Thain
-
Posts
133 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Thain
-
-
I'm really hoping we see a similar super-easy starter set for WH40k. They've got pretty nice newish push-fit Ultramarine Tacticals already (in the basic paint set) and a decent nearly-push-fit Dreadnought has been knocking around since Black Reach. Toss in twenty or so push-fit Genestealers and/or Termagants...
-
4 hours ago, Riavan said:
How much better are ardboyz than savage orcs which are destruction bat line?
Ardboyz
4" Move / 2 Wound / 4+ Save / 6 BraverySavage Orruks
5" Move / 2 Wound / 6+ Save (5+ in Combat) / 5 BraveryArdboyz have three different weapon options, but all give more attacks than the Savage Orruks' two weapon options.
Ardboyz' Waaagh! Drummer and the Savage Orruks' Skull Thumper are identical. As is the Ardboyz' Orruk Banner and Savage's Bone Totem. (Alternative to the Orruk Banner, Ardboyz can use the Icon of Gork... Mathematically the difference is insignificant most of the time.)
Really the main difference is quantity versus quality. Savage Orruks come in lots of ten for 100 Points, Ardboyz come in lots of ten for 180 Points. Ardboyz are harder to kill and hit harder, but you've got nearly a two to one ratio...
Honestly, it's more a matter of how the Heroes and Battalions you field will interact with the units that really matters.
-
1 hour ago, Riavan said:
Reducing ardboys to destruction battleline rather than ironjawz would let m justify buying a lot more models. Hint hint GW.
Ardboyz should remain Ironjawz battleline; they're meant to be more elite than regular orcs, it's only in the elite-er Ironjawz tribe that they are "common" troops.
Its the basic Greenskinz that need a boost, to encourage Destruction players to field something other than Ironjawz, Beastclaws, and Bonesplittas.
-
1
-
-
Oh, I am soooo looting some of those airships for my orcs. Scrap of the stuntie's runes, replace those silly steam-cannons with some proppa bolt-throwaz, and slap some red paint on it. (Cuz red wunz is fasta!)
-
1
-
-
I'll end the derailment, too. But first I just want to say I don't take any offense to our arguments. Friendly, respectful, but robust disagreement is the best way to learn things.
-
1
-
-
Here's my questions for everyone pushing a merfolk army:
• How do they walk?
• How do they breathe?
• Why do they care what happens on the surface?
-
It might be nice to see (sub)factions that break the "Order Good, Chaos Evil" status quo...
I mean, Games Workshop has long been the master of the "good is not nice" trope (Can you say Imperium of Man, kids? *Blam!* Heresy!) But they never seem to use the opposite... So how about a "Beastlords of Ghur"?
[/img]
Natives to Ghur, Realm of Beasts, the Beastlords are the barbarian-kings of that untamed realm where only the strongest survive. Noble savages, who have risen to rule in a world where only the strong survive.
The whole overall aesthetic would be a "Pan-African" one: Zulu shields and spears, lions, buffaloes, rhinos, etc.
"Elites" and "Heroes" would be lion-men, for that whole King of the Beasts vibe. Think Conan crossed with Tarzan for the basic personality profile.
"Basic Infantry" would be female lion-men (female lions hunt in groups, male lions are solitary) acting as skirmishers. With small units of young males as the "Heavy Infantry."
"Fast Cavalry" wouldn't really be a role as the whole force would be mostly rapidly moving skirmishes. But cheetahs or antelopes could serve as a fast flanker akin to Chaos Hounds or Gryph-hounds.
"Heavy Cavalry" would be rhino-men. Ogre-sized or possibly even bigger, mean dudes who should be able to headbutt a charging Gore-Grunta and win.
"Big Freaking Centerpiece Model" should be giant godzilla-scale elephant. Because elephants are cool.
-
6
-
-
I loathe the very idea of "comp," and have for decades. The point of a game tournament — Warhammer, Infinity, chess, backgammon, whatever — is to find the best player of that game.
