|
Foul Ole Ron posted:Any more news on dark eldar rules changes ?
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 03:40 |
|
|
I've just been told that Armies on Parade is now a store-only event, no nationals. While that's perfectly fine for me as I didn't want to go to them anyway, it's a bit disappointing (if not entirely unexpected) that they're cutting down. I guess there's no money to be made in event days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:24
|
|
|
There's no US gamesday anymore. No event to hold it at.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:25
|
|
|
Well I'm in the UK, if that matters. I wouldn't know when any events happen (or if they've been cancelled), it's not really my thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
Oh, forgot that the world doesn't revolve around us. That is weird, it looks like Warhammer Fest is October 11th and the deadline for AoP is the 25th, so AoP it two weeks too late to be featured. I guess they weren't sure if they were doing an event this year until late enough that they couldn't do AoP?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 13:41
|
|
|
Foul Ole Ron posted:Any more news on dark eldar rules changes ? I think, just because I the fact that there's new models, it won't totally be another GK situation. That said no one has spotted any new units yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 14:19
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:Renegade GT rules My group has been pretty disappointed at the lack of clear posting about Renegade (and no the Facebook page doesn't count). We asked if we could use a Combined Arms Detachment and a Codex Detachment (like Wolves or GK) since they have not been clear on what is allowed. That apparently blew there minds. I love the TOs and people who are running it, but they are not competitive players and it shows in there unique FAQ.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
Is it worth fielding a helbrute with twin linked lascannons, a power fist and heavy flamer?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
Fix posted:Got a team tournament coming up this weekend. Finally got everyone together on the display table. That's a crazy cool setup you've got there. How do you take that from table to table though? Most tournaments I've gone to have had enough space for a TV tray for each army, if that. Ultragonk posted:Is it worth fielding a helbrute with twin linked lascannons, a power fist and heavy flamer? SRM fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Sep 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
SRM posted:That's a crazy cool setup you've got there. How do you take that from table to table though? Most tournaments I've gone to have had enough space for a TV tray for each army, if that. That's just for the group paint judging. We'll toss the backdrop and everyone will have a 2x2 for individual scoring or just a tray like you say for the actual games. Luckily we get to get the main paint scoring out of the way the night before the actual tourney.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:04
|
|
|
Fix posted:That's just for the group paint judging. We'll toss the backdrop and everyone will have a 2x2 for individual scoring or just a tray like you say for the actual games. Luckily we get to get the main paint scoring out of the way the night before the actual tourney.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
SRM posted:Hellbrutes aren't exactly great, but they're fun enough units. I field one like that once in a while and it does okay. It just shoots things as it advances up the board and hopefully it gets to punch something eventually. I think I might drop the heavy flamer though, since it's not going to be up close and personal much. Multi-melta and heavy flamer makes more sense. Thanks that does make more sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
Already checked Dakka, but since they're Dakka thought I'd ask here. What color is Tau blood?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Blue-purple, as per For the Emperor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
Google says blue-purple, which makes sense with the blue skin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Already checked Dakka, but since they're Dakka thought I'd ask here. What color is Tau blood? Blue purple. Apparently cobalt in the blood instead of iron.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Fix posted:Got a team tournament coming up this weekend. Finally got everyone together on the display table. Nice! I don't remember "Stuck in the Middle with You" playing in the background when you filmed it, but it's fitting. "Nurgle to the left of me, bugs to the right, here I am...". thiswayliesmadness posted:Somehow I expect most videos of those awesome plasma ball creations to have somebody touching it eventually Touching the plasma ball is always a necessity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
