Zappgrot
-
Posts
216 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Zappgrot
-
-
On 9/24/2021 at 1:04 PM, Deepkin said:
No, though I am slightly surprised by the amount of people who think an international corporation deserves their undying loyalty and defense.
Ah yes those are of course the same thing. Cause obviusly pointing out extreemly clear economic motives is a defence.
-
10 hours ago, Deepkin said:
Yeah imagine being the rancid nerd who gets to "hold the line" and keep GW stores pure. Bit of a joke, that policy.
Really your supprised that a store that sells only a single product keeps competition outside of thier own store? Really?
-
5 hours ago, Marcvs said:
That's always good advice
As for a possible reason for this to be intentional: the interaction with Redeploy means that, if the opponent has a CP, a charge after translocate+move will only succeed if "movement (capped at 6") + 1d6" is equal or greater than 9", so it's basically 5+ roll for paladins, 4+ for 5" move units, 3+ for the others (since you can't finish your move closer than 3"). Much less certain than a gav bomb (gone but not forgotten).
Wut?
Isn't it 9-M+1d6
since they redeploy afther you move.
So palladins 5+1d6 (bad)
redemers 4=+1d6 (decent)
the rest 3+1d6 (good)
So as long as the opponent has a cp and space chargeing a specific unit will still be kind of hard.
However you can easily threathen a large part of the opponents force when you teleport and they can only redeploy one unit
-
35 minutes ago, Beliman said:
I don't know if you play ScE or Orruks, but I think that they are not far behind Lumineth. And if that's the case, you could talk to your friend to build a list without 30 Sentinels and this kind of stuff.
Btw, I think that SCE new book can beat Lumineth and can table 90% of armies that don't have enough chaff.
Well orruks obviusly. And while i can talk to my friend. It really isn't our job to ballance the game. Sure if we want closer game we can do that. But we kind of spend money on gw's product whit the expectation of them doing that. And yes SCE dragon spamm is going to be an competative stapple cause they are badly designed ( as in they do everything ) and undercosted at the moment.
-
1
-
-
On 9/15/2021 at 7:38 AM, Beliman said:
There are a lot of answers for that question. Chose your poison:
- Change on philosophy for new edition.
- Different teams with diferent frameworks to work.
- Different dates of delivery.
- New edition with a big shakeup.
- Covid destroying all pipelines.
- Different lead designers working in the same products.
- Etc... [You get the point]
That's nice and all. But i have to run my oruks vs my friends LRL. The extreem diffrance in options and interactions is crushing.
-
19 hours ago, EntMan said:
This would mean people searching for Warhammer stuff would be less likely to come across it, which I'd guess is what GW want to reduce.
People who want to buy Space Elves, Space Crusaders, Golden Angelic Knights, Corrupted Mutant Warriors etc will find them whatever. But I can see why GW wouldn't want me to chance upon the above and give my business to someone else when I search for Eldar, Space Marines etc.
That is kinda how buisness works right. A companie works to establish a brand and then want to profit of that brand. Clearly protecting your brand is a good idea.
-
4
-
-
On 9/9/2021 at 10:04 AM, EntMan said:
The feeling on here at the time was that this is exactly what they did.
100%
-
2 hours ago, Jabbuk said:
But isn't this the case with many armies though? I mean it's not an identical army to LRL at all, and several other armies have similar game mechanics or builds. Kruleboyz also have additional sneaky shenanigans that can disrupt gameplans.
Overall, I think it's very early to declare anything. Besides, let's not kid ourselves either, this is a destruction army. Destruction armies are never top meta. As long as we sit well in the fat middle I think GW did their job. The problem is with the filthy elves...
Well appart from giants who are top meta. My point is not so much about kruelboys beeing good or not. But that it feels like a fail on design space. If they wanted to make cruel boys sneaky. They should have made them proppa sneaky not just slap on a 6 to hit is a mortal wound and a single pre battle ability. Getting acces to more telleport or more redeploy tricks would have been nice.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Arzalyn said:
By what I have seen so far around many groups this is probably our best list for competitive play (at least from a theoretical point of view). I have seen some variations with 10 more guttripaz or 3 more boltboyz at the cost of the Hobgrots, but a good amount of them seen the correct thing to do if you are focusing in our ranged output.
