Aelfric
-
Posts
1,393 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Aelfric
-
-
4 hours ago, HammerOfSigmar said:
I care more about the following
"However, to make sure your Pitched Battles are as balanced as possible, we’ll be releasing an early (and free) points update to the most recent battletomes – for reference, that’s Skaven, Blades of Khorne, Fyreslayers, Gloomspite Gitz and Flesh-eater Courts. Keep an eye out for this – and the General’s Handbook 2019 FAQ – in early July."
Since skaven and FEC have the most broken units in the game currently.
So, I'm wondering why Gloomspite Gitz is the only one not underlined.
-
13 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:
Well the part I found most interesting about the new GHB was that they claimed it would serve us for years to come. Might this one stay for several years instead of only 1?
Well, now the points are in a separate book, they only have to print the points next year if they want - or even every 6 months. £10 every 6 to 12 months wouldn't be so bad.
-
1
-
-
With the new Meeting Engagement rules coming, I'm considering this list:
Spearhead
Fungoid Cave Shaman - Hand of Gork
3 Fellwater Troggoths
Main Body
Dankhold Troggboss - General Loonskin, Gryph-feather
6 Rockgut Troggoths
Rearguard
20 Stabbas
1000 pts
What do people think?
(If I gain 30 points in the new GHB, I'd swap the Stabbas for 3 Fellwaters.)
-
11 hours ago, Skreech Verminking said:
no rules can hold-keep us-us at bay, we do-do what ever we want to do-do.
Please GW, don't give us any Skaven do-dos!
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Baron_Bathory said:
I'm considering the Arachnacauldron for the full Gitz spell lore for the Fungoid. Itchy nuisance should prove useful to counteract "Strike first" units, plus several mortal wound spells. You could Hand of Gork the Fungoid onto an objective if required. Worth the D3 MW damage, I think.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Mutton said:
All they have to do is get rid of that dumb "falling over/failed charge" rule for Gargants and people would start using them. That's all they have to do!
I would have preferred that as their mercenary special rule.
-
25 minutes ago, RadVlad said:
Hello
I have been playing AOS for a few months now and have a question regarding shooting. The scenario is that I have just fired three wounding shots at a screaming skull catapult. Now who is it hitting? The crew or the catapult? It seems incredibly easy to quickly kill the crew if they all hit them with their saving throw of 6+ ,and why would the catapult have 5 wounds and a 4+ saving throw if you can just can kill the crew so quickly? Surely the wounds would be split between the catapult and the crew?
The rules don't seem clear to me so any help would be appreciated!
The warmachine and crew are treated as separate units (except for the celestar ballista). Before shooting, you have to declare which one you are aiming at. Most crew do get plus 1 to their save when near the warmachine. It is usually much easier to kill the crew and is an inherent weakness in taking them. Bear in mind, though, that the warmachines still count as a model on objectives even without a crew. This is really a hangover from the early years of AOS and I expect any warmachines that appear from now on will, like the ballista, act as a single model including crew.
-
1 hour ago, Malakree said:
I think loonskin is going to be so key.
Speaking of Loonskin, what is the general consensus on how it works. Does it work when the Bad Moon is off the board at the start of play, or only when it is actually in play. It only says it doesn't when the Bad Moon is Removed from play, but not sure about at the start. Does Loonskin over-ride the Bad Moon rules, which says that no models are affected when it is at the edge of the battlefield. It hasn't been addressed in the FAQ as far as I can see.
Apologies if this has been answered on a previous page.
-
1 hour ago, Overread said:
sylvanath is tangled up with shipping
Saw what you did there
-
I have no idea what E-Prime stands for; could someone offer a definition please?
-
4 hours ago, Kaylethia said:
The big one was teleporting any number of units. The current one is limited to one unit.
Yes, exactly. Restricting it to only one unit and having to be "wholly within" 6 inches of the edge in order to teleport really did render it almost useless. I use it to teleport Waywatchers about and pretty much little else.
-
27 minutes ago, awcamawn said:
You'll probably want at least one Nomad Prince, one Spellweaver, and one Waywatcher for a solid Wanderer collection, and potentially more than one Waywatcher. Otherwise you already named the Sisters of the Watch and the Wildwood Rangers which are both solid picks, especially if you love the models. 1Don't overlook the efficiently pointed Eternal Guard as an effective chaff screen, though.
