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

Charleston

Members
  • Content Count

    498
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

464 Celestant-Prime

About Charleston

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard

Recent Profile Visitors

342 profile views
  1. Because the game is more than just spamming the best models and some people prefer unit diversity Because some people don´t have 80 Marauders Because people don´t like the sculpt Because people thing that a unit of 40 is a pain in the ar** enough to paint and transport There are valid reasons
  2. We are here to help each other Regarding Sorcerers and Khorne: In general, althrough the Lore says that Khorne has little left for Sorcerers, there is not much that says you can´t utilise them. The Rules depict this in two ways: Khorne Alligience doesn´t have any Sorcerers and Wizzards on their own, which makes sense, as the Khorne Alligience can be also described as Khorne hardliners. Also, Khorne himself would never grant a Sorcerer his blessing, thus, as you noted, Sorcerer Lords cannot obtain the Khorne Keyword and therefore can´t be affected by the Aura of Khorne. There are currently two options how to use Wizzards nontheless with Khorne Units: Slaves to Darkness Alligience: Using Wizzards in a mostly Khorne Marked StD Army is fine and not even really something unfluffy. Wizzards are usefull and even a Lord of Chaos who praises and draws power from Khorne will use the service of a Wizzard if it serves his purpose. Meanwhile a Wizzard won´t deny his powers to a Lord that praises Khorne. Maybe it is a chance to show them the Glory of another godly patron in an attempt to convert them. Maybe he draw power on his own from this, or the Wizzard may play the long term game. Rulewise there is nothing to be mentioned beside the fact from above that Wizzards cannot take a mark of khorne. As StD can be built in any mixup of marks that you want, feel free to run all khorne marked units and f.e. two sorcerer lords. All you need for the Alligience is the "Slaves to Darkness" Keyword Khorne: Well, as already said, Khorne Alligience is Khorne Hardliners in their filterbubble. They hate Wizzards and in general everyone who isn´t one of them. Yet, even here, it may be that a Wizzard is enslaved and forced to fight for the Blades of Khorne before becoming a Sacrifice on the Battlefield. Or a cruel Khorne Lord may send the Sorcerer without his Staff into battle, beeing forced to fight for his survival Khorne Style. The Sorcerer would use magic nevertheless. Rulewise, you can Ally any Slaves to Darkness that are not Marked Slaaneshi. This includes Sorcerers as well. Keep in mind that Hexgorger Skulls, Bloodsecrators and the Skull Altar Terrain affect all Wizzards, so you will harm your own Sorcerers.
  3. Sounds like someone is still using the old warscroll Check the new one from either the aos app or the shop page of the DP. When using the Warscroll Builder, there were for a longer time two profiles around, the old for 160pts and the new for 210
  4. Well, Despoilers have access to an artifact for D3 additional CP´s while Khorne Mortals can have a reroll charges aura in the Khorne Alligience. Thanks for the input!
  5. Anyone made some experiences with a Cavalery list? I have 5 built and 5 unbuilt Knights and the urge to play them in a List with 6 allied Mighty Skullcrushers. Currently I am really not sure if I want to built them with glaives again or to take the enscrolled weapons. While the Glaives seem powerfull on the Charge and the new Khorne DP makes it easier to be the charing one, the Enscrolled Weapons simply seem like the more stable option. Also, I struggle between Despoilers with Mark of Khorne and Khorne Alligience. The ability to trade blood tithe for an additional charge in an enemies turn is just incredible with glaives. In the best case scenario you can just steamroll through the chaff right into the juicy target. Also, Khorne provides some easy accessible charge rerolls.
  6. I don´t belive it is so easy to say. There are a lot of different players out there, who have all different expectations and a different level of comitment. Not everyone is as strong as you and many people easily loose motivation when they get negative feedback from a game experience. I know players who really don´t care if their models are painted but who play for the sake of the game, with models beeing just a bit more expensive boardgame figures and seeing warhammer as the boardgame counterpart to a trading card game like magic. Thoose people tend to play rather to win, not WAAC but nevertheless picking often units for the sake of rules and viability, as they seek the trill of the competetvie aspect of the game. I know players from the other half of the spectrum, who really put effort into their army, who willingly pick the weaker models and units as they simply love the design or story behind it. From my experience, thus are also players who put more value on painting their models, writing some background, reading lore