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

Enoby

Subscriber
  • Content Count

    1,872
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Enoby last won the day on March 12

Enoby had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,702 Celestant-Prime

2 Followers

About Enoby

  • Rank
    Lord Celestant
  • Birthday June 13

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree with you about points and reception, and also about how things were leaked. Unfortunately Slaanesh had a bizarre hype cycle where we seemed to get a lot of hyping for the models, but hardly anything for the battleltome. And not even in a 'oh they didn't have anything to show way', but rather there was stuff they could have shown and just chose not to. I don't know if there was an issue in the team at the time, but something definitely seemed wrong about the pre-release week. To add onto that, there was a leak which revealed points first (showing very high points) which made people assume things about how strong the warscrolls will be in relation to the points (I was certain Hellstriders would see a buff for 50 extra points), but as the warscrolls didn't seem to match up with how strong people thought things would end up being and people ended up thinking things were much worse than they actually were. There were a lot of issues leading up to the release that I think contributed to the negative reaction and you can still feel their effects to this day. I really like twin souls mixed with a +1 save from Lurid Haze and a 5++ and Glutos nearby. They become a super tanky unit in an army that usually lacks a tank and they can later pack a punch. I am very tempted to start a larger army of them... I think Lumineth got a load more attention than pretty much any other army, to an almost strange degree. We got an equivalent model release but seem to have very little attention on the weeks leading up and after our release. I also don't know if one army is massively more popular than the other; I see a lot of Slaanesh models and a lot of Lumineth (though surprisingly little of the new stuff), but the LE box didn't sell out and their current LE battletome hasn't sold out upon checking (whereas ours sold out in a few hours). Maybe they just really want to push Lumineth?
  2. I wonder this too - it's pretty obvious, reading through the books that there are at least two different design philosophies when it comes to battletomes. Also, I highly doubt the rules writers are incompetent, and I think examples of super OP units or abilities (e.g. 2019 Slaanesh) are on purpose in that the designer wrote that with the intention to be powerful - though perhaps not as powerful as it ended up being. I really hope this new design lead can reign in the designers - either by saying "let your imagination go wild" and then having a heavy tone-down edit, or giving strict rules to follow and a small edit afterwards. Regardless, at the moment AoS's balance is a bit all over the place, and internal balance is usually worse; this is caused by many reasons (such as lacking defined roles in AoS), but partially poorly balanced units are to blame. AoS has fantasic models, but the ruleset can feel bloated - as if the simple rules framework is collapsing under the bloat of 'extra' stuff that it was never designed to support. I'm hoping the new rules team will be able to help out here.
  3. Thanks, you raise a good point. I've swapped around the slickblades for blissbarbs, and used the spare points to buy Wheels of Excruciation; mostly so they don't backfire on me like the gemnids could with so few models. They're also there to generate DP but they put out a decent amount of hurt. Blissbarbs would also be in charge of screen clearing, which the list lacked before. If I had the points, I'd have traded some chaos warriors for blissbarbs on foot but unfortunately can't - let's hope for a points drop there. As others have said, the hand is by far the best (shame they didn't bring the others up to snuff), but the shield looks the coolest. If you don't like the hand, the shield can be useful but it really depends on how lucky you are as it's unreliable. I think the whip could have some use if you plan with it correctly and against the right lists. Also, unrelated, but here's another conspiracy theory. Some have said that they're disappointed that many rules haven't changed in our battletome (things like hosts not having updated rules or some QoL changes to some daemons and battalions), or we lack synergy, or that they feel the mortal rules are uncreative; while I may not agree with the latter and I think the lack of synergy was a design choice as we debuff, there is the chance their was some internal upset as our book was being written. I'm not sure what (could just be perfectly normal moving on), but GW are looking for a new lead game designer. Again, it could have had no effect at all on us, or they could be wanting an additional designer, but it's interesting to note.
