Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Prosecutor

About IrishCarBomb

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As a new owner of a LoA army - It is going to take more hounding of their email servers to get us a new ruleset. I don't need GW to make them an "official" GW darling, just update the rules for the latest edition of AoS. It literally would take the Forgeworld team probably an hour to do so. the simplicity of the armies rules would make altering them relatively easy. And I just love how simplistic the army ruleset is yet how complex and varied their gameplay can be!
  2. I never received a reply...I guess we should all send again. We will not be ignored!
  3. Awesome! Are they original FW models or 3rd party? I purchased two as well (had to go 3rd party) but I haven't gotten around to assembling them yet. Too many other LoA models are being worked on right now.
  4. I guess I went with the latter 😬 - I'm 3k points in now, no turning back! ...And all I am saying in regards to everything above -- Logic would have most believe the more a product is bought and supported by customers, the longer it is likely to remain available. Now, whether GW or FW abide by logic when making decisions is all up for debate.
  5. I know what you mean about Shar'tor being expensive but I had to have the model and it is Awesome! I purchased the execution herd with my full army purchase and have plenty of centaurs to play around with. I knew going into it that their stats weren't the best but I had to have them because I loved the models. I just want to plop 9 or 12 of those down on the table if nothing more than for intimidation factor. At least until my opponent learns the army a bit.
  6. It kind of goes both ways. Most of us knew buying an FW army meant it wasnt going to get as much attention as the "mainstream" GW armies. And I understand the perspective that GW needs to generate the interest to some extent, which they could do a better job of (ie. updating rules, adding more LoA fluff, coming out with a new model(this alone would do wonders for the confidence in keeping the range)). BUT, if they aren't selling for whatever reason or they only marginally sell enough to keep the range alive then the updates and interest are going to wane. So it's kinda a catch22 - you could blame it on GW/FW but also on the consumers or lack there of. And my whole point is the pool of LoA players is small enough as it is, we need all interested parties supporting the line when they can. I compare this situation somewhat to Tomb Kings. Great models, great fluff, and interesting and unique army. It wasn't a lack of input from GW, but the consumer spending wasn't there and so they dropped the line.
  7. I get it, the cost can be a lot. But every backer helps to propel this army into the future. If everyone buys a generic version then there would be no reason for them to update the army. It has to make financial sense for them too. By playing LoA, we all have chosen an underserved yet clandestine army which comes with its pros and cons—price being one of the cons.
  8. First off, love your name! But if you can purchase the Dwarves from Forgeworld (I know they are more expensive) then it will help to support the line and thus keep interest up for the army. I had to buy my two Deathshriekers from another site but supported Forgeworld and the LoA line with the rest of my purchases. If you are interested in the site where I bought the Deathshriker Rockets just PM me.
  9. For what it's worth - I asked them back in April before purchasing my whole army (about 3000pts worth) whether they were keeping the line alive or not. They stated they had no intention of retiring the line. I also received an auto reply from both GW and Forgeworld. Funny though, my Forgeworld reply stated something about "currently experiencing a higher than normal volume of emails" and there may be a delay in replying to me. Maybe we overloaded their mailbox already - touche!
  10. I'm liking the momentum here with everyone's submissions! Hopefully anyone else reading these will do the same. And I see your point on dropping the Renders to 150, Qrow. I do like the idea of the 3+ save and a 20 pt drop, but I personally would prefer the points stay the same or maybe a 10 pt drop(to 170) and add a 4th attack, though admittedly this is less likely as you already mentioned.
  11. I just sent mine to both AoSFAQ@gwplc.com and forgeworld@gwplc.com.
  12. Nice Assessment! I agree with you on virtually all of those. The 3 most apparent over-costed units are the Dreadquake, Drazhoath and Renders and in that order. I think Renders should be dropped to at least 160 or even 150, OR keep them at cost but add 1 additional attack to their Darkforged Weapon profile. I also agree Shar'tor and the Battalions need to have points reductions. I would even argue a slight increase to the magma cannon +10 pts to 150 would be acceptable if the other units were adjusted accordingly. Also, I'll get a message out to them soon... I think we should have Forgeworld cc'd on all correspondence as well. Even if they state they are not the ones to change the rules any longer I am sure they have some influence over their armies. Let's flood their mailbox with requests to at least update the unit profiles a bit. Something as simple as point cost reductions immediately makes the army more competitive on the table - no other changes necessary. (...but if a change were to come - I still would like to see a couple more artifacts and/or additional spell in the Spell Lore. One more new unit or hero would be amazing too!) I almost forgot - here is the Forgeworld email I have used to communicate with them in the past: forgeworld@gwplc.com
  13. I can get in on this to help amplify the message. Where do you keep sending your messages so that I know I am sending to the same contact? If you want to send over some topics you have previously mentioned I can slightly alter to say something similar. I wouldn't want to send an exact copy - they'll think you a bot!
  14. Maybe they are getting ready to update the pdf...we can hope, right 😉
  • Create New...