RuneBrush
-
Posts
4,619 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
34
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by RuneBrush
-
-
2 hours ago, Malakithe said:
This kinda ****** doesnt even surprise me at this point. Im actually more upset/shocked/whatever at how the 40k team is so completely different then the AoS team. If you could separate the two it almost looks like two different companies in their design and writing philosophies.
You do know they're two completely separate sets of individuals in different physical offices?
-
9 minutes ago, KingBrodd said:
One week till Adepticon!! Hedge your bets on what we may see unveiled!!
Chaos Dwarfs! OK, I'm being hopeful there 😂 Could see confirmation of the next GHb with a bit more on the upcoming battletomes and associated armies. More combat patrol style boxes would be on my "highly likely" list.
-
1
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, CommissarRotke said:
Would your opinion on this change if all the rules were in one central, digital location that you could reference all at once? For me the overwhelming comes from having to basically track down rules because they're in multiple locations: separated FAQ PDFs, White Dwarf, Battlescrolls, and/or the app that may or may NOT be correct.
I think my answer would be "ish". I'm a big fan of physical books, there's something really satisfying about having a reference book to flick through when playing a game. Having rules distributed throughout a load of different places is certainly a pain in the bum - as you say we've some in White Dwarfs, some on WarCom, etc. Having these in a central repository of some kind would certainly be beneficial - even more so a living battletome. My reservation (hence ish) is that I just don't like having the requirement to have a phone/tablet when I game. As someone who works on a computer for work I love that my miniature based hobby gets me away from screens if that makes sense. I also think that in the case of organised events, there aren't enough sockets to keep devices charged which is probably more of a sticking point.
Now one idea that I have muted around in the past is that we have a Filofax style generals handbook - so a mini-ringbinder with all the GHb bits in. Each army would have a collection of inserts that could be added into your own personal GHb. When a rules update comes along we can download (and print) the insert pages that have changed - could easily have them as freebies in White Dwarf too. You could easily have the pages available through the app as well.
-
5
-
-
43 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:
You don't think this is a bit generous? Like generous to a fault? That the bar for lazy is "Literally doing nothing whatsoever"?
No else I'd not have said it. The definition of lazy is literally "doing nothing" or putting zero effort into it.
Does it "fix" the issues in the game? Absolutely not (and certainly not for my two armies), however a single page update was never going to be able to do that and it at least this gives us something and highlights that the game developers are conscious of the armies that are struggling.
43 minutes ago, NauticalSoup said:I know you guys are basically obligated to go to bat for GW but this seems a little silly.
I'm assuming you mean the mods in this comment? No, we're not obligated to bat for GW and I'm not sure where you get that idea. This isn't a GW forum and with one exception I've never been given anything for free by GW to "buy me". I am however a glass half-full person and actually enjoy AoS, and try not to bash things I enjoy - this can be read as me defending GW 🤷♂️
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
Narratively, these rules are a miss, as well. VP are a really abstract resource. They work fine as a representation of what is supposedly happening on the battlefield in a game of AoS, where two armies are trying to each take control of the territory. But suddenly an eclectic list of units is also worth extra VP. What do those VP represent? Why do you get them for killing Vanguard Hunters with Longstrike Crossbows, but not Vanguard Hunters with Hurricane Crossbows? Why do Nighthaunt get more VP for doing so? It's just completely detached from the fiction.
The new Battlescroll rules aren't narratively based in the same way as only having 4 artillery units isn't. In truth I don't think anything that's related to balance is done with narrative games in mind.
----
Having both a Khorne and Nighthaunt army, I'm looking at these rules and going "they're better than nothing, but not really going to gear my armies up".
Is it lazy? No, lazy would be simply not doing or acknowledging there's an issue. What I do think is that this is GW seeing if this type of addition could work to give lower power armies a bit of a step up. There are always going to be weaker and stronger armies in AoS, the real issue is that currently the difference between the top and bottom armies is too large. If this were able to be reduced (new battletomes, points updates etc), then Battlescroll could help those armies which naturally live at the lower of the pack compete - I don't think this was ever intended to make an army flick from 0-5 to 5-0 at an event though.
-
4
-
-
+++ MOD HAT +++
Come on folks, there's a whole thread talking about the new Battlescroll release, can we not discuss it in the rumour thread too please - bearing in mind many of you are commenting on it there too...
-
4
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Painbringer said:
Also, I do not like the constant updates. I have nothing against some point adjustments every now and then, but now new rules or warscrolls are being introduced with these updates and with the White Dwarf as well. I disliked this in Warmachine (and I played it competitively for a long time) and that game ended up with a never-ending cycle of army updates (which, I hope, won’t happen to GW games). I truly do not believe that Matched Play and tournaments should be the primary driver for rules changes.
One of the challenges GW has is that in ever survey that has been put out, the vast majority of players have pushed for more frequent updates. Now they're implementing this request, many people (myself included) have found it somewhat overwhelming and making playing the game more complicated. It's a tricky one, people who play AoS multiple times a week are going to have a completely different view on things than somebody who plays once or twice a month.
-
6
-
-
On 3/12/2022 at 6:04 AM, zilberfrid said:
You are right. I will adjust the post to "most". Things like Katakros, Triumph of st Catharine, Cawl, Karl Franz on Deathclaw, Mindstealer Phyranx, Ogroid Thaumaturge and a couple of other models are artistic to some degree, but I certainly can't say the same about things like most Freeguild, Beastmen, Stormcast, Tyrannids, Imperial Guard and all space marines (which are just ugly).
Though I don't understand why people that are used to better would go for Warhammer tanks, those things are ugly as sin (Exorcist excluded).
I think this post actually highlights that what GW make should be considered art as it's highly subjective on what is good and what isn't 😉
-
1
-
-
In truth a bit disappointed. Was hoping for something that would allow me to dust off my first AoS army and actually give them a bit of table time, sadly don't see how this fixes any of the main issues. Personally I've always said, that khorne should be massively anti-magic and with an increasing damage output the more things die. D3 MW's if any casting roll is 8+ would be a lovely addition 😂 That said, I also think Blood Tithe really needs a complete overhaul. Losing all BT points each time you use any is just awful and you're punished if your opponent has low unit count armies. Bit of a shame as it's suggestive we're not going to get an update for a while.
1 hour ago, Agent of Chaos said:Not limited to enemy wizards so will hit a bloodthirster with arcane tome and flaming weapon or allied Belakor, etc.
I believe the answer is that Khorne doesn't want your fancy magic casting antics in a Khorne army 😉
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, Enoby said:
I'm not sure how this worked with shooting, but it may be that shooting phases were simultaneous too.
I had it in my head that in Apoc pretty much everything was simultaneous and you just resolved damage at the end of the round after both players had finished. I reckon alternating phases and resolving damage in one block would make a pretty brutal turn one and two 😂
-
2
-
-
In truth the discussion about the priority roll is one that I don't think there is a single answer/response because we all view it in different ways and have very different experiences of. Certainly there are some major downsides to having it in AoS, but it's something that genuinely does define AoS because there isn't anything else that does it in quite this way.
For me, the issue isn't with the priority roll per-se. Instead it's the resultant double turn when combined with the amount of damage that one army can unleash (often at range) within an IGYG system. This is compounded when an army may take 45 minutes to take a single turn. The priority roll in Necromunda actually works really well, but it's an alternative activation system, where I pick a unit to perform their actions and then my opponent does (my leader units can also activate others within there activation so there is strategy required). Winning priority gives me an edge rather than winning me the game.
One of the key points about the priority roll is that it does help to prevent the scenario where the player who doesn't go first simply gives up. There's a chance you may be able to pull something back if you get a double, especially as many games are objective based.
What's the solution? I genuinely don't know. Removing the priority roll wouldn't remove some of the key issues (long turn time, high amount of ranged damage etc), but changing to alternative activations would require a huge rewrite of the game plus many warscrolls and battletomes (you'd no longer have "Your <xxx> Phase" just "<xxx> Phase"). Now one possibility would be a hybrid approach, so you roll priority, you then both complete each phase one at a time before going to the next phase. Winning priority would still give a huge edge, but would allow some reaction.
-
2
-
1
-
-
+++ MOD HAT +++
Just tidied up a couple of posts where members were taking shots at each other. Please don't do this, it's not acceptable on any level and won't be tolerated. Thread is otherwise a really good discussion and a great example on not being excessively negative - thank you!
