Tutenkharnage
-
Posts
175 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Tutenkharnage
-
-
The preview for the Eyes of the Nine is up, and they will definitely bring something new to the game.
Lots of subtle details in this preview, including the fact that the Blue Horror can’t actually be taken out of action and therefore won’t generate glory for the attacker. (Read the text carefully; there’s certainly a lot of it!)
-
So you agree that A Destiny to Meet awards no glory, and that Danse Macabre can’t be used if your opponent plays Bloodslick Ground even though the rules clearly state otherwise and do so in direct contradiction to what you’re claiming for Zealous Defender?
No, of course you’re not making those claims; they’re ridiculous. But your interpretation of this card isn’t any better.
Look, I can’t say with 100% certainty that I’m right, but I can say with 100% certainty that what you’re proposing causes conflicts with other cards that go against what is written in the rule book, and what I’m proposing doesn’t. (When it comes to the English language, I have an English degree and have worked as an editor for nearly two decades, so I trust my own judgment there.) GW might eventually release a FAQ that requires a fighter to have at least one supporting fighter in order to benefit from Zealous Defender, but they’ll have to release a similar FAQ to clarify A Destiny to Meet in the opposite direction, and that’s clearly not the intent of that card even though your interpretation of “additional” would make that card worthless.
-
1 hour ago, Sleboda said:
The phrase is "additional supporting fighter."
It isn't just "additional fighter."
If there is no supporting fighter at all, then you can't have an additional one.
My reply two posts above yours (and three posts above this one) provides strong evidence that this is not a correct interpretation (unless you think A Destiny to Meet can’t be scored at all, I suppose, because you can’t gain “an additional 1 glory” without first gaining another glory from another card).
-
2 hours ago, Bandit-94 said:
More than 7? Wow :0
Put all seven goblins in the starting hexes, then put the squigs adjacent to the herder. That would be my guess. Maybe the three will move/activate as a unit somehow.
-
That’s a sweet conversion. If anyone would like to know more about how it was done, go here:
https://canyourollacrit.com/2018/09/20/warband-showcase-skink-starswarm/
-
1
-
-
Some cards are printed on the fighter card, as @Sleboda said, so they do not use up a gambit slot (formerly a "ploy slot"). For example, Averon's Fulmination spell is effectively a 2R/2H/1D ranged attack, which puts it on par with any uninspired Farstrider's ranged attack. At least one upgrade—the Averon-specific Corposant Staff—gives the fighter a spell action that can be used multiple times. (This particular spell is 75% likely to work and hands out Range +1 on a stick.)
I'm not afraid of 50/50 cards. Their effects are extremely powerful. If you'd rather pack a can't-miss card with a concrete effect, such as Trap or Illusory Fighter, I won't argue with your decision. But if you're avoiding these cards so you can pack ploys that give you an extra 15% to hit or decrease an enemy fighter's chances of hitting by 10%, you're wasting your card slots, in my opinion.
The token mechanic is a necessary shot in the arm for the Guard. It certainly opens more avenues for the Swarm, but it does so at the expense of going all-in on Skritch, which is a really nasty way to play skaven. I suspect most players figured out that using activations to return weaker fighters to the battlefield was a dubious decision, which meant that these warbands probably weren't playing as GW intended. This change will, at a minimum, make that play style more attractive.
As for the hypothetical Hungering Heroslayer scenario, you're worrying about the following:
- Opponent packs Heroslayer instead of another card.
- Opponent puts this 1-hammer card on a 2-wound model.
- Opponent charges ... Garrek? And pulls off a 13-out-of-36 chance to kill him.
- You kill Hungering in return, gaining back the glory you lost when Garrek died.
- Opponent spends an activation returning Hungering to the battlefield.
- You somehow fail to kill Hungering.
- Hungering pulls off another 13-in-36 chance and kills another fighter.
