Mattrulesok

There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. Steal all you can comrades. In other news I bought a giant from mantic for £25 that fits the bill perfectly and saved me £95 🤑

Personally I'd take the vexillor and Relictor for teleportation and probably, the incantor for the auto dispel and the warscroll spel can be a nice deterrent to deep striking. With the last 250? I'd personally normally want an aggressive melee unit to either distract your opponent from the raptors or to punish those over committing to chasing the raptors however I'm not sure retributors are gonna give you the punch you need. My gut feeling is the comet, prosecutors for capping objectives and a command point are your best bet.

Honestly the only answer is budget, shop within your means and buy 2nd hand or proxies where possible. Ultimately the only thing that will prevent this hobby becoming more expensive is if the new higher priced models sell poorly. Complaining and making noise about the prohitive cost won't make a difference if GW sees increased profits on the new models. This doesn't mean don't support your lfgs, buy proxies from them and tell the staff why. Seriously I've been in the retail industry for 13 years (fashion) and I speak with suppliers on a regular basis. They ask what's working, what's not and why? I have been asked by brands/companies if their new price points are working and seen them adjust accordingly. If the new priced models sell poorly and better priced kits, as well as competitor kits, sell well they may just backtrack on this pricing.

I'm seeing a lot of discussion about balance and the relative strength of hordes and in my opinion changing the way the game system works doesn't fix balance it just means balance has to be adjusted differently and switching to S/T it's entirely possible balance would be worse if done badly. We could just end up back in 1998 with my chubby 10 year old ass winning most of my games becuae all I had to do was charge overpowered vampires for the win. Monsters and a lot of elite infantry don't feel right but honestly in most cases would be fixed with adjustments to the warscrolls taking into account the inherent deficiencies these low body count units have. In most cases extra attacks/save/wounds would be all you need to do to make these units usable. Take the Stardrake for instance, is it good? Not really. What if we take this massive dragon that has 16 wounds and the same armour save as all the other heroes (3) and just make it 20 wounds on a 2+. It will feel way stronger, large hordes with no rend will have a much tougher time but it's still eminently killable and probably still won't be the 'competitve' choice but can still put in work for casual games.

I much prefer the simple rules we have now, getting into AoS this year after a few years out from fantasy the change felt really intuitive and made the game really easy to get into, especially as I was introducing my wife to the game who had never played a tabletop game before (she played chess for the first time the year before). I find the current rule is so we'll streamlined, I've been playing 6 months now and can basically recall 90% of the stormcast warscrolls, 50% of the Seraphon (I play skinks only) and most of my wife's nighthaunt so games move quickly even if they still take hours due to decision making, moves etc. Now I don't think I would quit if they brought in S/T but my wife might and I do genuinely think I'd find games less fun, more time looking up numbers and calculating hits is less time drinking beer and talking ****** and ultimately there is already a game with this system so why not keep the differentiation?

I was under the impression the battalion lists the title not keyword hence why its in lower case, keywords are all upper case but correct me if I'm wrong

The retributors need 2 more models to make a full unit of 5. What you have left comes to 880 points so adding another hero like an incantor or something like a Ballista would fit nicely. Alternatively you can play the Lord celestant as Vandus Hammerhand (I'm assuming based on models you have the starter set) which takes your army to 940 or 990 with an extra command point. Neither team is overly strong. they both lack real firepower but you can certainly play enjoyable games with them especially if your opponent has a basic non meta team. Also if your opponent is nice they should just let you play with the retributors anyway, may as well play with what you have while you're learning to play the team, once you've got some games under your belt you will know what you want to add next.

I like some uniformity in the right unit, judicators are very uniform and I really like that look on them, they look like they are doing the whole 'ready, aim, loose' thing which fits the aesthetic of brainwashed zombie super soldiers. The namarti on the other hand fit the more aggressive chaotic, dynamic posing as they look like a raiding party fighting more as individuals within a group.

I think we need to draw the distinction between being negative and being critical, I'm overwhelmingly positive about AoS but I'm still critical of the game and it's many foibles, I started a thread the other day about our most disappointing units in game, its a fairly critical thread but one I would call largely positive because its lighthearted and people mostly asking for more not less. I think also, with the way a forum space functions it will always lean more critical and more negative because there are only so many "everything's great" posts you can make but infinite complaints. For what it's worth I find the AoS WhatsApp groups far more positive and less critical, they are far more focused on the hobby aspect.

Honestly ogors was the first team that came to mind for me or fyreslayers (although they are very samey)

I agree, the last few pages have left me genuinely sad at some of the opinions offered on people of various races as well as the perception of those on welfare.

