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 appreciate GW trying to diversify the game and get rid of big infantry being the only viable option - but yeah like most things GW tries to fix they went just a bit too extreme.

Not only that but because GW only uses 4 divisions it hits everything. I could have seen it working well if it were limited to say just one or two types of unit. But yeah its really strange to have a wargame where you can only have a limited number of full units and everything else must be minimum strength.



That and the double turn are two things I wish GW would address. Reinforcements should be changed or scrapped for something else; double turn retired to casual play only and removed from matched.

I'd also welcome them breaking up "Troops" into more divisions. Cavalry should certainly be its own block with its own rules (and cavalry-like models for those armies that might use snakes or beasts in the same role etc...).

And freaking heck releasing some artillery for most factions. For a game with only 4 divisions its crazy that most armies only have models for 3

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 GaroRobe wrote:
But but how could you possibly know that he was blessed with immortality otherwise????

Eternus, the Eternal Blade of the First Prince, armed with the Glaive of Unending, the Everlasting Flail, and riding his horrific Daemonic Steed, Immortia!

I swear to god, I scrolled back up just to make sure those weren't the actual weapon or steed names.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I've long felt that the reinforcement rules are a very harsh system.

I like the idea of making infantry blocks less attractive as the best solution to every problem. But GW went overboard, taking away the point saving for full infantry blocks (good thing) but then doubling down by harshly limiting you. Considering you can only have 2 full infantry blocks at 2K points and EVERY other unit must be minimum strength thereafter is a REALLY big change in how the game works.

It does make medium strength units and elites work better, I have to say that. Because now they have a slot in the army that isn't directly and always competing with infantry blocks.

But I still feel that it was harsh.



I'd fully expect some armies to have new methods - heck I'd wager Skaven could even ignore it for units like Clan rats which are at their very core designed to be worthless swarmers.

Honestly the reinforcement system is the worst part of AoS3, it basically just makes MSU the default way to play, which is something I've always found to be bland and boring. I preferred the old system which encouraged fielding larger units.

The weird thing is the coherency rules basically killed blocks of infantry by itself. Reinforcement just seemed mean.

It’s worth noting as well that the other mixed race warband warscrolls have identical keywords to the HoHs. I’m not expecting hobgrots, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are duardin or even a slave ogor

ERJAK wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I've long felt that the reinforcement rules are a very harsh system.

I like the idea of making infantry blocks less attractive as the best solution to every problem. But GW went overboard, taking away the point saving for full infantry blocks (good thing) but then doubling down by harshly limiting you. Considering you can only have 2 full infantry blocks at 2K points and EVERY other unit must be minimum strength thereafter is a REALLY big change in how the game works.

It does make medium strength units and elites work better, I have to say that. Because now they have a slot in the army that isn't directly and always competing with infantry blocks.

But I still feel that it was harsh.



I'd fully expect some armies to have new methods - heck I'd wager Skaven could even ignore it for units like Clan rats which are at their very core designed to be worthless swarmers.

Honestly the reinforcement system is the worst part of AoS3, it basically just makes MSU the default way to play, which is something I've always found to be bland and boring. I preferred the old system which encouraged fielding larger units.

The weird thing is the coherency rules basically killed blocks of infantry by itself. Reinforcement just seemed mean.

It's classic GW to identify a problem and then go so extreme in the resolution that it becomes a new problem of its own.
But they do this all the time in general. It's the same as how they latched onto the idea of units doing mortal wounds, started small and then suddenly every other unit is doing mortal wound damage from some armies.

It's the wide pendulum swing of GW balance and rules writing that can cause frustration.

I literally haven't closed Eternus' warscroll since it leaked. It really is just everything I like in a named character. Simple, easy to use, with a fun gimmick.

I bet he ends up costing 400 points, and belakor 700. Just to spit in my mouth.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
Those are some damn tall Chaos Dwarves.

They just live in the Vampire Lands, so it's all relative.

 GaroRobe wrote:
It’s worth noting as well that the other mixed race warband warscrolls have identical keywords to the HoHs. I’m not expecting hobgrots, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are duardin or even a slave ogor

Also the lore text for HoH talks about how they are the vanguard that marches ahead of the greater armies of Hashut. Which sounds like an extranarrative nudge that we might be getting a proper Chaos Dwarf army in the near-ish future (similar to Squats appearing in Necromunda before the main LoV).

ERJAK wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Overread wrote:
I've long felt that the reinforcement rules are a very harsh system.

I like the idea of making infantry blocks less attractive as the best solution to every problem. But GW went overboard, taking away the point saving for full infantry blocks (good thing) but then doubling down by harshly limiting you. Considering you can only have 2 full infantry blocks at 2K points and EVERY other unit must be minimum strength thereafter is a REALLY big change in how the game works.

