RyantheFett
-
Posts
349 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by RyantheFett
-
-
21 minutes ago, novakai said:
TBF for Custodes player their Codex release has been pan as one of the worst written one so far in 10th editions. So anger is everywhere
Seems the trend so far is that every other Codex is pretty bad. Bright side is that it means every release we don't get a crazy overpowered faction that will have to get a ton of nurfs.
Will be interesting to see how AoS codexs will go.
-
2
-
-
54 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
I am also a bit worried with the removal of subfactions and replacing it with formations. The positive is that you have much more freedom in how you want your subfaction to behave on the battlefield. The negative could be that i.e for CoS, the options will be more limited as currently CoS has 11 subfactions to chose from.
In all honestly 4 will be a good number for them. GW has had trouble in the past making more then a handful into good sub factions that see any kind of play.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Baron Klatz said:
I’m hoping it will be part of a moral about working together and things only turn around for CoS(and order as a whole) as they work more alongside eachother.
Currently human-focused: can barely hold their own.
Ironweld update with new city-duardin & Cogfort: can firmly hold together and even push.
Collegiate Arcane update has the city-aelves bolster the human mages & eldritch war engines: successfully crushing the forces of Chaos as they retake the Realms.
Order of Azyr bringing in the Celestium Gargants: stomp all over everyone.
Man that would be so cool, but I doubt they would do that. GW wants you to play the magic elves and steampunk dwarfs factions. No overlap allowed!!
Maybe in the lore we will see this, but it does not seem to be the way GW makes their armies on the table. All the new Cities shooting units and scouts were pretty easy for dwarfs and elves to be added, but GW has passed those options up.
Best hope is that they get the full Tau treatment. Of course are over a decade old and players are still begging for human options....... or really any other race lol.
-
33 minutes ago, Gitzdee said:
I can easily see dwarfs being the airforce/ engineers of CoS and delfs the navy.
I 100% agree and would love to see that, but I think they are the Tau of AoS for a fews years now lol.
Fans: Oh wow this faction has a lot of diversity and different races all working together in the lore?
Gw: Yes!
Fans: Can I see it on the table top????
Gw: No.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:
Nice Ogres and chaos dwarfs
Ok longshot but City dwarf it well aware their leaving
But will new city dawi incoming or should i recruit more humans into my crusade?
With Old World getting old dwarfs and AoS having chaos, steampunk, and fire dwarfs I find it hard to believe they will ever throw anything dwarf back into Cities.
I would love it, but if they are taking page out of 40k again it will mostly be human and few orgers if we are lucky. I still plan on mixing my non human stuff into it to keep the look going.
-
3 minutes ago, novakai said:
Funny thing is if THWG theory is correct then anytime some 40K player start a Daemon of Chaos army or bought a Daemon prince for their Chaos Marine army, then all that revenue would have been report for AoS because all the daemon stuff (especially product like Be’lekor ) are label as AoS products first and foremost.
What is going inside GW is a pretty big question that I wish we would get an honest answer for. Like really the only two answers that make sense is that they are set up stupidly like the rumors suggest or they are greedy/stupid.
I jump around between the two a lot lol, but it is clear that GW does not want players to use 1 army for two games. They have done it with 30k/40k and with ToW/AoS. And now it seems they are trying something with Underworld, so we will see when 4.0 hits.
-
1
-
-
As a fun test I tried to sell my Stormcast and Cities stuff that either was removed or most likely going to be to a game store. They flat out declined.........
I am scared to check out the ebay prices lol.
-
3 minutes ago, Chikout said:
6. What's up with the shield option on liberators. Just cosmetic or different warscroll?
It is just most likely built into the war scroll. 40k did the same thing in which they removed a lot of options. They been doing that with a lot of 3ed units.
-
So if we go with the 4chan stuff being somewhat right then with the other rumors then it is a safe bet that the cities wave 2 is sometime next year.
Sadly it seems that when they will fully remove all the non human stuff, but at least that new tank sounds fun.
My money is still on dwarfs being pulled at the start of 4th which would also with when they come out in TOW.
-
12 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
I will answer you that. Dawis and Old Empire. CoS second wave is coming!
Think the only reason Cities is safe right now is just that the new range is too small for them to pull more out???? Or they knew the backlash and figured they just kick the can down the road?
Think it is safe to say that Cities will lose all the old stuff. The only real question is when.
Just like with 40k and 30k, they will want to keep the two games as far apart as possible.
-
Just now, novakai said:
Checking in to see people reaction on BoC getting gone
seems about right
And this is the place that people knew that it was going to happen. Other less informed groups have taken it less well lol...............
-
How the hell did cities get untouched lol?
Makes me think we will get a wave 2 of this sometime soon......
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
I have no clue about the current one or the new one, but why would it add fun? Isn't it just another way to build armies?
The current system is a bit restrictive, but at the same time crazy important for certain match ups. Having the one drop to help a player go first can pretty much end the game turn 1. My LRL really need that +5 ward save up ASAP.
Not sure the new system is better, but it does look like they have a lot more freedom for units, but it looks like heroes will be crazy important. Have a feeling that it will weed out a lot weaker heroes and we will end up seeing the same few over and over.
-
Just now, Scáthborn said:
While I'm sad heroes won't be joining units, the new battle formations and the role restrictions being lifted will make for some fun and more interesting lists now in my eyes, I always find the "Oops all x" lists funny.
IIRC think the heroes will have the 3" rule so they will be sticking pretty close to their own units (which these new rules show will be usually certain units). I play Cities which already have this and it pretty much works like they joined the units.
