Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
sal4m4nd3r

NOVA Open Age of Sigmar Grand Tounament Top 10 Results (with lists!)

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sal4m4nd3r said:

NOVA was and IS an amazing event....but Acon and LVO are much larger. Not sure how "old" Acon and LVO are but NOVA is only 10 years old this year. But LVO almost doubles out nova in attendance. They had 198 tickets sold with 170 day one participants. I was at Acon this year, did fairly well to. The hall they had it in was MASSIVE. Also housed star wars legion and x wing and still could have had probably double the tickets sold if the had the people. 

They had best grand alliances, best sports (went to @Mitzy), best painted (went to @Terry Pike - Which was funny because he won a raffle prize, they called him up and Alex Gonzalez "shooed" him away and said "dont to worry about it. You will be fine" -- I screamed out " GIVE IT TO TERRY!" Then Alex called my name for the raffle prize and as I was walking up I yelled out "DONT GIVE IT TO TERRY" :P -- ten seconds later Terry won best painted with that jaw dropping nurgle/skaven army) and best overall. There was no best generaliship.  

Correct, there was no best generalship at ACON.  Both of these events do scoring this way, as does Midwest Meltdown (which is on track to have 100 people at it next year).  Waaghpaca, which will have 80 this next year, does do a Best General  (highest battle points), but they the more prestigious award is Best Overall (which is a 25/25/25/25 split between battle, sports, painting, and being present at all the games).  All of this to say, there are more than just 3 large events in the U.S., and most of them have a Best Overall and many do not have Best General. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Thomas Lyons said:

Correct, there was no best generalship at ACON.  Both of these events do scoring this way, as does Midwest Meltdown (which is on track to have 100 people at it next year).  Waaghpaca, which will have 80 this next year, does do a Best General  (highest battle points), but they the more prestigious award is Best Overall (which is a 25/25/25/25 split between battle, sports, painting, and being present at all the games).  All of this to say, there are more than just 3 large events in the U.S., and most of them have a Best Overall and many do not have Best General. 

Like I said... Major events with over 75+ players. There are 3 NOVA, LVO, and Acon.

Waaghpacha had 20-40 last year if I recall correctly and Midwest Meltdown had 60ish a few weeks back. You are characterizing the entire United states based solely on the events in your area. Here's one more that will have 60+ this year, Socal open, they will be doing scoring like LVO with equal support for general etc. If you want to project on event growth (like you just did for Midwest Meltdown and Waaghpaca) than take a survey of all US based GTs. Here is a list of them through December taken from AOS shorts:

Crossroads GT 
Last Rites
Michigan GT 
Octocon GT 
The Crucible
Dragon Fall 
ClawCon 
Socal Open
Holy Havoc 
Renegade Open
King of the Mountain GT 
 

Since it is so important for you to generalize the USA, report back with your results. I'm sure everyone will be interested.

Edited by svnvaldez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's 1 more while I am at it. The ITC (https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/bcpplayers?league=nYHquTtpm0&embed=true) with 621 USA players so far this year. The ITC tracks pure battle and NOVA will be submitting there scores with a vote count somewhere near:

46 votes yes
43 votes don’t care
6 votes no

I don't see you on the ITC player list and with the way you are forcing an agenda of USA not caring about best general is it safe to assume you voted No?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, svnvaldez said:

Here's 1 more while I am at it. The ITC (https://www.bestcoastpairings.com/bcpplayers?league=nYHquTtpm0&embed=true) with 621 USA players so far this year. The ITC tracks pure battle and NOVA will be submitting there scores with a vote count somewhere near:

46 votes yes
43 votes don’t care
6 votes no

I don't see you on the ITC player list and with the way you are forcing an agenda of USA not caring about best general is it safe to assume you voted No?

I was not at NOVA and I have chosen not participate in ITC like a majority of the midwest.

