What's not to love about the engineer? He is smarter than the others, more composed, a natural leader surveying the battlefield. He is clearly doing warlock and engineering stuff back there. His monocular is also bent upwards so he can easily see over the hordes of fodder.
Somehow that 1 second pause of gathering himself before Vince starts with his "Hello Everybody" makes me happy. Isn't consistency something beautiful? Haven't played a second of age of sigmar in my life, but that pause I have seen quite a few times.
The skaven warlock engineer, this first one, looks great. The mini communicates exactly what his warscroll does. He's a sniper who helps spot enemy heroes to pick off for jezzails. High versimilitude model.
Between the Priority Roll and these command point based out of turn activities I just wish they'd just move to a different turn structure. Steal the LotR one or something, integrated turns.
6:15 I agree with Tom. Snap judgement when I first saw it I didn’t really like it. It’s grown on me a bit but it doesn’t feel Skaven. But hopefully like you said this is the worst model.
Great show as always, Vince & Tom. Everyone is buzzing for 4.0. BUT many of us are still playing local leagues and tournaments in 3.0. - we have our Element Legends AoS spring tournament at Element Games in Manchester UK tomorrow!
this is actually one of my biggest issues with Vince, right or wrong, he portrays himself as "someone who wont yuck someone elses yum", and then...immediately shits on anyone who disagree's with his very slanted views on what the game should be like
I find it interesting that there are no restrictions on what units can be Honor Guard (other than being in the general's regiment). So like, I could have a Dankhold Troggoth be the Honor Guard for a Troggboss. Or a random Khorgorath could be the Honor Guard for a High Priest of Khorne. Fun stuff.
I'm wondering on prayers, what if you DON'T flush the points? What if the prayer lore has some low end prayers like this but also some super high powered prayers at like 12+/16+? Turn those late game Priests into absolute monsters if they've been left alone amassing power.
The prayer rules are the first rules I did not fully understand just by reading the article. If the points are spent or remain after chanting a prayer is big question that leads to very different systems. I am leaning towards them not being spent, because I think they would have mentioned that. But again, the article was very vague and unclear on this.
Warcry released battleplans with catchup mechanics a couple months ago. I find they help the more lethal warband, since ignoring the objectives for a round to maximize damage dealt to your opponent isn't punished as much. Whether that's good or bad is up to interpretation.
Sylvaneth players (like me) in tears. Now I gotta bring the following: My 2000pt army 100-600pts of summons depending on what I'm using and how many options I want 2-3 sets of Wyldwoods (hopefully these get tweaked in 4.0 to only require 1 set or maybe 2 sets max) faction endless spells and/or another set of endless spells if I choose a different lore Hope you have a truck to drive all that around to tournaments
@@inquisitorsz I think it will be an option (and probably a competitive one) but not mandatory. My guess is that 1) summoning, at least as 3.0 is concerned is gone. There might be replace a unit effects, setup X specific unit, or when it dies replace with Y. But other than that summoning doesn't fit in with the ability system they are going for. 2) I think everyone will get a free bonus enhancement, to take a second lore, or artefact or command trait. Adding lores will give a lot of flexibility but it doesn't increase the number of casts you have, versus artefacts and command traits have an additive bonus
To Tom’s point on the Warlock Engineer - he feels like the 5th model in a warband not like one of the most iconic skaven models. Nothing wrong with the model itself, it just doesn’t fit with my expectations for that model in the range. If it had been presented as “Skaven Marksman” or something I probably wouldn’t have had a second thought. Also…any news on undesigned?
re: Manifestations. I can see them being attached to a core rules regiment, so like take 3 wizards/priests in this regiment and gain access to a manifestation lore of your choice and they can only be manifested by the regiment wizards.
I think the language for priests being "match" the chanting value implies you don't actually spend ritual points, they just accumulate and succeed if you have that many. I could be wrong though
5 minutes of "I think he's cool/ I think he's weird" is probably not going to change anyone's mind. He seems a little too upright for me but I suspect that's because he's got one leg up on the valve thing and it'll look less so in real life. Looking forward to new jezzails confirmed.
One of the problems of sand-bagging is time. I tried only once in a small tournament (Nexus Collapse, one point behind), but my opponent went extra long on the third round and we had to end the match. He would have no miniatures left on the table by the end of the fourth, so there's that risk too...
... I don't play Warhammer... but I knew both of these people quite well back in the day, hah.... Hey Tom... we never got to do that "Closing Time" campaign, ;p
Regarding the skaven sculpt. Great to see new toys of course but I agree with Tom, the model looks too humanoid for me. Could be the pose but the animal aspect is missing for me. Still great but not Rat enough…which sounds silly 😂
Very excited for 4th after all of what I have seen. My two biggest worries are battle tactics and manifestation lores (aka endless spells that don't cost points). The thing about battle tactics that annoys me the most is that they are also used in the First Blood beginners battle pack. I really wish they were not there and that they had just used half a dozen battle plans with baked-in simple secondary scoring rules. As an option for new / casual players that don't like battle tactics, but want to play more than just Spearhead. Good points regarding the underdog mechanic. As long as it is not too powerful, I think it is a good mechanic to keep games tighter and more interesting. And from what we have seen, the power of the boni seems about right.
I think they tell you mostly everything you need to know about the priests in the wording for the prayer. You pick a prayer, THEN make a chanting roll. So it's not a system where you make a prayer roll, accumulate points, then "purchase" a prayer with those points. The rolls are tied to specific prayers, and so are the ritual points. I think "ritual points" are just a fancy way of describing the mechanic whereby a prayer's chanting value can "carry over" and increase from turn to turn. They use the phrase "or hold out for a chanting value of 8+". I think almost certainly unused ritual points will not carry over for use in the priest's next prayer. But these are just guesses.
I think the point is that the other way would be much simpler, at least in terms of wording. Each priest has a generic chanting roll that gives prayer points, and the points can be spent to trigger prayer abilities. No need to say "on a chanting roll of 8+" when you cannot roll an 8 on a D6, but which relies on spending prayer points that are not actually mentioned in the ability. Also no need to pick a target or declare what prayer you're using if you're planning to bank the points for next turn anyway.