-
3
-
4
-
-
As with Gaz, the usual disclaimer that I don't have special lines into GW, nor have any idea what's coming along 😉
From a personal perspective, I don't think AoS3 should have been released when it was. I know that's a bit of a sweeping statement, but I'm of the feeling that a 3 year version cycle is too short (it's a tabletop game, not a computer game), plus pandemic lockdowns meant a drop in games in the UK and playtesting being next to impossible (and at times illegal). A number of battletomes were also developed under the same circumstances and people learning how to do remote working in a team meant the battletomes created didn't have the same environment to be created in.
One of the joys of AoS when it launched was that the core rules were so simple they existed on a few pages and most units were pretty simple and straightforward to use in a game. The generals handbook then dropped and we started off with the destructive "escalation" process, where each iteration of a battletome or rules tried to be more powerful than the previous one. New miniature releases are expected to have rules that make them a "must have", but nobody wants to limit them - let's be honest having an entire army of behemoths (dragons, mega gargants, magmadroths etc) sounds great on paper, but just isn't something people really want to be seeing placed down against them - and I include friendly and competitive games in that. The trouble is that if every new unit has special rules, you end up with the situation where everything has special rules - you've raised the bar of "normal". The solution is to simplify units, however you risk making them a lot more bland - Stormcast being a great example because there are simply too many units for one army.
The AoS devs are between a rock and a hard place though. Unlike 40k you don't have a toughness mechanic, so everything has to work within a "to hit" and "to wound" attribute. Mortal wounds are now super common as are ward saves. With limited mechanics there will be a certain amount of recycled ideas and when an army is filled with "specials", the repetition becomes even more pronounced.
-
12
-
-
41 minutes ago, GrimDork said:
Oh, I completely agree! I just don't see why GW can't cater to both preferences?
I suspect it comes down to sales vs cost. One thing GW has access to and we don't is the sales of physical and digital alongside each other. It may be that digital sales were tiny by comparison, so not worth the investment to make a digital product. Alternatively it may be that digital meant less overall sales due to piracy issues. Could simply be that they don't want to do it anymore 😂 It's certainly worth feeding back to GW that you miss the digital battletomes though, else they'll not know there's a demand for it.
-
29 minutes ago, GrimDork said:
I resent that they removed the digital versions (ebook etc)
I bought all the Broken Realms books and have bought multiple battletomes and GHBs digitally. I like being able to access everything on my desktop, my tablet and my phone. The app comes nowhere close to offering the same level of service/flexibility. I don’t just want the rules digitally, I want the full tome, the lore, the artwork, the rules. The app is pretty rubbish, with lots of gaps that you need to refer back to the tome for anyway (at least for some of the 2.0 tomes anyway).
Since the change with AoS 3 to paper only with app backup I have bought zero battletomes or books.
I probably would have picked up the Orruk battletome, I would’ve picked up the GHB 21. Digital books are so much easier to impulse buy! Paper books for me are a planned purchase which I end up talking myself out of.
The only paper tome I have is the first Ltd Lumineth tome, (which was forced on me in the battle box). I rarely end up looking at it tbh.
I may pick up the idoneth tome as they are currently my main army and I don’t have any other option, but I resent not being able to get it in my preferred format. I don’t see how it would cost GW anything to sell digitally again and they have definitely lost money that I would’ve spent with them.
The whole digital vs paper does come down to personal choice. I think everyone has their own view on what they actually prefer. I lean more on having a physical format - I can loan to a mate and they can loan to me and they don't run out of charge and I'm not a fan of reading on a digital device. I've certainly bought battletomes I'd not considered after reading through somebody else's copy.
Bringing it back round to the original topic, the whole pricing of battletomes is a tricky one - I actually think these are one item that's increased in cost to the point where I'm unlikely to be picking books up on a whim. Physical books have really suffered due to the transportation problems in the world, so it's understandable there's a price increase, the sad bit is we all know that if things improve we won't see the prices reduce.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Sleboda said:
You're not alone.
I appreciate the skill of excellent airbrush usage, but the result, for me personally, is almost always off-putting. Airbrushed models just don't look painted to me, in the traditional sense. They look like shortcuts, flash and style over more appropriate, detailed techniques.
