Sleboda
-
Posts
3,381 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
22
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Sleboda
-
-
6 hours ago, novakai said:
don't know about that, the last article for Lotr implied they have a lot of long term plans for the game still yet like refreshing old models
Bummer.
Every time a LotR sculpt gets made, a Stormcast doesn't get his wings.
-
4
-
-
5 hours ago, Grimrock said:
Yeah this is what I've seen so far. Screens of 10 32mm base models have simply been dropped for 5 man units of cavalry turned sideways. Combat units running in triangles to maximize attacks. Large units mostly skipped in list building in favor of mass MSU to avoid loss of efficiency. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it absolutely doesn't look like the rank and file armies from the old WHFB days.
I'll ask be taking decent sized units and "ranking" them up.
🤷♂️
-
2 hours ago, Dreddships said:
Here is to hoping GW manages to use some of them if they ever decide to build out the Middle Earth range.
I suspect we're finally, mercifully, nearing the end of GW's Lord of the Rings license. I get that they almost had to take it on to prevent another manufacturer from capitalizing on the excitement of the films all those years ago, but it makes no sense to me to have two fantasy skirmish games competing for the same dollars with the same company. And now we get Kruleboyz, which feel to me like "hey, some of you found this hobby through our LotR game, and with that going away, we think you'll stay with us by getting these models that reeeeally look like the models from our LotR range."
-
1
-
2
-
-
10 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
It's just one of the two most contentious new rules, along with coherency.
FWIW, I really like the coherency rule. It's going to make units look more like actual regiments instead of strung out collections of rabble. Anything that encourages AoS forces to look more like armies is a plus in my book.
At this point, I'm assuming the recent 28mm bases will soon replace 25mm bases, forcing another rebasing wave and eliminating line formations for even the units that used to be on 25mm bases.
-
7 minutes ago, Vaporlocke said:
So do people not screen their shooting units where you play or what?
Sure they do, but that sort of speaks to my point of using tactics and the fun of figuring out the puzzle.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Reinholt said:
Unleash Hell would be acceptable in a world where shooting was underpowered and/or you couldn't take shooting units that had insane punch at scale, but that's not the gamespace we are in.
Couldn't we just use, man what's the name for it again, um, tactics - yes, tactics! - to handle it?
In all seriousness, you can do it once per turn. So send in sacrificial units first, tie up the nasty shooters, turn engage with the good stuff.
I know it's not a sure fire thing, and that not all armies have throw away troops, but many do, and those that don't can look for other answers.
The game presents us with challenges and puzzles, and part of the fun is answering them and figuring out solutions.
-
4
-
-
2 hours ago, KingBrodd said:
https://spikeybits.com/2021/06/rumors-first-4-battletomes-coming-to-aos-3-0.html
Ive heard Spikeybits is the Buzzfeed of Wargaming so this may mean nothing
Yeah, they also tend to lean toward negative commentary and use click bait to get traffic. Not as bad as the cringeworthy Bell of Lost Importance, but still not exactly a friendly site for fans.
-
Were the WQ ones ever actually in AoS?
-
16 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:
Constantly legending stuff
Have the done this to anything from AoS, or just older Warhammer Fantasy armies?
-
22 hours ago, Gailon said:
I suspect the playtesters may be doing too much of playing the game as intended, rather than doing everything they can to power game it and figure out how to win.
FWIW, when I was a playtester way back in old Warhammer days, we worked hard as heck to abuse the rules and find cracks.
Also, I know a few of the current testers, and these guys are not scrubs. They know how to break a system, and I'm willing to bet (true to their NDAs, they tell me nothing) they try like the dickens to do so.
-
4
-
-
On 6/27/2021 at 11:59 AM, Baron Klatz said:
, dropped 3.0 at least a year too early
This, combined with the blazing speed at which Battletomes are being replaced by newer versions over all in AoS, would be the reason for any hesitation I may have had. I mean, really, essentially junking books only a few years after selling them (digital or physical) is not great for consumer confidence.