I think the problem i have whit kruelboys form a competative sense. Is this. If this is the best thoretical list. Then kruelboys seem pointless. Since you could have a same type of army but way better by plating LRL. I know they ar filthy elves and all. But if one looks at it purely from a copetative point of view. There is little point to the lads ;(
-
On 7/30/2021 at 3:41 AM, Lord Krungharr said:
Orruks tome is on its way, with rules to save Kragnos' day!
HAHAHAHAHAHA
-
1
-
-
On 7/29/2021 at 9:56 PM, C0deb1ue said:
Looks cooler and that is where the positives end.
Not even that.
-
On 9/12/2021 at 4:31 AM, swarmofseals said:
also @bonzai although not quoting you
This is a bit of speculation on my part, albeit backed up by data. I think that GW is trying to be very careful with shooting in 3.0 given how shooting heavy the meta was in late 2.0 and the added power of Unleash Hell. If you look at the 3.0 points costs vs. the 2.0 points costs, shooting units went up more on average than melee units did. I calculate the mathhammer for a lot of units, and "par" for a shooting unit in 2.0 was around WOR (same stat as what I used to call WDR) of .07-.08 whereas now par is around .05 for shooting units. These numbers are consistent across the new tomes as well. Artillery units and hybrid melee units are lower of course.
There's also been some movement away from buffs that work on both melee and ranged. A good example of this is the most recent DoK tome, which made most of the buffs melee only.
Based on all of this I think GW probably wants shooting to be part of the competitive meta, but not dominant and certainly not to the exclusion of other playstyles.
A lot of you are discussing the removal of buffs to scale arrowboys and the gating of the third ranged attack behind a subfaction. I haven't seen much discussion (may have missed it) of the fact that arrowboys have +1 melee attack now. GW has shifted them from basically a pure ranged unit to a hybrid unit.
Let's compare 10 Icebone arrowboys to 10 Icebone orruks with chompas, using my WOR (weighted offensive rating) and WDR (weighted defensive rating) formulas. Both are measures of efficiency.
Arrowboys (WOR/WDR): .0653/.1738
Orruks (WOR/WOR CHARGING/WDR): .0727/.0871/.1855
Arrowboys are not that much less efficient than orruks with chompas on both offense and defense. In exchange, they get a bit of ranged attack (.023 WOR vs non monster, .0306 vs monster).
It's also worth noting that arrowboys have VERY high defensive efficiency for a ranged unit. Most ranged units have a WDR of .1 or less.
Is this a good thing? I have no opinion on that yet. But the idea that arrowboys are straight nerfed and unusable isn't really accurate.
@bonzai, I definitely respect your main point. I personally dislike it when a single subfaction defines the optimal playstyle for its faction. Whether the faction rules are bad because they've pushed the faction towards one particular playstyle is a valid argument and I certainly won't argue the point. I had thought you were arguing that the faction is mediocre from a power perspective, which I disagree strongly with. I did notice that you said that boars are a clear winner, but it seemed that you were also suggesting that although the boars are better that they still aren't very good. And again that's where I disagree -- I'm pretty confident that they are a top tier warscroll. It's very possible that I'm wrong but generally until there is a large body of gameplay data available I tend to favor the math.
If gw wants to do somethign about the shooting meta. They should look at order. Cause they are by far far far the main problem. The mortal wounds on 6 untis are competative stapels and dominate the order meta. At least where i play. I am up to my ears in snakes and pointy ears.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Orkmann said:
In Aos2 the path to victory for BSP was to control the board, score high in the early rounds and try to tank as long as possible. This was best done with Bonegrinz, which had some very competitive builds, even in the last months of AoS2.
The above strategy is not working anymore, due to the new battleplans and changes in the scoring (cant build up significant early lead) and also because the backbone of the army, the savage boyz went from 300 to 495 points, a 65% increase for a unit of 30.
The question for the new tome is how can we adapt to AoS3 ? Icebone brings some extra damage, but even with that the damage output is average at best. What really hurts the army is that we have lost all our tricks, like the old Bonegrinz ability and Breath of Gorkamorka. The tactical repertoire has also shrunk with the arrowboyz nerf. The latter is still good in Bonegrinz, but without Icebone there is just no combat output left in the army. In the meantime we can still field a lot of wounds, but we hace lost a lot of tankyness, esp against shooting armies.
Is there some new build which can still work? Maybe there is, no need to be too negative, but at this point I can't see it.