And I really don't see how you are claiming I'm forcing my agenda on anyone.  I am simply being descriptive of the current AOS environment in the United States.  And for the record: 

  • Crossroads GT:  Best Overall with combined scoring; "This event has a significant painting and sportsmanship component to the overall score."; no Best General as far as I can tell.
  • Last Rites: Best Overall with combined scoring and Best General with just battle points (which includes missions, kill points, and secondary objectives).
  • Michigan GTBest Overall with combined scoring; Best General in each alliance.
  • Octocon GT: Best General; no Best Overall from what I can tell.  
  • The Crucible: Unclear what awards; no pack available.
  • Dragon Fall:  Best Overall with combined scoring; Best General in each alliance.
  • ClawCon: Unclear what awards; no pack available. 
  • Socal Open: Best General (wins, points scored, and/or strength of schedule), as well as Best General in each alliance, and "Renaissance Man", which is Battle + Paint (but not sports), which is very similar to the Best Overall at other events.
  • Holy Havoc: Best Overall with combined scoring  
  • Renegade Open: Unclear what awards; no pack available.
  • King of the Mountain GT: Unclear what awards; no pack available.

Not included but just recently having happened was WargamesCon which has Best Overall with combined scoring and Best General with just battle points (which includes secret missions, not just scenario).  Its worth noting that the Best Overall was technically beat by the #2 person in battle points at this event a couple weeks ago as well, but sportsmanship and/or painting pushed Michael Vagenos to the top (a lesser version of what happened at Nova, but still a similar occurrence).

So, of the 11  events you named, 4 events didn't have publicly advertised packs/rewards.  Of the remaining 7 events,  5 events do a Best Overall with combined scoring (with another with a lesser combined version in Renaissance Man), 2 events with a Best General as the highest honor (and another event that acknowledges Best General as a secondary honor), and 3 events do Best General in each alliance as a secondary award.

This limited sample size follows my claims.  Most events seem to be doing Best Overall with combined scores as the highest award.  A couple are doing Best General.

Beyond my prior statements, let me go one step farther and suggest that there seems to be some regional DNA at work, maybe as a carryover from WFB. I've noticed that most of the pushback against combined scores Best Overall and the preference for Best-General-as-highest-honor mentality seem to come from folks out West and in the Northeast.  This also seems to be where the highest concentration of ITC support tends to be as well.  I'm not sure what to make of this observation but there seems to be some correspondence there.  

Edited by Thomas Lyons
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SleepingYeti and @Black_Fortress_Immortal those paint scores for you guys are scandalous. I hope they're seriously reviewing how that could be so screwed up. Well done for your great gaming scores.

@Thomas Lyons just because a "majority" of events are running something one way, does not mean that it is the best way.  As Henry Ford (misquotedly, but still a great quote) said: 

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

Until you've got a vote of every player that attends tournaments on the various styles  that could be used to run events, you have no solid evidence what players want. What you've got evidence of, is what TOs are doing. Many TOs do stuff because "it's always been done that way" or because that's what they're used to, because they have to do it that way because it's the only way they know how, etc. What you'll find in reality, I believe, is that a huge majority of players dont actually care how things are run or scored as long as it's fair. We can debate what people want or don't want all day, but there is an inarguable fact - NOVA was not fair. Look at those beautifully painted models linked above, people who's event was ruined by arbitrary scoring. Sleeping Yeti top 10'd with DESTRUCTION and was knocked down to 16 by painting points (if I read BCP correctly). It's a travesty. If even one person had that experience at my event, I'd consider my event a failure.

I'll finish with this - my inbox and my twitter DMs are blowing up with players who are telling me that the views of the "big names" in the USA are not their views. I have no knowledge or investiture in the US scene (although I will be there for events next year!) but it seems like there is an audience there who's views you are not representing. This is not, in any way, to say that there are not players out there who LIKE painting and sports scores done in the NOVA manner - but to claim that everything is fine because this is "just how it's done" is clearly incorrect.
 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ianob said:

@SleepingYeti and @Black_Fortress_Immortal those paint scores for you guys are scandalous. I hope they're seriously reviewing how that could be so screwed up. Well done for your great gaming scores.