My response to the sandbagging bit is that losing in points, and losing on the table, are separate things. Getting half your army blown out, then having the underdog mechanic given to your opponent anyways because they stood on one less circle, or took a double turn feels awful.
It's so funny watching this a couple days later, since GW released the battle tactics article shortly after this live show. I can't wait till next week's Warhammer Weekly
The Warlock Engineer is perfectly fine. It's a great sculpt that openly broadcasts what you should expect it to do on the table; spot heroes for your snipers to drop. It's very clear what this piece is meant to power-pair with and that's great, while still standing out. Also he is kinda hunched still and I think we are judging too much based on only one angle. My only gripe is that he is just the "Warlock Engineer" instead of Warlock with Jezzail. That's just weird to me that he is not more specific given he has a bery narrowly tailored role compared to your typical Warlock Engineer. Yes the Bombadier will probably get his own role, but still, I liked the idea of their being a generalized Warlock Engineer who tends to the war machines. Hopefully we will still get that.
As a servant of the horned rat since the 90s, I'm very comfortable that Skryre heroes are no longer battlefield wizards. Their forging of magic and engineering is done in the workshop. On the battlefield they are there to tinker and tweak their inventions. Dark mirror of dwarven runesmiths and the like. Also, this was telegraphed when they talked about magic. You choose one spell lore and that wouldn't work for Skaven if both Masterclan and Skryre wizards are in your list.
There wasn't much discussion about the nature of the lores themselves, and whether we are moving into a world of universal lores supplemented by dedicated faction lores. More than once now, the previews have stressed the importance of making a choice of spell lores in list construction, but if there are no universal lores, I don't see how this is a meaningful process for most factions which historically have had no more than spells all in a single lore. Also, as an aside Manifestation Lores have to be a separate choice because the DoK lore would include both Invocations and Endless Spells. We know Spell Lores and Prayer Lores are separate; there's no way that one choice would replace both of them. They're clearly bonus content for your army if you have the models.
22:15 Every time past the launch of third edition was a dumb time for these cuts! The cuts when they launched the latest CoS book was frankly a little late in the game.
So max 6 a round from objs, but it looks on boarder war you'll only be reliably scoring 3-5 controlling 1 or two middle objs. feels like even though secondaries are the same percentage of scoring as they used to be maybe primaries are going to be harder to max out, making secondaries even more impactful than originally thought.
If Manifestations / Endless Spells are essentially free enhancements now for armies, I wonder if they are going to add more incantations and endless spells for various factions Not to mention more general ones that are available to everyone (not simply repackaging the old ones) They seem to be treating having these as akin to Faction Terrain for everyone You rarely see Fyreslayers or Khorne without their altars because it is so helpful to the army on the field Now, everyone will at least have Manifestations? Also, yeah, it's about selling more models May as well take them since they are free and your opponent will certainly have them
3 Plans for the core battle pack is enough for an RTT, great for teaching events, shorter games so people can afford to be slower. Its aggressively fine, and I like having the option.
If people want detailed history of GW, check out Jordan Sorcery. The Livingston/Jackson GW started in London and that was when they won the DnD rights. It was when Bryan Ansell took over and moved the company to Nottingham when the true birth of Warhammer happened.
I know this entire balance update is a bit of a meme. But sylvaneth got a lot of buffs (justified based on winrates), and the dok point changes hit good units. But it feels like they forgot orruks were also at the bottom. Also buffing ancient resin ogor models with abysmal rules is funny to me.
I somewhat agree with Tom. The sculpt is fine, but I feel its a bit too tame. It lacks some warpstone shenanigans. It makes me fear that they are making the aos design too serious and not goofy enough when appropriate. Guess we'll see I really like the concept of new prayers, I just hope its a simple "I pray and get my ritual points. I then just spend them on any prayer I want or just hold on to them." Having to track points for each prayer would be insane. I am worried about battle tactics too. I dont like that we have to score them every turn. I am dreading the friday article ngl...
A comment about sand bagging, typically the player going second is in the best position to do it, HOWEVER, because if you double you cannot complete a tactic you are commiting to maintaining the turn status quo or go down an additional 4 points
The problem with tactics is they aren't tactics. They are just activities you do, as they do not usually relate to your overall strategy. I prefer to do just the objectives of a scenario to determine victory. I would rather call my shots with tactics. Like " do x wounds with my leviadon" or "get this spell off". Admittedly, this could get messy in a tournament and become a sloppy system where you get a point whenever something good happens
changing warscroll MW spells to "spell gun" is imo, a great change purely to provide a backstop with look out sir and other cant be shot tech to prevent the "i cast 10 mortal wounds at your guy" feelsbads
I think around battle tactics- they need a secondary scoring that allows a differentiator for armies to score. The old systems even like today’s old world stuck on their kill more game design. How do u want open up for different playstile if u are not able to score with it. Does matter if it is battle tactics, secondaries or something else- but just sitting on circles make the game boring because then u do not need the multiple roles in a army if u just put biggest defense on circles and best offense to kill defenses on other circles.
I’m wary about the underdog approach. It feels like ‘my first leader breakaway’ mechanic and GW track record of doing things for the first time is not great. (It feels tacked on, better if the natural game flow addressed this) but, as others have commented, VP isn’t always the best indicator of who is winning (feels like it’s intended to separate who’s getting killed the most as a victory condition, but now we are leaning into it?)
Having free endless spells seems like a giant win for magic armies, while a major loss for non heavy magic armies.. Like I'll just be able to churn these out pretty easily, while you can't... seems dumb
I dig the vibe of the new Warlock Engineer. They don't have to be hunched over and raving to be megalomaniacs. I can practically hear his shrill voice muttering yeesssss-yesssss, as the Arch Warlock he hates wanders dangerously-conveniently close to the line of fire toward the shoot-kill "intended" target. Also, I'm hoping the First Blood is just one set of battle plans in the Core book, aside from the seasonal ones. The wording in the article might just be more crappy GW editing.
I have always thought Battle Tactics had more to do with solving the impossible balance problem. Some armies will always hit harder than others, and points balance is imperfect, but players need to feel like they have a path to victory even if they cannot do anything to the opponent’s army. I think they were an answer to a 1st & 2nd edition problem of some real wildly powerful things and other armies that simply couldn’t match in a straight fight. Players will complain less about unfair things when they can still achieve a close game, buying GW maneuver space to fix their problems
@@VinceVenturella well…I don’t think it worked as intended for a variety of reasons. Tenant of systems theory: today’s problems usually stem from (or are) past solutions.
