Gailon
-
Posts
96 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Gailon
-
-
I've only really looked closely at the SCE book.
I tend to prefer stronger faction abilities with weaker warscrolls, as I feel like that creates more flavorful army construction. Ogors or Seraphon are books that come to mind for me. If I see a Seraphon list I can tell you what subfaction it is 99% of the time, because the different subfactions have very different play styles - they feel unique.
SCE didn't go this way, which was disappointing at first but probably makes sense for them. The Stormhosts aren't particularly powerful, and most don't require a certain playstyle. Perhaps a couple exceptions like Tempest Lords being the obvious choice for Dragon spam.
Instead they have provides some very unique battleline options. It will be interesting to see how this plays in list construction. Making a list without any battleline 'tax' is interesting, as now a lot of elite troops can be made battleline. I know I will definitely be painting up a Dracothian dominated list.
Personally, I'm encouraged. SCE just has so many warscrolls to write, but it seems like they tried to give reasons to take different units in different builds and metas. Even 'trash' like Liberators have a roll to be put on objectives in a Stormkeep - counting as 3 for objective control.
I'm excited to make a bunch of different lists and try them out, and that's about all I can ask for from a Battletome. It's disappointing when there appears to be an obvious choice at every decision point.
I think they did ok of having a couple artifacts that will at least make you look twice before taking the Amulet of Destiny.
The removal of some extra abilities from warscrolls is a bummer. It seems like a lot of warscrolls were just trimmed back a bit, taking away retreat and charge from the Heraldor, taking away stopping pile in from Concussors among many examples. I get the simplification, and it definitely helps prevent players from being surprised by some ability their opponent's army has, which can be a feel bad gaming experience. I just enjoyed finding and using little options like that to try out new strategies.
The biggest concern I have is that including Grand Strategies and Battle Tactics and Core Battalions in Battletomes is just asking for mistakes to be made. Those can't be fixed with points the way (most) army balance issues can be. So far it seems fine, but it's only a matter of time before a couple Battle Tactics or a Core Battalion slips by design and is very easy to abuse to give that faction a large advantage on a competitive scene. Of course I don't play competitive AoS, so I'm not sure why this worries me when I think about it....
-
All I wanted was the Pitched Battle profiles and he read for one hour forty five minutes and then said “eh, I’m not going to read these” and held up the page in a way that I definitely can’t make out the points.
Is it against forum rules to share a readable screenshot of the points pages? Just trying to finish painting a PtG army and trying to figure out what fits.
-
18 hours ago, Envyus said:
Armies if they are willing to go lower drops will have more artefacts in this game.
I'm curious about this, because I'm not sure I see it. I'd like it to be true. Most people will take a Warlord battalion and take an extra artifact, but that seems equivalent to people taking a warscroll battalion, which seemed fairly common,
Two extra artifacts requires 6 leaders, 4 of which have less than 10 wounds. Not sure how many people will push for that? (genuine question) And it pretty much concedes the choice of who goes first in most games.
-
This is a great idea, people are playing real games and we can all see how our theorycrafting works out. Plus, this game is huge. Looking online I'm realizing just how different other people's experiences can be because they play different armies against different armies with different styles.
I played Sylvaneth vs. my friend's Beasts of Chaos army. We used the new leaked points.
List building was definitely different. I found the new Core battalions more interesting than I thought at first glance. Because of the subcommander requirements I found it tricky to get the warlord battalion (my Sylvaneth lists don't run a lot of leaders with a few wounds). I went with a four monster list to try to take advantage of those rules, and Beasts went the other way, with TONS of small units and a couple units of Bullgor to do the damage.
The game was GREAT. Continuing my theory that basement tier AoS is the most fun. Some thoughts:
The changes to endless spells are interesting. Moving through them is a no brainer change that really helps keeping the flavor without having them just be movement blockers. Moving at the end of the hero phase is interesting, it gives that chance to try to dispel one before it moves. Rather than just being a thing that was there, I felt like there was interaction and back and forth with our endless spells (I had the glade wyrm and he had that freaking bull of course).
