A shame of the lack of loyalty symbols. On the plus side it may mean we'll see other factions pop up each cycle as neutrals, having fun fan favourites pop up as we go. Can't wait for Bretonnians, Vampire Counts and Tomb Kings!

I'm looking forward to seeing some Lizardmen eventually. I've always liked them.

Darthvegeta800 said:

I'm kind of confused, is this purely for fluff reasons (i.e. we want a deck full of lizardmen nd we want a pretty color/capital)? or do we find the lack of loyalty icon to be a balance/game mechinic issue?

Lars said:

The former on my part, especially with the decision to make High Elves and Dark Elves loyal without capitals. Also, don't get me started on using Witch Hunters as order-only neutrals over Dogs of War.

Odds are Dogs of War may appear in another battlepack in the future.

FFG can't really have each race/army have it's own capital without serious dilution effects.

Not to mention that the Dark and High Elves will both get their own capitol boards and have always been planned to do so, and we were told they would in the Core Set itself.

Exactly, as per the rulebook we are getting a companion set that adds the High Elf and Dark Elf capital boards. So using the Elves as a comparison is inaccurate. Also complaining about the way the Skaven are is not going to change it. The set is already designed, printed and on its way to the streets. Kinda late in the game for them to change now.

I am just thrilled to have Skaven so early into the game. I plan on building a purely Skaven deck as soon as all of the packs are out. Which is why I am getting at least two of every release each month.

AulayanD said:

Why would more capitals dilute anything? The ONLY thing a capital does for you is decide what your first loyalty icon will be. Even if Skaven had their own icons with no city, they could play with a Chaos or Orc city exactly the same as any Skaven-heavy deck we'll be able to make with them being neutral. Nor does having a city mandate having enough for a sole-faction deck with equal support to the big 6.

There's slightly more cost balancing to worry about if you include loyalty icons, but it doesn't seem like that should have been an insurmountable issue. It's pretty disappointing to see them taking a such a back seat. Right now, the Skavenblight Threat is more like a Skavenblight Nuisance

Here's why there'd be Dilution if there was a capital for every race.

You do the Skavenblight. Then EVERY Release from now on people would *want* Skavenblight things.

Let's say the next release after the Corruption Cycle is Undead. Well then there'd be an Undead capital, along with Undead characters, and characters for the (now 7) races. The release after that would be *8* races, plus the new one, so 9.

That's dilution. That happened to L5R for a bit and they had to trim back.

I do realize that many people love the Skaven, but many people love *every* warhammer option. And it's just not realistic for them all to be fully supported.

AulayanD said:

So then people will stop wanting Skaven and Undead and Lizards because there's no capital city for them? Or is it just that the developers can feel better about ignoring what people are asking for because they don't have loyalty icons?

Not every faction would have to be equally represented in every release. That's one advantage of using a GW property - players are quite familiar with their faction being left to languish, often for years.

However if they do it this way, the main 6 will be fully supported in every expansion and there could be a special 7th race in each expansion as well. They would be like an extra but then next set would not require having any support as they are only a special addition. Which could also be revisited down the road.

Neutral destruction only is jarring. Skaven neutral huh? How can you be neutral to only 1 side? Worse then flavorless it actually manages to subtract flavor. At the very least I would have expected different colors for chaos allies and order allies. Skaven could be 100% identical except use a black background instead of a grey one and remove the word neutral from them. Leave neutral/gray for things which are truly neutral and can work with either side. I'm not saying flavor is more important then mechanics but when you can increase flavor with identical mechanics...

I will give them things seem to be working mechanics wise. Loyalty increases your power/resource ratio under specific circumstances. Skaven have a similar mechanic except they increase the power side rather then reduce the resource cost. Witchhunters change the circumstances to what your opponent is playing (corruption) but it's the same sliding idea. My only worry for doing it this way rather then using loyalty is keeping it up. Choosing this path is putting a large work burden on the developers as sets keep coming.

Ummmmm..... Sorry to interupt the convo session, but.... more spoilers please. I wont be able to see any of the cards for probably another month... Post more spoilers!

A1istor said:

I posted the whole spoiler...there's nothing left to spoil unless you mean the Core Set?

Yeah, Skavenblight is full on the net (and completly added to my database), but perhapshe is talking about stuff for the next BP, I would like it also.

I expect much more sorry about that. I didnt read everything....

I'll post the next spoiler in a month

Ratcur said:

I think "neutral" means in this case "not aligned with one of the capital-boarded, loyalty-symbol factions", which is perfectly acceptable for the Skaven as they're not taking orders from the likes of goblins.

Buhallin said:

Skaven Icons? Not according to anything we've seen thus far. They're totally neutral according to the above description and the pics we saw earlier this week.

They are, I have the cards in hand. And the neutral just means not with one of the "main" 6 factions.