@Thomas Lyons just because a "majority" of events are running something one way, does not mean that it is the best way.  As Henry Ford (misquotedly, but still a great quote) said: 

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

Until you've got a vote of every player that attends tournaments on the various styles  that could be used to run events, you have no solid evidence what players want. What you've got evidence of, is what TOs are doing. Many TOs do stuff because "it's always been done that way" or because that's what they're used to, because they have to do it that way because it's the only way they know how, etc. What you'll find in reality, I believe, is that a huge majority of players dont actually care how things are run or scored as long as it's fair. We can debate what people want or don't want all day, but there is an inarguable fact - NOVA was not fair. Look at those beautifully painted models linked above, people who's event was ruined by arbitrary scoring. Sleeping Yeti top 10'd with DESTRUCTION and was knocked down to 16 by painting points (if I read BCP correctly). It's a travesty. If even one person had that experience at my event, I'd consider my event a failure.

I'll finish with this - my inbox and my twitter DMs are blowing up with players who are telling me that the views of the "big names" in the USA are not their views. I have no knowledge or investiture in the US scene (although I will be there for events next year!) but it seems like there is an audience there who's views you are not representing. This is not, in any way, to say that there are not players out there who LIKE painting and sports scores done in the NOVA manner - but to claim that everything is fine because this is "just how it's done" is clearly incorrect.
 

Well 2/3 of the largest events in the country, including that largest Age of Sigmar Grand tournament EVER held up until this point (Acon) used a best general system. So Sure we cant survey everyone in the hobby/ tournament scene... but people generally like there money. And time. So why attend an event you dont agree with the scoring system? People vote with their wallets. Supposedly a free market and sich. So I will go out on a limb and say that if the largest AoS event ever held in the world uses a particular scoring system, and then the 3rd largest event in the USA uses the same system.. its probably a pretty popular system. 

 @SleepingYeti Your army looked beautiful in person. You beat one of good friends, Luc and his green-ish nighthaunt army.  He is a REALLY good player, so hats off to you man. Your army looked beautiful. I'm sorry the paint score didnt jive so well with what was a spectacular army you created. I wanted to chat with you about your army but everything happened so fast at the event. I wanted a game against you so bad! My blightkings  and your ogres would have a blood bath!!!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thomas Lyons said:

I was not at NOVA and I have chosen not participate in ITC like a majority of the midwest.

And I really don't see how you are claiming I'm forcing my agenda on anyone.  I am simply being descriptive of the current AOS environment in the United States.  And for the record: 

  • Crossroads GT:  Best Overall with combined scoring; "This event has a significant painting and sportsmanship component to the overall score."; no Best General as far as I can tell.
  • Last Rites: Best Overall with combined scoring and Best General with just battle points (which includes missions, kill points, and secondary objectives).
  • Michigan GTBest Overall with combined scoring; Best General in each alliance.
  • Octocon GT: Best General; no Best Overall from what I can tell.  
  • The Crucible: Unclear what awards; no pack available.
  • Dragon Fall:  Best Overall with combined scoring; Best General in each alliance.
  • ClawCon: Unclear what awards; no pack available. 
  • Socal Open: Best General (wins, points scored, and/or strength of schedule), as well as Best General in each alliance, and "Renaissance Man", which is Battle + Paint (but not sports), which is very similar to the Best Overall at other events.
  • Holy Havoc: Best Overall with combined scoring  
  • Renegade Open: Unclear what awards; no pack available.
  • King of the Mountain GT: Unclear what awards; no pack available.

Not included but just recently having happened was WargamesCon which has Best Overall with combined scoring and Best General with just battle points (which includes secret missions, not just scenario).  Its worth noting that the Best Overall was technically beat by the #2 person in battle points at this event a couple weeks ago as well, but sportsmanship and/or painting pushed Michael Vagenos to the top (a lesser version of what happened at Nova, but still a similar occurrence).

