Skabnoze
-
Posts
2,427 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
40
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Skabnoze
-
-
12 hours ago, Sleboda said:
Yeah, I would actually rather play against a very badly painted army that someone painted themselves than a beautiful army that someone paid to have painted.
At least the person with the army he/she painted themselves is actually involved in the hobby,
It does not bother me if someone has their army painted by commission. That is better than just grey plastic armies. Honestly, there is nothing more valuable than time and people should be careful to spend it on the way that brings them the most enjoyment. If painting is not enjoyable for you but the game is then I see no issue with paying someone else to paint your army.
I regularly play Star Wars: Legion with a friend and his Rebel force was commission painted. He got a budget, but good, painting job and it looks nice. He himself is a good painter and I have seen a number of 40k and Fantasy armies he painted in the past and they were great. But he decided that he did not want to devote the time to his Legion force right now but wanted it painted - so he paid someone to do it. I can’t fault that thinking.
-
3 hours ago, Malakree said:
It's not really a case of grab and impliment, it works very well for things like Brutes, Troggs etc. however when you start getting massive swarms it's going to get really messy and not tactically pleasing.
I never claimed it could be a grab and implement. Any core rule change would require a new edition (one is coming eventually) and would require abilities adjusted with it in mind and costs reworked for that system. What we have now is here to stay for at least the duration of this edition and I would not advocate messing with any portion of the core rules with the exception that it is becoming extremely obvious that they need to append an explicit timing-system into the combat phase to clear up how wonky their "start/end" rules are beginning to become. I really enjoy Age of Sigmar - more than previous editions of Fantasy and most editions of 40k (that game is practically a dumpster fire at the moment). But that does not mean that I don't prefer certain system mechanics in other games and think that including them in future versions of AoS would not lead to an improved game - because I do.
I think Fantasy Flight has a number of very interesting mechanics in a few of their games that are easily worth stealing. As I mentioned, the movement system from Legion is just so clean and fast that it is really refreshing. After spending over 25 years playing a huge number of different wargames where most of them have some degree of fiddly movement system that is time consuming and often the source of some shady play I am frankly rather astounded at the very simple and elegant way that FF solved it with SW: Legion. That system also has the benefit of making unit leaders important without giving them alternate stats or making them some version of lesser heroes. It is a good representation of what they are supposed to be - organization leaders of their units. I really like that touch and I would like unit leaders in AoS to perform a better role than simply a tiny combat upgrade for the unit.
I also enjoy that Age of Sigmar uses alternating activations in the combat phase, but I wish it could be applied across all of the phases of the game. Xwing and Legion both have very interesting activation-order mechanics (orders in Legion, and pilot-skill in Xwing). GW already stole the Xwing concept of shared turns using phases with alternating activation within the phases with KillTeam. I think that they should consider moving this idea into both 40k and AoS in future versions. There might also be interesting room to slide in the concept of leaders issuing orders (kinda like command abilities) to prioritize activations (what Legion does) and then units having some sort of default ordering they fall back on based on some sort of stat value (like what Xwing does).
Anyways, I understand your point and I agree with it. You can't just lift & drop major mechanics like how coherency & movement behave without large impacts to an existing game system. It has a lot of potential repercussions. But in the future I think they should look into changing some of the things that they have treated as sacred cows for decades when there is opportunity for improvement.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, mikethefish said:
I never use movement trays, as I really don't think it saves that much time. Certainly it makes your first turn movement phase easier, but then they bog things down once you hit narrow terrain or melee combat. I hate the damn things.
As a long-term 40k Ork players from way back when, I am very used to moving large numbers of 25mm bases around. There are always a few tricks you can use to speed things up
I would really love to see GW consider adapting (just steal it wholesale) how unit movement works in Star Wars: Legion. It is so simple that it is just pure brilliance. In that game the unit leader functions as a sort of anchor for the unit. All coherency is measured using a radius from the leader. All shooting ranges are measured from the unit leader and line-of-sight (including whether targets get cover) is measures from the leader. In addition, when you move a unit you precisely measure the movement for the leader model. You then simply pick up and place the rest of the unit within coherency of the leader. Even vehicle squadrons use the same mechanism. After playing with that mechanic for a while now it is simply so clean and fast. It drastically speeds up the movement phase and clears up a lot of issues with systems that require you to move each model in large units precisely.
