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

mhsellwood

Members
  • Content Count

    228
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

mhsellwood last won the day on June 14 2016

mhsellwood had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

235 Celestant-Prime

About mhsellwood

  • Rank
    Protector

Recent Profile Visitors

627 profile views
  1. So Warcry has had a bit more info unveiled at Adepticon (you can go read it at Warhammer Community). Main thing that is new information is that on release there will be more than just Chaos - they have shown about 9 different faction symbols. Does this up the hype level just a bit?
  2. To be fair Stabbas are out of stock basically everywhere in Australia too. The basic fact seems to be that GW are at this point facing an issue of over demand and under supply (note they recognise this - if you read their half year report the CEO specifically calls out the issue of stock level). They are investing a lot of money in fixing this issue, again in their financials you can see significant investment in production facilities, and I read a newspaper article about the Memphis distribution hub doubling in floor space. However, supply chain issues aren't resolved overnight. Wouldn't surprise me if in general GW has been caught flat footed by the demand for AoS products.
  3. Rules as written it would appear that you can. I have had a look at Malign Sorcery and there is nothing in there that suggests that you treat Endless Spells as anything other than a normal model.
  4. Worth noting that in the real world Age of Myth (i.e. the period after the end times blew up the Old World and Age of Sigmar was released) there was a pretty well detailed rumour that did the rounds and was sourced from the fa/tg/uys. This rumour detailed a world named Regalia and the setting was bubbles of reality with new races and new names for many of the old races. It had enough veracity that it caused endless discussion and even some animosity towards GW (one of the rumoured races was supposedly the Nigmos which is not in the least bit a good word to use) but was entirely made up. For some of these people they are making things up, doing so deliberately, and gaining great pleasure from lying and misleading people.
  5. Necromunda came with 2 new unit boxes: a human kit and a skaven kit. Both had lots of weapon options like pistols and swords but also non weapons like lanterns. Similarly the terrain was ruined urban buildings that were very flexible.
  6. I have marked 3rd but I came in at the end of this and like amysrevenge living in a small town in New Zealand there were no gw stores in the whole country. So I have the 3rd rulebook and army book, the catalogues and White dwarfs from the period. But 4th was what I actually ended up playing.
  7. Balance is always tricky and inconstant. Underworld is pretty good at the moment with the recent restricted and banned cards approach. Regular reviews and a lot less randomness than gw traditionally have can give good results. Interesting thought experiment re. best bits of kill team and underworlds. My views- - with kill team it is the added depth of rules making all models more valuable. The injury roll, specialists, fire teams in campaign play. - the alternating model by model activation in both games - the unique aspect of each warband in Underworld What I hope. Small armies of 5 to 20 models. Basic rules are AoS but with alternating activation and addition of strength and toughness. Warbands are specific to the game but flexible (so for example a warband might allow for model and weapon combinations not possible in game but you have choice around specific numbers of models etc).
  8. Agreed on it being from my point of view the best news. I really like Kill Team, and Underworlds so if we get something like that... I think the game will be Chaos focussed, but all alliances playable. Chaos as the kind of narrative driving force - champions and heroes trying to get to Varanspire and the favour of Archaon, Order trying to defeat important followers of the Chaos gods, Death trying to enact some dark plan of Nagash, Destruction... destroying. And I really hope we get terrain as good as the Kill Team stuff
  9. Personally I can see both sides. From a definitive this is something you are getting, there was only one reveal - Blades of Khorne (although as somebody said this is actually a big deal from the point of view of getting a new Battletome when there is an existing battletome in the 1.5 mode) but this is pretty well required at this point given the changes in the game. It was nice to see the Sylvaneth warband and I think pretty much a confirmation that we will see a new battletome, hopefully with a few new models. On the other hand. Warcry. That is where I am at. Underworlds is great, Kill Team has led to more 40K than any other game being played so I have high hopes for the core game. And then the images that we have seen are redolent of so much potential - new terrain, new models, a new aesthetic like the old Realms Of Chaos books. So much hype from me. (also from a purely personal point of view I have a gaming group that love the Age of Sigmar models but still can't get behind the fixed to wound rolls. If this bridges that gap, Age of Sigmar could easily replace 40K as the game I play the most)
  10. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Personally I am taking a couple of weeks off from reading too much on this site / facebook and just enjoying what I am reading from GW, and will judge the full details in a couple of months when EVERYTHING (points, warscroll changes, rules changes etc) is out and there has been a chance to actually get an overall feel for how it is working for me and my gaming group