The old bone splitters worked for my by stacking armour on my stuff and tanking it out. But AOS 3 killed that. Also grabbing far off objectives whit the movment spell that is gone. This edition seems to be a straight up nerf to an army that wasn't strong to begin whit. and that makes me kinda sad.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, swarmofseals said:
It's such a relief to finally be able to talk about this book XD
@bonzai I think you are underestimating the power of the things that Bonesplitterz got with this tome. I get that there are a lot of little subtractions here and there and that the army will play differently now, but I don't think any of the losses are super impactful while the gains are exactly that.
Whenever I played Bonesplitterz I found myself frustrated by the lack of punch, particularly against anything with a good save. It generally felt like a race where my opponent was just trying to do enough damage before time runs out.
With the new tome, Bonesplitterz not only can do damage but have some of the most efficient damage dealers in the game.
Icebone is HUGE. The fact that the buff is army wide (combined with the 6+ exploding hits) means that every unit is now a threat in melee to any target. The high volume of attacks is great against anything with poor armor and the mortals are great against anything with heavy armor.
Boars (both types) are now extremely efficient on offense and still quite efficient on defense, and the new spell gives another out to dealing with heavy armor.
You can still play a more defensive style army, of course. You can spam a lot of bodies and put 200+ wounds on the board, but now those big blocks of Savage Orruks will deal a lot more damage back.
On top of that there is the new Bonesplitterz WAAAGH which is incredibly powerful.
Don't underestimate the Wurrgog Prophet's staredown ability. The fact that it was an artefact before meant you couldn't take it along with Glowing Tattoos. That's a pretty nice combo now, dealing an average of something like 17 mortal wounds before the Prophet dies.
I think Icebone is to huge. To be honest. It is such an increase in dammage to most units whit armour that it is probably the cause of the ifnatry beeing so exepencive for the bare stats. I would rather have cheapers stuff and more of it then such an effective ability
-
3 hours ago, zilberfrid said:
Even horde armies want heroes, well, at least Cities does.
Well tough luck against LRL acording to GW. But save stacking helps against everything else. A bit to much even and that is the problem whit how the games is at this time. Either your defences do nothing or they are overwhelming.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Beliman said:
As a KO player, I'm fine with the mechanic but not for the whole experience (and design) of the game.
Imho, that's because we play a 3.0 game with 2.0 army's rules.
Some armies don't have the new buffed up stuff (save stacking being one of them), others can abuse them. That's my main issue and why I really want to see what's in the first 3.0 battletomes (if we takke a look at Gravelords, they seems to be fine and be good to play with and against, so it's not that gloom & doom as some people think).Without lambent light, you are going to do 8-12 average. That's still a lot but imo, it's fine for a 450 points unit.
Depends. Against skaven gits or anny other swarm army even whit Lambent light it's not a problem. Against stormcast, obr, or Slaves. Your just going to delete 300 points each turn the problem whit sentinals is that they make defences useless. And that sux a lot if you paid points for it.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Skreech Verminking said:
To be honest, sentinel spam, really just makes it easier for any skaventide army with a few hidden weapon teams to win the game,
especially if that skaventide player gets the first turn.
Well at least there is one thing skaven might be good at theb.
-
8 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
I mean, if you are willing to actually burn a Finest Hour and All-Out Defense on him, he really doesn't die. Not to combat at least. A 5 wound model on a 2+/6++ takes 36 non-rend damage to kill on average. You have to be really out of positon to take that much in a single turn. 30 models at an elite profile of 2 attacks, 3+/3+/-1/1 don't do it.
Small models have the disadvantage that you can reasonably focus them down with just mortals, though. ~5 mortals in one turn is pretty easy for most tuned lists to do. So a unit of Sentinels will take a normal Vampire Lord right off the table. As will a lucky spell cast and a few incidental mortals or something.
That's what I am talking about when I said before that it's starting to affect the viability of normal combat. That stupid 5 wound Vampire Lord is hugely tough in regular combat at the moment. He still falls to mortals as easily as ever, though.
To be honest a unit of sentinals will take most things of the table. A unit of 30 whit both buff will likeley do between 14 and 19 mw. No LOS needed whitin 30 inch. There is no defence except dispelling the buffs. Meaning that if your stuck whit a magic weak army. You basically ******.
-
2
-
-
11 hours ago, AaronWilson said:
Hello all.
