IrishCarBomb
-
Posts
39 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by IrishCarBomb
-
-
I never received a reply...I guess we should all send again. We will not be ignored!
-
2
-
-
23 hours ago, Honk said:
Maaaaannn the caannnnoonnsss!!!
Beautiful!
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Honk said:
Sounds great... just finished two new rocketlaunchers to shoot some people off the table
🥳🚀🚀🚀😈
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.
-
On 7/26/2020 at 7:21 AM, Honk said:
To be honest, I don’t think GDubs or Forgeworld have an internal logic to those things...
All this is massive speculation with too many unknown factors to really mean something.
I don’t have any sales-revenue numbers on the costs of keeping an army alive, but tomb kings or Bretons were very liked around here. Especially TK had a very diverse line, so there was an incentive to buy more after your necropolis knights with necrosphinx army was done, you maybe tried out some chariots...
same for 30k, it seems to be selling well, then it gets faded out.
And if something like that threatens internal armies from GW it’s twice as bad for some external range of minis.
only some options available:
1. play boring posterboys sigmarines or ultrasmurfs
2. pray to your local deity, take the risk and prepare to get axed...
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.
-
11 hours ago, Qrow said:
I tend to by the forgeworld models because I like my army to look similar across the units where possible, and because I do use the Legion of Azgorh in tournaments.
I admit, however, that I would have a larger number of models of the rules were kept in line with other allegiances. Bull centaurs for example; I ideally would like 12 of them so I can run the execution herd as 6-3-3, but I can't justify buying 6 more with their current rules. Shar'tor as well, I am proxying him in matches because he is expensive as hell to buy and he cost too much to play regularly.
Outside of that, I have a large number of almost all other the other models. I would like to buy a skullcracker, but I think I will have to go through a recaster for that one.
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.
-
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.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Grdaat said:
It's hard justifying the extra money for FW models unless there's a guarantee it would lead to them updating the rules. They cost so much more and not everyone has the budget for it.
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.
-
6 hours ago, Shaquilleoheal said:
Just founded a good alternative miniatures for chaos dwarf on MOM miniatures set, has anyone else bought from them lately?How long it takes for the arrive?
Same question on FW miniatures,the order in these times of covid how long it takes? EU for EU
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.
-
6 hours ago, Charly2912 said:
I've just received a reply from FW and want to share it:
"Hi There
Thanks for the email and for letting us know your thoughts and feedback.
We do take all feedback very seriously from our customers, so this email has been passed on to the relevant heads of departments to look into.
Thanks again for your email, and should you need anything further, please let me know.
Kind regards"Sadly there is not a word of any future plans mentioned. It was not even ensured that they want to keep the range (as they usually do)
In general it sounds just like a generic awnser, but I hope it will be forwarded and read.
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!
-
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.
-
I just sent mine to both AoSFAQ@gwplc.com and forgeworld@gwplc.com.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Qrow said:
The email I was told to give feedback too was AoSFAQ@gwplc.com. I normally mention recent battle reports and suggestions for point adjustments; though in the case of the dreadquake mortar I suggest a warscroll lookover, poor thing is just... not great.
Feel free to disagree with point changes, but lately I have been suggesting adjustments in the ballpark of:
Leaders
Drazhoath: -60 to 260
Shar'tor: -20 to 200
Taur'ruk: fine as is
Castellan: -10 to 100
Standard bearer: -10 to 90
Deamonsmith: good as is
Battleline
Ironsworn: -10 to 80/210
Fireglaives: good as is
Other
Renders: -20 to 160/560
K'daai: fine as is
Artillery
Deathshreiker: fine as is
Magma: fine as is
Dreadquake: -40 to 140, really just need a total rework. Bring back the half move to hit units.
Behemoth
Iron deamon- -20 to 160
Skullcracker: fine as is
Battalions
War host: -40 to 120
Artillery train: -20 to 100
Execution herd: -20 to 140
I get that a lot of these changes seem extreme, especially the -40/60 point drops I suggest, but we have been skipped over twice (three times if you count the Christmas FAQ) and the newer allegiances severely overpower us. Just look at the Cities of sigmar dispossessed and compare them to ours. They get 3+ saves everywhere, irondrakes make our shooting look pathetic and they have actual synergy between units. Despite how much better their units are to ours, they are still not considered a top tier army.
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
-
1
-
-
On 7/20/2020 at 11:52 AM, Qrow said:
It would seem that we have once again been looked over. I will keep messaging GW with battle reports and issues with balance in our battletome, but I think it is safe to say that we are a not considered a 'real' faction by GW. At least not in their balancing concerns
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!
-
2
-
-
On 7/9/2020 at 3:59 AM, Qrow said:
While it probably means nothing, the downloads page on forgeworld no longer has any AoS content. You can still download them from their actual store pages and nothing has changed on the pdfs, it is just the downloads page that no longer lists them, but they were there yesterday and are missing today.
Maybe they are getting ready to update the pdf...we can hope, right 😉
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Lord Krungharr said:
Thank you very much! Looking forward to playing Sylvaneth; who doesn't love yardwork
Nice! My brother is building a Sylvaneth army as well - I can't wait to burn his forest down!
