KHHaunts

Members
  • Content count

    596
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

KHHaunts last won the day on December 10 2016

KHHaunts had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

289 Celestant-Prime

About KHHaunts

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant
  1. New Rules for Vandus and Khorgus on the GW website now. also a new book "Plague Garden"
  2. I was away when the skirmish book was released. I have a campaign to start tommorow. The armies are 25 renown each. My main set of models are either: Wanderers/dryads Or Mixed undead Can people give me some good ideas for a such a small amount of renown?
  3. I caught this thread a little late and so didnt read all the responses to sorry if someone has already covered this. Firstly the threads intial post reflects my thoughts exactly. However. When it comes down to it AOS is still new and the corners of the map are still being filled in. With WHFB the setting has always been the same. in my mind they started right from the middle giving us a grainy undefined picture of the whole setting. showed us a map, defined its boundaries and then developed the detail over time (Character backstory, historical events and timelines, cities, politics etc) and for a while this worked beautifully and created a setting which was richer with information and detail than any ive known (Hence why i loved the novels) I loved growing up with a setting where you would hear about an event from one source and eventually read the whole story from another. I would love reading about gotrek and then hear the same battle (And a reference to a one eyed slayer) mentioned somewhere completely different. It all felt connected and it all felt like it "mattered" As mention 40k does the same but with far my space to fill. In my oppinion to much space. It great to be able to wage solar system wide wars without it conflicting with the fluff but all the epic achievements really dont seem to amount to anything in the 40k universe.(Which is why im happy the have advanced the setting) AOS in comparrision seemes to be going for the middle ground. Its complicated to put into a post the thought process but here we go. AOS has started as a new thing at a time where people were missing all the old detail(WHFB was new and the first and therefore could start at a slow pace) in comparrision we all demanded that GW fill the void as quickly as possible. Therefore GW has had to give us vast quantities of detail but at the same time not cage themselves into a rushed setting. Linked to this is the buisness point of view. AOS is selling well atm by getting people on the hype train about what new form the races will take. If they released to much info about them we would all be waiting for our chosen faction rather than buying models. So GW seems to have been biding their time giving us just enough detail but without commiting to anything to definitive so that they can use this time to learn from the community and steer AOS in the right direction (If there inital plan wasent quite on point). Perhaps their intial ideas for the realms were to large? well at this stage they could still quite easily give us some set maps. Or perhaps the community wont like that so they can make the realms 5 times the size? I could go on for alot longer but ill try to finish this up. I think people belive that because its a high fantasy setting that nithing can be pinned down with "logic" however getting GW to commit to a city or event and making it matter (Hammerhal for instance) shouldnt be difficult. If they want a city floating on a discworld like turtle thats fine. But as long as that turtle actually shows up again in the rest of the fluff. I think once all the "expected" races appear and the realms are all "aknowleged" we will start to see GW drawing that loose boarder round their creation just like WHFB. i dont imagine it will be anywhere near as small allowing for the creation of new events and places.(and lets not forget that they could quite easily advance the story with something from outside the realms aka a new realm with a new threat??) but ultimately even a sandbox needs to be contained within borders.
  4. When it comes down to it some people loved the complex rules of 40k and WHFB. The problem was that the complexity was deeply ingrained into the games core rules and structure. AOS was never designed to be simple but "streamlined" by building the rules from the ground up allowing layers to be built up based on how much complexity people want. It could get 10 times the amount of rules and i could still play it the same way i have been.
  5. See i wasnt sure about WS and BS as alot of people didnt like the over simplfied to hit without taking into account a models speed strength etc. I think there does need to be some significant differences in either case just t to keep the games interesting. otherwise there only selling one game.
