Видео

1:28:30 this is my big wishlist item too. Give me the witch hunter army from Warmaster, GW!!

Totally agree, buy an empire captain OR 6-7 chaos warriors and you get the same result in combat - NOTHING!

For the Empire, you really want an army that feels tactical and as a jack-of-all-trades. The core should consist mostly of infantry in the form of state troops that are supported by all these other troop types. Detachments feel super thematic, but completely useless in practice. Perhaps give ranged detachments a special rule that they can fire in two ranks if within 3" and that the supporting charge automatically counts as a flank charge? My suggestion to make State Troops better is to give us the option to buy Heavy Armor for our poor halberdiers, and give us Warband. It would help a lot. Also, I don't know if any of you played 9th Age, but in there your general could give out "orders" (i.e. buffs) to their version of the regimental unit, with in his commanding presence, that was very thematic. You could buy an upgrade for him that would allow him to put out two instead of one (only one order per unit). It included things like a fight-in-extra-rank, movement speed bonus, reroll leadership tests, or ignore long range penalties I would love to see something similar for the Empire in TOW. P.S. I haven't watched the entire video yet, but I've already subbed. Very interesting points, so far.

Empire is really good at fleeing from stuff and rallying. There's rallying cry everywhere and you can put a captain on a baby griffon for an 18" bsb bubble

Without typing out a full list, there's a version of Caw! Caw! where you take a couple of Captains on Griffons at 200pts each and a couple of cannons to give you a stand-off option...

How would a BSB do in a unit of crossbowmen with a Dragon Bow?

I’m disappointed we didn’t get a State Troops army of infamy that could have fixed infantry.

Are you able to add your pods to Apple Podcasts ect please?

Interesting points and a lot of valid complaints, but as a Skaven player listening to this feels a bit like being homeless, and hearing 3 guys complain that the roof leaks in their second homes.

Japanese shirt says Slapchop XD

You need 7 and musicion to beat the dragon. 1 wound to the model 5 overkill 1 close order

Just wait for the prevalence of poison blobs to level out the number of dragons and big mknsters and hey presto! A couple of cannons will do the trick 😂 Helblaster w. 2x Engineers and Plague of rust is nice vs dragons. Reroll shots, then use Bs4, Str 5, AP3 (1+2 from PoR), AB2.

So Hyped for the Empire Arcane Journal.... M.E.G.A - Make Empire Great Again! Seriously though, I think the meta will trend towards more MMU as AJ's come out, but lets see.

my wishlist solution for the empire arcane journal against dragons is the magic itesm Van Horstman's speculum, which existed through almost all the editions before and in melee it exchanged almost all the stats of 2 characters while they were fighting. It was typically taken on a cheap captain in pegasus, which was basically used as a silverbullet against dragons, maybe now on a witchhunter with that item choosing the magic res 2 option or the hatred chaos and beastmen or undead (perfect change would be being able to choose the witchhunter option before each battle not when writing the list) since the big bad dragons are either undead or chaos (except elves). I'm also hoping for the buff wagons coming back so the luminarc and orcanium.

great show lads, cannot agree more about the sactity of painting requirement! Turning up to the 1 in 3 month brownie point burning tournament to then play black primed bret knights is a terrible vibe. My chaos shouldn't have more colours than the french boys.

1:01:05 oh and magic needs an overhaul, but that'll have to wait until 2nd edition I suspect.

53:30 Infantry being bad is definitely what disappoints me the most. The platonic ideal of Fantasy was blocks of dudes with flags lining up against other blocks of dudes with flags in a battle. Not sure what the solution is though. I thought this worked better in 6th, but i think I just never played 6th in a truly competitive meta. My friends and I all used big (well medium) blocks of dudes with flags, because that's what appeared in White Dwarf, and it was fun, but I bet someone with an optimized list that contained nothing like a block of infantry would have smashed our naive lists.

I don't see why GW would remake the Colleges of Magic Wizards. We allready got a plastic kit for those. Especially this far ahead to the conclusion of the Great War against Chaos. If we got new empire wizard models, surely it would be in the form of Hedge Wizards. IE the guys currently in the rules and without any models what so ever.

Ild like to say I watch your podcast, attended this tournament, spoke to some of you- and still didn’t figure out who you where

Enjoyed the conversation and that Steam Tank is unbelievable. Jabe was right first time about the static res required to challenge out a dragon (or similar) being seven. Dragon gets close order as well as one for the kill and (max) 5 for overkill so seven. Certainly possible to get a unit up to that, but realistically you'll only be able to do it with a unit with your BSB in it. So you then have one unit that the dragon doesn't want to charge into the front of on its own. That's all you have without further consideration about how to actually make it useful, but it's some sort of starting point for a plan I guess. Now if they took close order off the dragons and gave infantry an extra possible rank bonus then you could have more than one unit that does it and the dragon owners would have to think a bit more and perhaps some Warhammer would break out!

