Belper
-
Posts
84 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Belper
-
-
On 9/12/2020 at 4:04 PM, swarmofseals said:
While I heartily agree that the Blood Stalker warscroll is very disappointing, I think you are missing a key factor: hero sniping. Vanari Sentinels have pretty bad damage output for their cost, but the fact that they have good range and proc mortal wounds off the hit roll makes them good at picking off small heroes.
At 80 points I think they'd be good enough to see play but I don't think that they would be spammable. Their offensive efficiency at 80 points still isn't that good, and their defensive efficiency is merely fine. You might see some Kunnin Rukk style builds pop up around using Morathi and/or the mixed battalion, but I don't think builds with 70 Blood Stalkers would even be particularly good.
The problem is that as soon as Blood Stalkers become passably efficient (like in the 80 to perhaps 100 point range) they give the faction access to a key element that was previously to costly to really consider: hero sniping. One of the main things that keeps DoK honest right now is that they struggle to pick off support heroes. If you let DoK players pick off 5 wound support heroes for the cost of a 200-300 point unit then it might well unbalance the faction.
At 80pts their offense is totally irrelevant. They're 2 wound bodies with a decent resilience profile, an 8" move and a huge footprint. They don't need to kill anything. They just need to clog up the board, which they can do very well for very cheap. At 80 at least.
What other issues it causes with the faction is totally irrelevant. If they didn't want DoK to have a unit that can snipe, they shouldn't have made a unit with bows. (Also, not for nothing but I don't think it's unreasonable for any 300pts of shooting to be able to off a five wound character with no defensive bonuses no matter what faction they are.)The point is that until their offensive output is significant enough to be worth at least some percentage of their point cost, they're ultimately so terrible that they can't be balanced by points reductions.
-
2 hours ago, Chumphammer said:
Blood Stalkers, the bow unit for DOK
even down to 120pts, you get a 1 shot weapon that does 1 damage at rend 1. A 6 to hit is a MW that finishes that attack
the 24 inch range is great as they move 8, and 2W each is useful. Hit/wound are both on a 3 so its ok, but only 1 shot each is the killer. 120pts in a DOK army is 10 Witch Aelves/Sisters of SlaughterThis x100. It's my go to example for a unit that is too terrible for points changes to fix. At 160 it was useless, at 140 they were useless, at 120 they're useless, at 100 they're useless, at 80 bring 70 of them because by that point you're paying for the base stats so the fact that it's output is godawful pathetic is irrelevant.
-
20 hours ago, Beastmaster said:
Are they really such a tax for some armies? We recently had a thread where it was asked which army had the best battleline. Most factions were named at least once it seemed. So I would imagine that in most armies there are possibilities to at least make them useful to some extend.
As a newbie, I must say that the battleline requirement makes list building much easier. It’s a point to start, which often determines the general. Gives the army a backbone, theme and direction. Then you continue building around it.Some armies the battleline is the best thing you got. DoK witch aelves and SoS are both incredible, Tzeentch pink horrors had to be nerfed at least twice, Skinks used to be so good you'd take 40 of them as just allies, Sequitors are probably the best unit stormcast had before they got nerfed.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Beliman said:
That's their rules. With new editions, I expect at least new rules for our banana boys.
Especially considering their current rules are a lopsided mishmash of nonsense that functions more like 3 armies glued together than as one cohesive force.
-
1
-
-
On 8/28/2020 at 7:17 AM, zombiepiratexxx said:
40k in the new edition for matched play only has a rule that you cannot have more than 3 units from the same datasheet (warscroll) to prevent spam. Some armies also have limits on the numbers of specific HQ models they can have. T'au can only take one Commander keyword model per detachment. I believe the new Space Marine Codex will have a similar limit on some of the Space Marine HQ units.
It may be something that gets introduced into AoS at some point.I hope not. Those rules were introduced into 40k as lazy patchjobs covering up the fact that GW can't make a book without 1 or 2 units head and shoulders above everything else.
