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

paul7926

Members
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

49 Lord Celestant

About paul7926

  • Rank
    Prosecutor

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. paul7926

    Your five year plan for AoS

    To be honest I think that GW are doing a good job recently. I've had to actually stop trying to play 'everything' because I can't keep up. I don't have a grand plan but I really think the priority should be: 1) Getting everything a current battle tome with priority to those who don't even have one. Even if that means a few of the things that have been separated are rejoined for now. They can be separated again in the future if they get a major release of models and can stand on their own with enough choice. 2) Figure out some way of making a one-stop place for all rules. I don't know how but with rules all over the place and now WD looking like it will have monthly updates or additional rules it needs to happen to make the game more accessible to newer and casual players. Maybe have an online resource for quick updating funded by a reasonable single purchase and even a small subscription with maybe a print-on-demand (at cost) for those like me who prefer paper to electronic. There are tons of issues here and I don't have the answer but something needs to be done. 3) Do a proper skirmish game. The latest incarnation from WD is fine for now but it could do with a bit more love. I don't expect them to go too far because Warhammer Underworlds is their low model count competitive game for AoS so going full 'kill team' means that they would have 2 products aimed at the same demographic. They need something to capture the newer or really casual player leaving Underworlds and 'full fat' AoS as the tournament options I think. 4) Reduce the AoS competitive points cost from 2000 down a little. I personally think that it's currently a little high which means that there are fewer real hard choices to make in list building. I'm not sure what the best points level is but I do feel like 2k was used because it's always been 2k and the first few fan made points systems just went along with it. Although this is personal opinion and I'm highly likely to be wrong on this one.
  2. paul7926

    Low Points Games...Who's Playing Them?

    Interesting topic. I came here to see what the current feeling for 1k point games was because that's the sort of size game I want to play. My restrictions are basically time and transportation. I need to be able to get the game played reasonably quickly as my only real option is playing after work. I need not to have to transport around multiple crates of models as it will all have to go to work with me and the logistics of it not all fitting in one bag are just too much hassle. I was toying with the idea of dropping AoS and just playing Underworld because of the speed and the fact that you only need a few figures and a deck of cards. As much as I love that game it's just not the same as playing a fantasy war game. I'm taking from the responses to this thread that the game still works well enough at 1k. I accept that I'm not going to get to play my Maw-Krusher or Skarbrand but that's OK if the alternative is never finishing a game in time or just not playing because of the logistics of getting everything there.
  3. paul7926

    Combating the Dreaded Hobby ADHD

    I'm very guilty of this problem and I don't have any answers sorry. I do think that we gamers, as a group, don't help each other either. I find my local group constantly swapping between the latest 'new' thing not just within the confines of GW but all the other games systems out there. They have more hobby time (and disposable money) than me so I'm constantly on the trailing edge and nothing gets finished before they have moved away onto something new. All my GW projects have stalled completely because they are playing other systems and I don't have the motivation any more. I've managed to stop chasing the systems they play and have even brutally cut down my different GW systems but all that has really achieved is me slowly slipping out of the hobby completely (again). I think my only way forward is to just concentrate on the smaller skirmish sized things like Underworld and possibly Kill team. Either that or just redefine what the hobby means to me and get that fully painted Ironjaws army I always wanted despite knowing I'll almost never use it.
  4. I actually really like the comparison to the stock market. I think there is a definite place for that sort of thinking to be used for balance purposes. No matter how complex and accurate the points calculator is (either fan made or GW) that is just a starting point. A look over tournament lists could be used as the 'market force' and small adjustments made to a units 'cost' to bring it more in line with it's current perceived 'value' the players have assigned to it. So if everyone uses unit X then over time it's points just keep increasing until it's no longer the obvious and only real choice. It would need people to embrace the idea of a much more fluid points system. The biggest hurdles to that, publications being wrong soon after printing for example, we already have and the GHB already handles a yearly re-balancing effort. If the points cost was driven by actual tournament usage then, if done correctly, we end up with a self balancing system.
  5. paul7926

    New Podcast! Comedians talk Sigmar!