Watched the vids the next day, was great, few technical issues to iron out but some solid games and the presentation is wonderful.

Look, using cufflinks as your example of a stable business model might not be the best idea when most cufflink brands are diversifying into other accessories and in particular women's accessories as the number of men buying cufflinks is decreasing year on year, largely because there are no new customers coming into the business.

Personally I think decimators are still good, they are the most situational of all the paladins but as a result the unit with the strongest trick, they are still pretty good at cutting through armies with high model counts. One of the last game I played with them I got a unit of 5 into battle with a full unit of chainrasp. I play with 2 maces and still managed a ludicrous 45 attacks from 3 guys.

Retributors are such cool looking models, I really hope they rework some warscrolls in the next tome.

Yeh I wish retributors were better but they kind of highlight why I think prosecutors are so bad. Retributors are designed correctly they just do their job badly, add 1 extra attack on their warscroll and they suddenly feel about right. Prosecutors are designed, I feel, to be completely different to the look they give off. They are mini celestant primes and I want them to hit like mini celestant primes. Give them 5 or 6 attacks each, make them do mortals on the charge, give them exploding 6s and keep their other rules, make them closer to 200 points or even more and then they feel the way they look.

Oh god yeh I was looking at that warscroll the other day, its awful. Such nice models too.

What unit disappoints you the most? Which unit looks like it should be a world beater but hits like a pillow? What character is terrifying in lore but terrifyingly easy to kill in game? What units rules looked amazing on paper but just don't work on the table? What monster looks terrifying but only from the shelf? So tell me what unit do you find the most disappointing? Mine has to be Stormcast Prosecutors. I had to reread the battletome multiple times when I first saw the unit was 90 points, I thought maybe they'd be 90 each. To me they look like the elite troops in an already elite army, I wanted them to essentially be the valkyrie from god of war but they're just not, they aren't scary and don't serve much purpose. I'd love to see them reworked and turned into some super elite cavalry, have them hit as hard as any unit in the game but still be fragile, the ultimate glass cannons that move at the speed of lightning.

No but a room full of straight white men are probably going to write less diverse characters than a room with mixed race, gender etc.

This model lives in my nightmares 🤣 I do actually doubt GW would design a model this fetishised, for all my criticism of the company I still adore their model designs. I'm in a weird place here where my ignorance of the lore (I know basics like spawning pools and the slann dreaming the seraphon into reality) actually improves the experience as I always thought of the seraphon as being completely asexual and agendered hence my preference for just fixing the lore. Which is sad because knowing and investing more in the lore should improve the experience. Having said that I'm totally on board with the idea raised way earlier in this thread suggesting gendered seraphon. Skinks are male, sauras are female. would be really cool to make a different type of sexual dimorphism from human, giving the faction a different feel

I had a feeling it was going to be a pronoun issue. That's disappointing, I do wonder if that is a weird holdover from the old Lizardmen faction. Either way it's bad writing, if your written lore is that these creatures are asexual then they should be written as such, it's basically the same as writing a story about vandus hammerhand (for example) and constantly using female pronouns. I do personally still feel that it is a lore issue that needs fixing rather than female seraphon models, as I feel if you code a female seraphon you are now implying all others are male (plus I'm a little worried they'd just stick b r e a s t s* on a lizard) but I respect where you're coming from. *I can't believe that word is banned by the filter

I'm interested in why you consider Seraphon male presenting? I don't really read much of the lore so I have no idea how they are presented in fiction however I do believe the models to be both asexual and agender as they have no sexual characteristics I can think of and are all just naked with a few bangles and the occasional headdress. Fyreslayers I completely agree with you and it would go a long way to adding some visual depth to the army.

I wouldn't bother arguing with people like this mate, he called everyone who wants more female models terrorists.

I'm always reminded of THIS STUDY when these battles occur.

The actual reality is that we live in the year 2020 and this game is purely fiction. The actual reality is roughly 90%+ of posters in this thread are advocating for more female models so stop using the disingenuous argument of history and historical accuracy when it has little to no bearing on a fantasy game made in 2020. If you truly believe (which I don't think you do) that AoS has to be based on history which therefore limits design choices I'm not sure you're going to like it when you find out about games workshops biggest game, 40k, which has no possible historic basis. Also i'm going to leave this comment again as you chose to ignore it last time and it still feels relevant. "Claiming that women are over represented due to historical inaccuracies but seemingly having no problem with any other historical inaccuracies like seraphon and skaven really makes it seem like the problem being presented is not one of historical accuracy but instead women. "