The battalion isn't awful right now, but it is overcosted for something that hinges so much on a 5 wound model, in this Age of D6 mortal wounds. It's essentially a worse Kunnin Rukk, but it's also our best/only way of lowering our drops right now. It's also makes for a decent thematic roadmap for collecting Wanderers, if not the ideal build. Many see the battalion requirement of two units of either Sisters of the Thorn or Wild Riders as a substantial tax as it stands. All of this stands to change in the coming weeks with the imminent June release of the General's Handbook (GHB) 2019. For now, picking up a couple heroes and some Wildwood Rangers to go with your Glade Guard would make a solid starting force of Wanderers until we know more about what will change in the new GHB.
Here's hoping to some substantial point decreases for the battalion and our cavalry! What's on everybody's GHB wishlist? What changes to our battle traits will they make this year?
Maybe, with all that new room - with half the 'GHB allegiances' gone - they can give us a new battalion to play with (or two), like Seraphon/Fyreslayers/Ironjawz got in last year's book. Maybe even a Wanderer spell lore table? Although the more we get, the less likely a book of our own is coming real soon, huh?
I'd be happy if they just gave us back our original allegiance abilities.
-
6 hours ago, IRifter said:
I didn't know about the specific artefacts for skyvessels from the KO. What you said about the mounts is completely right. Although these traits are with one or two exceptions not that great(jsut nice additions) and are by far not comparable to a true artefact.
Going by the example you posted and looking up how exactly it works and where it is written in the SCE book it should be palced above the specific artefact tableand tell you how and why you get additional artefacts. This is not the case with the leaked sylvaneth pictures. I dont think its hidden on another page or something like that. We pretty much got all the important stuff from allegiance abilities all the way to pitched battle profiles.Doesn't one of the new Fireslayer Lodges state that 3 heroes can have an artefact as part of the Lodge traits? GW seem to be introducing slight variants to the standard rules from time to time, so this could be one of those times.
-
43 minutes ago, Mirage8112 said:
Well yes, in his turn. Which would basically be the same thing as initiative order, the main protect here is that ASF still fires in your turn, but since you pick the order abilities fire in your turn you have a chance to strip that off of him.. In your turn, you stomp, he now strikes last (there is some question wether it replaces the roll, or just cancels it out. He’d be pissed if he went from attacking first to striking normally, but doubly pissed if he went to attacking last.
It does depend on the wording. In the new Slaanesh book, their "fight at end" ability states that if applied to a unit that has "strike first" then they cancel each other out and thus the unit would fight in the normal part of the combat phase. Itchy Nuisance (Gitz spell), on the other hand, does not, so would make a "fight first" unit fight last.
-
5 minutes ago, GlitzFan said:
Would appreciate a comprehensive analyst from someone regarding this 1k list.
My questions are:
1). Choice of general: skragrott so that I can control the moon for a turn or fungoid so I can use boss shaman to essentially make him a loonboss (making a units wound roll of 6 MW)
2). Choose of spells: I want to hand of gork 1st turn. The other spell I'm considering between itchy nuisance and great green spite.
3). Endless spells: I have 70 spare points in the list to spend. Whatever combination would best suit my army's needs.
4) Artefact: must be on fungoid? And I'm guessing that I cam use a mortal realm artefact?
Thanks in advance to anyone who replies.
I would spend the 70 points on a basic Loonboss to boost your grot blocks and would be a good candidate for whatever item you choose.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Aden said:
As long as their from the same grand alliance and not part of that firestorm city's factions already, you can ally them in.
Yes, but allies can't count as battleline. Doesn't Hammerhal allegiance allow any order units and adds to bravery? - maybe use that.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Rogue Explorator said:
We know from the lore on the gods of Death that for the most part these are raised through belief. This does pose an interesting question to cases such as Morrda. Are gods that resemble or are even identical with gods from the world that was survivors, where they ressurected or are they completely new beings produced by the belief of survivor from the world-that-was? Whichever it is, it doesn't seem to work for the original aelven deities, seeing how Mathlann and Khaine remain dead despite a strong base of worshipper. In Khaines case that might be because of Morathi, but Mathlann is deader than dead as the Idoneth aknowledge.
