Neil Arthur Hotep
-
Posts
4,316 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
104
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Neil Arthur Hotep
-
-
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?
-
9
-
-
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?
-
2
-
-
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.
-
30 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:
It is impossible. If they sell them in smaller sets then it would be because are new models
The new manifestation lores definitely don't match up with the old sprues. I wonder if they would go through the trouble of making new molds. They might if they plan to produce the spells in-house rather than in China. After the trouble they apparently had with the spider incarnate and Dawnbringer buildings, I could see that being a possibility.
-
2 hours ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:
I find myself wondering if generic terrain will be attackable in the same way as Faction Terrain.
Would be an interesting replacement for that one rampage. A lot of terrain pieces already have warscrolls from Dawnbringers... 5?
Even though endless spells are now free, I wonder if they will be worth it for the average army. I previously never took them because I always thought that spending points on a spell I might not even cast was worse than going for a triumph or upgrading a unit. That part is no longer an issue, but if I look at what we know of the game so far, I am not sure I would want to cast endless spells, anyway.
Every army already gets a spell lore that all wizards know, so that's some competition for endless spells. If you only bring one small wizard, it probably has a warscroll spell you want. Even armies with multiple small wizards probably don't have a lot of free casts. My most recent list had 4 One-Cast Andys, and between warscroll spells and Mystic Shield, I basically never had a cast to waste on a 7 CV endless spell. I think only lists that effortlessly get more casts than they can use will really want an endless spell package. So Lumineth, Tzeentch, Seraphon, maybe Soulblight if Lore of Vampires is still bad.
But even then, endless spells now seem very easy to deal with, give you can unbind, dispell and fight them. Seems hard to keep them on the field.
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Ferban said:
Endless spells and faction terrain this time.
Overall, really like the changes. I've been advocating that endless spells shouldn't cost points (or cost waaay less) for a long time. So I'm glad to see that. Breaking it into lores means each army will get a few that they can bring. So we'll get more use out of our models which is always good.
Also, they will be much more like units on the battlefield. So they can be charged, fought, damaged, and killed. Love this change. If you bring an army with no or few wizards, the only way to deal with an endless spell before was to try to kill the controlling wizard and then move the spell on your turn. Eh. But now, it can be killed. So a melee focused army has a way to deal with endless spells. I like it.
Same with faction terrain. They are units that can be attacked and destroyed. Which is interesting. It'll make many armies want to keep their terrain in the back away from enemy attacks. Which may or may not be good given the terrain's powers. Some terrain (like Seraphon zaps or Ogor heals) often want to be closer to the battle to have a greater effect. I like this change, too.
Overall, super positive about this preview. The actual warscrolls for the spells and terrain is going to be very important, and they only showed off a few. But assuming those scrolls are decent, I think this is a great system.
These changes are very difficult to evaluate in a vacuum. I think I will just have to try them out and see how they feel at the table.
First impressions, this new way of running endless spells seems more attractive than the old. I previously never used them, but feel like they might be fun to try out now.
-
2
-
-
On 9/1/2023 at 4:05 PM, Nezzhil said:
I think they are coming before March-April ends
On 9/1/2023 at 4:06 PM, Neil Arthur Hotep said:I will mark my calendar and be sure to congratulate you on your foresight/clown on you as appropriate.
How are you enjoying those chaos dwarves, @Nezzhil?
-
9
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, AquaRegis said:
Probaly just easier to animate a expressionless mask for a quick scene, then some guys angry face.
No, the stuff in GW trailers is usually pretty strongly on-model. There is probably an alternate build with masks, if I had to guess.
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Marcvs said:
maybe I am missing some nuance between adding a dice and rolling 3d6, but they already had the same rule.
As for the minis, I am not a fan of the tactical columns in general, other than that Prosecutors are a cool concept and these are a nice improvement.
It allows this ability to interact with opponent's abilities that subtract dice, but it is otherwise more or less the same. I think writing it this way prevents situations where you roll 3d6 and your opponent triggers their "make them roll 1d6" ability and you just get trumped by it. Overall it's nice and makes those abilities more intuitive in their interaction.
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:
I'm really liking the blend of ancient roman/greek and medieval astrological/alchemical art the new stormcast have going on. They look so distinct now, really unlike anything from any other game.
-
2
-
-
Just a little guy.
-
3
-
1
-
-
I like models that come with base scenery because it generally makes the base look cooler. I dislike it, though, when I have a basing style in mind that the scenery does not fit with, like a sculpted tree stump when I am going for a city base.
-
17 minutes ago, Frodorowski said:
I'm following some discussions regarding the death BT, and I don't know I'm fully understanding it.... The requirement to accomplish it is pick a "NON-HERO unit with no models slain"... You can pick a hero only if there are no other units to choose.... I don't see how you could accomplish it by killing a hero besides last turn if the rest of the enemy army has been killed and there are just a couple of heroes left. Even if the enemy runs a hero spam list, if it has a 3 miniatures non-hero unit in a corner of his drop zone, you still have to choose that one instead of the heroes....
Personally, playing SBGL I see this BT really difficult to accomplish for all the conditions it has... Either the rival positions a very fragile 10-wound unit in front on his first turn to kill, or the more the battle advances the more units won't be eligible to pick due to having some random miniature killed at some point.
I agree, people treat the Death tactic like it is just "kill a unit", but it is not. I imagine it will be fairly hard for a bunch of the grindier Death lists.
The tactic primes you to think that you should be trying to kill a multi-model unit full to dead. But actually the prime targets for it are probably non-hero single entities, like artillery, war machines or monsters. You are allowed to weaken those and still pick them for the tactic.
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, Chikout said:
Yeah. Every unit moves, every unit fights. One way to stay away from enemy units is to kill them. I think they've struck a reasonable balance so far.
That said AoS and indeed all Warhammer games are fundamentally assymetrical by design. That death battle tactic looks easy unless you're up against 4 megas. Having to take one down from full health in a turn is going to be tricky.
It looks like that at first glance, but the condition is "pick a unit that had no models slain", not "pick a full-health unit", so going up against hero spam makes that tactic easier if anything. It really seems like the designers want to enable very free list building, but are definitely making it most optimal to run fluffy mixed arms lists.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Tonhel said:
If they wanted to keep the BT, then it was better to just keep the universal ones.
The problem with Alliance BsT instead of Faction ones is that for some factions its much easier to succeed in the battle tactics than others.
I.e I think the BT "Reclaim the Realms" is so much easier to achieve with Idoneth or Sylvaneth than it is for Fyreslayers.
Still feels like the variation in difficulty is within reasonable bounds. That could change in the future if they are not careful and write a "destroy a unit with shooting" tactic or something, but for the ones we have seen it seems fine.
IMO, having a faction that is less mobile struggle with mobility-related stuff (be it picking engagements, objective scoring or BTs) is just part of the expression of faction identities.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Gareth 🍄 said:
Pretty nice! I think this new approach to battle tactics addresses a few of the weaknesses brought up in this thread.
If the new system is a base of 6 generic battle tactics and 2 Grand Alliance specific seasonal ones, that seems much easier to handle. Both in terms of mental load and balancing. If they stick with this system and don't add battle tactics back into Battletomes, I think that's an improvement.
The generic tactics seem to focus on movement and fighting (so far), which is good because it makes the game more dynamic. They are tactics you can realistically consider during list building, both for your list and in terms of counter play. They also seem neither completely free nor impossible. I also like how the GA specific tactics allow the writers to express the flavour of the different alliances. It's cool that belonging to a GA will have an effect on how an army can win games.
-
4
-
Thoughts on 4.0's New Rules
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
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.