It does make medium strength units and elites work better, I have to say that. Because now they have a slot in the army that isn't directly and always competing with infantry blocks.

But I still feel that it was harsh.



I'd fully expect some armies to have new methods - heck I'd wager Skaven could even ignore it for units like Clan rats which are at their very core designed to be worthless swarmers.

Honestly the reinforcement system is the worst part of AoS3, it basically just makes MSU the default way to play, which is something I've always found to be bland and boring. I preferred the old system which encouraged fielding larger units.

The weird thing is the coherency rules basically killed blocks of infantry by itself. Reinforcement just seemed mean.

Yep, there were a number of changes that made big units less desirable without specifically or explicitly targeting them, but they coupled those "soft nerfs" with an unnecessary and explicitly targeted rule for good measure. GW has always taken a "belt and suspenders" approach, i.e. they use a stick AND a carrot instead of one or the other, with just about everything.

 Jack Flask wrote:

 GaroRobe wrote:
It’s worth noting as well that the other mixed race warband warscrolls have identical keywords to the HoHs. I’m not expecting hobgrots, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there are duardin or even a slave ogor

Also the lore text for HoH talks about how they are the vanguard that marches ahead of the greater armies of Hashut. Which sounds like an extranarrative nudge that we might be getting a proper Chaos Dwarf army in the near-ish future (similar to Squats appearing in Necromunda before the main LoV).

It's been confirmed in all but name since the 3rd edition launch.

I’d laugh if when we see that model in full it is still just dwarf sized.
And maybe his feet are just cut off and the size works out.

I’m fine with a mix but to be honest would have preferred just chaos dwarfs..

Honestly, Chaos Dwarfs seem to be more fleshed out than ever compared to AOS. Even with the Leigon of Azgorh(?) models from FW, we really only got two infantry units, some monsters, and vehicles.

So far in AOS, we have:
*Hobgrots
*Human worshippers

And not a single Hashut Dwarf. The army sounds like it could be very diverse

 GaroRobe wrote:
Honestly, Chaos Dwarfs seem to be more fleshed out than ever compared to AOS. Even with the Leigon of Azgorh(?) models from FW, we really only got two infantry units, some monsters, and vehicles.

So far in AOS, we have:
*Hobgrots
*Human worshippers

And not a single Hashut Dwarf. The army sounds like it could be very diverse

Not going to lie a "Legions of Hashut" army with Humans looking like the Horns of Hashut minis, Hobgrots, and Chaos Dwarves would probably get me to start playing AoS.

I'm beginning to get VERY worried about the complete lack of leaks about the skaven...

Considering the massive Slaves ot Darkness leak chances are GW has likely sent out a staff memo reminding staff that leaks can result in jobloss and punishments and stuff.

 Overread wrote:
I appreciate GW trying to diversify the game and get rid of big infantry being the only viable option - but yeah like most things GW tries to fix they went just a bit too extreme.

Not only that but because GW only uses 4 divisions it hits everything. I could have seen it working well if it were limited to say just one or two types of unit. But yeah its really strange to have a wargame where you can only have a limited number of full units and everything else must be minimum strength.



That and the double turn are two things I wish GW would address. Reinforcements should be changed or scrapped for something else; double turn retired to casual play only and removed from matched.

I'd also welcome them breaking up "Troops" into more divisions. Cavalry should certainly be its own block with its own rules (and cavalry-like models for those armies that might use snakes or beasts in the same role etc...).

And freaking heck releasing some artillery for most factions. For a game with only 4 divisions its crazy that most armies only have models for 3

I would spend so much money on StD if they changed up the base rules enough. The new chosen are just so awesome looking. Then again I may just wait for the return of the old world.

 Overread wrote:
Considering the massive Slaves ot Darkness leak chances are GW has likely sent out a staff memo reminding staff that leaks can result in jobloss and punishments and stuff.

I can tell you that I was at my local Warhammer Store this weekend, and for the first time since I began going there, when I mentioned the leaks, the Manager got really....well *mean* with me about it. He was quite miffed. I don't know that it means much of anything, but it was very surprising.

It's probably because every time something like that happens, everyone gets tarred with a brush by management.

Plus if he really likes GW and the game chances are he's just seen another nail in managers learning of any pre-release info or anything. You know those small perks of working for a firm you're keen on and such.



But yeah whilst GW in public doesn't attack leaks, they are certainly taking steps in the background to deal with them. Fair's fair to them too its not like the Kirby days where we got nothing - we typically have 3 months or so of a release window that we know.

