Jump to content

Season of war: Firestorm


Arkiham

Recommended Posts

So from what I'm seeing between the added abilities here and the allies from the General's Handbook 2017  it looks like they are trying to accommodate  a variety of dynamic armies. You can take your favorite faction, add in some support in the form of allies, and layer on an additional bonus that applies to both your main army and the allies giving you a customized army with it's own feel and synergies. It feels like a very modular system they are building, and I'm excited to see how it all will play out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 203
  • Created
  • Last Reply
17 minutes ago, hotboyronald said:

So from what I'm seeing between the added abilities here and the allies from the General's Handbook 2017  it looks like they are trying to accommodate  a variety of dynamic armies. You can take your favorite faction, add in some support in the form of allies, and layer on an additional bonus that applies to both your main army and the allies giving you a customized army with it's own feel and synergies. It feels like a very modular system they are building, and I'm excited to see how it all will play out. 

Agreed.  The modularity of Age of Sigmar is one of its greatest strengths, and definitely its advantage over its competition.  And now we are getting some "official" ways to have a strong mixed-Alliance army, which is awesome for my long-term army plans!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like the concept of introducing city based allegiances! I think the more they do to bust our preconceptions of who fights with who the better it is for the development of the game and the fluff. Its a new game in a new setting and we should stop judging it by the confines of the old game and the old world.

The Anvilguard ability ability also looks really encouraging. Its powerful if you do a lot of other stuff to make it work instead of powerful because "the warscroll says i do 2D6 mortal wounds" (sorry Boneripper but I hate you) . Broken stats are the worst thing in the game for me - they require no skill from the player at all to exploit them.

Allies and new allegiances can only be good for mixing up the competitive scene - Unless people actually want to see identical armies in the top 10 at competitive events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, DinoTitanedition said:

You can actually see how the factions are put to together for the campaign. The Games Workshop website has an overview already, but no new models included yet. Posted this in the rimourthread already, but it seems like it hasn`t been noticed yet and this seems to be the right place for it:

 

 

Season of War.JPG

It is pretty weird that there are only 9 factions there. What happened to number 10?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BunkhouseBuster said:

 I'm not too worried about what GW releases that might change the fluff, becuase, thanks to Age of Sigmar's undefined nature, it nearly all fits in together.  The realms have not been mapped out,

The whole point I was making it that this statement will change, and it's already started. You may choose to ignore it, and that's cool, play your own way man, but the times they are a changing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

You are more than welcome to pick and choose what rules you want. Hopefully you have a gaming group that's fine with that. but please don't pretend it's anything other that choosing what gives you the best result on the table xD

Lol, I'm the kind of player that doesn't mind rolling up my stats for D&D characters rather than "costing out" the points.  For me, it's player fun first, story second, modelling/painting third, competitiveness last.

To each their

7 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

The whole point I was making it that this statement will change, and it's already started. You may choose to ignore it, and that's cool, play your own way man, but the times they are a changing

Fair enough.  I guess I'm optimistic (and hopeful) that GW won't invalidate anything about other people's own personal fluff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

 Personally, if I pitched up and the opponent put down some blood angels, and said, oh yeah, these are now space wolves because it suits how I want to play, I'd shake hands and pack up. It's the beauty of the hobby, you'll always find someone that wants to play your way I'm sure

 

Let's nuance this.  Why would you pack up ? Because you always prefer to play a battle between armies which must LOOK like in the lore, or because you assume the person is doing it to gain an advantadge ? Narratively speaking, i have zero problem with someone using his minis painted with X xcheme for Z. 

The reason is because we have limited time and limited budget, so why would i put constrains for something as easilly fixable as that one with using my imagination. For example a few years back i played with a friend a campaign based on Behemoth hitting maccrage. I played flesh tearers and he played Kraken painted nids. We didn't need to re-paint o collect new armies to play it.

From gaining an advantadge, well  i would just adjust my expectations accordingly, but that's something that i can understand being a deal breaker for others. To be honest, plenty of times people will just use X armies as proxy to try out new things, and i am perfectly fine with it. I actually encourage it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well they can't invalidate peoples fluff, it'd be very difficult to in the first place.

But. Again, if you look at 40k (I know, I know, but it's a good reference point since it's A, the same company, and B, a fantastic universe) there are rules imposed, that provide more than guidance. 

