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

TheCovenLord

Members
  • Content Count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

143 Celestant-Prime

About TheCovenLord

  • Rank
    Decimator

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I would argue that they are necessary but in their current incarnation they are becoming unhealthy (in that they are too common). It is far too easy to add "6's" do a mortal wound in addition to basically everything. I am also not in agreement that there are significant defenses against mortal wounds present across armies. Maybe this is coloured by the types of armies my local meta comprises but there are few outside of death factions sporting natural shrug saves and even then rarely above a 6+ which is a pretty paltry defense for how common they have become. Maybe there are a few armies that have widespread defenses (ex: Daughters/Death factions) but it really is not common for the forces I face off against making it far more appealing than rend which is slowly becoming a forgotten stat in our group. Many factions also distinctly lack defenses or even shrug saves whatsoever against mortal wounds and it further adds to their struggle in this high shooting/high mortals/high magic era.
  2. You must activate and fight if eligible. The core rules are a bit murky on piling in being mandatory as part of fighting. The combat phase portion states that an eligible unit (one within 3" of an enemy) must be selected to pile in and fight during the combat phase. However, the piling in portion of text uses wording that makes it seem to be optional (lots of use of "...a unit CAN make a pile in move...") key word being the can which makes it sound optional. Due to this most players I know play as if the pile in portion of the text is optional. As @Aelfric has stated a way to meet all the criteria set out by the rules is that you can always move the unit 0.1mm (or less, even a molecule closer counts technically) as long as they end closer to the closest enemy than before. If their weapons are in range they MUST strike.
  3. Fair point. Goes to show rule writing isn't as easy as we would all like it to be. I do stand by that there should be an easier way to convey the information without leaving it open enough for players to abuse (such as in this case).
  4. They really should just say "models that flee are removed from play" and it would resolve this. No use of the word "slain" to confuse the issue. GW is notorious for murky language though
  5. By the very wording it is not split. They are only counted as slain for removal purposes. They are not actually slain per the wording of the rule. RAI vs RAW the very idea is ridiculous. They are running away not splitting to become more brave and stay and fight. The people you play with play in bad faith. EDIT: Not to say AoS rules aren't riddled with contradictions and silly RAI vs RAW moments but this is RAW and RAI agreeing and them splitting from fleeing is not how the rule works.
  6. No you do not. You can take fewer miniatures than the listed minimum but it will still cost the same as the minimum. Ex: Say a unit is made up of 5 models for 100 points and you can have a unit of maximum 40 models. If I wanted to field 10 models it would be 200 points If I wanted to field 8 models it would still be 200 points as you are paying for them in increments of minimum unit size regardless of whether you have the models or not. If I wanted to field the maximum of 40 it would be 800 points and I could not elect to add more to the unit as its "capacity" is 40. There are some units which have a "horde discount" if you max out the unit size. This will be listed in their points profile (either in the army book, GHB or points FAQ list on the warhammer website where they do points revisions a few times a year). In this case units would be listed as being fielded as units composed of 5 models to a maximum of 40 models and points costs would look like: 100/700 (where you are getting a 100 points discount for maximizing the unit).
  7. Diverse meta before COVID. Everything from the most casual to the tournament preppers near me - most players pack several armies at this point so it can change drastically week to week. It can lead to a wide range of experiences and you can usually find an opponent to suit your mood for the style of game you want. The only issue that arises is the weeks leading up to a major tournament will be flooded by bleeding edge tryhard lists as people try to put in the practice making games significantly tougher. Around those times the more casual players (like our sad Beasts representative and sylvaneth diehards) will be around less frequently and more competitive list building is required. Luckily it is not very often in my neck of the woods so its only a few weeks of the year where I basically shelve my casual dark elf double dragon elf list and focus on hobby time instead.
  8. Also to answer part of your question there is no true points per model in AoS anymore. Its points per unit (with a min sized unit requirement). So no more weird sized units to fill out points in lists anymore.
  9. Part of this I believe is not that there aren't "broken" and competitive choices at 1k points. Its just that there are fewer options for many forces (that rely on armywide synergies or various buff pieces that can be impossible to fit into such a small list) to deal with them. It also encourages skew listing as the ability to counter extreme strategies becomes limited when your options are so low. In effect the list of "haves vs have-nots" only becomes more heavily weighted into the "have-nots" category at 1k and many people do not like that and it shows. It also chews into armywide playstyles which may be encouraged by battalions/sub factions that do not particularly work well at 1k. I guess a simple example is very few armies can carry enough kit in a 1k list to deal with a ghoul king on terrorgheist that can fight twice or a mega-gargant if they are not capable of fielding their own independent piece of equal power. Its less that people don't want to find good stuff its just that the list of good stuff becomes so slim that you would probably only ever see a few factions played at a high level there (even fewer than at 2k which is already ENDLESSLY complained about from a balance perspective but is actually pretty reasonable as far as it goes). Furthermore a list that small starts to become a skirmish game and frankly there are better systems offered by GW let alone by other companies that do skirmish games way better than AoS.
  10. This feels like it is due to the Mightier Makes Rightier and how giants can change the scenario scoring rules so that they can always capture an objective. I believe this is done to prevent Giants from modifying the capture rules during the other plays turn and preventing them from scoring as it will check the conditions of whomsoever's turn it is first (thus checking capturing using the standard scenario rules) then check against the giants (who may to modify the capture requirements using Mightier makes Rightier to make themselves eligible to score but suddenly the opponent no longer can). I may be wrong though any Sons players want to weigh in?