-
The only aspect of the game that needs an overhaul is the Magic Phase, in my opinion. As it is it's fundamentally pretty broken on the simple basis that a handful of armies (Nagash, Tzeentch, Lumineth) both dominate casting and can completely shut down a non-magic focused armies only casters with no meaningful counterplay. Running a Medusa or other small caster to support your forces becomes almost a liability against the magic heavy factions because you're never realistically going to get a power off unless you manipulate ranges like crazy. You're also not likely to STOP any casts with a single mage because of all the bonuses Nagash and the others have kicking around.
-
3
-
-
43 minutes ago, alghero81 said:
AoS 3.0 next year would match the most recent trend but is not a given at all especially considering the current pandemic. While 9th 40K was mostly planned and organised pre-Covid, AoS 3.0 must have had a significant portion of development this year.
Nottingham is also at strong risk of a local lockdown according to the last numbers from the government. On a new big planned release for next year, GW has more choice and time to organise themselves and the chance to delay it (if it was scheduled at all) than they could with 40k. So I wouldn’t be so adamant 3th edition is coming next year considering the current situation but I would be pleasantly surprised.
In saying so I hope broken realms bring new miniatures and rules to the most desperate factions but as far as I know from PA, it will not solve warscroll issues, is that true people who follow 40K more?
Independently it seems AoS was not forgotten (as mentioned in the preview) and we may seem some more things this year. My wallet is definitely worrying...Depends on the army. PA basically rewrote the book on Grey Knights and Admech but barely affected Genestealers and Nids, for example. Sisters didn't actually get a single army specific rule in any of the books, even.
-
I just want them to fix the dead warscrolls. They keep dropping Stalkers and Avatars and it keeps not doing anything the make them better. Until a blood stalker is 80pts and you're taking them just because they're 2 wound bodies, they'll never be useful.
Also, let min-morathi use her command ability. She already loses it when she's big, why does she have to be the general too?
-
1
-
-
On 8/20/2020 at 7:18 AM, Nacnudllah said:
So, I'm very much a Narrative player. I run regular Narrative events (or at least did in the before times) and enjoy gaming for the sake of creating fun stories. However, I think whatever might be perceived as "detest" for Narrative play/players is kind of our own fault. Far too often in discussions of Narrative play, I see things devolve into bashing players for being too competitive. Narrative players swap tips about how to get their overly competitive friends to play "fluffy", "casual", or "narrative" lists, or make worse gameplay decisions for the sake of the narrative (I don't need any help playing badly, I can do it all on my own, but I don't think they appreciate the "help"). So, I think detest may come from seeing "Narrative" as a bludgeon used to attack them for being too competitive rather than a way to have fun gaming and telling stories together.
On a more positive note, if you want to find more Narrative stuff, check out the Tabletop Campaign Repository which collects homemade campaign packs, homebrew rules, and the like, the "Age of Sigmar Narrative Play" facebook group, Animosity Campaigns which is running a global Narrative campaign at this very moment, and NEON (Narrative Event Organizer's Network) which has discussions of how to play Narrative, how to run Narrative events, and more! There are a lot of great things going on in the Narrative community and it is better supported by GW and the Warhammer community at large than basically any time ever before.
This also goes along with a fundamental misunderstanding of competitive play that a lot of players who aren't competitively minded seem to have: Competitive play IS narrative.
The difference between what we call competitive play and what we call narrative play comes in two places. 1. Is that narrative play doesn't really have the capacity to accept landslide losses the way competitive play does. A competitive player gets destroyed they tend to change their list and the way they play and work to fix their mistakes(though plenty of blaming stuff for being OP or UP still happens) whereas narrative players tend to discount those results and work to change the GAME(whether through modifying rules or handicapping factions/players) to prevent similar blowouts. This means that you often get less feel bads but at the same time you're essentially wearing kids gloves which is both detrimental to the experience of the superior player, as well as allowing individuals to blame systemic imbalances for personal failure even more readily than players already do. It's sort of like not keeping score in little league.
