What Should Change in Age of Sigmar? - Warhammer Weekly 09212022

[@Sorastro]

Thank you so much for the kind words guys! I really appreciate that ☺️

[@budkehler5122]

omg, of course!!! Your content is fabulous!!!

[@Sorastro]

Thank you Bud, that means a lot to me 😀

[@andreasrasmussen195]

@@Sorastro your content is indeed fabulous! I painted 40 or so B1 droids, using your tutorial. And absolutely love them. I plan to paint all my Star Wars Legion using your videos. Keep up the good work friend!

[@drthunder7285]

Coherentcy 1" IF WITHIN 3" of target unit.

[@lestrike2707]

On a different note, if that’s something worth talking about: I love what CA has done with Slaves to Darkness in Total War Warhammer III: If you play Be‘lakor you can basically use the entire Chaos roaster with certain limitations. To me this feels like the core of what S2D should be. It‘s the path to glory, mortals that either join a single god or worship them all. Demons, warlords and every unit changes the way it works depending on the chosen mark (also: no hero-aura-micromanagement needed)

[@cleaveandrun284]

The last half second of this whole show might be my favorite part

[@mr08evox]

My friends and I only use the index’s for 40k STILL. So much fun.

[@joshuaclark3406]

All great points (and guests), however Vince's point about the Heroic Monstrous Actions really stood out to me. Ummming and ahhhing and finally coming to a decision on what you want to do only to have that outcome gated by a dice roll feels slow and really unfun.

[@VinceVenturella]

Thank you, it’s just one of those keys of game design I hate when it’s missed.

[@starslayer2438]

Keep: the way subfactions are done right now & armies having a couple interesting battleline if options Change: coherency (stricter version should start at either 7+ or 11+ models) & faction terrain (most should cost a few points so they are no longer auto-includes) Kill: army-specific battle tactics & miscasts & reinforcement point limits

[@VinceVenturella]

Second all of this

[@GreatWhiteShack]

Wondering if the battle tactic system could be redesigned to have three fixed tactics, unique to each scenario (though scenarios could reuse the same ones). For example, the battleplan Head on Collision could use the following battle tactics: 1) Destroy three enemy units by the end of turn 2; 2) Control the central objective at the end of battle round 3; 3) At the start of battle round 4, before the priority roll, each player chooses one terrain feature partially or wholly within their own territory. You complete this battle tactic if you control the terrain piece your opponent chose at the end of any of your remaining turns. This could add an element of flavor for each battleplan, removes the time needed to choose tactics at the start of your turns (perhaps simplifying things for newer players), and adds obvious ways to stop your opponent from achieving the battle tactics - you know exactly when and what your opponent will be trying to accomplish in each phase of the game, and some tactics, like #2 above, only one player could achieve. As an added bonus, it makes battletome tactics obsolete. Would like to hear discussion of this idea, or how to improve it, in a future episode

[@forehead84]

Over the moon to hear Vince suggest not retiring anything else. I've spent a small fortune on old kits this year to build a dispossessed heavy cities army and a wanderers heavy cities army and I'm terrified about it being a huge waste of time and cash.

[@theDackjanielz]

As a Fyreslayer fan i agree, our faction deserves to exist, we just have been neglected sadly.....I genuinely believe we could be far more impressive than we are. Cities of sigmar could easily be done through a double take - GW could refresh all of the old fantasy lines and sell it to both the old world AND Age of sigmar ppl, no brainer! Beastmen have also had a few scares and they deserve to be here too.

[@forehead84]

@@theDackjanielz Crikey, you've listed my other armies :D. Aside from Soulblight which is predominantly new lines stuff I have lots of BoC and Fyreslayers so I feel your pain as well.

[@davidblenner9082]

Love Daytons headphones!!!!

[@TombKingTristan]

A man of fine taste indeed Mr. Blenner

[@NicoNarwhal]

On AoS Flyaroundus, Battletome Gothic, how could you forget Squeppelin Grot Pirates?

[@ryansosna3432]

GW can take ALL of my money for Battletoad Gothic!

[@theDackjanielz]

Hah yes - make it happen!! Seriously if they come out with a new line of lizardmen and its lazor space dinosaurs .......MAYBE that rumour engine? Does look a bit like the frill of a skink....