 Overread wrote:
It's probably because every time something like that happens, everyone gets tarred with a brush by management.

Plus if he really likes GW and the game chances are he's just seen another nail in managers learning of any pre-release info or anything. You know those small perks of working for a firm you're keen on and such.



But yeah whilst GW in public doesn't attack leaks, they are certainly taking steps in the background to deal with them. Fair's fair to them too its not like the Kirby days where we got nothing - we typically have 3 months or so of a release window that we know.

For sure. I feel bad for the folks who are responsible for showing off all our toys. When this stuff happens, especially within a week of a big event, it must really be demoralizing.

True! Esp when he's likely getting a LOT of chat at the store about the Chaos stuff and not only is he likely not allowed, he likely didn't even know anything about it. Plus he's now got to try and get people excited in stuff for Warhammerfest when the Chaos Battletome wasn't going to be on the radar for months.

It's kind of a shame since the leaks have me excited about AOS despite... really not liking 3.0 at all.

 Overread wrote:
True! Esp when he's likely getting a LOT of chat at the store about the Chaos stuff and not only is he likely not allowed, he likely didn't even know anything about it. Plus he's now got to try and get people excited in stuff for Warhammerfest when the Chaos Battletome wasn't going to be on the radar for months.

Well, I would say fingers crossed the re-arrange the release order then - the sooner that chaos release happens the better IMO.

I really like the Chosen.

And 5 in plastic solves a lot of problems for me, as I wanted some for Warhammer Quest, but the current metal ones aren't great for that.

I can build three for Quest, a Champion as a mini-boss, and then something special for the fifth one; even convert him to 40k.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

 Overread wrote:
True! Esp when he's likely getting a LOT of chat at the store about the Chaos stuff and not only is he likely not allowed, he likely didn't even know anything about it. Plus he's now got to try and get people excited in stuff for Warhammerfest when the Chaos Battletome wasn't going to be on the radar for months.

Well, I would say fingers crossed the re-arrange the release order then - the sooner that chaos release happens the better IMO.

You think gw loves wasting money? Since doing such reorder would cost money if even possible.

Carlovonsexron wrote:

 Overread wrote:
True! Esp when he's likely getting a LOT of chat at the store about the Chaos stuff and not only is he likely not allowed, he likely didn't even know anything about it. Plus he's now got to try and get people excited in stuff for Warhammerfest when the Chaos Battletome wasn't going to be on the radar for months.

Well, I would say fingers crossed the re-arrange the release order then - the sooner that chaos release happens the better IMO.

Given the roadmap skeleton in the Daemon Prince reveal on WHC confirmed the book will be coming out this winter, I doubt it, somehow.

GW can't just take a book slated for winter and release it earlier. Sure the book might be done, but the boxes, the mass production of plastic and components, the production and packing and shipping etc.... You are talking several months just for them to take currently designed assets and order the boxes and print material from China/overseas. And that's if they decided to do it right now.


Plus all that material has to be paid for and takes up shipping space, so that means whatever is coming in a few months time originally would have to be moved. So suddenly a bunch of orders and paid and signed off material has to be dropped, changed, moved around and adjusted.


All that takes time, money, has the risk of confusion where some components perhaps get printed when they aren't meant too and vis versa. It also means all the marketing material GW has prepped has to be changed.




Basically is a massive undertaking. Yes the book is done, but GW don't just order stuff and then sit on it; they don't have the vast warehousing space. At best perhaps they've got the paper stock from overseas (which at least would take up less space when in packing shipments and squashed down rahter than inflated up when full of models). Even if they've got it you're talking a huge length of time to pack everything and then distribute.

 Overread wrote:
GW can't just take a book slated for winter and release it earlier.

If they have the stock they can, but we don't know that.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Overread wrote:
GW can't just take a book slated for winter and release it earlier.

If they have the stock they can, but we don't know that.

I'd be honestly shocked if GW had all the stock for a winter release right now.
Like I said they could potentially have the book and cardstock printed and in warehouse; but taking up far less room because its got nothing inside the cardstock - ergo its flat boxes.

It might be more likely that its a master or limited print run of the books done for quality control purposes or the like. We don't even know the source of the leak itself and it could have come from the factory itself or any part of the whole chain of distribution and information .

Stock and logistics aren't the half of it. Bookkeeping, for starters, is a foremost concern. You don't just dump Q3 releases into the market during Q2 for whatever reasons you guys are rambling about (leaks, I assume).

Yes, all logic says you are right. However, GW is well known for seeing the writing on the wall, and then turning to face a different wall.

So while you're probably right, if there was any company that would cut it's nose to spite it's face GW would be it.