amysrevenge Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Wow, I don't think I have a single army that matches exactly on base sizes. Hahahahahahahaha Wait, my KO I think are 100%? Shocking considering I used 3rd party models for everything other than bubblemen. Otherwise though? I custom-made a Lord Celestant that is on one size too big, but that was deliberate and otherwise the SCE are based on what they come with so they are fine. Bonesplitterz , Flesh-eaters, Spiderfang, and StD are about 90% (I like to do heroes 1 size up from rank and file, which some factions do and some don't). Warherd and Brayherd heroes are good but most of the rank and file are wrong. Moonclan were out the window already - I put them on 20mm rounds in the first couple of weeks of AoS and they've been shelved since the first guidelines came out. I think my Ogres are literally 0-fer, as in not a single model matches the list lol (wait, the Ironblasters are good). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michu Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 It's really weird with some characters. In Spire of Dawn there were only 25 mm bases for characters and now both Warlord and Warlock are on 32 mm? Yet archmage is still on 25 mm? It doesn't make any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Jeah. Nice... Now I have to rebase all my Ogor bases, because I oriented on the base guide which was on TGA before... Sorry. At this moment I am out. I already had to rebase everything after the change to AoS and there is no way I am doing this again. And if there is any tournament player telling me that I can't play with my current bases, I simply won't play him. They really should have oriented their base sizes on the ones the community mostly uses. I have to say that I am really disappointed with GW about this thing. I oriented the basing of my Ogors on the old pictures of GW. Also Ogors look ridiculous with the new base size. The Thundertusk and the Stonehorn are too big for their bases but the Ogors are way too small for their bases. Sometimes I have to question if GW even asks Destruction players for their feedback on anything or how official base sizes should look like... Also sadly the "who goes first" rule is still like it was before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sal4m4nd3r Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 plaguetouched warband is officially dead. RIP. Boy was it fun while it lasted. Chnagehost is still valid, but plageutouched warband needed to be removed for the sake of the game.. huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angrycontra Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Well I'm glad I guessed my stormfiends' 60mm bases correctly. My heroes are also on 32mm because I like their bases to stand out. Doomwheel is also in correct sized base so my skyre army is good to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drib Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 13 minutes ago, sal4m4nd3r said: plaguetouched warband is officially dead. RIP. Boy was it fun while it lasted. Chnagehost is still valid, but plageutouched warband needed to be removed for the sake of the game.. huh? As I understand, you only have to allie the Units/Battalions that don't have your allegiance's Keyword. So all Units in your Battalion are Nurgle, but the Battalion is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sal4m4nd3r Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, Drib said: As I understand, you only have to allie the Units/Battalions that don't have your allegiance's Keyword. So all Units in your Battalion are Nurgle, but the Battalion is not. If I have a nurgle army and include a warscroll battalion that has the everchosen keyword... according to this ruling ALL the units in the battalion (8 mortal nurgle units in this case) count toward the max numbero of allies. That means I would have to have 32 total units in order to run the 8 units in the batallion and still keep the nurgle allegiance. It is now an everchosen only army or Grand alliance chaos army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chord Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 It's a very large FAQ for something that is just releasing. Was it rushed through play testing? Some of these base sizes are just really odd. The community base guide here on TGA is much better. Seriously the Idoneth point increase got reversed? Is one of the playtesters a huge fan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drofnum Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 minute ago, chord said: It's a very large FAQ for something that is just releasing. Was it rushed through play testing? Some of these base sizes are just really odd. The community base guide here on TGA is much better. Seriously the Idoneth point increase got reversed? Is one of the playtesters a huge fan? The point change would have been a pretty decent buff for 90% of Idoneth lists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syph0n Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Just now, chord said: Seriously the Idoneth point increase got reversed? Is one of the playtesters a huge fan? If it's the Leviadon, looking at the response on here and elsewhere meant a lot of people just wouldn't take it, and it was already considered a difficult take for the cost by many. It's an expensive kit to leave on the shelf so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chord Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Just now, syph0n said: If it's the Leviadon, looking at the response on here and elsewhere meant a lot of people just wouldn't take it, and it was already considered a difficult take for the cost by many. It's an expensive kit to leave on the shelf so... *Looks at Celestant Prime, Archaon, etc* ..... I am not convinced that is the reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drofnum Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 The Leviadon would need to be less than the 380 he currently is to really be worth taking. Right now he is basically a mobile cover save which you can get other places with spells, then take 320 points worth of Morrsarr for far more damage potential or 280 points of Ishlean for more damage soaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syph0n Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, chord said: *Looks at Celestant Prime, Archaon, etc* ..... I am not convinced that is the reason It's also been out for a lot less time. I gave two reasons there. Perceived value in game, and the core business of selling models. And, Archaeon and the Prime are core characters, not just a big monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledha Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 hour ago, Brad Gamma said: That answers that one. what a bunch of loosers. They say they changed this rule in the preview, in the white dwarf battle report, in the CORE RULES, and no, finally, we are back to the old previous old stupid rule. I'm very angry at them now. Worst decision they took since months. I hope you are ready to face again 1drop army that play first, rush objectives and auto win The worse being Kroak that bypass rule of one... Seriously, this rule was MADE for preventing kroak to solo entire armies I hope and expect tournament will houserule this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chord Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 3 minutes ago, ledha said: I hope and expect tournament will houserule this Doubtful as the Tournament players most likely wanted it this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueshirtman Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 It kind of a punishs severly armies with no or bad battletomes, and they already lose on the artefacts, CP etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Also again, if I look at the commentary and rules changes in the Destrucion FAQ they almost got no adjustments. Even though there are some areas which could be fixed and which are often requested by Destruction players to be changed. But the only thing I read in those FAQs is "The warscrolls have been changed to the ones in their books" or "Don't use the old core rules anymore"- There is nothing else in most of the Destruction FAQs. But if you look at the otherr FAQs most of the questions people had were answered. Also wasn't it mentioned somewhere that the Thundertusk can now run and shoot? Maybe I have misheard this. But overall I am disappointed, like always, about the lack of focus and attention on Destruction rules. The thing that they gave out such bad "official" base sizes for Gutbusters units make me loose hope that they will be bringing out a Battletome: Gutbusters in the future. It seems like the base sizes wee created without even having the models in mind. At this moment GW really openly demonstrates that Destruction factions are not their top priority in any way. I mean it is their game, so they decide on which aspects they should focus, but I have to state that I am disappointed by their lack of care and attention on the needs and wishes of Destruction players. Edit: Sorry for the little rant. I still like playing AoS and some things I said might be a bit overexaggerating. But as a Destruction player it often seems like you are running from one disappointment to the next disappointment. ? But no hard feelings. This won't stop me from playing BCR. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amysrevenge Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 9 minutes ago, Infeston said: Also wasn't it mentioned somewhere that the Thundertusk can now run and shoot? Maybe I have misheard this. Thundertusk doesn't shoot. It has an ability that it uses in the shooting phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, amysrevenge said: Thundertusk doesn't shoot. It has an ability that it uses in the shooting phase. Damn. Really? ? Have I played this wrong all the time? ? I thought you can't use it after running, because the ability is still listed under "missile weapons". Doesn't the shooting ability still count as a missile weapon if it is listed as a missile weapon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amysrevenge Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Nope it's just an ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledha Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 11 minutes ago, amysrevenge said: Thundertusk doesn't shoot. It has an ability that it uses in the shooting phase. Sorry, but you are 1000% wrong here. It's a missile weapon, so it follow the rules of missile weapon. No run and shoot "it's an ability" mean nothing since it's here used to describe how the weapon of a unit work. In the same manner, while the shockbolt bow of a judicator prime have a "ability" section, it's still a missile weapon that can't be used while shooting. However, the lord-celestant cloak can be used while running because it's NOT registered as a missile weapon. Same thing for the roaring fyrestream of the magmadroth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infeston Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 7 minutes ago, ledha said: it's a missile weapon Jeah. That is what I had thought. It works like a missile weapon, but it still has no hit,wound and rend profile like a missile weapon. Was it cleared up in a FAQ that the attack is only an ability and not a missile weapon? Otherwise I would still think it is counted as a missile weapon. And somewhere in the Stormcast podcast about the Destruction I think it was mentioned that Thundertusks can run and shoot, which they only can if the ability is not a missile weapon anymore or if there is something added that says that the Thundertusk can run and shoot. But maybe there is someone who could clear this up and knows more about this? Maybe Destruction tournament players (if there are any left ?)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuneBrush Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 +++MOD HAT+++ Positive one for a change If there's anything in the new FAQ you don't think is right, is missing or think needs pointing out, please send an e-mail into AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. The definition of an FAQ is a question that's asked lots of times by different people, so if we don't ask GW don't know it's a legit question. Carry on folks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ledha Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 10 minutes ago, RuneBrush said: +++MOD HAT+++ Positive one for a change If there's anything in the new FAQ you don't think is right, is missing or think needs pointing out, please send an e-mail into AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. The definition of an FAQ is a question that's asked lots of times by different people, so if we don't ask GW don't know it's a legit question. Carry on folks! Thanks. I sent my mail to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killax Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 hour ago, ledha said: FAQ you don't think is right, is missing or think needs pointing out, please send an e-mail into AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. XD I think we're better of recreating a PDF and send the whole file to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.