Orsino
-
Posts
234 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Orsino
-
-
5 hours ago, Popisdead said:
I played the one game you mentioned along with lots of others. *also the aforementioned game had terrible balance and I gave an actual example instead of just arguing. I've played lots of games. Games generally don't have perfect balance.
I've never said it cannot be improved, I've pointed out it isn't something that can be achieved. You are correct it isn't an argument
You said you hadn't played the current edition of BA, which is the one that was being referred to. No one in this thread has suggested any game has perfect balance, but rather games can be better or worse balanced relative to other games and balance in AoS is relatively poor.
5 hours ago, Popisdead said:This isn't a Bolt Action forum and I would suspect very few people play the game. It is moot to argue it's a counter point to AoS's lack of balance.
If you want to play AoS play it. If you want to play BA play it. If you want to play Oldhammer play it. I'm not slamming Bolt Action, I'm saying it's more a sign of personal slight towards GW to argue that point than BA being "perfectly balanced". Belabouring that point isn't going to do much other than validate gamers like to complain online.
This is just a bizarre argument. When you claim no game is well balanced of course people are going to bring up counter-examples of games that are well balanced. For you to then say that people shouldn't mention those better balanced games on the forum because it's a "personal slight" against GW is really quite strange and unreasonable. You end by saying "play or don't", apparently forgetting this is a discussion forum. If you're not interested in the discussion then don't take part in it, but don't turn up to tell other people not to talk about it.
-
4
-
-
44 minutes ago, GrimDork said:
Personally, I think it's fair to give your opponent the kind of information found on an AoS reminders printout (maybe even have a copy for them along with your list). Yes, they can look up the warscrolls but, unless they have the tome, they will not know allegiance abilities, artefacts etc. Giving them a printout wouldn't give away your tactics, just all the rules that apply to your army.
This is what I do, AoS reminders makes it nice and clear and games flow better if you share info at the start rather than having to explain your army mid-game. However I don't consider not volunteering information to be deception/cheating and I'd have no issue playing with someone who didn't give me a rundown, although refusing to answer questions seems a little silly.
-
7 hours ago, Belper said:
Considering 'well balanced' is a largely subjective term, he isn't dismissing 'well balanced' games, he's stating that those games aren't actually 'well balanced' as he would define the phrase. Example: You could argue that chess isn't particularly well balanced because of the first mover advantage white gets.
Game balance is actually fairly quantifiable and (as I've pointed out a few times) when we talk about a game being well-balanced this is relative to other games. You can make that argument about chess if you like but chess will still be well-balanced relative to AoS because you're comparing a game with a single point of imbalance to a game with more and greater points of imbalance. Games are relatively more or less balanced when compared to other games, this isn't a point that can be sensibly disputed and you can't make game balance disapear as a design dimension by repeating that no game is perfect or appealing to subjectivity.
-
1 hour ago, Popisdead said:
No game Games Workshop has released has ever been balanced. Next to no games out there are balanced, that have any interest in them. There are way too many factors.
I don't know what BA is like now but it used to be so terrible that the community wrote the 1.5 rules which were the standard. Calling it balanced now makes me think it's been homogenized even more so to be pretty week. Or you are just claiming that. And since I don't play it any longer and this is an AoS forum,.. seems pointless.
You also seem to not understand what perfect balance is. You can care about balance all you want. You can have the expectation of it. Feel free to yell about it all you want on the internet. I just won't happen.
You suggest that no games are well balanced and then dismiss examples of well balanced games because you haven't played them and...they're not AoS. That's really not an argument. And again, balance is a continuum and repeating "no game is perfectly balanced" doesn't mean balance can't be improved.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Malakithe said:
Short answer: No /endthread lol
Real answer: Ultimately we play a game that is made by a for-profit organization. With every new model, new faction, even the slightest change in points or rules can and will unravel any kind of previous balancing.
So we get what we get and roll with it.
The fact that games workshop is motivated by profit is a bit of a non-sequitur, so are lots of companies that manage to make balanced games.
