Neil Arthur Hotep
-
Posts
4,454 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
105
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Neil Arthur Hotep
-
-
46 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:
To put CoS into a top they have stop making their settlments fodder for the big bad and subplot
They have to keep doing it for narrative stakes, though, because nobody cares if an Idoneth or Fyrslayers settlement is destroyed.
-
15 minutes ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:
I'm trying to work out where on the map Slaanesh is...
Between Ulgu and Hysh, where they should be
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Xil said:
Did a quick paintjob on those two for a change. My fever is also finally gone... so back to my Sylvaneth i guess
Love those freehand skulls!
I got started on Grombrindal.
This model will probably stay with me for a bit, since I am planning to go fully NMM on it (which will be my first time doing NMM at all).
-
4
-
1
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, novakai said:
I mean we can speculate endless on AoS video games but at the end of the day, we viewing the problem of lack of interest in one happening. Whether it be no devs outside mobile game dev want to use the IP or GW not interesting in pushing it. Like dealing with Nexon of all company says a lot of their quality control.
it also possible that the failure of realm of ruin set back any potential good project for a long time.
It's true. Sad that setting a game in the mortal realms is still so much of a gamble 10 years after its introduction. I personally think it is a great setting to play in, with lots of space for fun and creative stuff. I have been greatly enjoying my Soulbound games.
On the one hand I think a lot of WHFB players rejected the setting as a kneejerk reaction since AoS "killed" their game, and I think the general sentiment of "AoS is pretty fun but the setting sucks" has kind of persisted since then. On the other hand, though, GW are not making it easy to actually learn about the Mortal Realms and the AoS narrative from the outside (or even the inside!).
I'm with @Pizzaprez on this one, personally. I really love the freedom you get to tell your own stories with AoS and its setting and always find it hard to interact with highly-described (not sure what a good term for this would be) game worlds. And I find the details and concepts that are established in AoS very fun and interesting, as well. I think mortal realms have a lot of potential to set additional games (other than AoS) in, if someone with a real passion and vision for the setting comes along and takes advantage of its strengths.
-
3
-
-
14 hours ago, RandyRyan said:
It’s retributor, seraphim sepia, retributor, retributor 50/50 with stormhost silver, then seraphim sepia again. You’ll have to take my word for it looking better in real life 😅
Yeah, metallics always look better in real life. Very diligent approach, though. Makes sense that you get very smooth results that way.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Magnusaur said:
Is it possible that the terrain assumed to be in the big box is actually just cardboard? They've done a little bit of that in the past.
I believe with GW mentioning terrain in the box on Warcom and one of our leakers talking about terrain, we should expect more than a printed box.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, RandyRyan said:
Making some progress 🧛gold seems to have lost all depth in the picture…
Is this a gold paint or a something like an orange contrast?
-
2 minutes ago, Satyrical Sophist said:
With 4th being an index release I've been very much pausing all my cities stuff. I'm wanting to be hopeful, but there are a lot of variables. I'm a bit concerned that the magic lore choice might not support going mixed species very well.
I still have 10 Fusiliers waiting to be built and painted, but I am waiting for the indexes to see how I will do it (visually, 2x10 or 1x20 formation). For the time being, I am focused on getting a Spearhead ready, because that is for sure going to be useful to have.
But yeah, I am curious about what lists will look like, as well. My list is almost guaranteed to change, since I doubt after the changed to magic and subfactions, a list like current Hallowheart will still exist. There are also other changes that are no doubt coming. The Command Corps, for example, currently has battleshock mitigation on the Soul Shepard, but battleshock is not even in 4th edition.
I am definitely interested in the new rules. Maybe I will get to run the three Tank list I had originally planned this time around instead of having to compromise on two.
-
I recently had my last league game with my Cities list. Just want to share my experience with the army because I probably won't run it again until 4th ed comes out.
Overall, I am happy with my performance in the games I have had. I went 3-3, but that doesn't necessarily reflect the actual performance of my list, which was Hallowheart Steam Tanks and Fusiliers. Two of the games I lost were lost to time in the 3rd round, after I had essentially already tabled my opponent. My games would frequently go a similar way: I would lose some points and my Steelhelm screens (sometimes Fusiliers) early, but keep my Steam Tanks and buff pieces alive into the late game, where I would clean up.
