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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Sleboda

  1. Is anyone else having difficulty understanding the new person, other than the double barrelled general negativity, I mean?
  2. In old WFB, huge heroes were problematic. In AoS, they aren't unless you are just playing "kill 'em all" like how WFB used to be. With the heavy emphasis on objectives in AoS, you can have these amazing heroes on the table and still know the game is won or lost based on the battleplan's victory conditions. It's one of the best things and AoS, in my opinion.
  3. 3rd. Main rules + Warhammer Armies book + Realm of Chaos books.
  4. Sure! Good thing Mortek are not skeletons, but rather crafted beings, forged by Nagash and infused with the souls of ancient warriors, imbued with hatred for the living and an unwavering loyalty that comes from knowing the secrets of eternity! But yes, absolutely Stormcast will smash a skeleton. Agreed.
  5. The last time we had "legal" full character customization, it absolutely did wreck fair play. I had a Bloodthirster that had an axe that contained another Bloodthirster who could summon 80 skeletons for free every turn. Or something. So fair. So fun. Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of this stuff for narrative games, but for matched play? Nah. Edit: I I fondly recall the ability to add weapon options, armor options, mount options and so on the basic line-characters, to pay to upgrade units with the three command models individually, and to add one model at a time to units. It even factored in that a mounted model paid more for stuff than a foot model because the mounted model was more able to apply its upgraded abilities due to higher movement. It did the same for different level heroes (for example, a level 10 hero paid more for a great sword because he had better stats than a level 5 hero). I really do miss 3rd edition WFB with all that plus simple & complex maneuvers, turtle formations, etc. : wipes away wistful tear: 🙂
  6. @JPjr Sounds about right. I had all three. Here's a data point for ya: The Skeleton Army boxed set, which contained something like 8 horsemen, a chariot, and maybe 24 (more?) infantry sold for, get this, $19.99. I think. Crazy days. I still have about 20 of the chariots, maybe 200 infantry, and dozens of horsemen all on sprues. I use them to decorate scenery now. 🙂
  7. @JPjr Well done! I bought that thing back in the early days of my hobby and it always stuck with me. I still use several of the models, but the box is buried in storage somewhere. Thanks for the effort.
  8. If you have access to it, read the back of the old Skeketon War Machines boxed set (or was it the Nightmare Legion?). It has a little story that explains how they talk.
  9. It was Warhammer, not AoS, and at that time 4 x 8 was standard. Heck, I actually even still have one of the old Games Day tables from that era in my house, and sure enough, it's 4 x 8.
  10. And that would be a crime, now wouldn't it? /s Aren't we always, by default, playing for the fun of it? I'll never get the argument that there is fun and then there is winning in Warhammer. It's a game. Practically by definition we play it for fun. Or, to put it another way, if you find you do not enjoy a given activity, such as Warhammer, it's a little bit crazy to keep doing it. I get that when you play at tournaments it makes sense to take the list that you believe gives you the greatest chance to take the trophy, but that's really such a narrow part of the hobby overall. I think there is plenty of room to include the other units when not in the tournament environment.
  11. Divide them into castes. Termitians of the Wood Devourer (Earth elementals) M'skeetosians of the Swarming Suckers (Air) ToeBiterians of the Fluid Motion (Water) Skortchenian Antzerms of the Flaming Pinch (Fire) I'm totally kidding. I think this would be a goofy idea, but if GW can have a lizardman named tic tac toe, anything is possible.
  12. I realize it's accurate to call those "older" but it still makes me chuckle since I recall a time when there would be 4, 6, or even 8 years or so between updates to army books. 🙂
  13. I can't claim to know current stuff, but back when I tested, we were instructed to play 2000 points, 4x8 table, pitched battle for the vast majority of our games. We were to report our lists and the result, plus highlights if possible. We were actively discouraged from sharing our thoughts on the clarity of rules.
  14. Not even boxes of models or other hobby supplies? That's good to hear!
  15. Agreed, though just a point or two: 1. I hate "participation culture" in general and support rewarding actual performance. Prizes in a competition where the rules are clear and well regulated I'm ok with. From spelling to track & field, yes, award cash to the winners. Unfortunately, games of toy soldiers are never tightly written and accurately judged enough to support the clear recognition of who was best. 2. Subjective cartegories based on artistic expressions are tough to get behind as well (and this coming from a winter of a significant number of hobby prizes), but due to the inherent nature of art, I think the vast majority of participants accept that the "best" award for art is not a direct reflection on only the artist, which makes "losing" easier to take. 3. Any subjective award that can be gamed by, say, a club to give Best X to one of its members should be eliminated. 4. Lastly, I still say that cash or cash equivalents at hobby tournaments are a bad idea. Go with trophies in all cases.
