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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

67 Celestant-Prime

About Silchas_Ruin

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I enjoy a lot of the newer BL AoS books. But I think they need to do more to ground small area's of the world. Take the most important cities or places and give us more information. Maps of the areas around these places and give us some idea of how these places relate or not. If you had a map with Hammerhall in the center it would be nice to know stuff like where is Odessa? A army calling themself Lions of Odessa are mentioned in the first Gotrek audioplay sending troops to Hammerhall. Does the Hammerhall have buffer kingdoms all around it and then maybe wild lands held by Greenskins or still under control of Chaos outside that? There are several major cities in the Realm of Life, are they so far apart they are just kinda aware of each other or are there better relationships between some of them. What kind of leadership is there? In several books there has been hints at problems between the "leadership" of all the people coming out of Azyr and the poor people who managed to survive the age of chaos. There has been time jumps, has that kind of stuff turned into permanent upper and lower classes? Pick some area's, give them maps and ground them to make us care more. Can still leave 99% of the Realms wild and let the authors play there and explore most of the time. But pick some some places to make us care about, I'm sure some authors could do great work with that. Most books would still explore the wild places of the Mortal Realms, but if 100% of the books are exploring new fantastic places its not the best way to make us care. There are no stakes to a place being overrun by Death or Destruction if its the first time we hear about that place. Take a example like Odessa I mentioned before. If they had bit parts in a couple of books that happen around Hammerhall and then where run over if you make a major story about a Waaargh attacking Hammerhal, people might care. But there is not much impacts if you never heard of them before.
  2. I think most people agree the Realmgate Wars is a really bad place to start reading AoS. Personaly I gave up on them after a couple of books. After a break people startet talking about books they liked, like Nagash the Undying king or Spear of Shadows. Its still BL and its to a degree personal taste which authors you like, but much better than Realmgate Wars.
  3. I played a game of 40k last week that was pretty even and changed who had the lead in point last turn, it was great. But I also don't remember how long since last time I had a game like that. In AoS I have them all the time. Thats what I feel the double turn does for me, makes me want to play more AoS than 40k. To many 40k game you come to the table, see each others list, setup and decide who goes first .... and at that point you might as well shake on it and go have a beer. You know who is going to win. Its not always and you can get insanely lucky on dice, but really, you know who is going to win... Not that you can't have that situation in AoS, but way less so. There is always the the chance that if you do everything right AND get to decide the turn order at the right time you can make it. I look at the double turn as random ****** happens in a battle. Planning everything thats going to happen in a game before it starts just seems stupid to me.
  4. I feel like Stormcast need a new book, without a new chamber. I don't want to see point drops to make them better, all the old stuff new need new warscrolls,
  5. I will give my opponent a double turn at times. Far from as offen as I take the turn myself, but if my opponent is not in a great position to take advantage of the double turn I will do it. If I can survive the double turn I know it will not happen next turn, instead it could be my turn. A example could be if my opponent missed charges or or only killed my first rank his turn. I offen do layers, Bloodreavers in front of Bloodwarriors in front of Skullreapers. If my opponent can only hit Bloodreavers, sure give him the turn. If they are already dead or someone can double pile in, it might be worth it to lose both Bloodreavers and Bloodwarriors to get it over with, even more so as Bloodwarriors can give mortals back on 6 save and can fight if they die. In a situation like this they are also likely to have been the units I buff. This is a maybe, depending on how the rest of the table looks, but if a double turn only takes out my less important units I could be in a really good position in my turn with a possible double my way. If my opponent is likely to get into my good stuff, which depends a lot on what army you are up against and how much you can screen, no chance of giving away the turn.
  6. 1 thing I would like to see is more interactions between battleplans and double turn. They tried with Relocation Orb, and while not my favorite battleplan I like that they tried. I have lost that due to taking the double turn to kill my opponent, it got me ahead on kill points, but ended up losing with 1 point. I would love to see more battleplans trying to make players pick between killing and victory points.
  7. The best thing about the double turn is that you don't know how the game will go.. Its 1 of the main reasons I play more AoS than 40k. In 40k you (almost) always know basicly how the game will go sometime before the end of turn 1. Can happen that you get it wrong, but mostly thing will go as predicted unless the dice don't roll average at all. I been playing a ton of games with 15+ drops so opponent can give me turn 1 and try for double turn. Was fun and that double turn they get at some point rarely decided games. But then I play Khorne, so I can both have several screen units and hard hitting counters. Depending on what army you play it might not have the tools. And a couple of the top armies hit so hard you need luck with your good planning to survive a double turn.
  8. 9'th Age tournaments are bigger than AoS here, there are also people playing oldhammer. If someone asks on FB or a forum about starting Warhammer all 3 groups try to recruit. I was pretty sure AoS would slowly win out, with active support and stuff its easier to get the new people. And I guess I still think we will be ok, but this is making me worried.
  9. Its great that so many people here have a gaming community so big they are not worried about it splitting at all. But for the rest of us, this is actually a problem. If my local play group loses 1/3 of the players, it will be harder to actually get a game and if you start having trouble getting a game more will stop.
  10. I want to set up a Warcry campaign. It will be people who have shown interest in the game, but not people who have played a lot. The campaigns in the book seem fun, but pretty basic, you can pretty much play it on your own as long you have a opponent who is willing, which is great. But if you have a group doing campaign together is.... Do people just stick to people running their campaigns from the books or build on some home rules?
  11. This is not the same as 30k and 40k. Fantasy vs AoS is already toxic starting out. Still lots of people complaining about ending Fantasy and talking about AoS being a mistake and a failure. Its been slowing down and now GW is keeping it going. STUPID.
  12. Blades of Khorne is great. Almost everything in the book can be made usefull and you give most people a good fight. Can at least compete with most top armies and playing against weaker armies they almost always still feel like they had a good game.
  13. I enjoy the turn roll. Sometimes it ****** you over and there is nothing you can do, but its a dice game, games can turn on other rolls. I use several screen units and I'm in my current games trying to play for giving away the turn early and coming back later. It can be hard agains high dmg lists. The main reason I like the double turn is the feeling that the game can always turn. I had to many 40k games where a look at the army list and seeing who gets to go first can tell you most of the game, and if not from the start then after turn 1 you see where its going. The turn roll makes me feel like there is always the option of a comeback, unless you lost almost everything. Would much rather sit around watching my opponent play 2 turns in a row than play the second half of a game just deciding the size of a victory.
  14. Looks like the Firestorm expansion is the base for this, I like how they work so could be good and its a way to use a lot of the old small fractions. But if small human / aelves fractions don't get a place here I'm wondering if they are going away.
  15. I done good damage with Skullgrinder, but yes, I end up depeding on my opponent coming to fight. Never actually done 3 Slaughterpriest, normaly play 2 that do good work. But might be true that I don't get much extra out of the last one, opponent might just keep important stuff away from the Altar. Already have Bloodsecrator and the extra CP is from battalion. A real hammer instead of the Skullgrinder might be a good idea, Think I will drop a few things and go Insensate Rate or Skarbrand
  • Create New...