Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Kramer

Members
  • Content Count

    5,704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    33

Everything posted by Kramer

  1. I always go for a heartfelt thank you in that case:
  2. Im sticking with more named characters for the factions and then I’m happy for the time being. maybe big as giants... so lucky is on that front. also as a side note. I think ogor mawtribes is the best book I’ve played in AoS. Internal balance on point, external balance is nothing to complain about. Never feel I can’t compete. Only the Maneaters and the thundertusk have no real role in the army. So bring everything up to that quality.
  3. It’s shared a few pages back. It’s also talked about on the Aethercast podcast. (I personally can’t get over the audio quality but I’m a snob like that.) but other than that you can probably also find it by googling cinderfall, Kharadron overlords, and Alexander Krohn.
  4. Frosty Underguts list. Not really a point to it, or sharing it for that matter 😅 Just a fun game on TTS coming up soon. Might even drop the cannons for more leadbelchers. Bringing the powder! (And re-testing the Frostlord)
  5. Personally I think the FAQ is a bit unclear as everything (including battletomes) are a publication. but the generals handbook FAQ says that you can only use older publications with your opponents permission. the rule that allows the heralds in every army, including the cave shaman, is in the malign portents publication. so No, you can’t anymore according to the FAQ. but I expect a more detailed answer from GW soon. Because you can either take the faq literally and not allow anything before the generals handbook. or you take a more sensible approach and look at each publication in turn but that way confusion lies. for example wrath of the everchosen and malign portents are both Soul war supplements. So why one and not the other?
  6. Frigate and ironclad are both great options. A Ironclad with 20 thunderers list won the cinderfall tournament recently. So that definitely has play to it. and great model as well. Not to mention it will get you up to 2000 points real fast 😂
  7. I think the (viewers) left one works really well. Might be because it has a bit of a spot color in the green. They might become a bit of a blur in a bigger unit. so my, very lacking in knowledge, gut feeling says that if you can add a bit more definition and a spot color here and there you won’t have the raise the saturation. all that said I do really think they look dope. Such a different and eye catching look
  8. No the other legs are too static sadly. And would more sculpting to reposition then I’m convertible with. Good call though.
  9. Haha okay that I believe. You just said: That they do more damage in JUST their shooting phase than endrinriggers in a combat, I couldn’t believe. That’s not true. Although it’s closer with the grapnel and skyhook, which I missed in the conversation. 👍
  10. I disagree. If I think of the last three we had for AoS: malign portents, forbidden powers & wrath of the everchosen. two out of three really made the armies without a recent update more interesting. Of course malign portents introduced endless spells and artefacts, Which helped armies without a tome be more interesting. wrath of the everchosen introduced a lot of allegiance abilities for armies that hasn’t had an update in awhile or weren’t even a thing. Nurgle, Khorne and chaos daemons undecided. A breath of fresh air all around. forbidden power, and firestorm had less of an arched play impact. Although both added to the game. With the cities abilities and three new endless spells . But both of them really shined in the narrative parts. In the end it’s just another tool for GW to spice things up and offer a small helping hand without having to do a full new battletome. As long as they do it sensibly. Which is always a worry 😂
  11. Okay, say it like you see it please. I’m trying to make one of my decimators look like he’s shoulder charging into the enemy. Which version works better for you? just some side notes about the conversion. I’m going for brutal and more dynamic than the standard ones. I’m using the back end of the spears to make the axes look longer and deadlier. or just taking the spears and replacing the blade for the axe. Also adding shoulder spikes (see the GW lord relictor) and little fetishes. For this one I might need to cut up the legs a bit to get a bit more movement. what do you think. One hand on the axe or both? Do I need to angle things differently? Or is the base model just to static?
  12. Tag me in a post tomorrow afternoon gmt and I’ll check if the fantasy battletome has a painting guide 👍
  13. Yeah I got you. But the FAQ doesn’t talk about things having points or not. Just if it’s an earlier publication. Allegiance abilities not having points is irrelevant. There is no diversification there. It’s just: ‘ no earlier publications’. and whatever they contain, it’s not allowed without your opponents consent according to the answer. Which is why I called it a lazy answer But your point about the question also being wrong is spot on. Common sense is RAI but I’m gonna step out of this conversation. I think everybody agrees the wording requires you to make distinctions between what they mean as publications or you have no battletomes to play with. And the conversation has shifted to where and what is excluded from that.
  14. For the record, finished my relictor. Super fun to paint. and started the conversion work on the Decimators.
  15. Hahaha which is only possible due to the delay 😅
  16. Q: Can I use rules from older publications in Pitched Battle (2020) games, such as Mercenary Companies from the General’s Handbook 2019? A: Yes, but only if your opponent agrees or a house rule permits it This is the wording. We are all making distinctions to make it logical. That distinction in not in the answer. Older publications, bam! That’s it. the whole point of the FAQ and errata should be to avoid being unclear. And this isn’t it. and again I agree. The way it’s worded, if you feel the wrath of the everchosen is a publication, white dwarf is a publication, etc. Then the battletomes should also be counted as a publication. And with the above lazy wording should be disallowed. although I cannot stress enough. It’s not a big deal, the community is reasonable enough to just deal with it and not go all ‘but raw it says you can’t’... just annoying that they used such a broad term when they could have easily made it more specific.
  17. Yeah everybody understands that's what they were intending I assume. But it's a case of being badly worded. And there are a few unclear elements as well. How far back are the subfactions introduced through White Dwarf valid? Because you decided they are 'more for narrative fluff' but some of those white dwarf subfactions have real play to them. Furthermore, what's even the point of invalidating narrative rules 😂? I don't know anyone that would actually listen to that if they are aiming for a narrative game. It also isn't in line with their own description of narrative play to delete things, because its a friendly playstyle that require you and your opponent to talk how you change the game anyway. All in all I think the community pushback is more to do with lazy wording in the FAQ than a real misunderstanding of the intent. Also why do you consider the mercenary rules a 'temporary placeholder? What place is it holding, and for what?
  18. Wrath of the everchosen is a supplement though in GW terms. That's a different kind of product than a Battletome. So that should/could be the distinction they are making. But the wording 'older publications' sounds very concrete but is clearly creating more uncertainty. I agree.
  19. Oh man, some of the hero models are definitely made for a fantasy setting. I'm getting closer and closer to a full 20 man Greatsword squat where every model is a conversion. And most of the models are coming from 40k. That Eisenhorn model 😍 But most community posts were about the lore and tactics of all kinds of 40k factions. So no, still hibernation time.
  20. unless the only GW game you play is AoS.... then you could have done a summer hibernation and not missed much 😂 Yes they did! well, only for 40k... I made it worse not better, didn't i? But I fully agree a service based product that's not up to date is one thing, the lack of communication is a far worse one.
  21. 2 evenings and done. Super fun model to paint. Thought it would be horribly filled with details but so much more fun than I thought. Basing to be done at the end of the month with the rest of the models.
  22. 'elfs don't count' he grumbled through his beard into a tankard of ale.
  23. True as well. but afger two months of 40k focus I gotta be hopeful 😂
  24. Definitely could. Don’t see why they would leave what they already have prepared and not utilise November. We must be coming around to a ‘hero and a book’ updates for armies like maggotkin, deepkin, Daughters etc.
  25. By the same token. They might still do lumineth September. Giants oktober in a Max two week release as its only one kit. that would leave room for a double battletome release like last year with ogors and OBR.
×
×
  • Create New...