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

stratigo

Members
  • Content Count

    596
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

stratigo last won the day on June 17 2018

stratigo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

341 Celestant-Prime

About stratigo

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. If, after like 30 games you notice "hmmm, these dice kinda roll a lot of sixes" and start to use only them, you are already being TFG, but using the thin excuse that "Well I'm not CERTAIN the weights are off" to keep using them.
  2. It is what he said. He said the silent majority agreed with him. There's no data on that. No one's polled the "silent majority" to engage their satisfaction with the game balance. Using the "silent majority" to go "And that's why everyone else is wrong when they complain" is nonsense. And you know it.
  3. “Truly there is indeed a silent unseen majority who agree with me”. You know, this rings hollow pretty much everywhere, from the makeup of political parties to the opinions on board games
  4. GW dice are not in any way balanced. Do some salt water testing.
  5. The games designers often don’t listen to play testers. And the play testers aren’t homogenous in their opinions, so it can easily be a case where the testers with the opinions that a designer already likes get listened to but even then flat straight, I don’t know how slaanesh got missed
  6. Once upon a time there were elf and dwarf stormcast too. But it feels like gw changed their mind. But not in any concretely state’s way
  7. people don't hold to this because they are not a hive mind and it doesn't have any required guidelines.
  8. when you are throwing dozens of dice, upwards of hundreds, it is only polite to use dice that is quickly and easily legible for your opponent. It speeds up the game. If you want to use your specialty dice for your three to five attacks on your character, whatever. If you want to use them on your horde with extra attacks, please don't. And are balanced well. Them gandalf dice and their 6s
  9. Let’s take just slaanesh. So, a slaanesh army gets access to its book. But then also it can add in the majority of the beasts of chaos book, the slaves to darkness, and archaon if it felt so inclined. Aos has its own soup issues with how the Battletomes work. A bunch of books are literally just them going “here, soup it up”. Most notable with CoS imperium armies don’t tend to mix different tactics from the same book though. It doesn’t add anything that just covering the weaknesses of your book with another book doesn’t. And that’s the actual issue with soup, it allows an army to cover its own weaknesses by cherry picking the best units from different books. I agree this is a problem. but in aos, you just have books that really don’t have a weakness. So, well, aos doesn’t really win out here. The soupiest of armies in 40k is still worse than triple keepers or just competitive skaven is in aos also, hope is on the horizon. Space marines no longer want soup, and space marines have eternally been the forerunner of the future in 40k
  10. Nah, the real power move is to play hallowheart with 6 wizards and then just keep casting spells. Spell after spell after spell. Every hero phase an hour. And then when the tzeentch player lays, broken and sobbing, at your feet begging you no more magic, that is when you know you have truly won but really we can’t answer your question satisfyingly unless we know your army and list
  11. I'd like to note, this isn't really good business sense. Both 40k 7th and fantasy 8th had extremely poor balance that shifted every new book, and those two games shed players drastically. A poorly balanced game will see gamers leaving it. And for all the cheers of some people going "Well they were all WAACs anyways!", man, they KILLED a setting over this. There are still GW games that do balance better. SBG, and, like, a shocking amount of people have SBG models stored some place. If you're looking for an AoS off ramp because your sick of triple keepers, SBG. Especially in the UK which has a huge community for it. SBG is great and much better balanced than the two mainline games. And has a healthy community and healthy future. If someone comes up to you and goes "Hey I have only really played like a couple games. Want to throw down?" and you drag out your triple keepers and body their list, you are that guy. If you only play your triple keepers when your opponent is looking for competitive tournie prepping, that's fine. Context is context. The person playing triple keepers isn't not still playing that when they do open play. And some people will abuse the openess of the rules to the hilt. Matched play is as much a defensive measure against jerks as it is anything else. It is offloading the issues with trying to find balance to GW because a lot of people DON'T want balance. They want to win and will find the loopholes for it. Even when they complain about balance, they aren't going to moderate their lists or not use every single rule to their advantage, because the win is important for people. You have to have incredible force of personality and charisma to get people full on a narrative game that really does cut away the balance issues. I haven't seen it yet. When I played a firestorm campaign, one guy brought his tourney tzeentch list (tzeentch changehost was the best list of the time). And everyone else quickly followed in trying to build their own cutthroat lists with what they had. And eventually the whole thing fell apart. I fear Cities will just be the new slaanesh. That's not balance, that's just shifting who is the most busted. Currently the winrates for factions in 40k is largely 45 to 55 percent. There's no 60 percent winning factions right now in 40k period, and the one list that looked like it would break the meta lasted all of three weeks before GW nerfed it. And that's the thing, despite what people who are, frankly, just haters say, 40k balance IS BETTER than AoS balance. And this is a thing members of this community need to get over. There's a vocal group on this forum that reflexively hates on 40k and dunks on it any time it comes up in comparison. And it drags the discussion down because 40k is a good comparison point. 40k balances itself more regularly and better than AoS does. Is it perfectly balanced? No. Is it even really well balanced? Not really in my opinion. Is it better than AoS? yes. Why? It's the same company. Because 40k has more resources put into its balance efforts. The iron hands nerf is just one of dozens of examples of how GW quickly shuts down drastically overperforming lists and builds in 40k. This still leaves certain lists trending to the top, and a couple of factions remain in the trash heap, but, man, there's no triple keeper slaanesh in 40k today. And instead of just hating on 40k and declaring everything is fine, maybe demand that GW put at least as much effort and resources into AoS as they do 40k. This is what I'd like to see.
  12. Aos in fact implemented its own full los blocking terrain in the form of trees, which renders the requirement to have full los blocking ruins far less urgent
  13. Do a khemist, Brokk essentially takes some of the role of the frigate in giving the riggers a bit more movement. Though you are losing out on their pretty solid shooting if you are using his command ability.
  14. Riggers and generally better, but require more support, they need a khemist and usually want a ship to help them. Wardens are more self sufficient. But wardens also want to largely be shooters because they have the same shooting options as riggers for cheaper at 1000 points if you are bringing riggers, this is pretty much the entire point of your lists and you should build around them
×
×
  • Create New...