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

SwampHeart

Members
  • Content Count

    850
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

SwampHeart last won the day on December 20 2019

SwampHeart had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

721 Celestant-Prime

About SwampHeart

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant

Recent Profile Visitors

329 profile views
  1. Why is this happening? Changehost is one drop, you're going to know exactly where the flamers are, their exact threat range and you get to compensate for all of that before deploying anything meaningful.
  2. Best army bar people building lists that exploit it effectively. Again null deploy or just stuff like untamed beasts in chaos armies.
  3. Terrible solution if you're going to buy an army to deal with them. You're relegating yourself to a 50% win rate at best, better to buy an army with actual tools to deal with them.
  4. Play null deploy - Changehost has almost no counter play to it what so ever. I've played against the two lists that won Heat 1 with Living City and had 0 issues.
  5. Honest question here - why do you think its reasonable to expect this? I love competitive play, I travel to events, run locals, the whole nine. However GW has never advertised the game as particularly well balanced, they don't make any real claims as to it being overly suitable for tight games. They obviously encourage tournament play by running their own events, putting in matched play, etc., but they've never really stood up and said 'this is our design intent'. I ask the question because I think this is the crux of a lot of folks' relationship with GW. Their how and why lacks alignment with GW's how and why which means that the end result is always going to be far less than perfect.
  6. https://downunderpairings.com/Tournament.php?TournamentID=776&Panel1=Leaderboard
  7. Shhh! That's counter intuitive to the narrative that GW intentionally overpowers armies to make sales and then nerfs them. No one wants to hear all that.
  8. I assume you don't regularly need to add 3" to most of your charges because your opponent has positioned his models floating 3" up a terrain feature.
  9. Doesn't like toxicity but encourages toxicity towards those who enjoy using older GW range models/the updated lore for those ranges. Ironic.
  10. Show proof - link to concrete information that proves this is true. And as to the main point - in the politest possible terms, get bent. I love Cities of Sigmar and the fact that you think my army should be less than yours just because its not 'new' is utter garbage and a genuinely offensive idea.
  11. Notes (some positive, some -Release schedule - I love how fast its been. We don't need week long army spotlights or month long releases, get the book and the kits out so we can get them on the table and play. I doubt GW can keep up the 2019 pace but I'd love to see the game stay in the state of flux its been in as far as the meta is concerned for the foreseeable future. -Overall balance - there have been some obvious misses but overall I think GW has done a pretty good job on releasing books with options/multiple viable builds. -Plastic characters in dual boxes - get these out faster. Its especially bad when the model is a very good or pivotal model to an army, having to either scour 2nd hand or convert isn't great. -Terrain Rules - For the love of whatever you hold holy AoS needs better terrain rules. They're so abstracted as to be barely useful and can be gamed in a variety of ways. The fact that models can basically 'float' at a certain height on a ruin is ridiculous. -Terrain Kits - More of these would be great, I don't mind 3D printing or using great companies like Dark Fantastic Mills but having some ETB plastic kits would be nice and help further shape the lore in less interesting ways.
  12. Its not a nerf, it just makes you play the rule correctly as it was written.
×
×
  • Create New...