[@jeffreysas5888]

Top picks for me Keep: Command Points spending and generating) Change: Keywords interaction (they don't take advantage of this enough in rules writing to categorize units, and there's a lot of bloat (keywords that are on the warscroll but never brought up)) Kill: Ranged Attack mortal wounds trigger

[@Pennydude99]

Keep: Command Point and new commands Change: make more generic battalions relevant, let those abilities break the 1/phase commands Kill: all ally rules.

[@BeefyCrunch]

This videos great ! Always love to party at the all points! Bud's podcast is the best

[@brianshobbyspace3569]

Keep: Making battletomes quickly and with an even hand. Change: coherency to 11 models. Kill: Hero phase Shenanigans such as Move, Shoot, Charge etc…

[@VinceVenturella]

Solid list.

[@davidcampbell621]

I think Tom hit the nail on the head with battle tactics. I'd rather see them removed entirely though, and add some more wierd and/or non-standard symmetrical battle plans like what we saw in thondia.

[@mrTirwit]

"I work, I paint, I parent. That's my life" I can relate so much to that 😂

[@BreakingTad]

Tim with the coldest takes on this one😂

[@bobnospum]

Wicked Dicey!!! Great shirt Bud, Looking forward to the next Grudge with Tough Crowd.

[@budkehler5122]

That was a Wicked Nicey Shirt! lol. And yes. Next grudge will be great.

[@U_N_C_L_E_Mike]

They really match your eyes

[@Nubgan]

As a Lumineth player who has no priest and cannot ally in a priest, I hate and am exceptionally jealous of the arcane tomb and wish there was a generic pope hat I could get to make a priest! XD To stay with the theme of the show: Keep: Releasing all these bad ass models Change: Stupidly old models Kill: Stupidly old models!

[@VinceVenturella]

I would love the generic priest item.

[@Birdmanesp92]

For battle tactics I'd limit them to being worth 1 pt and make the primary objectives the primary method of scoring. It's a good spice to the game, but just like oregano, you don't want it to be the biggest flavor.

[@corbingovers7559]

Great one! One change I'd make is to get GW to stop trying to make I go you go more reactive and just allow for alternating activations. Out of Phase shooting, redeploy, HH Reactions..etc are all GW trying to make the game more responsive between the players...which could be solved by just making it an alternating activations game...65% of the rules bloat would go away and the game would be just as reactive if not more. Kill Team and Warcry do it so well, why can't the Army Games?

[@theDackjanielz]

Completely agreed - We have been shouting this at them for years and they wont do it, sadly...

[@VinceVenturella]

It would be a big change for sure

[@maphi8914]

OMG these headphones are cuuuute 😍 And yes, I have a major backlog of WW to listen to 🙈

[@blighboy1]

Missed opportunity not to use a Keeper of Secrets image for keep it. Regarding all the discussion on secondary objectives, I generally don't like scoring mechanics that seem unrelated to the overall state of the battlefield. If I take all the objectives and wipe my opponents army, it feels bad if he wins because his general did a kickflip for +5 bonus points. I think additional scoring mechanisms should be reserved for tournament/ranked play only, not individual pickup games, where victory should be decided by the battleplan.

[@TombKingTristan]

didn't get to go on my " WE NEED PRIESTS IN EVERY ALLIANCE" screed!

[@LukeDawson22]

My kill is Nighthaunt so Tom doesn't get away with killing Seraphon.

[@adamcraig9834]

Rally: maybe only models lost to Battleshock should be returned. Then, a 4+ matters less. Its probably low end troops who are fleeing from battleshock, and caps how many could come back. You don't need to slaughter the whole unit to prevent dead ones from coming back. Its not undoing your work at killing them, but it is giving a comeback from a bad battleshock roll. Also, has verisimilitude - people too scared to fight or that run can be brought back, not those smashed to bits

[@VinceVenturella]

The challenge is that’s a nightmare. People don’t track casualties like that, you’d have to keep two separate dead piles of all units and that’s just not going to fly.

[@thebryceroy6155]

My inquiring organ needs to know if Sexy Rat will be painted AS Sexy Rat...or if she'll be all gnarly and Skaven-y... My hopes for the latter, but I look forward to seeing the finished product one way or the other!

[@VinceVenturella]

Oh, sexy for sure

[@johnchaves1642]

Keep: Coalition. Change: Casting by rolling 2D6 to having a number of dice (printed on their scroll) that then you get to allocate to different spells, ex; Lord of Change rolls 9 dice, puts 4 dice toward a scaling damage spell (as in it does more damage the more you allocate to it), puts 2 dice to an aura buff, and the final 3 dice go into some utility (teleport, endless spell, summoning, you get the idea). KILL: all named characters (at the very least make the "gods" Open/Narrative only)!