  11. If they didn't have an annual opportunity to re-balance points and scenarios I would be more worried If they didn't have the capacity and willingness to update Warscrolls as they go I would be more worried On the more broad point of will they stuff up game balance... Nobody is perfect, but at the moment GW have more feedback mechanisms and scope to respond in a timely manner than they ever have before and are willing to respond.
  12. Just to quickly pick up on this point (and not taking a shot silentdeathz just that you happened to post) - do we all honestly believe that some of these issues are so difficult to pick up on that GW will have done nothing to mitigate the worst examples? (note that in a game with as many moving parts as AoS there will be things that slip through but that happens)
  13. To be fair mate you do seem to be going out of your way to make a case that is absolutely the most extreme example. In your example you are saying that potentially over the course of the next 3 years one army receives 3 separate changes and that at not point does Games Workshop makes these new Warscrolls available through the App, or on their website (n.b. outdated warscrolls have so far been updated on their website), or you don't just photo copy the old ones? Crikey. Also, if warscrolls don't get updated then what is the alternative? The game cannot change if you never change the moving parts of it. Sometimes this will mean certain armies benefit or suffer in different proportions, and different units similarly. The changes will happen, some units will benefit more than others, some will suffer more than others, and there is nothing that can be done to prevent this short of stopping releasing new models, doing new rules or ever releasing anything ever again. Instead the approach should be in line with Games Workshop are doing: reviewing current warscrolls and updating where necessary, and a regular points rebalance mechanism in the GHB. So Longstrikes are not viable? Reduce their points and update their warscroll so they are able to ignore the Look Out, Sir rule - boom they are a good sniper unit. Problem I have with a lot of what I am reading is that some of the reactions have more than a hint of hysteria. GW tell us something will change, and suddenly people know that this will make units completely unplayable, whole armies have been nerfed into oblivion, dogs and cats living together, the whole thing. But, we don't know points, we don't know warscroll changes, we don't know if there will be new battalions, so we have no real scope to make long term calls. For me, what I am getting is the following: Games Workshop are aware of what is causing some people to not buy in. If you look around at other sites, my observation is the following issues stop people: The double turn (probably number 1 on most peoples lists), ability to shoot characters quite easily, units able to shoot in and out of combat with no penalty or risk (in general the potency of shooting is probably number 2 as it is not really possible to play well and mitigate) The changes we have seen are very minor nudges to affect these things: double turn stays but is less likely to happen, shooting is being nerfed a bit on a couple of different levels. The core of the game however is clearly not changing
  14. why would you take a vampire lord and a Wight king? because command abilities probably won't stack (ref. the aether khemist restriction) so 2 of one can't buff the same unit so two similar but different provides overlapping buffs. because the Wight king is 20 points less and has a 3+ save. because in legion of nagash the Wight king is buffed by both lord of nagashizzar and the ossific diadem. because a Wight king is needed for the death march battalion which is really good. because the Wight king and vampire lords are awesome models. I really like the new command point rule. simple and intuitive with additional depth. specific advantages I can see: encouraged to take hero allies as they can boost their troops despite not being the general. Some characters that are currently not useful become a lot better - for example a cave shaman now is a really rounded support character as you can use him to add mobility without having to have him as your general. a range of heroes with command abilities becomes a source of flexibility rather than being reduced to the one good choice and the deadweight. a bit of a boost to msu armies as currently you are best off focusing your one command ability on one murder horde but with potentially multiple command abilities you could support multiple units more easily. finally if you do not link command points to battalions what do you link them to? at least with battalions there is a points cost attached so a lever of control over access to them. note that in my opinion 90% of battalions are garbage in matched play so any bonus is welcome
  15. Interesting little tweak to the priority roll, and if you go first your opponent will be on the back foot around playing for the double turn. That is, do they play to take advantage of a potential double turn and run bad odds of being exposed on your turn, or do they hold back and potentially be forced to take a double turn that they cannot capitilize on and face a potentially devastating later double turn? Also, interested to see what interactions persistent effects will have. In terms of the Everchosen / Slaves to Darkness faction preview: great for new players or as an introduction for people unfamiliar. Otherwise not a great deal of meat there for current players. Interested to see the rest of this weeks previews though which will cover off interesting things like command points
×
×
  • Create New...