The title of the rulebook is Warhammer: Age of Sigmar not "Warhammer: Ben and his Mates' Edition." I want to play Warhammer: Age of Sigmar not "Warhammer: Ben and his Mates' Edition." I want to know who is the best at playing Warhammer: Age of Sigmar not "Warhammer: Ben and his Mates' Edition."
Every TO who house rules the game completely invalidates their tournament's ability to determine the best player of the game.
-
1
-
-
Back in 7th Edition, I had the idea to gather a bunch of miniatures from the Warring States period in China. But paint the rank and file in drybrushed stone and clay colors. But with some Chinese courtiers and officials converted into wizards: Terra Cotta Tomb Kings!
-
1
-
-
I've never been overly keen on High Fantasy, as my tastes run more to the intersection of Dark Fantasy, Sword-and-Sorcery, and Historical. If someone would figure out how to write a Brother Cadfael / Cthuthlu crossover, I could die happy. But I digress...
What I feel Age of Sigmar is lacking is in reasons for intra-factional fighting. Now, some of the Alliances have plenty of reason to fight: Destruction is always ready for a brawl, Death has all sort of "palace intrigue" going on, and Chaos is... well, Chaotic. But how do we justify, narratively, two players' Stormcasts going at it? Why would Seraphom fight Seraphon? What can turn Aelf against Aelf?
I say we dust off a very old concept from the World That Was... The Gods of Law.
The gods of Law weren't "good guys," in the same sense as Sigmar, Morr, Ulric, or the regular pantheon of any Old World culture. They were, in their own way, just as dangerous as the Chaos Gods. Where the four main Chaos Gods represent constant dynamic change and possiblity, the Gods of Law represent unyielding, unchanging, perfect stasis.
Enter the Sons of Solkan.
So let's have Solkan come back and corrupt some Stormcasts, Devouted, and Seraphon. Whispering promises of retribution against Chaos, punishing the oathbreakers of Death, and bringing civilization to the barbarians of Deatruction... and dammit of those other Stormcast aren't going to help, maybe we need to show them the error of their ways. With a hammer. To the face.
-
2
-
-
On 06/03/2017 at 6:17 PM, CentralKarma said:
perhaps make a unit taken as dogs of war cost double its points in matched play (those pesky mercenaries demand to be paid well...), or impose strict restrictions on who can take mercenaries and what units can be taken.
Maybe only make certain units into Dogs of War? This would be fairly easily accomplished just by adding a new keyword to existing units... and would allow some of the "orphan" units to be more useful. Colligate Arcane, Ironweld Areaenal, Deathlords, Deathmages... All these are "Allegiances" that aren't almost impossible to play as full armies. Heck, Firebellies are an Allegiance of one model!
You could restrict some of them even more by making the keyword conditional. So something like a Necromaner could be "Dogs of War (Deathrattle and Deathwalker)" and only usable as a 'hired gun' by those Allegiances and not the others.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Captain Marius said:
From this I infer that we might be seeing a lot more flying stuff for many factions!
Aircraft have been a big part of making WH40k visually distinct from other science-fiction and science fantasy wargames on the market. If I were part of any planning teams inside Citadel, I'd be trying to figure out how to add them to Age of Sigmar. Dark Elf sky-pirates and Dwarven zeppelins would certainly fill the niche...
...and I really want to nick a zeppelin for my Orcs.
-
2
-
-
Officially remove the "bases don't matter" line from the rules. Almost no one plays that way to begin with.
TGA Official Generals Handbook 2 feedback
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
Change the terminology used for describing the blocks of models units are purchased in, to distinguish them from whole units. I suggest using "section" and "unit."
"This unit of Ironjawz Brutes consists of two sections; These two units of Ironjawz Brutes consist of one section each; and this unit of Gitmob Grots consists of four sections."