wayniac

Members
  • Content count

    480
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

290 Celestant-Prime

1 Follower

About wayniac

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard
  • Birthday 06/26/1982

Recent Profile Visitors

265 profile views
  1. I prefer the Horrors, as they generally put out more damage overall and are tankier, plus when you have a ghoul king nearby and cast the spell from the king on Zombie Dragon that re-rolls wounds, you re-roll hits AND wounds, and it's insanely nasty. However, the main drawback is that they have no Rend so anything with a decent save will laugh at your damage output and then beat the ****** out of you because 4 wounds with a 5+ save (let's ignore Deathless/Undying at the moment) means that anything that will wound you is likely going to get through. Flayers are less dangerous overall, but have -1 rend which can help because FEC lacks rend and have a chance at mortal wounds, but aren't nearly as reliable.
  2. I think the implication in what you quotes is that it's less about "bloat" and more about the gulf in power between pre and post General's Handbook armies.
  3. The "bloat" IMHO came from Sylvaneth and after, when GW went back to the idea of Battletome as Codex and added special things like artefacts, special traits, special spell lores, etc. that added an additional layer of complexity to the game and, intentionally or not, also led to what seems to be a fair bit of power creep with each new tome. The original game, with just the grand alliance books and battletomes providing small additions (reworked scrolls or battalions) was fine.
  4. Pretty much. The answer to mortal wound spam shouldn't be "just take more dudes". That's not constructive nor necessarily fun, and as such is IMHO not a valid response.
  5. Did they define what "solid blocks of LOS blocking terrain" means?
  6. I think it's the other way around, especialy now. GW seems to want you to only use their boards and their terrain, with no reason to build your own (in their mind of course). So to me it seems like GW's terrain is expected to be the only ones you use, and it's building your own that is the outlier (as much as it didn't used to be). Even GW's own terrain and dioramas and stuff use their own terrain as a basis.
  7. I agree to a point, but I think the issue is a ton of things that cause mortal wounds. The problem with the "meta" is the proliferation of lists that focus on spamming mortal wounds, not necessarily any of the lists themselves. It's literally just that they can pump out an obscene amount of mortal wounds and just delete units with little that the opponent can do, making for a very "negative play experience" as the term goes.
  8. Yep. And it gets crazier when you do something like add an Abhorrant Ghoul King on Terrorgheist and cast Unholy Vitality, because you have for example a 5+ save to ignore wounds/mortal wounds, and THEN you get Deathless Minions on top of that.
  9. Really though, I like the GW aesthetic for terrain (just hate how limited it is). I see too many AOS battlefields that look like they belong in a historical game, which makes sense because old world and all that, but IMHO don't really fit the new aesthetic. And the GW terrain doesn't have a lot of LOS blocking pieces (at least not where you can't figure out a way to draw a line to some part of it) so it is also IMHO (very much IMHO) that saying terrain is the answer to shooting heavy lists is not a valid suggestion because GW's terrain is meant to be the baseline/default and doesn't really do anything to prevent that (see my prior examples of actual GW battle reports with terrain)
  10. I feel that GW's guidelines for terrain are what should be followed. The problem with this is that there isn't a lot of LOS blocking terrain GW makes, and while you can make your own the GW range of terrain provides a common baseline and example for what "should" be followed, because it's the common ground without getting into custom terrain that can be nothing but buildings or whatnot. So I tend to look at GW's battle reports for an example of the "correct" way and number to set up terrain. The main issue I have now is we always forget to use the terrain rules, or if we use them we forget them during the game! Let's look at a few examples: The sample matched play battle in the general's book, which could ("should" is another story?) be considered a solid example, has 9 pieces (not counting the big wall thing in the corner because it's irrelenvant to the game): 2 Numinous Occulum 3 Woods (presumably not Sylvaneth) 1 Dragonfate Dais (in the middle of the table) 1 Realmgate (middle of the rightmost table edge) 2 Ophidian Archways (one looks to be converted somewhat) The stormcast side has basically no LOS blocking terrain, it has two woods and one occulum. The chaos side has one occulum, both of the archways. Next up, the KO vs. FEC battle report from the most recent White Dwarf (April 2017 as of this writing). They use a Shattered Dominion board with the following terrain: 1 Ophidian Archway convrted to be in an L shape 1 Dragonfate Dais (ruined, so has less blocking pieces) 1 Realmgate (double stacked) 1 Magewrath Throne 1 Numinous Occulum (converted) 1 Ophidian Archway (looks to be two glued together to be wider) 1 Balewind Vortex So basically nothing other than the two Archways that block LOS and even then you can see through the door to snipe a character.
  11. Nurgust perhaps?
  12. Disc could cost more, can't they be on foot as well or was that just enlightened? In any event I think upgrades and such as extra and PPM would be great for AOS, but that's just me.
  13. See to me, that's what AOS needs to fix it. Points per group is IMHO obnoxious, and upgrades would fix ****** like Skyfire spam that we are seeing being all the rage now.
  14. Could always have special rules to override them, with the default being you can't.
  15. The 40k changes sound so amazing, I could nearly cry. I've waited 20 years for GW to get their heads out of the sand and treat the game this way. I'm literally beyond psyched for it. In fact, I hope they backport some of those to AOS, namely having the current matched play (buy in groups, upgrades free) become Narrative and a new matched play that has things like points per model and upgrades costing extra, etc. In any event I am basically dropping all my other wargames now to focus solely on Warhammer, and that's something I never thought I'd ever say again.