Redeploy was amazing. I picked a battle tactic to destroy a particular unit of ungor. But when I moved up he redeployed 5" back. Out of range of treelord shooting and then I failed the charge. Then later, I thought I learned my lesson, picked another destroy unit battle tactice, but had a shooter that was definitely in range. moved up to 3" away. He redeployed 6" into obscuring terrain and I couldn't see the unit anymore to shoot it and now had a 9" charge. Failed.
Unleash hell only came into play once, as the only shooter of significance was Drycha. It was definitely good when used. My opponent was able to keep her in combat though by dropping chaos spawns into her. He had so many units and his heroes turned into spawns on death, I think he was uniquely suited to this, more elite armies will have a harder time.
One of the sneakier changes is the change to pile in. Being able to pile around a unit now, rather than just closer to the closest model, was critical at a couple points. This really opens up the ability to pile to objectives and to pile in a way that you clip another unit into combat. This rule also makes reach even more powerful. A 2" or 3" weapon can have a huge area it can reach now that the model it is on can pile a lot more freely. I was able to pile Drycha in a way where she killed a key unit that wasn't in combat, entirely because of her 2" reach. Of course he was able to pile chaos spawns around things to barely get within 3" of Drycha and keep her from being able to use unleash hell.
The other sneaky change (by my eye) is that unit champions can issue basic commands. This really powers up ambush abilities. When he brought a unit in from ambush, or summoned one, now it didn't have to have a hero to use inspiring presence, which is really huge to keeping those units on the table. 10 besti/un/gor coming into my backfield was a lot tougher to get ride of.
Generals are super important for generating those command points. This, combined with battle tactics for killing generals, may make it more important than ever to have beefy generals. After I killed his general he was hurting a bit for command points.
The grand strategy ended up being critical to the game. If you get yours and they don't, that's the same point impact as a round where you get all the objectives and they get none.
All in all, I loved the game. The hero abilities added a very interesting dynamic, the finest hour coming into play a few times. Choosing battle tactics will obviously be a huge part of the game that I'm already terrible at. I was too tempted to save the 'easy' ones for later, and I think I will start just picking the absolute easiest one to get.
-
19
-
-
Unleash seems like another ability to incentivize MSU. You can use unleash hell once in response to one charge. that's pretty overwhelmingly powerful if I charge with my eggs in one basket block of 20 ardboys or 9 kurnoth hunters. But is it lessoned if I have 3 x 3 kurnoth? I'm not actually sure, as deleted one of those units still hurts. 4x5 ardboys? certainly unleash hell is less powerful against that. of course the ardboys are a lot less powerful.
I've only played one AOS 3 game so far. I had one powerful shooter on the board in Drycha. She used unleashed hell once, but had to do it to a unit with about 6 gor, as they charged first. then my opponent kept her in combat with numerous small units (chaos spawn!).
I'm not a fan of the rule being added still, but I can see how and why the playtesters may have liked it and felt it added a lot of tactical decision making.
-
1 hour ago, Vaporlocke said:
Wanna take a bet that the designers and/or playtesters main shooting armies?
I kind of suspect it's the opposite. If you play this game from a narrative or casual style then it is far more difficult to identify the broken aspects of the game. I play a lot of casual games where both sides work to build lists to match the game style we enjoy. None of us are spamming that key unit, we will often take our best or new paint jobs, and we heavily skew melee with some support ranged.
So in our games I can already see that Unleash Hell won't be an issue, and in fact will be awesomely tactical. I suspect the playtesters may be doing too much of playing the game as intended, rather than doing everything they can to power game it and figure out how to win. Playing a lot of low powered casual games has really given me that perspective.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 6/25/2021 at 7:28 PM, Vaporlocke said:
I'm hoping they change it to only being available to the units being charged, keeps it usable and still powerful but not abusable and broken.
i could almost see trying the reverse as well. Where you can't use unleash hell if you get hit with the charge. Prevents you from just dropping a powerful shooting unit out there with a huge effective shield on it.