The frequent introduction of new factions does make it more difficult to maintain balance, but there are ways that could be mitigated to a greater or lesser extent, more play-testing, updating warscrolls more frequently, etc.
-
On 8/18/2020 at 10:27 PM, Popisdead said:
There isn't even balance in chess. This has been a comment for the past 17 years I've been back in the game.
Just enjoy the hobby and either play the latest broken or enjoy your army for what it is.
I don't really get this. Yes, you can argue that no game is truly perfectly balanced, but some games are a hell of a lot more balanced than others. Chess is extremely balanced, something like Bolt Action is pretty balanced whilst still having distinctive factions that play differently, and AoS is very unbalanced. Why would the difficulty of achieving perfect balance make a better level of balance an unreasonable expectation or something people shouldn't care about?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Lord of the Isle said:
Any reasonable friend would still let you play mercs right?
Probably, but I don't like to have to ask if it's okay to use a non-legal army everytime I play a new person.
For my own knights I think I'm gonna be running them as dracothians, Cities of Sigmar has plenty of mounted units but few of them are really elite and intimidating in the way I feel knights should be.
-
I'm seeing a few people suggesting Bloodknight mercenaries, didn't GHB 2020 scrap mercenaries? I don't see them in the points list or on the warscoll builder.
-
Making some changes to my list, wondering if I'd be better off running it as Tempest's Eye:
Allegiance: Cities of Sigmar
- City: Living City
LEADERS
Nomad Prince (120)
- General
- Command Trait : Druid of the Everspring - Lifesurge
- Artefact : Spear of the HuntCelestial Hurricanum With Celestial Battlemage (280)
Dreadlord on Black Dragon (300)
UNITS
20 x Sisters of the Watch (320)
10 x Sisters of the Watch (160)
30 x Eternal Guard (330)
3 x Akhelian Ishlaen Guard (140)
- Allies
3 x Akhelian Ishlaen Guard (140)
- Allies
3 x Aetherwings (40)
BEHEMOTHS
War Hydra (170)
I actually find the war hydra works well for me but I am concious that if I got rid of the hydra and atherwings I'd have enough points to take a unit of shadow warriors and some outriders or something.
-
Making some changes to my list...
Allegiance: Cities of Sigmar
- City: Living City
LEADERS
Nomad Prince (120)
- General
- Command Trait : Druid of the Everspring - Lifesurge
- Artefact : Spear of the HuntCelestial Hurricanum With Celestial Battlemage (280)
Dreadlord on Black Dragon (300)
UNITS
20 x Sisters of the Watch (320)
10 x Sisters of the Watch (160)
30 x Eternal Guard (330)
3 x Akhelian Ishlaen Guard (140)
- Allies
3 x Akhelian Ishlaen Guard (140)
- Allies
3 x Aetherwings (40)
BEHEMOTHS
War Hydra (170)
Would appreciate any thoughts/advice. I've found a big block of EG and SotW buffed by the celestial hurricanum works well for me but perhaps I need more mobility. I know people don't rate war hydras but I have to say mine has always done good work, it's an intimidating-looking conversion that draws attacks and with the hydras own wounds regeneration + Living City it tends to last until the end of the game. However, I am concious that if I got rid of the hydra and atherwings I'd have enough points to take a unit of shadow warriors and some outriders or something.
Nomad prince is pretty useless, but unfortunately necessary for the batteline and with Druid of the Everspring at least it serves as a second caster. Is there a better way to go? I was previously taking 5 Sisters of the Thorn but for their points cost I always found them pretty disapointing.
-
4 hours ago, Myrdin said:
So I`ve been tinkering with the idea of running a "mostly non 1W models" list for Living City to make a little use of the +1W regeneration the city bonus confers.
Big monsters, and lots of all sorts of cavalry (Outrides instead of Handgunners. Demis, Wildwood Riders, multiple Hydra, DrdonBdragon and such). The exception being SistersoW. Taking Emerald Lifeswarm and a Runepriest in order to recast it as necessary each turn for maximum Healing potency.