  16. This whole discussion around playtesters and the seriousness of tournament competitive balance reminds me of one thing above all others: I really, strongly, totally believe that the worst thing for this hobby is the availability of prizes, either cash or cash value, at events.
  17. There is a game within the game. Yes, indeed. Or, more accurately, there is a "game about the game" but that is not the same as the current way the game is played, and it's certainly not the same thing as the way people are playing the game. For example, meta data refers to data about the data. Like if you wanted to say that 10% of the classifications of color of dice are variations on red. That would be data (10% of the things) about the data (the groupings of colors of dice). Simply saying that a lot of people are using shooting heavy lists is not a game about the game. It refers to the environment in a local group. That's not, at all, a meta game, and certainly not a "meta" (which is a prefix for other words). Edit: To add to it for clarity - If we made a game, an actual game and not just an analysis (oh look, another extant real word and not just a prefix), about the game, we could call that metagaming when we played it. Like, if we had a game where you accumulated information about an army by turning over cards and rolling dice, and used the results to allow the winner of that game to change the rules of a game of AoS, we could call the first game "an AoS metagame." TL;DR -Meta is a prefix, not a word. -Even if it were legitimate shorthand for "metagame" it would still be an incorrect usage of the term. Edit edit: In anticipation - If you refer to an army as an "auto," you are wrong. You may mean "automobile" when you shorten it to "auto." The full word (automobile) is wrong as the word to describe an army, and the short version (auto) is still not a word.
  18. I would just like to call out the ---fact--- that there is no such thing as a meta. Just like there is no such thing as a pre, or a circum, or an omni. We have words and phrases for what some people mistakenly call a meta. Environment. Popular style. And so on. We don't need to support the dumbing down of communication by accepting the use of a prefix as a word on its own, especially when there are already ways to say it correctly. I will now kindly ask everyone to get off my lawn.
  19. This is the sort of comment that had me start this thread, so thanks for saying that and giving me the nudge to encourage it to get more focused. See, I just don't get that. In my recent game vs. Gitz, it was not mortal wounds or shooting that got me. It was superior movement and being vastly outclassed in combat. Manglers and hoppers dominated in both areas, wiping out droves of Mortek easily, giving my opponent control of objectives they I simply could not counter. This was why I ended up thinking "This is the army people were concerned about???" So, to get us a bit more on track, I'll ask again - What is real, on-table experience showing us? What is the reality of the situation as opposed to the read-the-book-theory of it?
  20. Which would still work for the power fist with dripping wetness on the fingers. Cuz, um, well ... you know. 😈 Bring it on!
  21. I left out your #1 because I pretty much touched on it earlier, but I wanted to say a thing on each of these. First, the #3. Yep. A very good friend of mine is a current tester and wow does he ever do a great job of keeping things to himself. I don't really poke him for info since I recall what it was like when I was a tester, so I can sympathize with how he must feel sometimes. It really is a bummer. I don't think this is a tournament disadvantage, but I guess I just wanted to take the opportunity to praise the integrity of the current crop of testers. For #2 - yeah, it stinks. I know it's come up in other threads, but it's worth mentioning here. The US is big. We don't have 20 tournaments running each weekend, all 5 minutes from our houses (exaggerating, I know, but still), and the concept of a club or store league is mostly a fantasy. Also, our friend group is likely to have its members living an hour or more apart, and most of us don't have domestic partners who also play (I'm lucky as a nurgling in grandfather's garden to have @TwiceIfILikeIt as the love of my life and constant hobby partner/nemesis so I can game pretty much at will now, but that was not the case before). A lot of us are lucky to get in one gaming day every month or two. Having to trade in that day with a bunch of buddies for a focused NDA-fuelled "working" hobby day is a genuine bummer.
  22. I may have to think that through a but, dang that seems brilliant. It gives folks time to learn the new army and gives GW time to fix things. Plus it helps painters. I like it!
  23. Remove "competitive" and add "by the player" to the end and I'm with you.
  • Create New...