-
For some reason I thought there was a kind of core battlepack in the core rules. But there isn't? Are there no battle plans in the core rules at all? Or are there just battleplans in the published book, and not the free basic rules?
-
30 minutes ago, Overread said:
GW is in a much better position now than back then, so I'd expect the Battletomes for Stormcast and Cruelboyz to drop far sooner. There's just no good reason really to launch new models (and a new army) and then leave them without any way to play them for months.
I certainly hope you're right and that makes sense, but we can definitely play with the new Stormcast and Kruelboyz, they come with the warscrolls and a couple faction abilities. It's not ideal, but you could team them up with other SCE or Orruks and play 2,000 points easily (as I think is being done by some Youtubers). So it wouldn't be a complete unplayable gap if they took awhile on the battletomes.
-
Played what will probably be my last game of 2.0 last night. Was super fun, but I was just constantly thinking about some 3.0 rules and how excited I am. We played 2x40 chainrasp list vs. a 2x40 saurus warrior list, as these unit sizes will be going away.
During his movement I kept thinking about command abilities I could use, was really wishing I had heroic and monster actions for the carnosaur. Was seeing how powerful roar could be in the right spot. So many things. 2.0 has been so much, but I am pumped to see and play something a bit different and find the strategies in them (and be continually outplayed). Even if a lot of my collection won't be played now.
I'm excited to make a million new lists and only get to play about one tenth of them and never play a single list enough times to actually get good at it. the more things change the more they stay the same.
-
1 hour ago, Golub87 said:
So the uppity Slaanesh players should accept that they need to sit at the back of the bus with Sylvaneth and BoC and Spider Riders and just accept their lot in life?
No, but it's also not personal. It's not new, it's not a slight, it's not an attack, it's not a bomb. It's a thing that happens in games like this and it sucks and is a bummer. I guess just react like it's a bummer and with criticism, not like someone dropped a hydrogen bomb on you. The game is still playable, the game will be FAQ'd, the meta will change. Doesn't mean you can't be bummed. I mean, we aren't even being bummed about the rules, just pure relative power level, for a version none of us have played.
But others are right, this isn't really the place for the discussion, sorry to egg it on.
-
3
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, AngryPanda said:
I’m just gonna leave this meme here to summarize my overall feelings towards the HoS point increases, both from yesterday and carrying into today. This is gonna be the last comment on the HoS point increase I’ll make here because I agree that this forum is for rumors and not this type of discussion.
Regarding the nuke that HoS (an already crippled battletome) got to their points, it is the political equivalent of dropping a hydrogen bomb on a developing country, and having the UN say “let’s just wait and see what GW will do next, I’m sure it will get better.”
I agree that we should wait for the FAQ, but this the last time we should wait before taking action. If there are changes, then we can end it here. Yet if there aren’t, then this is the kind of blunt disconnect from the community needs to be addressed; it’s just wrong and unfair to people who’ve spent hours painting their armies and being loyal customers only to be treated so poorly. We put numerous hours and hundreds of dollars into this hobby, you would think that GW would have the decency to be a bit more open about the changes they make?
Take a look at what we did over on the HoS side of TGA. Since February, we kept saying “let’s wait.” We waited for our battletome to be released, only to be disappointed. We waited for the FAQ, which didn’t address any of the problems the book had. We waited for the GHB, which was a massive nerf to an already crippled faction, and now we are being asked to wait for the next FAQ. When is the waiting going to end? People who say we’re angry about the hobby and need to chill aren’t seeing the entirety of the picture here: we came together as a community and developed a survey that was submitted and confirmed to have been read. The vast majority of the community, in terms of player base and influential figures, agreed the book sucked. Yet, it feels like they took what we said and tossed us aside as if we are nothing.