Take the Mephiston argument. You can write a cool story, have the coolest paint scheme. But the rules say 'this model can only be used in a blood angels force'. Now you have two choices. You can say 'Well this is a sucessor chapter', but this is covered in the rules. It specifically says that you can't use this model. You can say 'well he's not Mephiston, he's a named character of my own creation'. Now that is very close to making your own rules. 

some people, and I'm going to say more that you think, want to stick to the rules. More power to you if you have a group of people that aren't like that. But that's exception rather than the rule hobby wide. 

 

Bringing this back on-topic, and stopping this beginning of a circular discussion/argument, Firestorm puts us in an awkward position. We have abilities, strong abilities. they are designed to represent an army shaped by the city they belong too. Some are designed to replicate where the army fights. But without a degree of control, be that with painting, modelling, or restriction to that particular campaign, you end up with a system ripe for abuse. Now as Chris has obviously seen the product (are there any podcasts yet that aren't getting some lovely free stuff now), and is saying to wait for the drop, hopefully this is addressed. You have TOs already coming out saying this is comp'd if it is as open as it says it is. Whilst you might not go to tournaments, and have no interest in that type of play, unless again you have the perfect group that agrees with your way of playing, some people will want to play the same way they do in a tournament. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Keldaur said:

Let's nuance this.  Why would you pack up ? Because you always prefer to play a battle between armies which must LOOK like in the lore, or because you assume the person is doing it to gain an advantadge ? Narratively speaking, i have zero problem with someone using his minis painted with X xcheme for Z. 

The reason is because we have limited time and limited budget, so why would i put constrains for something as easilly fixable as that one with using my imagination. For example a few years back i played with a friend a campaign based on Behemoth hitting maccrage. I played flesh tearers and he played Kraken painted nids. We didn't need to re-paint o collect new armies to play it.

From gaining an advantadge, well  i would just adjust my expectations accordingly, but that's something that i can understand being a deal breaker for others. To be honest, plenty of times people will just use X armies as proxy to try out new things, and i am perfectly fine with it. I actually encourage it.

I don't mean this as "you should play it". 

I wrote this as a generalisation. It's not meant to be picked apart, but if you want that.

 

'I'm trying out a new army': fine. Why would you buy a load of stuff just to see if it suits. 

If I think it's simply to gain an advantage, then I'm shaking hands and getting a beer, because that isn't the hobby to me. And part of the hobby is the look, otherwise we can push around paper models or counters for all I care. Except I wouldn't play that sort of game. 

Your campaign example. Again fine, you decided to do that, had a conversation with a friend. Again, I'd do the same. I'm not sure I'd do it in the first place as not sure it'd look cool and feel quite right, but that's personal preference.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Thebiggesthat said:

Bringing this back on-topic, and stopping this beginning of a circular discussion/argument, Firestorm puts us in an awkward position. We have abilities, strong abilities. they are designed to represent an army shaped by the city they belong too. Some are designed to replicate where the army fights. But without a degree of control, be that with painting, modelling, or restriction to that particular campaign, you end up with a system ripe for abuse. Now as Chris has obviously seen the product (are there any podcasts yet that aren't getting some lovely free stuff now), and is saying to wait for the drop, hopefully this is addressed. You have TOs already coming out saying this is comp'd if it is as open as it says it is. Whilst you might not go to tournaments, and have no interest in that type of play, unless again you have the perfect group that agrees with your way of playing, some people will want to play the same way they do in a tournament. 

Its only took you 2-1/2 pages of off-topic discussion to get back to the point Chris said, which is, wait for the book  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

The Wraith Fleet has boarded! The webstore was correct this time and it's Soulblight, Nighthaunt, Deathrattle and Deathmages:

Makes me wish my work wasn't blocking images and videos from the WH Community site.  Now to pull it up on my phone....

EDIT: Neat, but could be stopped fairly easily I would think.  I would have made it more like a Deep Strike than Outflank, but that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the issues they had with the Escalation battle plan, this 'Without Warning ability' for units to only deploy within 6" of an edge and 9" from enemy could be seen as particularly weak?

