Jump to content

Gauche

Members
  • Content Count

    315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

238 Celestant-Prime

About Gauche

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard

Recent Profile Visitors

733 profile views
  1. Yeah I put three units in my list and found them to be the unsung heroes of the game. KO are going to rely so hard on screens this Edition because there are so many things that can Charge Turn 1 and wreck your game plan. However a unit or two of Arkanauts blocking for an Ironclad, to use an example, is a nightmare to fight. Charge in and pick up my 100pt unit while I shoot you in your Turn? Win.
  2. Got a full game in over the weekend against SBGL, not a super competitive build but pretty strong anti-Shooting. VLoZD with a 2+, Vengorian Lord, Coven, Grave Guard with Shields, etc. Managed to win by a point but walked away with a lot of strong impressions. My Arkanaut Company were actually very strong as a screen, there was a clutch Redeploy that kept the VLoZD out of melee so I could finish it off the next round. I also just found having bodies is so necessary as otherwise you have to almost entirely shoot the opponent off an Objective and that's not always possible. Really dis
  3. Isn't is known that you can take StD under the Coalition Rules? Or are they still not Battleline? My army doesn't care about those so I haven't reviewed them in depth.
  4. I'd echo to the people that are having negative reactions, without trying to invalidate that, to play some games. The Point Changes do have a lot of head scratchers and honestly I wish GW waited a bit before dumping this all out at once. There's so much new stuff that just looking at one thing doesn't tell the whole story. There are new Missions with big changes, the board size is consistently underappreciated as a change (I come from 40K), obviously a lot more counter-play with CAs, etc. etc. Have the reaction you want to have but temper it with table time when you can. Things might turn out
  5. Been tinkering with some builds since the leak. It feels like you're almost expected to play with an Ironclad now, they barely went up in comparison to most things. Since the Edition also made them even better, not a bad place to be in. Gunhaulers are the thing that got the biggest hammer, people are down on that but if you could spam 8-9 in a 3.0 army it could have gotten out of hand. Still, lots of weird things that I want to test: Heroes Admiral Aetheric Navigator Aetherkhemist [General - Collector] [Arcane Tome] Aetherkhemist [Spell in a Bottle - Wildfire Taurus]
  6. Kharadron Overlords Mostly big buffs or side-grades. The only nerf that was taken is the change to Triumphs, which is a big deal but it's easily survivable. Monsters - Faction has none but is good at killing them and doesn't bring a Faction Terrain piece. More Monsters just helps matchups. Heroes - Very hard to remove KO Heroes now that they can heal if needed (at times), +W works on Guns and Melee, and you can grab an additional Dispel when needed. Command Abilities - Most of the KO ones are pretty weak so the new baseline ones are great and make up for some of the loss of
  7. Just to preface my thoughts I'll say where I'm coming from since everyone in this hobby has their own background that heavily informs their opinions. I play competitively, only, and have been into wargames for 17 years. My main game was 40K but I'm likely switching to AoS because I just think it's better. I did not play 2.0 but I've binged tons of Battle Reports and other content to get a tenuous grasp on how things were. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So far I've found myself liking almost every change from 2.0 t
  8. Which I didn't get because almost every time they FAQ something it goes the intent way and not the RAW way. But I guess intent is way more nebulous so they hedge their bets by saying that.
  9. As modern GW they've never put out an Edition that didn't require numerous FAQs. Things won't be settled until probably 3-6 months after the first wave of FAQs drop. Just how it always ends up. Operating under intent vs. RAW has almost always been the safe bet though. :]
  10. Glad to stop arguing about that. I think it was wishful thinking on a lot of people's parts. When something gets leaked from that many sources it has always panned out.
  11. I find myself disagreeing so I'll probably give up the fight here but my last $0.02. The new complexity...isn't complex. Coherency will take you one game to adjust to, I promise. It's not a new concept in the genre or from GW and it's been tested thoroughly. New Command Abilities you can write on a notecard, they're very simple as well. What new Special Abilities, the Monster/Hero stuff? Again, fits on a notecard and is pretty easy to grasp, I hope. Unleash Hell looks strong at first glance but we don't have the whole picture. What if Terrain starts playing a bigger part? Now shooting isn
  12. For what it's worth I think they will separate Matched from Competitive a bit with the GHB. Those Missions will be more competitively tuned and may have additional rules if 40K is anything to go by and it has been thus far. I disagree that all they're doing is removing a lever. They are removing one but they're re-assigning the weights as well. Command Abilities are way more important now, Monsters/Heroes may be big. If you like Battalions I have nothing to say about that, your preference is yours. But I think it opens things up more, it divests a ton of army power from that one thing (as
  13. And they should get rid of them, their balance was awful. They still exist for non-Matched Play, and that's where I think they belong. The problem is the community is stuck on Matched Play being the ONLY way to play, it isn't. It's for competitive minded folk like myself. The other methods are fine too, for example Crusade is MEGA popular with 40K Players now and the new PtG system for AoS is based on it. The reason I approve removing them is that the less rules there are the less chance GW has to ****** up. AoS is way easier to balance because Toughness and Strength don't exist and Invul
  14. I agree AoS has the best ruleset GW has made in some time but that's not to say the game doesn't have a ton of issues. Removing Battalions is a change I celebrate, without it I have zero interest in the game. Changing how First Turn works is another huge problem and the game needs way more Terrain interaction. So far nothing I've seen hurts the good parts of the game, it makes it better. 8th to 9th 40K was the same way, the Codexes is where GW is dropping the ball there. They've been doing excellent on their Core Rules for games, they still need a lot of work on army balance.
  15. In my experience there will be an extreme minority that prefers the old ruleset and keeps it, everyone else will move on. Happened with every game I've ever played. Even mostly happened when Fantasy turned into AoS and that was huge.
×
×
  • Create New...