I’ve seen this take before, that somehow he’s not an engineer… You think he pooped out that high powered sniper rifle? That’s engineering! And with a kick like that it’s probably warp powered, not to mention he has MECHANICAL LEGS! He’s a super engineer.
Seeing IDK just constantly get "buffs" by units getting cost reductions does *nothing* to solve the most glaring problem: the entire army has access to five models that aren't heroes. Five. How are you supposed to effectively work with that? And then! Of the heroes they have access to, three elevenths of them aren't among the easiest things in the world to lift off the table.
I know you play 10th edition 40k on occassion Vince. do you also hate hoe they have done the fixed or tactical secondaries in that game? I find battle tactics to be the same sort of thing and think it will be interesting if they gave sigmar a choice like that
@VinceVenturella I respect that answer. I used to not like the random of tactical but have learn to seal with it. and suprisely to me, it seemed a lot of people like the random tactical
The model is visually fine, but I'm not huge on my three Warlock Engineers now existing only to buff my zero Warplock Jezzails, which is the only Skryre unit for which I never cared. I can't think of a time when I've ever been happy about a model (in either AoS or 40k) being redesigned down to the conceptual level; remakes should be re-dos, not do-overs.
Yeah looks like we may have some granular power pair action with the engineer loadouts. Hopefully the arch warlock and Bombardier have their own good pairings (assuming we get a new arch warlock).
I dislike battleplans that encourage sandbagging for a few reasons. As Vince touched on newer players are going to miss out on the intricacies of the battleplan because its antithetical to the competitive game we are playing to try and score LESS. My other issue is that obviously the underdog mechanic exists to give the losing player a chance of coming back. With the advent of a penalty for the double turn they needed to find a way to have a come back mechanic so the game doesn't end up like 40k and you just concede top of turn 3. My issue is that winning doesn't necessarily mean you have the most points at any given moment. If I sandbag and keep the game close but have better board presence and control along with better synergies because of hero sniping or just unit positioning then I am winning in all but score. By the end of the turn in this scenario I have your entire army neutered or dead or contained where they cant score much. So now, I'll score max points for turns 3, 4 and 5 putting me WELL in the lead but the entire first two turns, along with possibly the beginning of turn 3, I was the underdog. While this sounds like a good thing it leads to really negative play experiences where you just don't feel like there's any way for you to interact with the game. Your opponent has you dead to rights and instead of the catch up mechanic helping you catch up, it is giving the already winning player a win more button. All this to say, I don't hate the mechanic but I think it needs to be thought out a little more and should be one of the Modules they've been touting. All of this comes from a background of hosting a lot of small tournaments in my local shop and going to some of the bigger ones in the area as well as places like the NOVA Open and ACO. I've seen players give away a double just because they know they're opponent can't do much or anything in the turn and then they can double them the next turn when its even stronger. Just my 2 cents! Love the show guys!
Totally on Vince's side with engineer, just cause he looks so adorable with his cute little crooked telescope and his warpstone eye! i just wanna snuggle him and pinch his little cheeks >^V^
I want to be excited about 4th, but even putting aside the mostly terrible (imo) articles, I am struggling to feel convinced and local players seem to be getting the same vibe. Hopefully it will be a when we see actual full rules and play it will come together. Warlock is fine, appreciate not every model being in an action pose, looks good but again not got that wow factor for me. Don't want to be negative, will be buying the release box, and give it a good go. Buy 4th is GWs last chance for me. Maybe it is in part other system exciting me more
The skaven looks human. Proportions are all wrong. Hope for TOW (if we ever get Skaven again on that end) don't go that route. Anyways I'm out, looking forward to you guys doing TOW content ever again 😅
Sand bagging - do not know how it is written in English - is over 3rd edition the viable strategy for Sylvaneth players. I need to underscore to control the game to have a change by mitigating it by turn 4 and 5. Mostly winning by 1-3 points more.
Honestly Battle Tactics and Season rules just in the bin. Let’s just play the game with the ghb and stop adding more into it with it. That being said these are really the only two major gripes I’ve had with the new edition stuff, scenarios look great and if they actually don’t interact with the seasonal rule and are permanently usable that’ll be great.
The engineer sculpt is fine, but I don't like it as a Skaven model. He looks too much like a normal dude that just happens to have rat face, as if he was converted from a human model by someone who insists on turning everything into rats.
This isn’t about sandbagging. It’s about catch-up mechanics and mechanics that let a player get points for doing nothing. It’s about keeping new players from quitting due to frustration about not being any good at the game. It’s like crappy board games or video games that just keep giving you little rewards so you’ll keep playing even if you are exercising no skill. This is bumming me out in a big way. I want to be excited about and like AoS4, but GW is making it really hard.
@@VinceVenturellaI’m against catch-up mechanics that just happen by default. If there is some additional strategy around its use, that’s okay, but just having a catch-up mechanic that always triggers and rewards the “losing” player requires no additional strategy, unless you count sandbagging as a strategy.
I'm sorry Vince, but if this 'it's fine' anti-rodent vibe is what we are going to get from Tom, then he'll just have to be benched until he can appreciate the greatness of the master-race, yes-yes?!