  4. Yeah, it's a good point - I'd probably have a section to put notes under each questions so that anyone who wants to leave comments can if they feel their answer is unusual. I think a question like that would be useful, though I'm not sure if it would end up getting mixed responses from people who just miss a more powerful book rather than the quality of the book. We might also send too many messages to the rules team - it may be better to send a concise message which focusses as much as we can on points. What do you think?
  5. On the other hand, if a mechanic is fine on its own but often ends up abused, it should be brought into the discussion. While I voted for yes, in concept, if a lot of people think they're abused currently then perhaps the concept of them is too easily abusable and so they're not a good concept? Or at least not good without some adjustments
  6. Yeah, I very much agree with you here. I can definitely understand why people think our book is bad - as you said, it plays so differently to most books that any inexperienced player using it is almost certain to lose. While I enjoy the playstyle I'd hesitate to call it good design as AoS isn't meant to be a a highly complex game to get into, whereas Slaanesh is a complex army to even do okay with (and, as you said, even harder to do well with). Unfortunately I don't know if there's a good compromise between finesse, easy to play, and balanced. Maybe DoK? But I'm not 100% sure on the 'balanced' part of that? Good job on the placing Did you find any particular army very hard for us to counter? Also, I was thinking of an Archaon list. Tbh, I think it'll struggle to be competitive due to such a massive points sink, but it would probably be oppressive against casual lists. Lurid Haze (I've found this is my go to for the save) Archaon - daemon healing spell Glutos - battleshock spell Chaos Sorcerer Lord (mostly for that rr save on Archaon - he's too valuable to not spend an extra 110 points on nearly doubling survivability) 3×5 chaos warriors (sit on the points) 5x2 Slickblades (here's the part I'm struggling with the most; they're good for a flank, but they're costly and no battalion. Archaon's +2 bravery will help, and I didn't want to use Twinsouls as they're a bit slow in this list) The biggest weakness, as you can probably tell, is the objective game and board coverage. Archaon will destroy anything he comes into contact with and, with Glutos, is practically immortal. However Glutos doesn't have the damage himself to take a strong unit down in one go unless he was very lucky on claws. Screens would also be an issue and I'm still not 100% sold on the seekers in this list.
  7. Yeah, I agree that an origins story would be much more interesting than a current events one. A bit like Korgus Khul's novel, or Sigvald's old novel. To be honest, it's hard to write a chaos novel about someone who's already fallen fully as there's much less room for development. I think something like this could be really interesting - something about corruption, even strung together through an overarcing narrative across many mortal storylines that converge.
  8. I like them in concept but not in all implementations. For spells in AoS 0 they were fine - you might get hit by an arcane bolt but it was 18" away, had a chance to fail, and also a chance to be dispelled. There were also some 6+ to hit MWs, but again they could be turned off by a -1 to hit (or made stronger with a +1). MWs felt rate and powerful, whereas now in some armies they feel too liberally integrated. I think the main potential issue with MWs is that, asides from ward saves, there's no interaction with the wounds. If it's caused by a spell that's fine because dispelling was (or at least should be) a potential here. If it's an automatic ability or at least an ability that has little to no counterplay, then I think MWs are boring. I like MWs to feel like a small reward - you manage to cast a spell so you are rewarded with unsavable wounds, or you lined up a charge and so do some unavoidable chip damage. Basically they're good in small numbers when a condition has to be met that the opponent can stop (e.g. dispelling or charging first), but I think they're poor when they're en masse and without much counterplay.
  9. Thanks for you write up I think you bring up some really good points - our army is designed very strangely compared to others. Like you mentioned we don't have combos or big deathstars we can always rely on. In one way, I think this leads to the army feeling more satisfying. It feels as if we can use the full extent of our toolkit and play the game on the level of the battlefield rather than on the level of the list. That's not to say combo armies are brainless (definitely not), but when I've played for combos the gameplay often feels quite samey - position deathstar combo piece, buff the deathstar combo piece, and then use it as the buff suggests. It's fine but it can force your hands in lists with needing certain support pieces and the best unit to buff. Slaanesh on the other