Skabnoze
-
Posts
2,427 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
40
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Skabnoze
-
-
1 hour ago, DantePQ said:
Or that talk about changing Temples etc not gonna happen.
It will happen eventually whenever they get another book - but we have no idea how far away that is. It could happen soon or it could happen in a few years. There is no way to tell aside from GW announcing it.
It is highly unlikely to happen outside of a new book though - since GW seem very very reluctant to make these sorts of changes in the General's Handbook or in their errata document. But that does not mean it should not happen. And honestly, the only temple that really should change is Hagg Nar. The fact that it is so amazingly ubiquitous indicates that either the other ones are all really bad or else Hagg Nar is far too useful. I like to use Occam's Razor for initial assessments and so I lean towards saying the single one that is used the vast majority of the time is probably the issue. But when you examine the abilities it becomes clear why that Temple is so heavily favored. It grants both a substantial offensive boost to the whole army and also gives a substantial defensive command ability.
We can argue all sorts of things, but my opinion is that an army that is heavily built around being on the extreme offensive end of the spectrum should probably be fairly poor at defense.
All that said, I don't think the Daughters of Khaine army as it currently exists has big problems. But that does not mean that they may not be a bit better than they should be - which I do think is the case.
-
8 hours ago, a74xhx said:
Go for it! They are my other army. Hopefully the upcoming battletome will mean you don't need dozens of wyldwoods too. There's a good crossover in the flora/fauna/mushroom aesthetic and sudden growing mushrooms vs sudden growing branches.
I already have a lot of forest terrain at my house, since I can build a variety of different tables in my game room. I only have 3 of the GW woods - which I mainly bought because the individual trees make great spooky woods for graveyards or gnarled trees for badlands/desert boards. I honestly don't care that much about being required to use "official" models - especially since a lot of games happen at my house. That said, I don't care for the way GW implemented the Wyldwood terrain rules for the Sylvaneth army and I do hope that they rework that. I also have forests of giant mushrooms for my goblin armies - so I can make plenty of diverse types of wooded terrain.
-
@PlasticCraic I personally like the 2nd list more. However, this opinion is based upon little more than the fact that the 2nd list has a Troll Hag in addition to the Bonegrinder and Magma dragon and not due to any real strategic thought on my part. List 2 has more big stompy monsters and I like big stompy monsters.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, prochuvi said:
The discount for wycthes gone
Hag 120 points,and changed the aura to wholy within as every actual army have
120 seems too high. That said, if you bumped the cost up to 80 (a 33% increase) I think she would still be an instant auto-include. However, a lot of the reason she is an auto-include is simply because she has a stupidly amazing buff that is unique to the army. So you could jack the price up pretty high and she would still be quite a good power-piece. However, I don't think she warrants an absurdly high cost. I firmly believe her current cost is far too bargain-bin cheap, but there is nothing wrong with having good models that are well priced - or even a bit under priced. I think 80 is an improvement, and I would probably put the ceiling of a cost increase to 90.
I would be very wary of heavily bumping up the price of the Hag while also jacking up the cost of Witch Aelves. Be wary of heavily jacking up prices of all parts of a combo since you can end up with a larger overall cost increase than originally planned.
-
5 minutes ago, Lord Veshnakar said:
I am assuming they wouldn't be able to modify the rules so I was mostly thinking about points costs. Obviously it would go a long way to have their ranges on prayers and buffs be changed to "wholly within" like a lot of the new books have had so they can't conga to the hag narr/cauldron buff etc.
I think they could change that wording in an errata without much issue. Aside from cleaning up rules to conform to the 2nd ed style (wholly within, natural 6s, etc) the only thing I see as an issue with the book is the Temples. Hagg Nar is simply far too good - to the point where you don't see any of the others except maybe the odd Khailebron force for a Naga themed force. Rebalancing the temples to make Hagg Nar less of an obvious choice and the rest of them interesting would be useful.
Apart from that the point balancing seems like it would be pretty small. Maybe adjust the horde discounts a bit. The only model that stands out to me from a skewed cost perspective is the Hag Queen - who is simply far too cheap for what she does.
-
2
-
1
-
-
I think all they need is a bit of point cost rebalancing and a rework of the rules for the Temples.