I had three games pre-nerf and three post. Pre-nerf, the list was absurd. I had a game against OBR where I basically shut them down from turn 1 and lost no units. I was punching well above my weight with the Alchtemite buff, taking on units that I honestly had no business beating. Fusiliers really were point-and-click, destroy a unit at that point, but Command Corps healing was also pretty insane. I frequently healed up a Steam Tank from its last legs back up to full in a turn.
Post nerf, things got a lot harder. Fusiliers definitely started to kind of suck. They still performed OK with the Master of Ballistics +1 to hit and wound, but their Unleash Hell became a lot worse. I believe the expected damage of Fusilier Unleash Hell is about 5 or so rend 1 wounds. Before the nerf, you could add about 7 mortals to that, which definitely changed the math a lot.
I find it hard to judge how strong the Cities allegiance abilities are. A lot of people in my play group continued to blunder into Counter Fire even after becoming aware of its existence. For those who remembered, it mostly just served to shut down small incidental shooting and made them position more carefully to avoid giving me a free shooting attack. Overall, I don't know how to feel about it. It is by far the ability that caused the most feel-bads in my games (I killed an Ogor Tyrant full to dead before it could get off a big charge because it shot me with its pistol, for example). My most used orders were probably Advance in Formation and Counter Charge (which is great and super fun). I very rarely used Engage the Foe, because my list just does not make good use of it (it is great on Cavaliers), and I never once got Suppressing Fire off successfully.
My worst performance with the army was against Kruleboyz, who in many ways seem perfect to counter a magic-heavy shooting army between Gobsprakk hurting you on unbinds and Grinnin' Blades making units untargetable outside of 12". I also missed my Zenestra prayer the first 3 rounds of that game, so that sucked.
Some of my best moments came from me hitting a clutch Pall of Doom and disabling a key units with it. The Battlemage was really hit-or-miss, but the hits were really impactful: Shutting down Katakros, or essentially doubling the damage Fusiliers by forcing a huge battleshock loss. I also really enjoyed some fun interactions from Orders.
Final verdict, I guess, is that I enjoy how this army plays. Currently I feel it is a bit difficult to build the thematic list I have in mind. Running both Fusiliers and Tanks spreads you too thin, the current rules kind of incentivize you to go all-in on Tanks (even post nerf, due to battleline requirements) or run human goodstuff (previously with Fusiliers, now probably with Cavaliers). But that is set to change in 4th edition, so I am excited about that.
-
Finally got the first 10 Fusiliers done.
Overall, I found the models easier to work with than you might expect, but the wrought iron/trim just always kind of sucks to paint. Definitely the biggest barrier for me, after I had that part base coated, I finished the rest of the painting in a day.
-
6
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Clan's Cynic said:
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Arzalyn said:
Yeah I totally agree that much of its success will depend on how much we try and adopt it in the end. Its quiet funny because we always see people talking how we needed to make smaller games more normal (to get a bigger number of games per play day, to reduce the number of models to play barrier and all other factors) but when those modes appear they generally don't stick around due to them being "unbalanced because the game is balanced with 2k in mind". Remember meeting engagements? I know it (much like combat patrol) may have its problems, but maybe if we as a community come together to get to keep it been played and fixing it, if needed, we could have something really important for our hobby to flourish.
Coming from a country where it is really hard to get warhammer models in general I can't stress enough how important a smaller, easier to get into game is important for this hobby to keep up. We've trying to grow our community and there are lots of people interested but having to say "oh get enough to play 1k first and you can start playing" and getting 1k translating into having to buy multiple boxes has made we loose a great amount of people that wanted to get into it. A lower entry barrier and games that are faster and easier to set up are all positive things that both get new people in but also help keep old players interested with more games happening and making easier to start a new faction you are interested in try/paint.
I can definitely say that I am more positive about Spearhead so far than I ever was about meeting engagements, which even when I was building up my army I had no interest in. The whole set up of splitting your army into three and having them come onto the board on different turns just was not appealing, and I didn't see the point of doing it instead of just playing normal matched play battle plans that were workable with smaller unit numbers and board sizes.
