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

Tropical Ghost General

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

452 Celestant-Prime

About Tropical Ghost General

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant

Recent Profile Visitors

749 profile views
  1. How would you know what needs nerfing if you can't play the army at a competitive level? This data from GW via AoSShorts is a very small amount, with very little details. Were realms used? Were secondaries used, if so what? Was there other soft scores used? Was it just GHB20 missions or all 18 matched play missions? etc.... Iirc the recent 80+ event in Germany had a few armies outside of the top 5, that went 5-0 but lost out due to soft scoring elements. But regardless of the data source and how indepth it is, the main issue with the article is how little it offered in terms of actual solutions to the current hotness (shooting) affecting the game. It was basically saying shooting is king, if you don't have shooting try playing eels. After failing to be able to finish reading the first 40k article due to it's complete pointlessness and dully written content, I was fortunate enough to not have high hopes for when they did the AoS version.
  2. Totally agree with you. But iirc stuff like Knife to the Heart, RAW can't be won if you kick it out of your deployment zone. This is not a good mission interaction with the ability. Personally I would have no issue with objectives staying the same points, with regards to scoring, even if they get kicked out of their original position. It just makes the game much, much fairer and is a better balance.
  3. @PlasticCraic I was just coming on here to share this excellent article https://plasticcraic.blog/2020/10/21/sons-of-behemat-wrap-up-allies-mercs-and-misconceptions/amp/?__twitter_impression=true ------------ One of the things I feel is going to get addressed/needs to get addressed is the way the objectives are determined for scoring points. Currently the kicking them out of the deployment zones or other zones, being a thing that completely negates the scoring or ability for your opponent to win just seems wrong from a matched play perspective. Missions themselves should have balance for both armies to be able to win around a fixed set of parameters. Moving the parameters is fine, but either changing the points values or denying them altogether doesn't sit right with me. I'll be interested to see where it goes with the FAQ tbh
  4. Out of interest, has anyone played any missions that isn't focal points? Nearly every report on gargant performance I've seen has been using focal points. I'm more interested in how we'll do on missions like blades edge or better part of valour or any of the other 11 missions that aren't the 1 that we have heavily skewed in our favour.
  5. I just love the fact that they settled for imo as validation for their version of the rules πŸ˜‚
  6. So in regards to the recent facehammer video, in the comments section they introduced a new element to rules debate, when asked about endless spells not having a wounds characteristic to be able to step over them We previously had RAW and RAI, and now we have IMO πŸ˜‚.
  7. Lol. I read it as, just not a SoBt army πŸ˜‚. Mercs allowed then πŸ€” Edit: Have been reminded that mercs don't get the 20 models on objectives so, yeah, not the best option πŸ˜…
  8. Unfortunately not allowed mercs in a SoBt army. Love the idea though.
  9. I think I might need to sit down and cry for a while. I got all excited that my uber big lad was going to be usable and he's been relegated to the pit of obscurity. #ripbonegrinder
  10. I think you guys are forgetting, that in Stomper his shooting attack can be damage 5 or 6, and his club damage 4 or 5 depending on size of target unit. *EDIT: Only affects manchrushers, ignore this excitement πŸ˜‚). In gatebreaker, with wavey flags, he's basically hitting everything on 2+. Also, the auto kill a model ability is just roll greater than the wounds, not double, so 4 or 5 wound models can potentially be killed. and lower wound models are much easier to kill. Only downside is no mortals on the charge. Not sure why. I thought I had my list sorted out and now I am not sure if I include my bonegrinder or not. πŸ˜‚
  11. 3+/3+/-2/3 is better than any of the other gargants
  12. I run regular local events and I'm all in on the big lads, 3 big and 9 small (not all GW as that would be a mental and monopose looking army πŸ˜‚), as these guys are a perfect TO ringer/spare player army. Games will be quick enough and you'll have way less to do in game than with other factions, that you can dip in and out of the game as you do all the TO stuff. And it means that you don't have to worry about bringing along a list that is too strong against even fluffy tournament players. I am excited to be able to use these at my events.
  13. You know an army is good when people are wishlisting what they want in the next book before the first one is even out yet πŸ˜‚
  14. It doesn't grant the user the WIZARD keyword. So to cast an any endless spell, you need to be a wizard, often with faction spells it will be something like NIGHTHAUNT WIZARD. To dispel endless spells, at the start of the hero phase, a WIZARD may attempt to dispel an endless spell. If they attempt to do this, then later in the hero phase they have to reduce the amount of casting opportunities by one. So in summary, an ability that is worded 'in the same manner as a wizard' is different from 'makes the bearer a wizard', as this artefact only let's you cast or unbind in the same manner as a wizard, but lacking the vital keyword locks you out of using/dispelling endless spells. Luckily an archregant is a double caster and is 240pts and can be taken as an ally.
  • Create New...