2. The interesting part of the narrative for a competitive player is almost entirely what happens DURING the game. The interesting part for the narrative player tends to lean towards things that happen before and after the game. Narrative players find a lot of their drama and tension in the way the result of a game impacts the greater design space they've built for themselves. Competitive players find ALL of their drama and tension in moment to moment gameplay.
-
1
-
-
On 8/20/2020 at 6:40 PM, Orsino said:
You suggest that no games are well balanced and then dismiss examples of well balanced games because you haven't played them and...they're not AoS. That's really not an argument. And again, balance is a continuum and repeating "no game is perfectly balanced" doesn't mean balance can't be improved.
Considering 'well balanced' is a largely subjective term, he isn't dismissing 'well balanced' games, he's stating that those games aren't actually 'well balanced' as he would define the phrase. Example: You could argue that chess isn't particularly well balanced because of the first mover advantage white gets.
On 8/20/2020 at 6:43 PM, Saxon said:BA is up to 2nd edition which is pretty well balanced. Germans can be hard to play with but the gap between the best and worst factions is not even close to AOS. It's also not homogenized, each faction has its special rules that do factor into the game. It's a lot simpler and that is quite different to AOS. Some people would like that, some don't, each to their own.
There surely has to be a reasonable expectation of balance. These forums become tiresome when people will make any excuse to defend GW and their tendancy to cheese new abilities and then nerf them later as if it was accidental. The cynic in me feels like the regularity that this now seems to happen means that its part of the marketing plan to appeal to the power gamers who will drop a fortune to have a flashy new army. Sure it works. But it's a collective eye roll from my gaming group seeing these flash rules come out each time a faction is updated.
This is more or less a myth. 'Powergamers' tend to be thrifty a lot of the time. The nature of needing to build, assemble, and paint 'new hotness' units in order to actually be able to use them limits the amount of full faction changes to people who either have pre-existing collections, ridiculous amounts of money, or people looking to enter into factions like space marines that can be acquired(especially prepainted) relatively cheaply. You'll either see a large percentage of their army being purchased second hand or through discount box sets, or they simply stick to a handful of factions and only make purchases that are relevant to those factions. Sure, if one UNIT get broken to hell and gone people will flock to that, but the number of individuals who have the combination of time and money to create tournament ready armies of brand new factions essentially out of the blue, within the time frame where their powerlevel is significantly above curve, is very small.
-
3 hours ago, novakai said:
well they said that about Sister of Battle too but they got a PA supplement in the end as well so
No they didn't. There were 0 Sisters of battle rules in that supplement. (Ephrael Stern was imperium not really sisters).
-
3 hours ago, PJetski said:
Dracoline + Ballista core is one of the lists I was talking about a year ago when people were telling me that Gavriel was the best Stormcast list. I'm glad people are (finally) catching on!
Gavriel was the best list until people got smashed by it enough times to play learn how to play against it.
Now it's shootcast.
-
No? Why would it? Warcry scenery ( at least the starter set's) is terrible for sigmar. It doesn't block los, doesn't provide cover...it's just not very good.
-
So it looks like only 1 model can take a long rifle. That's really different yeah? Or did I just not read the old warscroll right?
-
1 hour ago, Frowny said:
I think kharadron overlords allies are going to be great. Grundstock thunderers seem notably better than irondrakes. 2 shots basic instead of one and you cold bring a khemist for the 3rd.
Big blocks of ironbreakers are also looking strong. Hard to shift. Up to 3 quality attacks. Carry other buffs well.
Combos I see
Sisters of thorn + ironbreakers is a 2+ wall
Tanks in a bubble around the general in tempests eye. 2+ save, +1 to wound, control the middle from turn 1 with a wall of armor.
Both wild riders and demigryph knights hit quite hard on the charge. So math will tell us which is better as a hammer. Demis are much sturdier though.