Van Horstmans Spectrum!! Help deal with Dragons as Cannons just dont do it in this edition

A: No. Whilst units that move randomly do not declare charges, if you wish to move one into contact with an enemy unit, it must fulfil the same criteria as any other charging unit during its movement, as detailed on page 126

I am not a fan of ranking, it has to much of a domino effect of causing people that would not normally power game to net list.

45:46 Steam tank is magnificent. Saved you a time stamp.

For infantry, bring back Step Up. I know lots of people got butt hurt about this in 8th Ed, but seriously, give the infantry players something to do besides cry as their models are removed. I started in the tail end of 7th, when my Dwarves had no option but to cower behind their shields as they got hacked down. Step Up at the start of 8th Ed was a ray of bloody sunshine, I didn't know until then that infantry could make attacks...

As a big blocks of infantry enjoyer, I liked the way 8th ed worked with support attacks, hordes and 'step up' meaning regular infantry actually got to contribute to fights rather than standing behind a row of characters to provide wound tokens and moral support. I think the easiest fix for 'Old World' would be to bring in scenarios where VPs are gained from holding certain points on the board rather than just for destroying units. Infantry are bad at chasing down the remnants of enemy units but they are good at holding ground (as this mechanic would be based on the number of models within range of an objective) being generally numerous and resilient.

More static combat res for infantry and some charge resistance if charged in the front arc and ranked up enough would do a lot

I run a pure infantry/cavalry Khorne WoC army, only mortals. So I have 0 magic, and 0 monsters. Call me crazy! It is definitely sub-optimal, but it can absolutely still win and it's heaps of fun

The beat fix to the game should be fixed unit size. Ex: dwarf warriors ca be in files of 6, 5 or 4 and 1, 2 or 3 ranks. Also, models with more than 5 wounds should use the best save they have/phase. Arm 3+, ward 4 and regen monster attacked by ap-2 attacks, use ward, etc

Chris, I really appreciate the value you bring to this podcast. Just saying. Thank you :)

I've played since 3rd edition. I lived through hero hammer. 6th edition had issues, but it was focused on regiments of cavalry and infantry. 7th had broken army books and power creep. 8th was mostly tight and easily the best core rules, focused on the regiments and mass armies. The failing of 8th was mostly the cost of armies. Just a single 50 model Witch Elf core regiment cost 300.00 USD. Starting WFB had to many barriers to entry in cost and learning curve. GW can fix that by making regiment models more accessible and affordable. The game can have simple base rules. Personally, Age of Sigmar was a mistake as it destroy the lore and setting. There was a way forward that could have streamlined Fantasy rules, reboot the setting with many of the AoS elements, but keep the Old World as a setting and game system. If Old World had a warband level of play for new players and a rank and flank level for veterans or large scale games. I would of dragged out End Times and instead of destroying the setting bring in the upheaval of the Old World instead.

8th was overall a better set of rules than many of its detractors realize. The game had a weird learning curve that made first impressions seem it was all deathstars, mega spells and random charges. In actually, the armies that were used in tournaments and by veterans of the system had realistic armies with large blocks of infantry. The magic was better as support all over the board. The random charge was in reality a bell curve charge that lead to baiting movement and risky charges out of your opponents. Step up is still one of the best rules that WFB had and I do not understand why they left it out of Old World.

Infantry need the 8th edition Step Up mechanic and Rank Bonus should be increased for Close Order to +3. Supporting Attacks should be the rank behind again, not the whole fighting rank.

I don't think Games Workshop is ever going to all the legacy armies. The goal is to keep those armies and their models in AoS. The proof is look at the attention and new models those armies have gotten in AoS, especially with the new release of AoS 4. Skaven just got more new models for AoS than we have gotten anything new for Old World.

I wish this wasn't the case, but I think Old World had a couple of objectives that is counter to getting back Warhammer Fantasy in its full glory. 1) Divert the WFB fans away from complaining about AoS. 2) Make money off of the Old World models that do not work in AoS, keeping the best stuff from Old World in AoS. 3) Make players rather play AoS than Old World. This is meant to gather us, quiet us down and make money off us using models and factions that are less interesting than the ones we lost.

The reason games take long and are hard to learn is the rules are messy, counter-intuitive, contradictive in a few parts and way to much cross-referencing.

Not sure if someone else has commented on Jabe's question, as far as I understand it, due to Bound Spells not being cast with the potential to Miscast like normal wizard spells, you can just cast all of your Bound magic first, and then move on to your wizard spells. That way you maximize your output/efficiency, and it works regardless of the ruling from GW or differing interpretations from individuals.

