Doko
-
Posts
1,112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Doko
-
-
i sent this,feel free to copy it and send it to the faq team if you want.
page 134, the warscroll "freeguild command corps",havent weapon option for the Great Herald and need a faq to give him a weaponpage 143, the warscroll of the unit dwarfs hammerers dont have champion,standard bearer neither musician when they have all this in the unit,so need be fixed because its a erratapage 127 the warscroll of the freeguild marshal his shield is missing and havent statspage 143 the irondrakes have other errata,the gromrhill armor is missing(+1 save against shooting)edit for not spam posts.remember my problem with the box where the cavalry was missing?i got my replacement sent today and i got a double surprise!first they sent me all the units and not only the cavalry unit missing(even the heroes),so i have 40 stellhelms(i only gonna use 10 tho),5 cavalry and two of each hero.second surprise,they only sent me the plastic and no bases,so i gonna need buy the bases in some store because i wont ask for bases after the first surprise haha-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Lord Krungharr said:
If using a more combined arms force, what would the best chunk of Dark Aelves be to include with a Steam Tank Company (Comm. w 3 tanks, Warforger) and Cavalier entourage (Marshal/5 horsies)? At first I'm thinking 20 Black Guard and a Sorceress, but now I'm wondering about a bunch of skirmishing Corsairs and a Dreadlord and Fleetmaster?
Trying to get my first real Cities game in next week.
seeing that you gonna bring tanks and cavalry,i would bring corsairs for screens and keep in your objetives also because you gonna need corpses
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
Quite interesting article. Turns out there's even more unexplored potential in the BT that we haven't talked about.
https://plasticcraic.blog/2023/09/18/cities-of-sigmar-crunching-the-rules/Too bad the article doesn't go into some of our things (Vindicarum/Cavaliers/Corsairs) but there's some real original stuff in here. My favourite is Steelhelm blocks in Hammerhal Ghyra with the brazier of holy flame + deliver rousing speech, it sounds really viable now ! Would you paint 60+ Steelhelms for it though...
their old articles about cities were so bad lol,got many rules wrong as the triple on greywater +1 hit and +1 wounds that isnt posible and a big etc.
but this article is written by a diferent guy that seems know read better and know very well the rules.
in general i knew everythimg of this,but one rule was new for me,i didnt remember that a save - is a save of 7+.
i tougth as mortal wounds the vitriolic spray,when enemy can use many options to get +1 save and save at 6, doing the spell many worse than i tougth
-
1 hour ago, Chikout said:
Why are you using this data? It says July at the top of the page and it lists number of wins not percentage of wins. The faction with the most 5-0s is not necessarily the best faction. According to Woehammer who seem to have the most up to date stats, Khorne are currently at a perfectly reasonable 52% Win rate. That's pretty close to perfect. Soulblight are on their second round of nerds after round one didn't do enough which is probably why we are seeing a bigger change this time. OBR have seen their strongest build hit but we'll have to see how that turns out.
Generally I think this is a solid update. It hits some shenanigans like the incarnate and teleporting blizzards but that might not prove to be enough.
The most common complaint I'm seeing is that Seraphon escaped without any changes though that seems to be more of an NPE problem than a power problem.
even if we get the win rate of woehammer as you said,idoneth have 48 win rate and fyreslayers also have 48 win rate.
idoneths got reduction in points across the board and even a buff in rules while fyreslayers got 0,0000 buffs.
so dont make sense from win rate or tournaments wins point of view
-
40 minutes ago, Chikout said:
Why are you using this data? It says July at the top of the page
is spanish,but says since july(when general handbook was released) untill now
-
2 minutes ago, Ganigumo said:
we're due for a fyreslayers release in one of the two next dawnbringers books
i wish,but i think we only gonna have this warcry band as new unit after 8 years with nothing.
the rumours about new units for fyreslayers have been going since almost two years ago but so far we got only this small band and that it is,only more foot units.
we need something that break the visual style,some cavalry,fly unit or big unit as golems but not more foot units
-
1
-
-
i think who makes the balance havent idea about the meta.
this is the actual data of the tournaments with 5 rounds since this gheneral handbook.
