Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Athrawes

  1. What did the lists look like for both sides? And what were the missions?
  2. I feel like 2 of them have to be the Stormcast and Nighthaunt halves of the the Soul Wars sets, since that box is gone, and there is no other way to get some of those models currently. It's what they did with the aos 1 starter set, split into start collecting sets.
  3. If hero's arbitrarily don't count to you, how about psychic awakening for 40k? Eldar and Dark Eldar both got new units and new heroes, all without a new codex. Admech too. If you only accept AOS evidence, how about the new Daugters of khain units (hero, and unit) that got released 4 months before a battletome with the shadow and pain set and Warcry? Maybe Warcry doesnt count to you, so how about the new Slaanesh and Khorne units that got released with Wrath and Rapture (New fleshhounds and KaranaK, and infernal Enrapturess with new fiends) with no new battletome in sight? You could just own up to being wrong instead of making arbitrary distinctions about what does and doesn't count for your "GW doesn't operate like that" argument.
  4. Broken realms would kind of disagree with you though...
  5. Here you go. Others have posted similar date collected by lovely people like AOS Shorts. This is just January to June of this year, but if you look at his full spreadsheet of tournament results, it looks pretty similar. Only 2 lumineth lists placing first, and a handful of top 5 finishes over the course of a year. Hardly looks like an army breaking the meta. But go on @Benkei insult me more, and discredit my anecdotal experience that lumineth are not all powerful, by putting it down to me being bad. That's why I *GASP* called it anecdotal, and not hard data, which is however plentiful if you bother to look for it (see attached image). All you people seem to have is anecdotal evidence that lumineth are game breaking, despite others in this thread providing hard data from tournaments to the contrary, you ignore it and continue on or change your focus to "well they are still NPE." Finally when someone you disagree with provides their own anecdotal experiences to counter your claims, you mock and belittle them, and shout for them to provide data. Honestly a moderator needs to lock this down, or at least retitle it the "Lumineth Bashing Thread"
  6. No data, so personal attacks? Cool. When you use anecdotal information to back up your unsupported claims, it must be taken as gospel. But when I use anecdotal experience to contest your claim, you imply its invalid and choose instead to mock me to discredit it. I don't play competitively, but I like to win as much as the next guy. However as soon as someone like you stars blathering on about broken this, or cheese that, I can no longer win at this game. If I win game, playing an army that you claim is broken, then I dint win, the autopilot-powerhouse-army won for me. And If I happen to lose with that army, I REALLY lose, cause' I lost with an army that was supposed to be unbeatable. You're ruining the game. Please. Stop.
  7. I just had my teeth kicked in with Lumineth using 3rd edition points and rules against a Hedonites army using slaangor, and Fiends. But sure, lumineth are cheese. I disagreed when people were making these arguments against lumineth back in 2nd with no supporting data, and I disagree even more strongly now as we transition into third, where there is pretty much zero play experience from anyone. "Sentinels are soooo scary, because of feelings, not because they average 3 mortal wounds a turn if buffed up for 150 points, SOOO Broken" Maybe Lumineth will end up a true nightmare powerouse in 3rd edition. I could be totally wrong, but unlike many fear mongers on this board, I'm going to wait until there is actual data to back up that assertion. Until that time, anything else is just anecdotal noise.
  8. For those looking for a ray of hope and positivity. I played a 2500 point game yesterday of 3rd edition using the new points. Playing my Lumineth, I just got my ass handed to me by a Hedonites of Slaanesh army using fiends and slaangor. If that's not a ray of hope in these dark times, I don't know what is!
  9. Me too, I've played through 6 edition changes in 40k, 3 in WFB and the change to aos 2, and honestly I have never been so optimistic for a new edition. My Gitz, and Ogors are chomping at the bit to start poking and eating things this edition with all the crazy new changes. I hope the rest of the board can find their way to a similar eagerness soon, If your hobby makes you miserable, what is the point?
  10. sigh. I'm getting so tired of the irrational indignation and passive aggression from certain members of this board. Let me lay out a hypothetical for you. By the end of aos 2, there were arguably 6 or so top tier armies that were (generally speaking) winning tournaments and very competitive. Likewise there were about 5 or so, bottom of the pack armies that really struggled to compete at any level. The rest of the factions fell into the middle of the pack. Got it? Imagine then, that its 5 months from now, severl new battletome have been released and there have been a bevy of proper aos 3 tournaments. A meta has clearly developed. From this info, we can see that there are now 7 or 8 armies that appear regularly in the top three finishes of tournaments, and prove very competitive. In comparison there are only 1 or 2 armies that really struggle to compete. The rest of the armies again fall in the fat middle of competitive results. If you played one of the armies that still ended up in the that bottom portion of competitiveness, you might feel that the game is in a terrible state, but anyone honest with themselves would view the general state of the games, and spread of competitive armies as better than it was (in this hypothetical) at the end of the previous edition. No one can possibly knows if this will be the case. But likewise no one knows that it wont. You need patience to see how this will shake out. And freaking out the day of new points is just stirring up community outrage and generally spoiling what has the potential to be an exciting time for AOS fans. Have patience. I could be totally wrong, and this edition could be the least balanced ever. It doesn't look that way from this moment to me, but it really could be the case. So maybe try to control you indignity, have patience and maybe even acknowledge that you just cannot know for sure how this will shake out. Your kneejerk reaction to outrage, does not constitute proof of malfeasance on the part of GW.