All the podcasts I've been listening to trying toa ddress infantry issues refer exclusively to warhammer fantasy 8th edition...that was the edition that bled players something fierce, it was in that time period where GW wrote rules forcing people to buy crap tonnes of models to have a hope in heck of being competitive and it was also the edition many refer to as Purple Sun edition. It wasn't a good edition and if you played in it and it was your one big edition of whfb then cool, but there were better ones. Take a step back to 6th ed whfb, it lasted 6 whole years before 7th edition came out. Yes, it was in an era where there wasn't this stupid 3 year edition cycle that brings outa new edition even if the rules don't need a new edition, but 6th ed was also the longest running whfb edition and for many good reasons. A lot of rules are seen in TOW but TOW is also a product of a newer rules set - dragons/mounts combining profiles with their riders instead of being separate is a huge issue because it makes them so much more dominant and extremely hard to kill off. Here's a rather radical approach to balancing Monstrous Mounts - what if you change the rules such that once the number of wounds that the mount in question gives are lost, then that mount is dead and the rider is now on foot for the rest of the game? You're still able to stack saves etc but most dragons etc that are dominating the meta, will have significant power drop off after 4 to 6 wounds have been lost. Suddenly you have characters on foot that want to probably be supporting or supported by infantry. I've not seen this idea bandied about, but it's very much like older editions of whfb where once a mount was killed the rider was on foot, it worked back then, it can work again.

Setting 25% for heroes/commanders ,and 25% for heroes only would fix the whole meta, which currently revolves around the big character mounts. With such constraints people would try to cut out expenses on their characters, and we would see more characters on foot or horse. Then, it would be necessary to use infantry and cavalry units just as a place to hide these characters

They didn't do Kislev because of the optics of the Russian invasion of Ukraine

It's called The End Times.

I don't know if you can get it in Australia, but Duplicolor Sandable Primer is the way to go. I've been using it for 17 years now, and it has NEVER fuzzed on me. (And I live in super humid New Jersey!)

After hearing your conversation, the idea of a living ruleset with a paid subscription sounds like a bad idea. Right now we have beautiful books with a decent ruleset, not only would those be invalidated, we would also enter the exact treadmill many 40k players hate with passion. On top of that we would have to pay a fee. This sounds like a pretty bad proposition for any outsider, whos vaguely interesed in TOW and also to everyone who is playing beer and bretzel wargaming at a local level. Also I fear, that any system with ruleschanges and "improvements" mid- edition would put the ruleswriters in a position, where they have to introduce major changes to an already "patched" ruleset just because they have to release a new edition. Under those circumstance, we might end not only with a treadmill, but also with a worse ruleset in the next edition. My proposition/ hope therefore would be for GW to release FAQ on a regular basis and taking notes and feedback while the edition is in its cylce. Then they should be in position the do meaningful improvements in a new rulebook.

The original ruleset they were working on should be re-introduced and this absurd ruleset thrown away. The rules need to be 20 pages at MOST not 100, and certainly not 160. There are so many "darlings you didn't kill" and fat in this game. There were so many quality-of-life fixes in 8th that they didn't add in TOW. I should never be measuring pivot angles and inches in 2024. These are small groups of 10 or so men, not legions of 100. They got this.

Hate to break it to you lads, but GW are desperate to squat Old World. They've done everything but throw the kitchen sink to try to kill sales of the game. The AoS faction is winning despite poor sales. Old World just isn't cutting it and that's not the IPs fault, it's the price (and rules). Who can afford this stuff? It was unaffordable on release and GW slapped on a 10% price hike this year on Old World just to make sure even less of the stuff is sold. It's deliberate. Premium prices for old tat from 1999 and 2003.... lol. Where's the new plastic kit released for Greenskins? Where are the Resin and new plastic kit for Chaos? I mean we can WAGER that new plastic Forsaken have been produced but where are they? They have no respect. Meanwhile Skaventide can't be given away.

I think Parabellum and Corvus Beli have both proved that a free online rules and up to date army builder app works, alongside real hardback rule books. We all want the art, lore new book smell but we all want current and updatable rules. If anything, a free to use army builder is only going to encourage miniature sales, which is where the 💰💰💰 is

An army book for the New World would be nice with the legacy armies in. They could just copy/print the PDFs for free money! (With some balance fixes…)

Infantry fixes: 1) +3 Rank Bonus / +4 for Horde 2) +1 Combat Res for Outnumbering 3) +1 Bonus Attacks per rank _instead_ of the current Fighting Rank (because wide lines of troops with no ranks looks stupid) 4) Thrusting Spears always strike no later than same Initiative as chargers 5) Remove +1 Close Order combat res boost (replaced by Outnumbering)

Fall back in good order popping through until still cause panic. It isn't completely safe...

Infantry are just as viable now as they were in 6th and 7th. Stick a lunatic lord in it.