The World Tree
-
Posts
498 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by The World Tree
-
-
2 hours ago, PJetski said:
I think the game is too fast and we should slow things down. Maybe it's just my experience, but you can predict who will win by the initiative dice roll for round 2 in >99% of games. I would like to get back to a point where turn 1 charges are not the normal, you actually play out all 5 rounds of a typical match, and maybe even have some models left over at the end.
Furthermore, I think that there is too much overlap in what armies can do. You don't ask your opponent "can your army deep strike/teleport?" you ask "how does your army deep strike/teleport?". Similarly, actions outside of their normal phases are too common. These special effects should be rare and army defining features, but they have become the norm and the few armies without them are left to suffer.
<snip>
Completely agree with all of this. I think it is definitely a battletome issue. I'd much rather a clean slate for next edition - same rules, erasure of battletomes.
-
2 hours ago, RuneBrush said:
Join lines down the middle of shoulder pads is what's always put me off doing a Stormcast army 😉
Only in the starter boxes (I hate that so much!)
-
2
-
-
Terrain is the big one for me. The new realm rules make a difference, but could be refined.
I'd like greater thought to how the priority roll can be disincentivised (eg in the new Blade's Edge scenario).
I'd like secondaries like in 40k, though they'd need some thought as they couldn't be transposed directly. Perhaps that feeds into my second point.
Lastly I'd like to see a general depowering of armies. The fundamental rules are fantastic but some of hte army books, less so...
-
2
-
-
20 hours ago, stratigo said:
KO.
There's a lot of conditional battleline out there though, so it's not hard to find super good battleline units, since battleline units are quite common.
KO were mentioned and there is definitely an argument to be made for Gunhaulers. Though I'm not sure they'd be my pick.
For me it has to be Morrsarr Guard. The insane speed and damage capability mean that their small numbers don't matter.
-
22 hours ago, Smooth criminal said:
I think you can do that with big blobs of marauders who get battleshock immunity.
Don't see why would you pass up circle buff on varanguard but whatever.
God how I wish the circles were available to all hosts. Or at the very least, Empty throne.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Ggom said:
But what if I rolled other successful hits that are not 6s? Do they also end with no effect, or do I get to proceed with wound and saves for those other successful hits?
Each attack is individual so you would continue the attack sequence for each dice roll as appropriate
-
1
-
-
I still think it is too binary a list. You either smash them or have no way of competing. Not to mention how dull an experience it is to play versus.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Charleston said:
I like the changes, many as I´ve expected. Knights back at 160pts are good news, Karkadrak at 230 is now a must have, althrough I guess the bigger points decrease already concidered the missing ulgu shadowblade for matched play.
The Chamon artefact works nicely on him
-
16 minutes ago, amysrevenge said:
On this point, it has happened before in the pre-pandemic/pre-delayed timeline days. There were points for Bonesplitters in a GHB before the first Bonesplitters battletome came out a month or so later (whichever year that was - 2017?).
Good memory! Though the models for those already existed
-
1 hour ago, NJohansson said:
If trying to be objective (I like the Book so I am biased) the biggest problem of the argument is that people mix freely between:
1) The competitive strength of the Book;
2) Internal balance in the Book; and
3) How the fluff fits the various units.
2) Internal balance - the internal balance is not super. Both MoT and MoS are close to worthless compared to the other two marks and there are clear winners (from a point efficiency viewpoint) such as marauders. On the other hand show me one book with great internal balance? Even the top books have half of their entries at “you will never see this unit unless I like the models and don’t care for efficiency”. So asking for “I want all my models to be balanced” is really asking to play checkers since even in chess the Queen is far more valuable than everything else. If you must play with unit X - either accept that you will not build an optimal army or change unit X/army.
I don't disagree with your general point but Mark of Slaanesh is excellent.
-
3 hours ago, Neverchosen said:
I feel that Sons will release with the appropriate amount of fan fair but being a smaller release window (so far a single new release), so I feel it will have a shorter dedicated period than Lumineth had.
I am curious what GW's intended release schedule would have been. Would we have Sons by now and be waiting on the next army... or would we even know what the next army would be in light of 9th ed. releasing. Clearly 40K takes priority right now and considering how good last year was for AOS releases I feel that is fair.
Clearly something deathly is coming soon but as people have already posited it could be Warcry/Underworld/Quest related. This lull is a little dull but I have truly enjoyed the combination of speculation and wish listing that this community has been developing over this pandemic.I think it is clear that we were due to have Sons before the GHB - the point are in there after all.
-
3
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Gistradagis said:
Huh, so nothing about the GHB's FAQ. So they either didn't bother to even mention it as something worthwhile, or it's not arriving this week.