    PSA : new episode is out. Go get your Painty Men fix folks. EDIT: Beaten to it but hey, listen to it again, you will still laugh in all the same places.
  6. paul7926

    Starting an Underworlds League

    The 'seasonal' decision is a big one and I don't have an answer either. One thing that I did think about however came from my old MTG days. Yes the barrier to entry is quite big for a new player who only really wants to play a season 1 warband but then if you have a core community of a few guys/gals with everything then might it be possible for them to loan some of the cards they are not using in their warbands to help out the newer people? You have to guard against peoples cards going missing but it worked well enough when I played MTG. New people would borrow cards from the 'old hands' and we simply just kept a little book of who had lent who what. A quick reminder at the end of the night to 'return anything you borrowed' was usually enough to ensure everything got back to the owners. I'm not up enough on competitive Underworlds to know if there are enough 'spare' cards that are viable to loan out or if everyone is using the same things so they are never 'spare' because unlike MTG you don't end up with that many multiples of things.
  7. paul7926

    Organised play - bans and restrictions

    Any competitive game will need either a banned/restricted list or rules amendments as more and more things are released for it. Otherwise it will slowly degenerate into a single 'best' list and one or two other lists that come close to beating it. Just the way it is I'm afraid. Having said that if you want to play for fun against your friends then there is no need for you to enforce it. Play the game the way you want to and enjoy yourselves.
  8. paul7926

    Can we trust "fan" sites and channels?

    Is not the onus on the consumer of the review to decide for themselves how accurate that reviewer is? What you (the OP) are talking about has been happening for years in every walk of life. The 'free meal' for directors and salesmen to discuss a big contract for example. I don't understand at what point people started to believe everything they hear, see or read without any sort of fact or basic sanity checking on their part. Social media probably has a lot of the blame but even reading a paper (old technology) or watching the news (slightly more modern technology) you will see a definite bias from different organisations on what they present and how they spin it. If the reviewer has been going for a while then simply get their review of a product you own. If their review is in line with your own personal experience then you are more able to 'trust' that what they say about the new product. If nothing else you will be listening to someone who has a similar set of tastes and biases as you do. If you disagree about their review of the old product then chances are you should not be influenced by their review of the current one. I know there are reviewers out there that I pay no attention to whatsoever. It's probably not because they have a hidden agenda about being falsely positive. I just find that the things that matter to them don't align with the things that matter to me or alternatively they are so 'fan' oriented that anything and everything is always perfect.
  9. paul7926

    Most sporting opponent......