Sure, you might miss in step 4, in which case this rule change did nothing to change the situation. And your opponent might use a ploy card to return Hungering to the board in step 5, in which case you're down two fighters but 1 glory, which is a not-unusual situation against skaven. And sure, your opponent might dump Awakened Weapon into his fighter. But you get cards yourself (Quick Thinker comes to mind), and you're ultimately left worrying about a 13% chance of Hungering pulling off a double-Heroslayer against Reavers. (Against Champions, the odds of the double tap are just over 9%.)
Let's see it on the table first and then decide whether it's really all that. If the play style is inferior to "all Skritch, all the time," then it won't matter; if it's not any stronger, just different, that'll be fine, too.
-
On 9/21/2018 at 11:53 AM, Valenae said:
What is best board side for Magore? And why?
Great question! I'm going to assume you're asking for those times when you lose the roll and have to place the first board. In general, the answer is going to depend on the following factors, regardless of your warband:
- What is your opponent's (likely) strategy?
- How vulnerable is your strategy to board placement?
If you're playing Fiends, your own strategy is almost certainly going to be aggro, which is vulnerable to the following:
- Two boards matched up short side to short side (a.k.a. "the long board")
- Offset boards that minimize the number of friendly fighters you can get into battle in round 1
Spiteclaw's Swarm, Steelheart's Champions, and the Farstriders are more likely to go long; other aggro warbands are more likely to go with a strong offset. An opponent who wants to mix it up with you is a good bet to simply line up the long edges and start brawling.
So! In general, I think you need to analyze the following eight scenarios for each board, regardless of which warband you're playing:
- Offset strong to the top left corner
- Offset strong to the top right corner
- Offset strong to the bottom left corner
- Offset strong to the bottom right corner
- Long board placement to the left
- Long board placement to the right
- Full long edges to the top
- Full long edges to the bottom
As I mentioned earlier, certain warbands are likelier to aim for certain layouts than others, but stay on guard! I've played a lot of aggro builds and have gone for long board placement regularly because my opponent chose a board that created a very favorable position, because my warband had fighters and cards with multiple attacks, or both.
I'm having a hard time inserting images into this post, so here's my short take:
- The Fallen Statue is the best board for Fiends. Of the six boards currently available, it's the least vulnerable to long placement in either direction or to strong offsets. It might not be your preferred board if your opponent aligns the long edges, but it still won't hurt you much.
- The three boards with blocked hexes are the absolute worst boards, and you shouldn't choose them first. Of these, The Staircase is probably the least vulnerable to long placement, but it is extremely vulnerable to strong offsets to one particular corner. The other two are very vulnerable to long placement, and you won't be too happy with the worst offsets, either.
- The Crypt isn't a bad board, per se, but it's worse than the Fallen Statue against an opponent who might make you go long. At its worst, the Fallen Statue will allow you to get two of your fighters into enemy territory and two into no-man's land, but the Crypt will only let you get one into enemy territory, one into no-man's land, and two into the last row of complete hexes on your side of the board. The Crypt might have a slight edge when it comes to the worst offsets, but if so, that edge is very slight.
- The Arcane Contraption—you know, the lethal hex board with the blue energy balls on it!—is quite interesting. Because most of the hexes are toward the board's edges, it's actually one of the best boards against long play and strong offsets alike. (Against opponents who are trying to score Bloodless, you can even send Riptooth through a lethal hex in round 1 to stop an opponent who might be holding Bloodless.) If this board has a vulnerability, it's that the starting hexes are spread away from each other, so if your opponent is likely to align the long edges as much as possible, your fighters might end up left on their own little islands. Also, well ... it has lethal hexes! This isn't a concern for Ghartok, but it might spell trouble for the rest of your warband if you aren't careful.
So! There you have it. I almost always take The Fallen Statue whenever I place the first board with Reavers or Fiends; IMO, it's the least vulnerable board, which really limits any advantage your opponent can gain in return. I'm going to try out the Arcane Contraption board against some stall-heavy builds as well and see if it plays as well in practice as it does in theory.
Hope this helps!
-
1
-
@Desidus Thanks for the info! Just to be clear, upgrades do not count as gambits; only ploys and spells do.