-
21 minutes ago, Latty said:
You should probably take the recast links out of your post
I can, but since there is no other option for purchase anymore I didn't realize it would be contentious. I would have bought the FW version if they had it, but a rep from FW informed me it would not be coming back. I'll remove it anyway.
-
On 7/6/2020 at 9:40 PM, Lord Krungharr said:
I am keeping the flame alive and if I can make the warmeet this weekend I’ll use my four skullcrackers. All done finally!
Nice work on the crackers - That's a lot of meat to grind!
-
1
-
-
On 7/5/2020 at 11:16 AM, mattbarker said:
Very true! And exceptional eye sight / deducing btw, I never bothered looking at those images on the gw site lol
I’m more worried about FW not updating our compendium for another year and it stagnating. And hoping more of our units don’t randomly vanish off the site without warning like the others have! Deathshrieker most recently.
I was worried back before Covid also - then their site was down for a couple months and I wrote FW. They told me they had no plans to retire the range (i know that doesn't mean they can't) and that the skullcracker and deathshrieker outcomes were due to two separate production issues. I recently ordered a full LoA army from Forgeworld and it arrived quickly from. I believe the army will be around for a time to come but I am not under the illusion it will get the same attention as the other GW armies...nor do I want them to. I like the pace and feel of the army without power creep through new units, shifting rules and a constant new book release. Not to mention, the army will always retain its value(whether legitimate or not) and has a cool/unique factor many others do not. In case anyone hasn't noticed - seemingly all FW models go up in value once retired. That should make most of us want to double down on our Legion!
-
On 7/4/2020 at 9:00 AM, Qcbob025 said:
I don't think people have to be too fatalist on the on going of the Chaos dwarves. Points were in the GH 2019, i don't see why they would'nt be in the GH 2020. Forgeworld always been a niche product and never played a mainstream role in the lore, it's a standalone thing. I think it's unfair to expect it to be an "real official army" and occupy space in a "official" document.
People jump to conclusion way too fast. It's not in the ally chart... does Death Korp of Kreig was in the ally chart back then in previous 40K editions books nope... did Death Korps of Kreig still exist... yes. There is no point for FW to stop selling a product if it's still sell, they do a simple math (total profit - cost of maintenance and repair of mold. If it's not profitable, they stop producing it) Look at the Deathshrieker Rocket Launcher and the Skullcracker, they removed it because it was not profitable to maintain the mold, not because they wanted to fade away the branch.
I agree. I believe the army is doing well for what it is and that they must be selling nicely. I have even seen a few recent battle reports on youtube with the LoA being quite competitive. I think the interest and support is out there, and may be gaining a little traction.
-
We need all of you out there who are considering the army to jump in and buy it! The more backers, the more stable and supported the line of LoA becomes. Besides, even if they did discontinue the army down the road, everyone's models would increase in value (as most other discontinued Forgeworld items do) as the models themselves retain their collective desire and uniqueness. WHAT SAY YOU?!
-
On 6/25/2020 at 2:18 AM, Ar-Pharazôn said:
I'll admit I've had a great deal of anxiety over Legion of Azgorh and their future. I love the army, but it feels almost like playing AoS 1.0 sometimes with how basic are Allegiance Abilities are. We have no spell lore, no unique terrain, no endless spells or equivalents, and barely any current lore. I'm afraid that they'll end up like getting more and more models gradually cut. There have been more Azgorh units lost than gained since Age of Sigmar released.
I can see where you are coming from. For what its worth, I reached out with the same concern and they replied back quickly and dismissed the rumors of dropping the army. Even if a lot of people don't play LoA, I think Forgeworld sells a lot of their models. I bought several years ago just because I loved the models. Long before AoS was even a thing, and I wasn't using them for fantasy.
I for one love that they are given a little less attention. I know it means we don't get as many updates but the army itself is truly unique and there isn't power creep and rule changes within the army very often. Though their "battle tome" is simplistic comparatively, I still love the versatility and feel of the army - and I think that comes with them being a relatively underserved and niche faction.
-
14 hours ago, spenson said:
From the video:
The new realmscape feature of Aqshy is 'Burning lands'. This means that Burning Skies is no longer in the game. If they don't even update the LoA compendium then they really don't care about the army anymore.
-
1 hour ago, Grdaat said:
Because they only keep what's profitable, more than half the Forge range was already removed, so I don't see why these would stay if they're not selling.
But with the molds made they could just cast orders as they come in. And what are they currently doing with the molds anyway? - just thousands of dollars worth of paperweights.
As you said though, the fact that they even took a long break over this Covid period and have brought back the LoA models for sale must demonstrate they sell them somewhat regularly.
-
On 6/17/2020 at 4:02 PM, Lord Krungharr said:
I ordered a ton of bitz and am in the werx of making 3 more skullcrackers. The ogor-centaurs are assembled at least.
You'll need to post some pics of these when completed... and any other pics of your army too!
What will take to have Chaos Dwarves, inside or outside of the Legion of Azgorh become a real Faction?
in Chaos
Posted
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!