so we have as the top to vampires and bonereapers with same stats,what make gw? huge nerfs to vampired with across the board increases in almost entire book and some jokes as 30+ to zombis,delete one spell doing it useless,also kill the legion of nigth teleport blizarf, but meanwhile bonereapers get more buffs than nerfs in points and only a direct nerf to one unit.
in general bonerepeaers get a sligth nerf while vampires have been deleted.
then we have khorne in 3th position and get 0! nerfs but many indirect buffs.
other top 10 armys as slaves or nurgles get many buffs.
then we have the botton armys: fyreslayers who are the botton get 0 buffs,then orcs also get 0 buffs.
this balance dont make any sense,only make bigger the gap betwen the top armys and botton,the top got buffed and only vampires have been deleted while the botton got 0 buffs and the middle tier as idoneths got huge buffs
-
i am not a fan of the female models of gw(they are more men than girl) and so i dont like these two female dwarfs.
but the minidroth is cute and the male models without the ass visible finally are great.
i hope they are playable
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Morathi is my Goddess said:
Don't worry I'm definitely aware I'm in minority on this one 😄. But I'm a sucker for most dragon models..
you arent a minority, almost every fantasy genere fan love dragons.
i really love this black dragon model,in real life looks better than in pics but is a pain to store being so tall
-
12 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
Older units might stay, they might not stay
good point that i usually forget when compare units.
i gonna play the old world when be release,so i dont mind too much if they dissapear from aos but you got a very good point for these players that only gonna play to aos
-
31 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
Unfortunately I think there is a good chance none of that is errata. I've had a look through the book and every time you see Hammerer's appear in the art they don't have a command squad. I think this might be a deliberate choice they made. If thats the case its a shame, but there is a sort of thematic sense to it.
I don't think the shield has rules, might just be a look thing.
As for the iron drakes defence against shooting, I think that is also an intended removal, they already have 2 different unit rules, and they've been cutting down on them
yep i know that the irondrakes is a direct nerf and not errata,but i dont loose nothing for try it.
the gryfon is more dubiously because the black dragon have shield even if it is bad,so it is weird if dragon shield have rules but gryfon not.
the hammerers im sure 100% that is a errata,they have com,amd squad in the miniatures,they have had rules for 20 years this comand squad,and this book have comand squad for every single unit with the model but only hammerers are out?
also i only found page 144-145 with one pic,and yes hammerers dont have musician neither standard,but in this same pic also ironbreakers dont have musician neither standard and have rules,so that dont mean nothing
-
41 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
They are more locked into a buffing piece than the ironbreakers though. Iron breakers can be buffed by a rune lord directly, but you could have that runelord buffing Iron Drakes instead, or buffing hammerers and hanging back close enough to the Iron breakers to still order them. The opponent doesn't know whether the runelords order is going to be shieldwall or counter charge. There are definite builds with the warden king working with hammerers as well, where he is there and can potentially order. I do agree that the cogsmith is fully underwhelming, he should definitely be cheaper, acting as a budget dwarf hero
i dont get what u mean,soceres can also buff to other diferent unit while giving the ward to blackguards and better even can even debuff enemy to give a indirect buff to non elf units where runelord only can buff dwarfs,also enemy dont know what order gonna give the sorceres where if you see a ironbreaker in a objetive together a dwarf you know that he gonna do the shieldwall.
41 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:think you need to stop looking at things in such a simplified top trumps, it achieves nothing and only really makes people who like the non optimal option feel bad
again i dont get it,what u meaning. we are speaking about the more competitive options,whats the point in speak about how ironbreakers can be used as shield,or how a sorceress can do one spell,or the artillery can be used to shoot!?
everyone know these things,usually the point to discuss is what are the best units for each role.
also i dont get because i gonna do feel bad to persons that dont like the non optimal option,they gonna feel better spending 300€ in their non optimal units thinking that they are good and then get destroyed in every game and dont have fun?
here in my club i am asked for many players about the best unit to buy to be competitive etc and maybe i have got a habit to be too much white and black about each unit.