Since units like Outriders, Hydra, DarkRiders and such would still benefit from this as well as the Command Ability, it doesnt sound so bad on paper.
Has anyone tried that, or is the Living City Regeneration just a nice little gimmick and not really something to be considered when army building ?
I like it for hydra, combined with the hydra's own regeneration it makes for an effective, attention-drawing roadblock that can tie up enemy units. I don't know if it's worth building you army around though.
29 minutes ago, swarmofseals said:- vs no save: 40.19 damage (.089)
- vs 6+: 40.19 damage (.089)
- vs 5+: 40.19 damage (.089)
- vs 4+: 33.92 damage (.075)
- vs 3+: 27.22 damage (.06)
- vs 2+: 20.53 damage (.046)
Sisters of the Watch: .094-.063
Irondrakes (melee): .133-.067
Irondrakes (ranged): .2-.067
Freeguild Crossbows: .12-.1
Additionally, Sisters of the Watch have a slight speed advantage, slight range advantage over Irondrakes, the benefit of stand and shoot (although at half strength) and require the lowest effort to buff (only a Nomad Prince OR Hurricanum).
Any particular reason you wouldn't use both a hurricanum and a nomad prince or are you just saying that only one is necessary for the buff?
-
6 hours ago, Cerve said:
That's true, but I don't rely on them. I mean, I like her as distractions. They pop and shoot at weaker positions, clearing objectives and most of all forcing my opponent to come back facing them. What push me to belive that LF is secretly the best city overall it's because the mix between alpha/betastrike (basically, your units are always going to do some damage before dying) and the map control. You force your opponent to split all around the board (because you have to manage those sisters, or they are going to shoot you down every turn). It is the perfect guerrila style. Yes it has an high skillcap, but if you manage it it is the best city imho.
Absolutely this. SotW can be really good when you use them well but their fragility makes them unforgiving. I recently played two games in the same evening, in the first the SotW deleted unit after unit my opponent sent in to take an objective. In the second game a good charge let my opponent get around my EG screen, I rolled badly on the Fire Until The Last attack, and the SotW were pretty much immediately wiped out without doing ****** all.
-
1
-
-
Double post.
-
On 12/11/2019 at 11:25 AM, zilberfrid said:
Because GW did not make a lot of females in the past (and Order human females have never been a big thing), and new sets for CoS seem far beyond the horizon, I see a few possibilities for the "soldier, but female" look.
-
Wizards 2
- Sorceress
- Battlemage
- Nomad Prince(ss) with added horns
I'm working on a Nomad "Prince(ss)" myself at the moment. I think there are a lot of options for kitbashing female heroes, I've gone with the Isharann Tidecaster for the body/cloak, Khinerai for the hair and weapon/hands, and a wild rider helmet. I would recommend the Isharann Tidecaster generally as a proxy for lady-heroes, her armour has that Idoneth scallop design but it's quite subtle and there's nothing particularly fishy about the body so can work in other armies.
Edit: Obviously the Nomad Prince also has a hawk, but you can probably proxy in any small flying animal, I'm making a baby dragon for my Nomad Princess.
-
2
-
Wizards 2
-
1 hour ago, Overread said:
Firstly - OUCH -
Secondly - tell us the story!I've got the old GW scalpel with the thick handle (love that thing really surprised they don't make it any more); however because the top end with the blade has the metal locking ring and the base section is thicker plastic, the thing will always fall blade down. One time it was on my desk and I just nudged it off the edge. It rolled, aimed itself downward and then stabbed right into my leg - blade going most of the way in!
I was actually surprised how fast the wound sealed up and that I wasn't left having to resort to superglue or something. However it felt really rough and nasty for a good while because of how deep the blade had cut into muscle/fat/whatevers in your upper leg.
Otherwise I've got the odd cut and scrape on fingers, but never otherwise managed to stab myself with a blade.
That said sharp blades are best, even if they have to dull just a little bit to get to a perfect edge for scraping off mould lines.