They don't usually announce that in those previews, IIRC
-
20 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:
Feels more like a trend with GW really:
40K Chaos is rubbish and Marines are a joke and it‘s the same for AoS 🤣
But remember: The promo-Battle in White Dwarf (StD VS Lumineth) was a draw... in truth it would be a massacre for the aelves.
This is simply not accurate.
The Slaves to Darkness book can have several strong builds. Chaos Warriors as a warscroll are diabolical.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, Charleston said:
Well, Chaos Warriors go toe to toe with Liberators, offering even more deffensive capabilities and can be easily buffed. Also, Warriors have more weapon options to offer. All on a base with a smaller footprint. I guess they lack that one special weapon per unit but are still a unit in an overall okay shape.
They are really bad.
Yes they can be made durable with relatively high investment (min. 270 for the unit, warshrine and nurgle). But to what end? They'll get whittled down and those buffs are better placed on units that will have offensive value.The reason people dislike them is because they do nothing. They don't play like the background. Chaos Knights aren't great but they can basically function in that way (o' how I wish for them to be better!). Warriors just stand there and are killed. Marauders* have rend! Namarti thralls have rend!
-
4 hours ago, Kurrilino said:
- I do think we have a really fun book
- It is just weird that the most iconic units are rubbish
May i ask how you combine those 2 things ????????
I want to have fun too but garbage units and fun somehow doesn't work for me
Because many of the other units are fun to use?
When I say iconic units I mean knights (which are tolerable) and warriors (which are atrocious).
That is why I specified weird. In terms of design it has several good sub-allegiances and there tends to be high variety in lists. Both of those are good things.
The problem is a few warscrolls are strange; Warriors need rend 1, Knights should have both weapon options; Warshrine is too variable (the secondary effect should happen on the 3+). Plus the army's allegiance abilities are too conditional (EOTG is a bonus, not an ability, aura of chaos is too restrictive).
There are lots of phenomenal warscrolls in the list and the interaction of the different unit is really interesting and creates a high amount of depth when using the army.
-
1
-
1
-
-
The priority roll is central to the game. Do you play cautiously and leave yourself resistant to your opponent's charges but sacrifice board control/objective control? Do you play aggressively but leave yourself to the mercy of the roll? What do you risk and what do you conserve? These are the sorts of questions you have to answer.
To remove it from the game would be to irrevocably change the game. Grappling with it is central to strategy and tactical play. It means you can't just rely on predictable, list-built combos.
That said, one or two armies mess around with it in ways I dislike. Hearthguard are too resilient and damaging and fast. Overly shooty armies can be a bit abusive on double turns.
-
8
-
-
It is worth bearing in mind that we haven't seen the big changes coming to Petrifex
-
17 hours ago, Turragor said:
Yes I think its this kind of imbalance in the realms that'll probably lead to a blanket ban of them - or at least the CA/spells. Especially with a Teleport on offer.
Having said that, maybe TOs let the artefacts slide through. That'd be nice!
Having played in the realm of metal, the massive amount of entangling terrain is the biggest issue (in a good way - the terrain is meaningful!)
-
4 hours ago, Ganigumo said:
Pinks are where they should be if each model returned to the unit didn't net you 5 more wounds.
That interaction is the reason they need an increase or new warscroll.
I do think one of the simplest fixes is that in order to do the 'split' you have to have purchase the blues and brimstones in the list building/have to spend fate points.
-
Played another game with the Slaves to Darkness last night. Great fun as always on the Blade's Edge. I do think we have a really fun book with a huge variety of effective army archetypes. It is just weird that the most iconic units are a bit rubbish.
Warshrines are so annoying - rolled a 1 every time for their blessing...
-
2
-
-
I do wonder if there is potential in a high density Pallador list. I've always rated the unit (I jut hate painting the mounts!), but I think there may be something to them at 170. 15 4+save wounds with that much flying* mobility could be a real hassle.
-
8 hours ago, Eldarain said:
In a Slaves army Archaon only has one. In the Allegiance section it says he has to pick one Mark of Chaos keyword to apply for the game. Not just what aura he is projecting.
It's possibly a more interesting question in the other armies without that restriction.
It is very silly isn't it. But this is my understanding.
-
5 hours ago, JackStreicher said:
Alright. After seeing the changes made to Cities of Sigmar I highly doubt GE gets that Std are in trouble AT ALL.
the two worst offenders of Cities remained untouched (Wizard on Griffon and Sorceress in Dragon) - wth?
What will be the Point changes for Chaos then? -10 pts for a spawn and -10 pts for the chariots?
Umm, pretty sure neither of those are the killer unit in Cities...
-
I mean it is £16 and I get some scenarios that I will spend hours on. Easily worth the money. I'd always take more, but I don't think I have any huge complaints.
-
2
-
What would you like to see for 3rd edition?
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
I expect stormcast with pikes