i myself i have used a full dispossesed army for 8 years (not in tournaments) and i never felt bad when other players said how bad were the dwarfs units so i dont get what you meaning,i think that i am doing a favour to many players that dont know the army or the units and only want spend the money in one 2k list that gonna be competitive and dont want spend this money and then end with a non competitive list(im sure of this because i got many persons asking me for this in real life and on the web)
in short my intention is that persons that dont know cities can know that is good and what is bad,and then they can choose if they want do a full army with bad units because they like the models,but they know that this list wont be good,and that is better than give wrongs ideas about how bad units are good and then some players that like these units gonna make a full list with these units thinking that they are great and gonna be discouraged when they are destroyed in games.
i know that my english is bad,and sound rude many times,and i am too much black and white but my intent is good(teach to new players)
-
8 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
lock you into a sorceress (who I think is a fantastic unit, don't get me wrong) if you want the ward save.
hnnn dont irombreakers lock you on a runelord also?(because enginer is the worst hero of entire aos and runeking dont have any use of he isnt your general)
so is the same combo, irombreakers+runelord vs blackguard+sorceres but sorceres is better than runelord by a big gap and blackguards better than ironbreakers in almost every situation also(more damage and with rend,better tankiness in our combat phase,enemy shooting and enemy magic and only worse by a small +1 save in enemy combat phase)
also the dwarf combo need one order while the elf not,and is free of choose one order while dwarf is locked to shieldwall if we are speaking about tankiness
-
5 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
I am working under the assumption that this is a mistake and will be errata'd. Otherwise, you are right, this is a significant downside
yup in fact i sent some emails to the faq team with this:
first errata is in page 143, the warscroll of the unit dwarfs hammerers dont have champion,standard bearer neither musician when they have all this in the unit,so need be fixed because its a errata
second errata in page 127 the warscroll of the freeguild marshal his shield is missing and havent stats
also page 143 the irondrakes have other errata,the gromrhill armor is missing(+1 save against shooting)
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Beliman said:
Take in mind that numbers are just numbers. A few weeks ago, you did some maths for Grdunstock Thunderers and the result was that they were a bad unit for their points and damage (even fully buffed).
So, Grundstock Thunderers are still the most KO used unit, doing the most damage and defending objectives in most KO games.
That's my point: numbers are good to understand most of the units, but they are not the whole picture. I'm sure that Grundstock Thunderers would be shelf'ed in any other army.
yes numbers are just numbers,but they never lie and are acurate.
and yes i said unbufed thunderers are bad for their cost,is a fact and is true.
but buffed thunderers numbers are diferents and make them good,also the utility/movility and extra tankiness from the ship.
thats my point, is as fussilers,their unbufed numbers are horrible,but buffed they are ok.
the problem with irondrakes is that their unbufed number is bad and they have 0 buffs available, so nothing gonna change that they are bad as happened with fussilers and thunderers
-
yes for sure,if you can get the irondrakes with their 15" in range of the enemy unit and betwen 6 and 3" then yes,but skilled enemy players wont do this misstake.
usually they gonna be inside of 3" or outside of 6"
also i never have saw irombreakers as a good tank unit,shieldwall being only in enemy melle phase make it pretty useless.
for only 10 extra points the blackguards are so far better than ironbreakers with a save 4 and ward4 allways and not only in enemy combat,and meanwhile doing 50% more damage than dwarfs and with rend.
to me is a no brainer if i have to choose betwen ironbreakers and blackguards,dwarfs are a 2/10 and blackguards 8/10
-
6 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
They Unleash Hell a lot better than fusiliers
this is wrong,irondrakes shoots half also with units in 3", so their unleah hell is horrible and almost 0 damage
-
as i said in other post,idoneth reavers are so good as blisbarbs for only 10 extra points, so we can compare to reavers if blisbarbs are broken.
and i have very good faith but some things dont make sense how is posible,and irondrakes are a good example.
irondrakes 160 points for 8'8 rend1 damage with 15" treathrange or 4'4rend1 damage with 19" treathrange
blisbarbs 160 for 8'8 rend 1 damage with 30"+ threathrange
reavers 170 for 8'8 rend1 damage with 24" treathrange or 10 rend 1 damage at 15" treathrange
So call me bad faith,but my brain dont get how is posible that seeing these stats irondrakes have same cost that other units with the DOUBLE threathrange.
and this is ignoring how irondrakes makes half damage also with enemy in melles,so even if they remove the rule for dont move and put baseline the shooting 2 even then irondrakes would have same stats and cost than these units but less range.
