Mark Williams
-
Posts
659 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Mark Williams
-
-
8 hours ago, Maturin said:
GW hasn't been doing a great job with female faces, that's a fact. But I think this is one is really ugly, that's just my point of view :). Lena Stormspire's face was also a pain for the eyes.
Still my personal taste, I think some old metal cast or wfb mini were better when it came to female faces. But that's just meI think the face is meant to be non European.
-
I agree with the point made that we got a slight bump to an overall pretty bad tome. I do think the water rose, and I’m sure happy about that. But yes it feels like they sorta nerfed everything that used to work, just enough so that we need to buy a bunch of new stuff if we want the good stuff. It feels like the marketing strategy is more transparent than ever here.
Don’t get me wrong though. I preordered everything. Haha. I can’t wait to get my mitts on some new dragons.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, lare2 said:
Almost as good as blood warriors.
-
47 minutes ago, Wraithwing said:
Do we have any predictions as to what Abilities each Stormhost will have?
Do we think they will remain the same?
Really torn on colour schemes for my Dominion Stormcast, so hoping rules will swing it for me.
Current choices are Hammers of Sigmar, Hallowed Knights and Celestial Vindicators.
I predict that the old ones are going away hard, and being replaced with weaker ones that often do little or nothing. Look at the Soulblight format and draw comparisons.
Hammers of sigmar might get a bonus for dragon units, like +1 to hit on the charge or something.
-
Looks like going forward, we won't get all the special rules on warscrolls in the boxes/instructions, just some base stats without the abilities. Which means I guess the warscrolls won't be downloadable from GW either.
-
2
-
-
For the battle tactic “Aggressive Expansion,” can you pick objectives that are on the border of your deployment zone?
-
3 minutes ago, PrimeElectrid said:
I dunno about that, try Gavriel, an Imperatant and 15 annihilators.
Ah I don't really have access to purchase/acquire that many annihilators yet. I'm in Oceania and everything has been locked down due to covid, so we never got any releases other than Dominion so far. But I will try that soon.
-
I've been playing Yndrasta twice a week for about a month. She's great and nearly oppressive in casual games, and dies almost immediately and pretty much does nothing in competitive games. It's the same old Stormcast problem - we're decent at the hobby store and meh in tournaments.
I've had a few games against weaker opponents where she just sorta tanked the entire table at one point or another.
I've also seen her shot/meleed down in a single turn quite easily.
As to her attacks - she's super swingy. She's good against light infantry and 5 wound characters, usually, but she can't handle much else, or at least she just gets bogged down in combat for multiple turns. If there were a way to boost her attacks, you might have something interesting to work with as a sort of risk assessment for opponents who are just barging across the table, but I haven't noticed anyone avoiding combat with her or worrying about her. They seem to consider her potential vs what she actually does to be an acceptable risk to just YOLOing into her.
That's my experiences. Take them with a grain of salt.
-
3
-
-
Yndrasta is the best character in a book of horrible characters. Depends on what you were expecting.
-
8 hours ago, mystycalchemy said:
I believe its the extra enhancements from Warlord/Command Entourage Core Battalions.
When I did a cursory check yesterday, I didn't see anything saying you could take Unique Enhancements multiple times, I also didn't see anything that says you couldn't take Unique Enhancements multiple times. So its very much a grey area until clarified what extra enhancements we can take with the Magnificent Core Battalion ability.
I just spent 20 minutes reading and re-reading these sections over and over.
The 3rd paragraph under Stormcast Mount Traits, which was deleted, had two qualifying statements:
1) It explained a method for getting more than 1 mount trait.
2) It explained that if you got more than one mount trait, they did not intend for you to stack more than one on a single hero.
I believe that the first qualifier was the one that they intended to replace with the new rules, and that the 2nd one was not intended to be erased by deleting that paragraph. Basically, it's an accidental "gaf" by GW, probably because they either made a mistake and didn't think about it, or because they felt that it was an obvious, implicit rule that didn't need stating.