The main negative that adopting a system like this would have for GW games is that it would make it much more difficult to "bubble wrap" units using another cheap unit - since it makes it almost impossible to put large units into line-formations and requires them to behave as blobs due to the leader being the center of a coherency area bubble. It would also hurt tactics for stringing out units to zone block. However, I never cared for those mechanics as I prefer my games to have more verisimilitude in regards to representing a fantasy battle. I would prefer that those types of tactics/roles would be added into the game using other mechanics than large unit model micro-management. These games have so many models that I really like when some of the more tedious spots are sped up and made cleaner.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, TheWilddog said:
Just got a big shipment of the Broken Toad mushroom bases in and am really impressed. Some of the best quality resin bases I have seen. Ready to get my squig army up and bouncing.
Glad to hear. I ordered 2 of each of their sets a few days back to test the quality and see how they fit with my others. I doubt I use these for all my bases, since my base scheme is caverns and I have a few different types, but I expect I will mix these in for more variety.
The plates really intrigue me and if I like the quality I will probably order a bunch more of them.
-
1
-
-
On 5/12/2019 at 6:21 AM, Skreech Verminking said:
I’ve taken the cutta, because of the rule of cool.
Best rule ever implemented - hands down.
-
7 hours ago, GlitzFan said:
Who here uses movement trays and who doesn't + reason why/why not?
Yes. I use them because after playing Warhammer Fantasy in the rank & file version they just made using big units so much simpler. So I have never gone back and instead I started making them for other GW games like 40k and now AoS.
I simply put magnets under/into my bases and then I get cheap metal roofing shingles from the hardware store and cut them into whatever shape I want using some metal shears.
-
I am on the fence about the idea of prayers in a Savage Orc army. I get that it is a good way to put some buffs into the army, and it could be a good way to make Wardoks have a better buff system.
However, I very much like that GW stuck with the shaman leader theme for Bonesplitterz when they split the Savage Orcs into their own distinct army. Orcs in Warhammer have historically never used Shaman as the leaders of their forces except in rare instances. Orcs almost always follow a powerful warlord and the shaman are something of a combination of advisors to the warlords and crazy oddball lunatics that the rest of the orcs tolerate and somewhat avoid. GW kept to this theme when they created the Ironjawz so it still seems to be present for Orruks.
But Savage Orcs were always the oddity in that they typically pay great deference to the shaman. So much so that the shaman are typically the leaders and tell the various warlords and bosses what to do. I was very glad to see that fluff maintained and even emphasized in the Bonesplitterz army. And while I admit that they are religious - to me that religion is exemplified through magic and not prayers.
I would like to see GW rework the shaman warscrolls to emphasize their ability to channel the power of Gorkamorka more than they currently do. For example, I would like to see Gaze of Mork/Gork become a standard warscroll ranged attack or ability rather than a spell. Bonesplitterz shaman should be casting plenty of spells while also unleashing bolts of green energy from their eyes or staff. I see no reason at all that a ranged attack can not represent magical power. And if they wanted they could even make an ability where the attack becomes more powerful when lots of orcs are nearby and/or where the shaman could potentially be harmed (1 to hit or something). Anyways, the reason I bring this up is that shaman are integral to Bonesplitterz and I would like them to be able to blast stuff with magic without having to give up choosing useful buff/curse spells. I would like powerful attack spells also, since that has always been a theme of Greenskinz magic, but I would like some regular magic attacks on the warscroll just to reinforce the theme that these are powerful magic users.
I would also like to see the concept of the JuJu dance expanded. So if they need to add a prayer system or some other form of buff/curse ability then I would like to see the Witch Doctor voodoo concept explored and JuJu dances become a more integral system used by most of the wizards. But, if they put prayers into an Orruk army and GW decided that only one army would get them then I would vote for Ironjawz instead. It seems more fitting for them in my opinion.
-
10 hours ago, Killamike said:
I'd be so pumped for any type of orruk battletome release.
Or ogres.
I am pretty sure it’s coming. During the Q&As at Warhammer Fest this weekend they seem to have confirmed that there is at least one book for each Grand Alliance still coming this year. They also mentioned that right now the story is mainly being driven by Death, but Destruction will be the focus next in terms of driving the story.
That said, I would not expect anything aside from a rewrite of Bonesplitterz or Ironjawz in terms of Orruk books. Hopefully they tackle Ogres soon as well. I would also not expect much more than a rewrite book with a terrain piece and some endless spells.
