michu
-
Posts
2,648 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by michu
-
-
15 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
I agree TOW has been a success, but without being able to see in the preorders 1/4000 boxes sold (which you can guess with numbered stuff like premium BTs), it is impossible to see.
Imagine we have a visual of the numbers and the TOW stuff is all sold out 0/200 available, meanwhile, nothing is sold out for AoS but you can see 1000/2000. Is TOW a bigger success? No. It is sold out, yes. But it didn't sell more. I think something like this happened.This can be reversed. We don't know if the TOW stock was the same as AoS one, it wouldn't sell out anyway.
-
1
-
-
It's literally the first photo of the article
-
-
Wait, they were sculpted by Colin Dixon?
-
I would argue that their removal was unnecessary. There are kits that need more help.
-
It's not about "neatly forming up". It's about "I have no space to do anything other than move forward".
-
1 minute ago, RetconnedLegion said:
Which is why they should be in a multitude of poses not neatly ranked up. Ironically this is also why Beastmen never quite fitted WHFB for me. In a game of square, ranked units their background was an ambushing, charging in a horde from the woods force. Which fits AoS playstyle far better than Fantasy.
On the contrary - their limited poses added to the swarm feel. There's so many of them that there is little space for individual clanrat.
-
2
-
-
Here people meet every week for TOW
-
2
-
-
I wonder if those clanrats will be, "surprisingly", posed in a way that makes them hard to rank up on squares
-
3 minutes ago, The Red King said:
This drip feed release of the factions has squandered all the massive hype ToW had at launch.
As usual, this varies between shops and clubs. Here the hype is going strong.
-
They literally wrote in the article that skaven are next
-
"We made a mistake. Vanguard Chamber will also be removed."
-
8
-
-
That is not a Gryph-Charger, it's a big bird.
-
1
-
-
I'll say this. I did not have an issue with 4 pages of rules during AoS 1.0. But ultimately I prefer AoS 3.0 approach (and TOW approach even more). This return to simplification was completely unnecessary. Especially the simplification of weapons. Some of you say that very often the choice between unit's weapons was an illusion, because one option was clearly better. Maybe. But then GW should make it matter and not just take away that choice completely. Some of you say that it gives you more modelling freedom. And in the past I thought the same. But not anymore. The reason? Because to me it feels like nothing I do matters. I want to make this choices!
Ultimately, with both those changes and recent squatting, AoS is (not so slowly) losing things that made me interested in it.-
2
-
-
Finishing assembly of my High Elves.
-
2
-
-
Sacrosanct is not going to be replaced
-
Just now, Garrac said:
Go play OPR! It's as flavourless, but it's fun and surprisingly quick af. A normal match takes like half the time of a GW match, and you dont require as many minis to field (no point shrieking happening any time soon btw)
I have no interest in playing any OPR game
-
1
-
-
There is a difference between being upset at the decision and burning your army. I'm done with AoS, I am not going to burn what I already have, I just won't buy new stuff (unless to put it on square base).
-
2
-
-
Well, I'm done with AoS. If I have to choose between "Those old sculpts that made you interested in Warhammer? We're bringing them back!" and "Those not at all old sculpts that made you interested in AoS? They're gone now!", I know what I'm picking.
-
6
-
1
-
-
Makes sense, we have no official Grey, Amber and Jade Wizards
-
1
-
-
Warsaw - Red Vale
-
1
-
-
Never liked those markers too. I prefer objectives that are actual objects.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, Ferban said:
This may be total hopium, but I'm strongly encouraged by the PtG system that looks to use all rules except battle tactics. While I love matched play, it does feel sorta samey. Your motivation is always just to stand in circles better than the other player (and hit the same BTs your army was built to hit every game).
But PtG battelplans have been really good. Storming castles, disrupting rituals, defacing monuments, running from or pursuing the other army, and so on. Those narrative battles really cleanse the pallet and have some of the funnest moments. I really hope they lean into that.
I agree so much. "Control the generic objective" was always the most boring way to play for me.
-
3
-
-
I agree with GW but only in the "it's better to have a whole new rule instead of replacing a bit of the text in errata" sense. Not with the "pay for errata" sense.
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
No, Destruction is not about "bringing the civilisation and whole reality to a primordial sludge". Destruction is about "destroy the castle, let them rebuild, repeat".