Certainly if you are facing a fast and numerous enemy, or one with their own deployment shenanigans, then you could find whole board edges neutralised for this deployment.  So you might be limited to only using it with your faster units, which kind of spoils the point maybe?   Im not a Death player so not sure.  Certainly it might force the opponent to hold units against their own table edge, which would be useful, not sure how it compares to other abilities.  The fact that it you might not get a unit at all kind of seems harsh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Keldaur said:

Let's nuance this.  Why would you pack up ? Because you always prefer to play a battle between armies which must LOOK like in the lore, or because you assume the person is doing it to gain an advantadge ? Narratively speaking, i have zero problem with someone using his minis painted with X xcheme for Z. 

The reason is because we have limited time and limited budget, so why would i put constrains for something as easilly fixable as that one with using my imagination. For example a few years back i played with a friend a campaign based on Behemoth hitting maccrage. I played flesh tearers and he played Kraken painted nids. We didn't need to re-paint o collect new armies to play it.

From gaining an advantadge, well  i would just adjust my expectations accordingly, but that's something that i can understand being a deal breaker for others. To be honest, plenty of times people will just use X armies as proxy to try out new things, and i am perfectly fine with it. I actually encourage it.

Just to play devils advocate here (and we're really getting wildly off topic :D).  If me and one of my usual friends wanted to play with different colours, models whatever that's all cool.  If on the other hand I was playing somebody who I either didn't know, or only knew a little, I'd consider it really bad manners if I rocked up with my appropriately modelled and painted army and they didn't.  It'd not only confuse the game but I'd question why I've spent the time and effort to get something that reflects the background of the army and they couldn't be bothered.

21 minutes ago, Double Misfire said:

The Wraith Fleet has boarded! The webstore was correct this time and it's Soulblight, Nighthaunt, Deathrattle and Deathmages:

Interesting!  This does go a little way to my thinking that all of these allegiance abilities are going to be limited to playing a Firestorm campaign ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't have been the only one hoping there was going to be a vampire pirate model appearing with this campaign, oh well!

More deployment shenanigans hmm, could've been worst. 

3 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

Interesting!  This does go a little way to my thinking that all of these allegiance abilities are going to be limited to playing a Firestorm campaign ;)

I think anyone that wouldn't be able to take advantage of an ability like this in a regular game would tend to agree as it gives people something extra that others can't have. But I guess that has been a problem for a while now for quite a few allegiances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Nubgan said:

I can't have been the only one hoping there was going to be a vampire pirate model appearing with this campaign, oh well!

More deployment shenanigans hmm, could've been worst.

 

Yeah, it's a bit of a shame that the 'Vampire Pirates' hype train basically just boils down to porting a rule from Stormcast Eternals to Death. What could be more piratey than a unit of heavily armoured vampire cavalry suddenly appearing out of nowhere? Humph.

I still have hope that their background will be top notch and will inspire someone to create an impressively converted undead pirate army. That would make it all worthwhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

If on the other hand I was playing somebody who I either didn't know, or only knew a little, I'd consider it really bad manners if I rocked up with my appropriately modelled and painted army and they didn't.  It'd not only confuse the game but I'd question why I've spent the time and effort to get something that reflects the background of the army and they couldn't be bothered.

I don't see how this is bad manners at all. I'm completely on board with @BunkhouseBuster on this - I would never ever in my life paint an army according to a predefined color scheme. To me, that is a complete buzz kill. I see and read the official stuff, and then I use that to enrich my own theme and backstory. This creative process of doing my own thing is what gets my juices flowing, and I'd consider it rude if someone told me I couldn't use interesting new rules just because I decided to be more creative than copy the color scheme on the box art.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the large amount of pictures from their rumour mill segments that point towards some sea based/aquatic faction... I was a bit disappointed with this news. 

Although, if they would release some sea-aelves at some point, you'd get some great conversion opportunities for pirate vampires ofc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, tea_wild_owl said:

I like the undead pirates. now I finally have a fluff reference for my converted undead wiking army :)

20170828_215544.png

Amazing conversion. You are ready to hit the ground running with the ghostly pirate theme. Way to crystal ball it.  

By the way where did that ship shell come from, it looks great?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TheWilddog said:

Amazing conversion. You are ready to hit the ground running with the ghostly pirate theme. Way to crystal ball it.  

By the way where did that ship shell come from, it looks great?

thanks :) I got the idea when KO got released, to have some epic air battles ;) the ship model is the ghost ship from Revell (only 15€). just needed to damage it and remove some ornaments to fit the size

20170921_215818.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...