chosen_of_khaine
-
Posts
213 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by chosen_of_khaine
-
-
36 minutes ago, Bosskelot said:
You know some of the statements being made by ardent double turn defenders really read like the people making them have never played any game aside from Sigmar.
I find it's the opposite, it's usually people who have only played a handful of games (and aren't that good at it, if I'm being frank) that are the most vocal detractors of it. But that's just me.
40 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:This image right here is why Ill meber touch the gaming side of the hobby. That looks like hell.
You'll never play a game of AoS because of some of the match up disparities at tournament level play? Interesting, but to each their own.
-
3
-
2
-
-
58 minutes ago, Grungnisson said:
Why don't you go and have the same argument with Apple about the pricing of their phones and laptops? Or with Leica about their cameras? Or Bang & Olufsen about their audio equipment?
Because luxury tech is different than a tabletop game that lots of people have invested time and money into? This really shouldn't be that hard to comprehend.
This defense of GW's pricing, marketing, etc. is such a weird sentiment that I see all over the place as if the health of the game isn't something GW should consider.
-
4
-
-
3 hours ago, Grungnisson said:
If GW doesn't sell stuff for profit, what's their purpose in life? How would they exist?
I dunno, maybe making a good game without fleecing players for as much money as possible?
At least the warscrolls are free unlike 40k, GW treats 40k players like addicted whales.
-
6
-
2
-
-
Has anyone done the mathhammer on when it is more beneficial to use +1 save via All-Out Defense vs. +1 to wards via Impenetrable Ranks?
-
53 minutes ago, J4yzor said:
Hey, i have a rule question. Our new LoB Comman Traid sais: "...Attacks made with meele weapons that target that unit score a hit on an unmodified hit role of 2+..." This mean even if my unit is debuffed with a -1 to hit it will always hit with every 2+. Is that assumption correct?
It is correct, because "-1 to hit" effects modify the hit roll (so counting a roll as a 3 when you roll a 4, for instance) but with that trait, unmodified rolls of 2+ always hit, so how the hit roll was modified doesn't matter.
-
Hi folks, like many I'm branching out into Sylvaneth with the battleforce (pun intended) and in thinking about how to expand from there I've looked at many lists, including in this thread.
I see many folks running reinforced units of Spiterider Lancers and/or Revenant Seekers, and I'm wondering - how many models do you realistically get into combat when they charge? 4? Or is it relatively easy to position them so you get 2 ranks, even with their 60mm bases?
-
I find it weird that peoples' interest in playing the game is so tied up in how much release hype there currently is, especially when - odds are - the releases have nothing to do with an army that you play. I play the game because it's fun, not because a random army I don't play is getting a tome in the next month. And if you're tired of the current GHB (as I often am), you can just play last year's missions.
-
8
-
-
14 minutes ago, Jagged Red Lines said:
GW prioritising 40k again
I mean...did you read it? Not exactly an indication of them prioritizing balance in 40k based the paucity of those changes.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, woolf said:
Mental load I would agree, but then again some armies should be more complex imo to cater for players who wants that, and moving abilities to warscrolls makes it way easier for an opponent who doesnt own the book as you can just look up what they do. Re NPE, they killed off the foxes, the sentinels ignoring LOS, Lambent light, Cathallar battleshock shift and they moved eclipse to CV 9... So I honestly struggle to see how this book is now "more NPE" than a lot of other armies in this game, to keep pushing that line of argument seems more out of legacy than forward looking
Then they buffed the stoneguard and the bladelords which imo was great moves. Wind temple I think is in quite a weird spot now but maybe there is some use for them
Sure Teclis can autocast but I dont see him being worse than Morathi/Nagash/Kroak etc in terms of what he can do and he is still fragile and expensive... without the Sentinels block to deal out damage Im not sure how well Teclis builds are going to work. Maybe we will see him with a bunch of melee units which could be a nice mix up from the old sentinel build (and that was tbh quite uninteractive and easy to see why people had an issue with)
Complaining about LRL is a part time job for this user, you won't convince them.
-
2
-
-
On 10/10/2022 at 6:02 AM, JackStreicher said:
Quite controversial opinion:
They should have binned and rewritten the book.
It is still the Incarnation of NPE and mental load, with a new cover and 4 Warscroll Abilities less. Leaving total eclipse, Teclis (mostly) and the command ability block untouched is really a slap in the face.
Edit: This way the vast majority of the cummunity (talking about the 2% of comp. Players) still has powerful tools while the minority (the rest) will continue to have ruined games. Or people outright refusing to play against LRL - totally worth it. That’s how you create good games, fun experiences and the urge to play again.
Controversial, maybe. Predictable, absolutely.
-
Actually, looking at it zoomed in more, that definitely looks like the quiver, elbow, bow, etc. of the Hurakan Spirit of the Wind...sadly.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Voltek said:
What is this?
That is curious, it does look like there's a model that isn't terrain behind there. Maybe a photoshop error?
Or maybe...TYRION?!? -
24 minutes ago, novakai said:
Because it’s a spell and not easy to get off.
look at where bone splitters is and they have it armywide on their arguably best subfaction. And they are balance by their lack of rend so it only there to boost their measly damage by not getting negated.
this is on a unit that not tied to a subfaction and can be brought in mass who are also not chump in the actual shooting game. Not saying it strong or overpower, but they are clearly putting them on better units as time is going on.
