firebat

You seem to have entirely misunderstood.

Why would anyone in their right mind be buying the mess that GW had put High Elves in? Why would anyone sensible be buying armies that GW had given little inclination they were still actively supporting? Why would people be buying battle line troops that weren't available to buy except in some legacy starter set from a previous edition? Why would anyone be buying tiny factions with one unit and one character and that's all you get if you need to use those troops as battle line? Gosh it's amazing these kits weren't flying off the shelves they weren't even on to begin with. What a silly argument lol

The thing is, when AoS first came out, this was fine because it was so freeform. You could have an army of undead, elves and daemons if you wanted to and it was one of the things I really liked about the game over the restrictive nature of fantasy battle. The problem is that since then we've moved back to the more restrictive army book format and needing battleline troops and the like with limited configurations and the customers have proven they are willing to pay for GW's poor planning/mistakes in re releases of army books in short time periods. I've no issue with stuff cycling if an army is really just a small battalion or unit you can slot in anywhere but as it stands it's some form of commitment that is starting to feel very much one way. I'll keep saying it, but the rules should be free and army books should be collectable art/fluff books and it would feel a whole lot less than some attempt at a p2w mobile game. The funny thing is in a way it's not entirely GW's fault. I have no issue using my Lion Guard or Silver Helms as something else and i've said for a while that people should just use the Dark Elf rules with High Elf models since there is a lot of redundancy there in some ways (although clearly the High Elf models are better :p). Many issues comes from players demanding stuff needs to be official and thinking they're going to get robbed of some game because the silhouette of a model isn't identical to the proper model when in reality it's going to make very little difference.

Well thanks GW, I won't need the Cities of Sigmar book after all it seems. At this point i'd have rather they just had axed High Elves at the same time as Brets and Tomb Kings instead of this giant mess they've made of the army that largely got me into fantasy to begin with.

The mausoleum can be garrisoned so it's not like you can't game it for advantage already like that to try and use it to teleport troops across the battlefield or have your spells or shooting cover everywhere. I can also deploy a Bloodthirster as a pile of bits on it's base but at some point you just have to decide what kind of game you're playing.

No but there's certainly a contradiction in replying to this in a way that it deserves and getting in trouble with the mods

He's wrong, but not because of your reasoning. The wording of the ability is that "you can immediately" not "you must immediately" or "The DP immediately...". 'Can' makes it a choice.

It really doesn't sound that bad to me. Watching the GMG video it assumes a large terrain piece is at at the largest 10"x10" which is pretty big and you're supposed to use 1 of those for every 24"x24" section of board. The small pieces are assumed to be at the most 6"x6" which is also large for things like barricades and in fact many of the pieces people use as large ones they could probably fit into the small piece bracket. If you assume an absolute worst case (depending on your outlook) scenario then yeah there would only be a space of 2" at the closest points between 2 of the large pieces if each was in the very centre of each 24" square section and each was the absolute maximum size. That's never going to happen though. Even the biggest pieces they sell simply aren't that big in every direction.

Yeah I was waiting for this. There isn't a contradiction between 2 rules where one says you can't place it within 1" and the other says 6". It makes one redundant but you can absolutely fulfill the requirements of both rules.

Well the placement rules are part of the allegiance abilities.

People not reading the things they're complaining about? Now that would be silly. How is one thing saying they can't be within 6" and another saying they have to be within 6" not a contradiction. What's more if there isn't actually a contradiction how can there be an issue?

You keep making a whole list of assumptions based on how you think it works that isn't actually covered in any of the wording. The only relevant part is that the DP rules say that wounds done by spells cast by a Slaanesh Hero count for DP generation. Any attempt to say that the spell stops being one cast by that hero once a model is on the board or anything else is you applying rules you've made up on top. Did the Endless spell do a wound? Was that endless spell cast by a Slaanesh Hero? If both of those are a yes then it counts until they say otherwise. They are also clearly spells because any items or effects that provide protection against spells work against endless spells so they don't just become something else they haven't defined after they're cast.

I don't think i've ever seen it used in the context of actually making something unusable. The only time I saw that as a stated goal was when Blizzard nerfed Demonology Warlocks in Warlords of Draenor to disincentivise people from playing the spec because it was complicated to play. It still wasn't useless though. Any competent player could still do well with it and do all the content if they wanted. I mean there are always people that just take any nerf what so ever as making what they like unusable but that's not usually the actual case (Like in this thread the Look Out Sir! rule making shooting useless). It's not like any of the talk in this thread is about making DoK worthless. Also it's entirely possible to nerf something to make it weak compared to what it was before and it still be very strong. Google's definitions are apparently from the Oxford dictionary which actually says: As an aside my personal peeve is the term "viable".

But it's simply impossible for them to just buff stuff up to your level. I already addressed that. They buff every other army because the people with the most OP one are sensitive about being nerfed and then a couple of armies will inevitably end up overshooting. You're just shifting the problem around and you end up being nerfed anyway because everyone else gets better. They just did it by buffing everything else. It's exactly the same end effect on your army, but it's shortsighted and doesn't make the game any better other than making it even more catch the latest broken OP nonsense.

I'm sorry but that's your problem by only buying what is currently the most OP in a game where there are always new things coming out and they've committed to making yearly changes. Them only buffing the stuff that isn't performing will still make your choices not broken and is better for the game than you trying to game the system and then complain about it when it no longer goes your way.

