Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 57.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • My question is this: If you have two units in the same combat and they destroy the opponent. Do they pivot/reform at the same time or one at the time - and also it is one move sequence or two? My guess is that you can not put one unit on top of the other before you reform the second unit but what about unit spacing? if the two units are more than 1" apart before reform is the first unit allowed to be closer than 1" before you reform the second?

  • Quote from Palmu: “Whoever Wilhelm is, he seems to be a man after my own heart. That is some nice bone train right there. ” Thanks , The list was fun to play and fun to build - and im pretty sure that for pure troops 10 chariots is the biggest unit you can make, so it will remain the biggest bus ever muhaha . (its all about the swarms though) The size of the unit is also somewhat of a challenge, as an example it simply cant get a downhill charge - the hills are to small to cower half the foot pr…

  • Yes. unless I want to charge something I dont want to challence. Vultures over Scorpion I didn't even consider. they are purely speed chaff ready to jump from behind other units

  • I will be playing the army below at the WTC I have all of one game with UD (terracotta list) and another 4 or 5 games with tomb kings back in warhammer 7. edition. so the list is based on pure theori hammer. The reason for playing Barrowlegion is partly to play something different than everyone else and partly that I think it sits pretty well in the metagame. Playing an unusual army is IMO a strenght in itself I play so few games that my oponent will probably know a NETlist better than I do, whe…

  • Quote from Herminard: “Quote from Groefte: “or a single adept with extra spell. With the wagons it should be enough for a decent and versatile magic fase. I would double up on both wagon spells. Nothing in the new magicfase as relliable as double tap:-) ” I meant if you were going to milk the 90 point mount discount x2. ” you are of course right if you do it once you might as well go for target saturation.

  • or a single adept with extra spell. With the wagons it should be enough for a decent and versatile magic fase. I would double up on both wagon spells. Nothing in the new magicfase as relliable as double tap:-)

  • Kathal's AMA (Ask Me Anything)

    Groefte - - WWW Topics

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “Quote from Groefte: “Quote from DanT: “On some level, not pricing for peak power means deliberately underpricing the optimal way to use a unit or item. The consequences of this are non-trivial. GW didn't price for peak power, and I would argue this contributed to some of the stupid stupid top-level hobby-destroying builds in 8th. ” The right question to ask is. at what "dept" should we stop pricing for synergy. ” Good to see you're still hanging around What do you mean by dept.…

  • Kathal's AMA (Ask Me Anything)

    Groefte - - WWW Topics

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “On some level, not pricing for peak power means deliberately underpricing the optimal way to use a unit or item. The consequences of this are non-trivial. GW didn't price for peak power, and I would argue this contributed to some of the stupid stupid top-level hobby-destroying builds in 8th. ” The right question to ask is. at what "dept" should we stop pricing for synergy.

  • Kathal's AMA (Ask Me Anything)

    Groefte - - WWW Topics

    Post

    cool idea (AMA)- im sorely tempted to try it I read your ASAW post and agree on most of it (except that ASAW is fundamentally a sound design tool) Therefore I want to ask In your opinion have there in the game to this date (both ninth age and before) been instances where armies were to close to each other in feel and playstyle? Could the whole ASAW guidelines in 99% of the cases be replaced with: use your common sense and dont be an idiot? Cheers

  • Quote from Qwerty: “Damn... there is no good way to say this... I think part of the problem is that, since T9A is not a business company, friendship and family got in the way of things, and now many key roles are being filled by people totally unfit for their given tasks that you cannot simply kick out of the project. Could endogamy be the illness that kills T9A? ” In This you are mistaken, I can asure you that we go to great length trying to be a company. That is actually the main game We have,…

  • Its a good army. Biggest force is the completely different threat picture it gives, don't under estimate the power of playing the unknown (says I playing the worst net list) you will miss a canon though My Bet (assuming you are drunk but not that drunk, and that Norwegians by divine intervention have grasped the match up system) If Noway finish top 10: 70 points Norway finish bottom half: 90+ Looking forward to a beer - but i'm not touching the horn Cheers

  • are ogres overpowerd?

