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

Kasper

Members
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Liberator

About Kasper

  • Rank
    Judicator

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I'm really grateful for the insight and really not trying to nitpick, as I'd like to try building towards tournaments, but I'm just curious why kitbashing and conversions are allowed then. If I converted my Keeper, how is it any different? Or even people that convert the leaders in their battleline unit - Why wouldn't the opponent potentially be confused about wether it is a hero/herald or just the leader of the battleline unit?
  2. Really? Well it is interesting to get other people's take on it. As said, it was purely to "help" the opposing player to differenciate between the general and a normal Keeper. I personally couldn't care less. I just figured a Keeper model was a Keeper, despite it looking a little different.
  3. I have actually been curious about this rule. I bought 2 Keeper of Secrets, but one of them would be my general and therefore be stronger due to artefacts etc. To differenciate between the 2 models on the battlefield, I decided to build one as the named unique Keeper character "Shalaxi Helbane" and the other as a "normal" Keeper of Secrets. The idea would be that my opponent could easily tell apart which would be significantly stronger. Would tournaments allow for this, even though Shalaxi is equipped with a spear rather than her normal sword?
  4. He should be tested prior to a tournament - Yet another Armstrong doping scandal incoming? 😋
  5. I mean Slaanesh obviously got a huge advantage over armies that just push across and want to punch you in the face, but what about armies like Shootcast or Skaven with a million endless spells? Anyone tried to face some of the current top contenders rather than just face smash armies?
  6. I'm somehow not really surprised by this list. Joel has played loads of BoC and prefers to run as many models as possible. In his BoC lists he has like 150+ models in a 2.000 pts list. He said his playstyle was counterpunch, and not just move everything up the table and ram it at the opponent.
  7. Certainly, I'll be going Thermal + Speed Chaser in the future. Im really liking the idea of going Godseekers with the hero batallion and think Pretenders might be bit of a trap
  8. I got smoked by Seraphon with double Bastilladons at 1.500 pts. I played far from perfect and I should certainly have gone for thermal cloak on KoS to hunt the Slaan, but due to Bastilladons being tough as nails and the mass skink spam, I basically generated zero depravity. 1 shooting phase of the 2 Bastilladons basically wiped out a 30 man Daemonette squad too.
  9. But this has nothing to do about the talk about "top tier armies". This just goes to show that deck building is half the battle. At entry level, every face-smash army is miles ahead of armies that require tricks and good positioning. It also heavily depends on if you play with objectives or not. With new players, all that matter is what units have the best damaging profiles. This will 100% decide the games when they don't have any idea of synergies and how their army functions. If you play a non objective game it is even worse, since it is 100% a fight to the death.
  10. I certainly think the whole "top tier armies" should be taken with a grain of salt. At what point is the armies imbalanced? At the very top? Surely the difference is much smaller for the people who aren't in the very top and not constantly participating in big tournaments. I understand the desire for having a fair match, but I know at my local it has been infected by this whole "top tier armies" thing. People kinda frown upon DoK players because they read somewhere that DoK wins a lot and therefore it must be "an easy and OP army". People using Tzaangor units as BoC are dorks etc. Some people seem to obsess a little bit too much without realizing that the imbalance the very top faces, isn't relevant at all for local play.
  11. I'm tempted to try some Bravery shenanigas with our spells that rely on Bravery, and maybe try locking down their general to prevent the usage of CP for battleshock.
  12. To the guys that have gotten quite a few games done with the new tome already - Do you ever see yourself summoning in Seeker Chariots? I bought 2 SC boxes and made an Exalted Chariot out of the first. I'm considering making a second, but I'm not sure how often I'd run with double Exalted in my list, however I just don't see myself summoning in Seeker Chariots, much less including them in my start list.
  13. It sounds great if there would be a bigger focus on 1.000 pts armies. Means more but quicker games. Easier to collect etc. Im personally not a fan of huge characters like Nagash, so hope there will be some restrictions.
  14. At first I thought it was that way due to the wording, but if you explain to someone that by bringing X amount (which isnt unreasonable point wise), you would be able to summon a Keeper a turn by being passive, Im sure they can see the fault in the wording
  15. Elite armies will have trouble against the Locus, but armies where your KoS etc is in combat with multiple units per turn might be abit troublesome. Im not sure how Slaanesh will fare against Skaven with their insane reach.
×
×
  • Create New...