[@teagancombest6049]

Even Valkia?!

[@johnchaves1642]

@@teagancombest6049 "ALL"

[@VinceVenturella]

Those are bold moves

[@Frogomb]

If you're doing the monster killer attack with new gargant, why would you ever not use all out attack? Roar?

[@Nodonn]

Roar or ran out of CP or really need it for an AoD elsewhere.

[@christianallemann9736]

Titanic Duel

[@VinceVenturella]

Yes, those, but basically only use that when you are on 2/2

[@Frogomb]

@@christianallemann9736 you're right, my bad, I'm wrong

[@KK-qm1mr]

Hoping for bonus content, where the hosts play actual F*** Marry Kill with AoS characters.

[@smatta84]

I think Tom’s “change it” just boils down to tournament tiebreakers…would Tom’s suggestion be satisfied if an event just didn’t use them outside of scoring to determine a victory in a given round.

[@VinceVenturella]

Could be, I think it’s mainly scoring yes

[@kopfnussklopfer8679]

I disagree with the "retire models, not armys" thing. Im fine if citys would be discontinued, if there is a new cool dwarfs book with all the dispossessed units, druchii with many crossbows and the return of the wood elfs.

[@mathiasikit]

Yes!!

[@VinceVenturella]

I like them as a unified cities force, I think it works in the realms. You should still be able to have your all dwarf force, or so on, but they likely don’t need their own book.

[@theDackjanielz]

Honestly i would like to see a form of both, keep cities around with all the combined guys but i also would like to see the "Re- imagined" dwarf army which has been hinted at several times over the years.

[@rabidwhale]

@Vince, speaking of reality splitting axe, if the Khorne guy does damage to a single model unit but then that unit kills the Khorne guy before the end of the combat, does it still trigger at the end of combat? This split the reality of our LGS because pretty much it was down the middle on the ruling.

[@VinceVenturella]

The effect will still trigger. It’s not dependent on him being present. He’s out the effect on the model.

[@rabidwhale]

@@VinceVenturella Thanks Vince! Very helpful

[@stephenwood6665]

Any idea what happened to the lumineth book. They just skipped it

[@VinceVenturella]

I’m sure it will be coming soon.

[@dalorasinum386]

I have an idea on why rampages are at the end of charge phase. If you have it at the start of combat then doesn’t the player who’s turn it is pick the order of start of phase stuff? So if you charge an enemy monster, you can pick to do start of phase command abilities first and then rampages. So the monster player if he does roar it doesn’t do anything as roar prevents units from issuing and receiving command abilities. So if it has already been received then the roar wouldn’t do anything.

[@jordivermeulen2519]

Obviously it needs to be made so that you wouldn't be able to pull this kind of bs.

[@VinceVenturella]

Yes, but that could be addressed

[@kennethchambers4820]

Coherency should be 1/2", and all units 3 models or more, but everything gets to fight if within 1/2" of someone who's fighting. This way every unit deploys in little nurgle symbols of 3s, front 2 fight- back guy also fights. Will stop all congo lines, cav is now a problem that must be fixed.

[@U_N_C_L_E_Mike]

Cute headphones

[@TombKingTristan]

What IS a mile anyway?

[@lorenzosgarallino]

The rumor engine is ofc a terrain feature

[@teagancombest6049]

I don't have a good keep, there isn't anything controversial that I particularly love besides the priority roll. But I have a huge flaming CHANGE IT! and that is: Line of Sight. This covers core rules and terrain rules, we need a massive common sense restriction on line of sight. Bare minimum, you must measure from the closest points of the 2 models bases and not like the top of your hat to the tip of my wing even when I'm 99% obscured. If I can hide my base in 2 dimensions, I am hidden from your shooting (unless you're lumineth or Crossboos). I also think there is at least a paragraph that needs to be added to terrain rules about how they interact with LoS. My Kill It is the Wurgog Prophet with 4+ ward.

[@Umberhulk-yr1ul]

Hot take here. Increase the points on unique characters, maybe drastically. Or restrict them in some way. I get everyone wants to have a giant toy Archaon or Morathi on the table but it's so ridiculous fluffwise that they appear in every damn battle. Let's put the spotlight back on the warriors making war, it just feels better to me.