Spearhead, on the other hand, seems great. Its design does a lot to mitigate the weaknesses of low-points AoS. In my mind, there are two big factors that make low-point AoS kind of janky.
1: For a smaller board you need bespoke battle plans. You can't just shrink down a 60x44 battle plan with 6 objectives to half or quarter size. The distances make no sense at that point, and you don't have enough units to actually play the scenario. Spearhead addresses this by giving us the necessary scenarios and the core rules change with objectives being 3" capture range helps, too.
2: Low numbers of units with barely diminished damage means that half your army might die turn 1. In regular 2000 point AoS, you frequently have 10 or so units on the board. You have enough points to bring screens after bringing all the hammers you actually want. Your opponent might alpha charge or shoot you and blow up a unit turn 1, but that only loses you 1/10th of your list in points most likely. In low points, if your opponent can build a list that contains one of the combos from the regular game (a cav hero and his squad, a strong shooting combo...), they might point-and-click 1 of your 4-6 units of the board (easier due to smaller board size), which might be too much to ever recover from. Spearhead deals with this through REINFORCEMENT units and fixed lists that (hopefully) don't contain that kind of firepower.
I am really into the idea of spearhead. I will definitely be making the factions I already own Spearhead-compatible and would love if the system is fun enough to play as a quick play mode in its own right. But it is definitely a huge boon to new players, who now have a very tangible and actionable way to playing their first game of AoS and a good on ramp to 2000 points proper.
-
6
-
-
1 minute ago, Tonhel said:
I really like how they did BTs with Spearhead. It's something really new and makes the game more interesting. I wonder why they didn't do this for AoS main. Probably because drawing cards for BT/commands is to random for tournament play?
I think they want matched to be for "serious" play. Not necessarily tournament or competitive, but with high skill expression and little "wacky" stuff, if that makes sense. High consistency and predictability (as much as a game with random turn order can have).
Which, if they actually pull off Spearhead and Path to Glory as fun alternative modes, I think might not be a bad idea. It would be nice to have different game modes that appeal to different player types, instead of everyone playing Matched and Narrative/Open existing in name only.
-
7
-
-
11 minutes ago, Grungnisson said:
Yes, it can. But unless we see any hints of that, based on the information given so far, there's no such indication.
Why do you find it easier to believe that there will be two separate launch boxes rather than two separate spearheads when they explicitly state in the article that "the launch box" will have two spearheads, some terrain and a hardcover core book?
-
11
-
-
8 minutes ago, Grungnisson said:
OK, let's recap once more.
The Dominion style, launch box for AoS 4th edition - we know it will have a Core Rules book, as they always do, and we do have every reason to expect the new, redesign SCE, plus brand new hero(es) to be included.
Spearhead - will have two Spearhead/Vanguard type warbands, one of them SCE. Which we know exactly the content of, and therefore we know it's different to the above.
I would say, logic dictates, we're looking at two different products here.
Stormcast can have two different spearheads. Yndrasta and Ruination.
I would say the warcom article is pretty clear about there being one box:
QuoteThe incoming launch box provides everything you need to play with a friend, including two complete Spearhead forces, terrain, a double-sided board with printed objectives, and the packs of cards that really make this mode tick. You’ll also get a beautiful hardcover book that includes everything you need to play – the core rules, the Spearhead battlepack, and the rules for every Spearhead force in the game – so you can start playing with your existing collections immediately.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Vagard said:
Do you mean that when GW talks about the "lanch box" here, it is not the AoS v4 lauch box but a special spearhead launch box?
The incoming launch box provides everything you need to play with a friend, including two complete Spearhead forces, terrain, a double-sided board with printed objectives, and the packs of cards that really make this mode tick. You’ll also get a beautiful hardcover book that includes everything you need to play – the core rules, the Spearhead battlepack, and the rules for every Spearhead force in the game – so you can start playing with your existing collections immediately.
To me it is clear that they are talking about the v4 launch box as their did not really insist on a special spearhead one
And it makes sens to appeal new players by telling them "hey, you can directly play a balanced game with special rules for small armies with this "all included box" and then add more units to play the matched play 2k pts"
Especially since this is what Spearhead is supposed to be: The format with preconstructed lists that you can play out of the box. It would be a huge missed opportunity for GW to not make the 4th ed launch box Spearhead compatible. It is one of those loss leader boxes that is aimed at bringing new players into the game, after all, so if that is the main target demographic, of course it should be Spearhead.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Garrac said:
GW is free to do as they may, but you won't get anyone asking on reddit if Leviathan sold poorly.