I think battle tactics exist for the sake of having secondary objectives to add dynamism. That being said, slotted round by round tactics aren't the answer. If for example you had 3-4 BATTLE tactics that you chose to accomplish as part of your overall game strategy that had to be accomplished any time during the game, that would probably be better. Maybe not. But I don't like this formulaic way of always doing the same thing every battle plan, every game. Now even more so with scores being designed at a hard cap, every time. Doesn't feel good to me. This is article #1 and 2 I'm not happy about for 4th. Magic is better, but the article is piss poor in how it presented prayers and manifestations
That battleplan/battlepack article was probably the most disappointing for me so far. Still the same boring and cookie/cutter mission design GWs been employing for how many years now in both their two big, flagship games. Still the weirdly generic/nondescript objectives that boil down to "stand in that circle and that circle and that circle". They even mention 40ks secondary objectives in the little asterisk about battle tactics, so I assume it's also going to be very similar, randomly drawn "generic/nondescript things do to" each round. I don't really see the point of these terrain maps, there is nothing unique or interesting about that symmetrical layout and the fact that terrain is seemingly boiled down to 4 rules does not inspire confidence either. I really, REALLY don't want to fan the flames of the stupid "competitive vs. non-competitive players" fight that happens in social media too often, but both of these points to me look like concessions made for the tournament scene. Keep missions simple-stupid, keep terrain as non impactful as possible, paint random symmetrical terrain maps so terrain can be condensed into 2D cut-out squares on the table. Honestly I don't think this is really necessary, games like Malifaux can still have thriving competitive scenes without losing the flavour in actually playing the game.
this new system honestly feels like it is made for young kids. to the point that my own pre-teens think that the new rules are to juvenile for them...in more polite words here, of course. I get that Vince loves ultra simplified rules, but seriously when will it be acknowledged that a Lot of people are disgruntled by these rules? Why is it Always lovebombing as a pseudo echo chamber? I almost never see detractors speaking on this show, and when they exist they often get talked over
I welcome the feedback, I welcome the comments, most feedback so far, in comments and on the show, have been positive. There are concerns as we raised, but I remain positive. The concerns most have expressed this far are not with a lack of perceived complexity.
@VinceVenturella in your comments section, perhaps. I'm in several large discords, in Facebook groups, etcetc. Most of the comments I see is irritation with both the squatting of models (which you diminished by downplaying it), and thar the rules seem far to simple (doubly so for weapon loadouts seeming to mean nothing, something you always cheer for). It's not that you have a different opinion. You just Constantly "yuck other people's yum", or in this cause deny others have opinions that differ from the show. Even with cohosts
@@autumnlotus6250 I watch discord groups, facebook, watch other videos, twitter, etc. I try to take in lots of opinions and present a balanced view. Not yucking anyone's yum is me not saying - "You're wrong if you think this" - I am sorry if I come across like that, it's truly not what I intend. I do support these moves toward simplification, as I think the game is better with a simple foundation. I think the broad base of the community agrees, but that doesn't mean everyone does, I am sure there are some material % of people that are not happy. I don't ever shut down discourse, I don't beat people up for their opinions, I give differing views a fair shake, but I also share my opinion and strongly advocate for it. That is why I am here and what people watch this for. Also, as a side note, I definitely am going to push back on your saying I downplayed the models being cut, that is simply factually wrong. I had a good 20 minute rant about it, described every way it was wrong, lambasted them for several of the choices, described ways it could have been better, I straight up said that whomever was behind a particular decision should be fired. You're not being fair with that characterisation, plain and simple. I didn't engage in name calling, or unecessary vulgar attacks, I simply laid out the 4 categories of wrong, I am not sure what you would have wanted me to do instead, but I very much stand behind my points, my belief that some choices in the cut were wrong and the way it was rolled out was (mostly - the extra year and lots of notice was good) wrong.
@@VinceVenturella two points on the last section: You actually downplayed about Half of the discontinued models. I am rewatching that section specifically of your video, to not just misremember or misquote you here. You specifically downplayed the issue with Sacrsanct, telling people to just use other similarly based models when there is no clear equivalent for models. They deleted the only magic units in SCE, and removed MOST of the wizard heroes on foot and mounted. Thats essentially seeing Thousand Sons being deleted from 40k, and tell them to just play World Eaters instead. Secondly, and most importantly since you have been an Orc player for a while now: You basically shrugged off Bonesplinters being removed. after years of shrugging and playing off the constant neglect and abuse of the faction by GW. At one point in the past you wished that they were gone, which is incredibly hurtful. And the comments just played it off as if it was nothing. You mention "well not many people played them". Yes, because they had their competetibe playstyle removed, their unique army rules removed, and no effort since 1st edition to update the range in any capacity. you love beastmen, and they were in the exact same position. but they GOT that support, and became super popular. whats good for the goose is goose for the gander
What's not to love about the engineer? He is smarter than the others, more composed, a natural leader surveying the battlefield. He is clearly doing warlock and engineering stuff back there. His monocular is also bent upwards so he can easily see over the hordes of fodder.
the words "natural leader" and "skaven" are almost, but not quite, an oxymoron though...
Somehow that 1 second pause of gathering himself before Vince starts with his "Hello Everybody" makes me happy. Isn't consistency something beautiful? Haven't played a second of age of sigmar in my life, but that pause I have seen quite a few times.
Warlock Engineer casts "bullet to head". Will look much better amongst other troops with that pose.
Alt universe; the engineer is a KO Thunderer captain who does the same thing, Tom's the one bigging it up and Vince is so-so on the fig.
It’s so real it’s scary.
I love the idea of a mega just punting a purple sun off the board.
The skaven warlock engineer, this first one, looks great. The mini communicates exactly what his warscroll does. He's a sniper who helps spot enemy heroes to pick off for jezzails.
High versimilitude model.
More like verminilitude
@@ROilman jealous I didn't think of that pun. 10/10
Between the Priority Roll and these command point based out of turn activities I just wish they'd just move to a different turn structure. Steal the LotR one or something, integrated turns.
I love how the chat and Vince called the health on endless spells. Good prediction
I like the engineer. The pose is skryre dementia: 'Out of the way, get down! I have data to collect and "superiors" to mollify'
8:25 I can’t believe I’m going to agree with Tom, but yeah, the engineer could look more skittish.
Tom’s right here.
6:15 I agree with Tom. Snap judgement when I first saw it I didn’t really like it. It’s grown on me a bit but it doesn’t feel Skaven.
But hopefully like you said this is the worst model.
Great show as always, Vince & Tom. Everyone is buzzing for 4.0. BUT many of us are still playing local leagues and tournaments in 3.0. - we have our Element Legends AoS spring tournament at Element Games in Manchester UK tomorrow!
