chord
-
Posts
1,953 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by chord
-
-
Ever since they did a pivot on AoS to try and bring back the more dedicated competitive gamer they have strayed further from balance. It makes sense from a short term financial decision. They are getting a sales boost for people chasing the meta, but I think in the long run they will cause more harm. Of course developing warcry they can use that to help drive new gamers into their offerings.
I do know that malifaux is becoming way more popular than GW (minus 40K) around these parts.
-
6
-
-
Awesome, can't wait to see it in stores
-
1 minute ago, zilberfrid said:
When I started historical fencing, I was out about as much as what I paid for a bit over 6k points of cities* in protection and a rapier (and a very cheap rapier at that).
So yes, it is an expensive hobby, and Games Workshop is the expensive on between them, but startup costs in many hobbies are high.
*About 350-400 euros
True but the difference is your equipment will not suddenly be unusable via a rules change whereas in WH a model can be dropped from competitive play and that investment is gone. (Not really an issue for casual players).
-
16 hours ago, Mutton said:
This is always my fear. There will always be affluent hobbyists to toss money around at anything that gets released; and I worry it's this sub-section of people that GW will only further target. I know we go round and round on the "Is the cost worth it?" debate, but eventually there'll be customers that simply cannot keep up with the prices---regardless of the reasoning behind the increases. You need to keep a middle ground somewhere, and these types of boxes (along with SC boxes) used to be great for people wanting to jump into the hobby at a respectable entry fee. I'd hate to see a world where $230 boxes are the norm, and no one at the shops can afford them except for the particularly well off. And as mentioned above, you're only just barely saving any money, and that's if you even want both armies. We're slowly whittling away at the idea of "savings" and heading toward those hokey online pre-order deals that bundle everything at full retail price.
Anyway, that's enough worrymongering. We always see trends between AoS and 40k, which is why I bothered to say anything. Maybe this is a one-time thing and nothing will come of it; but if it isn't, it shouldn't be slid by us without an utterance of disdain.I probably fall under the "affluent" hobbyists, and I still wouldn't pay that price for some plastic. But then again I'm not a competitive player, so that may be the difference. I think competitive players are the ones who will pay the price no matter what.
-
18 hours ago, Thiagoma said:
I am biased because Order Draconis have all my favorite models. That said i intended to just use my Draconis as Serpentis and oh boy... GW killed a fun alpha strike force (that would shine with its new allies) and didnt revamp Serpentis rules to fill the void.
I feel the same with Eldritch Council. Now with Hallowheart you spam Battlemages, but with EC you would have archmages, Loremasters and the 2 Dragon Casters warscrolls. Instead we have the Sorceress that doesnt have a whole log going on for her except her CA...
Feels like the Dark Elf counterparts are just way worse than the HE ones.
Agreed the Eldritch council was interesting and would have liked to seen a wider variety of mages.
-
8 minutes ago, Overread said:
GW doesn't hold that much stock, esp these days with their higher sales volume. Heck a year or two back quite a lot of models were regularly out of stock. Heck look how fast the Order models when out of stock when GW ended their production. Hardly a day and their entire backlog of stock was gone.
Plus if they've got stock then its boxed up ready for sale, which would mean paying staff a fortune to open up stock and rebox it.
It's more likely that armies which don't appear as popular get a marketing boost with a discount box to encourage people to start/expand armies of them.
The months leading up to the Seraphon battleforce box saw my local GW get all their seraphon models recalled except the start collecting box, then boom they got reboxed into the battleforce.
Same thing happened with Slaves to Darkness as well.
-
2
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:
what do y'all think the Christmas boxes will be this year? I still have an unopened Vanguard SC and wondering if I could return that to put towards a bigger Christmas box...
Probably whatever they have excess stock of.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Lucur said:
Can we moan a bit about how demigryph knights now get a 3+ save, while mighty sigmarite plate only gets a 4+ (except for dracoths. But it's their scales i'm sure
)
Crazy.........
It's a deep state conspiracy against Stormcast.
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Troll.exe said:
There’s a good discussion of the slaughterbrute on page 219. I believe since then they have removed the Khorne keyword and tagged the master as Slaves to darkness. Might have to give the master the Khorne keyword and take the slaughterbrute as an ally if you want to use it now.
There is a Slaughter brute of khorne warscroll in the PDF File.
-
What does everyone think of the Slaughterbrute? I love the look of the model, but I just noticed the Slaughterbrute of Khorne isn't in the AoS app anymore.
-
@scrollbuilderdude I think the slaughterbrute of khorne is missing, the regular one is in the app just not the khorne version.
-
Anyone plan on stripping and redoing their models? I am hoping to avoid that.
-
1 minute ago, jhamslam said:
reaaaaaally hope the CA for Hammers changes in the next book. It sucks. It makes you invest in a full block of sequitors /liberators but only happens on a 5+. So . you either get nothing and lose or its this totally broken thing where you have 440 points worth of sequitors again and now your opponents done for.