That said, I did opt to jump in and get the new stuff. I like AoS and this is the new version, so I'm in. I'll continue to watch for how quickly books get replaced (and likely will greatly reduce the number of warscroll cards and limited edition Battletomes I buy), but if the product stays high quality, I'll keep getting it.
I happen to think that the reason the box hasn't sold out it's pretty simple - they made enough.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Boar said:
Why abilities such as this exist at all is very simple, adding reaction abilities was one of main goals in designing this edition.
Agreed. I'm really looking forward to using this vital, key design element with my Bonereapers.
Oh. Wait.
-
3 hours ago, HollowHills said:
Also I am starting to think whitefang is the GW PR department
Orrrrr ... just someone who really, really gets off on attention.
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Chikout said:
My feeling about the battletomes
Thank you for accurately calling them battletomes.
Edit: To avoid confusion - I hate, hate, hate when people call the book a Codex. That's 40K. AoS has Battletomes.
If folks want a generic, use "book."
I was just commending you for your accuracy.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Sception said:
You can use them, they just don't gain the stalliarch keyword, and thus don't benefit from the subfaction traits.
Ah. Got it. Thanks. I can deal with that.
Guess it's been a while!
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, EccentricCircle said:
What do people like about battle reports?
Assuming the hosts don't put me off with bad attitudes, rules mistakes, or assumptions that every viewer is a long-term player, I like having them on in the background when I hobby.
I can pick up a new tactic or idea here and there, learn an application of a rule I didn't know, or just get inspired to paint more terrain.
That's about it for me.
If the GW versions lean into the teaching of rules more than the indies do, I'll pay much, much closer attention.
-
2
-
-
If they don't take a new Warclans book as an opportunity to release Foot of Gork as an endless spell, they're nuts.
That spell surely seems like the original endless spell to me.
I want a giant, glowing, disembodied foot floating around on my tables!
-
8
-
2
-
-
I'm already a 40K app subscriber, and new models are cool, so I'm pretty much in automatically at this price. If they increase much more, not so much.
A few key factors for me:
- The painting videos must end the "lies" (exaggerating/tongue in cheek) of the paint guides in books, in articles, and on boxes. I mean, really, listing a few colors and following the methods of the underpants gnomes just doesn't cut it. I want hyper-detailed, multiple camera, no-excuses-or-short-cuts videos. That red on that guy is no freakin' way just "mephiston, wash crimson, edge orange." It's 17 layers, several techniques, drying times, brush sizes, etc. Give me the real story. I'm an accomplished painter (losing my skills as I age, but won my share of awards and got published enough in my younger days), but I've always believed that there is more to learn. Teach me.
- Battle reports must offer more than YouTubers in terms of not only production quality and listenability of on screen talent (for example, don't use slang and don't use abbreviations like "CP" without establishing what that means first, ala AP style - each viewer could be new to the hobby!), but also in terms of accurate application if rules. Further, they have got to use them to teach the rules. Each game could take a rule or two to highlight. As it's played, have breakouts with highly detailed explanations of why a choice was made based on the rules, and how that rule works. In other words, get the rules right and teach players to do so as well.
- Lastly, "access" to old lore and magazines. If "access" means I can pay more on top of my subscription for these things, hard pass. I'm not buying the equivalent of a Personal Seat License for products that don't have scarcity.
-
9
-
-
2 hours ago, Sception said:
My only real complaint is the forced praetorians keyword. If they had to be legion locked that's the best one, but I would have preferred an open subfaction approach like the vamp warband got.
******. I didn't notice that.
Showing my long gap between games here, but does that mean I can't use them in Stalliarch armies at all?
-
On 6/23/2021 at 3:56 PM, Deepkin said:
I mean no offense to anyone in this situation, but do you perhaps work for GW or something?
Asking because you consistently shill pretty hard for them, which is understandable if they pay you to do so.
