Neil Arthur Hotep
-
Posts
4,228 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
103
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Neil Arthur Hotep
-
-
3 minutes ago, Ookami said:
It actually says that:
Endless spells and invocations are still in the mix – but instead of spending points to add endless spells when constructing an army, you can pick a manifestation lore. This grants access to a selection of endless spells and invocations that you’ll be able to summon in battle.
Which I understood as endless spells will have their own lore, which you also pick. But do you pick it instead or in addition - yeah, that's the question. I think it's too powerful to pick both and players should opt for one of them. Maybe thematic endless spells will be included in one of the army lores, but who knows.That quote just says endless spells don't cost points anymore, not really anything about mixing them with regular spells.
I would assume that since Spell Lores and Manifestation Lords are different categories, they don't make you choose which type you want. I wonder if the enhancement system is still around, because that would be one way to limit access that they could use.
-
1 minute ago, Ookami said:
Am I correct that now you either select some normal lore or endless spells/invocations lore per army. So you can't further mix endless spells with normal spells anymore?
It does not say this in the article. I would assume you get one each of spell, prayer and manifestation by default.
-
3 minutes ago, Grungnisson said:
I would cerainly expect at least the Arkanauts to have SiC. I mean, let's not read too much into the mini design, but if you have a pistol and a cutlass, you're equipped to use both in close-qarters. Maybe SiC on infantry only, with Thunderers included? I don't know. But seeing how traditionally everyone else sh*ts on KO for causing then an NPE, I brace myself for GW over-compensating.
Also, I would expect KO to get shoot in combat from their small ship guns, but not the big ones.
I think the overall design intent this edition is to get shooting to be more of support strategy for melee rather than the main game plan of a list. I think the supposedly reduced shooting range is evidence for that. Also, the new commands help melee units (counter-charge, power through) and encourage players to bring limited shooting (covering fire).
I hope that the warscrolls of ranged units are as good at defining unit rolls as the ones for melee units we have seen so far. "Ranged damage" should not be the extent of their niches.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:
What if... the "weird" things that claimed @Whitefang for the next edition are new cross-allegiances factions:
- Chaos Duardin: Chaos-Destruction
- Malerion Daemons: Chaos-Order
- Silent People: Death-Destruction
- Followers of Morr: Death-OrderIt's an interesting idea, but what would a faction being cross alliance even mean at this point? Just ally choices? It's not like GAs even have mechanics attached right now.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, dmorley21 said:
Actually insane that they decided to squeeze another battlescroll in. Even though this one is mostly points changes. I barely played any games with the last one.
-
23 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
Little easter egg about Empire I feel like. Nothing more.
I suspect the model refresh might have just been in the pipeline for so long that those Empire models were actually still current when the artwork was made. There is some more evidence for that in the Warhammer+ short where Gunnar and his Darkoath guys come from, which also freatures non-Dawnbringer Freeguild.
-
3
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Chikout said:
I'm not sure what all the kerfuffle about coherency is. I had a look through the AoS minis and there's only a small selection of units that might really struggle with half inch coherency. Harridans and Bladegheists from Nighthaunt, squig hoppers and fanatics from Gloomspite and maybe thralls from idk. Anything old world that could rank up before will be fine with the extra half inch of space.
GW have already said that some units will have different coherence ranges written on their warscrolls. Do that with the warscrolls listed above and there's no problem.
Why make the change? I think there are two reasons. Aesthetics and board space. The more important aspect is the fact that tighter grouped units will make more space on the board and make movement more important. Combined with the lack of double reinforcing, this will make a huge difference. Before with a unit of 60 zombies you could make a line about 60 inches across. Now the maximum you will be able to do is 30 inches. Swamping the board is going to be much harder than before.
Why not just switch to squares? I really don't want to go back to wheeling around bushes. I like to feel like I have 50 game pieces instead of 5 or 6.
The suggested options in the other thread are all more complicated especially as AoS unit sizes are so variable.
What about piling in? With the 3 inch combat range and the reduction of pinning possibilities, I think there's going to be a lot less piling in than before.
Obviously the litmus test is actually playing the game, but I've experimented with my own armies and I don't have to much trouble getting them in coherency.
I think they just want units to be in base-to-base contact, honestly. Which is fine with me. I don't dislike that at all. With 3" combat range, that sounds super managable.
-
4
-
-
5 minutes ago, Baron Klatz said:
Ohh, this guy did an amazing ancient bronze job for his Stormcast Eternals.
“Baselayer green then drybrush a slightly brown gold. Doing something similar myself at the moment it’s deceptively easy.”
I have already done a test paint that I am pretty happy with, which is also just a drybrush of my favourite bronze paint over dark brown. I want this Stormcast project to be low-stress.
The hard part will be the verdigris. Trying to avoid the trap of "paint this whole thing bronze, then paint the whole thing green" trap. I'll need go out and take a bunch of reference photos of old statues, to get it right, I think.
