Beliman
-
Posts
3,692 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
17
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Beliman
-
-
15 minutes ago, Marcvs said:
On the other hand, I think that a company should be criticised for this kind of communication -plans can change, especially on such a long-term project, but it was their choice to communicate so early and in this way, so the lack of clarification before the release of the product makes the whole thing feel a lot like a bait and switch.
Yeah, that's the whole lecture that GW needs to do. That's why roadmaps are good only when they are short term, because most of the products are in production or nearly finished, and the roadmap will not be altered to much if anything happens.
But if the roadmap is 4 or 5 years away, there are a lot of variables that can't be handled by the company: a (wordwide) pandemic, new Brexit laws or just a Boss swap (to say a few ones).
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, Marcvs said:
I'd have to dig out the precise articles to give you links but no, it was a bit more specific than that
Wow, didn't remember that, thanks for the answer. Knowing this part, I would say that at least Cathay was part of the project's long term pipeline but at some point, it that was pushed back. Sad outcome
-
3
-
-
It's disappointing for Kislev and Cathay fans, but for whatever reason, I totally expected this outcome. Yes, both armies were presented in TOW articles, but just as lore blurb (hey look, ice witches weapons are made of ice, and they have bears) or some form to build hype for Total Warhammer 3, or just to show the collaboration going on between both companies.
Btw, that doesn't mean that Kislev & Cathay will never be released, it means that GW has already some projects to work for TOW, and both armies are not part of this projects.
-
Kharadrons Overlods:
[✓] Duardins / Dwarfs.
[✓] Victorian-Steampunk with some Norse Patterns.
[✓] Flying ships.
[✓] Honorable" pirate-like" society (the Code).
[✓] Awesome design and aesthethics.
[✓] Unique arche-type (a lot of firepower, vehicles, and flying/fast dwarfs).
[✓] One of the most grounded backstories for an army (appart of being, you know, steampunk flying dwarfs).
[✓] In an universe with godlike beings, realms made of magic and weird stuff everywhere, KOs are based on aether-science.
[✓] Best miniautres in the whole AoS range (that's a FACT, not an opinion).
[✓] Artillery-
6
-
-
14 hours ago, Gitzdee said:
Didnt think much of it at the time but im starting to believe the cursed city heroes are the future looks of CoS. So showing us the duardin and aelf factions. If CoS and Dawnbringers was really that much delayed it could be true.
We got the necromancer style heroes, the ogor, the witch hunter style models. Is this telling us we are going to see Qulathis style kind of the stag wanderers back and these steampunkish duardin with a less metal look.
Dagnai is 100% kharadron. The metal beard is part of the breathing device of any Ancestor Mask, as we already seen with Torrk Lenssen secondary head:
He has less "armour" than Admirals because he is a Trade-Commodore, and his power-backpack has the tools for his job (think about an upgraded Captain, but with more logistic stuff to do). His boots, emblems, axe and trousers follow the same design as any Arkanaut pattern. His main diference is that he is wearing this (awesome) fancy coat and a customized weapon, but that's not really unique because any character with enough wealth to spend on equipments has a customized weapon, as we saw with Brokk or Dreki Flynt:
-
5
-
3
-
-
Still reading the book, but it seems that it has a bit more going on than the previous ones. At least, it feels more "immersive".
-
16 minutes ago, MotherGoose said:
They've made unique characters incredibly hard locked (soulblight in particular) to the point you HAVE to use them in their subfaction. Traits and items have been cut in half or worse, magic choice is all disappearing.
[Offtopic]
That's one of the bullets that AoS 4.0 need to dodge. Some units have the same problem, their rules are so meh unless you put them in their subfaction, then they become from good to excelent.
[Offtopic Off]
-
On 2/18/2024 at 7:07 PM, Gitzdee said:
What characters would you like to see reused in AoS, or dont want to make a comeback at all? Or do you think AoS should create its own unique characters?
Both. I expect a lot of new unique characters, but at the same time, old characters returning in some form (no need to copy&paste old books in to AoS).
-
I'm a bit confused about Drilled.