We’re not asking to be Uber-powerful; we’re just asking for some basic standards to be established. A point drop would of sufficed, people would have been happy if we had just stayed the same, or even gotten a very small increase in the new edition. Instead, HoS was the third most increased faction in the game. It’s wrong what they did, and if there aren’t changes in the faq we gotta do something to at least get some answers.
Frankly, it's perceptions in the community like this that make me understand GW's aloof lack of responsiveness to the community. Because there are so many people and so many competing interests, and so many people that are going to engage in pure hyperbole that it's not worth it. If you feel like there is no pleasing people, then just make your product and close your ears.
Hydrogen bomb? That's the equivalent? You typed that out and feel like that's the best analogy to this situation? Let's see if we can think of some better analogies:
It's like being a Sylvaneth player and being bottom tier for ages and then not getting points fixes. Maybe it's like being a Beast of Chaos player and then having a game released in the realm of beasts and it not being clear that any of it will do anything for your faction. Maybe it's like being a Seraphon player and having one of the oldest AoS 2.0 model ranges in the entire game, then getting a new book that doesn't update a single model.
I don't like the "but GW has always treated people like trash" argument. But I don't think that's what's happening. This is more just that in a game this complicated and large there are always basement tier armies and units. That's a given. Isn't that a given in any competitive game with a shifting meta? There are heroes that are unusable in LoL or in DotA,
It is definitely tough in Warhammer, where models are expensive and time consuming. You can't just switch armies. But the complaints are all about competitive power level. This is where I just don't see eye to eye with the severity of the complaints. (having a weak army is a bummer for sure, but HoS players here are acting, well, like this is a hydrogen bomb). If you have a weak army, then try to play against weak armies. There are a lot of them, there always are. Someone has a collection of spider riders they barely get to play with.
Frankly, that's the same situation for powerful armies. Maybe some people like smashing their opponents to bits, but people with very strong armies also need to seek out specific opponents with strong armies to have a good game.
If the concern is with high level competitive play, that you want to take an army to a tournament and win, then it is difficult for me to believe that that type of player (where that is their primary enjoyment from the game) is stuck with only a HoS army as their option.
I think GW thought HoS would be better in 3.0 than it looks like it will be. There are arguments for this (summoning is more powerful now, depravity points could be more numerous). In my opinion, they were wrong. Just like how Wizards is frequently wrong about the strength of magic cards, or any other company that makes any other complex game with a shifting power balance.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Sleboda said:
It's sort of a topic on it's own, but sadly, yes. Prizes at tournaments are, in my opinion, one of the absolute worst parts about this hobby.
It's bad enough that some folks use winning at these things as some sort of alpha dog creating, personality validating, ego inflating experience that lets them measure the size of their, um, you know, in public, but when you then also dangle vacations, cash, and/or hundreds (or thousands) of dollars worth of toys in the face of these "bruh, do you even lift, bruh" types, it gets so much worse.
Prizes bring out the Roid Rager in far too many hobbyists.
I guess it just shows the full scope of something like Age of Sigmar that so many people who play it can have such a wildly different experience than I do. Makes me very grateful for my local gaming group where we play and have fun. Imagine that.
-
21 minutes ago, Havelocke said:
Copy/pasting my unit by unit breakdown of the Sylvaneth changes from our faction discussion thread.
Overall, I feel like Sylvaneth got more or less standard points increases, while really benefiting from a number of changes to the core rules. I don't think they'll be breaking into the upper echelons of the meta any time soon, but I think that they might find their way out of the basement in third edition.
Okay gang. Now that we've got the points, I've compiled all of my thoughts on how our units will fare in the new edition. I tried to consider past performance, new points,and the new rules set when casting judgement. I gave this far less thought than I could have, so please feel free to pick it apart and tell me where you think I'm wrong!