Personally I would like to see some form of big centerpiece kit for Bonesplitterz since the army is really missing that, but I honestly don’t expect to see it happening soon. I would be happy with a book rewrite where they do a better job making all of the units useful and have a good role. I would like to see Savage Orcs as an actual compelling option rather than just totally outclassed by Morboyz and Arrer Boyz.
In addition I would really like the army to return to playing more like the Savage Orc fluff (both from the Old World and from the 1st AoS Battletome) where it is primarily a melee force comprised of a horde of frenzied psychopaths trying to beat everything to death with sticks and rocks - rather than the shooting force it became. I don’t believe that build was really purposeful on GWs part. I know that might be controversial for some, but it’s just my opinion and preference. I think the shooting should be present in the army and I don’t think it should be poor. I also would like shooting heavy builds to still be possible, but I just don’t want that to be the only way to play the army - or even the primary way.
-
1
-
-
The advertising for Warcry, in regards to being lumped in as an AoS update, is no different than what they did with Killteam. I get not being that excited if a dedicated AoS skirmish game does not interest you, but I also am willing to bet that A LOT of people are excited for it. In fact, given that it appears to be the spiritual successor for Mordheim I would not be surprised if this game makes quite a big splash. GW is smart to be heavily marketing it.
-
5
-
-
8 hours ago, novakai said:
i guess you haven't play KO in the last year?
Because that single army is the barometer we all use to decide how well GW is doing at updates for the entire game?
-
9 hours ago, Charleston said:
About the two GHB, I habe a wild speculation. I do not wan´t to creaty any wrong expectations, but:
The Point Values is one of the thin Handouts/Pamphlets. I could imagine we can get theese for free at out local GW just like the Rules for 40k or AoS (at least as it was in the last edition). This would let the GHB be not necessary to get the updates, and therefore it would allow GW to put more content in it to make the book of a higher value for players. Also Point Values could be therefore changed in a higher pace than once a year.The fact, that it would mean higher costs for GW, is the main argument against my crazy theory
I highly doubt they will ever pull the points completely out of the general’s handbook as a product. In this case I am willing to bet they simply have separated the product into a pamphlet with the points and maybe a few other pages of rules in order to make the main book just contain rules that will not be likely to be replaced in the next yearly version. Then the pamphlet will contain the transitory rules such as points and whatnot.
But I expect they will still sell both of these together and not provide them separately. It makes no sense for them to do that as a business. If the main thing that sells many copies of the GHB each year is the matched-play points, and their profit margins on book products is quite strong, then why would they offer those points for free? That would be a poor business move.
I expect that they are simply trying to make the book portion of the GHB more convenient and useful as a product. Most of what is in each edition of the GHB is valid and useful across the span of a full game edition and some stuff is still good across multiple editions. This is probably just a move to pull apart longer lived content from the more temporary content and also make it easier to reference just the points.
-
I come with a bit of rumor mongering.
I visited my local GW today and the store manager mentioned to me that in the most recent batch of HQ ordered product returns he had to send back all copies of the Bonesplitterz battletome. So they have basically pulled it completely from the shelves - at least in my local area.
I suspect that means a replacement will be coming soon. But that is just a guess. Make of this what you will.
-
1
-
1
-
3
-
-
52 minutes ago, bsharitt said:
I know some people where underwhelmed by the the Fyreslayers release, but I think it did at least make them play a little more thematic to their, which is a direction I like over every battletome being powercreep. I hope KO at least get that treatment. Right now on the table they're fragile little guys who can't shoot.
I agree completely. I think the KO have an amazing, even if small, model range. I know everyone always wants new stuff, but just a functional and fun set of rules would go a really long way for KO. They deserve at least that much.
And I very much hope that GW works hard to make the boats a lot more attractive as game pieces. I really want to see more fleets of Dwarf airships gracing the tables for AoS games.
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Charleston said:
-Savage Orruks
Interesting tid-bit on this one. I stopped in at my local store today to pick up the Fyreslayer book for reading and he informed me that he recently had to do another round of large product returns where corporate HQ requests them to send a bunch of product back that they no longer want on the shelves. He mentioned that he had to send back all of the copies of the Bonesplitterz battletome.