-
1 hour ago, TheWilddog said:
Have any of you seen these new Savage Orc sculpts from Punga Miniatures? They look fantastic I am itching to get some in my hands. I hope the quality is as good as the pictures.
I ordered a couple of those individually and the quality of the ones that I got were just like the picture - except for the usual bit of flash with resin models. If you like the sculpts and don't mind the prices then they are a great addition.
In addition, both Kromlech and Maxmini have very nice sets of Savage Orc heads that look great added into the plastic bonesplitter models.
-
1
-
-
I really like the contents of the Looncurse box for both factions. I was planning to buy a few more sets of both Cave Squigs and Hoppers/Bounders and I would probably buy at least 2 copies of this plastic boss on Great Cave squig. I don't really like elves in general, but Sylvaneth are closer to Fae forest demons than standard Elves. I picked up their old book a while back and thought the army looked interesting. This box set seems like a no-brainer and it runs a pretty hefty discount if you like both factions in it (like I do). I'll probably pick up two boxes.
-
3 hours ago, Xelotath said:
Hey guys, was looking for a little inspiration on basing Gloomspite models, was wondering what other people had done for them. I was considering going for the toxic swamp base with some grassy bits. Worried it might look a little bit too Nurgle though. What do you guys do for your bases?
I make fungus-filled limestone caverns. So lots of types of types of stalagmites & other speliothems, different types of weird fungus, and some weird little critters & creatures mixed in.
-
7 hours ago, RoyalDachshund said:
Did anybody tried/thought of making a squig mega battalion with the one and only Gordrak from Ironjawz? His command ability working on entire battalion could be a deadly force.
Honestly I think it is nastier with a Troggherd. And funny enough, in that situation the Dankholds and Gargants become surprisingly nasty when their string singular attacks (headbutt, mighty kicks, crushing grip) get multiplied by Gordrakk's command ability.
-
17 hours ago, Malakree said:
They are tanky wizards, generally push them with the rest of your army so they can properly use the spells you take. I don't throw them into combat, their stats don't justify the risk, but you want them in range to hand of gork, itchy nuisance, arcane bolt, mystic shield etc.
I would not consider melee a primary role for him, but his stats are surprisingly decent for a cheap hero/wizard. He has 5 attacks at 4/4 and -1 rend on 3 of them. I would certainly consider tossing him into a melee in certain situations. Of course, this all depends on what he would be fighting and how critical the spell he has been allotted is for my game plan.
I'm just saying that his personal attacks (ignore mount attacks) are arguably better than a few of the moonclan combat heroes. Given that he is a wizard people might overlook his melee profile and it can be a good "ace up the sleeve" in certain situations.
-
@Seanwise23 How do you like the Fellwater in groups of 3? Have you tried them in groups of 6 and preferred 3s? You have an interesting assortment of unit sizes in that army so I am just curious how you found the different size units of various trolls to work out.
-
2 hours ago, mikethefish said:
Pointy feet would have been a really boss idea! Wish I would have had it early on. At this point, I think I will just let that one go, and power through to get this thing completed.
It seems like you can still do it by just overlapping plasticard to make the armored shoes and extend them out a little ways.
-
16 minutes ago, Quahog said:
'Troggbosses are huge brutes, and often the eldest of their monstrous subspecies'......Well, not THAT huge.
I don’t have an issue with the size of the new plastic Troggboss kit. His size is fine to me. What bothered me was the old Throgg troll king model being smaller than the Troggboss. I like that model and would like to use it for something and if I use it as a Troggboss then I will probably need to convert him to be the size of the new plastic Troggboss kit.
-
4 hours ago, mikethefish said:
As I mentioned, I think it's a sure thing for an endless spell. A giant ectoplasm foot just screams "Orruk" to me
Possibly. It is a pretty iconic Greenskin spell and has been in both Fantasy and 40k in various editions. I would love an endless spell model for it - but I can also see them making it a spell in the lore. Either way I am ok with it.
-
1 hour ago, Superninja said:
Endless spells will be ok news, but with our caster...it will be reduced to less than ok news. (He has 2 spells already)
It is likely that the rules for the Weirdnob will change. I highly doubt that he will keep both of the spells on his warscroll. I can’t think of any modern battletome that has a caster with multiple spells aside from Nagash.
Most likely Foot of Gork will be moved off the weirdnob scroll and put into an Ironjawz spell lore.