  11. You know I think this may be my biggest wish for 3.0. Ditch the books for printing warscrolls and provide the scrolls/faction/subfaction rules via the app. Sell the books as lore/narrative/scenario pieces and I would still probably buy them.
  12. As a cities player of Dark Elves. EMMachine is correct. The dual blades gives the rerolls only no additional attacks. Generally you take the lance and shield for devastating charges and a tougher monster.
  13. Absolutely this. How much do Cygors/Ghorgons/Hydra/Kharibdyss need to be reduced before they're just such a bargain for the wounds chaff? This mostly needs GW to be unafraid of warscroll re-writes and not much to do with a new ED. though. I have some hope though with the broken realms revealing pretty significant warscroll updates. However, the winter FAQ immediately reminded me it was GW at the helm.
  14. Things I would like to see: -Overhaul bravery/battleshock. It either is either completely ignored or feel-bad crippling. It messes with unit pointing etc. Move to the 40k system or something make ignoring it difficult. - Make the choice for the double turn matter more. More and more armies are given endless spells that either cannot affect themselves or cannot be controlled (which I like as they cost points). But there are fewer and fewer advantages to going second. Make scoring differences significant. Make shooting less effective if you seize 1st, or magic less effective. Make it so its a real choice that a player has to think about because right now its just a roll off to win and go. I do like the double turn. But I have also been on the bitter receiving end of a double turn that closed me out of a game by turn 2 without me being able to do anything but pray to the dice gods that my opponent whiffs every single 3+ rerollable hit roll he/she has. - Get rid of horde bonuses/discounts. Units are hyper effective and discounting them makes it worse. It also is not applied evenly. Seeing it on BoC or skaven make sense but then we get it on things like elite hearthguard and then not on other elite-ish units is very strange and adds random power to certain units I suspect it was a balance choice at first but it is a bit non-sensical and could definitely be applied more evenly by using.... - Keyword unit roles. Give units specific keyword roles. Elites/Behemoths/Battleline should all come with inherent rules that define their role. Make elites baseline very powerful so that they can operate "outside the influence" of cheerleader buff units OR special rules that give them utility beyond killyness that battleline would struggle or just not get. Make battleline more dependent on having leaders nearby. Make behemoths damage double vs X+ number of infantry or specifically battleline to represent their crushing presence. Do something with those keywords to really make the units shine at specific activities. They have sort of started doing this with ogors and giants abilities with regards to objective capping now they just need to standardize it as a generic keyword. Within this we could also introduce unit caps (ex: 1 elite unit may be taken per X battleline units etc.) to give another balancing lever. -Make shooting into combat impossible. Either make it so units cannot fire into their own combat (allowing melee units to rush and lock up ranged units) or make it impossible for units to fire into combats involving friendlies for fear of hitting them. Something needs to be done about shooting and this is a potential solution. Make it so either it harkens back to eras past where if a ranged unit got locked in combat they had to resort to their awful melee profile with knives/fists OR make it so the fear of hitting friendlies prevent them from focus firing units pinned in place off the board. Either one would do wonders to help mitigate some shooting lists (still doesn't fix hard 1st turn alphas but that may have to be a tome by tome basis). I did consider making it so that units run the risk of dying to shots fired into a combat with friendlies. However, it encourages a rather toxic playstyle of pinning with cheapest chaff (you don't care about) and shooting it anyway (regardless of fluff) OR putting a unit that is just too difficult to kill by the source of shooting and shooting into the combat anyway. Without how good shooting is at the moment I'd be very doubtful that using "misses" as hitting your own units would be much of a detriment to people who invest heavily in the shooting game. -Rework magic/prayers. Right now its the haves and the have nots. Either a tome has powerful casters with multiple casts and huge bonuses (Kroak, Nagash, Arkhan, teclis, even cheap skaven Grey seers etc.). Or they have awful single casters with few to no bonuses. I know personally if I am not running hallowheart I just no longer allocate points to wizards anymore as it is extremely futile to attempt to unbind or even cast anything. The same goes for prayers. Some armies have access to them. Some do not. And they are not interactive whatsoever. For how prominent the gods are in taking an active hand in the mortal realms I believe most factions should have access to prayers of some sort if they are going to hand them out to some factions and not others. It is kind of odd how they handle them as well. Completely uneven even within grand alliances. Khorne has prayers as well as skaven however Tzeentch (probably fluff reasons) and Slaanesh do not (so far). Some argue that prayers are for factions that have limited casting to help make up for it (Fyreslayers) but this is patently untrue as many factions have access to both (DoK, Skaven, Mawtribes etc.). I feel they should either be more accessible or should be interactive with your opponents (denying their prayers or making their pleas go unheard or some such). -Rend over mortal wounds - I feel mortal wounds are too cheap and plentiful. Once again this would likely require individual warscroll changes over many tomes rather than a sweeping change from an edition change. Go back to rend being a way to mitigate armor rather than just ignoring it completely by dumping mortal wounds onto every 6 to hit/wound. -Pipedream - Reduce lethality - I feel like lethality could be reduced a little bit. But the game has developed in such a way (and been painted into a bit of a corner) with some units being "tanky" even in the current hyper death environment which would make them mathmatically impossible to kill (they already approach it with the 5 turn limit with current rules). There would have to be complete overhauls of individual warscrolls across all factions to get out of this and I doubt it will happen particularly since tomes like Lumineth are likely here to stay IF 3rd ed happens soonish.
  15. Skaven, BoC, Bonesplittaz, Kroxigors/saurus are hideous the skinks still hold up OK and the carnosaurs are neat. EDIT: Mancrusher gargants look awful compared to the new Megas.
×
×
  • Create New...