[@VinceVenturella]

Well, the issue is when people talk about special characters, they always reference the big gods, but of course, the game is littered with 100-200 point special characters that are just quite useful to armies, but nothing overwhelming, it would be a shame to lose them.

[@Umberhulk-yr1ul]

@@VinceVenturella oh, indeed! I didn't write that correctly. I mean the big ones, the Gods and faction lords of the setting, the ones who get their own books and legends. Nagash is a cool model but c'mooooon, every matchup? It just breaks my personal immersion in the world. No problem with Lotann, Yndrasta and their like.

[@Kometrion]

Old World Kislev model. Years away from now!

[@theDackjanielz]

KEEP: The Armies - Thank you Vince completely agreed. CHANGE/KILL: The endless web of pointless complexity that never needed to exist in the first place.

[@drzephy]

Wow I guess Tom decided to openly declare his lack of taste with that kill it pick. I mean, its dinosaurs riding other dinosaurs with lasers! IN SPACE!!!

[@MisterDragon]

I knew Tom would say that when it came to "Kill it" and I still hate him for it. That said... Yes the line is old and desperately needs updates. Also the lore from launch about the starborne is dumb, everybody hated it so much they backtracked on it in 2nd edition, just kill that entire half of the book. Make everything coalesced by default, this is what the lore is, what they have always been. This would also allow the Warscrolls to be functionally balanced because right now it's 1 scroll for every unit trying to make it work in two factions, fundamentally making it impossible to balance them. No summoning for them at all. They're not daemons, they don't need it. They can keep teleports via spells, fine but keep the army a little more honest.

[@MKDietz]

Mounted units go to 2 or 3" coherency - that's my solution :)

[@VinceVenturella]

I wouldn’t mind that either, there are likely 10 good fixes to this :)

[@DSamuri]

Change it: d6s, I'd love to see a switch to d10s

[@kangthecarnivore]

Tom's Kill it makes me disregard everything else he's said (jk). Mostly because Lizardmen have a bunch of classic models that are top tier. Keep: Initiative Roll Change: YGIG. Alternating activations within phases. Would solve a lot of stupid problems with the game. Conquest has convinced me that it is the true way. Kill: Faction Specific Battletactics/Grand Strats. Alternatively, MW shooting. Shouldn't be a thing. Leave it for melee and spells.

[@davidwasilewski]

Options are always good but, in the same vein as the “three ways to play”, there could be a ‘basic’ AoS version of the game and the ‘advanced’ version (think D&D). AoS has too much cognitive overload for me and my friends now. When we do play, we don’t use the general’s handbooks (other than points changes). We tend not to use endless spells, allies, battalions or stratagems and battle tactics either - just playing for objectives.

[@VinceVenturella]

Oh, I agree, that’s why we did the simplified battlepack episode and I hope to have something soon on that formally.

[@Phetus1337]

Nobody talked about the double turn ? Im the only one that still hate the double turn ?

[@VinceVenturella]

We mentioned it some. The priority roll I just believe is part of the basic DNA of the game. I understand that some people don’t like it, but in the end, I think it creates more good than bad. It’s a combative mechanic that also provides for a tactical challenge and a skill test. I truly love it and fine that beyond a point, it’s not deciding games for the most part.

[@ThomFoolery12]

Do we really need bonds of battle to stay or could we just be more liberal with 2” range?

[@VinceVenturella]

Well, the challenge is we can’t just give 2” to everyone, and too many people are on 32s

[@bartek_ewertowski]

The new Megas are disappointing model-wise. Would have been nice to get some alernate legs so they don't all look the same.

[@thel1chking]

Completely Disagree - most of the groups and communities I keep in contact with have left AOS throughout this edition for various factors . Most went to OPR, some just waiting for Old World or using other systems.

[@theDackjanielz]

We went from an 18 page rulebook to 360.....That's why i hate this edition of AOS and quit it the moment i saw it. Like why? Honestly....Why.

[@thel1chking]

@@theDackjanielz horrendous - had good ideas but as usual they mess up the rules constantly to sell you more books. Think about : they’re still talking about books when it’s a model company. Other systems have better streamlined or even cohesive sound rules that don’t require any money. Models agnostic. I suggest people transition to those. AOS models are good however !

[@VinceVenturella]

Well, the games sales numbers seem to be higher than ever (anecdotal) and the tourney attendance is higher than ever (not a complete measure by any stretch) but both point to a very healthy game. As I said though, the complexity is a real challenge.

[@christophe8708]

Purple Sun nerf ! Great news !!!