Just a bit of information, but if they are pulling the battletome off the shelf then I expect that means they plan to replace it soon. If that is the case then I really do hope that they have a few models slated for a Bonesplitterz release aside from spells & terrain. So far I have been fine with the book only releases they have done, but I have had a Savage Orc army from back in the days of Warhammer Fantasy and I really like the concept direction they went in with the Bonesplitterz. I don't mind how far they managed to stretch just a few kits in regards to making units. But the one thing that is missing from the army is a large centerpiece model. They have been so great in regards to making awesome centerpiece models for each faction and the Bonesplitterz army just feels like it is missing something without one.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Barkanaut said:
KO suck and might not be this year as they need a huge rework and way more than just 3 spells, a hero, and terrain to get them up to 2.0 standards. Their model range is cripplingly focused on only one playstyle and its terrible at even that shooting. I'm hoping the KO get a bit more than that like 1 or 2 more models/units + hero/terrain/endless spells to give them some playstyle options like more mobile or more melee focused builds. Mere points reductions isn't going to cut it either lol as the models are simply too badly designed from a warscroll perspective. And even if they made them worth the cost I don't want to haul around like 10+ frigates and boats that are super hard to pack as it is. I was always under the impression the KO were kind of a quasi-elite army that had a few super strong things like their boats and then had the rest rank and file. Right now though its more like a horde army and I can need to bring almost as much horde/infantry stuff than GG lol.
I bet you that they could do more with the existing model range than you give them credit for. I would not at all mind for KO to get a bunch more models, but they managed to make Fyreslayers a lot more interesting without many new kits and most of us figured they would need a fair bit more to really spice that army up.
If they decide to expand the KO range with a book then I would be all for it. But, I expect that if they take the whole army rules design back to the drawing board that they could do a good rework with what is already out and the standard book/terrain/spells format that they have used for a lot of other releases. The design crew has been doing quite well so far at army expansions, army reworks, and new army creation - good enough that I won't really complain too much about which route they take when they choose to update a faction (please ignore my hypocrisy in the subsequent posting...).
-
1
-
-
Just now, Barkanaut said:
I’m fairly certain we’re getting a new death army. I hope it’s Luthor and his pirates but expect it to be something else with the previews seen. Who knows though.
Undead pirates has really been done to death. I'll take two of everything please.
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:
Well has he ever dealt with 13 ratman, fused together through hate, plague, might and cunning?
Well since most hated skarsnik isn’t her to tell the tale anymore, I guess this leaves you to find out.😜
Eh, I expect that sneakily dropping hints about the location of our super secret weapons, or a major cache of warpstone, when in reality the location is a massive squig breeding lair - will still work like a charm. Tunneling into there will be a fun surprise!
I would also expect that Skragrott might have some fun ideas as well. Maybe some warpstone powder that has tiny spores for an amusing fungus that infests the brain and takes over the hosts body? Everyone should get in on Fun with Fungus!
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:
hope you don’t mind a Skavenplayer amidst your group (don’t worry I want betray you guys😀, although I have 12voices in my head telling me other wise, but just trust Us-us, we are-are very trust worthy)
Skarsnik already provided the blue-print about how to deal with Skaven neighbors that get uppity.
-
1 hour ago, 5kaven5lave said:
Any thoughts chaps?
Why make the Hag the general? She can't take any of the Gloomspite general traits so there does not seem to be any reason. You can still give her the relic without needing her to be the general. If you make the Loonboss your general then you can give him Fight Another Day or Dead Shouty. Fight Another Day would probably be better for your list since you don't have many targets for the Loonboss command ability - but using it on himself is not terrible. If you make the Fungoid the general then you can get a number of interesting & fun command trait options such as Boss Shaman, Great Shaman, or Loon-touched.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, GlitzFan said:
Well I currently have 40 spears and 40 swords built and painted. I now have 2 more boxes on sprue.
What combination would you suggest? Bearing in mind I like the idea of hand of gork and being aggressive + using mushroom whilst holding the enemy inside the mushroom.
If you don't have at least 500 grots then I don't know what to tell you...
-
My point in regards to changed warscrolls is that they already do it when they errata the text of a rule. Your physical book or physical warscroll is obsolete the second they decide they have to change a sentence in the text for whatever reason. And it is not wholly uncommon for them to do so.
