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


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

71 Celestant-Prime

About tokek

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. tokek

    AoS 2 - Seraphon Discussion

    Start collecting box is pretty good and if he likes dinosaurs it gives him the choice of Carnorsaur or Trogladon (hint: start with the carno) Another box of Knights lets him run 3 units of them or one big unit and leaves a spare to have fun converting up into a Scar Vet. I would steer him towards something like Oldblood on Carnosaur Scar Vet on Cold One Starpriest Knights x 15 Warriors x 10 Ripperdactyls x 3 At 950 that leaves an extra CP or room for an endless spell that the Starpriest can cast. The extra CP on either the Oldblood or Scar Vet is not to be sniffed at - stacking additional attacks could be a heap of fun when he pulls it off. But obviously be guided by models he likes and wants to paint and build - but don't let him see Razodons or Salamanders unless you are literally made of money
  2. tokek

    Tournament Realm Rules

    Maybe you will. Maybe your opponent will have worked that out from your list and then pick a feature that is to their benefit or a detriment to you. I actually quite like putting the control in the hands of the players as it can become its own game of skill and double-bluff. Of course you can only assume you will be picking realm half the time, the other half you will be picking feature anyway - so building a list to maximise benefit from a single realm would not work consistently for you. Anyway just an idea that occurred to me.
  3. tokek

    Tournament Realm Rules

    How about something on the lines of the old Starseer guessing game. TO excludes one realm and assigns numbers 1-6 to the ones in play. Player 1 places a dice out of sight for the realm Player 2 places a dice out of sight for the feature Both dice are revealed at the same time. Play the chosen realm + feature.
  4. tokek

    Tournament Realm Rules

    The entire point of this thread is about non-random realm rules do. So far as I can tell nobody - at GW or elsewhere - is actually proposing fully random realm rules for tournament play. What GW in particular are suggesting is not revealing ahead of time which realm rules will be in play - or at least not until after lists are submitted. I snipped the rest of that because you appear to be trying to rebut something that nobody is actually proposing. In practice I think there are a couple of the realm rules which most TO will steer well clear of and the majority of them might see use in tournaments as they shift things around a bit without having a crippling effect. The set of suggestions at the start of the thread looked very sensible and pragmatic to me, enough variation to cause problems for one-trick-pony hypertuned lists but nothing that should negate the value of a more typical balanced list. They are far from the only such set of realm rules a TO could choose - most of them might have a place in competitive play.
  5. Lots of super-tough and hard to kill units on the other side. Preferably all clustered together. Hit a unit of 30 Liberators with it and maybe clip another couple of units and it will get work done. It is only worth its cost if you can get value out of the fact that it bypasses all saves and almost all post-save rolls. It does seem a little situational to me but if your local meta is full of super-tough armies then I think it has a place.
  6. Let's approach this from the other side. Some people on this thread are viewing it as terrible that they might lose a game. If you cannot take both victory and defeat in your stride then you should not be playing in tournaments. Everybody loses sometimes. I can only explain the strength of opinions here as being driven by a fear of losing a game but if you really do have such a strong fear of losing then tournaments are either a miserable experience for you or you are making tournaments a miserable experience for others. Oh and the evolutionary biology stuff is a bit over-simplified - we are also social animals endowed with empathy so there is a lot more to it than just wanting to win. We have many urges relevant to the social situation of playing games in a tournament, winning is just one of them.
  7. As I said further up the thread I hit a worst-case scenario version of that in a 40K tournament game at the weekend because that is what Open War cards do sometimes. I do not mind that I lost because I know that making my opponent have to make a save with the last dice roll of the game to avoid me winning was the result of me having diluted the "power" of my list to put more options in there and then using those to the full limit of my tactical ability. Trying to overcome a disadvantage that crippling was a huge test of my ability and nearly pulling through that was and is a high point of my competitive play - frankly much more than the 3 tablings I handed out. I accept that some players do not care for that, they only enjoy the win regardless of how they get it. Fine, we can be a diverse community of players but GW had to make a recommendation and the one they gave was intended to appeal to as wide a spectrum of players as possible and is in line with the way they have designed the game. As for the dice rolling - I really doubt that tournaments will be rolling dice for that any more than they currently roll for scenario which is what the game has been saying to do all along. TO's have not been rolling for scenario so why would they suddenly forget what they are there for with realm rules?
  8. When all the serious contenders take that approach it really just comes down to who gets lucky with the match-ups. No list is an auto-win against everything so it is the old rock-paper-scissors of who you get in the draw. GW want to create a ruleset where the play on the table is a larger part of what gets you the win. It happens that the way they want to do this is by introducing a significant unknown (but not random) element to the games which push players towards diluting down the more single-minded lists in favour of giving themselves more tools to deal with the unknown. Some people genuinely want tournaments to be all about list design and luckily dodging your bad matchups - for those players what GW are proposing is not what they wanted GW to propose. The truth for GW as for any company is that you can't please all the people all the time, that should not stop the designers form making their opinion known nor from explaining that this approach is what they had in mind when designing and balancing the game.
  9. This is almost exactly what we should expect tournaments to do - the generation of exact realm optoins does not need to be totally random and they can choose not to use results which they believe will skew games too hard. I would like to see them not reveal all the realm details until the start of the event - to put more emphasis on playing skill and less on list building - but we will see how they go on that. That recommendation from GW makes sense to me. The tournament pack need say no more than no two games will be in the same realm and that alone will push players to much more well rounded lists.
  10. Freeguild have some pretty decent melee options available to them. They have some mobile units to play a game of manoeuvre rather than a static sit and shoot game. It is your choice not to take any of those options so if this situation comes up and you lose it is because of the choices you made.
  11. Having faced pretty much that situation at Warhammer World at the weekend[1] I would say that you can either learn to love a challenge or perhaps what you need is a more predictable game without dice and stuff. Finding ways to make those games winnable is what makes you get out of your usual gaming rut and really win the game on the table and not in list building. Having played a tournament (40K) with the very random Open Play cards I say give it a go with the distinctly less random realm rules and it might work out just fine. As others have noted it does force you to try to put tools on the table for unpredictable circumstances which I believe will move things rather away from super-extreme lists if you actually want to win. If you just want to smash stuff and don't mind taking the odd smashing in return then nothing has changed. [1] I was playing Tau (long range shooting army) and the scenario limited shooting to 12" all game - and randomly put the sole objective on the furthest part of the table from me so I had to go right through a much more choppy army without the chance to shoot it up first and win an objective that he was already camping on. That I left my opponent with a couple of 3+ saves to hold on for the win with the last rolls of the game is a high point of my gaming experience, although he did make those saves and hence I lost.
  12. tokek

    6 Nations take aways

    I am pretty sure that GW do not and will not ever hire the sort of data analysts that would be required to truly balance the game. Therefore the game will always have imbalance for the competitive players to simultaneously exploit and complain about. All the really good players seem to be pretty relaxed about this and just have fun rolling dice anyway - e.g. see the comments from actual 6N players on this thread that it was still a real fun event.
  13. tokek

    6 Nations take aways

    That is exactly what Rippers have always done in Narrative games, all the way through AoS 1.0 that is what they did. And Kroak did his thing all through Narrative games in 1.0 too. Literally nothing changed on those for narrative games. Have the discussion boards been full of narrative players having a massive problem with it? Barely seen a comment in all that time personally. Let us be perfectly clear - the only real balance change for narrative games in 2.0 is the fix to summoning; so far as I could see narrative players just house-ruled summoning in some way to make games more fun. What the Narrative players got with this new edition was a massive uplift to the narrative at https://malignportents.com/stories/ and in the new rulebook. Once the GHB was out AoS was pretty good for the competitive gamer but the narrative gamers still had a valid issue with the lack of background relative to the old warhammer fantasy line. GW have made a really concerted effort to fix that.
  14. tokek

    6 Nations take aways

    In a world of limited time and resources this cannot be true. The more time and effort GW put into play-testing etc (which this thread has been banging on about plenty) the less would be going into producing background stories and interesting narrative scenarios. They have a budget, spending it all on keeping one (probably minority) part of the audience happy inevitably takes things away from the rest. Balance is rarely directly bad for non-competitive players but nor is it really of much substantial value to a true narrative player. The time, effort and resources that might be dragged away from other things to chase the chimera[1] of balance would however negatively impact the very existence of things those players value. Where balance could be actively harmful for narrative games is where rules that have a fun potential would get removed because they might also have potential for abuse - the abuse is a non-issue for narrative games while the loss of fun options is definitely an issue. [1] The balance in a game of this kind will never realistically satisfy a certain type of person. Although written In a 40K context i probably could not improve on this article for the limitations of calling for better balance http://variancehammer.com/2018/06/04/how-would-nasa-balance-40k/
  15. tokek

    AoS 2 - Seraphon Discussion

    That item is looking good against quite a few lists, I would regard it as almost an auto-take. But then I will probably be playing a lot of games against Tzeentch and watching my beautiful lizards getting transformed into nasty Chaos monstrosities makes me sad. Unless you are playing Chaos Daemons the lens of refraction pretty much does solve the Kroak problem and is also handy against many magic-heavy armies. You would need a really strong reason to take anything else unless you know your local meta has a shortage of wizards.