59 minutes ago, Still-young said:I think I was trying to cut through an Infinity base, which are slotta bases but the slot has a thin bit of plastic in it that’s generally easy to get through. There was a batch that was thicker than usual though. I was trying to get the blade through and it slipped and buried itself in my thumb through the nail. It was incredibly painful. It was also at an angle, so when my nail grew out there was a big diagonal catch through it for a while which didn’t help either.
Similar to your story, my uncle does model railway, and once dropped a new scalpel in his lap, gashing his inner thigh pretty close to his femoral artery. My mum had to look after my cousin while he went to hospital. My brother did a similar thing on his finger with my grandads model knife (he also does model railway). My grandad got a lock on his hobby room after that.
I think we might just be a clumsy family...
This is one of the benefits of not using a handle on your blade. Most of the time I just hold the blunt end of scalpel blades, I find it gives me better control than using a handle and if I drop the blade it's not gonna go through my foot.
-
So, I've seen a few people in this thread post lists featuring Alarielle, and I'm really curious, how's that working out? It's a great model, but such a big chunk of points, do you use the full 1/4 Sylvaneth to make her worth it?
Here's my own Living City list I'm putting together:
Nomad prince 120Dreadlord on Dragon 300Sorceress on Dragon 30010 Dark Riders 220 (Riding drakespawn of course)5 Sisters of the Thorn 13020 Sisters of the Watch 32020 Eternal Guard 2603 Ishlaen Eels 140 (Allies, have converted eels into juvenile forest dragons)5 Blood Knights 200 (Mercenaries using Dragonblades models, I may like dragons too much)You can probably tell from this list that I lean more fluff than competitive, but I'd ideally prefer to be in with a chance. I'm conscious I've got some very small units there that are at risk of getting wiped out before they do anything. I feel like I could probably make a more competitive list by swapping out the Sorceress for a Celestial Hurricanum and losing the allies and mercenaries to take full advantage of the Dark Rider horde discount...
-
1
-
-
-
On 9/5/2019 at 12:28 PM, Overread said:
There's a few options:
1) Magnetic tray cases are the current "new hotness" with Battlefoam making inserts for their cases and I beileve there's one or two companies making dedicated magnetic tray cases. Basically you stick a neodymium magnet on the bottom of every model (perhaps more on big ones) and then the "case" is simply a box with a metal sheet on the bottom. You put the model in and the magnet sticks to the sheet and its stored. The bonus is that you can store a LOT more models this way than you can with foam and its easy to change what you take because you don't have to change the foam packaging. It's also good for a lot of armies which are getting a lot of big things into them. Trying to pack armies like Tyranids or such is getting hard when they take up so much room.
The downsides are:
a) you want to pack the magnets after the glue is try, surrounding them with some greenstuff or such to improve their hold on the base of the model - reducing the chance of them popping off.
b) It's good for models which are very solid in stature, but things like Khinerai or any flying unit or mode with a very small contact to its own base is at risk of wobbling off and snapping/weakening its connection point.
c) Most of the cases will take bumps/knocks but in general you're still trusting the magnet and if something comes off its going to bounce around. This is likely more an issue for much heavier models such as big chunky old models made of metal - things like a solid old dreadnought would be a risk.
Of course with some cases like battlefoam you can mix magnet trays and foam.
Magnets all the way, I've found it so much better than any other method I've tried. If you don't have a lot of really tall models you can even stick them in a cantilever toolbox which is an incredibly handy and space-efficient way to transport an army. With a strong glue and a strong magnet (or multiple magnets) you don't need to use greenstuff or worry about heavy models moving around.
Weak contact points could be a concern but if your model doesn't fall apart when you touch it the vibrations of being transported in a car (or on foot, or on a train) probably aren't going to do it any harm.
-
15 hours ago, Indecisive said:
They really should've waited until they had a concrete plan of what they're planning to do with it. As now we've been locked into years of arguing and fearmongering about whether they'd bin another setting.
