Sugarlessllama

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 10:33 PM, WestRider said:

One of the few things I'm really going to miss in 8th is saying "Jinkies!" every time I have a Unit jink. But on the flipside, it looks like there will be a lot more opportunities to disembark multiple Units from a single Transport. "OK, gang, let's split up and look for clues!" ;)

You did the thing. You are awesome for doing the thing.

1 minute ago, spagunk said:

"BA/Death Company are awesome if you pump 600pts of Named characters who can be one shot by anyone with sniper weapons!!!"

I don't know. I think Blood Angels are still really awesome without the named characters. In fact I'm planning on doing a BA army for the new edition. :D

My Skitarii are at 7.

Trumbo. Absolutely outstanding.

On ‎6‎/‎7‎/‎2017 at 6:06 PM, InfestedKerrigan said:

Imperial Knights, because mutha fuggin mech warriors homie

Hell yeah! I actually picked up some resin bases for my Knights in preparation for the new edition.

I'm really happy with the power level system. I have always hated sitting down with a calculator and pricing out each doodad in my army. :D

I am sending GW the question via Twitter in hopes of an answer.

23 minutes ago, pretre said:

"Overwatch is resolved like a normal shooting attack"

I understand. I am stating that it would appear that is not how it is being used in the twitch live streamed games being played at Warhammer World.

This sounds pretty awesome. However, I don't have any zombies in my collection.

I plan on being in the shop on Saturday. I hope to see you all there. :D

1 hour ago, Munkie said:

Nope, charging from out of a weapon's range will be a great way to avoid overwatch. 

It's generous to want to give your opponent the benefit of the doubt, but that's not how it works on 8th.

I don't think that is correct. The Warhammer TV games being played on Twitch don't seem to follow that interpretation. It seems like you just get to fire all of your weapons regardless of range.

3 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

I think you disagree with the conclusion.  i think the reasoning would never have mattered.  

If I had a 426 point Obelisk and said "Is this freindly" 120 people would chime in coming from all angles with what is ultimately a yes or a no with lots of people making lots of good points.

The one thing we know for sure is that at 426 points, you can pretty well bet it does something awesome and scary.  You can bt that the concerns Rick has ,which i shared earlier, are going to be well founded when the obelisk goes first and begins to express itself destructively.  Now that is not to say that the Obelisk is really OP.  It wasn't in 7th, it was probably the best pointed unit in the edition (again subjectively).  But the point is, it's going to do WORK.

 

Now the one side of the brain says:  "I paid the points so why should I mourn for the dead ti creates?  their equal numbr of points might blow me up by the end of round one as well".

The other side of the argument goes:  "sure, but is that really going to make our game more fun, or is it just going to make it shorter?  Don't we kind of want to see more?"

Neither point of view is particularly wrong as far as it goes, but the Ricks of the world would like it very much if they didnt spend the time, money and painting love on models that essentially never do a thing and so Rick might say "You know, if we use a little less powerful stuff, we could probably make it more of a fight and less of a "Who goes first with their mag-giganto thing".  So he sues for a game that tones down the craziness.  The result of the compromise is a Power limitation.  Not so constricting as points, because we already agreed to a points limit...but now we are agreeing to make the game a little lesss about who goes first and a little more about getting the mileage out of your models.

I really don't see, in any of what I just said, some overt attack on you...what kind of games you like nor a demand that you accept this format as anything other than a pleasant diversion from the norm.  Nothing.  Because it is just that:  another fun way to challenge yourself using less powerful things.

I don't see anything here thats "uncool".

 

 

 

Le sigh.

I understood your reasoning. And yes, it did matter. And yes, I still disagree. Please do not attempt to define my thought processes for me.
 

1.) Prohibiting an entire faction sets a bad example. If Imperial Knights are prohibited, why not Eldar? Tau?

2.) Leveraging 7th reasoning in 8th is not.... wise. 8th is a very different game, and we haven't fully tested the rules yet. And while you may have gotten your hands on the rules, it doesn't mean that everyone else has. Making event decisions based upon what you were able to glean off of Reddit before general circulation is not the best policy IMHO.  

3.) I never said you were attacking me. I asked questions and stated what I thought. "Cool" is subjective. In case you didn't notice, a lot of people in the world don't think toy soldiers are "cool". You were the one being aggro first. And I stand by my statement.

4.) Tournaments. I dislike them. A lot. However, they have a purpose in 40K. To best all of your opponents using all the tools in your tool box. That's it. They is no narrative. There is no lore. There isn't an overarching storyline to be shared with the world. There is a win/loss ratio and a leaderboard. And if that is how you are going to roll, then why remove a faction as a whole? It's like having the NBA finals and prohibiting centers over 6'7. "Well the NBA finals is just a friendly match." No. It is not. There is a trophy. There is a losers bracket.  If you want it to be friendly, then host open play, a mini-campaign, or a story based battle. But a tournament is none of these.

Thus, I will continue to respectfully disagree.