Vinces face when Tom was talking about Warlock: "Yeah dude, please continue, it's okay to have an opinion even tho you're wrong an all levels"
To be fair, Tom is entirely objectively wrong on this one, on all levels.
this is actually one of my biggest issues with Vince, right or wrong, he portrays himself as "someone who wont yuck someone elses yum", and then...immediately shits on anyone who disagree's with his very slanted views on what the game should be like
Beasts of Chaos could also functionally be darkoath as well
I find it interesting that there are no restrictions on what units can be Honor Guard (other than being in the general's regiment). So like, I could have a Dankhold Troggoth be the Honor Guard for a Troggboss. Or a random Khorgorath could be the Honor Guard for a High Priest of Khorne. Fun stuff.
I'm wondering on prayers, what if you DON'T flush the points? What if the prayer lore has some low end prayers like this but also some super high powered prayers at like 12+/16+? Turn those late game Priests into absolute monsters if they've been left alone amassing power.
It might be cool to bring summoning in with this, or like you say, spend 3 turns building up a comet to spank your opponent
The prayer rules are the first rules I did not fully understand just by reading the article. If the points are spent or remain after chanting a prayer is big question that leads to very different systems. I am leaning towards them not being spent, because I think they would have mentioned that. But again, the article was very vague and unclear on this.
Warcry released battleplans with catchup mechanics a couple months ago. I find they help the more lethal warband, since ignoring the objectives for a round to maximize damage dealt to your opponent isn't punished as much. Whether that's good or bad is up to interpretation.
Every army taking a manifestation lore would be such a barrier to entry because of stocking
Sylvaneth players (like me) in tears.
Now I gotta bring the following:
My 2000pt army
100-600pts of summons depending on what I'm using and how many options I want
2-3 sets of Wyldwoods (hopefully these get tweaked in 4.0 to only require 1 set or maybe 2 sets max)
faction endless spells and/or another set of endless spells if I choose a different lore
Hope you have a truck to drive all that around to tournaments
@@inquisitorsz I think it will be an option (and probably a competitive one) but not mandatory.
My guess is that
1) summoning, at least as 3.0 is concerned is gone. There might be replace a unit effects, setup X specific unit, or when it dies replace with Y. But other than that summoning doesn't fit in with the ability system they are going for.
2) I think everyone will get a free bonus enhancement, to take a second lore, or artefact or command trait. Adding lores will give a lot of flexibility but it doesn't increase the number of casts you have, versus artefacts and command traits have an additive bonus
To Tom’s point on the Warlock Engineer - he feels like the 5th model in a warband not like one of the most iconic skaven models. Nothing wrong with the model itself, it just doesn’t fit with my expectations for that model in the range. If it had been presented as “Skaven Marksman” or something I probably wouldn’t have had a second thought.
Also…any news on undesigned?
Exactly this.
re: Manifestations. I can see them being attached to a core rules regiment, so like take 3 wizards/priests in this regiment and gain access to a manifestation lore of your choice and they can only be manifested by the regiment wizards.
I think the language for priests being "match" the chanting value implies you don't actually spend ritual points, they just accumulate and succeed if you have that many.
I could be wrong though
5 minutes of "I think he's cool/ I think he's weird" is probably not going to change anyone's mind. He seems a little too upright for me but I suspect that's because he's got one leg up on the valve thing and it'll look less so in real life. Looking forward to new jezzails confirmed.
One of the problems of sand-bagging is time. I tried only once in a small tournament (Nexus Collapse, one point behind), but my opponent went extra long on the third round and we had to end the match. He would have no miniatures left on the table by the end of the fourth, so there's that risk too...
... I don't play Warhammer... but I knew both of these people quite well back in the day, hah.... Hey Tom... we never got to do that "Closing Time" campaign, ;p
Regarding the skaven sculpt. Great to see new toys of course but I agree with Tom, the model looks too humanoid for me. Could be the pose but the animal aspect is missing for me.
Still great but not Rat enough…which sounds silly 😂
Very excited for 4th after all of what I have seen. My two biggest worries are battle tactics and manifestation lores (aka endless spells that don't cost points). The thing about battle tactics that annoys me the most is that they are also used in the First Blood beginners battle pack. I really wish they were not there and that they had just used half a dozen battle plans with baked-in simple secondary scoring rules. As an option for new / casual players that don't like battle tactics, but want to play more than just Spearhead.
Good points regarding the underdog mechanic. As long as it is not too powerful, I think it is a good mechanic to keep games tighter and more interesting. And from what we have seen, the power of the boni seems about right.
I think they tell you mostly everything you need to know about the priests in the wording for the prayer. You pick a prayer, THEN make a chanting roll. So it's not a system where you make a prayer roll, accumulate points, then "purchase" a prayer with those points. The rolls are tied to specific prayers, and so are the ritual points. I think "ritual points" are just a fancy way of describing the mechanic whereby a prayer's chanting value can "carry over" and increase from turn to turn. They use the phrase "or hold out for a chanting value of 8+". I think almost certainly unused ritual points will not carry over for use in the priest's next prayer. But these are just guesses.
I think the point is that the other way would be much simpler, at least in terms of wording. Each priest has a generic chanting roll that gives prayer points, and the points can be spent to trigger prayer abilities. No need to say "on a chanting roll of 8+" when you cannot roll an 8 on a D6, but which relies on spending prayer points that are not actually mentioned in the ability. Also no need to pick a target or declare what prayer you're using if you're planning to bank the points for next turn anyway.
My response to the sandbagging bit is that losing in points, and losing on the table, are separate things.
Getting half your army blown out, then having the underdog mechanic given to your opponent anyways because they stood on one less circle, or took a double turn feels awful.
I hit the like button and and my wife brought me waffles
The Warlock Engineer reminded me of The Secret of Nimh. :)
Honor Guard is interesting to units that may still be able to pile in without charging. ie current Zombies. (You sill have to be wholly within 6")
It's so funny watching this a couple days later, since GW released the battle tactics article shortly after this live show.
I can't wait till next week's Warhammer Weekly
The Warlock Engineer is perfectly fine. It's a great sculpt that openly broadcasts what you should expect it to do on the table; spot heroes for your snipers to drop. It's very clear what this piece is meant to power-pair with and that's great, while still standing out. Also he is kinda hunched still and I think we are judging too much based on only one angle.