So, of the 11  events you named, 4 events didn't have publicly advertised packs/rewards.  Of the remaining 7 events,  5 events do a Best Overall with combined scoring (with another with a lesser combined version in Renaissance Man), 2 events with a Best General as the highest honor (and another event that acknowledges Best General as a secondary honor), and 3 events do Best General in each alliance as a secondary award.

This limited sample size follows my claims.  Most events seem to be doing Best Overall with combined scores as the highest award.  A couple are doing Best General.

Beyond my prior statements, let me go one step farther and suggest that there seems to be some regional DNA at work, maybe as a carryover from WFB. I've noticed that most of the pushback against combined scores Best Overall and the preference for Best-General-as-highest-honor mentality seem to come from folks out West and in the Northeast.  This also seems to be where the highest concentration of ITC support tends to be as well.  I'm not sure what to make of this observation but there seems to be some correspondence there.  

I think you are mistaken at least on the NE USA.  You are correct that there are marked regional differences in how they approached soft scores but also honestly in just about everything else related to Warhammer. . . 

The NE USA large events in the WFB era all had a significant soft score component (Colonial, Crossroads, Da Boyz, and I believe Conflict)  that continues for Da Boyz and Crossroads which are the only old guard left.  Beef and Wing and Triumph are newer AoS events in the NE and I must admit I don't know their breakdown but I'd surprised if it wasn't a mix of soft and table scores. 

I know as I run Da Boyz and wrote the rules set for AoS at Crossroads for the last two years.  I've also won awards (Best Sports, Appearance, General)  at most of the old guard events at some point in the past.    One issue in understanding awards available is the size of the event smaller events have less awards. 

As a data point Da Boyz is still 2 months away and I have 33 signed up for AoS right now.   We've been the largest in the NE each year of AoS (though Triumph is giving us a run for our money this year!)   We're again doing Overall, Best General, Best Painted, Best Sports and likely will add in some other awards as we go along.   Crossroads this year has 8 I believe for AoS. It doesn't make a lot of sense to do a lot of sub awards.  

As another data point on where we are now vs where we were.  Colonial was a 100 player event for most of it's existence.  Crossroads in 7th and 8th was a TWICE a year event with 80-120 players at each of it's twice a year events.  Da Boyz was in the 60's range  for 8th ed WFB .    We've got a long way nationally to go to return to our previous level of competition.

Edited by gjnoronh
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ianob said:

@SleepingYeti and @Black_Fortress_Immortal those paint scores for you guys are scandalous. I hope they're seriously reviewing how that could be so screwed up. Well done for your great gaming scores.

@Thomas Lyons just because a "majority" of events are running something one way, does not mean that it is the best way.  As Henry Ford (misquotedly, but still a great quote) said: 

“If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

Until you've got a vote of every player that attends tournaments on the various styles  that could be used to run events, you have no solid evidence what players want. What you've got evidence of, is what TOs are doing. Many TOs do stuff because "it's always been done that way" or because that's what they're used to, because they have to do it that way because it's the only way they know how, etc. What you'll find in reality, I believe, is that a huge majority of players dont actually care how things are run or scored as long as it's fair. We can debate what people want or don't want all day, but there is an inarguable fact - NOVA was not fair. Look at those beautifully painted models linked above, people who's event was ruined by arbitrary scoring. Sleeping Yeti top 10'd with DESTRUCTION and was knocked down to 16 by painting points (if I read BCP correctly). It's a travesty. If even one person had that experience at my event, I'd consider my event a failure.

I'll finish with this - my inbox and my twitter DMs are blowing up with players who are telling me that the views of the "big names" in the USA are not their views. I have no knowledge or investiture in the US scene (although I will be there for events next year!) but it seems like there is an audience there who's views you are not representing. This is not, in any way, to say that there are not players out there who LIKE painting and sports scores done in the NOVA manner - but to claim that everything is fine because this is "just how it's done" is clearly incorrect.
 

