KHHaunts

What about the Karic Acolytes?. I think thats what they are called . . . .. And if the recent rumor engine thing it arcanite where does that fit in?

O_0

My favorite style of play that.

3320 Bretonnians (With a few empire bits thrown in) 2760 Dwarfs 4960 Sylvaneth & Wanderers (Old school wood elf Army) 2680 High elves 720 Stormcast eternals 640 Blood bound 800 Misc chaos & Daemons 3340 Death (Mainly night haunt and death rattle) still working on this one 19220 in total

Did you do this on a program?

In reality i imagine that the changes will be small compared to the number of requests (Think how many people cried about having pointsb before GW actually did anything) True i suppose but its a bit off a toss-up really if its about the competition the fluff shouldnt actually matter just the rules. If fluff does matter however the recreating cross alliance armies is very fluffy inmany cases. Orks and stormcasts, chaos and fyre slayers, Undead and SC. I suppose you could create battalions for those. As far as powergaming goes if you pay your battleline tax and stick to the Behemoth/Leader requirements what combos could be considered powergaming? (Not meant as if i know that was a genunine questions some example of post points + list buildig rules + less strict allegiance rule would be great.) if i say wanted to take a megaboss and a single unit of Brutes who have been promised a good fight by my Stormcasts i feel like thats fun and fluffy. I dont think i should be put at a disadvantage for that. Again this is mainly down to me wanting to use the rules for non comp match play. (I know i could just do what i want. but you could say that for all the rules) I feel it would make more sense for the comps to enforce that rule but it to not be set in the GW rules to encourage what they original set out to.

yes this was mostly applicable to cross alliance combos. However the majority of the subfaction specific allegiance abilites seem far more powerful the the grand alliance ones. There is pros and cons to be gained from synergy. Again its may be more applicable to competitions but id would be great if that was left upto the comp and the actually GW rules were a little looser to accommodate "Friendly competitive" play with all sorts of bizzare armies with intresting outcomes. The list building is more than enough to ensure a bit of army structure.

have mentioned this one previously i think near the beginning of the thread but want some more feedback on it. Loosen up the allegiance abilites. I dont like the fact that they promoted mixing armies up for fun interesting combos (Chaos and fyreslayers is a proper fluff sensitive choice) and now have done a complete U turn with the points system. I get that some competition players treat the game more seriously than other and see armies simply as a variety of tools to be used to achieved victory. (like picking a golf club before a swing) now personally the few competitions i do i still enjoy unusual army combinations but then im in it for the thrill the challenge brings and not just for the win. But the GHB rules were created for all players use not just competitions. Therefore i think promoting the idea of custom armies in their rulesets should be done by GW. If a competiton body wants to stick to "Pure bred" armies let them specify that themselves and everyones happy. What im suggesting is not to eliminate the reward of allegiance however make it less pivotal. We already have synergy for that. Instead you should simply have to pick an alligeance with certain specifications (Such as:General must be of Allegiance choice, over half the army must be of the allegiance etc) then simply only the units that comply with the allegiance get the benefit gain and those that dont, dont. This will allow for players to mix their armies and use a combination of synergy and allegiance to powerup their armies allowing for endless possibilites instead of these finite lists

Just think that the whole design and positioning isent very dwafish. Its to dainty and delecate. Sounds stupid but i cant imagine an elf holding a set of keys like that let alone a duaradin. If its for AOS my money would be on Tzeentch. If its for 40k . . . . could still be tzeentch but part of a further crossover option. I dont think that key is a cog i think its just exotic looking key . . . . .

seems odd but there is something very un dwarfish about the positioning. Not just the delicate appearance of the arm itself but the way its holding the keys and the finger positions dont seem like something you would see on a dwarf or anything made by a dwarf

Hmm the arm looks skeletal at first glance but some of the proportions are out (like the ball at the elbow joints) unless its armor over a skele. Personally i would go with some sort of tzeenctch sorceror unit. The whole key thinking seems a little guant summoner esk unless its one for 40k. Think undead would be just a little to out of the blue. It would make sense that they would show snap shots of things that are likely to be released soonish and in the case of AOS the general consensus is Arcanites and steamheads could be wrong though

Ill HELP!

Thats your input . . . . . .? cheers . . . . . any way the whole point of these threads are to filter loads of ideas so that GW doesent get given a load of garbage like people who keep posting changes to core rules and warscrolls. GW have asked the question what would we change in the Generals handbook. If people keep making suggestions about stuff that arent relevant to the handbook then you may as well just turn this into another AOS wishlist thread.

Horaay!

However id like to think that they will release all that sooner rather than later so they could start looking into Aelfs next summer or something . . . .

Well considering we have seen a teaser for the Steamheads and all this tzeentch stuff is flying around. Id assume its going to be dwarfs and Arcanites since they are both in the realm of Metal. But who knows . . . .

There there Tiger. itll be ok.

True enough. I dont field a huge amount of heros and monster so i dont often need that many counters. But it pretty confising for the opposition so it would be useful. Ive taken to just keeping a load of lamenated squares (roughly 20mm X 20mm) and a drywipe pen in my case so i can just make up whatever tokens i need such as shields with +1 for saves or just straight numbers for wounds. works really well.

i assume the point of a D10 is that nothing in the game currently exceeds 20 wounds therefore you can count the amount of wounds inflicted up to 10 and then count the wounds left after that.