Perhaps if the Idoneth actually believed that Mathlann was still a live God, then that belief would become self-fulfilling. As it is, he remains dead because they believe he is dead. Belief can work both ways. I don't think that the main Gods - those that are the embodiment of a Realm - require belief from mortals for their existence, although their strength may wax and wane accordingly.
-
3
-
-
Rumour engine could be Shadow Dragon Aelves created by Malerion.
-
1
-
1
-
-
The Idoneth Deepkin were Teclis' attempt to create a new race from his portion of the Aelven souls rescued from Slaanesh, whom he has rejected. The Light Aelves to come ought then to be Tyrion's version. Any talk of Teclis gathering an army would seem to me to suggest a gathering of those of the Elder Aelven factions willing to heed his call. The Pheonix Guard are meant to be based in Hysh, I think, and possibly the Eldritch Council and Swifthawk Agents have a presence there. I'd agree that It does seem to point towards separate releases.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Grimrock said:
For sure, it makes perfect sense for narrative and it'll add some great fun, but for matched play it just seems to add needless complication. They seem to be in this weird state of trying to keep allies a part of the game but continually eliminating anything that would make allies appealing for matched play. Why not keep mercenaries as Narrative only? There are 3 ways to play, it's not a sin to make rules specifically for one of those ways.
Narrative and matched play are not so easily separated from each other - it's more of a sliding scale. In many instances narrative gaming uses the points system as a way of creating roughly equal sides, then layering the narrative aspects on top. It is easier and more helpful to give Mercenaries, and allies, a space within the matched play points system as this will lend legitimacy to, and encourage, their use within narrative gaming. At the same time, they have to ensure that allies, and now mercenaries, do not unbalance the purely matched, tournament-style, play end of the scale. The end result effectively is that allies, and mercenaries hopefully, are generally optional but not game-breaking, though some older armies that lack particular types of unit may benefit more (which is fair enough). I think, on the whole, that GW has kept the balance pretty well in this instance.
-
2
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Grimrock said:
I'm really curious about the use of mercenaries actually. GW has been rigorously obliterating any desire to take allies for quite some time now, and I rarely if ever see them in the 15-20 people in my play group. Moving the best rules into the allegiance abilities just means it's pointless to bother. I wonder why they went through the trouble of making a mercenary system if they were just going to toss even more restrictions on them.
Well, for those who like to create a thematic army or prefer a narrative element to their games, the idea of mercenaries can be quite appealing. I, for one, am looking forward to seeing what GW have done in this latest iteration of mercenaries. If any fit with one of my armies, then that gives me yet another way to play and add even more enjoyment to my hobbying.
-
8
-
-
5 minutes ago, ElectricPaladin said:
Not necessarily. We've already noted that the Azyrite runes look a lot like Aelven runes.
That's true. After all, Sigmar had to learn how to make runes from someone - I don't think he used them in the World-that-was.
-
43 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:
These seem to be some kind of altered high elf runes RUNES
What I could make out:
Right to left:Garvir, Darkness, Gloom
(mirrored) Horothoi, youth, Boundless Energy (makes sense due to the Penumbral Engine)
Lacoi (as mentioned before), Might, Glory, Fear of Death
Dassoir, Scrying, Sight, Forbidden Knowledge --- Or --- Lecai, Light Mobility of the Soul
(this one is pure speculation) maybe Oriour, blood, birth
the first one: Hard guess, this might be Tavlu, Mark of Hoeth, Misery
In the right order (with a little interpretaion):
Misery, Birth (Blood), forbidden knowledge, Fear of Death, Boundless Energy, Darkness
Sound a little like the Nagashs story XDSo whatever or whoever it is, it was bound by Teclis, not Sigmar.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:
Page 1066! anyone got any rumours pertaining to historical wargaming to commemorate the event?
I agree that the runes look like the azyrite text on the various scenery kits. The chaos runes have a much more angular look, with a few exceptions.Perhaps missile weapons will become game-changing again.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Maybe, with all that new room - with half the 'GHB allegiances' gone - they can give us a new battalion to play with (or two), like Seraphon/Fyreslayers/Ironjawz got in last year's book. Maybe even a Wanderer spell lore table? Although the more we get, the less likely a book of our own is coming real soon, huh?
The great big Generals Handbook 2019 Discussion Topic
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Ok, thanks. Not very tech-savvy, I'm afraid - I'm working towards the 21st century (slowly)