My only gripe is that he is just the "Warlock Engineer" instead of Warlock with Jezzail. That's just weird to me that he is not more specific given he has a bery narrowly tailored role compared to your typical Warlock Engineer. Yes the Bombadier will probably get his own role, but still, I liked the idea of their being a generalized Warlock Engineer who tends to the war machines. Hopefully we will still get that.
On your thoughts of Khorne, I COMPLETELY agree... they should play in a similar fashion to Ironjaws
As a servant of the horned rat since the 90s, I'm very comfortable that Skryre heroes are no longer battlefield wizards. Their forging of magic and engineering is done in the workshop. On the battlefield they are there to tinker and tweak their inventions. Dark mirror of dwarven runesmiths and the like.
Also, this was telegraphed when they talked about magic. You choose one spell lore and that wouldn't work for Skaven if both Masterclan and Skryre wizards are in your list.
There wasn't much discussion about the nature of the lores themselves, and whether we are moving into a world of universal lores supplemented by dedicated faction lores. More than once now, the previews have stressed the importance of making a choice of spell lores in list construction, but if there are no universal lores, I don't see how this is a meaningful process for most factions which historically have had no more than spells all in a single lore.
Also, as an aside Manifestation Lores have to be a separate choice because the DoK lore would include both Invocations and Endless Spells. We know Spell Lores and Prayer Lores are separate; there's no way that one choice would replace both of them. They're clearly bonus content for your army if you have the models.
22:15 Every time past the launch of third edition was a dumb time for these cuts! The cuts when they launched the latest CoS book was frankly a little late in the game.
Love the new warlock! taking his time looking around, like a boss!
Indeed!
I love the new engineer. Changing up siluettes is so import for a horde army
So max 6 a round from objs, but it looks on boarder war you'll only be reliably scoring 3-5 controlling 1 or two middle objs. feels like even though secondaries are the same percentage of scoring as they used to be maybe primaries are going to be harder to max out, making secondaries even more impactful than originally thought.
If Manifestations / Endless Spells are essentially free enhancements now for armies, I wonder if they are going to add more incantations and endless spells for various factions
Not to mention more general ones that are available to everyone (not simply repackaging the old ones)
They seem to be treating having these as akin to Faction Terrain for everyone
You rarely see Fyreslayers or Khorne without their altars because it is so helpful to the army on the field
Now, everyone will at least have Manifestations?
Also, yeah, it's about selling more models
May as well take them since they are free and your opponent will certainly have them
Tom specifically requested weight in, he's wrong. Skaven sniper getting his range rocks
3 Plans for the core battle pack is enough for an RTT, great for teaching events, shorter games so people can afford to be slower. Its aggressively fine, and I like having the option.
Sure, it’s fine, I was just hoping for great. :)
What was the company name Tom bought new gaming mats from? I couldn't quite hear it, and there isn't a link I can see in the description 🙃
Gray Matter Gaming 27:19
If people want detailed history of GW, check out Jordan Sorcery. The Livingston/Jackson GW started in London and that was when they won the DnD rights. It was when Bryan Ansell took over and moved the company to Nottingham when the true birth of Warhammer happened.
Team Tom on Nexus Collapse! Alpha strike and get while the gettins good!
Having manifestation lores might mean we get to keep the BoC endless spells around
I’m debating between whether the engineer is a bad model, or GW still take pictures from the worst possible angle
Juggz is a fantastic podcast! Great pick from Vince.
It really is!
I know this entire balance update is a bit of a meme. But sylvaneth got a lot of buffs (justified based on winrates), and the dok point changes hit good units.
But it feels like they forgot orruks were also at the bottom.
Also buffing ancient resin ogor models with abysmal rules is funny to me.
I somewhat agree with Tom. The sculpt is fine, but I feel its a bit too tame. It lacks some warpstone shenanigans. It makes me fear that they are making the aos design too serious and not goofy enough when appropriate. Guess we'll see
I really like the concept of new prayers, I just hope its a simple "I pray and get my ritual points. I then just spend them on any prayer I want or just hold on to them." Having to track points for each prayer would be insane.
I am worried about battle tactics too. I dont like that we have to score them every turn. I am dreading the friday article ngl...
A comment about sand bagging, typically the player going second is in the best position to do it, HOWEVER, because if you double you cannot complete a tactic you are commiting to maintaining the turn status quo or go down an additional 4 points
That you thinking about Re again Vince 1:11:02
The problem with tactics is they aren't tactics. They are just activities you do, as they do not usually relate to your overall strategy. I prefer to do just the objectives of a scenario to determine victory. I would rather call my shots with tactics. Like " do x wounds with my leviadon" or "get this spell off". Admittedly, this could get messy in a tournament and become a sloppy system where you get a point whenever something good happens
changing warscroll MW spells to "spell gun" is imo, a great change purely to provide a backstop with look out sir and other cant be shot tech to prevent the "i cast 10 mortal wounds at your guy" feelsbads
Sorry Tom. Skaven look good.
The warlock model was cool and all; but what I really really want is an army of ninja rats. Show me the Eshin!!!
I think around battle tactics- they need a secondary scoring that allows a differentiator for armies to score. The old systems even like today’s old world stuck on their kill more game design. How do u want open up for different playstile if u are not able to score with it. Does matter if it is battle tactics, secondaries or something else- but just sitting on circles make the game boring because then u do not need the multiple roles in a army if u just put biggest defense on circles and best offense to kill defenses on other circles.
Tom: Hype! Let's go!!!
I'm with Tom hard meh on the sculpt
I’m wary about the underdog approach. It feels like ‘my first leader breakaway’ mechanic and GW track record of doing things for the first time is not great. (It feels tacked on, better if the natural game flow addressed this) but, as others have commented, VP isn’t always the best indicator of who is winning (feels like it’s intended to separate who’s getting killed the most as a victory condition, but now we are leaning into it?)
Having free endless spells seems like a giant win for magic armies, while a major loss for non heavy magic armies.. Like I'll just be able to churn these out pretty easily, while you can't... seems dumb
Unstable might mean that the terrain could be destroyed by some means
I like the new FAQ because it gave me just enough points to fit blood knights into my SBGL army
I dig the vibe of the new Warlock Engineer. They don't have to be hunched over and raving to be megalomaniacs. I can practically hear his shrill voice muttering yeesssss-yesssss, as the Arch Warlock he hates wanders dangerously-conveniently close to the line of fire toward the shoot-kill "intended" target. Also, I'm hoping the First Blood is just one set of battle plans in the Core book, aside from the seasonal ones. The wording in the article might just be more crappy GW editing.