It is fine to err on the side of not messing with the warscrolls if possible, but I would personally rather they were willing to make that choice when it is the best choice and simply deal with my physical rules needing to be accompanied by printing the errata. I am sure some people will complain but honestly there is always someone that will complain about something. I would prefer to have better working rules for my army and if the consequence is some of the printed materials become outdated then I am ok with it. I would rather play with something better than stick with something inferior just for the sake of keeping my book text current.
And bear in mind that I play other games and I have seen how much it can suck when some games issue multiple versions of rules cards. Early Malifaux was pretty bad about that, but even then I appreciated the updates to the model rules because it almost universally made them better to plan with or against. Their rules update methods were a pain - but the game itself always got better.
-
2
-
-
29 minutes ago, Malakithe said:
Thats true...I guess when I hear stuff like under performing my more video game nature kicks in. In a mmo type setting if a class or ability is under what it was designed to do then numbers would be tweaked but doing the same on table top is tricky.
Looking back though how many factions have had actual warscrolls changed to help performance? Not including full releases or re-release.
Performance usually equates to points adjustments. Lower the points = more models on the table = better performance(usually). I would like to see most of the Troggs come down a bit and maybe certain heroes/monsters. Most of the bread and butter units are probably okay points wise.
To be fair, tweaking a rule by changing a keyword or adjusting the basic keywords on a warscroll is in line with other errata they issue that changes a sentence in an ability. That is a rather small change that does not fundamentally change what these units can do - it just shuffles around who can be effected by buff abilities.
That said, when they say they are going to adjust the allegiance in the GHB I expect that they main mean points. They may also tweak some of the allegiance abilities. But, it also could be the case that they plan to be more proactive with the next GHB in regards to altering warscrolls if necessary. GW has been pretty reluctant to do that so far, but GW has also never really been known for sticking to things for the long term. They historically have a tendency to pick a plan, stick with it for a while, and then drop it in favor of something different at the drop of a hat.
I simply brought up the keyword alterations for buffs or units because that is a pretty low-effort change that could potentially have big impacts to shake things up in the army. Personally, I would really love the Brewgit to be more universally useful because I think he is a fantastic model but is way too niche and ends up practically being a tax for the Gobbapalooza. The Spiker would be amazing if he could buff Squigs, Troggs, or Spiders. And the Scaremonger would at least be interesting if he could effect more targets.
But, I think what we should probably expect mainly point changes. If their position is that Gloomspite is underperforming then my guess is that we will probably see costs go down on a number of things and I would be surprised to see Boingrots adjusted upwards (as I have suspected in the past). Short list I would say we should expect the obvious units adjusted - Dankhold Troggoths, Troggboss, Loonboss on Mangler. I would probably also suspect changes to some of the Grot heroes who seem high in cost compared to similar heroes in other books. In addition, I would also expect to see a cost decrease in some form for Squig Hoppers to make them compete a bit more with Boingrots. So either a standard decrease or a horde discount. If GW was feeling really really nice they would also include a horde discount for Squig Herd units - which would be stupidly awesome.
-
7 hours ago, Malakithe said:
Interesting...makes me wonder how they could increase their performance. Not like they will do sweeping warscroll changes. Points adjustments for sure but what else could really be done?
They could do a lot with minor errata such as some key word alterations either for abilities or on some units. There is so many buffs that play keyword bingo and some buffs that are seriously restricted that you could open up a lot of interesting things through small adjustments like that.
For example, I personally love the models for the Gobbapalooza but I also feel they were one of the biggest misses in the book in regards to rules. They have a lot of character, but you have to buy all of them for a not insignificant price and you can only take advantage of all of the buffs in a couple very specifically designed lists. Basically you have to be really heavy into just grots. If some of the buffs could apply to Squigs or Troggs. Or even broaden some of the buffs such as the Brewgit so that his character buff could apply to a broader range of targets. Currently not many heroes have the "Moonclan Grot" keyword and so he is not terribly useful unless you have Skragrott for him to buff.
They could also potentially tweak some of the Battalions as well.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, willange said:
Facebook page says that you'll still be able to use the old Wyldwood models if you want. That seems odd since the template is so vastly different, but I'm intrigued.
I would guess that you can use the old trees individually to mark out the area but not necessarily use the old woods area footprint base. It may also indicate that you don’t have to place the new trees so that they physically touch each other to create the wyldwoods area and there is some variance in how you can place them.
I guess once the slow boat from China gets here we will know completely.
So, what do we think of the new Contrast paints?
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted