Jump to content

angrycontra

Members
  • Posts

    333
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by angrycontra

  1. Here's my opinion about the 3rd edition. The biggest mistake that GW did with it was that they just added massive loads of unnecessary complexity to the rules that just make the rules more complex for the sake of complexity. I mean okay, sure many of these rules were probably made with good intentions, heroic actions to make heroes to feel more heroic, monstrous rampages to make monsters more scary, battle tactics to give some semblance of tactical thinking in your turn etc. but in truth it is just extra steps added to the game that could be reflected elsewhere or in the warscrolls themselves. AoS started off with complex warscrolls (complex as in every warscroll is unique) but easy rules, that's what made people come to the game in the first place but 3rd edition started throwing way too many bonus rules here and there. Now individually these rules are not big deal (like heroic action usually doesn't take more than 1-2 minutes to figure out) BUT once you start stacking these extra rules on extra rules, it turns a lot of people off (and those extra minutes start adding up, making games longer and more tedious). My local AoS scene has basically completely died, partially thanks to the 3rd edition. I genuinely hope that GW moves AoS to similar direction as 10th edition 40k, where they just cut off massive loads of unnecessary fat and make a fun game that is easy to pick up. And while this is not really a rules based thing, I think that everything in AoS is currently either way too killy or way too tanky. I honestly want to see those index books come to Aos to balance all the factions to something far less killier and I hope to see removal of save stacking shenanigans. The save on unit should in 90% cases be what is shown on the warscroll, certain very specific factions I would maybe allow one unit (like stormcast lord castellant) that can boost saves but that's it. It's funny how in weird way I'm more relaxed playing 40k, because I know that my opponent can't just boost their save and make their relatively hard to kill unit into impossible to kill unit.
  2. Here's some first impressions after playing couple of games against AI in the beta 1) Overall game performed well, didn't see any major hiccups or problems. 2) AI of the game is really aggressive and surprisingly effective. I've only tried against easy and this thing is not easy to beat. It does lose some steam after you get upper hand though but I'll try harder AIs to see if anything changes. 3) Both factions feel unique to each other but because of the aggressiveness of ai, I didn't really have time to check all the abilities, units etc. in action. Game can get bit overwhelming at times, but I believe that once I deepdive into the faction abilities more, I can play them better. 4) Retreat and charge on same button is a real problem. There's been number of times that I've tried to charge something, get dragged in combat, and then I end up retreating instead. 5) Speaking of retreating, it should always be available and not just when I'm in combat. I think it's silly that only when I'm in combat, can the units run away fast to regen their health at the base. 6) UI in general is a bit wonky. The upgrade tree especially feels weird and it's very difficult to figure out which upgrades affect which units. I also wish that the units would show up on side or at the bottom, so I don't have to wonder where the heck did my units go and it would also make selecting them easier. Nevertheless, it seems fun game but I do wish they had given maybe one or two more maps (especially multiplayer map) on this beta. Playing this one map with same factions (and with no army painter yet available) can get kinda boring really fast.
  3. Game looked pretty great on preview. My inner dawn of war 2 player was however screaming at the slow play (of the player, not the game) and the lack of proper retreating and use of other mechanics. But still it looks fun game for sure (although I'm bit disappointed that it seems that there's no hero selection, I really liked that in dow 2). I do like the outpost mechanic, if it's balanced properly, I can see that adding a lot of depth to the game.
  4. It's obviously commando snail, with red bandana and two eyes poking out. It even has nose and lips. Case closed.
  5. I really like the new FS hero (despite it not being needed) and I hope it's a sign that they're getting bigger release in next edition (with last campaign books all the factions that got cool new stuff got bigger releases so maybe it's finally fyreslayers' time. However... I really dislike the whole regiment of renown boxes thing. For new FS players that box is great to start collecting them but for player with full army it's annoying to get them just for some hero. Well, there's always ebay.
  6. Jade obelisk warband is in the app. They are battleline for DoT which is nice. 4+ ethereal saves but on down side they do seem to be a bit too expensive for what they bring. Their damage is underwhelming and survivability wise a bit too costly. Still interesting screening option nevertheless.
  7. Here's my two cents regarding this whole fyreslayer discussion (which probably doesn't belong in rumour thread but since it's here might as well say it): Why are some people so keen on changing army simply because THEY don't like it? I like my pantless fyreslayers very much thank you and if GW were to give them pants, I would see it as cowardly move to please these "imaginary" masses and betrayal to many existing players. I never ask for any army to be changed simply because I don't like it. Different people have different tastes, yeah sure fyreslayers are arguably in the nichiest niche there is probably but that is no reason to change them, there is room after all for some niche factions. With all that said, they do need desperately new models to spice up the faction and hopefully at some point more dynamic better looking infantry models.
  8. Flux master can't summon loc in guild of summoners. Must be Arcanite wizard hero, so kairic acolytes don't work either
  9. 40k will get new edition in summer. Aos is not going to get new edition until 2024 earliest.
  10. Behemoth limit does not count battleline (because battleline are not considered to be behemoths as far as rules are concerned). So you can actually run full list of arachnaroks if you wish (whether you should is another matter).
  11. Shield of fate spell (5+ ward) can be used on tzeentch units, not just disciples of tzeentch. Gaunt summoners can deepstrike them and lord of change/kairos hands out +1 cast to all tzeentch wizards.
  12. The ratling gun exploit doesn't work. Part of the core rules states that any warscroll rules triumph over core rules if there are exceptions. The fact that you roll 4d6 is irrelevant for the whole "only 2d6 can roll double" argument because the rule works exactly as it is written. Anything else is deliberately misreading the rules to gain favor.
  13. That chaos legionnaire warscroll is clearly faulty. Their attack profile is same as Marshalls which would make them the most broken unit in the entire AOS history (they're literally hitting harder than skaven plague censers but with more models and better save for roughly same cost)
  14. The heroic action can only be used in your hero phase. It says "at the start of your hero phase, you can carry out this heroic action instead blaa blaa"
  15. I know it's maybe too early to complain, but am I the only one who sees that +1 damage battalion potentially being so broken that it ruins the game until it is either banned in events/local games or changed/removed completely. Adding +1 damage to almost any unit is already broken (and there is no stack limit to damage bonuses so ironjaws with +2 damage can become a thing) and it just turns the game into "whoever gets to attack first, auto wins", because the damage is absurdly high that you don't need more than single turn to delete a unit. And this in turn will just lead people to use more units that can't be harmed by this (dragons, stormfiends, magmadroths in lofnir etc.) which is literally the opposite intention of this "grand battleline battlepack". Certain armies will be completely butchered by this, because their battleline options are too poor for it.
  16. I think the chanting bonus there is just gw using the same base profile for both furnace and screaming bell, I doubt this thing can become priest. And I for one am happy that this thing no longer gives bshock immunity. Gameplay be damned, skaven should not be the "brave" army. Also removal of bshock immunity should not come as surprise, GW has removed many bshock immunity abilities from basically all 3rd edition tomes they've released (I'm even willing to bet that ossiarch bonereapers will no longer have that ability in their future btome).
  17. Any abilities that trigger on 6s to hit (or wound) do not stack with each other, you would have to choose which effect you trigger (and in hgbs case, you always pick poleaxe to trigger), If you have seperate hit and wound roll triggers that of course works normally.
  18. Rune that is barely shown appears to be the former "reroll hit rolls of 1" rune, which now has been changed most likely to just "+1 to hit rolls" (with the +1 to attacks with enhanced effect same as before). However there's chance that it only affects melee attacks now as it appears it reads "made with melee weapons".
  19. Well the profile is up now. 9", 2+ 3+ rend 1 dam 1. Pretty solid, generally more powerful and reliable than the awkward original rule. (especially with rend buffed to -3)
  20. I think there's some kind of mistake in the article, since I have absolutely no idea how to even hit with that fire. Article is missing some key information there or I'm a bad reader. Nevertheless, I like Lofnir changes. But I would've wanted to see a bit more info about magmadroths. I believe it's not meant to be "look below" for the entire profile. My guess is that it's a shooting profile and under attacks it's supposed to say "look below", then it would make sense, they just edited the article badly. Edit: Almost missed the fact that Lofnir gets runesons on magmadroth as battleline, that's very nice.