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the paint judging at NOVA was fair.  There was indeed some uneven paint judging and lessons were learned. I am certainly of the mindset that there be a list of minimum check boxes and if those boxes are checked, then full paint scores are awarded.  Honestly, we probably ought to also limit how we deploy professional painters when evaluating armies painted to minimal tabletop standards.  People who serve on GW's miniature painting teams are probably best deployed (and it is the best use of their time) judging for Best Painted/Appearance, rather than making sure a checklist is filled out.  There probably needs to be better communication on expectations amongst the judges as well. This problem will be addressed next year, as noted in Chuck's blog today. My pushback is that just because there was miscommunication amongst the painting judges at one event doesn't suggest the entire system is defunct.

I know not everyone agrees with the "big names" in the U.S. I know there is a contingent of folks who would prefer pure battle scores, no secondary objectives, standardized experiences, etc.  And to them I say, "Awesome! Go do that!" If folks want events like these, then host them! I want the AOS community to grow and will certainly support any attempt to do so.  That said, those probably aren't events that I would want to go to for a variety of reasons. Event packs communicate a vision of what the community is and what the desired community experience will be, and I ultimately have concerns around the type of community created that lowers the standard of painting, removes checks and balances for bad actors and bad game experiences, and simplifies gameplay to such a degree that match-ups can be fully evaluated/predicted before any army hits the table because of predefined scenario scoring.  This is not the kind of gaming community I want to personally participate in but that doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. For those that want something different than the current U.S. scene, I would encourage them to start new events.  People will vote with their feet and like-minded folks will inevitably migrate to the types of events they enjoy.   

44 minutes ago, sal4m4nd3r said:

Well 2/3 of the largest events in the country, including that largest Age of Sigmar Grand tournament EVER held up until this point (Acon) used a best general system. So Sure we cant survey everyone in the hobby/ tournament scene... but people generally like there money. And time. So why attend an event you dont agree with the scoring system? People vote with their wallets. Supposedly a free market and sich. So I will go out on a limb and say that if the largest AoS event ever held in the world uses a particular scoring system, and then the 3rd largest event in the USA uses the same system.. its probably a pretty popular system. 

To be precise, ACON uses a Best Overall system for its top three, then acknowledges the Best General in each grand alliance who are not in the top 3.  The higher honor in that system is the Best Overall, which is the composite score, rather than the Best General of each grand alliance.  I'm sure this is what you meant but wanted to make sure we were precise with language.

36 minutes ago, gjnoronh said:

I think you are mistaken at least on the NE USA. 

Indeed, and I would certainly acknowledge that the NE seems a little bit more diverse on the subject than out West.  Thanks for the update on the current status in the NE!

Edited by Thomas Lyons
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing the paint rubric sheet.

I feel the requirement to meet or not a criteria could be better spelled out. It would help both the players and the judges to respectively paint and judge in accordance to the rules that were given

An average of 14/44(cap at 34) is not  right, we all want beautiful armies in those events but they should not have to be painted by golden deamon winners to get a good score! I m glad to hear the TO is taking feedback and the rubric sheet will be updated for future events

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@azdimy the issue isn't what percent people get out of the max score. It's question of what's the average in the room vs the max in the room and the minimum. What's the likely achievable range.

If paint scores are out of 100 points but the max in the room is 95 and the lowest in the room 90 your paint score variation is actually on 5 points out of your final score.    On the other hand if the paint score is out of 20 points  but the average score is 3 and the highest actually achieved is 20 you've got a 17 point effect from max to average.      Every TO has a different goal on how much impact they want any score (battle, paint, sports or other) to be on the final score.  They have to look at  the max score in the room vs the average ond minimum to figure out the impact on  on player's final score.  Of course how big the scaling and range on other components matters too.

Sometimes it doesn't work out as planned the variance ends up bigger or less.   

 

If it's a 34 point max but no one got above at 20 then the range (and actual impact on final scores) is relatively smaller.    What's that distribution of scores look like and does it match the TO's vision.  

 

Edited by gjnoronh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, azdimy said:

Thanks for sharing the paint rubric sheet.