I guess you don't read many of my posts (understandable! Lol.).
Then again, you say I consistently shill for them, so I guess that implies you do read them?
Anyway, no, I no longer work for them. I did for almost 12 years back in the 90's and early 2000's, but that ended somewhat bitterly. It took me a while to get over that. I also was a playtester back in 6th (7th?), even got my name in the book and several Army Books. That ended, too, much to my chagrin.
If there's one thing I do consistently when talking about GW it's present a fair view (edit: I will acknowledge that some emotion - good and bad - creeps in now and then). Even beyond GW, I've always believed in listening to alternate views, seeing other perspectives, etc. Sure, I have some nigh-unshakable views (NMM has almost zero place in painting 3D objects, for example), but there's an idea I pretty much live by:
"Have an opinion on everything. Be prepared to change it when persuaded by new info, but start with an opinion on everything."
Often my views on GW are supportive. This is due in part to my time there, but it's more due to understanding marketing, believing in IP and other businesses rights, hating piracy in all its forms, and understanding that they sell a hobby as opposed to food, clothing, or shelter.
I do have my (often voiced) criticisms of them, including a number of pricing and product decisions. In fact, I've had temp bans and warning points here, likely due in part to being aggressively critical of GW.
And that brings me to the last point. The rules of this forum very heavily lean into presenting positive takes on the hobby, and since we choose to participate in a private forum knowing these rules going in, I try to operate within that spirit.
-
16
-
2
-
-
20 hours ago, Soolong said:
Paper books use more resources then digital ever will, it's just an excuse to limit (badly) piracy. they can do both physical and digital, the books are designed on computers 🙄
I definitely support offering both. I know that just for me, I'd likely be out of the hobby if I could not get physical books. Screens have far, far too many issues compared to books for me.
But I get that some folks want digital options.
-
1
-
-
I just read the warscroll for Mir Kainan. I don't normally include Underworlds warbands in my AoS armies, but he really seems like a great addition.
Is it just me?
Has anyone tried him out?
-
29 minutes ago, Soolong said:
So no digital battletomes going forward then if the new aos app is aping the w40k one. GW need to understand that some people can't read the current battletomes because they are to big and heavy.
I mean no offense to anyone in that situation with this take:
While inclusion is always appreciated, and looking out for others is a laudable societal trait, it makes very little business sense to choose a path that tries to accommodate what is assuredly a miniscule segment of your potential customer base at the expense of a course that would generate what that business believes to be significant income from the vast majority of the customer base.
We see this all the time in society, both in terms of business and just regular social interaction. Even in medicine.
Not to make this too much of a downer, but my grandfather, a decorated part of the Greatest Generation, a conservation officer, business owner, and all around loving, intelligent, and kind man died from an extremely rare brain disease. There is almost no research done into combatting this disease because it is so rare and resources are limited - resources that go into curing ailments that aflict many, many more people. It tore me up that he died from this ... but the medical community was and is right to not work on the disease that killed him.
To put it in more geek-centric terms, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
GW is right, and indeed has a legal responsibility to its shareholders, to focus on the majority with their plans rather than hamper those plans to accommodate just a few.
-
3
-
3
-
-
45 minutes ago, Dreddships said:
With the very classic WFB Greenskin inspiration, I could see something akin to the Wyvern for Kruelboyz.
Extend the jaw and it's an alligator too
I still have that guy on my "up next" painting bench, where he's been for at least 10 years. At least he's basecoated!
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted · Edited by Sleboda
Not literally Stormcast, no.
Resources are finite. People, time, money, and so on. I know that plenty of folks like the LotR stuff from GW. I don't hate it or anything, nor do I think those who love it are somehow wrong to do so. I just think that the resources of GW could make more stuff I like if they didn't get used on LotR. Purely a personal want, not a judgment of the views of others. So, for me, news that more LotR may be coming is a disappointment.
I also want Gotrek to just go away already. Not a popular opinion, sure, but it is the one I hold.