I agree that the Chroneas looks pricey for what it does, but I can see a nice role for it alongside the Well of Souls. Drain Life 8 combined with the Well will put out a pretty decent amount of healing, especially when paired with a Sacrificial Imp regen.
I certainly don’t think I’d ever take more than one Chroneas in a list but I think one could be workable.
Aye, but they aren’t Ranged Infantry (I’m assuming because they enjoy full US4 on hordes). In truth it’s probably more correct to compare Ironwatch with a Ranged Infantry unit, not an Infantry unit-that-shoots.
All their special rules are to do with their ranged attack. Their melee attack is nothing to write home about, and I imagine very few if any Abyssal Dwarf players take them for their melee capabilities.
Abyssal Dwarfs have no other infantry with a ranged attack, so Decimators fill that role.
If it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck, and flies like a duck… chances are it is a duck.
And yet they do not appear to be Ranged Infantry. A lot of the chatter about Decimators vs Ironwatch is about balance and 3E falling short (!) when it comes to Ironwatch (I don’t think anyone is saying Decimators are too strong, but Ironwatch too weak). My point is that a more appropriate comparison - because the discussion is actually about balance - is Ironwatch vs another Ranged Infantry unit.
If the intent is to compare Decimators to a Dwarf unit (for AD one-upmanship or something), aren’t Rangers a better parallel as an ‘it shoots but also fights’ unit? Though that comparison is fraught with peril thanks to how many special rules the two units don’t have in common. A lot like Decimators vs Ironwatch, in fact.
For full disclosure, I think and have always thought Decimators are awesome and think and have always thought Ironwatch are bad. In the off chance that’s what we’re talking about?
Please Mantic, give us some more rumors so this discussion can stop 
Wow… so because mantic for some reason haven’t listed them as a ranged infantry unit, they: a unit with big guns, who specialises in shooting their big guns, and go to bed thinking about shooting their big guns aren’t ranged infantry. Really?
Sometimes games can be very special, reminds me of the time GW had to FAQ what ‘wholy within’ means.
Your right for games within friendly rounds, but for me as an also tournament Player it’s very important that every army has a fair chance to win a game when it’s played better. Also it’s always difficult to say what is overpowered and what is a fair unit. For me KoW goes the right way having a rules committee, but I also think they are ignoring some points (like the decimators discussion shows already) 
but a good thing is Mantic is going to fight this points, many overpowered units (from my side) get a nice change reducing their power to the level of all other units, making the game even better. Also I’m loving it that they are going to make Infanterie interesting again, because it’s very beautiful to see 2 Infanterie army’s fighting each other instead of some flighing or riding monster (my own army looks also that way actually in 2nd ED)
One unit is 25 attacks at 4+.
The other is 20 attacks at 5+.
If Decimators attacks are nothing special…
That makes Ironwatch feeble.
Decimators can smack a small scout unit, so that means a much larger unit/ points must be devoted to shut them up .
They are a much better unit all around. More US more attacks & shots, more versatility all around.
That’s my view. Others have their own. So I’m off the Decimators topic. Looking forward to the book.
Hope it balances out.
If that’s directed at me, here’s my reasoning that Decimators don’t appear under the Ranged Infantry heading in the AD army list:
Decimators have US4 on hordes and have been buffed 
But I’mma fade away now, we’ll have the full picture of the Abyssal Dwarf and Dwarf lists next week, as well as the answer to this apparently contentious debate?
EDIT: Decimators are awesome, AD seem real strong and Dwarfs will continue to be played by Dwarf Players ™ and tournament winners alike. Hot takes abound!
While I don’t think you’re wrong in your general assumption (see my reply above) the above comparison loses one very important parameter.:
One unit is 25 attacks at 4+ at 12"range.
The other is 20 attacks at 5+ at 24"range.
This seems kinda important… Other than that, we’ll see how things turn out. Let’s give the guys a bit of layway.
I was talking about melee and the unit defending itself in that post. There can be no denying that one unit is much more capable of defending itself.
One of those units can also move 4" and still hit on 4+. That is important as it increases their threat range and allows the unit flexibility when enemy units are near its flanks. Being able to pivot move and then shoot with no penelty is really useful. The other unit can move but is than hitting on 6’s with half the number of dice.
The two units aren’t even close.
“Can anyone tell me why Kyle tells Molochs get a buff with Me3+?” Sales strategy? He does some unit glorifying… in some videos he says how great losing something is since it reduced the cost. 
I’m not saying he is disengenious, but it is hard to deliver a disappointing message… “we are taking away your toy Jets and giving you chinook utility helicopters.”“you’ll really love the new unit.”
There is a marginal Att improvement in there on the molocs. The speed makes them a bit more threatening and have a slight edge on regiments at the same speed with angled charge due to the longer frontage. this is one of those “Side-grades” aimed and toning the armies for the new edition. Some will see it as a detriment, some will see new tactical advantages. Some will drop the unit, some will add it. I think thats one of the conundrums of calling this a new edition or a Cok20 update. A new version has so many more strengths and change is going to happen as the game matures.
I like that people have a voice to share how they feel. I think that intial “deep impact” will fade and people will adjust to the new way to use the army tools. We will have more evidence on armies once they hit us in the next week or so. It’s been a wait for the new game. I think they have something to be very proud of.
Keep putting in the feedback. Lets see how we feel a few months from now.
Yeah, Kyle is saying every unit is very strong and useful. But your example with Molochs is good, they have been nerfed. Also the Hellhounds was nerfed, lost 3 attacks by reducing the points 5 points. But he is presenting it as the biggest gain having now the opportunity of taking a regiment, but units with a star will always have problems getting into lists because they are not creating slots for heroes or monster, it’s even more difficult taking them when they are more expensive.
On the other way I like his speech ING and enthusiasm. I think he’s a nice guy
The common thought is to hold onto the emotions and keep in perspective that unit are still usable and we will need to see the rest of the list.
I think there are different perspectives to looking at the changes. Yes, some people will see only the losses. The complete list will give us some edge on the whole picture. Im reserving judgement as I see new play styles and strategies to work with tactics I use to neutralize targets. In this edition, we will see more chaff based armies. Imagine more Pawns on the table and needing to use the Bishops and Rooks better.
We have to be a bit more patient to provide some insightful commentary. Some of the books are hitting the Dev team and play testers today. Hopefully us in the following week.
I just received an email from Mantic, saying my order {3rd Ed gamers bundle) has been dispatched! Whoo, whoo, hype train has left the station!
Let us know when it has arrived
Admiralty miniatures has a really nice big hat rocket launcher. Hopefully more like it in the future.
Really positive for v3, think the RC will have done a cracking job all round.
Yes, there will be units that have taken a hit and situations where (as now to be fair) comparing unit x from army 1 against unit y from army 2 make one look a lot better. These things will balance out, and where something is found to clearly lopsided probably corrected with a relatively swift errata