SYLVANETH WINNERS AND LOSERS FOR THIRD EDITION - SNAP JUDGEMENT EDITION
Alarielle - 740 (+0)
Small Winner. Better than she was post Kragnos, by virtue of most other stuff going up. She still doesn't compare favorably to Morathi, but she's the same cost as Teclis now. If you wanted to, you could even argue she went down in points, since the value of her summon went up. I can't say she'll be a top-tier choice, but I think you can make her work in a list.Drycha Hamadreth - 330 (+30)
Big Winner. Drycha loves the new rules. The new command abilities, heroic actions, and rampages, all help her do exactly what she wants to be doing. Her points increase is on par with what we're seeing in most other factions. She takes a small hit due to Spite Revenants being less viable, but let's be honest. That's not why you were taking her.Warsong Revenant - 275 (+0)
Small Winner. Like Alarielle, was clearly pre-pointed with third in mind. I see the Warsong as competing with the Treelord Ancient for the 'durable second rank caster' role in the army, and I think the Warsong comes out ahead with the extra cast, casting bonus, and fly.Arch-Revenant - 105 (+5)
It's a wash. From what I've seen, most heroes are going up by about 10. Skating in under the curve is nice. I think the Arch-Revenant loses relevance, though, due to the fact that Kurnoths got hit rather hard, and due to the rules changes, which hurt her command ability.Branchwraith - 95 (+15)
Big Loser. Fifteen points is a larger price increase than we've seen on a lot of foot heroes, and she didn't gain much from the new rules in any way. While I expect her to continue to be a staple due to the power of her warscroll spell, I think she's seen a downgrade to her competitive power. I suspect we'll see two of them less frequently now.Branchwych - 90 (+10)
Small Loser. Compared to the Branchwraith, the Branchwych is a bit more likely to care about the heroic actions, or about counting as two models on objectives. That said, I can't see you ever taking her unless you desperately need another cast and have exactly 90 points to spare. (Read: Never)Spirit of Durthu - 340 (+40)
Small Winner. Durthu is primed to take advantage of the new rules, and he especially loves Heroic Recovery to unbracket him. Still, he got hit harder than some other units by points hikes, and still requires resource investment to work. I don't see myself taking Durthu over Drycha unless I'm building my list around him.Treelord Ancient - 295 (+35)
The Biggest Loser. The Treelord Ancient saw an increase in points, while also being outclassed by new competition for its primary role in the army. The ancient benefits from the new rampages and heroic actions, and the improvements to wyldwoods indirectly benefited its warscroll spell, but there's a better alternative for just about everything the Ancient does. I suspect the Ancient will occasionally appear in lists to take advantage of its free wyldwood, but iI think it will be replaced by a Warsong, Treelord, or Durthu in most cases.Dryads - 95 (-5)
Big Winner. While Dryads lost their horde discount, they gained about half of it back, and units of 20 are now ten points cheaper. On top of that, they synergize well with the new rules. Having multiple buffs on their warscroll softens the blow of the cap on command abilities, and their reach lessens the impact of the coherency changes. I expect to see one or two blocks in most competitive lists, moving forward.Spite Revenants - 70 (+10)
Big Loser. The rules change did them no favors, and they got the only points hike among our battleline on top of it. I have a hard time envisioning them as competitive choices without some changes.Tree Revenants - 80 (+0)
Big Winner. Tree Revenants were already competitive, and they didn't see any points increases while most other units did. I expect that small units will continue to be a mainstay of the army moving forward.Treelord - 190 (+10)
The Biggest Winner? One of my two contenders for most improved warscroll in the new edition. The treelord gained access to rampages, now counts as five models on objectives, saw a modest points hike compared to the field, and their primary competition in list building got hit harder than they did. I suspect that some lists will try running a treelord alongside six scythes instead of three swords.I think Kurnoth Hunters really like the changes to the universal command abilities, and counting as extra models on objectives is nice. That said, not having access to heroic actions or rampages closes the gap a bit between them and some of the other heavy hitters in our book. This large of a points increase definitely hurts them.