This isn't true at all. If you both nerf and buff the outliers then you're always shaving off the edges to approach a common centre. You're never going to reach it obviously because perfect balance is impossible but you're still always working to some kind of average. If you only buff the weak stuff because for some reason some players can't handle it then all you're doing is introducing an arms race. No matter how careful you are you're inevitably going to overshoot the currently most powerful thing and because you're pandering to this attitude of "don't nerf my stuff" you then have a bunch of stuff that you can only buff again and so it just repeats. The stupid thing is that if they buff everything else but your stuff it's still really a nerf for what you're using, it's just been done in a way that doesn't result in patch notes saying you've been nerfed. There's also this weird psychological fallacy that seems to go on where if something is nerfed the player distrusts the developer to get it right and the nerfed thing automatically becomes the worst thing ever and useless (even if they got the nerf right) while at the same time, the same player will trust the developer to be able to buff everything else because that will only ever bring them up to the same level as you.

I've been using it as a KoS for at least 15 years so a KoS it's staying. Just on a bigger base.

I think chariots for Slaanesh can probably work. The biggest issue is that they're the least efficient for attacks or area for points which they trade for durability. For similar points you get 9 attacks and 6 wounds for the chariot where as Daemonettes or seekers get 20 attacks and 10 wounds. But it's all or nothing for the chariot as you get all the attacks until the last wound is lost. For the objective game you get 1 model vs 10 or 5. The best way if it was about speed is probably to take the minimum battleline as chariots and then load up on seekers with the Bladebringers being the main chariot component. Bladebringer on Exalted Chariot Bladebringer on Exalted Chariot Bladebringer on Exalted Chariot Bladebringer on Exalted Chariot Bladebringer on Hellflayer Bladebringer on Hellflayer Seeker Chariot Seeker Chariot Seeker Chariot 15 Seekers 1960pts There is a lot of room to move stuff around like having Bladebringers on Seeker Chariots instead of Hellflayers. I think you'd be looking to be split into 3 components roughly. Have the seeker chariots charge soft targets or in places they'll be safe so they can retreat and charge each turn and maybe use an exalted chariot and the smaller herald chariots as a missile to just launch at the enemy and make them deal with them. Assuming all 3 charge and you roll a 3 for the godseeker host trait that's 26 DP's if you do lose them all so nearly enough to replace both the big and one of the small chariots and doesn't factor in any wounds inflicted, or the Fane refund. Without having tried it I guess it depends if with the rest of the army you can be generating enough to summon at least 2 or 3 chariots every turn to fire off at the enemy. It will be like Beastclaw Raiders though with objectives being the biggest issue without some Seeker (or Hellstrider) support and it can be easy to zone out your army since the bases are so big.

Daemon Princes are great. The only thing they miss out on is the Locus ability but the Slaanesh ability they get is arguably better anyway. Something being summonable or not has absolutely no bearing on if you should include it in your initial army. I used to take 2 in 2000pts and never regretted it and they've only been buffed with the new rules. I mean people seem to think a lot of the Enrapturess and yet for only 20 points more you get +3 wounds, +1 Save, is faster and is far, far more killy with the only loss being a situational magic defence and a bonus depravity point that is quickly outstripped once the prince gets into combat. Not saying the Enrapturess is bad but I think people have always underestimated Daemon Princes. I've got a Godseekers list i'm going to try out next week that makes the Prince the General so that the Keeper can be thrown away more and with the retreat and charge command trait and fly can reliably charge every turn for DP but make sure he's hitting somewhere he'll be reasonably safe.

Yeah. I have my cavalry mounted on 25x50mm oval bases with magnets in the base and they fit into bigger bases. You can get them in a few places in MDF online although I make and print my own these days. Got a big 100mm base being printed at the moment for my metal KoS to get lost on since I can't afford a new one right now.

This is why for the most part I just base everything on the smallest I can do (or what still works for WHFB pretty much) and then use adapters to change the base size.

Endless Spells would do until they say otherwise because it's still a spell the hero has cast. The abilities wouldn't because they're not a spell or an attack. It's probably for another topic but there should never be an argument for RAI because you simply have no way of knowing the intention unless the person that wrote the rule tells you. Anything else isn't what was intended but your own assumption and if they do tell you then that becomes part of the FAQ and then is part of the rules.

They'll probably lose the wood spam anyway. It's a terrible mechanic.

The heal is pretty good. I'll probably end up always using the heal on the Keeper too (although being able to snipe command models now is pretty good) so for that reason i'll probably still take them. Ironically the herald is probably worse now than before. At least the one on foot. Sure being a wizard is kind of nice but they've lost the ability to be on a steed and the units lost the locus ability so instead of it just working you have to cast it. Nice having a bit or parity with being able to run and charge though. That was always a bit silly before that they couldn't when the daemonettes could. Hellstriders just look like they don't want to sell them any more. They lose 2" movement, the spear loses 1" range, they lose the banner, soul hunters is worse, they lose the chaos runeshield and they have lower bravery. But they gain +1 save and are slightly more reliable at hitting and I have to keep reminding myself everything gets extra hits on 6's now. Actually thinking about it a bit more they're just more reliable now. The -1 to hit banner is a loss but whatever, they're still a cheap speedy battleline unit (I presume).

Well that's a very one dimensional way of looking at it. Yes, they could come for her but it slowed everything in range down. It also wasn't impossible to protect her or position her where it wasn't ideal for her to end up in combat.