Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 470.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from sixfthoneybadger: “Chop off one head and two take it's place. ” HAIL HYDRA!

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    First, I do think that every one has his own idea of what "MSU" means. For example, @Baranovich post above more or less showcases what I consider "herohammer" or "monsterhammer" (depending on the most common component) - MSU (to me) only means that your army is composed by several cheap and disposable units (roughly, 200-400 pts each) working in accordance, so it can very much have as many models as a MMU or pure horde army. Personally, I find it more engaging visually because to me each model r…

  • Warseer Down?

    Shadeseraph - - WWW Topics

    Post

    Quote from Smooth Boy: “Good to see Warseer back but they need to sort out the sub-forums. Having only 'tactics' and 'background' as boards is too focused. We need a general. ” On the other side, I can see it as a move towards avoiding the "Whineseer Syndrome". "General" is where most of the worst stuff came from. Followed closely by rumours.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    I dunno, I kind of like the magic system. Most other proposals have been kind of negate the gambling/negotiation aspect of the phase, which I think is a pity. I could see the dispel scroll / crown of scorn leaving, or becoming a flat +3/+4 to dispel once per game for few points, though (in addition to my previous suggestions about the magic phase). Most of my lists are scroll-less lately (though not magic-less).

  • Erratas versión española

    Shadeseraph - - Spain

    Post

    eso es cosa de la aplicación de foro que se usa, necesitas permisos de administrador para editar esa página. Y con más de 200 personas de staff como que no están las cosas como para regalar esos permisos, sobre todo cuando ya ha habido bastantes leaks.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from Lagerlof: “I didn't really understand what your side of the argument was, so that makes it hard to see it. Hence I asked you to elaborate. Writing with big letters does not make it any more clear however. ” Note that it might not be him actively changing the font of his post. I've noticed that for some reason, if you write from a smartphone sometimes the text changes size for no apparent reason.

  • lo sabemos, estamos trabajando en ello.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from fjugin: “Here we recently added @Shadeseraph and @There Is No Spoon to help out with this. ” Yeah, we've been doing a bit of everything lately (from PR to temp-ACS) and have been unable to define our role correctly (too much work due to the 1.3 release). I hope we can define it a bit better at some point - we are going to skype about it with @blonde beer after Christmas.

  • Quote from Pablo: “Pero en unidad de carros? O unidos a otra unidad de caballería rápida? ” bueno, en teoría ambos. Si un personaje en carro se une a una unidad de reavers, mantendrían tropas ligeras (aunque moviendo 9"). Si se une uno de leones, perderían tropas ligera. Y a parte, si, las unidades de carros también necesitan tropas ligeras o tendrían que pivotar, y de hecho si se une un personaje en carro de leones a una unidad de carros de caballos, tampoco pueden usar tropas ligeras.

  • Quote from Pablo: “Hola buenas! Que diferencia tiene el carro de caballos con tropas ligeras, respecto al carro de leones o cualquier otro carro sin esa regla especial. ” Ninguna. Tropas ligeras importa si lo llevas en unidad.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from jouso: “So, are current paths of magic at a power level that warrants re-introduction of magic dice or extra channel mechanics? ” I'm not part of the RT, but while the spells are on the power level of "+1 to wound" or "-1 to be hit" with ranges of 18+ inches, I can't really in good conscience support measures that allow more than one of those per turn on average with relative reliability without a serious point investment, like - close to 1500 pts. I know it might seem exhorbitant, bu…

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from Adam: “You know that it would hit hard fast cav movement (since you wouldn't be able to sneak between units) ” Mmm... how about checking for the condition only at the end of the movement instead? Kind of like fly - you can move over other units, but your final position must be clear.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from WCB: “Magic is so bad that most people forego a wizard/magician ” We are aware of the issue and are working on it. Rome wasn't built in one day, and we hope that the day of tomorrow we can make both magic and magicless armies viable. Quote from WCB: “And if you are worried about rules lawyers, then why copy all the magic classes from Frostgrave? ” Quote from frostgrave: “-Chronomancer -Enchanter -Necromancer -Soothsayer -Witch -Summoner -Thaumaturge -Sigilist -Elementalist -Illusionis…

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Meh. Monsters are the solution to too many things. Chaff? throw a monster at it. MSU? throw a monster at it. Mother in law? throw a monster at it.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from Drakkar: “Wait... the fluff of the game isn't similar to a party of Civilization ? ” Of course not. If it were, I'd already be playing Scythians

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from Kristian: “There will always be skewed lists. No amount of fine tuning or points adjustments will get rid of that. ” Skewed, unbalanced lists where one match-up has the advantage against the other are fine. Extremely skewed lists were player choice in game matters little is a recipe for frustration. Trying to control every single skewed list is bad and develops a stagnating meta - but placing enough stopgags that games can't be decided before they even start seems, to me, a fairly rea…

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from Drakkar: “Yes i believe it's necessary if we want to tone down Strength & AP... i spammed various threads about this to gather support from players (originally it was @Shadeseraph idea), and it's currently under discussion for 2.0 : ” I should do my job as well and spread the gospel too

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    @2Cats1Tuna: the full rule book including the core fluff for each army, is scheduled for the 24.

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    credit where it's due, that's @There Is No Spoon work. I did the general overview - either way, many thanks in behalf of both

  • Let's talk about 1.3

    Shadeseraph - - General Discussion

    Post

    Quote from HJFudge: “(hopes he did his math right) ” yups. The sliding values are a bit confusing and counterintuitive at first, but that's basically the idea.