PantsOptional posted:Blue-purple, as per For the Emperor. MasterSlowPoke posted:Google says blue-purple, which makes sense with the blue skin. Hencoe posted:Blue purple. Apparently cobalt in the blood instead of iron. Wow, you guys are quick. Now to grab some clear purple and blue paint.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Post 9-11 User posted:So, the army rules in the 3rd Edition book, that was supposed to be it? The rules? Then, someone higher up said, "But, we won't make as much money, gently caress YOU!" and that was that. They're explicitly saying that 3rd was a massive reboot and that all editions after 3rd have been tweaks rather than other reboots. It's completely valid to say that another reboot is warranted, but what they aren't saying is that there would never be another edition (as evidenced by their discussion of then-new 7th Edition Fantasy being relatively minor tweaks and not the sea-change that much older editions went through during transition). Personally, my takeaway is that relative stagnation with very minor updates has been the plan all along--the perceived blandness of Gray Knights and Orks, for example, is a feature rather than a bug.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
Naramyth posted:My group has been pretty disappointed at the lack of clear posting about Renegade (and no the Facebook page doesn't count). We asked if we could use a Combined Arms Detachment and a Codex Detachment (like Wolves or GK) since they have not been clear on what is allowed. That apparently blew there minds. I love the TOs and people who are running it, but they are not competitive players and it shows in there unique FAQ. The one competitive player on the crew is Dave, but he's still stuck in 4th edition and is a known critic of allies and detachments. They're all great guys and some of my best friends, but yeah, I haven't been impressed with their handling of the FAQ.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:The one competitive player on the crew is Dave, but he's still stuck in 4th edition and is a known critic of allies and detachments. They're all great guys and some of my best friends, but yeah, I haven't been impressed with their handling of the FAQ. If you are stuck in 4th you aren't competitive.  Only sort of related, I'm hoping they approve my ad-mech count as Tau because I want to play mechwarrior: 40k edition.  
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
Naramyth posted:If you are stuck in 4th you aren't competitive. I'd allow it. Either way, I demand a rematch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Naramyth posted:Only sort of related, I'm hoping they approve my ad-mech count as Tau because I want to play mechwarrior: 40k edition. Goddamned over-armed Jenners, always ruining my poo poo! gently caress you, Kurita! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:I'd allow it. Either way, I demand a rematch.  AbusePuppy posted:Goddamned over-armed Jenners, always ruining my poo poo! gently caress you, Kurita! Liao or gtfo
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Hencoe posted:Blue purple. Apparently cobalt in the blood instead of iron. What colour is Tau cum? And what does their sweat taste like? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
The battle report in the latest WD describes the DE bomber as having Dark Scythes, hinting that they have something similar to the Eldar D-scythes. Could be a boon to the ignore-cover-starved DE lineup, especially if it can also be picked by infantry. Other rumors say that Power from Pain is being changed into a progressive buff that change as the turns pass. A bit wonky, since you might not have much stuff left on the table by turn 3 when FNP finally kicks in to give you some durability, and it requires changing haemonculi and wracks both a lot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:The battle report in the latest WD describes the DE bomber as having Dark Scythes, hinting that they have something similar to the Eldar D-scythes. Could be a boon to the ignore-cover-starved DE lineup, especially if it can also be picked by infantry. I don't buy that PfP rumor, but I totally believe they would address the lack of DE template weapons by devising a whole new weapon type instead of just fixing the shredder.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
I didn't see anyone post anything about it yet, but having played a couple games with the new edition of Space Hulk, this is what's new: -There's the new "intro" mission called Beachhead which uses a pretty large map and has boarding torpedos that arrive in a semi-random fashion(you roll a die to see which board section they land on, and you can choose the square within the section). This is a cool mission but it's a really bad intro because it adds a ton of special rules and uses ten marines and a fuckton of starting blips. The loading torpedoes are 5 square long corridor type things with separate boarding ramp squares(for some reason). -A new mission called Into The Depths which uses a rather large (6 square) elevator to move between floors. Marines can operate the elevator, genestealers cannot. -A new mission called Hard Vacuum with the largest room in the set, which is damaged and open to a vacuum. The only effect a vacuum has is it makes close combat harder for genestealers. -A new mission called Breached or something that uses "breach counters" which are essentially genestealer entry points in the middle of the board. The mission starts with one of these and they arrive one at a time after that, meaning the marine player could have one pop up behind him in an area that's supposedly safe. All in all a nice bonus if you hadn't bought it before like me, but not worth $125 if you have the last version.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