  21. Just a reminder for people: Warhammer community always releases pretty lackluster previews for these smaller battletomes. Nurgle battletome got 1, just 1 article, that previewed only diseased weapons (okay they also got path to glory preview, but whatever). No mention of fnp 5+ for all, no mention of wheel, no mention of important unit changes. The fact that they only gave brief glimpse at the fyreslayer rune system doesn't mean that this is all they get. With that said... I'm not gonna lie that more than any other battletome they've ever released, this one is giving me insane anxiety. It can be absolute disaster if it's not done right.
  22. Magmadroth is available through start collecting set. I believe the magmadroth in that list is only referring to magmadroth by itself (which was kinda pointless anyway, since it costed same as the Start collecting set).
  23. Well that was disappointing. I do like the new nighthaunt units (particularly the crossbowmen) and if there's one thing that I take away from this: No dwarf soup announced. The hope for more dedicated fyreslayer release still remains.
  24. I try to be positive on these forums. Heck I even called out people for not to complain before the rules are here. Well now the rules are here and here's my opinion: I'm depressed af. This honestly is the new low of gw rules writing. All they needed to do, was to make hgb less durable and more killy, thus making them dedicated hammer unit, vulkites cheaper and thus becoming better anvil (they didn't even need to change warscroll that much if they had just made them cheaper) and aurics with better shooting profile against all targets rather than just monsters... And what do they do... Vulkites, same price as before but with literally half their attacks... Sure you can buff them to save 3+ now but eh. Better throwing axes are not gonna save this unit. Aurics, same crappy 4+ hit but no more extra monster damage. The movement reduction ability is legit good, but it's not gonna save them from being pretty much useless now. And oh yeah, no more hero protection for army that runs many small heroes, great. Hgb... Same as they were before. Which is good I guess but the writing was on the damn wall... Everyone spams hgb, Gw needed to make them less appealing to spam, not make them even more spam worthy, because they are horrible at writing competent rules for the rest of the army. Hero, despite not being priest, is actually quite good for 80 points, I will say that much. But how useful he is now, when the #1 unit to sacrifice for better damage (vulkites) are not good enough to include in army. Sure tome rules could still change something to benefit vulkites or give fyreslayers extra boosts, but outside of "vulkites in fyreslayer armies count as 2 models on objectives instead of 1" style rule writing, I can't see what they can do to fix this mess. Because if there's nothing there, then I have a dead army in my hands. I was fully prepared to be disappointed in seeing that most fyreslayer units in the box would have been unchanged, but to see them being made worse... And honestly, gw should delete their excel point calculator. Those points don't make a lick of sense. Gw has made bad battletomes before, that much is true. 2 ed khorne, sylvaneth, slaanesh book 2 attest to that. But in none of those books, have there been blatant warscroll nerfs like in this fyreslayer release. Usually those books have been bad because of outdated rules or some weird bad allegiance ability changes. Even bonesplitterz (bad as they are) at least retained most of their stats in the new orruk warclans book. I had such high hopes for this book, especially coming after excellent nurgle book, but now I'm just depressed...
  25. First of all, people are (once again) drawing conclusions based on current rules instead of new rules. For all we know, new fyreslayers could be more killy but less survivable. Secondly, fyreslayers are not exactly immortal. Unless you're fighting one of the worst opponents, you WILL 100% lose 6 models either to shooting, charge mortals, spells or whatever. Always strike first thing is also probably gone in the next tome so no more that either. Adding +1 damage to vulkites is 100% damage increase, for hgb (with current rules ofcourse) it's 50% increase. On top of that this guy is probably priest so all of this is in addition to that. Also finally, different armies have different advantages. Stop comparing units and heroes of different armies, they're not meant to be compared. Some armies have easier time to buff their units but they need those buffs (try playing ironjaws without any warchanters and come back here to tell how awesome faction they are) and others work more better without buffs or other synergies.
×
×
  • Create New...