The engineer is so similar to my 3d printed engineer (resin warfare), upright with a rifle instead of a pistol, bionic eyes and a limb...
I have always thought Battle Tactics had more to do with solving the impossible balance problem. Some armies will always hit harder than others, and points balance is imperfect, but players need to feel like they have a path to victory even if they cannot do anything to the opponent’s army. I think they were an answer to a 1st & 2nd edition problem of some real wildly powerful things and other armies that simply couldn’t match in a straight fight. Players will complain less about unfair things when they can still achieve a close game, buying GW maneuver space to fix their problems
The challenge has always been of course the most powerful armies and those that are best at battle tactics are often quite the same
Armies.
@@VinceVenturella well…I don’t think it worked as intended for a variety of reasons. Tenant of systems theory: today’s problems usually stem from (or are) past solutions.
I’ve seen this take before, that somehow he’s not an engineer… You think he pooped out that high powered sniper rifle? That’s engineering! And with a kick like that it’s probably warp powered, not to mention he has MECHANICAL LEGS! He’s a super engineer.
I really hope obscuring terrain is nothing like the absurd kill team rules for obscuring terrain
I'm still not over the squatting of Ball in Cup :/
I saw it was Tom and thought: how long until he is abused? Turns out it was 2 seconds. Yes, Tom. Stand up for yourself. Good man:)
Seeing IDK just constantly get "buffs" by units getting cost reductions does *nothing* to solve the most glaring problem: the entire army has access to five models that aren't heroes. Five. How are you supposed to effectively work with that? And then! Of the heroes they have access to, three elevenths of them aren't among the easiest things in the world to lift off the table.
Possibly my mis-reading and for next week's show but the grand alliance battle tactics seem to herald them being garbage for another edition.
Maybe "unstable" means a monster can destroy that feature somehow.
I know you play 10th edition 40k on occassion Vince. do you also hate hoe they have done the fixed or tactical secondaries in that game? I find battle tactics to be the same sort of thing and think it will be interesting if they gave sigmar a choice like that
I don’t hate them, I don’t love them. It’s sort of a mixed bag for me with 40 K.
@VinceVenturella I respect that answer. I used to not like the random of tactical but have learn to seal with it. and suprisely to me, it seemed a lot of people like the random tactical
The model is visually fine, but I'm not huge on my three Warlock Engineers now existing only to buff my zero Warplock Jezzails, which is the only Skryre unit for which I never cared. I can't think of a time when I've ever been happy about a model (in either AoS or 40k) being redesigned down to the conceptual level; remakes should be re-dos, not do-overs.
Yeah looks like we may have some granular power pair action with the engineer loadouts. Hopefully the arch warlock and Bombardier have their own good pairings (assuming we get a new arch warlock).
Vince says he will not play AoS until July?
No more 3.0 for me. :) I said that
I dislike battleplans that encourage sandbagging for a few reasons. As Vince touched on newer players are going to miss out on the intricacies of the battleplan because its antithetical to the competitive game we are playing to try and score LESS. My other issue is that obviously the underdog mechanic exists to give the losing player a chance of coming back. With the advent of a penalty for the double turn they needed to find a way to have a come back mechanic so the game doesn't end up like 40k and you just concede top of turn 3. My issue is that winning doesn't necessarily mean you have the most points at any given moment. If I sandbag and keep the game close but have better board presence and control along with better synergies because of hero sniping or just unit positioning then I am winning in all but score. By the end of the turn in this scenario I have your entire army neutered or dead or contained where they cant score much. So now, I'll score max points for turns 3, 4 and 5 putting me WELL in the lead but the entire first two turns, along with possibly the beginning of turn 3, I was the underdog.
While this sounds like a good thing it leads to really negative play experiences where you just don't feel like there's any way for you to interact with the game. Your opponent has you dead to rights and instead of the catch up mechanic helping you catch up, it is giving the already winning player a win more button. All this to say, I don't hate the mechanic but I think it needs to be thought out a little more and should be one of the Modules they've been touting.
All of this comes from a background of hosting a lot of small tournaments in my local shop and going to some of the bigger ones in the area as well as places like the NOVA Open and ACO. I've seen players give away a double just because they know they're opponent can't do much or anything in the turn and then they can double them the next turn when its even stronger.
Just my 2 cents! Love the show guys!
The Midwest is the most American part of America
I liked and suddenly became 15% cooler. It felt great
Hear me out - folks complain that 1 year GHBs are too long, and 6 month GHBs are too short, so... 9 MONTH GHBS
Totally on Vince's side with engineer, just cause he looks so adorable with his cute little crooked telescope and his warpstone eye! i just wanna snuggle him and pinch his little cheeks >^V^
The rat model is good
I’m with Tom. Something not right with the skaven model. Necromanda Skaven vibe
Tom cooked, it looks wayyyy too human and more importantly composed.
I guess we have to manifest the endless spells ourselves because you can’t buy them anywhere.
🤷♂️
I want to be excited about 4th, but even putting aside the mostly terrible (imo) articles, I am struggling to feel convinced and local players seem to be getting the same vibe. Hopefully it will be a when we see actual full rules and play it will come together.
Warlock is fine, appreciate not every model being in an action pose, looks good but again not got that wow factor for me.
Don't want to be negative, will be buying the release box, and give it a good go. Buy 4th is GWs last chance for me. Maybe it is in part other system exciting me more
The skaven looks human. Proportions are all wrong. Hope for TOW (if we ever get Skaven again on that end) don't go that route. Anyways I'm out, looking forward to you guys doing TOW content ever again 😅
Sand bagging - do not know how it is written in English - is over 3rd edition the viable strategy for Sylvaneth players. I need to underscore to control the game to have a change by mitigating it by turn 4 and 5. Mostly winning by 1-3 points more.
what in the hell is wrong with mini stomps website?....
What do you mean?
Honestly Battle Tactics and Season rules just in the bin. Let’s just play the game with the ghb and stop adding more into it with it.
