in that book. sure GW buggered it up royaly but they are still making attempts to make unbuffed armies. KO is also fairly new and they have very few buffs. stone horns, phoenix guard, keepers, marauders, pinks . all of those came out in the last year and a half and they all are unbuffed good warscrolls. so out of the last 8 books at least 5 of them have that as a option.