-
3 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
There are definite points in cities favour, a 4+ save is a lot more durable than a 6+, particularly if it's either unrendable at range (fusiliers) or the unit can get a 5+ Ward in combat (Iron Drakes).
yup that would make sense from balance perspective,but blisbarbs have 1 extra wound than irondrakes and fussilers and also a ward5 in every phase since turn 1 with luck or turn2 for sure(slanesh sumon points passive)
so in truth blisbarbs are more sturdy than both irondrakes and fussilers with a 10% more wounds and ward5 for only 2 less save
-
36 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
The FAQ team are for frequently asked questions, not "I want this unit to be better".
Iron drakes currently are surprisingly effective. They are just a massive pain in the butt to get into range. I just wish they had the castellite keyword, or were eligible to use suppressing fire with. It feels like if they could use the orders more they wouldn't need much else. I wish the Advance in Position order worked with them, or at least Misthaven/Living City. I do wonder whether early drafts might have been too easy to abuse, and these are the "Safe" Iron Drakes.
Moving Irondrakes aren't as far below non flaming weapons Fusiliers than I expected. Damage numbers in the table below have been standardised to 100 points of unit. Assuming 10 Iron drakes, 20 Fusiliers, 20 Fusiliers with a Warforger, 10 Blissbarbs, 88 Blissbarbs and 5 Seekers and assuming pretenders for triple AoA.
If you had Irondrakes at 110 points they would be far and away the most efficient unit in the army. Not included in the table below are scourgerunner chariots, they are surprisingly efficient, a unit of 3 with a fleetmaster to all out attack for the bonus shooting is pretty close to fully buffed up Fusiliers, and actually beats everything here against vs monsters.
Save AoA Irondrakes Moved AoA Irondrakes Stationary AoA Fusiliers Flaming Weapons AoA CT Fusiliers AoA Blissbarbs 88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers for Rend 88 Bliss Barbs, 66 AoA, 22 without, 5 Seekers and Shardspeaker for Rend AoA Irondrakes Moved at 110 points AoA Irondrakes Stationary at 110 Points 0+ 0.64 1.27 0.78 2.59 1.22 1.04 1.85 0.93 1.85 1+ 0.75 1.50 0.78 2.59 1.22 2.01 2.81 1.09 2.19 2+ 1.39 2.78 1.56 3.39 2.43 3.05 3.77 2.02 4.04 3+ 2.03 4.05 2.33 4.19 3.65 4.10 4.73 2.95 5.89 4+ 2.66 5.32 3.11 4.99 4.86 5.14 5.69 3.87 7.74 5+ 3.30 6.60 3.89 5.78 6.08 6.18 5.75 4.80 9.60 6+ 3.82 7.64 4.67 6.58 7.29 6.26 5.75 5.56 11.11 7+ 3.82 7.64 4.67 6.58 7.29 6.26 5.75 5.56 11.11 hnnnn are you reading the same numbers and table that you have posted?
how is posible that you consider actual irondrakes as surprisingly effective when reading YOUR table show how irondrakes if move have only half damage than blisbarbs,and if dont move only a 10% more damage, so you consider a good balance that? in my mind a good balance would be same tradeoff, 50% less than blisbarb if moved and 50% better if dont move,that is called a good balance and not a penalty of 50% worse and only 10% better if dont move.
in fact as i said irondrakes must cost 110,seeing your table is closer to balanced, against save 4 for this cost irondrakes moving are around 40% worse than blisbarbs and if dont move are a 40% better,that in my dictionary is called a perfect tradeoff and balanced.
so thanks for your table,maybe i gonna steal it and send it to gw to further claim as irondrakes must cost 110 to be balanced.