and who desire to simply enjoy the hobby without any pressure. This is not a categorisation but rather a wide spectrum, with all kind of hobbyists being somewhere more on the A side or B side of this. A lot of issues I noted occur, when people have too different expectations. Imagine a player, who put hours into painting and converting his army, beeing able to only make few games in his free time and therefore beeing somehow tied to picking up the next game if possible. Now imagine such a player in a game with someone, who plays his new army which is fully competetive grey plastic. That doesn´t have to be an issue on it´s own, but now imagine the grey player to talk to his opponent and asks things like why he picked this army as it is weak. Or why he doesn´t play hero XY as it is a must have in the meta of this army. From my experience this can turn quite fast into a situation that sounds almost insultive: "You made an mistake with your army configuration. You are loosing because you did something bad". This really doesn´t feel good and stops the excitement of someone who really did nothing bad beside enjoying the hobby the way he wanted to. And the powercreep and power discrepancy between books makes this issue even worse. Also, as weird as this sounds, loosing with an army in which you put love into every single brushstroke against something a players just glued in a hurry just to have his army ready to put them somehow on the table, always hurts a bit more and feels unfair. Yes, noone shall deserve a better game because they painted their models well, but nevertheless a lot of people receive it as a sign of respect playing against painted models. But don´t get me wrong, this can occur the other way around, too. Like players beeing called out for beeing a bad painter or putting not enough work into their models, althrough they really want only to play the game and don´t care much for the modeling or painting side of the game. Typical "models have to be painted" restrictions on tournaments are often an example, which always seems irrational to me as I expect more of thoose rule focused people to go to tournaments In the end, things break down to how we handle other people and if we are cool towards others. We have to look out for players which share a fascination on the same aspects of the game as we do. It is really worth the time to find a player with a similar view and expectation from the hobby. ~~~ Well, enough offtopic: The newest rumour engine seems interesting as it isn´t something I would´ve expected to see in a while. Gotreks Ram seems like the easiest way to assign this bit to something we know, on the other side this would be an awesome shield for a heavy armoured gargant. Destruction is currently the thinnest GA with only 3 subfactions and I really really belive that we can expect something new here. This, together with the Gargant rumours, makes me belive that we may see some GA Destruction news this year. Meanwhile I would love to see @Whitefang comment on our guesses and if anyone of us is atleast close with his/her speculations.
  7. I was also in the spot where I asked myself which way to read that nurgle CA. I went for the weaker reading that is now confirmed. My opponent said striaght that that can´t be because the rule would be utterly trash and we proceded the game with the other, now confirmed false, ruling. The impact of the CA wasn´t that big at all, putting my opponent just into the spot of selecting what he was about to charge more carefully. The biggest way I was able to utilise this was a buffed marauders unit I ported right into the enemy t1, but even this together with the plaguetouched battalion was merely enough to kill 2x 3 wound-models. Yeah, we StD players are actually a bit sensitive about rules and nerfs as we had to wait 5 years for this book. Now it is full of restrictions and limitations while other factions seem less bound to such. Getting then the disadvantaging ruling to one of the more promising abilities is in my eyes quite natural to heat the temper.
  8. Nevermind, didn´t saw the faq...damn what unneccessary nerfs.
  9. Well, I´ve thrown 3 SH´s at him (Hosskard, Frostlord and Riders), but his Morghasts seemed like the bigger threat. I had to load all my shooting (including one TH) and 2 Monsters + a unit of Mournfangs to tear the chainrasp chaff screen far enough down so my main mournfang unit could charge. Felt like I had to do so because I know that thoose morghast could have caused serious trouble. In the meantime, he rotated his forces putting everything behind the second wall of Chainrasps, including nagash. It would take me another turn to kill this chaff unit, including taking damage from another unit of morghasts that was a backup, than to survive the mortals from nagash before closing into meele with him. All with 3 Mournfangs and one Stonehorn left. Maybe that was the issue, maybe I should have rushed head first into nagash without bothering the rest. I mean, my opponent played all this placing stuff really well but that spell spamming was really...ouch. I might be just too stupid to play right against Death but I have the feeling that thoose factions are masters of all trades, with no real downsides. Maybe I am just to dumb to get it right. Maybe I should remain at the painting part of the hobby. Had meanwhile a game against Everchosen right before the other one and the Husskard on SH did an amazing job, althrough dices beeing really lucky, allowing him to take archaon in 1v1 down to 3 wounds, surviving a load of damage.