[@KK-qm1mr]

Now let's hope for a Purple Sun Nerf Ball!

[@Farmers-Almanac]

I 100% agree with Tim on Battle Tactics. one of the things I don't like about 3rd edition and one of the things new players I teach have a hard time with

[@lestrike2707]

Kill: Battle Tactics, Bounty Hunters, Save Stacking, 80% of all Mortal Wounds, Instant kills (dealing too much damage with a single attack counts as well), miscasts, Lumineth, Seraphon (should be a melee army, not a shooting army), Incarnets, rules that stop interactions. I‘d live for the game to move back to being Warhammer. At the moment it‘s all too techy, there‘s no Warhammer in Age of Sigmar anymore (to me)

[@theDackjanielz]

Like it used to be - Yeah.

[@VinceVenturella]

Strong takes for sure.

[@northstartaxadvice8251]

Throw away battle tactics. Tactics in real life are what you use to achieve objectives - they're a means to an end. It's contradictory to say "We want you to control objectives" and at the same time, we're going to give you sometimes arbitrary methods you need to use. I've lost the objective game before because I was desperately trying to achieve a battle tactic that was counterproductive to controlling objectives. Battle tactics make no sense at all. If you're going to reward behaviors (which is what battle tactics are), then reward behaviors with long term implementation. That's why grand strategies are ok to keep, but they need to be general and not achievable in one turn (I'm looking at you, army-specific grand strategies).

[@mwyler3390]

Ugh, kill path of glory section in the middle of my matched play nonsense (not completely of course, just kill the placement in battletomes). Oh and bonus round Kill: 'no reserve' rules in scenarios. Let the people play with them rules.

[@kayosiiii]

As somebody who bought the most recent fomo Box but is yet to play the game… Keep: keep making interesting figures, it's the weird and wonderful stuff that has drawn me into the setting. Keep making new stuff that somebody who isn't into the game can look at and say - wow that's a really cool mini. Change: Don't make any army feel like they have to include a named character model in order to make a faction work or be competitive, and give us tools to make our own unique characters. I get sick of seeing the characters over and over again. I might have more to say on this once I have played some games but I fear that the play experience might not be as good as some of the better Euro-style war games that I own. Kill: Stormcast Eternals - I do not care for the fantasy space marines, if you do keep them make them more morally ambiguous. This ambiguity was one of the things I liked most about the old world and 40k as settings, and I think it's an important teaching tool for young minds. Mostly I think I just dread playing against the sort of player who plays Stormcast because “they are the heroes”.

[@VinceVenturella]

This hurts, I love my stormcast. :)

[@kayosiiii]

@@VinceVenturella To be fair the newer models don't look bad, it's just that lore wise they make the whole setting feel a lot more bland. It doesn't help that the concept for the Cities of Sigmar faction is just so much more evocative and interesting from a story perspective, but doesn't seem to get any support from GW beyond being a dumping ground for Warhammer old world miniatures.

[@VinceVenturella]

@@kayosiiii Good news on that front, they're redoing the whole line and have a series on the progress. Looks really promising so far.

[@kewanzahedinour7304]

wtf 12 books a year, thats the worse keep it choice ever and I once saw a man keeping his burning jacket on ...

[@VinceVenturella]

I think it’s basaically he wants all the books quickly on the back Of a new editon. But we could change it and say - the speed of editions as well. ;)

[@dannythompson9642]

👍👍

[@williamwinters1976]

The concept of battle tactics are one of my favorite parts of the game. Adding an additional way of gaining VP that is counterintuitive to holding objects is great. Without them I find the game is just who kills who spikes damage first. Changing them to add ways of denying them would be cool but going only to primary objectives seems like a boring game.

[@niilofriden4465]

.

[@skreechverminking2227]

A bad book= the skaven tome. Poorly written poorly thought out, has lots of problems. What’s fun with the book? The tons of exploit ine can use. From probably not intended flying doomwheels, to not working redmaw plagues to never exploding overcharged rattling gun weapon teams

[@VinceVenturella]

That's surprising, I really love the book, it's been very fun for me - far from perfect, but some very fun lists.

[@tcerathi]

The priority roll has to at least go in the CHANGE IT box - if such a detrimental rule to the health of the game has to stay, then it needs more of a punishment for getting a double turn. Put it right next to the coherency/melee rules in the change box.

[@VinceVenturella]

I love it, I am open to playing with incentives around it, but I often give the turn away now in 3.0.