Jump to content

Beliman

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,605

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Beliman

  1. Beliman
    Imo, that's not what he means. It's not the powerlevel, is the entire battletome FAQ'd, rules outdated, 0 interesting mechanics, and a lot miniatures that suffer because of that (gunhaulers, skywardens, Endrimaster,...) Btw, I believe that KO are not bad, they just have mechanics that didn't catch up with AoS 2.0. Nobody wants just more firepower and better saves for everything (but some ships should have +3save anyway ).
  2. Beliman
    Imho, they need to bring all armies under AoS 2/3 settings (lore-wise and gameplay-wise). Make it clearly what they want to do with AoS. That doesn't mean to stop any new faction, GW can do whatever they want. They can merge all Aelves in one battletome, and next year build a new army like DoK and take Aelves from last battletome (or 2 keywords). Even swap units between Grand Allegiance (ogors and fyreslayers!!) and even put some mercenary rules in the White Dwarf. The customer need to feel that he/she is buying products for AoS, and GW know that (and I'm not talking about money). Someone that just bought an old WFB army and feels that his/her army doesn't belong to AoS is something that will hurt in the long run (they need to kill any shadow from TombKings and Bretonnia ASAP).
  3. Beliman
    That's nice! This mechanic has some lore behind and is eazy to understand and play. I'm a bit skeptic with "summoning" or even using magic with Dwarfs but they are doing a good job with the latest battletomes, so I'm not really worried. Imo, Ko should be a Dwarf army that interacts directly on the table and not just list-building/ stat-buffing. Fyreslayers and Dispossessed are armies that rely on themself, they know the enemy and they run and punch them in the face. But KO seems to addapt better than other stunties. There are awesome concepts on this thread, a "reload mechanic" for our ships with diferent bombs or ships with garrison rules are mechanics that I really want to see for KO. If the enemy summons a big fat demon, we use our "holy bomb". If enemy has long charges, we put traps. Our tech and utility should be our most powerful weapons.
  4. Beliman
    Someone was right about something before, and now is saying this. I guess it's 50/50, and LVO is in two days... just wait to see if GW throws any sneak peek.
  5. Beliman
    I believe that you can. The oficial Errata for FireStorm (december 2018) says that to be available to pick Firestorm Abilities or warlord traits, you must use Allegiance Abilities from your Gran Allegiance. So, an Allegiance that don't have their own Abilities can use GA Abilities and I understand that this allows you to pick Freecities Abilities too. Looking more about this, if you ara Allegiance: Scourge Privateers using Anvilgard, you can't take Dispossessed even if they are GA:Order because you are still using Allegiance: Scourge Privateers (even if they can be taken by Anvilgard lists). Thanks a lot! One less restriction to break, let's go for another one!!!
  6. Beliman
    Doesn't matter how many you can take, not enough dakka!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! New rumours: After Sylvaneth and KO warbands for Warhammer Underworlds, it could be a new box with both armies and 2.0 battletomes (like Carrion Empire box). Like I said, it's just a rumour.... ALL ABOARD THE HYPE SHIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  7. Beliman
    I really hope that you are right. I don't have any problem with Endless Spells nor new toys to play (even if KO have one battleline....). But new rules and interactions is what makes AoS so awesome (without going full skirmish like Malifaux or Warmahordes), and this rules can only come with new battletomes. So, I hope that they take their time thinking new mechanics (even if the minis or stats are not the best, editions will change that, but how an army is played is a bit more tricky to change) to write awesome new ways to play.
  8. Beliman
    I have my doubts about freecities too. My reason to not use the same points of Dryads or Treelord with battalions is becaude Dryads and Treelords are units, and units (Core Book) only need one keyword to be legal to be played for an Allegiance (Dryads and TLA has "Order" keyword in their warscroll). But battalions don't have keywords and the only rule that explains them is that they are "from" the battletome where they are written (Sylvaneth battletomes have "Sylvaneth" over their battalion's name, so they are a bit more clear than other battalions without any word nor keyword). And the only FAQ that explains a bit how to take battalions using other Allegiance is the one that we are talking about (that, like you said, it seems to aim to other type of armies, but is generic enough to be relevant in our exemple with Sylvaneth). That was "my" logic behind my argument. I'm not saying that your are wrong btw, but the rules for freecities are a bit unclear and I want to be sure that I understand everything. Edit: BoC battalions couldn't be picked with specific god Allegiance even if the models gained their keyword. It was FAQ'd later but before that, all that battalions were just exclusive for BoC.