-
2 hours ago, rattila said:
Hello everyone ! Quick question about the spells of the shamans:
If i take an army with the Destruction allegiance, can a shaman use the spells who are in the book? Or the army have to be Gloomspite for the shaman to use those spells?
Thanks,
The army only gets access to allegiance rules (allegiance abilities, relics, general traits, spell lores) by playing using that allegiance.
-
46 minutes ago, Rangeltoft said:
Or is it still just one unit that is brought back in full size? Sorry if Im a bit dense, but have worked the nightshift so my brain aint working very well
You can only bring one unit back at full strength during the game. So in the case you listed above you would bring the 60 unit back at full strength and the 20 unit back at half for only 10 models.
-
3 hours ago, Amradiel said:
I'm thinking about going to a competitive 1k event in may. Do any of you have nasty lists at 1k? 😊
I think an army that plays a lot of big Squig herds or else a full troggoth army would be good at that point level.
-
1 hour ago, Aelfric said:
For 320 points you can have 16 50mm Snotling bases with 64 wounds. In units of 6, 6 and 4, or 4x4, it should be possible to screen the first 20" of your side of the board all the way across and at bravery 10 they don't run away. I am halfway there, just need to buy more Snotlings.
I get the distinct impression that snotlings as a unit are not long for this world in any version of GWs games. I think they will be relegated to being fun little extra details on greenskin models. They are already at that point in 40k and have been for a while. In fantasy they have become more and more marginal over time. I don't think I would advocate for many people to purchase them now as I don't think they will be around for too much longer.
-
2 hours ago, Furuzzolo said:
You said it. I'm going to spam the s**t out of the rumors thread quoting you.
I'd rather see people spam that than endlessly clamoring for Tomb Kings...
-
@Malakree I like that you included grots to facilitate this tactic. It is fitting because Trolls are far too stupid to figure out anything aside from to either hit or eat the thing in front of them and even that calculation takes them a bit of time to work out. But sneaky tactics with grots is almost just role-playing.
-
1
-
-
I like it!
Although I will admit that the long-time 40k Ork mek in me laments that you did not start this project with a Mr Potato-Head body. But this looks fantastic all the same!
This is obviously quite early in the project, and you will certainly add more details, but my only real suggestion at this point is that I think his feet should be the pointy armored jester shoes that you see throughout the Goblin range (or Rackham). The same thing that you see on the new Loonboss on foot.
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Malakree said:
Heavy Cavalry vs Light Cavalry is the comparison you're looking for
Sort of.
Maybe in the context of Gloomspite, but I honestly don't think either of those units fits quite into those roles. If we use the old WFB roles of those 2 forces then Heavy Cavalry was still quite a bit faster than standard foot troops before any potential buffs. In AoS bounders are only really slightly faster than foot troops on average. They can swing to be slower or much faster, but on average they are not going to massively outrun troops on foot. They do fight very well in combat and drastically increase on the charge - so they fare well in that comparison. Light Cav used to be extremely fast but only good for harassment or as chaff. Light Cav almost universally could not fight their way out of a paper bag. Hoppers are quite fast on average, but they fight a lot better than most light cav ever could.
So yeah, your comparison is probably fairly accurate. I guess I was just trying to say that while both units do conceptually fit that mold I also think there is a bit more to it for Gloomspite. Also, the way that AoS is structured with units and core rules makes roles like heavy/light cav not mean quite as much (at least to me) as they once did.
I guess I am thinking too much.
So, who does want Tomb Kings and Bretonnians back?
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
I would not mind if GW brought any of these back as long as they did something interesting to them. They are all fairly generic and bland as old Warhammer concepts generally are compared to the more over-the-top interpretations that Age of Sigmar tends to favor. Tomb Kings are probably the most unique and interesting of those forces as-is
If GW took any of those old forces and turned them up to 11 like they have been doing with the other AoS factions then I would be on board with it. But none of them are anything that I am going to actively campaign for either. And bear in mind that I own a decent chunk of Gitmob and I have a massive Greenskins army with over 200 infantry alone. But honestly, the only models that I would really miss from the Gitmob and Greenskins ranges if they were retired completely are the Warboss on Wyvern and the Doom Diver. I would like to see the Doom Diver stay in the game in some form as it really is the most iconic of goblin artillery.