One thing I think we can say with certainty is that they're not going to bin AoS when this comes out, AoS is doing well for GW, this is expansion rather than replacement.
And hopefully we won't be arguing for the next three years, there's a lot of people getting a little bit overexcited because the announcement has just dropped and it was a surprise. Things will settle down as people run out of stuff to say about a logo. At some point in the future we will get more information about this, and people will over-react to that too, but once we know what this actually is the speculation will become less wild and people's fears will hopefully be put to rest.
-
4
-
-
9 hours ago, Panzer said:
Pretty much the same way how two concurrent sci-fantasy battle games set in the very same universe with similar characters and even similar units work for GW. It's really not that big of a deal.
There's a pretty crucial difference there, 40k never replaced 30k, they didn't need to spend several years delineating the difference and getting people to buy into the new system, scrapping old units and shifting people to a new aesthetic and lore only to then undo it. There is a need for differentiation here, and probably a few ways to achieve that, but scale seems like an obvious one.
-
1 hour ago, Jator said:
I know you already know this, but there's little chance of GW moving away from the 32mm heroic scale. They have to play their strengths, and great sculping is hard to appreciate at that scale.
That being said, I'd love something like Warmaster, even if it keeps a more popular scale as @sandlemad suggested. Heck, whatever keeps us away from individual miniatures removal would be great for me.
I can't really see how two concurrent fantasy battle games set in very similiar worlds with similiar characters can work for GW if the models are the same scale. They're not gonna bring all the models they've just scrapped back into production. They're not gonna want to confuse the branding by having the same models represent different units. They're not gonna let players use the models they already have if they can get them to buy more. A different scale would seem to solve all these problems.
-
1
-
-
My knee-****** reaction was that this is bizarre given they're still in the long proccess of squatting old world stuff, a load was removed with CoS and it seems strange to be planning to restore stuff at this stage.
But logically, this probably isn't gonna be a restoration in the sense of letting people use their old models or having dual warscrolls for models. That wouldn't take years to introduce and it wouldn't make GW much money.
More likely this is gonna be very much it's own thing with it's own models. A different scale seems very possible as that would prevent people using models they already own.
-
So giant elves?
-
On 8/27/2019 at 7:31 AM, Cronotekk said:
They wouldn't be angelic since that's the aesthetic of the realm of heavens, light realm is a lot of geometric weird looking guys. I can see it being an army of high elf wizards controlling crystal golems
You could combine the angelic thing with the weird geometric thing by drawing on the original depictions of angels in the abrahamic religions. Weird, multi-winged, multi-faced things incorporating wheels and shapes:
I'm not saying do these exactly, they might be a bit too Tzeentchy, but there are elements you could draw on. Or you could similarly combine the themes of angels and geometry by evoking stained glass either through borrowing some of the stylistic features or even having their bodies be made up of "blocks" lik the segments in a window:
-
2
-
Female model representation in Age of Sigmar
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted · Edited by Orsino
The statistics demonstrate a far higher proportion of female leaders in AoS than pretty much any real army in history
I can hear people now getting ready to tell me "IT'S FANTASY" and yes it is but all fantasy has reference points in the real world. That's what gives fantasy a feeling of reality. All of our real world reference points for combat are male because almost all real world combat has been done by males. Which is not to say that you can't have female combatants in a fantasy game, you can have as many as you like, it's only the idea that you must have more women that I take objection to, given that female combatants are actually grossly overrepesented in AoS rather than underrepresented.
The other argument that's made here for increasing the over-representation of women is that some people need their gaming pieces to be the same sex as them or they won't want to play with them. As a male playing a nearly all-female CoS army I can't say I've ever felt alienated and excluded by my gaming pieces not having enough penises and it's hard not to see this need as little more than chauvinism.
So yeah, more female models would be nice, more models are always nice, but the idea that it is some sort of fault or deficit of a game not to have parity doesn't make sense and the idea that people are being cruelly excluded by the gender of their gaming pieces holds no weight for me.