If one of your units is in Marching Column, after declaring their charge target, can they redress the ranks to allow a charge move?
-
To me, AoS must use Fantasy backround and characters, that's the whole point of being a continuation of it.
But, as it happens with 40k, there is no need to return Primarchs every week, even if they print money by itself.
But let's be honest here, 40k already uses old characters and/or old background as a bridge with 30k (or even older than Heresy): old chaptermasters or promoted new ones, vehicles, weapons, old races (men of iron), silent king, etc... that's exactly what AoS should do.
Explore what Fantasy had but was never shown. That mummies that Malekith stole their crown from the chaos wastes, that insect-like thing that Gotrek killed, Monkeyking, Blood-Nagas, Krakanrok the black, etc...
They don't even need to return as they were, they only need to have a some type of link with Fantasy.
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:
i'm finding AOS duardin are more interesting without it tbh. Especially KO's ridiculous "laws and bylaws and sublaws and and and" schtick, which I think is a great replacement
Barak-thring has a Dammaz Kron and the Code has a grudge-clause that uses an administrative system for any grudge (Rune of Mark) and how to solve it.
-
3
-
1
-
-
On 2/16/2024 at 12:06 PM, Whitefang back me up said:
What do you think of Aqshy? Or Indexes? No reason for asking…
The realm itself is not the problem, the issue is when players doesn't have any involvement in that zone. Maybe because there aren't any characters to follow, any interesting civilizations to defend (or attack) or nobody knows anything about the zone (aka, Thondia).
If a Thondia's settlement is destroyed, probably nobody will blink an eye (appart from @Baron Klatz, is a joy to read your posts), but if someone destroys
AnvilgardHammerhall, that's another thing.What I'm trying to say is that GW need to invest in creating an environment for players to care. That's the whole point of building a Setting.
About Index, I hope for the best, but I don't want to be naive, I expect a lot of problems in early edition (if we are lucky, all of them only about balance). I just hope that AoS flavour is still there in some form (customization and a bit of love for Heroes).
-
6
-
-
On 1/23/2024 at 12:39 AM, Danaork said:
For a Kruleboyz's second wave, What's your wishlist for that if it happen ?
So, i want to see more swamp monsters, swamp Troggoths and wyverns.
I think that Kruleboyz doesn't feel like an army (2 type of troops and a bunch of monsters and heroes). That's why I would like to see some wargaming arche-types for a 2nd wave:
- An elite melee unit, with utility (something like monsta-killaz, but a proper unit instead of a warband).
- A tech-unit: gnashtoof pack (fast light cavalry), gnashtoof riders (cavalry), Rambo-like guttrippaz (Grakk da Hook) with teleport, block enemy troops to advance or put mines on the field. Anything that give us another tool to play a bit diferent.
- Siege-monster: A swamp-drake or giant croc with a howdah full of guttrippaz or a Killbow (or something like that).
-
1
-
The last Battlescroll for AoS 3.0. Nice "additions" to our KOs...
I don't know what to say, our main problem is our Battle Tactics and Grand Strategies, not our points. At least a double Ironclad is -40p LOL
-
1
-
-
On 2/14/2024 at 6:23 PM, Landohammer said:
I think a lot of 40k players, myself included, think 10th edition 40k was the most botched edition change since end times/AOS 1.0.
They found a way to simultaneously suck the flavor, fun and balance out of the game all at once.
I think that war40k core mechanics and the rule's design are a lot better than people think. If there was more customization options, subfactions or "background flavour" to play around, people would have another perspective, even if the game still had the same mechanics.
AoS is in the other side of the coin, there is a lot of flavour, but the rules are a bit off. With a lot of layers of rules on top of other layers, and a meta-gaming based on stuff like how to acquire arbitrary Victory Points instead of what your models do or have.
