mattbarker
-
Posts
97 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by mattbarker
-
-
Nothing from mine yet. If I'm honest, I'm not expecting much anytime soon what with Christmas and New Year rush and it probably being a topic they don't have an "official" answer for
-
2 minutes ago, Lobeau said:
I'll join in by expressing my support for continued love and care of our Legions. Any advice as to what I should focus the E-mail on?
You'll likely no get anything solid as a response - it's just not the way companies deliver information like this. Hopefully
That said, expressing interest and passion in the range along with asking about short and long term intentions and rumors can't hurt. If nothing else, kinda just wanna know they aren't going to just vanish from the site in the new year! The more people they know support the range, the longer it'll stay around!
-
6 minutes ago, eekamouse said:
Just shot them a strongly worded yet hopeful email to aosfaq@gwplc.com
I sent one to forgeworld@gwplc.com!
Hopefully someone will reply. Probably not, but who knows. If enough people do...
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Qrow said:
I have a large LoA army, so I will be kinda pissed if they do suddenly make it a legends army. If they do, I hope they at least give the entire army a once-over update and fix some of our underperforming units, instead of ****** us over
Same, nearly 3000 points all in I think, plus a lot build around it for allies etc. If they get s final update as a "that's all folks" then fine. At least it'll hopefully fix a few things on the way. But yeh, will be pissed if they just pull it with no notice
-
1
-
-
I just ordered a Shar'tor - so if it is, I'm kinda livid!
-
I'm not sure I buy it ..
Typo in the name, format didn't match other emails from FW and, they aren't on the legends page like they say.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/legends/#age-of-sigmar
Dunno what to say, but it just don't feel right.
-
Gotta say that seems very odd. They've only just put the rules and points into the 2019 GHB so to vanish the whole range out seems unusual.
The skullcracker has 100% been in "never coming back" status for the last year or more as it physically broke, but for the rest, that's quite unexpected.
-
19 minutes ago, erasercrumbs said:
I need to know the army isn't going anywhere before I commit more money to it.
This is exactly the same for me and shar'tor. The model is beautiful, but the unit is trash so if like to know it might get a tweak in future, or at the least still be playable in a year before dropping a big chunk of cash on it
-
1
-
-
I've had a lot of good proxy / alt models from scibor. Great things there!
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Grdaat said:
you cannot negate a MW
The trait doesn't negate it. Negation happens pre-allocation, same as a ward, or a roll or a disgustingly resilient or whatever else in the game prevents a wound from being allocated to a unit.
At the end of a round, you total up all the damage to a unit and allocate it. You don't do this twice for mortal and non mortal wounds. After this step you deduct that total, regardless of how it is comprised, from the units available wounds. We then ignore the first.
Anyway... Going to sleep now!
-
2 hours ago, The_Dudemeister said:
It definitely doesn't unfortunately. 😕
From the rulebook FAQ:
Without wanting to do this all again - I think it does.
Note the use of the past tense allocated. Not when allocating, allocated. Already happened.
Standard rules state after it has been allocated, they're treated the same. The armour doesn't prevent its allocation. The trait simply states the first allocated wound is ignored. Regardless of what caused it.
Right or wrong, that's how I read it and how the tense and syntax of the rules explain it.
Anyway, not looking to start this up again. It needs an FAQ as at this point I just don't care enough to argue why if it specifically worded in the past tense!
-
7 hours ago, Qrow said:
decent number of attacks if you 4D6 it, ignores one wound if you hurt yourself.
Assuming this means your subscribed to the Blackshard armour applying to mortal wound camp?
As an additional update for me, I'd like Shar'Tor tweaked a bit. Not sure how, but he's twice the price in money and 60 points more than a taur'ruk for really not that much more! As a named hero feel he should offer more to see him used anywhere outside of execution herd lists to make bulls battleline 😌
-
1 minute ago, eekamouse said:
Still available in the US. Them being out of stock is actually a good sign tbh. It means things are selling.
95% chance, yeah. Your right it's nothing. But running out over a key order time like Christmas doesn't look good and like I say, it's how all the other items started that are now no longer there.
Depends on you point of view. They didn't make more when they were "low stock" and have now run out. Not fantastic stock management if you know something sells well to wait until you've literally run out!
-
Let's hope they do update us at some point, although I don't see it happening until whatever is going on internally there is finished happening and they tell people why half their stuff has just vanished from the site. Currently the units I was going to order are now unavailable too. Probably nothing, but this is how everything else AOS that is now no longer available on their site started off 😞
Hope it isn't a sign of things to come for us
-
6 hours ago, LeopoldKamirov said:
What about you all, what's your typical list like?
My last list that won me a game looked like this! Was a lot of fun I thought too.
-
51 minutes ago, Ben said:
I saw some running the Slannesh Epitome. Seems like a good choice. 2 spells. resilient, fast. 200 points.
That's the one I couldn't remember!
Also chaos gargants are kinda fun. Random, but fun.
-
32 minutes ago, Televiper11 said:
Taking any good allies suggestions.
Some of my favourites...
Block of plaguebearers with festus / spoilpox scrivenver to objective holding + stickiness
Tzanngor shaman + skyfires for mobility and grabbing
Chimera - for funnies
Swarm of furies - for funnies
Skarr bloodwrath / skullgrinder - randomness
-
6 minutes ago, Lord Krungharr said:
I think the best allied things for Azgorh will be ones that debuff the enemies, like Festus the Leechlord. Just not seeing a great shining future for Azgorh however. I'm wondering if I should even unload my other AoS Forgeworld units for my Gloomspite Gitz. If FW isn't going to support AoS at all in the future then it might be unwise to have any from them.