I finished up a whole mess of Cadians! I actually finished painting up both the second infantry squad and the company command squad the other day, but my camera died and I had to wait on a replacement. This makes one small platoon and a command section for this allied force, which I think may be it. I might add a Leman Russ to them and I've got more Guardsmen if I want them, but for now I'm saying they're done! First up is the second infantry squad:       Next I've got the company commander and some special weapons. These'll be doled out between the platoon (melta) and company (plasma) command squads:       
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Naramyth posted:If you are stuck in 4th you aren't competitive. Are the sentinels missile broadsides? A flock of birds, a murder of crows, a macross of missiles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
Naramyth posted:If you are stuck in 4th you aren't competitive. Please tell me you named them something-Madcats.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
Sulecrist posted:They're explicitly saying that 3rd was a massive reboot and that all editions after 3rd have been tweaks rather than other reboots. It's completely valid to say that another reboot is warranted, but what they aren't saying is that there would never be another edition (as evidenced by their discussion of then-new 7th Edition Fantasy being relatively minor tweaks and not the sea-change that much older editions went through during transition). I may have misread something entirely, but what I took from that article snippet is that they admitted multiple Codex releases was a debacle in terms of game balance. Better to have all armies written with the same rules set and on an even footing rather than going piecemeal which makes entire waves of army books obsolete or with rules that are entirely unusable. I recall reading through White Dwarf issues back in the day where they even declared that the "mini" Codex/supplements were also a massive headache. Yet, here were are again with Dataslates and minidexes. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
Some guys from our local gaming group are going to LVO next year, and I'm planning on heading as well, even though I'm not much of a tournament guy. (I love Vegas, and any excuse to go is fine with me). After hearing stories coming out of Nova about Transcendent CTans and Knights, should I bother with the GT (I run SM & Guard, and have little interest in chasing the meta... I like playing what I play) or should I plan on doing one of the other events? I don't mind losing, but I'm just worried I'll get bored and discouraged by the end of the first day. Is there any way to make IG & SM competitive at 1850 without running a pile of drop pods with melta? Or should I just embrace being a casual and play the narrative or team thing...
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
Tuxedo Jack posted:Some guys from our local gaming group are going to LVO next year, and I'm planning on heading as well, even though I'm not much of a tournament guy. (I love Vegas, and any excuse to go is fine with me). I'll be going down with a group to LVO as well, so I will totally recommend you come. While it's typically a fairly competitive event, there are plenty of more casual folks who show up (at BAO recently there was a guy with an amazing Orca on a flying stand that was literally as thick as my arm and about 4' tall), so you'll hardly be alone in that respect. And the Transcendent C'tan isn't allowed as part of the Frontline events- they permit Lords of War, but only a limited selection of them and the C'tan's not on the guest list. As far as IG/SM goes, I can see it working out a couple different ways. IG are basically gonna be good for two things: backfield units that shoot at the enemy and huge blobs of infantry (or both.) Drop Pods would pair well with either, but you don't necessarily need a dozen of them; even just one or three would be useful for delivering some stuff. You could also go mechanized if you have Rhinos/Chimeras or take a heavier tack and bring a bunch of Land Raiders and Leman Russes. There's actually tons of options for fielding a list like that, since both SM and IG are pretty flexible armies depending on what you have and what you want to do.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 06:33
|
|
|
Post 9-11 User posted:I may have misread something entirely, but what I took from that article snippet is that they admitted multiple Codex releases was a debacle in terms of game balance. Better to have all armies written with the same rules set and on an even footing rather than going piecemeal which makes entire waves of army books obsolete or with rules that are entirely unusable. Nah, Sulecrist has it right. The purpose of that interview is to justify Fantasy 7E as an evolutionary edition and assuage fears that it will invalidate 6E books. To put it in context, if they're talking about 7E Fantasy, it's some time around 2006. 4E 40K has already been out for 2 years, so 40K players have already seen an evolution of the 3E rules from 1998. But Fantasy was last redone in 2000 with a massive overhaul equivalent to 3E 40K's, so Jervis and Alessio are letting Fantasy players know that 7E fantasy is going to be like 4E 40K, an evolution that won't invalidate their current army books. And the army book system has been in place since 1992. Just because someone says,"that's the problem with..." doesn't mean they're admitting something was a debacle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 07:07
