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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Celestant-Prime

About paul7926

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Interesting link. January was a while ago and the opposition faced back then were obviously not the new shiny stuff that people like to play now. That said at least I can take away the deck structure and purpose as one of only a few examples out there. So it seems that 'hard mode' aggro is the way to go with them, which I guess is not really a surprise. Having said all that I'm not exactly in a position to be winning any glass anyway so as long as I get to enjoy some games with them it's all good. I don't suppose I'll craft anything earth shattering but if I do manage to get a few games played I'll report back. Thanks EDIT: With no testing at all based on generally good cards and a few previous decks I think I'll start with this. https://www.underworldsdb.com/shared.php?deck=0,243,257,94,N373,90,305,N302,272,273,N357,348,N391,N417,331,101,343,361,365,339,N401,378,N503,N506,115,111,113,N499,N504,N529,109,235,N340
  2. I've been on the sidelines of this game from the beginning and whilst I don't own everything I think I'm only 3 warbands (Guardians, Nine, Hunt) and 1 expansion (Leaders) short of a full set of product. I'll probably pick up the warbands I'm missing but can't see me bothering with the leaders expansion. My problem is that I've got a huge soft spot for the Boyz as I always play the Orcs in any system that has them. They seem to pretty much be the worst warband out there at the moment. From my amateur perspective they don't seem to be a very versatile warband, they seem to want to play aggro but the truth is there are multiple warbands that just do aggro better than they can. Then there is the huge Troggoth in the room. He is better at aggro than the the boyz and whilst he exists and people tech against him they are by default teching against Gurzag, Despite all that my intention is to play them because, well frankly, I want to. I'm just going to do the best I can with them. I've not played for a while so the deck I had is way out of date and also no longer valid due to BAR changes so I need to start again. The most recent deck I can find is from the Moscow Grand Tournament back in May. So is anyone out there playing them? Are they being built as just a sub par aggro warband or is there another way? I'm not asking for people to build my deck for me I'm just interested in any shared knowledge or experience that I can build upon.
  3. Some really good points in this thread, kinda wish I'd seen it before rambling on in another one but hey! @PlasticCraic I'd like to explore your feelings about the 'model tax' if we may. I'm not sure I actually agree with you on this but it might just be a perspective sort of thing I'm not sure. I view each expansion as a product. So I don't separate the 'model' from the cards. So for example I'll probably but the next dwarf expansion because I like the models where as I got the 'eyes of the nine' set for some of the cards in it and will almost certainly never play that warband. I can see that if the cards and the models were sold independently then I would have spent less so I agree with you there. I'm not sure how much I would save because I highly doubt that the cost of the two parts would have much to do with the pure cost of manufacture. I also suspect that whatever pricing model was used the cost of getting both parts would be far in excess of the current price of the one product. I obviously can't prove that however. I guess I just don't think the 'tax' is going to be a significant amount even though it probably does exist at a conceptual level. Now there is the comparison with something like MtG which a lot of people do but they always forget what, in my opinion, is a very significant difference. In MtG you buy packs blind without knowing the contents. So you are never sure what the real price of an MtG card will be. I may have to buy 1 pack or I may have to buy many before I get what I want. GW to their credit don't do that with Underworlds. I knew from the start what buying the 'nine' box would cost and I can then decide if the parts I use are worth that cost to me personally. Just take a look at the secondary market for the sought after MtG cards. The price of the best cards is high if you want the luxury of knowing what you are buying and several companies exist just to service that secondary market. All of the money they make is money that the game producers don't get. So for me personally I'm really OK with the fact that if I just want card X from warband Y I know what it will cost and if I choose to pay that then the money I pay goes to GW and I can hopefully believe that it will, at least in part, be used for R&D into new products for the game. I'm just not sure that the 'model tax' you refer to is going to be in any meaningful way significant. Especially if it's the case that you had the choice of three purchase options. 'Cards + models' = X 'Cards' = X - 25% 'Models' = X - 25% If that was the case and I had bought the 'nine' cards only and later down the line I really want to play the 'nine' warband then I would end up paying 150% of the price I could have got them both for and wiped out two lots of 'savings' from only getting the cards from a different two releases.