Kurnoth Hunters with Swords - 225 (+35)
Small Loser. See above, and... swords will still probably be the go-to choice for three man units, but I think we'll see fewer of them in the new edition.Kurnoth Hunters with Bows - 225 (+35)
Big Loser. See above, and... if they were going to make the weapon options cost different amount, I don't know why they didn't reduce the cost of bows. The new command abilities help them more than the other loadouts, but bows were already the weakest option on Kurnoths. Outside of fools who love them (like me!), I don't think we'll see a ton of them until they get changed.Kurnoth Hunters with Scythes - 215 (+25)
It's a wash. See above, and... if you were ever going to make an argument in favor of six swords over six scythes, the new edition made it a lot harder. While Kurnoths as a whole got weaker, scythes got stronger relative to other Kurnoths. I expect a unit of six scythe hunters to continue to be our premiere hammer unit moving forward.Ylthari - 150 (-30)
Small winner. Still not playable, but she hurts your army by thirty fewer points.Skaeth's Wild Hunt - 110 (-10)
It's a wash. Less attractive in the new rules, where you're probably less interested in paying for a non-hero caster. It's not like the unit was viable before, though.Spiteswarm Hive - 40 (-10)
The Biggest Winner? My other contender for most improved warscroll. The spiteswarm hive was already an integral part of some competitive lists, and a boon to almost any list. And it got cheaper. I've been pretty conservative with my predictions so far, but I'll go out on a limb and say that, barring a rewrite of its warscroll, I expect the Spiteswarm Hive to be a borderline auto-include in the new edition.Gladewyrm - 60 (+30)
Small Winner. While the Gladewyrm got hit with a pretty big points increase, the ability to maintain control and keep the Gladewyrm in the middle of a big scrum is a huge boon to the model. I'm definitely going to try it.Vengeful Skullroot - 85 (+45)
Small Winner. The biggest boon to the Skullroot is the changes to the Wyldwood, which makes it much easier to summon woods within three inches of an enemy unit, and then combo the Skullroot on the same turn. The big points cost is a little harder to stomach, but it's got a low casting value and D6 mortals to multiple units is potentially very potent.I think Sylvaneth really benefits from the changes to all out attack and all out defense and mystic shield. A lot of Sylvaneth abilities let them reroll 1's to hit or to save (or reroll saves entirely). Now those abilities are way more useful. I think this may be where the Arch Revenant actually plays well. Put him out with some Kurnoth Hunters and an all out attack and they are hitting on 2's rerolling 1's then rerolling saves that might be boosted to 3+ by a mystic shield?
Treelord Ancient's command ability is also improved under similar logic.
I agree with you though, seems like these will bump Sylvaneth to mid tier, but we'll see. I can definitely see some lists surprising and occasionally hitting a podium.
-
Has any heard or seen any leaks about monstrous arcanum? I see that it was listed in the books section of the GHB, where it listed the books that are part of the game, but it's not clear to me where it stands points wise, as I didn't see dread saurian, troggoth hag, or rogue idol among the points for their factions. Would be very sad (and inexplicable to me, as GW seemed to figure out to just point them where they are not competitive and let people have fun with them if they want) if they were just squatted. Anyone seen rumors about their status in 3.0?
-
Just now, Malakithe said:
Oh sure. I bet lot of people are willing to relocate to other cities in the hopes of finding new friends and gaming groups. Thats not a realistic answer just like people that say 'lol play narrative'
According to the internet right now there are a ton of people whose army is rendered complete garbage. You can't find any of them to play against and have a fun game? the two people I play the most against have a BoC army and a Nighthaunt army among their collection, and I have a Sylvaneth. All bottom tier armies that can play just fine against each other and have made for some perfectly enjoyable games.
You're saying no one in your gaming circle has a Nighthaunt, slaanesh, BoC, [insert virtually every army here according to this thread] army to play against?
-
2
-
-
Based on the internet every army is worse, so I guess mine is fine?
I'm glad that the rules and points have brought some serious balance to Seraphon. Playing Seraphon in a friendly environment has been a bummer. I need to make a list that isn't overpowered, and when I win the question is "did I bring an OP list?" Now I feel like I will finally be able to craft the best list I can make and have a fun and competitive game.