I feel the requirement to meet or not a criteria could be better spelled out. It would help both the players and the judges to respectively paint and judge in accordance to the rules that were given

An average of 14/44(cap at 34) is not  right, we all want beautiful armies in those events but they should not have to be painted by golden deamon winners to get a good score! I m glad to hear the TO is taking feedback and the rubric sheet will be updated for future events

And thats exactly why I pay people that compete at things like the golden demon to paint my army for events :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dead Scribe said:

And thats exactly why I pay people that compete at things like the golden demon to paint my army for events :D

You re falling into the pro painters trap. They have the US tournament scene exactly where they want it to be ?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean where it's been for the entirety of it's existence? Also where the scene in the rest of the world is almost entirely?  Odd take.  


When there was more of a US competitive scene and I used to run paint judging at a number of GT's I'd encourage the use of a screening question "Did you paint this army?" If someone said no it was up to the TO whether that meant there was a cap on their painting score, or they couldn't win a painting award etc. 

What's the right answer on how to handle it isn't clear or universal.  But for some  TO's and players it felt like the equivalent of someone paying a GT winner to stand by their side and give them advice during the game - didn't feel right.  

But on the other hand many would feel if it meant really awesome armies showed up that everyone could enjoy looking at then purchased armies were a good thing.   

There isn't one universal right answer.  

 

Edited by gjnoronh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thomas Lyons said:

There probably needs to be better communication on expectations amongst the judges as well. This problem will be addressed next year, as noted in Chuck's blog today.

Everyone should check Chuck's blog post out. Also its one thing to talk about scoring in a TGA thread and another to reach out to TOs, EOs, and Podcasters through email or DMs to get different views in the open and discussed.  I would highly recommend making sure you write an email to the TO if you have participated in this thread. NOVA deserves  credit in that they 1) recognized scores were not distributed fairly, 2) doubled the AOS player base from 40 to 80 from last year,  and 3) provided a fair vote for ITC. NOVA did alot of things right but it is important to recognize that one mistake in scoring (or a breakdown of how scores should be given: club upvoting in sports, uneven paint scores) can ruin the whole event for people, who invest their time and money into making it to the event.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, svnvaldez said:

Everyone should check Chuck's blog post out. Also its one thing to talk about scoring in a TGA thread and another to reach out to TOs, EOs, and Podcasters through email or DMs to get different views in the open and discussed.  I would highly recommend making sure you write an email to the TO if you have participated in this thread. NOVA deserves  credit in that they 1) recognized scores were not distributed fairly, 2) doubled the AOS player base from 40 to 80 from last year,  and 3) provided a fair vote for ITC. NOVA did alot of things right but it is important to recognize that one mistake in scoring (or a breakdown of how scores should be given: club upvoting in sports, uneven paint scores) can ruin the whole event for people, who invest their time and money into making it to the event.

I agree, the overall event was wonderful. I would say one of the best judges i've ever met! Thank you for running the whole event, and despite my critiques and disappointment, it is still a wonderful event where we all can relax and enjoy our labor day weekend!

Nice comfortable place,  nice scenery, well written rules and scenarios. Good luck for Nova 2019! 

I did have quite a bit of discussion with him throughout the event, thank you for being so patient!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys

I came in 7th at that event, I played a lot of fun opponents. While I’m a bit desapointed at my standing, I really wanted to come in a good spot since having won best order at adepticon last year. However Nagash just did what Nagash does, coming back from a zero really takes a lot. Kaleb Walters and I had to do some pretty inventive plays to come back in the top 10 respectively.

I just wanted to chime in on the painting scores. I feel most people were taken by surprise by the toughness of the painting rubric. I myself with the army bellow scored very low. I kindly asked the judge to take another quick look to confirm their judgement.

All of this to say, it’s hard to judge 85 armies during an hour lunch time. The paint judge might pick a model and then walk off. If you would like to place well in painting I really recommend  you stay by your army, so you can lobby a bit for your own army.

Overall it was a super fun event and I would like to thank the organizers for having the patience to deal with all us.

DC913ECC-C8DD-40AC-A395-96867380962F.jpeg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That color scheme is gorgeous? ?

