Killax

Members
  • Content count

    1,372
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Killax last won the day on June 15

Killax had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

690 Celestant-Prime

1 Follower

About Killax

  • Rank
    Lord Celestant
  • Birthday 08/10/1988

Recent Profile Visitors

426 profile views
  1. Certainly but I think that another change is to come aswell. As it's also in the interest of FW to have models be relevant for AoS. While some are overly relevant a lot of them are not. So I think another change is not out of the question, especially if GW wants us to have tons and tons of viable unit options for AoS.
  2. Well it follows what weve seen from the GH2017 spoilers. I firmly believe that GW decided to have a good look at any unit that so far has not seen a competitive representation in an army list and those are actually quite a lot of units. Even those who have seen some play are likely to have some points dropped if they need to be a big unit to become relevant. In addition I even think that FW will have their points update probably in the nex month after GH2017 is released.
  3. Really cool and good stuff!
  4. Love the new video, couldnt spot anything new personally but the artwork did give us Plaguebearer Maggot Riders, which is very likely what we've seen in the spoiler pictures months ago. Female Stormcasts are obviously great aswell, I for one welcome them
  5. I think we'll be in awe again with GH2017 which is released soon, this will stop the complaining for a half year orso. Unfortunatly Ive noticed as a reseller myself that complaints start if the production or content for something even for a moment stops. I feel that the recent discussions about the nature of the game directly come from how 40K is handled and seems to thake some of the limelight. However rightfully so I would say because AoS had recieved tons of love and this love is also empowered by the TGA forums. However to all Id say, worry not, complain not but certainly share your ideas to improve the fun. I have issues with the Shooting phase in AoS. I have have issues with the double turn but other than that I think Age of Sigmar is a wonderful game that fits nicely between casual and fun play while still retaining enough depth for competative games. I also tend to provide or discuss possible solutions to create more fun by for example re-considering some of these core mechanics. Cheers and have fun! We're all here because we love this game. Though some express their distain only on the forums by large because it's anonymous, it's a bit of the downside of forums in general.
  6. No worries, sure! It's a really easy mix of 1:1 Vallejo Black and Vallejo Natural Steel, you can easily use GW black and GW boltgun metal aswell (or how that's called now). This is the base armor and basically step 1. After that I highlight in broad strokes with the Vallejo Natural Steel. This gives a cool plate armour effect. The apply multiple thin layers of Tamiya Clear Red. Its essential you dont want to rush this but the process is easy. It's like washing with thick but very translusent wash (which doesn't pool). The cool thing about Tamiya is that they have many clear colours. So it's great for other armies aswell. The result to me gives the best coloured metal. Better as pre-mixes of coloured metal paints. As this clear coat is really just a clear coat on metal. Cheers,
  7. Lovely news, nobody can have enough Bloodletters!
  8. In addition GH2017 is doing its best I believe to present a balance for everybody. Better put, making cost directly related to power. Frankly speaking AoS allready has a really decent balance for it's Matched Play design. Something I believe will be even better in the upcomming book. Which leads to what wiser men have said about the AoS Core Rules before, something will eventually need to change for them in order to bring this game to the next level for the more hardcore gamer. The prime reason for this is that I still firmly believe nobody that spends its time into building 2000 points worth of models and painting them likes to lose against a random double turn. As GH2017 is likely not touching on such core rules I hope GH2018 will.
  9. I dont dissagree but at the same time removing weaknesses from all is what this new GH seems to be set up for. With this I mean that every aspect of armies seems to be buffed rather than toned down. Which for Horde armies especially will be a massive change of competative approach. Personally though I dont think AoS really ever had the depth of a true hard pro/con design, by large because the Army specific Alliances are still very recently created and for the most part Grand Alliances where still more popular because they allowed for this now build in "Allied mechanic". E.g. Chaos with Sayl and Bloodletters and Skyfires was doing better as Slaves to Darkness, Blades of Khorne or Desciples of Tzeentch for a longer while, in that sence going for the mixed Allied approach always has been "better". All this is to me is blending AoS to WFB flavour again. In some cases I agree with it, in others I do not. Espcially the Battleline rules and Horde rules is something I hope they gave good consideration as this again lead to the death of WFB to begin with (40 block units make this game have a extremely high buy in, much higher as say 40k).
  10. Absolutely, but the quantity isn't too much of a concern either, I think it's more the ease some Mortal wounds come with. I personally do not dislike Mortal wounds but I do think that if they for example trigger on 6+ it would be better for the game to have them trigger only on a rolled 6 and not an accumulated 6, the latter is still quite common and as a result can cause a lot of Mortal wounds in particular situations. All in all though I think some have a problem with the ease it comes with and probably rightly so. Directly thaking away armour saves removes a lot of the interaction and it's typical players don't like that for any 1 vs 1 game, AoS included.
  11. Check the rules for your local Tournaments in regards to this, the one is more strict as the other. As others have said though AoS doesn't have the most strict WYSIWYG rules but it is very important not to cause any confusion, especially if the difference in weapon is Spear vs Sword and really alters how a unit functions. Going by what looks cool as such isn't always the best option for tournaments.
  12. I personally think it has become more positive, especially due to the GH2016 and this will likely repeat in GH2017 which seem to aim to make more armies relevant and not just the semi elite or the armies GW has created specifically for AoS. To date I still dont think that the double turn adds to populairty for the game. It's unique to AoS but not so much in any good way. I am happy they did not apply it for 40K. In terms of the I go you go versus alternate activations, the latter is cooler but costs way more time, it's ideal for Skirmishes however and that is why games like Necromunda and Shadespire can easily adopt it. Cheers,
  13. I think it might have something to do with the issues of the past but also catering to a particular style of play. As when we look at 40K the designs (of Codex and such) are much more designed towards what we would call Matched Play. In addition many 40K players also worried that 40K would suddenly loss their cost-made-designs, something I feel didn't help AoS at the start either. But as said, AoS indeed in it's design is a double/triple edged sword. Being in the fact they it wants to cater to Open, Narrative and Matched play at the same time with pretty much everything. While this is really cool, what we also see is that the community in general will lean towards what the game provides the most of. In my opinion AoS has become more focused around Matched play and it did so because there was a lot of content for it in the Generals Handbook. To date what I'd love to see is GW thaking the lead for all three with different supplements instead of stacking it into one bundle, as ultimately it's very difficult to have both RPG elements (Narrative) and wargame point elements (Matched) into "one game" or "one book". Though that has much less to do with the Core rules of the game, more the way they supplement the Core rules Customers will follow where you get the most from regardless.
  14. Well I think the shooting rule is almost there, a simple character protection line is not difficult to add. This might mean melee orientated armies are stronger for a period but we can now more or less state that many shooting attacks are always stronger as melee and magic. By large because shooting is done in addition to melee and again completely unrestricted in its core rules. Leading to Skyfires and Judicators and other strong shooters dominating since gh2016s inception.
  15. Perhaps, I think the consequence should mean some Snipers remain and additional Assassin characters should be added. Im not saying hunting Heroes should become impossible but am saying it should be specialistic role that isnt on everything with a ranged weapon. As a result I think it would only add to the experience. While snipers would be better theyd also be more costly while poorer shooters can become cheaper because they would hunt chaff. The experience most people I know have now is that its too relevant and magic too irrelevant. It would be cool to find that balance aswell.