Agreed, to have to spend a CP for such a low chance of anything happening,...
-
7 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:
Every thing is still usable. Just because its not i. Cities of Sigmar doesn't make it vanish from the ghb, so there should be no problem using things as allies, either in CoS or other order factions. That might change with next year's ghb, but we should hopefully have legends points by then by the sounds of it!
True but most legends can't be allied with non-legend armies
-
1 hour ago, dekay said:
For both it's either sorceress on a dragon on one of the Stormcasts' own monsters. Tauralon is the best fit size-wise.
Thx the sorceress was what I was thinking but honestly not a good fit with stormcast. Guess I'll have to get rid of them 😔
-
10 minutes ago, Overread said:
Just the Grand Alliance rules, no specific army rules are in the book. So it doesn't fully replace the generals handbooks.
Bummer so close
-
Didn't get a chance to watch the gaming book reviews, are the seraphon allegiance rules in it or just grand alliance ones?
-
I have a Drakeseer and lore master I would ally into my stormcast army. Suggestions for using them as other things? The dragon is red and was pro painted so I don't want to strip it. The lore master I don't mind stripping.
-
1 hour ago, Overread said:
Campaign stories on their own are not a bad idea; I think the core issue was that they were campaigns released at time when many wanted stories and grounding in the Mortal Realms. Furthermore they were VERY Stormcast heavy, so anyone that wasn't rocking up with Stormcast likely felt left out a bit. Even when other races did jump in they had stormcast allies saving them/helping them.
Hopefully if GW does a campaign system in teh future the army spread will be far more diverse
The battleplans were usable by any army, so although the stories were stormcast heavy they were the protagonist of the realmgate wars, and the way the mortal realms/races were being introduced.
IMO, I'm not interested in a grounded mortal realms, crazy over the top stories are what I was interested in.
-
13 hours ago, Overread said:
I wonder if BL has had trouble shifting non-release tied books as of late. The early AoS novels were not bad, but they were VERY Stormcast heavy and very battle focused so they lacked a lot of worldbuilding as most of it was "might stormcast being mighty and beating up chaos". Now that's a gross simplification and there were many allies through that such as the Sylvaneth - however I think it tainted some against AoS and the novels in general.
It might be that the stigma has stuck a bit and that thus books tied to battletomes and launches have done better (by association); whilst something like the new Gotrek stuff could be doing far better based on his past and fanbase.
Without any hard numbers its really tricky to tell. Hopefully the lore parts of the Cities books and the general increasing Battletomes and things like the novellas will steadily push back and get the AoS lore far more popular in general.
I really enjoyed the early AOS novels, because I could then recreate the battles in the novels (with different armies) by using the campaign books. It felt like a really cohesive design that everything worked together for a living narrative that was constantly updating.
The current way of doing releases and lore really does not interest me anymore. I'd rather a campaign book every quarter or every six months that was constantly moving the story forward that was tied into novels and army releases. Really I just want campaign books in the style of the realmgate wars ones. They were great.
-
5 hours ago, RuneBrush said:
I do also think the rules as they are have created an air of laziness - a couple of games I've had to ask my opponent to check that a unit can actually see a hero model when it's hidden behind other ones (spoiler alert, they couldn't). There's just an assumption that ranged units can target anything within their range unless it's parked behind a large piece of terrain
I've noticed this as well, they also need to check each model can see the unit being targeted. I think improving the LOS (or just following the ones we have now) will make placement more strategic
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, XReN said:
You see Archaon - you shoot him, or burn with MWs from evocators, he won't be able to engage them without getting in range of lightning arc, you can even kill him with Celestant Prime I think.
Unless Archaon gets killed by the Celestant Prime immediately the Celestant Prime will be toast. The Prime can not handle a protracted combat with Archaon
-
14 minutes ago, XReN said:
I'd like to have silhouettes being a thing, so there won't be any "my helmet spikes can see the top of your banner, your unit is doomed" thing, I usually play it with some common sense, but some people will play it in less... appealing way. And not neccesserily LoS-blocking other units just because it will rob IDK of their special feature. Also LoS requirement to unbind spells should be returned. The cover shouldn't get any changes just because it will punish occasional shooting units in more well-rounded armies/lists than balance heavy shooting, I know it's god awfull to get your support pieces melted away, but it's possible to win nonetheless and "look out sir" combined with cover and occasional realm artefacts already provide enough defence.
I agree LOS for spells and unbinding should be there. Also you shouldn't be able to cast at a target if a target is within 3" of you (just like shooting).
Also I'd like to see better LOS rules so you can't shoot through a unit so easily. It makes placement a lot less interesting
-
😨 When everyone is saying 4" move is a weakness and the majority of stormcast move 4-5" and hit less hard
-
1
-
2
-
)
Speculation: Will AOS ever be balanced or is this as good as it gets?
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
That pivot occurred with the GHB and has only been increasing , especially with 2.0.