  10. Had a game against nagash today and wow...that arcane bolt spam is terryfing. Lost really a lot of stuff only to Nagash and the Umbral Spellportal. As a full BCR player, getting even a single dispell is quite expensive, but this was...woah. Tilted right away as there was really nothing I could do, charging was no real option due to the chaff walls. Now I try to thing of an option how I could turn the game in my favor next time facing big uncle bones. any tipps?
  11. Technically, yes, but no, as the SCE vs Nighthaunt thing is the Core Set which is not a limited 2 faction thing but an "allways on stock" entry product to lure new players into the hobby with it. That´s the reason why there is so much stuff around it: To make more products interesting for new players who got into the hobby with the box and vice versa. Meanwhile the two faction boxes are rather meant for players who want to start a specific faction or expand their new force with some neat units.
  12. Yeah, that Order vs Order thing would even make sense at some point. We had already: Chaos vs Death (Skaven vs FEC) Order vs Destruction (Sylvaneth vs Gloomspite) Destruction vs Death (Ogors vs Bonereapers) Chaos vs Order ( Kharadron vs Tzeentch) We miss: Chaos vs Destruction Order vs Death And maybe a cycle of GA vs itself. What´s most interesting: Current Loresnippets don´t show any obvious pairings here. Any cool suggestions from you guys?
  13. @trolemon thanks for the listing! Some interesting data Also, OBR are from Nov 2019, not 2018. I find it interesting how subjective feeling of an army having enough Warscrolls is. Factions with 15, which seems like GW-min for new factions, really feel "thin". In my personal opinion, the Gutbusters book feels just about right with the listed 23 Warscrolls. Meanwhile Slaanesh seems "thing" on Warscrolls again, while having 22 according to this list. Meanwhile, having roughly 20+ Warscrolls should make a faction feel more fleshed out I guess, which is why the lack of new kits for Fyreslayers, IDK, Daughters or KO feels like such a big issue right now.
  14. The whole Seraphon Lore seems a bit messy due to the conversion from the world that was to current AoS lore. While Aztec Lizzards were pretty based in the old world, they somehow had to transit them to multirealm forces. Also, theys had to justify, why they did not die in the Endtimes~ At this point gw choose to turn them into what they are right now, mysterious lizzard daemons, summoned from memory of the slann. This whole shift, while the reason for it seems quite understandable, led to the seraphon lore beeing confusing as there are some unanswered questions. Also, a lot of people would like to see a return to the old, more based lore, having Seraphon to be living things again. The last lore tidbits all seem to go into this direction, as daemons and seraphon seem to be able to keep manifested within the mortal realms, and don´t disappear as they do in 40k. It is quite interesting how gw wants to shift this and we have to wait to see how they will proceed with it. I see many cool options for this. An example for a rulewise reflection would be to be able to choose a keyword between Mortal and Daemon and having different Sub-Alligiences for factions who do so. Daemon-Seraphon would be the one summoned and cast, freshly manifesting on the battlefield, Mortal ones could be ones that wander among the realms for quite a time, maybe were even born and not summoned. This would open up the lore to many cool stuff, internal tensions, veterans, rise of named characters, maybe even some tension between seraphon and slann reflected in a suballigience that don´t benefit Slann at all.
  15. It would give a lot to the narrative. Currently the lore calls tensions between different Order Factions (which is the lore for why order armies may fight against each other). Meanwhile, all Aelves we have (including Sylvaneth) show an exterme egoistic view on the things. We have lore that outright calls how unhappy Allarielle is with Sigmar. We know that Idoneth raid anything to gain souls. Moriathi...well, we all know her. In this point, an alliance of aelves would be great as it would allow gw to utilise different motifs for future lore. Sigmar (and so Stormcasts) may loose their leading role, something that a lot of people wished for a long time. Aelves meanwhile could turn into new big players. It would also allow GA:Order to shrink so gw could introduce maybe some new human factions or similar, maybe giving "order" a new taint.
×
×
  • Create New...