    I'm against these sort of soft scores because of all the things mentioned above. When handing out my votes for 'best sport' I try not to let the result of the game bother me. I've been totally destroyed by people I'd happily play again and beaten people who, quite frankly, I've no interest in ever playing again. It's still not very 'fair' because as we encounter people in life there are naturally some that we get on with more than others. Those will get my votes but it doesn't mean people who didn't were not nice people. I'm also in the camp that thinks if a person is being a bad sport then just not voting for them is not good enough. Whatever the problem is it should be mentioned to the tournament organiser. They can then take any appropriate action. If they get a comment about a person from only one of their opponents then maybe best to do nothing but if all 5 of someones opponents feel strongly enough to make a comment then perhaps they should inform that player. It is possible that a person does something without necessarily knowing it upsets their opponent and if only they knew they could and would be happy to change. Silly example but I remember years ago upsetting someone because they wanted a 'take-back' and I politely refused. I come from a scene where we don't do it but they came from a club where it was the norm. Neither of us were acting outside of our normal accepted routine but it left him feeling unhappy because he felt like he was being cheated. If you want to encourage 'best sportsperson' or 'best painted army' or even 'best dressed player' then by all means do it but understand that they are subjective measures and don't combine them with game results. Winning any of those would of course be nice but for those that don't win it doesn't necessarily mean they are doing something wrong. I think as long as you are polite, know the rules, engage in the game and try to have fun that is all most people want from an opponent. I think someone trying to 'win' the best sportsman title by running through a checklist of 'say nice things about their army - check', 'apologise for rolling well - check', 'commiserate when they roll badly - check', might actually not come across as genuine and therefore actually harm their chances rather than increase them.
  10. I'm assuming they would be Mo, Curly and Larry (probably way too old a reference for a vast majority of the forum)
  11. Since starting this thread I'e been doing some thinking and rationalised a lot of things. I've promised three guys I game with everything I have for three systems they play but I no longer have the time and focus for. They are happy with free toys and if I ever do want to play those systems again I get to 'borrow back' enough stuff to give them a game. I've mothballed 5 other systems where I don't really want to part with my stuff but I've not used it in ages. If the need to play those systems strikes I have enough to play I just need to get it out of storage in the garage. I'll concentrate my gaming for the moment on two different systems. AoS and 40K. For AoS I have over 2000 points of Khorne that I got mostly second hand so I don't need to buy anything there and it's all unpainted so I have that to do. I have 1000 points of Ironjawz that are also unpainted which I'll probably use more than my Khorne unless I just have to play larger games. So there are a few IJ things I could buy but don't need to just yet. I'm just getting into 40K and slowly building up models via the Warhammer 40000 : Conquest subscription. As I'm already committed to that it will give me a slow grow way of building a Death Guard army. The plan is actually to be painting it as it arrives so when I'm ready to play that I'll at least have one system that is not all unpainted models! I figure that by having less to buy and keep up with I'll actually be able to dedicating some precious time to painting and actually playing those systems enough to enjoy them and actually make some progress on finishing things.
  12. Lots of ideas here and I can see there is a general split between those wanting Destruction to have more of a grand plan and take part in the main story lines and those that are happy with the idea of being a pure force of nature that nobody can deal with precisely because they don't have a grand plan and can't be bargained with. For my money I'm happy either way as long as what we get is fleshed out with more story line and characters and we lose the comedy element that got a little too much for my personal taste over the last 20 odd years. I don't mean that it all has to be ultra serious and dark just dial it back a bit (To be fair they have done that with Ironjawz so there is hope). @Yoshiya That sir is something I'd buy to read.
  13. The great Waaaagh is the more traditional route to go and is a perfectly viable one if done correctly. I disagree a little with your assumption that Orc players like the current lore for two reasons. I don't really think there is any current lore and secondly I play (and love Orcs) more because it's a fantasy setting and I don't want to be playing a human army rather than actually liking the Comedy and Random direction that they have taken over the years. However those are personal reasons so I'm happy to be wrong about them if there is a large player base that likes where they are at the moment. I don't want to take away something that others hold dear, I just wish there was more to, what certainly feels to me like, an entire Grand Alliance that has no real identity or purpose.
  14. In game terms there is nothing stopping GW making more models and battletomes. In reality if they do that then all destruction forces start to feel the same but with different models to represent them. I've read people moaning that Beasts of Chaos are just newer better Ironjawz and Ironjawz are just newer better Orcs. It's because they are all just "we fight coz we like it" clones with different skins. In my opinion Orcs absolutely must shed the "football hooligan in clown clothes" image they gained in the 80's and become more purposeful and serious. I mean you could take them in several directions. Just off the top of my head... They could become the "violent organised crime" faction. Perhaps for some reason Chaos in any form can't taint them or use them so they gain influence and power by grabbing and transporting slaves (or magical artefacts or whatever) and selling them to the highest bidder transporting them from realm to realm. (same works for Nagash & Stormcast as in the lore Chaos, Death and Stormcast seem to mostly be about humans not the other races). When a superpower wants something but doesn't want the world knowing it was them, use the Orcs. They could become the "proud savages" who have genuine lore and belief systems that are being assaulted by the infux of Chaos and the Stormcast and are fighting to preserve their way of life and the conservation of the worlds as they know them. Almost anything would be better than being the comedy relief who just get to have the straight guys throw mud in their faces for a laugh when there is quiet part in the main story.
  15. Now don't get me wrong here, I love my IronJawz but to be honest, the destruction part of the "lore" simply breaks down to "this lot like to fight coz it's fun". It's not exactly a deep and meaningful interaction and necessary to any plot. As long as that is the only thing that defines a "destruction" army then they will always be unnecessary to the lore. By definition they have no grand design, no goals and no meaningful interaction with those that do other than to slow them down a bit by accident maybe. I often wondered why they are not simply folded into the existing Chaos powers. Khorne if the focus is on pure fighting and gaining power from it, Slaanesh if the focus is more on the pleasure gained from fighting without real purpose. Supposedly Khorne cares not from where the blood flows so why is he picky about not having Orruk followers and only having Human ones? Slaanesh is supposed to be all about excess so an entire race that exists only to wage war sounds like they should be excessive enough to warrant inclusion. Ogors for example are supposed to always be hungry and kill and eat anything, another Slaanesh excess if you ask me. If they are to remain a distinct entity then they simply need a better reason to exist. They need to care enough about something to take an active part in the lore and help shape the story line.
×