  11. Patience because you and others here cannot possibly have played any meaningful number of games in 3rd edition using the new points. There have been no tournament, there is NO META. We have ideas about issues with the ruleset, but no proof. The idea that this position is apparently a controversial one, is however proof of how toxic the community is becoming.
  12. The difference being I'm not trying to claim a moral highground and paint only the other side of this discussion as "vicious and childish" I'm arguing for patience, but I am NOT trying to virtue signal the 'righteousness' of my position. I have no problem getting mud on myself, but loath the hypocrisy of people who sling mud, and then argue they themselves are stainless.
  13. I believe you called me galaxy brained? It's kind of hard to take the moral high ground when that person is slinging mud. I and others like me are trying to get people to cool off, have patience, and look at the recent news with some perspective before grabbing pitchforks. And the response is generally being mocked.
  14. And I'd say expecting games workshops attempt to balance their game to be flawless for every army (when they have never managed it before) is equally unrealistic. Having lived through many edition changes, this one looks very polished by comparison in terms of eyeballing balance, but all their armies have never been on an even footing at the launch of a new edition. Some people screeching like they have been purposely slighted by gamesworkshop for their choice of army is a tantrum. I'd argue that trying to organize a boycotting effort over something that just 5 years ago warhammer fans would have killed for (yearly points updates) because you're unsatisfied with them is the height of entitlement. Could things be better? OF COURSE. Could they be worse. YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT. On the whole, and playing several of the armies the "community" has declared have been nerfed into oblivion, This edition change seems to have a wider swath of armies within swinging distance of their peers, with some high and low outliers, but compared to earlier edition changes this looks to be in a better state. People online need to have more realistic expectations.
  15. A few people whining on internet forums and facebooks groups does not constitute any type of consensus. People I know personally who live a breathe AOS are giddy about how many of these changes might effect their games. I'm more excited for 3rd edition than I was for second. And I imagine that barring a vocal minority online, that is probably going to t be true most Age of Sigmar fans. Are there some things about 3rd I have questions about? Obviously. And I eagerly wait to start getting games in to test those concerns, and maybe even an FAQ to address them, but compared to past edition changes, I think this one has far more hits than misses, and that includes points changes. In short, I cannot wait to get my hands on 3rd edition and the GHB!
  16. A wizard can only choose to control a spell that they themselves cast. If that wizard dies, but the spell remains on the table, no one can control it and it is wild until dispelled. Each wizard can only choose to control 1 endless spell, and it must be one that they cast. If there are more endless spells on table than wizards that can control them, those spells are wild, and they you and your opponent alternate moving them when appropriate. Honestly, they lay it out very clearly in the new rules if you just want to give those a read. Free to download on the GW site.
  17. Only the wizard that summoned an endless spell can control it, and he may only control 1 if he summoned more than 1.
  18. How do you know what is or isn't overcosted without the new GHB? Point costs for every army are changing...
  19. They do specify that an unmodified casting roll of 2 is a miscast, and spell fails to cast. So modifiers don't matter there.
  20. So having read through the 3.0 core rules, there are some cool changes that effect Lumineth. - They changed the section about 'most wizards" having access to Mystic shield and Arcane Bolt, to "All Wizards know the arcane bolt and Mystic Shield Spells" So our Vanari wizard champions can finally have access to both arcane bolt and Mystic shield. Pretty awesome since mystic shield is now back to being a +1 to save, not reroll 1's. Miscasts are back! An unmodified casting roll of 2 is a miscast, and your wizards spell automatically fails, they then suffer d3 mortal wounds. Additionally, for multicasters, if you miscast a spell, you cannot cast any further spells with that wizard in that hero phase. Something else super powerful The "Magnificent" bonus for using certain core battalions allows you to choose several additional enhancements for your army, artefacts, spells, triumphs. The 'Spell lores Enhancement' is of particular interest to us, in that it allows every wizard in your army to learn 1 additional spell choosing from any spell lores they have access too. I first thought this must be my own misreading, as it seemed super powerful compared to the artefact enhancement only giving 1 additional artefact for 1 hero. But in the core rules, on the side bar, they clarify it by underling "allows every Wizard to know" 1 more spell from a spell lore.
  21. The new Path to Glory system seems incredible. I mean, to the point where I cannot imagine wanting my games of AOS to be anything else besides continuing an ongoing (or starting a new) Path to Glory campaign.
  22. You're exaggerating. If your are 3" away from an enemy unit, the odds of them moving back 6" are 1 in 6, meaning at WORST you end up in the same spot as if you held back 9.5" Youre complaint seems to boil down to "I want everything I do to be successful or it leads to feeling bad" And that doesn't sound like a good way to design a tactical wargame.
  23. Or the enemy can be tactical with their charge distances and stay 9.5" away, thereby deny the shooting army a chance to unleash hell or redeploy. Kinda hard to argue this will lead to feel bad moments, when you have a pretty clear tactical incentive for both getting close, or staying back.
  24. Both unleash hell, and redeploy can only be used if an enemy unit is within 9" so (like the article mentions) there is now a big tactical decision about whether you want to get danger close for your charge, and risk the enemy redeploying or shooting you, or you hold back distance. I love this! anything that adds new layers of tactical choices makes the game richer in my book.
  • Create New...