This could be pretty good since we won't need like 6 of one hero, but the game still loses the aura armies that forces everything into a blob.
-
What I find interesting with the double turn is how GW keeps on trying to fix it lol. The last handbook gave a lot of bonuses to try and get people to not take the back to back turns. Now 4.0 just straight up says you can't score (how much this will hurt players we will have to see).
My friend and I were talking about what were the odds that GW was done trying to balance double turns and they instead made the penalties so brutal this time to make sure nobody would ever use it again lol!
-
2
-
-
26 minutes ago, Peacaf said:
It exceeds 200 people on Twitter and is clearly in favor of the double turn.
An interesting theory I saw pop up is that asking AoS players about the double turn will always come out in favor of it since you know they are already playing the game with it lol.
Would be a lot more interesting to see a poll of players who don't play AoS and the reason why. A better way to see if the double turn is a dead weight or you know people still mad at them killing Fantasy all those years ago.
-
6
-
-
I find the talk over the the double turn very interesting with pros and cons with both arguments. I am not a fan, but I do know all my friends play super aggressive and we all bet it all on getting the double turn...................... Bright side being is that most of my AoS games are less then an hour lol.
The biggest issues I find with the system is:
1. Balance- We all know GW track record when it comes to balancing pretty much anything lol. Very interesting to see if the setback is enough to make people not take the double turn. GW have been throwing so many negative rules, but none of them seem to be enough.
2. Keeping new players away- You see a lot of complaint and people pointing to the double turn as the reason they stay away from the game. For new players it could just wipe them from the table (of course a lot of the blame would be on the teacher there).
Just wonder why GW is so set on that one rule when it feels like AoS really likes to throw things at the wall and see what sticks.
-
3
-
-
14 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
Would they release a new "pack" just to play Spearhead? Is it the same way for Combat Patrols?Combat Patrol is just a slimmed down version of 40k. Same rules, but units are dumbed down somewhat. The faction ability are somewhat different as well. Overall its fine and it works pretty well in teaching new players how to play and games last about an hour.
Combat Patrol is crazy unbalanced tho and I don't remember when GW was showing it off if they pushed it the same way they are doing with AoS version.
-
2 minutes ago, Chikout said:
The fact that path to glory stops at 5 suddenly makes it much more appealing. I really hope battle tactics have had a complete rethink. They need to be much harder to achieve and require more interaction with the opponents army.
Most likely they will just steal the mission deck from 40k. Give players options to go in with static missions or believe in the heart of the cards. But pretty sure most options would be better then battle tactics.
Outside of spells it seems like everything else revealed has been 10ed rules, which is not a bad thing.
-
26 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
They said last week that the scope of the project has changed. Thus this could mean that everything is possible from moving some legacy armies to core armies or add Cathay, kislev sooner than later. Everything is possible.
I hope so, but I am still thinking they will stick to making sure there is 0 cross play between the games. They just did it to 40k and 30k, so I figure it will be the same thing here. It is stupid and will be really hard to do, but you know GW going to GW lol.
27 minutes ago, Scáthborn said:I'd love it if the current Dark Elves were rolled into Daughters of Khaine as a standby for when Malerion's Umbraneth release. Har Ganeth(Kuron) Executioners fit so well with the theme.
As a Cities player who got into the faction for the mix race stuff I just wish they end my suffering when 4th comes out and do something like this lol.
-
3
-
-
15 minutes ago, Ookami said:
If BoC and cities’ dwarves are gone to TOW, then I wonder why don’t they bother to also remove dark elves and represent them in TOW as well?
Dark Elves most likely getting their own faction in Age of Sigmar along with Chaos Dwarfs.
Old World pretty much gave us all we needed to know about the future of both games and which armies will end up where. so prepare accordingly.
Figure the 4th ed release will do a lot of trimming. My money is on dwarf leaving Cities there.
Or course these are all rumors and GW could change their mind on keeping all the game separate................ Of course 30k and 40k point that they are trying to make sure nothing can be used between games.
-
6
-
-
25 minutes ago, ScionOfOssia said:
Yeah, RN it feels like my Bonereapers won’t really be able to contest against Horde armies- Who cares about killing 30 Zombies when my opponent still outweighs my Mortek Guard with the ones left? Or my 20 Namarti Thralls kill 40 Clanrats but still get outweighed by the remainder? I need to see the new version, because it could very much be punishing for Elite armies.
I often found that horde armies had way better ways to ignore those rules then the elite armies. I play LRL and Stormcast and get destroyed by having to take several battleshock test a turn................ but I have always had bad luck lol.
-
4 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
In my personal experience, the coolest, biggest guys were always the one with the highest bravery. Underpowered units like grots, rats and normal humans were usually the ones that suffered. In fact, they got doubly hurt by both having worse bravery and losing higher numbers than elite units.
Then you get stuff like the death factions that had crazy high bravery and pretty much allowed them to ignore those checks.
It was a mechanic that only hurt a select few factions.
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
This. It never felt very impactful to me.
Oh it was very impactful to me. I can't tell you the number of games that I lost because had to do a battle shock test for like one guy dead and then roll like a 11 lol.
Glad it is gone
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted · Edited by RyantheFett
I usually play once a week and my games usually last about 2 hours. If we want it to end quickly we can do it in under an hour if we bet everything on the double turn and finish the game on turn 2..................... Of course I may not be the best example since my Old World games last 30 minutes lol.
Right now the game has a strange combo of being too long and short in the wrong spots. A heavy spell army takes forever to play, but with how fast everything dies combat is over in seconds.
The changes look fun so far and based off of how quick 10ed is (about 2 hours) it will take a lot less time to play.