That being said these are really the only two major gripes I’ve had with the new edition stuff, scenarios look great and if they actually don’t interact with the seasonal rule and are permanently usable that’ll be great.
The engineer sculpt is fine, but I don't like it as a Skaven model. He looks too much like a normal dude that just happens to have rat face, as if he was converted from a human model by someone who insists on turning everything into rats.
This isn’t about sandbagging. It’s about catch-up mechanics and mechanics that let a player get points for doing nothing. It’s about keeping new players from quitting due to frustration about not being any good at the game. It’s like crappy board games or video games that just keep giving you little rewards so you’ll keep playing even if you are exercising no skill. This is bumming me out in a big way. I want to be excited about and like AoS4, but GW is making it really hard.
Are you against catch up mechanics in general or this specifically?
@@VinceVenturellaI’m against catch-up mechanics that just happen by default. If there is some additional strategy around its use, that’s okay, but just having a catch-up mechanic that always triggers and rewards the “losing” player requires no additional strategy, unless you count sandbagging as a strategy.
I'm sorry Vince, but if this 'it's fine' anti-rodent vibe is what we are going to get from Tom, then he'll just have to be benched until he can appreciate the greatness of the master-race, yes-yes?!
👍
I think battle tactics exist for the sake of having secondary objectives to add dynamism. That being said, slotted round by round tactics aren't the answer.
If for example you had 3-4 BATTLE tactics that you chose to accomplish as part of your overall game strategy that had to be accomplished any time during the game, that would probably be better. Maybe not. But I don't like this formulaic way of always doing the same thing every battle plan, every game. Now even more so with scores being designed at a hard cap, every time. Doesn't feel good to me.
This is article #1 and 2 I'm not happy about for 4th. Magic is better, but the article is piss poor in how it presented prayers and manifestations
That battleplan/battlepack article was probably the most disappointing for me so far.
Still the same boring and cookie/cutter mission design GWs been employing for how many years now in both their two big, flagship games. Still the weirdly generic/nondescript objectives that boil down to "stand in that circle and that circle and that circle". They even mention 40ks secondary objectives in the little asterisk about battle tactics, so I assume it's also going to be very similar, randomly drawn "generic/nondescript things do to" each round.
I don't really see the point of these terrain maps, there is nothing unique or interesting about that symmetrical layout and the fact that terrain is seemingly boiled down to 4 rules does not inspire confidence either.
I really, REALLY don't want to fan the flames of the stupid "competitive vs. non-competitive players" fight that happens in social media too often, but both of these points to me look like concessions made for the tournament scene. Keep missions simple-stupid, keep terrain as non impactful as possible, paint random symmetrical terrain maps so terrain can be condensed into 2D cut-out squares on the table.
Honestly I don't think this is really necessary, games like Malifaux can still have thriving competitive scenes without losing the flavour in actually playing the game.
I think the engineer is boring and the paint job is drab.
Fair enough. :)
this new system honestly feels like it is made for young kids. to the point that my own pre-teens think that the new rules are to juvenile for them...in more polite words here, of course. I get that Vince loves ultra simplified rules, but seriously when will it be acknowledged that a Lot of people are disgruntled by these rules? Why is it Always lovebombing as a pseudo echo chamber? I almost never see detractors speaking on this show, and when they exist they often get talked over
I welcome the feedback, I welcome the comments, most feedback so far, in comments and on the show, have been positive. There are concerns as we raised, but I remain positive. The concerns most have expressed this far are not with a lack of perceived complexity.
@VinceVenturella in your comments section, perhaps. I'm in several large discords, in Facebook groups, etcetc. Most of the comments I see is irritation with both the squatting of models (which you diminished by downplaying it), and thar the rules seem far to simple (doubly so for weapon loadouts seeming to mean nothing, something you always cheer for). It's not that you have a different opinion. You just Constantly "yuck other people's yum", or in this cause deny others have opinions that differ from the show. Even with cohosts
@@autumnlotus6250 I watch discord groups, facebook, watch other videos, twitter, etc. I try to take in lots of opinions and present a balanced view. Not yucking anyone's yum is me not saying - "You're wrong if you think this" - I am sorry if I come across like that, it's truly not what I intend. I do support these moves toward simplification, as I think the game is better with a simple foundation. I think the broad base of the community agrees, but that doesn't mean everyone does, I am sure there are some material % of people that are not happy. I don't ever shut down discourse, I don't beat people up for their opinions, I give differing views a fair shake, but I also share my opinion and strongly advocate for it. That is why I am here and what people watch this for.
Also, as a side note, I definitely am going to push back on your saying I downplayed the models being cut, that is simply factually wrong. I had a good 20 minute rant about it, described every way it was wrong, lambasted them for several of the choices, described ways it could have been better, I straight up said that whomever was behind a particular decision should be fired. You're not being fair with that characterisation, plain and simple. I didn't engage in name calling, or unecessary vulgar attacks, I simply laid out the 4 categories of wrong, I am not sure what you would have wanted me to do instead, but I very much stand behind my points, my belief that some choices in the cut were wrong and the way it was rolled out was (mostly - the extra year and lots of notice was good) wrong.
@@VinceVenturella two points on the last section: You actually downplayed about Half of the discontinued models. I am rewatching that section specifically of your video, to not just misremember or misquote you here. You specifically downplayed the issue with Sacrsanct, telling people to just use other similarly based models when there is no clear equivalent for models. They deleted the only magic units in SCE, and removed MOST of the wizard heroes on foot and mounted. Thats essentially seeing Thousand Sons being deleted from 40k, and tell them to just play World Eaters instead. Secondly, and most importantly since you have been an Orc player for a while now: You basically shrugged off Bonesplinters being removed. after years of shrugging and playing off the constant neglect and abuse of the faction by GW. At one point in the past you wished that they were gone, which is incredibly hurtful. And the comments just played it off as if it was nothing. You mention "well not many people played them". Yes, because they had their competetibe playstyle removed, their unique army rules removed, and no effort since 1st edition to update the range in any capacity. you love beastmen, and they were in the exact same position. but they GOT that support, and became super popular. whats good for the goose is goose for the gander
Vince must have some Conan/Thulsa Doom level wizard hate backstory to justify how loud he is about hating magic
Conan and I have much the same
Backstory yes.