Pretty? Yep!
Look 'right?' Nope.
No disrespect to those who use or like airbrushing. Like I said, I respect the skill. It's just not personally interesting to me.
Of course, I still buy my music on CD, read paper books, and find my lovely ladies (like @TwiceIfILikeIt, my love) at bars and not on Tinder.
One of the issues with airbrushes is that people view them as a one-stop solution rather than another tool in your repertoire. If you're doing it right, nobody knows it's been done with an airbrush, because it'll be combined with other techniques and traditional brush skills. Would 100% agree that they're not for everyone either. But I digress and this thread has gone wildly off topic 😂
-
7
-
-
15 hours ago, readercolin said:
So something that I think needs to be said because it is being missed by a few people.
There is no "General" rule that no more than half your army can be a single unit. This is battlepack specific. If I play a 1k game using the generals handbook, that rule doesn't exist, and therefore I can bring Alarielle in my 1k game despite her costing 740 points. I can bring Archaeon and 2 squads of 70 point cultists (say, untamed beasts?) - it comes out to exactly 1k points, and is a completely legal army.
However, if we switch from the Generals Handbook to Path to Glory battlepack rules, or to contest of generals, then we do have a rule that says that no more than half of your army can be a single unit. Now you can't bring those god characters to a 1k or a 1500 point game.
Now, is bringing a god going to be a good game? Probably not. Whether you are looking at it from a "competitive" viewpoint or a casual one, someone isn't going to have a good time. Can you play a 1k game and have fun? Undoubtably. I've done it a number of times. However, I find that 1k works much better as a "casual" environment, because as soon as one player starts to get competitive about it a lot or armies just don't have the tools to handle that due to the lack of scaling benefits.
On a related note, one thing that I'm surprised about is that we've not seen events writing their own Battlepacks. When I read the 3rd edition rules, I got the impression that we'd see a variety of Battlepacks being used at events, including home grown ones. We did see it at Facehammer last year, but that's been it so far.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, zilberfrid said:
While the setting is beloved by many, that can be replaced by other companies and the games they make are subpar.
In your opinion. Let's not forget this is an AoS forum please, it's a little rude to slate the game system we all enjoy 😉
-
42 minutes ago, GrimDork said:
That was where I was visiting! I love Bath, one of my favourite UK cities!
I think I had the last Gutrippa Boss. Was going to get an Inquisitor for my brother but apparently they sold out on the Saturday in 6 minutes 😳
I didn't bother ordering one in as it's Salisbury store's anniversary this coming Saturday, which is closer for me. Likely the Inquisitor will sell out again but if I order from that branch will be closer to collect later. I noticed on eBay the inquisitor has been selling for £50-£60! I might have to order a couple for myself!
It's quite a nice little store in fairness and like you say, it's a lovely city. Salisbury is one store I've not gone to often, though it's about the same distance as Bath by bus. Swindon is a little closer for me in fairness (which is one store that still has multiple staff members), but only been there once since they told me they didn't want any forge world models in my armies on parade entry back in 2017 😂 I'm not bitter about that of course.
-
1
-
-
On 2/25/2022 at 8:09 PM, Gaz Taylor said:
Looks like it’s my local stores birthday tomorrow and their Facebook page says the anniversary models are £21 each
Noticed that Bath has their anniversary up last weekend until next week too. May have to get a mate to pick up a cheeky model 😉
-
6 minutes ago, JackStreicher said:
I agree.
however to highlight one example:
I bought 1 box of Banshees (40K), they‘re do pricy however that I‘ll simply print the 15 more I require. -> Instant loss for GW due to overdoing the prices. And a win for 3D printing.
overall the (resin) printing market gets cheaper, bigger and more easy to use every day. In 2-3 years from now almost every hobbyist might have one. At some point 3D printing will no longer be a hobby itself but a tool to enhance your hobby.