We have the back story of why so many Dominion boxes were left on store shelves by now. It was not because of lack of demand: Due to low supply, GW decided to prioritize webstore orders over independent stores during the release period of 3rd, which led to stores being initially unable to fulfill their orders, and later being stuck with excess stock after GW produced more and delivered it to them.
-
3
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Garrac said:
So, then launch box gets revealed on 18th of may, and preorders for the 9th of June? That's barely 22 days of marketing. It's utterly insane, AoS (nor any other game for the matter) isn't 40k, it doesn't have the privilege of a large fandom instabuying every release. But, oh well, I'm not an executive...
Dominion was revealed May 29th, pre-order June 19th, for reference.
So, seems about right?
-
3
-
-
3 minutes ago, bethebee said:
is anyone else considering buying a Vanguard box just for Spearhead? Vince's podcast got me riled up with the idea and i figure it'd be a good way get back into the groove of the hobby.
I'm buying a cannon for CoS so that my army can be Spearhead-compatible. Definitely want to be able to play intro games with new players, and who knows, maybe Spearhead will actually have some staying power for quick games?
-
1 minute ago, Ejecutor said:
Do you mean the Gallet ones? I would also love it but don't you think people would be a bit disappointed? Especially if the launch box has less minis. If it has to contain terrain at least give us something that feels new.
The new Stormcast have destroyed masonry from the Dawnbringer buildings on their bases. I feel like "Skaven are attacking one of the settlements, now completed, that was founded in the last edition" would be a pretty good theme for the box. I suspect this is just wishful thinking, though. They probably had bespoke terrain planned for that box 3 years ago.
-
1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:
Currently I am more curious about how that terrain would look than about any more models from the box.
I would be super happy if they repurposed the completed Dawnbringer buildings for this box, but I expect something with more of a blight city flavour.
-
2 hours ago, Tonhel said:
The marketing power is strong within GW. 🙂 I fear Spearhead is a gimmick and that it will be boring very quickly.
I think a preconstructed game mode like Spearhead is valuable for beginners. I hope it is fun and succeed at lowering the barrier to entry for AoS. If it does, then I don't think it needs to have long-term appeal for enfranchised players with large collections.
-
5
-
-
15 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:
According to the articles, Manifestation Lores are in addition to your spell lore. So there is no competition on listbuilding with other non-manifestation spells. You pick the ones you might potentially benefit from.
Will you cast them in many games? Maybe, maybe not. There might be a point where casting them is beneficial instead of other spells, and you can do so at no points or listbuilding costs.
Another point is that the Weirdnob does not have a warscroll spell. There is also the question if spells like Mystic Shield are going to be a CORE spell for everyone, or if those are going to be in a generic lore.
Even though endless spells don't cost points anymore, there is still some opportunity cost to them. There is no disadvantage to bringing them, that is true. But I am not convinced yet that not bringing them is a big disadvantage.
Take the Quicksilver Blades, for example:
Assuming that the banishment value is close to the cast value, is it really that good to use a cast on a CV 6 or 7 endless spell that probably does nothing for a round and does, like, 4-6 rend 1 damage and 2 mortals per activation? You have to set it up outside of 9" and get through the possibility of banishment and getting the spell shot off the table before it can fight a lot of the time, aftwr all. I feel like if I have a 1d3 mortals + some other effect on a regular spell, the two are in pretty tight competition.
I am more likely now than I was before to pick up the malign sorcery box after the rules change, but I don't yet think that I need to buy it in order to not handicap myself.
-
39 minutes ago, Grungnisson said:
Spending so much money to make models the existing playerbase already has does not strike me immediately as a GW kind of idea.
Sure, I get that. It depends on a few factors, I guess. Do GW want to avoid producing in China in the future? Are the endless spell molds close to the end of their lifespan anyway? How much do they want to keep endless spells and faction terrain available for AoS, given the logistical troubles they have been recently having?
I can at least see a world where redoing the moulds and manufacturing in the UK makes financial sense.
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
[citation needed]