-
Personally, I frequently have low-intensity periods of hobbying that last a few months. This is fine, I have other hobbies as well.
During 3rd ed, there was an about a year long gap where I didn't really do anything substantial in terms of hobby, for a few reasons. I had just recently moved, I had a young child, but most importantly, there were just no releases for the armies I played. In the case of Cities, it was even worse, because they were telegraphed to get their update way in advance, which made me shelf my existing Cities project for over a year while I was waiting for their new models and rules.
In that time, I mostly painted terrain and which ever models I felt like painting. Mostly heroes for role playing games and stuff.
There really is not a problem with taking a break from non-stop hobbying if you are just not feeling things for a while.
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Baron Klatz said:
They’re too perfect for Anvils of Heldenhammer for me so I guess I’ll have them as an allied mixed Stormhost into my Cleansing Rain Heralds.
Ghyran’s life giving rainstorms mixed with the stalwart wardens of death to complete the cycle.
I am thinking of a bronze colour scheme for those ancient civilization vibes, with Ruination units getting that extra verdigris to show their age.
-
2 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:
To be honest, my enthusiasm and interest is getting sapped with each reveal. I see the wall of coloured blocks and my brain just... shuts down. Its a style of information presentation that doesn't work for me.
Interesting. It seems so much more approachable to me than the huge blocks of text we had before. No more digging through the rules text for activation timing, casting values, your phase vs. any phase etc.
But what I am really excited about is the Anti-KEYWORD stuff. I'm super excited to see what new roles all those redundant units from past editions get.
4 minutes ago, Baron Klatz said:And Ruination is just covered in tanky Death vibes so maybe they cause enemies to take a straight 3 mortal wounds when they retreat instead of D3 to play on the fear they can cause and make opponents more wary of fighting them as elites?
Really exited about Ruination, too. I am already finding myself planning out colour schemes.
-
1
-
-
I don't know about you guys, but I am super excited to play 4th edition. Can't wait to see the warscrolls for my factions. What they have been doing for Stormcast is so good!
-
5
-
-
15 minutes ago, Flippy said:
Depends on the magnets. If too strong, you will have some problems, but with proper magnets minis just slide on the tray and the tray itself is almost flat and doesn't get in the way. For small units (3-5-6) these trays are on overkill, but for big infantry blocks they speed up a game significantly.
That is, once you simply get the habit of putting the models base to base in ranks and thus stop concerning yourself with coherency rules and related positioning shenanigans.
I use them on for Steelhelms and they are a huge time saver. Since I magnetize for transport anyway, they are very convenient. Highly recommend them.
-
32 minutes ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:
I've never had that problem. How do you end up losing the 30%? I ask out of curiosity.
For my rarely-used Citadel paints, I always had minor spills and the last bit of paint usually dries up or separates.
-
8 hours ago, Tonhel said:
Yeah, but I think most is looking fine. I quite like how strong those Kroxigors are now and I can appreciate the rock paper scissors approach which gives each unit a well defined task. It's clear that the game is focussed on competive play with lots of casualties once in melee.
But that 0,5" approach I really don't see the benefit of it. I only see negatives. What is the purpose of it? I don't play in a competive environment, so nobody really abuses the rules. Same as we don't abuse the rules with TOW.
My first thought was that they intended the shorter coherency distance to close the loophole where miniatures on 25mm bases, but nobody else, can deploy in a long line.
Based on my personal experience, this change won't affect me a lot. I already have my 25mm base dudes in base-to-base contact all of the time, and now with 3" combat ranger there will be even less reason to ever take them off their movement trays.
I wish, though, that we had gone back to "within" instead of "wholly within" on measurements, since the conga lines that originally necessitated that change are now completely impossible.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Quote
Overall, rend has been reduced throughout the game
Boo. More rend, fewer mortals.
QuoteOverall, rend has been reduced throughout the game, and while you can still positively modify your save profile with All-out Defence, this remains capped at +1. Most factions lack any other tools to further increase a unit’s save profile, so “save stacking” – the process of negating rend by adding extra save – is largely a thing of the past.
They want to address save stacking, but it sounds like they didn't fix it structurally (by making rend apply after save bonuses are calculated) but by limiting access to save bonuses. So potentially, some factions can still save stack or the mechanic will make a return as battletomes are released.
QuoteWith combat range gone, you might have some questions about how a warrior with a hammer is set apart from one with a spear. This has been handled by further differentiating the role of each unit on the battlefield. Weapon and warscroll abilities now provide units with specific roles – take the bristling spear-wall of Stormcast Eternals Vindictors as an example.
Really happy with unit roles. The game will benefit a lot from a stronger rock/paper/scissors and better functional signposting like the Anti-Charge ability on Vindictors.
QuoteThe coherency range of units is now ½”
25mm base supremacy is a thing of the past.
QuoteBut Retreat is now an ability used in the Movement Phase, a tactical decision that comes with a cost of D3 mortal damage, though some wily units may be able to use special abilities to slip out of combat without reprisal – including certain Skaven.