I can certainly see things changing on the 3d printer front that removes the faff. I'd hazard you're looking 5~10 years rather than 2~3 when we see every hobbyist with access to one in some form. The point where the printer does the full clean and cure without you needing rubber gloves and alcohol is the point when they become viably mainstream. It will come and hopefully sooner rather than later 😊
-
2
-
-
I think where 3d printing sits within the hobby is still in limbo. How many years is it since 3d printing became available and yet GW and other companies continue to thrive? An increase in access to this facility hasn't changed the status-quo. From a home perspective too, 3d printers are still faffy, they require a lot of effort, plus loads of clean up or chemicals. Print as a service is growing in popularity, but not mainstream enough to really offer an alternative to going into a shop and picking up a box of models which is one of the things GW does really well. One thing that 3d printing does offer is an amazing range of customisation options - alternative heads, weapons, wheels, shields etc. The things that GW doesn't sell, but allows you to personalise your miniatures and make them really unique. Software like Blender are also become more learnt so we'll likely see the choices available increase too.
Although arguably flawed, GW's game systems are also recognised throughout the world and more importantly, people want to play them. My local club has a pretty eclectic mix of individuals - but almost without fail each week somebody will be looking for a game of 40k, by comparison I've yet to see anybody ask to play a game using one page rules. This may well change in the future, but at the moment GW games have the benefit of being recognised and very well known, which will allow them to continue to charge premium prices for their products.
-
1
-
-
The last couple have been £20 - however we have seen some of the limited run versions hitting £25 so be prepared for that! Stock level seems to vary from store to store based on what they're sent and the popularity of the models - going on a Sunday I'd expect them to still have the shaman but no Inquisitors. Generally they're OK with you buying more than one of each (likely down to the store manager) - though they're likely to be a bit more reluctant if they only have 5 and you want to buy multiple. Previously if they've run out of stock, they have had a list that you can put your name on and get the stock in afterwards - but you'd need to go back to the store to pick it up. This seems to take anything from a week to two months 😂
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, The Red King said:
I'd say they grew up not being ALLOWED to innovate. Innovation requires trial and by extension error. Few people can afford error with the rising cost of living and stagnant wages, and the people who HAVE money (companies) don't invest in innovation. Look at the way Hollywood churns out remakes and creatively anemic films that follow prescribed patterns, and why? Because it sells and that's all that matters. I don't fault companies for attempting to make a profit, it's their purpose, but I don't excuse them for their methods either.
It veers off into anti/pro capitalist political discussion if I go any further on that train of thought but I personally blame the people with the power (money) before I blame the individuals (generation) who USUALLY have only as much artistic freedom as is profitable for the people above them.
Very conscious that we're deviating from the original topic on this, but I do think it's a good conversation to have 😉 From your comments, you're looking at innovation as a commercial entity whereas I'm looking at it from a hobbyists perspective. If I wish to innovate I can do what my teenage self did and sit down with a pad of paper and a pencil. I can create a custom battleplan, a warscroll or even a brand new set of rules using miniatures I have in my collection. I can break every laid out concept that GW has ever written - Khorne could become a farmer, Sigmar could go on a wild rampage and kill everything in Azyr etc. If I wrote a scenario of some kind I could play it with friends and iterate it to improve it. The only thing it has to cost me is time, there's no financial impact because I'm not a business, nor am I undertaking this as a commercial venture to make money.
I grew up in the 80's where largely life could be pretty dull unless you made your own entertainment - there were 4 TV channels in the UK and that was it. In contrast we now have so much entertainment on hand that the need to innovate and be creative no longer exists as it did - things like computer games provide the dopamine hit you'd get from creating something. There is also a lot more demands on our time at all hours of the day - life is basically more complicated.
So where am I going with this? Yes, innovation in business is reducing. The money involved in new innovative ideas is so large now that companies don't want to risk it not working. Within the hobby innovation is also reducing because we have less time and inclination to innovate and the current generation aren't encouraged/forced to innovate or create in the way previous generations were.
-
1
-
New "balance" change gets everything wrong
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
I didn't think you knew, which is why I asked (also, please don't be sarcastic). In short, each GW design studio is autonomous of each other, with it's own management structure and generally everything is kept secret and not discussed outside the design studio. An AoS game dev won't be even able to get into the 40k design studio offices because everything is behind security doors with pass keys. If memory serves, this was put in place when GW was suffering from a load of leaks and the change plugged this. The other benefits is that it ensures that staff are working on what they're meant to be, plus those staff can actually enjoy the excitement of new releases from the other studios.