As we're settling into AoS 3 save stacking is a topic that comes up quite a lot and I'd though it would be interesting to have a discussion on the topic now we've a few months into AoS3.For those who maybe are unaware, save stacking is the practice of putting multiple instances of +1 save on a model (Mystic Shield, All out Defence, Their Finest Hour) etc to pseudo ignore -1/2 rend. This is most effective on a 3+ save hero (Nagash, Archaon) etc as the limit to the roll is +1, any extra means you will be ignoring -1 rend and on TFH turn -2 rend. This is new to the edition due to Mystic Shield becoming +1 save & Their Finest Hour appearing.
Initially I thought I dislike the idea of save stacking, but now I'm multiple games in I've swapped stance. It's nice to have your big heroes which you invest a lot of points in actually feel like as hard to kill as they should be. Even not for the big names (Nagash, Archaon, etc) I had a Liege-Kavalos in Petrifex elite under mystic shield & their finest hour tank Bel'akor & a Khorne Deamon prince to deny Slay the Warlord and it felt epic.
While I can appreciate some people may think it has tipped certain big names into the too hard to kill category, I think it's nice to see them feel as epic as their points / backstory tells us.
What are your guys thoughts on save stacking right now?My toughts are that it does not matter. Since you will get kicked of the board by mortal wounds much more then ever before.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, The Red King said:
I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree with you.
Paraphrasing you so I apologize if I misrepresent something.
"To get what's really special out of tabletop you have to do both." Well good news. YOU have! Your opponent not painting their minis doesnt keep you from getting that something special.
"I didnt get into this hobby to push grey plastic around." More good news, you arent obligated to play with your opponents models, in fact most people would reccomend you not push around their grey plastic without permission.
I prefer seeing painted armies fighting painted armies but every person who gets driven from the game by that kind of "standard" will never paint their army and they'll never play any games so the standards at a casual level should really be "whatever allows you and your opponent to have the most fun* *must make REASONABLE accommodations" clear proxies and the like being reasonable. Not being allowed to deny someone access to the hobby based on your personal preference is NOT an accommodation.
I should add I'm fine with tournaments having paint requirements. Nobody is being kept out of the hobby by not being able to go to tournaments and by the time you've reached that level you could probably paint them or use some hobby budget for commissioning a tabletop level paintjob.
Nothing personal. Just an observation.
I think this is such an interesting response. From a philosophical point of view. The lvl of standard we have for painting and assembling of our opponents models is purely subjective. There is just no objective stance we can take on that point. But i think this response is full of language trying to make the subjective, objective. I mean the term reasonable accommodation means absolutely nothing. Some ppl find bases whit a code reasonable enough others will find models in the wrong sub faction colour unreasonable. Those two would both seem unreasonable extremes to myself but that would be my subjective perspective.
The same for trying to create a divide between the players armies. There is no clear line between those other then who paints what. Your opponents army being grey can be just as big an detractor to a players fun as their own. Sure the opponent is an autonomous being in control of his own life. But he can not impact what makes a game feel special to the other player. If the other player find it annoying to play against grey, nothing the opponent does or does not do is going to invalidate that feeling. There is no objective right or wrong in that sense.
The only objective observation one can make on this issue is that any and all standards are a form of gatekeeping. That is what standards are for, to keep out that what does not meet them. And where we draw standards should be a practical consideration.
Are you looking for more opponents? Better keep those standards low.
Are you looking to prepare yourself and your buddies to win some events better keep those standards high.
-
So anny one else worried the release is pointless because their friends play LRL, Cruel boys and/or Cities. As of late the only wounds i suffer are mortal wounds and the points invested in getting tough armour seem completely wasted.
-
2
-
-
I also like how the Khardron sky vessel issue was not addressed. I mean having the battletome state that you can move the ship after the unit gets out. But not being able to do that because the new rules will make you miss the timeing window to move the ship is not going to be confusing at all. .............
-
5 hours ago, PrimeElectrid said:
Why have they removed ward stacking, removed bodyguard from stacking wards, then reintroduced ward stacking again!
Cause they are stupid. Obviously
-
3
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Scurvydog said:
That he lost the ability that forces rerolls of 6s to hit against him will be a HUGE deal in competitive lists, he suddenly takes full damage from all the exploding and MW 6s to hit abilities, which was a saving grace for his survivability.
Well not full. Half since he still bounces mortals on a 4+
Games Workshop aggressively implementing new IP policy.
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Gw stores are about as far from a utopia as realiticly possible. But expecting them to allow 3d printed stuff is eeh........ a wierd stance to take.