Winner seem to me like hammerhal (generally useful), tempests eye for a strong alph Nd resistance to enemy alphas. Halloheart for a blob of battlemages
Anvilguard and grey water fastness seem.
Pheoneciumhas some good builds but seems like really only the go to for spamming pheonixes. Maybe do some will figure out how to build around the +1/+1.
Not sure how to Interpret living cities. I play sylvaneth and aside from the hunters not too much seems better in a living city than in a sylvaneth army. Some great traits spells and artifacts though
Can't thorn anything not a wanderer.
-
Not sure if she had those CAs before but the Sorc on Drag is an amazing single model piece if you can spare the CP. I would run her with dual frosthearts for some monster mash goodness.
-
2 hours ago, cplhicks said:
Kunning Ruk 1 big boss 2-5 Savage Orruks or Savage Orruk Arrow boyz.
Can still shoot or move in Hero phase must be wholly withing 12" of the Big boss. Unit size in this battalion capped at 20.
140 pts
So is the age of arrow spam dead or is is still workable? I'm a bit surprised GW didn't nerf arrow boyz/kunning rukk in to the ground. It seems still usable to me but we now have some other tricks or choices to run.
Anything with decent range is gonna pop that big boss like a balloon. Even DoK (with Morathi) have enough sniping to put ruck out of the game with 12" wholey.
That said, just enormous blocks of arrowboyz with the busted allegiance trait will still do amazing damage to anything but stormcast even without ruck.
-
3 hours ago, Grimrock said:
Yeaaah, ok then. Anyone saying this guy isn't competitive is off their rocker. I appreciate he's expensive, but his only weakness is speed and if you can drop cogs he has a threat range around 17.5" with the reroll charge command ability. Or you can use a command point to run him on an objective and just own that point for the rest of the game.
He'll walk through any magic heavy army because it takes 24 successful spells (because each spell can only do 1 damage to him) to kill him on average. He'll walk through any combat focused army. A ranged heavy army miiiight just kill him before he fights, but it'll take 48 successful wounds at rend 0 to kill him. Oh, and he can be healed so those numbers could be even worse .
He does an average of 30 wounds to a 4+ save opponent per combat phase. You can play around half the damage by removing the models close to him, preventing the double pile in, but that doesn't help if he's gotten to one of your heroes or monsters. It also ensures he's free to move and charge whatever he wants to in the next turn.
I'd expect some serious nerfs for him next year, but for now I think we've entered the Age of Gotrek. Start filling your lists with cheap chaff to stall him as long as possible, you're going to need them.
Or you could just kill him with large amounts of low quality attacks. It only takes 48 wounds to kill him on average (assuming no rend) a unit of witch aelves does 20 more damage than that without mindrazor OR full rerolls.
Plus he's not going to be in a decent charge range until turn 3 without investment and the more you invest in him, the less he'll do. So you get Cogs, that's 180pts minimum extra. The you need run and charge, that locks you into specific armies and costs even more points.
If he hits a chaff unit at any point he's pretty much out of the game and you don't really have enough points left after putting 700+ into Gotrek already to keep board control.
If he goes up against Legions of Nagash he pretty much auto loses because any movement debuff will put him out of the game.
That said, if you take him with DoK, he'll be absolutely brutal. Two units of WE, a Cauldron 2 Hag Queens a medusa and another battle line is only 1370 and is fairly difficult to deal with as is. Adding Gotrek puts it to 1890, which still leaves you room for Cogs.
Edit: Bad math.
-
38 minutes ago, Grimrock said:
Yeah I think free people probably have the best shot against him with the high volume of low damage attacks, but that could change in the new battletome too. Most armies can't put down that much fire though. Even tzeentch would have an extremely difficult time bring him down before he started cleaving his way through important units. Plus any army that's willing to dump the resources required to kill him will be giving the rest of his army a free pass for multiple turns.