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Nah, Sulecrist has it right. The purpose of that interview is to justify Fantasy 7E as an evolutionary edition and assuage fears that it will invalidate 6E books. To put it in context, if they're talking about 7E Fantasy, it's some time around 2006. 4E 40K has already been out for 2 years, so 40K players have already seen an evolution of the 3E rules from 1998. But Fantasy was last redone in 2000 with a massive overhaul equivalent to 3E 40K's, so Jervis and Alessio are letting Fantasy players know that 7E fantasy is going to be like 4E 40K, an evolution that won't invalidate their current army books. And the army book system has been in place since 1992. It's a 2008 February article. 25th year of warhammer article.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 13:41
|
|
|
LordAba posted:Are the sentinels missile broadsides? You got it. Dump_Stat posted:Please tell me you named them something-Madcats. Ligna Lupum timberwolf clan4lyfe I'm amazed women talk to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
Post 9-11 User posted:I may have misread something entirely, but what I took from that article snippet is that they admitted multiple Codex releases was a debacle in terms of game balance. Better to have all armies written with the same rules set and on an even footing rather than going piecemeal which makes entire waves of army books obsolete or with rules that are entirely unusable. Irrespective of what they meant--I think what you're saying is a totally valid criticism, just not what they're talking about there--rules delivery, access, and cost is definitely my biggest gripe about this game and I know a lot of people feel that way. I wish GW had something like Infinity's centralized online resource or even, though it has some real faults, PP's War Room. It doesn't even have to be free (War Room isn't), it could be subscription-based like D&D 4E's old online resource. I'd still pay too much for fluff and artwork, I just hate the way rules are bought and sold in this game. EDIT: full access for $4.99/month or $49.99/year, and every single miniature kit includes a code for a "free" month. you're welcome, GW. Sulecrist fucked around with this message at 15:22 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:It's a 2008 February article. 25th year of warhammer article. Ahh, okay. Still, they're not crapping on the army book model; they're just saying its problem is that massive overhauls to the games invalidate a whole set of books, which is really a problem with all table top games. They obviously think the codex/army book system works well enough despite that problem because they have used it for 22 years, continuing with it after they saw that problem first hand with 3E 40K and 6E Fantasy. Note that those editions were the last to come with comprehensive army lists as part of the new edition release. They haven't done that since because they haven't massively overhauled the games since, and each new edition has supported the previous edition's army books or codices. Beyond that, the designers would never admit that a cornerstone of their product line is a debacle, even if they truly believed so, in their own house magazine. Post 9/11 is reading a lot of nonexistent negative tone into one little phrase. Don't get me wrong, I'm not mounting a defense of the way they release army rules. There are a lot of problems with it beside the one they bring up. The "backwards compatible" editions don't invalidate entire books, but they do invalidate certain stuff from those books by doing away with or changing certain rules that unbalance or invalidate certain options. The changes can cause confusion and create some weird rules interactions. The system doesn't inherently lead to power creep, but it makes it easy and tempting to introduce power creep. Finally, it encourages them to update popular armies more often than less popular ones, which can lead to stuff like Necrons and Bretonnians waiting nearly a decade for an update. I like the codexes because I like collecting and reading books for the games I play (you should see how much FR stuff I have), but I wish GW would do the kinds of things Sulecrist mentioned or package rules cards along with the models like WM/H because the codex system is clunky.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 03:40 |
|
|
I don't know if the codex system is clunkier than hauling around a deck of cards and a bunch of rulebooks. That said, if they introduce new units, I'd like it if they had rules for them in the box until they're available in a codex.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2014 16:59
|
|