I'm bummed for saurus warriors though. They were already bad an neglected, even saurus lists played knights instead. So they decreased the unit size and increased the points by more than they increased skinks. the age of the carnosaur has arrived.
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Mutton said:
Look, I do my share of whinging when points are revealed, but people need to calm the heck down and stop being such turbo nerds about this. Threatening to boycott the new points or edition changes? It's childish buffoonery. That's the kind of attitude I'd expect on some popular video game forum or something. The AoS community is better than that. Deal with the hand you're given and just enjoy the hobby. Almost no one has played the game more than once with the new edition, let alone the points updates--no one here has ANY idea what the game will be like at this point; and the hobby is about more than just little numbers of little plastic men going up or down.
Vent your frustration. Get away from social media. Chill out.This, a million times this. What the heck is wrong with people?
90% of this hobby is painting and crafting and lore and hanging out with cool people who share an interest. Are people getting some kind of amazing prizes for winning tournaments or something? Everyone seems to be responding to changes with "this rule sucks because it makes my particular list worse." or something.
If you have an army that is generally weak, and a list that is generally weak, then get better friends. Because if you don't know someone is willing to bust out their sylvaneth, or beasts of chaos, or some jank build like StD without marauders or Fyreslayers with only magmadroths and vulkites, then. I don't know, find a nicer gaming group?
This is all wild theory crafting to begin with, and we've seen the meta shift up and down. It is a bummer to have a book of rules that lacks synergy, lacks dynamic play, but it seems like everyone is just complaining about power level, when that's all just relevant anyway.
Maybe I just don't get it. Personally I choose to enjoy a hobby that takes so much money and time.
-
16
-
1
-
1
-
-
I am going to get some hate for this, but hear me out - Lord Kroak.
Kroak is super good within the game, but a lot of that is value, and in particular his value over the point cost of a Slann. But that is part of the disappointment. Lord Kroak is such a powerful Slann that his magic is still potent after death. On the table we get a better Slann, who is point costed in a way where basically the only reason to take a Slann is if you want a Slann AND Kroak.
Korak-nado is also kind of boring to play. Rather than spells that impact the battlefield, and utilize terrain or movement or the fates, Kroak's main ability is murder facing support heroes that get too close (too close being a giant 22" bubble).
It would be far more interesting and fitting to have a warscroll worth 500-600 points for Kroak. Giving a genuine decision between him and a regular Slann.
-
4
-
Painting Standards in Tabletop Games and Gatekeeping
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
I agreed with this in theory when I started but now found that it completely conflicts with what I tend to prefer.
I really enjoy painting, BUT I am not very good at it and I'm slow. So I enjoy getting a chance to sit down and slowly paint a few war dollies in the evening. I also have two small kids and a stressful job. This means my army progress is super slow, but very enjoyable for me.
So my goal is to continue to have painting projects. I really enjoy the models I have finished and as I get closer and closer to having more complete armies.
As a result I have resisted the 'fast paint' methods. I don't really want to fast paint my army, even though I do prefer to play with painted models and enjoy the immersion. Fast painting something is tough because it is just less enjoyable as a process. I am losing out on the peaceful and relaxing painting process and replacing it with something that feels more job like only centered on the goal.
I think there may be more painting in the community if we encouraged people to enjoy the process, not because it results in a painting army or because it looks awesome, but because engaging with something creative is enjoyable. I often compare my painting process to knitting. I do it for my own mental health. I'm glad that I get a hat or scarf at the end of it, but if that became the point it would no longer be enjoyable.
I say all this to point out that the big problem with painting standards is that the way people engage with the hobby is just way too varied to possibly standardize anything. Some people enjoy painting and have painted armies as a result. But I have found that I enjoy painting and have mostly unpainted armies as a result (although I just keep plugging away and that keeps changing, and now I show up to games and realize that without really noticing it I have almost entirely painted lists).