Why kill him? If you ring around the rosy him with a cheap unit like dogs or Khinerai, you lock him out of the game for at least 2 turns.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Someone2 said:
Exactly! Although going 2nd is actually the way to go.
You can make sure you get 1st turn charge that way or atleast make sure your opponent doesn't get 2 turns in a row (battleround 1 + 2 are the most important rounds).
As a FEC, IJ and BCR player I almost always opt to go 2nd for this specific reason. Making sure I win the game on round 2 or 3 at the latest. It is done with VP though. Most players forget that you can be wiped and still win... games don't end by a wipe, but by turn 5. If you make sure you get more VP by turn 2-3 for the enemy to even get even without your units on the field, you've won.
For this very reason I find double turns to powerfull. Way to easy to win the VP game early on without your opponent having a large enough counter force to get enough VP back
Most missions make later turn VPs worth more and limit your ability to jump ahead early with roughly mirrored starting objectives.
On the majority of missions if you leap out on mid board or opponent deployment zone objectives too early, they can devastate your forces and out score you regardless. Star strike for example is a mission where holding the center objective for turn 5 is the same value as holding it for turn 2+ turn 3.
I'm almost always down in points turn 1-turn 2 but by turn 3 I have enough board control that I can lock you out for the rest of the game.
-
I think bravery as a whole works best as a mechanic that you have to expend resources to ignore.
Losing huge chunks of your forces in with no recourse feels awful. Having it there as a boogieman you have to build your list around is just a better way to deal with it, in my opinion.
-
On 8/20/2019 at 3:20 PM, missing1leg said:
Is there something I'm not seeing which would indicate when building my sisters of slaughter that I can't use both the masks and the hair? It seems like the weapons are the only really defined part which would need to be accurate and the rest could be however I liked visually. But I wanted to double check before I start building. Thanks in advance for any help.
I straight up used normal witch heads and just gave them the whips to differentiate them.
-
SoS trade a slightly longer pile in for 75% of WE output. I would never run 2 units of WE anymore but I also would argue that SoS simply don't do enough damage to be worth running 60.
I also personally think that the Slaughtertroupe is and has alway been wildly overrated.
-
5 hours ago, Turragor said:
I made another list rundown and I kinda like the idea behind it. Critique it so I know what to change before my next tournament: https://thehonestwargamer.com/aos-list-rundowns/choose-your-own-stormhost-adventure-desolators-edition/
The list is:
Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals
- Stormhost: Astral Templars or Celestial Vindicators or Anvils of the Heldenhammer
Leaders
Drakesworn Templar (460)
- General
- Storm Lance
- Trait: Dauntless Hunters
- Artefact: Godbeast Plate
- Mount Trait: Lithe-limbedLord-Castellant (120)
Skink Starpriest (80) OR Excelsior Warpriest (80)
- Allies
Battleline
5 x Liberators (100)
- Warhammer & Shield
- 1x Grandhammers5 x Liberators (100)
- Warhammer & Shield
- 1x Grandhammers5 x Liberators (100)
- Warhammer & Shield
- 1x GrandhammersUnits
6 x Desolators (600)
6 x Vanguard-Raptors with Longstrike Crossbows (340)
3 x Aetherwings (50)
3 x Aetherwings (50)Total: 2000 / 2000
Extra Command Points: 0
Allies: 80 / 400
Wounds: 109 (OR 110)
I know it's a thing at the moment but desolators and drakesworn templar are still pretty subpar and unreliable and the fact that you don't have any meaningful defense against mortal wounds or magic means that you could lose most of your offensive ability to a single endless spell.
You're also going to have to choose between exploding to bravery or doing nowhere near enough damage. If you lose 3 raptors or 2 desolators in the same turn it's pretty much over.
-
1
-
AoS 2 - Daughters of Khaine Discussion
in Daughters of Khaine
Posted
Bigger base sizes would be a MASSIVE nerf to witch aelves and sisters of slaughter. Not being able to fight in two ranks would mean a unit of 30 would be significantly overcosted at 300.