    Groefte - - Ogre Khans (OK)

    Post

    Quote from SmithF: “I guess we come from different places... I find that currently there are certain armies and builds that definitely surpass the norm. And by that I mean that for an experienced player it is like playing 9th-age in easy mode. The bloating of special rules is particularly predominant in OK. ” I don't think we disagree that much. a random ogre army will be very strong compared to a random list from a lot of other books, when we are talking top lists played by good players the gap…

  • are ogres overpowerd?

    Groefte - - Ogre Khans (OK)

    Post

    Quote from DanT: “So I think it would be easy to have a debate where we're all working with a different definition in our heads of "overpowered", so let me try to make a few claims independent of this word, that I hope most people will agree on. 1) OK are amongst the best 4 army books in terms of external balance. 2) They have a couple of "wtf?" units/options, that are surprising in terms of their cost/rules: including hellfist, ironfist, rock auroch and possibly tusker hunters. From my point of…

  • Quote from Nicreap: “You're missing that part that said the majority of each model needed to be a GW product, or did you forget that little gem? And while that was true at GW events in the GW stores, it was not required elsewhere. ” just a quick correction im not talking about tournament rules but the actual 8. ed. rulebook page 88 in the small book "..it is acceptable for a unit to include a minority of models diffently armed ... but the unit still counts as armed as the majority. Where models …

  • Quote from Nicreap: “Why is the Rule Team, a position that does not involve organizing or running tournaments, feel it is necessary to be issuing standards for WYSIWYG? This project has no official models, and TO's have handled it just fine without guidance from GW for years. So why does the RT suddenly feel it is their job to dictate how people are to engage in the hobby? Because that is what this entire thread has boiled down to, why does the RT? have to dictate it. The RT members do a good jo…

  • Quote from Nicreap: “Also, @Groefte you do realize, that with the 51% requirement for correct weapons equipped, that almost every single GW model with a "halberd" is violating that rule, right? By that standard, Temple guard can never be put on the table without heavy conversion, nor necropolis guard, nor tower guard. Because, as Squirreloid pointed out pages ago, halberd is a VERY specific type of weapon, ” You tag me so I asume you have read my posts, then I read this and must assume you haven…

  • Quote from WhammeWhamme: “First off, the standard *cannot* be "made for a fantasy wargame", because I think we all agree that using miniatures made (to the right scale) for a historical war game would be totally fine, inarguably fine. "made for a fantasy wargame" is also kinda pushing it; there are some fantastic minis out there that weren't made for wargames (e.g. the Kingdom Death line has wonderfully grotesque monster minis made for it's own boardgame). If someone plonked down a Screaming Ant…

  • Quote from tiny: “We all can hope that's not what TOs will enforce, but it kind of reinforces the argument made by @lawgnome and @Squirrelloid that as soon as you write it down as rule it comes problematic. ” there is no denying that the rule is problematic - It is. What lawgnome and Squirrelloid is arguing is that therefore we should have no rules except distinguishable bases. I agree very much with the common sense aproach and I think we should change the WYSIWYG rules to be more guideline lik…

  • Let me try one last time - I don't like WYSIWYG if interpreted literately. Most of the tournaments in Denmark don't enforce WYSIWYG. I think in a narrow tournament sense there are good arguments for WYSIWYG (avoid confusion) but also real problems with "policing" what people play. Where we absolutely disagree is when you jump from dont liking enforcement of WYSIWYG rules to Its destroying the game that I cant play my orcs as beasts. And the rule is bad so we can have no rules A nuanced discussio…

  • Quote from Squirrelloid: “Except this is the very definition of arbitrary and capricious. We know these armies don't satisfy WYSIWYG. If the rules only apply to armies a TO doesn't like, then you're stuck guessing what the TO will like. You can't just say 'and we'll suspend the rules whenever we see something we like'. ” No really its not, its using common sense. you have to trust you TO anyway he can pretty much decide whatever he wants. I have no great fear of TO's turning in to megalomaniac m…