  9. Beliman
    @Cynric I'm not sure if there is a rule for GA: Order, but from Core Rules Errata: "An army can include a warscroll battalion of a different allegiance to the rest of the army, but if it does so the units in it do count against the limits on the number of allies the army can have (and the points for the battalion and the units in it count against...". Imo, that means that GA: Order is not Sylvaneth, so Sylvaneth battalions will use "ally points" for GA: Order. English is not my main language and I hope I'm wrong, so if someone knows anything more to skip that restriction, It will be nice.
  10. Beliman
    Don't know. Imho, GW needs to upgrade Firestorm rules(and build more cities for Destruction, Chaos and Death). With less restrictions and more tools to build crazy (optional) lists with awesome new rules (like Stoneklaw's Gutstompas) with artifacts+weapons and maybe even battalions.
  11. Beliman
    I'm afraid that Sylvaneth don't have that option, so if you want to take amy Sylvaneth Battalion using GA: Order, then you need to pick them as allies and build a legal list to use GA: Order Allegiance Abilitites (and then ally with Sylvaneth for that battallions). I remember that BoC had some type of problems with their God Specific battalions that coudn't be taken with their respectively Allegiance (khorne, Slaanesh, tzeenth and Nurgle). Maybe someone that knows better how they fixed that problem could exlain a bit what happened and see if there is any "legal" hole to fix this problem about Batttalions. That was FAQ'd later (see my quote above, that was from Desembre 2018). So you can't chose anymore because you must take your own Allegiance Abilitites (read the last sentence: "Note that if allegiance abilities exist for a faction army, you must use them."
  12. Beliman
    Generals Handbook Official Errata: Page 62 – Pitched Battle Profiles, Introduction Add the following section: ‘ARMIES WITHOUT ALLEGIANCE ABILITIES If a faction army does not have a set of allegiance abilities, then you can use its Grand Alliance allegiance abilities instead. For example, if you had an Eshin army you could use the Grand Alliance Chaos allegiance abilities, and if you had an Order Draconis army you could use the Grand Alliance Order allegiance abilities. Note that if allegiance abilities exist for a faction army, you must use them.’ Btw, your quote answered one of my questions. All battalionns (because we don't have generic ones for GA: Order) must be taken like normal allies for any free city. So expensive ones are not an option anymore.
  13. Beliman
    I think that you can't. It was FAQ'd that when you have a legal option to take an exlusive Allegiance Abilities for your army, you must take them. So, if you can take Sylvaneth Allegiance Abilities, you must take them (removing the option to take GA: Order). One option is to take other battlelines (ex.: Wanderers) breaking any possibility for your army to be Sylvaneth only. At this point I'm a little lost, because I think that you could take specific battalion from other armies and still be Order? This battalions must be taken like allies for GA: Order? What's the Allegiance of this battalion, Order or their specific keyword?
  14. Beliman
    Don't go mad. Like I said before, this last week we didn't have anything for this forum (not even the thuesday sneak peak from the community team gave us a lot to talk). At least we had some fun chats about "supposed rumours" (but they become worthless in the end). That's how this things works, if the main company don't feed us, we become hungry for news and every wishlist has some potential to become a rumour. I'm not saying that it's GW fault (we are not talking about that here), but in the end, all of this helps this thread to be alive (anyone reads other fantasy forums? That's what I'm saying). We had some fun and duardins have the Big first Grudge written in the Big Book, imho, that doesn't feel like we had a bad ending with this "affair".
