Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:

For those still wounded by the destruction of WFB, please give AoS a chance. The ruleset is really well done and I could definitely see 40k rolling to this. Plus the newer model line has been really ace!

Eh?

Might as well have said;
"For those still wounded by the destruction of WFB, please give <insert any fantasy game here> a chance"

AoS is a different kind of fantasy setting to WFB. The style of game is different. Not everyone is tied to GW as the only company that can make games and figures. There are many others to try as well.

However, I do agree, some of the recent releases have been good. The only ones that have annoyed me so far are the fact that the Sigmarines have to have those awful masks. If they'd only put human heads on the sprues, I could have been suckered in (ignoring the overkill of skin runes and skin skulls in some of the other models).

I also wonder if deep down GW planned on 40k merging with an AoS style ruleset, therefore allowing fantasy vs sci-fi battles for those that wanted it. Time will tell.

Glad you folks are enjoying the points and AoS now. Let's hope it helps keep GW thriving as I do like a lot of their models.

Requizen wrote:

 VeteranNoob wrote:
Khorne seems to be the best I've faced since January. When they remember all those bonuses they hit hard and fast.

Was that straight Khorne Daemons or Daemons + Bloodbound? The regular Daemons seem a bit underwhelming, but I know Bloodbound have a lot of buffing things and strong units.

Mostly Bloodbound but sometimes mix with demons.

 Grimgold wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

The Pitched Battle scenarios would make such a tactic near auto-lose; the opponent would have too many victory points from board control for the Stormcast to recover.

Tabling your opponent is an auto win, and in the match I watched he did it in less than two rounds. It's not a technique I'd use because it's too risky, but it did get me thinking about how to deal with big point sink baddies like Skarbrand, Nagash, and the occasional Dragonprince. My current thought is a unit of 10 retributors and a knight vexillor ought to be a good counter, especially if I get first turn. If you have a Lord Castellant and your opponent has a lousy rend value, that could be game over first turn.

If he's dropping the Celestant Prime with 8 attacks then he's doing it on round 4, with the scenarios ending at round 5 the opponent needs only keep one model alive until then. And if the Stormcast player goes second in round 4 its even harder. Its certainly possible to win that way but I suspect his opponent actually tried to fight the Stormcast rather than simply running & retreating.

 ClassicCarraway wrote:

 Etna's Vassal wrote:

-Abilities that could go on infinitely (for example Darmonettes getting extra attacks on rolls of 6 to hit) only trigger once. After the first example of an ability in a given instance it cannot trigger again.

Does this count even if the ability/spell specifically states it could potentially trigger multiple times, such as the foot of gork spell?

Without quoting the rule exactly (which, understandably, is a big no-no), extra attacks, to-hits, and to-wounds are capped at one instance. They then go on to give a short example. As Foot of Gork is none of those (no exact instances of such rolls are made), it could go on until the target was pancaked. A little Google-fu will let you see a snapshot of the actual rules.

Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

Do those benefits seem worth it at this time?

 Charistoph wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

Do those benefits seem worth it at this time?

Yes.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

Do those benefits seem worth it at this time?

Yes.

So much like not going Unbound in 40K? Good to know.

So there goes my plans for a Beastmen/Treemen army, darn it. Oh well, I'm not sure how many people are actually playing nearby, but I wanted to have a reason to make collecting worthwhile.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

Is this like 40K where you are in a Formation you get FREE RULES or do you have to pay for the benefits of these rules. I can't remember what I read on the forums. I just hope AoS is not going to be like 40K and it's free rules for everyone in a formation. A lot of these free rules are not balanced or fair in a lot of cases.

How balanced are these rules if they are free?

Davor wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

Is this like 40K where you are in a Formation you get FREE RULES or do you have to pay for the benefits of these rules. I can't remember what I read on the forums. I just hope AoS is not going to be like 40K and it's free rules for everyone in a formation. A lot of these free rules are not balanced or fair in a lot of cases.

How balanced are these rules if they are free?

Battalions are not free, though. They cost points to give rules to the units within.

The only things that are free are the rules you get if you select an army within the restriction of type - Sylvaneth, Chaos, Death, Bonesplittaz, etc. I don't find those problematic since basically everyone is going to get them other than the people running Stormcast + Daemons or Orks + Skeletons, which is a very very small subset.

Well, and those people mixing outside of their Grand Alliance probably have HORRIBLE unit synergy. The way abilities proc off of keywords, it is often hard to create synergy outside of a faction, let alone Alliance.

Davor wrote:

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:
Any notations on mixing Alliances in an army?

Mix away, you simply give up the benefits of Allegiance in exchange for a wider selection.

Is this like 40K where you are in a Formation you get FREE RULES or do you have to pay for the benefits of these rules. I can't remember what I read on the forums. I just hope AoS is not going to be like 40K and it's free rules for everyone in a formation. A lot of these free rules are not balanced or fair in a lot of cases.

How balanced are these rules if they are free?

The Formations of AoS are called Battalions, and those aren't free. In 40k terms think of allegiance as every game being unbound by default, but players who do all-Imperium, all-Chaos, or all-Xenos getting bonuses for not mixing in anything else. For Sylvaneth allegiance, the analogy would be a player opting for a better set of bonuses instead but limiting himself strictly to the units from one codex without any allies whatsoever.

Requizen wrote:

Battalions are not free, though. They cost points to give rules to the units within.

The only things that are free are the rules you get if you select an army within the restriction of type - Sylvaneth, Chaos, Death, Bonesplittaz, etc. I don't find those problematic since basically everyone is going to get them other than the people running Stormcast + Daemons or Orks + Skeletons, which is a very very small subset.

NinthMusketeer wrote:
Is this like 40K where you are in a Formation you get FREE RULES or do you have to pay for the benefits of these rules. I can't remember what I read on the forums. I just hope AoS is not going to be like 40K and it's free rules for everyone in a formation. A lot of these free rules are not balanced or fair in a lot of cases.

How balanced are these rules if they are free?

The Formations of AoS are called Battalions, and those aren't free. In 40k terms think of allegiance as every game being unbound by default, but players who do all-Imperium, all-Chaos, or all-Xenos getting bonuses for not mixing in anything else. For Sylvaneth allegiance, the analogy would be a player opting for a better set of bonuses instead but limiting himself strictly to the units from one codex without any allies whatsoever.

Happy to help!