-
4
-
2
-
-
Just to add to the BoC argument, AoS had the same "WFB Tzaangors" too a few years ago (aka, marked Gors and Bestigors):
Spoiler
AoS Tzaangors are not marked gors/bestigors, they are diferent in their design (armours/weapons) and background. Imho, CA just pointed out that beaks are not part of the WFB Tzaangors design, they are random mutations that mostly appear in background and a few illustrations. Not even old designs had beaks:
Spoiler
-
1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:
indexes are not that far in time
I hope you are right
-
1 hour ago, ScionOfOssia said:
I’d personally give “Worst Tome” to the Kharadron
Why? From my pov, KOs main issue was the edition itself instead of their mechanics.
-
I think that it could be fine to make a post about new beta rules for Trench Crusade, a game written by master-designer Tuomas Pirinen.
It's a skirmish game called Trench Crusade. The rules seems to be top quality, strightforward and easy to understand (and it reminds me about, with just a few mechanics that can affect multiple decisions (-/+ dice and blood/blessing dice), from damage to accuracy, defensive stance or being in cover.
It's an Alternative Activation skirmish game that you can use all your actions in each activation, with a basic system to see if the action fails, success or it's a critick, modified by +/- dice system, same with injury table (aka, damage) for your miniatures. In other words, everything goes with a 2D6 roll, and then add (+) dice or (-) dice and then take the 2 highest or lowest results depending if you had (+) or (-) dice and see if your actions was successful or your unit was injured. It remind me about Malifaux's +/- flips.
If anyone is interested, link to the Beta rules below:
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, dmorley21 said:
Maybe a sign of indexes for 4th?
You got my attention
-
Happy to see that Black Library books can be bought without trouble. My last two books disappeared in a few minuts after release and I had to wait 6-8 months
-
1
-
-
Time to hunt some thunderers.
-
10 hours ago, Gitzdee said:
I just like the idea that a chaos warrior could have 10 armour save. Compared to maybe a 3 armour save for a moonclan stabba grot. I think it could make the stats represent the models better than a D6 could.
I get the point, but you can achieve something like that with what we already have.
-
Make Chaos Warriors a bit more resilient:
- Better save (e.g: 2+)
- Ward Save
- Re-roll Saves
- -X to Hit/Wounds for ranged and melee attacks
- Can only be Hitted/Wounded on rolls of 4+ (Sekhar new "mechanic").
- Ethereal
- Can use Commands (AOD) without spending a Command Point.
That's how AOS works, and even if I like simplicity over layers of rules (that can even be stacked), I think that it's a good system if the devs are completely in control of this system.
-
1
-
Make Chaos Warriors a bit more resilient:
-
9 hours ago, Ganigumo said:
2. There are only so many ways to write similar heroes (foot, cav etc) without them looking the same or getting overly complex. They could do stuff like 10 attacks with 1 damage vs 5 at 2, but thats mostly splitting hairs. Making your own character is largely aimed at narrative play now, and I'm not sure I have a problem with that.
3. I don't think this is a problem. Typecasting units by performance (i.e hammer, chaff, anvil, support) is just as viable a method. If anything I prefer this, because it gives more freedom for asymmetrical armies. There was a bit of an arms race in older editions of wfb/40k whenever a new unit type was introduced as each army would get (or not get) that unit type as well.2-Not sure about that, we have Range, Attacks, Hit, Wound, Rend and Damage for their basic profiles, and we should add Saves, Wounds, Movement and Bravery too if we want. And we still have basic stuff from Core Rules: Attack First, Attack Last and Ward Save. I think that's a lot more than what other games have and still, our foot heroes doesn't feel unique.
3-I wasn't talking about hammer, chaff, anvil, etc... If a great cannon does less damage than 10 handguns, that's a rules problem because people don't expect that. I don't care which role they give, but they should be easy to understand just by looking at our miniatures.
-
5
-
Warhammer - The Old World
in Warhammer: The Old World
Posted
Yeah, I understand that. But that doesn't have a lot of value, the company can talk about fishmen or Hobgoblin kanate (even with pics or background), that wouldn't mean that fishmen will be one of the armies for the tabletop. They could even cross-promote another product with TOW (TWW3) and that would be fine.
The main problem is when the company tells you "Fishmen will also be coming to the tabletop in the upcoming warhammer: The Old World" and a few years later "there aren't any plans to bring Fishmen to the tabletop". That's not interpretable, it is what it is.