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.

The Nighthaunt box having the unmounted Knight of Shrouds is probably the reason why its been out of stock on the website for ages.

Couple ghb rumours i saw. Can't comment on reliability but if true looking good.

I forsee salt from sce players. They got salty enough when their teleport became same as others beside being lot more reliable :lol:

Hi everyone,

I was browsing on FB and the latest AOS article mistakenly mentionned a new edition for the game.

It has been quickly modified (and the comments related have been deleted) but you can still find it mentionned in the versionning system


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here it is >



(sorry for the double post, I couldn't post images in my first reply as it was my first message !)

AoS 3.0 is like 1 year old. I'm sure they're referring to a new "season". I wouldn't read too much into community post typos.

Assuming legit. We know no death this year for sure. Gw can suffer delays but having announced roadmap for this year with no death they won't hasten it.

A battalion that gives +1 damage vs units in one other specific battalion seems like peak ineptitude in game design.

Anyway, only weapon profile consolidation I really want to see is for Stormfiends. Units where every single model has unique weapons is kinda just gross.

chaos0xomega wrote:
A battalion that gives +1 damage vs units in one other specific battalion seems like peak ineptitude in game design.

Anyway, only weapon profile consolidation I really want to see is for Stormfiends. Units where every single model has unique weapons is kinda just gross.

The phrasing on several of those is weird; 'fight in 2 ranks' has no mechanical meaning, and can be interpreted as quite a lot of different things. One drop still being there is entirely redundant since that battalion is in the core rules; there would be no reason for it not to be there unless a battlepack specifically removed it. Suffice it to say those rumors are not entirely precise (assuming they are accurate to begin with).

Removing the hero phase move on Stormdrakes would be great; it is an ability they completely do not need and pushes them well into broken territory.

In the past I've seen AoS players shorthand "fight in 2 ranks" to refer to engagement ranges. Units with weapons that have 1" melee range can fight "in 2 ranks" if it is in base contact with a friendly model that is itself in base contact with an enemy model, as the GW bases are about 25mm across but 1" is roughly 25.4mm across, etc. Units with weapons that have 2" melee range can likewise do the same, but the base to base criteria is no longer needed, and if in base to base can "fight in 3 ranks" so long as they are in a unit mounted on 25mm bases, etc.

Personally I hate the usage of that terminology and think its gross/kinda try-hard, but it is what it is.

In this case I am not exactly sure what they are saying, but I imagine its probably a rule that says that a model is considered to be in range with its melee weapons if it is within base contact with a friendly model in the same unit that is itself within engagement range of an enemy model.

2 Ranks makes no sense in a game that hasn't got any ranking system in place. Either the person providing the summary is really shorthanding it a bit like Chaos says; or its just fake and people repeating it didn't think it through when they repeated it.

"All battleline infantry under 4 wounds can fight in 2 ranks"

So I guess that doesn't help gluttons/bulls......

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/06/15/veteran-infantry-take-centre-stage-in-the-next-generals-handbook/

A bunch of the rumours are confirmed.

Big change here. Gs that can fail besides lose more. Lot less auto t1 bt's.

Glad to see more difficult strategies and tactics, assuming the rumor pans out. Combined with the preview article looks like a lot of creative changes that will mix things up and keep gameplay fresh. I am definitely sold on the concept; we players get novel gameplay experiences, GW gets the inevitable sales boost from people picking up new units. As long as the rules have sufficient checks and balances to keep gameplay from getting too skewed I think it will work well.

That is in regards to the overall theory. On ground level I do have some concerns. Will wait till I can go through everything before passing judgement though.

 Overread wrote:
2 Ranks makes no sense in a game that hasn't got any ranking system in place. Either the person providing the summary is really shorthanding it a bit like Chaos says; or its just fake and people repeating it didn't think it through when they repeated it.

Its the silly shorthand as I said, WarCom pretty much confirmed those rumors, odd wording and all.

What the rumors got wrong though is that the one battalion doesn't give +1D vs units in the other battalion, as best as I can tell. Reconciling the rumors with the Warcom article, the "Bounty Hunters" battalion is the one that would be getting the damage bonus vs the "Expert Conquerors" battalion, except Bounty Hunters battalion does +1D vs Galletian Veterans rather than against Expert Conquerors (who are otherwise all Galletian Vets) specifically. That makes a lot more sense and is much more mechanically sound.

 GrosseSax wrote:

"All battleline infantry under 4 wounds can fight in 2 ranks"

So I guess that doesn't help gluttons/bulls......

It's 4 or less, the WarCom article even calls that unit out specifically.

Out of my armies barring point changes dok love these. Archievable gs, 3 good bt's, loads of atttacks benefitting from extra damage battalion...wow.

(extra damage better be just melee)

WarCom did say it was melee attacks, yes.

So they're trying to buff infantry armies, huh? Theoretically that'll be nice for how I like to play slaves to darkness, lots of sword+board warriors. I also really want whatever chaos legionnaires end up being so they'll also be nice.

 cole1114 wrote:
So they're trying to buff infantry armies, huh? Theoretically that'll be nice for how I like to play slaves to darkness, lots of sword+board warriors. I also really want whatever chaos legionnaires end up being so they'll also be nice.

Next season will be characters or artillery, and who wants the fun of massed artillery.

I do like that there is such a shake up to keep things fresh(ish).

I always consider it strange how GW broke up armies into leaders, troops, monsters and artillery.

Because so many armies have zero artillery and many that do often only have one model in that slot. I can't see GW focusing on artillery for a season at all because its just not there unless they do a MASSIVE release of models for a lot of factions or a set of highly adaptive neutral artillery models (or one for each GA)



What would be cool is if in 4.0 they create a Cavalry slot then they can mess with cavalry in a bigger way as right now cavalry is just larger fast infantry in how it functions

Still waiting on the season for boats. Will only like 3 factions be able to engage with it? Yes.
Do I care? Not really after having 2 seasons my faction just cannot engage with at all.

Chaos Warrior command and Chaos Legionnaires images posted on Reddit

 DaveC wrote:
Chaos Warrior command and Chaos Legionnaires images posted on Reddit

Nice.

In the initial leaks you could almost see them in the pics, blurred out in the foreground or background. Good to get confirmation.

Even though they are monopose, the Chaos Warrior kit in the SC box are amazing mini's. To get another kit to supplement them with options will be awesome.

And Chaos Legionnaire in the bottom left of the second pic is pretty intriguing.

Whoops! Already posted. Sorry.

 DaveC wrote:
Chaos Warrior command and Chaos Legionnaires images posted on Reddit

I must be crazy, but aren't those Chaos Warriors just the single-pose ones from the Start Collecting! box?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 DaveC wrote:
Chaos Warrior command and Chaos Legionnaires images posted on Reddit

I must be crazy, but aren't those Chaos Warriors just the single-pose ones from the Start Collecting! box?

No, the top row is all new sculpts

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 DaveC wrote:
Chaos Warrior command and Chaos Legionnaires images posted on Reddit

I must be crazy, but aren't those Chaos Warriors just the single-pose ones from the Start Collecting! box?

Someone speculated that they would just have a new sprue for the halberds and command bits, but even the bodies of the standard, musician, and halberdier are new. Or at least don't match any of the ones in the current Start Collecting box.

The top half are new, the bottom half are the current new ones

Seraphon point changes reportedly. If true quite modest. Wonder if line continues.

Stegadon +5
Saurus Astrolith Bearer -10
Skink Priest +10
Razordons +10

Whee. Rules giving low wound battleline infantry bonuses...but if 2vp per dead such　unit is common feature that's...lots of vp's being bleeding.