hand feels as if you have to play the game kind of more like chess - trading pieces and forcing poor plays while you move into the correct places. A lot of people don't like this because, as you said, you have to be thinking about your plays all the time because on ****** up and it's all over - this is stressful and sometimes people just want to buff something to crazy heights and let it rip. I think it's also why some people think the army is bad, because it is when you play it like another army. I do think some parts of the book may be hidden gems (I still stand by twinsouls ) but I think the Seeker Cavalcade and Glutos are the key players in a competitive scene. But also as you've said, the issue for most of the other units is their pointe costs. It's why I see this current lack of variety as not as bad as what you can see in other armies; Seeker Cavalcade is good, but not the answer to everything, and other parts of the book hold that answer and just need a bit of a points decrease. Just curious, where did you place in the tournament? a lot of people have placed highly but it feels like the consensus in some communities is still that we're weak and BoC tier; to be honest, that outlook frustrates me a lot because it feels like some people want the book to be bad so they can complain more. Yeah, I think a 20 points decrease would help them find their space a lot. To be honest, that describes most of our unused units (sans Slaangors) - I think most units have their place but maybe not their price. If everything comes down a little bit I think Slaanesh lists will be very varied.
  10. I think that's a really good addition. I don't know how much communication the rules team has with the finance team but even if they meet once a month it could be useful information. By the way, for the survey, I was thinking of distributing it on Reddit, the unofficial GW FB groups, the Slaanesh part of this forum, and the Slaanesh Whatsapp group. I can also distribute it on my Instagram. I don't have any reach on Twitter so I'm not sure if someone can take it there? Are we missing any other places to post it? I'm debating whether the general forum on TGA would be appropriate if framed less like a Slaanesh issue and more like a community push and seeing how much community action has an effect on rules. Also, sculpted Glutos's cart pullers
  11. I was just thinking, in relation to this thread as we've talked a lot about Slaaneshi characters, but who would we hope out of our existing characters to get a novel written about them? I'd actually quite like Glutos, if they did him well - they could easily make him boring so I'm a bit tentative with this suggestion, but I like the idea of a chaos lord who was a reluctant chosen, and I'd like to see if he was still kind of reluctant now - or if he had any introspective thoughts at all on his current position. I think he could be a really interesting character, but I worry they'll just make him a Skeletor-tier cartoon villain
  12. Thanks, it would be really helpful for you to give the questions a read through to see if there's anything missing or if you can think of a way to get a deeper analysis. One thing I've been back and forth on are any questions about specific rules within the battletome. For example, some people would like to see more combos or more uses of depravity points so summoning isn't needed or more in depth hosts. While the survey could touch on that I would worry it would dilute the message; if the message is clearly about points initially then I feel there is more of a chance of a change because points are an easy fix, but if we mention other issues we have then we may end up being too 'wish-listy' and thus brushed off. I think the reason Sylvaneth and BoC don't see a change is because the problems can't be solved as easily as a price drop, and we don't want to put ourselves in that bracket. Yeah, I would also like to see fiends move down a bit; I love the models but they're in an awkward spot at the moment where they're not quite good enough to compete with the better units in the price bracket and they're not cheap enough to just be a nice addition to round out a list. It's tricky because they're not actually terrible warscrolls; with 4 wounds and inbuilt negatives to hit and sometimes wound and casting, they're kind of a mobile debuff unit, but their poor save and total lack of defence against shooting means they're easily answered against some lists. That said, the new depravity rules means they're better than they were before. I like the look of the list, though I'm not sure if I'm fully sold on the Karkadrak lord. He is tanky for a hero, but if you wanted something just to be tanky then 10 extra chaos warriors provide more wounds and a nearly equivalent save, as well as being battleline. What do you envision as the use for your Karkadrak Lord within a game? I used to use him a bit last battletome when he got EK and his damage was just okay then so I'm not sure what he'd be like to play now.