  4. A thought occurred to me which probably stems from my MtG background so I thought I'd share it here. I'm very used to a game having a 'rotation' and everything that comes with that. So perhaps my view is different and possibly valuable to those getting to grips with the concept for the first time. The usual complaint I hear when rotation is mentioned is the one where people are upset that something they have purchased in the past is invalidated by the games makers. It's usually voiced along the lines of 'you have made my purchase worthless and therefore taken something from me which gives me concerns about buying anything new'. I totally understand where that sentiment comes from and the logic behind it but can we examine it from a slightly different perspective for a minute. In reality nobody came around your house and confiscated your cards. Nobody is going to break down your door at 3am in the morning if it's revealed that you didn't destroy your product at the end of the last day that it was tournament legal. Something has been taken from you but that something is just the ability to use that product in an officially sanctioned tournament. For a percentage of the playing population (and I have no clue what that percentage might be) what you have lost is something you never really used in the first place. If you play casually with friends and didn't enter tournaments anyway you carry on like nothing ever happened. So what about the people who did play in sanctioned tournaments? In my experience with other systems they fall broadly into two categories. There are the players who go mainly for the experience and those who go with the intention of winning or placing high in the results. Now I'm going to generalise things even more but bear with me. Imagine Cedric, he enjoys going to tournaments for the chance to go to a new venue, meet new people and play a game he enjoys with them. He is happy if he does well but he is also happy just to have had a good day out. Cedric doesn't do much in the way tournament testing or building the ultimate deck. He probably even takes his 'pet warband of choice' regardless of their current tournament viability. He might not even have all the product so for the day he may borrow a card or two from a friend who can't go or doesn't play in tournaments. The spectre of rotation doesn't really change much for Cedric. He will continue to buy the new product he wants and ignore what he doesn't and borrow what he can on the day. Yes he does suffer a small negative experience when he can't use a card that he previously enjoyed playing but he gains a positive in return as the game continues to be supported at a competitive tournament level. He can continue to attend tournaments, meet new people and have a great day out. Sally however is a tournament player. She enjoys the challenge of competitive play, owns all the product, spends ages testing deck ideas and swaps between warbands based on her observations of the current meta and has a shelf full of shadeglass. She attends tournaments to play the game she loves and it's usually against people she has met at the top tables of other tournaments. The day for her is all about trying to do well and have some fun with rivalries against other top players that grow over time with a new chapter written every time they meet up at tournaments. On the face of it Sally has the most to lose as each rotation will invalidate a whole seasons worth of models and cards. In reality however she probably never uses the vast majority of those cards anyway. Her tuned deck building means that only a subset of cards are viable fer her use anyway. She probably isn't emotionally invested in the lore of a warband or it's particular models too much and the enjoyment of playing a new warband with new card combinations outweighs the negative of the loss of whatever is no longer tournament legal. It's far more important to her that the tournament scene remains fresh, properly supported and well attended than the fact that some of her product slips out of use. She has used that old product for a while anyway and she is far more focused on what the latest release is and how she can best use it than losing a few old cards or models. Now I've rambled a lot but I guess my point is this. Depending where you personally land in the range between 'totally casual' and 'tournament pro' the true effect of a rotation policy is either not as bad as you think because it hardly effects you or an acceptable price for the continued growth and support of the game. It's all about how you view it really.
  5. My personal opinion is that they need to keep releasing warbands to keep the game moving and evolving. I think because of that they really do need to instigate some kind of 'rotation' to make sure that people wanting to get into the game are not faced with a massive expense that puts them off. I can see tournaments being either 'vintage' where any product ever released is legal (apart from the current FAQ's and banned list) or 'current' which might be something like the previous season plus the current one. As an example a local store to me has already done a tournament where the deck building rules were nightvault set plus cards from the warband you played only. Let's not forget that any 'rotation' system would be for the tournament players. Anyone can play with whatever they like in home games or non tournament games so it's not as restrictive as it might sound.
  6. I'm not sure Darksphere actually do. I tried to order before and they never managed to get it into stock and now there are no Feldherr specific products on the web site at all.
  7. Just a quick update. Cancelled the order because they hadn't even ordered from the makers after three weeks. I mean they are honest in that they don't carry stock but they don't seem to be able to get it either. They have been removed from their site now.
  8. That makes sense. I've already put the order through Darksphere for the Ironskulls box. They are and will always be my warband of choice so it made sense just to try it out with that one. I'm not really in a hurry so we will see how long it actually takes.
  9. Thanks so much for that link. Looks like they don't carry a stock but I'm happy to wait for them to order them up.
  10. Love those Feldherr boxes designed for a single warband. Does anyone know of a UK stockist that does them, I've not been able to find them yet.
  11. Going by the Shadespire rules he scores it. It's even quoted as the example on page 27 Each symbol is followed by italic text that replaces the italic text in the objective card’s condition, modifying the condition depending on how many players are in the game. In this example, in a game with three or four players, you score the objective in an end phase if two or more warbands are entirely out of action, rather than when all enemy fighters have been taken out of action.
  12. I've had a quick look and whilst there are other cards that you would want to include to be as competitive as possible I think you could easily construct a deck with what comes with the warband that would be fun to play. I'd just run whatever you fancy and see how it plays out.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  • Create New...