That I'm aware of, there are no other enhancements that can be "stacked" in such a way. As I read through the rules, they account for the situation by qualifying that you can only have one of each, for each character/hero in your army. I suspect the reason that it isn't covered in the core rules is that there's no section whatsoever for mount traits at all (again, probably a mistake via poorly written rules).
Everything I'm looking at points to poorly written rules, probably overlooked on a technicality of deleting a paragraph while trying to address some other aspect of the rules and accidentally deleting something else.
I would also point to some other logic within this thread that just because a rule doesn't say whether or not you can do something, doesn't give you permission to do it. At the very BEST, it's an unknown that needs an answer from GW, and not permission to do it until someone says you can't.
In absence of an answer from GW, it should be a discussion between yourself and your opponent, or in the case of an event, the TO (or the body that makes up the TOs).
My belief, after reading everything, is that if GW were to FAQ this, they would say that each mount can only have 1 trait, and that they goofed by deleting that last sentence. I feel like this is gonna get FAQed real quick. If I were on a TO panel I wouldn't allow mount trait stacking based on the above reasoning.... I'd be surprised, and a bit sad, if some TOs did... I can't see any consistency in the other rules or the way enhancements work in general that would make an exception for just these like that, without explicitly stating it.
Edit: Just having an in depth discussion with a friend who I game with, we're thinking that the ability to take duplicate artefacts is also probably an unintended omission as well - seems like the Enhancements section in general was really poorly written...
Edit 2: Ah, I just saw they covered it in the Errata FAQ: 27.3.3 – Artefacts of Power Add: ‘An army cannot include duplicates of the same artefact of power.’
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, mystycalchemy said:
I believe its the extra enhancements from Warlord/Command Entourage Core Battalions.
When I did a cursory check yesterday, I didn't see anything saying you could take Unique Enhancements multiple times, I also didn't see anything that says you couldn't take Unique Enhancements multiple times. So its very much a grey area until clarified what extra enhancements we can take with the Magnificent Core Battalion ability.
Interesting. I'll have a couple reads back through them again today.
-
3 hours ago, jhamslam said:
Whats allowing people to take more than 1 mount trait on the same unit? i understand taking the same mount trait multiple times on different drakes but what exactly allows multiple traits on one stardrake. even according to the FAQ it says one of those HEROES can take A mount trait
I was going to bring this up today too. When I read the rules, I got the same thing out of them.
-
27 minutes ago, PrimeElectrid said:
That’s quite clearly a lot of judgement.
You know it’s possible to disagree with someone without calling them a WAAC rules lawyering power gamer, right? @PJetski is the only person who doesn’t come across as a ****** here.
That’s funny, I feel the exact opposite.
-
7
-
-
I agree with the interpretation that the FAQ is giving Evocators a choice of either their warscroll spell or one of the Invigoration spells - this accounting for the fact that their warscroll as written would only allow Empower and nothing else. It feels weird having to try to argue about it... every time I go to respond to one of these posts I end up deleting everything I wrote because I feel like I'm trying argue about whether or not water is wet with someone who is saying stuff like "what if you don't touch the water" or "what if the water is ice?" It's not that I couldn't hash out an argument for it, but at a certain point I feel like either the person I'm arguing with is having a laugh at me, or they are not worth arguing with... I can't tell which, but it's not worth it either way.
-
6
-
-
How do you make evocators cast two spells in one turn?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Champasaur said:
Has there been a time in AOS where a single faction got this much new stuff? Between Dominion, new battletome rules, and all of these amazing new dragon models, I can’t think of another faction update that has gotten this much. Also Kruleboyz.
Lumineth.
-
It’s because spellcheckers don’t recognise the word most likely. I’ve gone to type it in many times and it will just auto type something random.
I’ll say Battledome is my favourite so hat. Haha.