3 minutes ago, fluger said:

Yup, quick and dirty way to make up lists on the fly to get games in without sitting around adding things up carefully.

I know that I have friends who find list writing to be tedious and daunting, and, the power level system is much more streamlined.  

I know that it is very unlikely that I will be using points in lieu of power levels in the new edition. I disliked list building before, and having fixed unit values is delightful to me.

Just now, Lord Hanaur said:

No idesa why you think that way but I have explained it.  Not much more i can do.  =)

I know you explained your reasoning. However, I do not agree. Just because you have a reason behind your decision, it does not make your decision objectively correct. It just means you have made a decision.

You explained the reasons behind your decision.

I have listened to your reasons, and decided for myself that from my point of view, they are not good reasons, and therefore decided that I think you were incorrect in your decision making.

And so all that is left is that we respectfully disagree.

7 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

The rules HAVE been accessible, whether you personally have access or not i couldnt say.  I have been reading them every day the past four days.

I didn't say points, i said Power.  

As for your other commentary:  You know long before you get to OFCC that there are limitations (spoken or unspoken) and would of course have plenty of time to adjust.  So there's nothing "uncool" about it anymore than it was "uncool" of the ITC to make limitations on Super heavies in 7E or to nerf Invisibility.  No more than it was "uncool" for a list committee to reject certain lists at OFCC.

This subject came up because we were having a discussion about doing a 7th edition tournament wherein the units had to be 199 points or lower. Arbitrary number.  This was simply for the fun of the variety of trying it.  No ones "out to get you" when they set limitations like that.  Treating it like they are is the issue, not the limitation itself.  Go to the hypothetical tournament if you like the idea and don't go if you don't.  I have no issue with someone saying "I am literally incapable of playing an army without a unit that is X Power in it, and even if I could, i will cross my arms and skip all the fun I might have had"  I get it.  People like to make a point.  Doing so is a thing.

The line of demarkation is wherever the TO sets is.  I have no real sense of where it might be best.  13 seems likely after looking at different builds and factions and how their units are done.  But I have no immediate plans to run a tournament like this so it is fodder for discussion only.

 

Nope. Still uncool.

So I don't really understand the idea here LH. So your idea is to prohibit the use of models and units based on points value? So if I brought my Imperial Knight to play at your thing I would be turned away? That doesn't seem very cool. I mean people spend a lot of money to buy models; and then they work really hard getting them painted. So to just say "Nah. I don't like that army so it is prohibited" is not cool IMHO. I mean like it or not, they are part of the game. They are a valid faction. And people (myself included) have spent hundreds of dollars building said armies. I mean, I don't like FW stuff because it is usually broken as hell, but that doesn't mean I am going to tell people that they can't use those models.

Are you prohibiting Riptides, Wraithknights, Blood Thirsters, etc. as well?

How about Harlequins? They have a faction wide 4++. That completely nullifies the rend mechanic that is so integral to the game.

Where is the line of demarcation? especially for a rules set that hasn't been released yet.

19 hours ago, Lord Hanaur said:

Raiders got worse for sure.  They were far more mobile than they are now.  Big loss on that end.  More survivable is beyond dispute really, but as i did not RELY on their durability in my case (again...in my case) their functionality was served.  Now i will be forced to overpay for functionality that I (again *I*) did not really require while losing functionality I did need.  

 

So there's one perspective on it.  they are not objectively "better" because the function for which you took them may not have required added durability.

 So when I say the new Land Raider rules, I was pleased. So, what is it about how you use Land Raiders that makes them now worse using the new rules?

What army am I going with? I suppose I am going to keep working on my DIY Chapter of Space Marines. I have been working on their lore for a little bit, and slowly getting better at painting. I think I am at a point where I can just modify units with new kits and replace poorly painted models with better ones.

However, with the Primaris Marines coming out I am down. Part of my would like to do some kind of successor chapter for either Blood Angels or Dark Angels with them.

I haven't seen a lot of horde armies being used on the tables. It might be fun to throw people a curveball.

I plan on being there are 6 pm. I will be bringing my Kill Team, and some of the 8th edition rules books if people want to look them over.

Just now, Lyraeus said:

You shouldn't be able to buy any 8th edition products yet. Those go on official sale on the 17th. Until then, the books the stores have are just for people to look at and see how their faction changes. 

Oh. Well.... gosh. Okie dokie.

On an unrelated note, I will be bringing Imperial Index 1 & 2 to WoW on Tuesday.

3 hours ago, andy said:

I saw the books at Dice Age this afternoon. You've got to hand it to GW, they make absolutely beautiful game books. I might have to revisit my decision to go with the eBooks. 

So I picked up the Index book for my Space Marines today. But you mentioned that Dice Age had the books? Do you mean the BRB? They have it in stock?

I can see myself using these pretty often.

I like it.

Well, we don't know if the box set is going to be limited or not. The local GW guy did point out that the box set is NOT the new starter. According to GW it is the "ultimate 8th edition box set". The difference I can think of would be if they made it limited like the box set for Shadow War.