-
3 hours ago, Easygrin said:
So... no nurgle no Bonesplitterz no Dark aelves no Slaanesh no deepkin no gor beastmen was hoping for epic posed Gor and a Minotaur
Season 3, perhaps?
-
34 minutes ago, Sadysaneto said:
Sylvaneth.
Wood Elves are still elves, I don’t care what GW calls them now ?
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, dillonjay21 said:
Super excited for all the revealed warbands. Especially the grots, troggoth + little buddies, and the barbarians.
Can someone explain the deal with the living rock and the living mushroom that the flying squig is perched on? I’m totally lost here.
-
4 minutes ago, ReynakZhen said:
Disappointed that their are no aelves next season. The warbands we ARE getting though, look awesome!
If that green warband of spindly people wasn’t elves, what was it?
-
New article is up. Includes a video!
-
Agree to disagree on plastic vs. painted in the upper left corner. This image is intended to help new players identify the model on the table. Bare plastic makes it clear. Privateer Press did the same thing with The Undercity, and I’m sure these two companies aren’t the only ones to have done so.
-
#AlwaysGoSecond
-
Varclav’s action is strong, but you’ll care when I play Great Concussion after his last activation ?
-
I'm going with three regular Tzaangor led by a Tzaangor Enlightened. Maybe GW will produce rules for Horrors, but I'm not sure this will the right warband.
-
@Anthony225 Good point regarding Alone in the Darkness. I’ve built objective decks without it, simply on the premise that actively working to prevent it allows me to deny 2 glory to nearly every opponent I play. Seems like a good idea for the Thorns, since they’ll have multiple ways to pull it off.
-
2 hours ago, zedatkinszed said:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/09/16/next-week-the-nightvault-opens/
I'm loving the new arcane hazards - they'll double as nice objective markers too
I love them as well, but I'm a little leery of putting items into lethal hexes, which the skull throne and tentacle pit are clearly designed for. I just know I'll keep forgetting that those hexes are not, in fact, blocked!
They look fantastic, though. I suspect they'll come unassembled and unpainted.
-
They don’t look like a hammer-and-shield warband to me. Also, that’s her uninspired side, and since 3 swords is more or less equivalent to 2 hammers, she’s still a better fighter than Garrek (-1 Move canceled by +1 range, +1 defense) and the Warden (+1 Move, +1 defense). Looks like she can’t spend an activation to activate two fighters at once, so Drifting Advance will likely end up in every deck.
-
Why would spells as upgrades have to be underpowered? They can be on par with, or just below, shadeglass weapons and still be very worthwhile upgrades. In fact, they wouldn’t be much different than cards that boost damage. (The fighters already have 1-damage spells on their cards, so 1-damage spells that also damage adjacent enemies would be fine as upgrades, so to speak.)
Anyway: None of us know, but none of us can wait to find out!
-
Regarding the artwork, I see a guy with some sort of glowing magic thing, possibly on a staff.
Regarding actions, this is easy: Nightvault can simply add “cast a spell” to the list of possible activations. This would mean that “Gambit Spell” and similar terms would be equivalent to “Action.”
-
Hm! Fair point that it could be an upgrade, even though the artwork looks likes a spell to me.
-
A coworker of mine pointed out that the magic card is almost certainly an upgrade:
1. It’s tucked under his fighter card, like an upgrade would be.
2. The warband has two glory.
3. One of those glory tokens has clearly been spent.
Regarding the staff symbol and the number 2, I’m going to guess that it marks the character as a wizard who rolls two dice for magic.
The Shadespire News and Rumour Thread
in Underworlds
Posted · Edited by Tutenkharnage
Typing on a phone is hard!
It says that if the blue would be taken out of action, flip the card over and replace the model with the brimstone instead. The brimstone side of the card says that if the fighter is taken out of action, flip the card over and keep the upgrades. (You would then follow the normal rules for taking the model out of action because the fighter’s rules say nothing to the contrary, so you would remove the model from the battlefield.)