-
Played a few game this past week with the new allegiance ability and a selection of random units.
concerning liberators and sequitors at 4+ without rerolls. I feel like they die even faster now, and they are bad targets to spend cp on. I concur with what some others have said, that they are just sorta speed bumps to briefly protect better units.
First game with Yndrasta, she feels kinda broken with a 4+ ward save and healing from heroic recovery. She tanked so much.
Vindicators are pretty decent all rounders if they don’t get focused too quickly.
Not sure what to think of annihilators yet.
The smaller board size really changes the game. I’ve been “alpha struck” on turn 1 by every army I’ve faced so far.
The new allegiance ability feels meh. It’s not unwelcome but doesn’t feel like it does much.
Stormcast is still Stormcast.
-
2
-
1
-
-
27 minutes ago, Marcvs said:
I wonder why no full warscroll. have they produced and shipped boxes without them just because they would arrive on the shelves before the battletome?
I wonder if they are aiming to no longer give the rules out for free.
-
2
-
-
On 7/22/2021 at 9:34 AM, Abstract_duck said:
What FAQ states that? It seems quite relevant to a discussion in the sylvaneth forum a while back, in regards to the new wyldwoods and treelords
It’s in the core rules faq, I believe under Movement… I think. I posted the Q&A above in my original reply.
-
1
-
-
I just finished Yndrasta, hoping to play her this weekend and see how she does. Thought I would share.
-
15
-
-
3 hours ago, Domize said:
Quick question - does the new "9.2 Remaining Stationary" section in the Core Rules mean that units dropping down from Scions of the Storm don't count as remaining stationary? Or do they have to have been on board beforehand to 'remain stationary', and therefore did not move in the movement phase? Mainly curious because of units like the Vanguard Raptors and their Rapid Fire.
One of the new FAQ questions confirms that units that redeply don't count as moving. What you can or cannot do after redeployment will be covered in the ability text rather than the core rules (ie. most redployment or setups specify that you cannot move in your movement phase).
Q: Some abilities allow a unit to be set up ‘instead of making a normal move’. Does a unit set up with such an ability count as having moved? A: No, unless the ability specifically states otherwise.
-
3 hours ago, Juicy said:
Fair enough if you took 1 battalion you could get an extra mount trait.
Still your ignore the first paragraph where its telling you one hero can have a mount trait. We got nothing right now that tells says you can have more then one mount trait in any way. Also there is no where writen that 1 hero can have more then 1 mount trait. First paragraph explains it al. Im not sure why you read that differant then i do.Sometimes when a rule is vaguely written or it's some sort of paradoxical situation (ie. Longstrike Raptors shooting +6 in the hero phase because they haven't moved yet), some people will take the most beneficial interpretation of the rule and call it RAW because without a FAQ telling them they can't, the grey area gives them leeway to interpret it however they like.
In this situation, with a mount with multiple enhancements, I'd check to see if other armies with similar rules are doing the same thing, as I think that mount traits are pretty common across multiple books. If a lot of other armies are doing this, then maybe the game designers truly intended the way things are done to shift with the new edition.
I agree it seems strange to change the way a fundamental game mechanic works because of chopping up and adding extra rules etc... It seems FAR more likely that this is just a loophole that the designers overlooked. This is a case where it would be really helpful if the rules designers and FAQ writers had a faster turnaround or perhaps even an open forum for gamers to ask rules questions of them.
However..... the book isn't going to be valid in a month, and the argument isn't worth exhausting yourself over. Let people do potentially illegal things for a few weeks. Nothing with the old book matters anymore. If this type of vagueness lasts into the next battletome, by all means let's spam GW with FAQ questions and hope they address it.
-
2
-
-
Been using gotrek for tournaments for a year now. Always a good choice.
Stormcast Eternals 3.0 - There is no "a" in Vindictors
in Stormcast Eternals
Posted
Actually yeah, I do consider units and their supporting units, when used as part of a threat combo, to be a net sum of their points.