also irondrakes MUST HAVE MORE DAMAGE per points spend than blisbard or fussilers for a reason: irondrakes have 16" treathrange where blisbarbs have 30+ and fussilers also 30+(with order etc). so from a balance perspective is imposible that two units with 30" threathrange have more damage than a unit with half range.
and i dont know because you count blisbarbs with aoa when that numbers are of unbufed blisbarbs because they have 4+1 hit in their scroll and so aoa is useless for them,but you could count the +1 wound that they get easily
you got a good idea that i gonna also send to faq team,if the order to move 3" used on irondrakes also count as dont move would make them less useless
-
7 hours ago, JackStreicher said:
Still waiting on my box to arrive ;-|
im from spain and i just got my box today(5 days later than release),seems out of uk this box is having problems.
also take attention when you get it,mine had missing the unit of cavaliers and some problems as one body of one human broken out of matriz or some bits with white stress marks.
i just send the pic with all the content to my store to ask to gw for my missing cavaliers so i can just put the pic here also
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:
If we are having a discussion about fussilators and blossbarbs.
shouldn’t we first discuss the fact that dwarfen irondrakes cost 10points more then the fusilators?
i have discussed this before,and even i have sent many emails to the faq team of gw with the maths and explaining how irondrakes are garbage and must get a new scroll.
rigth now irondrakes have a similar damage output and cost to reavers or blisbarbs archers, so far good,now the problem,reavers and blisbarbs have bonus as run and charge or +1 hit of reaver but irondrakes only a huge penalty.
in fact irondrakes cost the same than these two units but have the half damage if move,less range and less move.
even they lost his +1 save to shooting.
as i have said to gw in my emails,irondrakes need two options:
option1: change cost to 110
option2: increase cost to 170 but change his number of shooting to 2 and change the bonus when dont move from +1 attack to +1 rend.
rigth now dont make sense to nobody how is posible irondrakes cost the same than blisbarbs when have half treathrange and half damage if move,and worse even with this book irondrakes lost EVERY BUFF AVAILABLE, they lost the rend of runelord,lost the +1 wound of longbeards and the multiples +1 hit as the hurricanum.
rigth now irondrakes are useless and havent any buff available(only the ward5 and -1 to be wounded)
-
your math is fine,but the premise is wrong.
sorry if i sounded rude before,but to me dont make sense compare fussilers with a warlord trait,+1 cp and with a spell that can faill and enemy can cancell it(very easy this season with primal dice) to a unit (blisbarbs) that is unbuffed and only have the +1 wound for bring one hero.
so i said that the table was wrong,the maths behind is fine but not the source of the numbers.
and as i said,even with all these extra resources spents on fussilers they are worse than blisbars with +1 rend of the cavalry that isnt taken in account in these datas.
but to me this table even if we take in account the +1 rend of blosbarbs dont make sense as i said because we must waste one warlord trait that is only one for entire list and 1cp and worse even a spell that isnt reliably and we compare to a unit(blisbarbs) that dont need nothing,only bring the hero that give +1 wound .
if we compare base stats then the comparation is fair and a huge win for blisbarbs
blisbarbs 160 points for 8'8 rend 1 damage
fussilers 150 for 5(6 if we add the captain) rend 1 damage
-
i edited the first post to be nice to you seeing as you tougth was rude and evade posible next problems but seems you ignored it and even you went beyond.
im spanish and the asterisk wasnt nothing rude,i wroted scr ew that isnt something rude in my idiom and is something as modify the data.
again i only said that the table is wrong when dont compare same cost vs same cost.
even if we ignore the +1 rend of blisbarbs,only adding 4 more blisbarbs to the table to get it to 380 points and closer to the 390 of fussilers then blisbarbs win.
but i get it,next time i wont say anithing, i couldnt avoid it seeing people compare units vs units and forget the huge gap in points,usually the comparations are made same points vs same points to be acurate
Did anything happen in 3e?
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
really nothing have happened this edition,only the new dawnbringer crusades.
and these crusades dont bring nothing exciting,only humans beins punching bags of everyone.
broken realms books were amazing but these dawnbringer books are boring to the point that i havent waste time reading them and i only read the sinopsis in reviews.