As they stand right now, Windriders are definitely closer to the "chump" end of the "shooting game" spectrum. The wording implies that they have the potential to do mortal wounds with shooting, but in what capacity remains to be seen. Without seeing the new warscroll, the 'roos don't seem any more problematic than existing units that negate wards.
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, novakai said:
And so begin the arm race for anti ward abilities lol
While I agree "ignores wards" shouldn't exist, that started already - abilities like this are not new to the game. Nighthaunt, Kharadron, Orruks, and Fyreslayers already have access to "ignore wards" in some form or another.
-
22 minutes ago, Ogregut said:
Might have to build the 10 tree kangaroos I have now!
Let the complaining about snippets of rules previews commence!
-
2
-
7
-
-
9 minutes ago, MitGas said:
Worth a shot but it might also remind them that Lumineth still need their last two waves.
Can't wait! Give us Tyrion, GW!
-
2
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:
Shocking absolutely nobody, new roadmap.
Very minor thing, but I LOVE the new art on the Lumineth book. Great colors, and I love the old school bismuth-looking Hysh crystals.
-
7
-
-
46 minutes ago, Ogregut said:
New faqs for Skaven, Sylvaneth and some others now up
https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/#warhammer-age-of-sigmar
And they undid that dumb ruling with abilities that set vs modify characteristics - things that set it are applied first, then modifiers. You know, like how everyone already played it.
-
26 minutes ago, HollowHills said:
The source is my infinite knowledge and wisdom.
I really hope "aren't very good" just means "not abusable" and not "garbage tier" because the whole aesthetic of lines of pikemen backed up by archers with cavalry in the flanks is one of the major appeals of Lumineth.
Then again, I'm pretty tired of vague discord leaks that are just one dude's opinions with minimal actual information, so I'm putting basically no weight to this.-
5
-
-
30 minutes ago, Gothmaug said:
If Marines make up 40% of your annual sales, you make more marines, that's just pure business. If tyrranids sold as well as space marine's, you'd see a lot more of them.
And if they didn't keep churning out new marines every edition, they wouldn't make up 40% of their annual sales. It's a self fulfilling prophecy.
Look at how many people picked up Necrons after they got a massive overhaul, they were (and maybe still are) by far the most popular xenos faction when 9th released. And you didn't have to look far for people saying "I'd love to start an Eldar army but half the range is finecast" before their recent update. GW can choose to make 40k less Space Marine centric any time they want, but they won't.-
7
-
5
-
-
23 minutes ago, xking said:
How?
In the box, it was letting them do All-Out Attack/Defense again on a 4+, in the book they are treated as wyldwoods when near an objective. Same ability name - Envoys of the Everqueen
-
2
-
-
32 minutes ago, pnkdth said:
When an army is about twice as popular as all but 6 other armies it is a very good indication it is, i.e. you will face LRL twice for every other than the top 6-7 armies at a tournament (since the entries per army takes a sharp dive by about half post top 7 IIRC).
My argument do not hinge on the claims of vocal players online. I do not over/underestimate them. I'm just interested in why you think LRL isn't popular or why you think people haven't really played against them. The data seem to suggest a lot of players out there have indeed played against them.
I didn't say they weren't popular, my point is entirely that of the group of people that complain about LRL online, some number don't play very frequently, and some number haven't played much (or at all) vs LRL - and I'd bet the number that do and have is under 50% of the online complainers. Wasn't intended to be a nuanced point, just to get across that the vocal complainers online are (I believe) very overrepresentative of people who actually have experience playing against the army, and have their opinions mostly formed by online content creators, which leads to the community hating on an army for not much reason more than someone online telling them to.
-
1
-
-
45 minutes ago, The Red King said:
I don't think poor timmy with his all melee army is comforted by the fact that the fox spam list he can't do anything against isn't doing well at tournaments.
Bringing cutthroat meta lists in casual games vs "poor timmy" has always been an issue independent of the armies themselves, which can be further exacerbated by poor matchups. The majority of true Negative Play Experience TM comes from the players themselves, not army rules.
13 minutes ago, pnkdth said:LRL is one of the more popular armies in AoS so I very much doubt there's a lack of experience in facing LRL out there. It is top 6 in tournament entries in AoS 3rd edition. Perhaps the army is rare in your area but that doesn't make it true across the community.
In other words, I wouldn't put too much money behind that bet.
Tournament popularity doesn't necessarily correlate with casual popularity, but more to my point I think you overestimate how much the vocal online complainers actually play the game. And when they do, they'll already have the opinions of certain weekly content creators floating around in their heads to justify anything that doesn't go their way in a game.
-
2
-
-
While I agree that Foxes, Sentinels, and Total Eclipse aren't the most interactive to play against, every army has elements that could be a "NPE" (such an awful, overused term). Let's not ignore the fact that much of what determinies which armies get hate and which armies are deemed "fine" is merely the discourse around them coming from 1-2 major AoS content creators, whose (often poor) takes get uncritically parroted throughout the community and basically just become memes. I would bet money that ~50% of people who have complained about LRL online have not played a single game against them.
Season of War once had a battle report with LRL a while back that ended up very one sided, not because of any "cheese" or "NPE", just the mission and dice plus some very good play from the LRL player. Nonetheless, the comment section was full of "ugh stop playing LRL" or "nerf LRL already" because the community just decided they were the army to hate. Like most internet memes, it gets tired pretty quick.
-
6
-
1
-
1
-
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
"We"? "Supposed to be"? Where is this narrative coming from? Or are you talking about TGA moderation?