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

Recommended Posts

I do get why fyreslayers players are disappointed at no new normal units, but I do think that the new magma beast endless spell is one of the best made so far. The scenery piece is actually pretty cool as well in my view. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am happy to see that my wallet will have some rest next month:no release for me (until I'm falling again for some more plastik).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GeneralZero said:

I am happy to see that my wallet will have some rest next month:no release for me (until I'm falling again for some more plastik).

I'm the same - it's a pleasant respite after a few in quick succession (personally I've been hit by Beasts and then Gitz and the FEC all in a row and even with the small breathers in there that was fast enough).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

I do get why fyreslayers players are disappointed at no new normal units, but I do think that the new magma beast endless spell is one of the best made so far. The scenery piece is actually pretty cool as well in my view. 

 

Cause you hear the 0.05% of Fyreslayer's players voices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:

I'm the same - it's a pleasant respite after a few in quick succession (personally I've been hit by Beasts and then Gitz and the FEC all in a row and even with the small breathers in there that was fast enough).

You'd have a big pile of shame of unpaint & unassembled  plastik...like myself :$ ? (I felt for FEC SKAVEN 40K chaos )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

You'd have a big pile of shame of unpaint & unassembled  plastik...

You really don’t want to know 

Edited by Skreech Verminking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a Stormcast Scenary?

I saw a Stormcast symbol in its legs

3941B659-5CA6-4E0A-9F19-56183D42D2F1.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, armisael said:

Is this a Stormcast Scenary?

I saw a Stormcast symbol in its legs

From what I can gather it's something to do with the stormvaults that Sigmar locked all these new endless bad boys away in. It's either an actual stormvault itself or some kind of key or controller that either gives you access to the other stuff or gives you more control over them or something along those lines. 🤷‍♂️

But anyway whatever it is, it seems that any army can take it, so it's not just limited to SCE. 

Share this post


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

I’ve been Reading these pages since the previews dropped. I don’t het te probleem with the terrain pieces. It’s terrain, it’s niet meant to represent something that aan army always carries around. It’s a way to theme your table to fit your army. 

Tldr: if it’s to theme the table to the army I shouldn’t have to take it for gaming reasons. Or it should have a reason to be on every table. 

As I’m one of the people critiquing it I’ll respond. 

I would agree with you if it wasn’t tied to your playstyle. By giving it rules that benifit your army you can’t combine your narrative of the table with playing a competitive game. If my setting is a magma cracked and collapsing earth table and I’m fighting goblins that big statue with extensive tunnel network.... 

or in my upcoming map campaign My home territory is invaded by the gits and apparently there was a massive shrine within bow range of my castle walls? 

Its because of the terrain helps tell the story that some feel forced upon me. The Sylvaneth and nurgle trees sprouting up where they go... amazing! And cool game mechanics. The deepkin ships fun concept, game mechanics seem bit dull. But still okay. 

Those have reason to be there and if a piece of terrain is easily carried it at least has a reason to be on the battlefield.

But the last few just feel forced and cheesy. Two thrones that just boost a hero power and I’m betting the forge is the same. And now I have to choose to include them for gaming vs the story of the table when they clash. 

(Also something that made certain factions unique now feels like a money-making gimmick to me ☹️

All that being said. The terrain is gorgeous and some I won’t get because I personally don’t like ‘em. Others I will even though I don’t play the faction. Loonshrine for example. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Kramer said:

If my setting is a magma cracked and collapsing earth table and I’m fighting goblins that big statue with extensive tunnel network.... 

or in my upcoming map campaign My home territory is invaded by the gits and apparently there was a massive shrine within bow range of my castle walls? 

This is called narrative gaming and you can and are supposed to alter the rules to fit the narrative. It isn't as if you're forced to used every matched play rule when playing a narrative game. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SwampHeart said:

This is called narrative gaming and you can and are supposed to alter the rules to fit the narrative. It isn't as if you're forced to used every matched play rule when playing a narrative game. 

Your argument doesn’t make sense to me. It’s called matched play. But I still want a cool matching table that tells a story. So far that always worked.  But a throne on both sides in the middle of city doesn’t work for me. If the look don’t matter I could just throw down squares of paper and write down what terrain it is. That hurts the experience however ‘matched play’ you want to call it.

And even if you call it narrative gaming, is therefore my argument any less true? It’s my perception of the faction terrain and why I find fault with some concepts.  In response to elfheads genuine question, see the post I quoted in the previous comment. 

GW could have delivered concepts that would have worked on any table like the wild woods, gnarlmaw etc. But they didn’t and I find fault with those concepts. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Gotta say I'm a big fan of army specific terrain pieces.  I always feel like I have to prioritize getting models first before terrain, just so I can actually play with an army.  Having faction specific terrain kills two birds with one stone by giving me more rules and filling up my table.  I really wish Nighthaunt/LON had one, at first I thought the skeleton bridge from Forbidden Powers would be it!  From a narrative perspective, I firmly believe there's always a way to make these pieces fit the story too.  Is it such a stretch that 80 ghouls cobbled together a throne quickly before a fight?  The Khorne battletome gives an awesome excerpt of how a Slaughterpriest summons the Skull Altar in the heat of a battle.  The only limit is your imagination!


To stay on topic, this is my first time being in the hobby for Adepticon, will there be more announcements coming out?  Not complaining about what we've got already, just wondering if I should give my F5 key a break.