  13. Yeah I definitely agree the poll should go ahead - I think it's important for the game as a whole to look at how much impact we can have as a community. I agree that the points have made some units unfavourable and thus not used (e.g. painbringers), but at least it's mostly the points rather than one unit being used because it combos the best. At least this is an easy fix - I'd be much happier to take a LoP for 120pts. So, how are these for some questions: 1) Generally, how do you feel about the points cost in the Hedonites of Slaanesh battletome 2021? A) A significant number of units are overcosted B) Most units are correctly pointed C) A significant number of units are undercosted D) I don't have a strong opinion either way 2*) Do you feel "X unit" is correctly pointed? A) Yes I feel they are correctly pointed B) No I think they are too highly costed C) No I think they are too cheaply costed D) I don't have a strong opinion either way 3) Have the points cost impacted your choice to play Hedonites of Slaanesh A) No, I play them regardless B) Yes, I chose to play them because of their points cost C) Yes, I chose not to play them because of their points cost but would have played otherwise D) No, I do not play them regardless of points cost E) No, something else stops me from playing Hedonites of Slaanesh but I would play with that fixed F) I have no strong opinion 4) How do you feel about the rules of the book regardless of the points cost A) I strongly like the rules B) I like the rules C) I have no opinion either way D) I dislike the rules E) I strongly dislike the rules 5) Would you like to see a Warscroll rewrite for the Slaangors, or do you believe a points cost would suffice A) I would like to see a warscroll rewrite B) I think posts changes would suffice C) I think the warscroll and points for the Slaangor are good D) I have no strong opinion --- The question is then what units we should include; I think the easiest way would probably be just to include all of the new mortal models. It's not that all daemons are perfect, but rather people seem to have more issue with the mortals. * this question would be repeated for the 10 mortal warscrolls
  14. Got my second unit of Slickblades done, these ones more brutal Onto building Glutos
  15. Yeah, I think Slickblades are usually better than blissbarbs. It's not that blissbarbs are bad, but rather I think their purpose is to harass and deal a little bit of damage here and there for depravity, which is all well and good but with how pricey things are it's hard to justify bringing in depravity generators over actual threat. By the way, how are we feeling for this poll? We may still need more time, but I was thinking we need a link to a polling site with an option to add notes to answers, so that we get a raw number and some comments to help show a general consensus. Mostly this is about communicating clearly to GW so I think we need to think about everything we're going to say. On one hand, from my own experience and from others' tournament experience, we're not weak. We're not in the Beasts of Chaos or Sylvaneth rutt and it's quite frustrating to see some people (not on this forum) to brush aside all wins as 'dumb luck' and all loses as definitive proof we suck. It would be inaccurate to portray the idea that we're super weak and need massive buffs, and the notion would likely be ignored. On the other hand, we do need some reductions on particular units, it's just which ones there's some disagreement with. I think we can all agree on Slaangors needing help, but then there's a bit on contention on Painbringers (though most in favour of a reduction), and much more contention on Twinsouls, Glutos (I don't think he needs to come down, but some think he sucks), the KoS, Sigvald, blissbarbs on foot, and likely more. I think we need to be clear on our message; we don't want a uniform points drop across the board. While many units may need a drop, some need it more than others - if we did a big 20% cut, Glutos would be OP 320 and Slaangors would still be bad at 110. As such, how specific should the poll be? Should it just be one basic question "Do you believe the points, generally, in the 2021 Hedonites of Slaanesh book are: 1) too high 2) too low 3) generally correct"? While that's simple it'll probably miss the nuance even with comments; for example, of two people just believe Painbringers and Slaangors are overcosted, one may vote "generally correct" because that's what they think, and the other may vote "too high" because they want to see change. On the other hand, too specific and no one will answer the questions. If we ask for opinions for every point in the book, we'll get far fewer answers. If we just ask about the "problem" units, then the question becomes "what are the problem units?" Thoughts? @Sorrow @AngryPanda I know you two have shown a lot of interest in the poll specifically (there are many others too but many people with letters as their profile pics so their names are harder to remember - sorry )
×
×
  • Create New...