I don't really get why they want to discourage retreating. If anything, I think the game would benefit from players retreating more often.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Gotz said:
remember that they can also make an old fantasy kit the official AoS kit and rerelease an older kit for the old world, like they've done with night goblins.
There are a few instances where I suspect an old WHFB kit is internally just treated as a regular AoS kit. Blightkings are an obvious one. But also something like the Hurricanum/Luminark, which played a pivotal role in Broken Realms and has appeared in official AoS art, such as here illustrating the Realm of Azyr.
I would bet that this kit stays in AoS unless it gets replaced, and that it doesn't get replaced for another 5 years or so at least. Which is pretty funny, considering it literally says "Emperor Karl Franz" on it. I think several 8th Ed/End Times kits are in that category.
-
1
-
-
On 4/13/2024 at 12:59 AM, TechnoVampire said:
I had the same reaction. It felt like a rebranding of the current system, minus the narrative intrigue. The new subfactions (“battle formations”) appear to have all the same kind of restrictions as before (relating only to specific unit types), however now there’s is no lore… which apparently allows us to paint them however we like for the first time.
I’m also concerned that there might only be a single trait for each battle formation, which to me would feel like dumbing down faction rules, while keeping numerous core rules I’d happily have seen stripped away. That’s the oposite of the kind of “streamlining” I’d like to see, but hopefully it’s not the case 🤞
I have been thinking about this whole "battle formations" thing, too. Like others, I don't really see it as a super big improvement. Even though you were never required to paint your models a certain way to get access to subfaction rules, I suppose it is somewhat nice for people who do feel a strong compulsion to do this kind of thing, but would like to paint their guys differently/use a different subfaction's fluff.
I was recently thinking about how I never used Living City even though I think ambushing is pretty fun. Mostly it was because I have a tech-heavy cities army, so I think I kind of just mentally skipped over the nature subfaction. I might have considered them more seriously without the fluff mismatch. But I am not really convinced this kind of benefit necessitates a restructuring of the whole subfaction system.
-
23 minutes ago, DeLewko said:
Gw has a tendency lately to leave 1 elite infantry untouched when redoing a line, see seraphon with temple guard and sbg with grave guard. No idea when they will update those kits. Theory floating around was that they left it for warcry update, but it has been 3 years since sbg was released and we still have them..
they will 100% be updated since we got the test models through WHU and I hope its pretty soon
I honestly don't think it's any deeper than "When did this kit come out? 8th ed? Let it ride for a few more years.".
Although Grave Guard definitely deserve better.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Ferban said:
OK. I've seen the reaction to switching up the Hallowed Knights as the default color scheme instead of the Hammers of Sigmar. So I know that this is an unpopular opinion. But am I the only one that prefers the golden boys?
The silver looks good too, don't get me wrong. But it feels sort of like ordinary knights in ordinary armor. Whereas the gold "sigmarite" armor felt otherworldly and rare - both evocative of the Stormcasts themselves. Plus, I never understood the hate for blue (capes) and gold (armor). Blue and gold isn't a totally unknown color pairing among sports teams.
Anyway, I'm OK being wrong on this one. I'm just hoping that there's at least one other person out there who likes the Hammers paint scheme.
It's not like gold/blue is a bad colour scheme, but I think anything that is mostly painted gold is hard to make look good.
I like the colour scheme change because it illustrated the change in the characterization of Stormcast. When they were the big heroes retaking the realms, they were painted in gleaming gold. Now that they are tragic characters ravaged by their past, they get painted in more down to earth, more natural steel and leather colours.
-
4
-
-
16 minutes ago, Beliman said:
Imho, that's exactly what I expected.
Edite: Any teaser about what are we going to see for 4oS today?
Didn't they say combat phase rules as well as magic and prayers are this week?
-
2
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
It is clear that GW wants to attract some of the 40k players to AoS via SCE. This is a good move, because it means more profit for AoS and this then results in more investments in AoS.
Maybe at the cost of 40K, but perhaps also that 40K profits will remain the same, but that AoS will come closer thanks to the upcoming new edition.I saw this graph in the Honest Wargamer discord and it shows how huge 40k is.
For completeness, also a graph of TOW and AoS. It proves nothing, other than that 40K IP is immense.
I can't view these images, could you reupload them?
-
14 minutes ago, Flippy said:
Good point. Do they also arrive on the filed of battle
in drop podsvia lightning bolts?They just get strapped into a little baby carrier beforehand.
-
4
-
-
29 minutes ago, Gitzdee said:
Im not bashing one or the other. Just think they have a similar design. These might draw in some 40k people because these stormcast feel familiar.
On the one hand, we really don't have to pretend our Games Workshop holy knights that were supposed to be fantasy Space Marines don't look like Games Workshop Space Marines that are supposed to be holy knights.
On the other hand, I still think Stormcast look way cooler than Space Marines.
-
7
-
2
-
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Would make sense given how we have been moving away from cross faction models over the course of 3rd.