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

Battlefury

Members
  • Content Count

    253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

103 Celestant-Prime

1 Follower

About Battlefury

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thank you very much! In the gterman warscroll it is defined to "MW per model", and that's a huge difference. Best regards, Ba5terD
  2. Does the Vengeful Skullroot deal D3/D6 MW per model in a unit? Or does it inflict D3/D6 on the unit? Refering to the german warscroll it deals D3/D6 per model. Best regards, Ba5terD
  3. A true bloack colour for the stone itself would probably look unnatural imo. I would recommend you to take a dark grey as a basecoat, then shade it with any black wash and lighten it up again by drybrushing the base colour again, and then with a slightly brighter middle grey tone. I would suggest these: as the Base colour for the 2nd drybrush Why that greenish grey? It already will give you a very very slight gritty and dirty tone to the overall stone. But tbh, you will not see it very much, since the green in the colour is not really dominant at all. After you have achieved the result, you could again slightly wash it with a sepia wash, wich would give it a little dirty tone. And there you could apply a variaty of pigments, for the dirty look. You could also achive a similar result by drybrushing the stone with some brown colours. The very difference would be, that you won't have texture on it this way. With pigments you will gain some texture to the stone. Hope this helps!
  4. Right now I wanted to state th same, but thank you for the reply! We could easily build our own versions of Sayl, use another model that we find fitting ... . Or watch here for an alternative: https://www.thingiverse.com/
  5. Good question. "From the second battle round, if this model is on the battlefield and did not attack in at least one of the combat phases of the previous battle round, when you look up a value on this model’s damage table the model is treated as having suffered 13 wounds." The Warscroll does not specify, that the unit has to be on the battlefield in round 1, but it has to be in round 2. My interpretation: Since the text is stating in 1st place, that "from the second battleround", and in 2nd place "if this model is on the battlefield", that the circumstance being on the battlefield is applied for round 2, not obligatory for round 1. So afaik I would say, that you are right, when you say, that when he comes in in round 2, the ability does apply to the model.
  6. So Sayl changed from "Sayl the Faithless" to "Sayl sucks now". What a shame... . But thanks for the advice.
  7. Just saying, it could be benefitial to use, for being in combat pretty soon. As that sorcerer I would recommend Sayl the Faithless, since he himself can teleport one Chaos unit across the battlefield.
  8. So, been here a long time ago now. How did the Khorne List meta evolve so far for #competetive play? Did anyone find a way around those shooting heavy lists? Like Tzeentch being the new number one with shooting right now... . Also, did anyone think about using an allied sorcerer in combination with the soulscream bridge?
  9. Hey there! A player of my community and a member of my tournaments wants to have confirmation on how many artefacts he can use in his army. As I know, it is 1 genreals ability for his general and one further artefact for any hero. For one more battalion he can use one more artefact per battalion. BUT As I wanted to show him I saw, that it isn't written in his BoK Battletome. there is no restriction mentioned. I then had a look at the basic rules to confirm the rules, but couldn't find it. Now I don't know if that rules is even existing anymore. Could you give me the rules text for this within any of our documents please, so i can show him? Thank you in advance! Cheers///
  10. If I got you right, I would partially agree. BUT I can totally understand him, that the community might, and most likely will be splitted, as more options roll in. Sure, it is nice to have several games to dip in. BUT The prerequisite would be, that the now established players will be willing to pay fot that option to have. Otherwise there will be a distinct number of players wanting to play that version of AoS ( wich i really think it will be ), or the existing ones. Some of those will find it better than the AoS we know, others won't. I guess that's what his concern is. Iagree totally, that this shall not happen frequently, since communities are very integre, BUT that also depends on the community itself. If they are not that integre with each other, it might be a splitting in that community.
  11. Also not correct. It is not this product, that makes GW equal to EA. It is the path they already took until now, beginning at least 1 year ago.
  12. Since my post of yesterday, I am not that optimistic about that anymore, since I saw the release of Sororitas today ) although it is not AoS, but certainly it is GW's business practice again ). The picture, that it shows for me now is this: §1 This is a new cash grab, to drain money from those poor souls, that wanted WHF to stay §2 It will become a limited edition release fest a la couleur, that will give GW the possibility to gain mney as fast as possible §3 It was only released to secure the stagnating playerbase to stay for this and have a solid selling point ( potentially ) §4 The prices until that date will be far from ridiculous. GW hiked the prices not only one time this year, they still do. Each new box is slighty more expensive, than previous releases with a similar content. It is kind of the same, like it was with the Adeptus Sororitas for 40k. It took like 10 years for them to release plastic models with rules. Why though? It wasn't because GW wanted to get it right, or didn't have the ressources for it to be produced. They where sitting on these products to wait for a gap to release it in a moment, where there will be a fu** ton of people to buy it. It is literally 26 models with a book for 160€. That box is limited edition, just like everything what is entirely new at the moment, and is sold out already. Boxes are on ebay Germany from between 249,-€ to 400,-€. This is exactly, what we will se even more in the future. Because it works for them. And this is exactly the sense they will approach The Old Wrold. By waiting ( what they already do now ) for the right moment, when there is no retreat for those, who really wanted to have it, even though they didn't know what it will be, how it will be supported, what it will cost and what the release scedule will be for that. Imagine a product you spent like 500€ into, just to see it being abandoned like several other sub game systems. We should be sceptic, more than ever before, about the ( again ) upcoming business practice of GW. They became the EA of miniature game producers and let me tell you, that they didn't change, when they told it. They just changed some faces, but not what was behind it.
  13. Well, I am totally confused right now, after I saw this, to be honest. My initial thoughts where: a) Will this just be a rules parallel rules set, that brings back the WHFB rules? b) Will they shoot AoS in the Neck, like WHFB? c) Will this be the attempt to rewind and go for the soft reboot, like in 40k? I always said, that the 40k way to soft reboot the rules, but to keep all the rest functioning, was the better way to go. The anhiliation of the WHF world was a rough mistake, imo. They could have redesigned the rules and go for it. For that, personally, I hope they would rewind and go for that soft reboot style, by bringing back the lore, the world, the characters...just all of it, what made WHFB a good game backgroundwise. I know that WHFB was difficult to play for new players, and therefore shot itself into the knee a little, but I would like that soft reboot. Need to say, that i never played WHFB, just saw it played, but I had a look at the lore, wich was fantastic. So technically I am an AoS player, who likes the combination of both ( soft reboot version ) for our game.
  14. To be honest, most of those very strange name creations came up, because GW wants to copyright those. This is why for example Fyrreslayer have an "y" instead of an "i", because they where not allowed to copyright the word "fire". After they shot WHFB and lost some of the armies, as they froze some of the former designers out, they wanted to keep their stuff within their copyright. Because those designers took their work with them and didn't grant GW any right to their former designed products and product names. This is why we will never see another Bretonnia and Khemri faction anymore anytime. But I am with the creator of ths post, those names are often ridiculous and lousy.
  15. Hey there! If i would play an army, with their own allegiance, for example Sylvaneth, can I then include the generic Battleline for Order, wich is the Liberators without breaking the allegiance? Cheers///
×
×
  • Create New...