  6. First of all let me just take a moment to justify this thread to all of you that will pounce and moan "This is an AOS not 40k forum!" Firstly there is has been alot of reactions about the new 40k announcement on this forum and so i thought it prudent to open up a place to "Dump" all these discussions. Secondly as my title suggests. I belive that 40k link to AOS (Such as comparing storylines in one to release sin other such as tzeentch stuff) and now with the new changes we are likely to see alot of AOS players branching out to 40k and vice versa because of the lessons 40k seems to have learned from AOS's apparent awesomeness. If the mods dont like having it fair enough but thought it would be worth a shot. So to steer the discussion on the right lines. What do you think that the new 40k will take from AOS? and what will be different/Kept the same as before. For instance im am curious to know if they will do away with generic elements to profiles like wargear (A bolter is a bolter and its effectiveness is calculated based on the wielder) and instead go for individual warscroll like profiles with the weapon options and their stats laid out for each unit. What do people think?
  7. yeah . . . . i was trying to avoid that lol
  8. Its also worth noting that we way simply have not been given the answer yet like so many things. There have been many hints to mysterys unsolved from other peoples perspective. To name but one example would be Nagash amazed by how Sigmar has some how manipulated and bound souls in a way even more efficient and potent than the god of death can manage as said in "Lord of Undeath" It could be that there is some unknown factor keeping Sigmar in Azyr that has something to do with the stormcast power. Perhaps he is a little like Caledor stuck in the vortex. A focal point for the stormcasts power who needs to keep channeling the power of Azyr into is warriors. Maybe stormcasts would lose their power if Sigmar were to leave. Who knows. When you think about the amount of questions in 40k. Sigmar sitting in Azyr seems pretty tame.
  9. As a night haunt players i would lay it out as follows Battlelines: - Spirit hosts - Hex wraiths Elites/Heros Cairn wraiths - id actually love if these guys could be converted into an elite unit. But if not support hero roll would just fine a guess Banshee - same as above. slightly happier for this to be left as a support hero. Behemoths and centre pieces: Mourhghul (Maybe re jig the points), Mortis Engine(With hero option), Black coach (New flying model with revised rules) Heros: - Archwraith - Cairn Wraith on steroids (Scythe in each hand larger scarier. Possibly something like the 40k nightbringer) Possible general or combat hero with decent synergy buffs. - Fell Summoner - possibly the only living thing in the army (Along with a mortis engine counterpart). Decent mage with summon bonuses. Some sort of funky unique spell dont really care what. and command ability.
  10. The concept sounds wonderful and i imagine that having a base model (Stormcast) along with a large variety of poses customozation to create something that is truelley unique would be outstanding. If you could produce GW current standard quality then i would expect to pay no less then one mark up than the standard GW equivilant. Perhaps Forge World prices. But then again it really depends on just how unique and awesome the models look. if it just looks like a standard model with a head swap then i would rather convert myself. As people have said its an awesome idea. But is the technology that can handle such a task cost effective?
  11. Im ashamed to say i thought exactly the same lol
  12. funnily enough i do most of this in most of my games. Its my favorite way to play. So all thumbs up from me! will try some of your ideas
  13. Ive found that they are extreme glass cannons and that little shield is very hit and miss. Ive always had them with great weapons and just let them munch through the enemy by getting the first attacks. Ive had a few cases where opponents have just assumed they would be tougher to kill as they did so much damage but in actual fact the are very squishy
  14. Your posts seem a little hostile Arkiham. However in the case of comps i would have to agree that it is a factor that matters. And at the end of the basing "correctly" will set people up for either style of play while not caring wont. That being said. Even though this post is a question asked by a single person its acts as a source of information for lots of different people therefore it should be made clear that as far as the "AOS GW rules" say. it dosent matter in the slightest. However most seem to agree that had more to do with not wanting upset the delicate WHFB crowd by ordering them to rebase everything and pratically it makes way more sense to base them "Properbly" though until this is brought into the rules properly it will always be open to a little interpretation.
  15. I have heard a lot of arguments for and against powered up armies for following specific allegiances. One of the big ones is that if people were allowed to take anything it would allow for some fairly brutal army compositions. The allgiance abilities supposdly address this. My question to everyone is: Has anyone found any non allegiance (Whether that be mixed grand alliance or no allegiance at all. e.g. Fyreslayers and blood bound) army combos that can really hold their own against a well rounded allegiance army with all its allegiance power ups? NOTE: I dont want this to turn into a discussion about whether or not the allegiance rules are right, wrong or whatever.