  15. Beliman
    I believe that It was FAQ'd. Maybe I'm wrong, but I remember that If you have any Allegiance Abilities, you must take them (without the option to chose GA:Order and free city abilities). Imo, the main problem is if you chose an allegiance that has "battleline if..." and NO abilities, then you pick Order+Free city AND an ally that you can pick because you are "Order" but you shoudn't because you used "battleline if..." because you previously took Y allegiance. It's a bit blurry, technically you could chose this "allies", but picking them seems wrong if you took "battleline if..." before.
  16. Beliman
    Not going to lie, it seems awesome!!! DoK (just ignoring how good they are) had a really nice update, with tons of mechanics: diferent "hosts", magics, prayers, even two types of "fluffy units"with Witches and mutated witches (well, or maybe "gifted" witches), etc... and not counting on a Morathi herself!!! And with a bit of luck, terrain and endless spells (if firebellies are going to be part of the same battletome, I see some big fireballs or even monstruos creatures made for fire). Only time will tell if this rumours are true or not, but until then, we can hope for the best.
  17. Beliman
    Don't know if I'm one of "this people", but I'm not saying that we (KO) need an update because we are bad. Someone made a joke about there was nothing for KO in the last rumours, and someone continued with some arguments about why KO needed some type of update ASAP. Nobody says that KO are the worst (that was debunked after Khron gameplay in CanCon btw...), and that's what happened this last to pages: people talking about powerlevel or why KO need any updates (they don't need to be true btw). Nothing more, nothing less. We have rumours, we can talk about them and by the nature of this thread, we will have a bit of wishlisting. This type of arguments are just part of this thread (like Aelves, Dispossessed,... and now, Gutbusters!!! First rumour about the fat boys!). Sorry if you are upset btw.
  18. Beliman
    Thanks! I'm really happy to see this "new" tricks for some underused units (g.thunderers). A bit sad for our ships, but happy that we still are using one of them (even if it's just a teleport-thing).
  19. Beliman
    I can't speak for other KO players, but, like I said in another thread (KO main thread btw), my main complain is not about the power level of our units but the "fluff" that's represented in our gameplay. The latest battletomes (including BoC) have an awesome design (even if they have bad units), and that type of design is what I want to see for KO. Some old battletomes have the same problem, others (Tzeentch, Nurgle, etc..) had some nerfs but the main core-mechanics are still there. KO at this moment uses some type of canons (blob of arkanauts with hooks buffed by khemist), some type of countercharge/shock troops (evocators or endrinriggers) and sometimes an ability to deep strike ( ship+Zilfin). I'm not saying that we are bad, I'm saying that (ignoring powerlevel and competitive play), we are a bit "underdesigned". Having a battletome that is FAQ'd just after being available to doesn't help. Editions can change points, make some units better and others worst, but my main complain is how GW wants the army to be played and if It has enough "fluff" behind that design.
  20. Beliman
    Well, after more and more bad news, only good ones can come Grand Alliance: Dispossessed confirmed!!!
  21. Beliman
    Thanks for the rumors @Ndabreaker. I don't have a problema if they are true or not, but at least they are rumors to talk about.
  22. Beliman
    Well, my main complain about KO is that we don't have enough "fluff" in our gameplay. I'm not really mad about competitive play, but our ships are more for one turn alpha and not because we need them (if we had some type of teleport like other armies, I believe that people will just swap Zilfin-ships for more bodies and rely on that teleport to make our alpha). At the same time, GW wrote awesome new allegiance abilitites (Nurgle, Gloomspite, ID, etc...), and IMHO, Kharadrons Overlords deserve something like that (I love the Code btw).
  23. Beliman
    Wow, congratz @GrandAdmiralAutumn. I will try to view on youtube/Twitch. Really happy to see KO be played and doing great!!!!
  24. Beliman
    Can I see it with twitch tv or any other platform?
  25. Beliman
    Wops, I wanted to say "Rune blade" not "Relic Blade" sorry. Btw, don't know if @Furuzzolo wants to use some realm artifacts, just an assumption for my part.
×
×
  • Create New...