Given the pace that GW release things, for the past few years there hasn't been a whole bunch of "new" from FW comparatively aside from that ludicrous khorne dragon. I know it's not their main game so that's fair enough and I've noticed a few things are slipping from the site too. But really, all that's changed here is a spell for a single unit that we used as an ally anyways. A damn good one, but it's hardly a prophecy of doom for us
I love my legion, have about 2000 points of core units and can throw in bubbles of many different allies for different purposes so hopefully there are many more fun games to be had - given that if everything else keeps getting buffed as we don't it'll be an uphill battle, but hey what's new there!
-
53 minutes ago, Televiper11 said:
I was thinking of replacing his with the CSL on Manticore -- great anti-horde spell, can fly, decently tanky, and can cast Oracular on self.
Still, losing Daemonic is really going to hurt. Anyone know any other allied wizards we can add for a quick buff?
I fear our army is getting binned next GHB.
YeH, I'm currently searching for a good allied wizard too. With all the new updates they're really stripping all the keywordless stuff out. Maybe some new unannounced StD unit will fill the role partially. I quite liked Sayl the faithless, but his teleport spell got hit with the only StD units hammer when we got out first update!
I wouldn't worry about being binned off. Was a huge step being put into the ghb this time so feels wasted effort to just pull them out again!
-
4 minutes ago, Televiper11 said:
Bye Bye Chaos Sorcerer Lord's Daemonic Power spell, which I've used consistently to buff Taur'ruk & K'daai. Now only applies to Mortal STD units.
And his passive oracular visions buff too 😑
On the other hand, I never liked the model so glad to not have to see it, but it's a heavy blow to some major synergy in our lists
-
"very big" changes could literally mean anything, and when announced at events like that its only ever designed / intended as a good thing. Armies being dropped / cut / discontinued aren't that, especially after making the effort of putting them in the new GHB and fixing issues with them in the errata. More likely to be building on what they said last time about being more involved than every in AoS and, as suggested above, stopping being treated like a separate company.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Grdaat said:
It's not a negation? Let's check the rules:
"The first wound that is allocated to each unit with this battle trait in each shooting phase and each combat phase is negated."
Well I think that's pretty clear, it's negation. After thinking on it you probably could argue that it still works since when it takes effect mortal wounds no longer exist, so technically you're not negating a mortal wound.
Also after thinking on it more I think arguing that it works when mortal wounds no longer exist is the only way there isn't a contradiction between the designer's commentary and the actual rules, so with that logic you'd still be able to get the negation.
That's the only premise I'd argue it works as it's after its allocated. No argument about allocating the wound. But when you evaluate the effect on the unit, it's just a number that's treated the same.
Thank you for the opinions by the way. Not dismissing as the right or wrong answer, I genuinely don't know 100% so only have my own justification which I like to see hold up to scrutiny!
-
39 minutes ago, Grdaat said:
Hey so I also came across some evidence that helps support the idea that the Chaos Dwarfs Blackshard Battalion would be able to both charge and pile in, while still retaining the bonuses. Here's a bit from the Core Rules designer's commentary:
"Q: Some abilities allow a model to make a move out of sequence (in the hero phase, for example), or to make a specific type of move (a ‘6" retreat move’, for example). Can I run when I make these moves?
A: You can only run if the ability refers to making a ‘normal move’ (which includes any move made ‘as if it were the movement phase’) and the ability doesn’t specify the distance of the move. Note that the restrictions that apply to normal moves (not moving within 3" of the enemy, and having to retreat if they start within 3" of the enemy) also apply to normal moves made in any other phase. Also note that the increase to the unit’s Move characteristic for running only applies to that move."
So the Blackshard Battalion says "a move", not any kind of move or movement as if it were the movement phase, which is odd since it is still vague. I'd find it even stranger though if "a move" wasn't supposed to mean "a normal move", which can only happen if it's the movement phase, instead meant any kind of move, which would mess you up if you wanted to pile in.
You probably could still argue it either way, so it's something you need to talk with your opponent about in advance.
Unfortunately here's something else I found in the same designer's commentary:
"Q: If an ability says it negates a wound, will it also negate a mortal wound?
A: No, unless the ability specifically says it negates mortal wounds. By the same token, an ability that negates only mortal wounds will not negate wounds."
So sorry to say, but the bit in the rulebook stating "After they have been allocated, a mortal wound is treated in the same manner as any other wound for all rules purposes" should be ignored. You actually still do treat them differently for almost all rules purposes (with healing being the only exception I can think of).
I still think it applies. Only due to the nature of the wording.
Our ability doesn't negate a mortal wound / regular wound. Its not a save or a shrug or a negation. It simply states after all wounds have been allocated, ignore the first one. Important part being once allocated. Not before they're allocated (i.e a save or pre-check or a type screening where a distinction is made between the type of wound). As such the core rules, which have no FAQ comment to imply they are anything other than as written, applies so they're treated the same, the same as healing.
Our ability is a retrospective thing, not a pre-allocation.
-
1 hour ago, Grdaat said:
So here's something I just realized to help people who are still separating wounds and mortal wounds even after they've been allocated (and so think the armour can't negate them). You know how there are some models who can heal themselves or others? If Mortal wounds and wounds were always kept separate, you would never be able to heal damage done by mortal wounds, since there isn't a single datasheet in the game that says you can heal mortal wounds that were done to a model/unit.
Exactly! Amazing alternative example!
Once allocated they all count as the same. I'm totally printing this out as a reminder next time I get asked this...
AoS 2 - Legion Of Azgorh Discussion
in Chaos
Posted
Well I got a reply. Good news?