Edited by relic456
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kramer said:

Your argument doesn’t make sense to me. It’s called matched play.

What you described isn't a matched play experience, its a narrative play experience which is very different. 
 

1 minute ago, Kramer said:

And even if you call it narrative gaming, is therefore my argument any less true?

Absolutely its less true. Those terrain pieces aren't required and in a narrative game experience you are expected to shift the rules to fit your desired narrative. If those terrain pieces don't fit the story you are telling you don't use them. 

The argument that they're immersion breaking doesn't hold up because if that's your primary interest then GW literally has a way to play spelled out for you where by your immersion doesn't have to be broken with faction specific terrain pieces. The fact that you chose to play matched play when its clearly not a fit for what you want out of the game isn't the fault of the system. 

But by all means continue to complain about it - as I recall you spent a decent page in the BoC thread talking to me about how my negative attitude towards Gors wasn't helping anyone but I'm sure constantly complaining about faction specific terrain is entirely different. 

  • Like 2
  • LOVE IT! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Kramer said:

 

I would agree with you if it wasn’t tied to your playstyle. 

Thanks for the response, i can see your point. I guess that, as someone who doesn’t play, i didn’t consider te gaming side of it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is there an assumption by many that because  no new Fireslayer units were revealed that there won't be any?   GW rarely reveal everything in one go.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aelfric said:

Why is there an assumption by many that because  no new Fireslayer units were revealed that there won't be any?   GW rarely reveal everything in one go.  

True, but if they were releasing new models this would have been the time to do it. They also don't hint at "more to come" save for the rules side of things. IT also sounds like they are going to beef them up the same way theyv'e done with flesh-eaters - ergo armies of magmadroths etc..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

But by all means continue to complain about it - as I recall you spent a decent page in the BoC thread talking to me about how my negative attitude towards Gors wasn't helping anyone but I'm sure constantly complaining about faction specific terrain is entirely different. 

Haha if it's about that's fine. Just call me on complaining then. So far I though we were having a conversation. In response to a question about the arguments some people had not liking it. And seeing the response...

1 minute ago, elfhead said:

Thanks for the response, i can see your point. I guess that, as someone who doesn’t play, i didn’t consider te gaming side of it. 

... that's exactly what happened. And @elfhead No worries, always happy to eleborate if I didn't manage to get my argument written down right.

8 minutes ago, SwampHeart said:

What you described isn't a matched play experience, its a narrative play experience which is very different. 
 

Absolutely its less true. Those terrain pieces aren't required and in a narrative game experience you are expected to shift the rules to fit your desired narrative. If those terrain pieces don't fit the story you are telling you don't use them. 

The argument that they're immersion breaking doesn't hold up because if that's your primary interest then GW literally has a way to play spelled out for you where by your immersion doesn't have to be broken with faction specific terrain pieces. The fact that you chose to play matched play when its clearly not a fit for what you want out of the game isn't the fault of the system. 
 

But just in case you still want to have a conversation. I think I get what you are trying to say. And I agree with the argument that if a certain set of rules don't agree with your way of enjoying it, You should drop it. Fully agree with that, and that's what we do with endless spells. 

The difference for me is that you can't drop the add on of faction specific terrain without hurting different allegiance abilities differently. So dropping the Charnell throne isn't a big of a deal as dropping the Herdstone. 

So when you say its Narrative instead of matched play I disagree. Yes we want to create a narrative setting but game competitive within that. And again I don't dislike the faction terrain. I dislike the execution on some of them, they feel forced. But maybe it's all down where we draw the line between narrative and matched play. That's of course personal. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2019 at 7:59 PM, HollowHills said:

As someone who has painted a lot of deepkin over the last year or so... This rumour engine is 100% for deepkin. The chest and vase are both strongly represented on other sprues, eidolon, shipwreck and akhelian units all have these. 

I also suggest the coins relate to underwater treasure. 

My strongest belief is its endless spells for deepkin, because it reuses existing models and suits the made in China style of those models. 

#shame #embarrassed #whippedbyslaanesh

  • Like 5
  • Haha 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Keeper of Secrets is an outstandingly good model. There’s so much subtle detail, composure. I can’t see a skull or a spike 😮. It may be one of my favourite kits of recent years. Can’t wait to see the other options that come with it, also can’t waitto convert it. 

 

All the Slaanesh units look great, that Daemon prince/Daemonette duo look like they stepped out of the Dantes inferno Boss Concepts. This book is a definite for me, I really want to know what Kinky Boots  has been doing all this time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HollowHills said:

#shame #embarrassed #whippedbyslaanesh

There's something deliciously Slaanesh-y about them specifically previewing the Idoneth urns on a Slaanesh terrain piece when they knew we'd argue that it'd be Idoneth endless spells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

#shame #embarrassed #whippedbyslaanesh

That's how Slaanesh gets you 😂You think you are hyped for you faction and... boom! Now your enthralled by the wrong god. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

#shame #embarrassed #whippedbyslaanesh

As apparently there is also a mirror matching DOK design, do you think there will also be artefacts hinting the future elves factions on this Slaanesh terrain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

#shame #embarrassed #whippedbyslaanesh

Well you cannot deny certain similar visual traits between Slanesh host and Idoneth. 

Share this post


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

Why arent you talking about the gobbos x trees box??????

Im really intrigued by that set. Will it include new units? And If yes, only for Sylvaneth? Does that mean an update is close? 

  • Like 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...