Loving the base theme a lot too

 

Edited by calcysimon
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey @sal4m4nd3r, congrats on your high paint finish! Sounds like you really revamped the army from the one I played at A-Con (which makes sense since you can't run the Plaguetouched Warband now). Well done! You got pics of the army somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/8/2018 at 7:52 PM, SlaaneshCultist said:

Hey @sal4m4nd3r, congrats on your high paint finish! Sounds like you really revamped the army from the one I played at A-Con (which makes sense since you can't run the Plaguetouched Warband now). Well done! You got pics of the army somewhere?

Hey there! Thanks for the kind words ^_^ I spent quite a lot of time reconverting Glottkin for this event in particular. Added a citadel tree growing out of the top of him, and another large branch growing off the side for his brother to stand on. Also kitbashed/converted a nurgle chaos Warshine to match my army using a corpse cart, epidemius and citadel trees kits. Went for a vibe like..a travelling compost/mulch salesman using dead bodies as the compost...with trees and mushrooms sprouting from it. 

 As for the list, yeah I was bummed PTWB got removed, but it was kind of broken. Ran a blight cyst and stacked a couple "feel no pain" abilities (harbinger and warshrine) for max durability.  Here are some pictures. I didnt think I deserved a perfect paint score. And I genuinely feel bad for the peeps who didnt score that maybe should have. I had my army scored personally by Pete Foley. 

Sorry for the poor picture quality. My phone has brain damage.  https://imgur.com/a/6fF4zJN some close-ups of some of the blightkings for those interested.  Same as when you saw them, @SlaaneshCultist:D 

board.jpg

board2.jpg

board 3.png

gIwtsal.jpg

Edited by sal4m4nd3r
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sal4m4nd3r said:

Hey there! Thanks for the kind words ^_^ I spent quite a lot of time reconverting Glottkin for this event in particular. Added a citadel tree growing out of the top of him, and another large branch growing off the side for his brother to stand on. Also kitbashed/converted a nurgle chaos Warshine to match my army using a corpse cart, epidemius and citadel trees kits. Went for a vibe like..a travelling compost/mulch salesman using dead bodies as the compost...with trees and mushrooms sprouting from it. 

 As for the list, yeah I was bummed PTWB got removed, but it was kind of broken. Ran a blight cyst and stacked a couple "feel no pain" abilities (harbinger and warshrine) for max durability.  Here are some pictures. I didnt think I deserved a perfect paint score. And I genuinely feel bad for the peeps who didnt score that maybe should have. I had my army scored personally by Pete Foley. 

Sorry for the poor picture quality. My phone has brain damage.  https://imgur.com/a/6fF4zJN some close-ups of some of the blightkings for those interested.  Same as when you saw them, @SlaaneshCultist:D 

board.jpg

These are great! I got some kind of plague by just looking at the photos. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/10/2018 at 6:00 AM, sal4m4nd3r said:

Hey there! Thanks for the kind words ^_^ I spent quite a lot of time reconverting Glottkin for this event in particular. Added a citadel tree growing out of the top of him, and another large branch growing off the side for his brother to stand on. Also kitbashed/converted a nurgle chaos Warshine to match my army using a corpse cart, epidemius and citadel trees kits. Went for a vibe like..a travelling compost/mulch salesman using dead bodies as the compost...with trees and mushrooms sprouting from it. 

 As for the list, yeah I was bummed PTWB got removed, but it was kind of broken. Ran a blight cyst and stacked a couple "feel no pain" abilities (harbinger and warshrine) for max durability.  Here are some pictures. I didnt think I deserved a perfect paint score. And I genuinely feel bad for the peeps who didnt score that maybe should have. I had my army scored personally by Pete Foley. 

Sorry for the poor picture quality. My phone has brain damage.  https://imgur.com/a/6fF4zJN some close-ups of some of the blightkings for those interested.  Same as when you saw them, @SlaaneshCultist:D 

board.jpg

board2.jpg

board 3.png

gIwtsal.jpg

Love the tree on Glottkin, looks great!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...