Jump to content

Tamwulf

Warlords
  • Content Count

    293
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Tamwulf last won the day on November 30 2016

Tamwulf had the most liked content!

About Tamwulf

  • Rank
    Extremist
  • Birthday 11/18/1971

Recent Profile Visitors

494 profile views
  1. Found this on Facebook. I'm sure it'll help! The models are color coded on the srpues to help in assembly.
  2. The problem is Android SDK is in Java, and Apple can use Java, but it's mainly developed in Swift (which is Java-like, but handles things very differently). They can both use Objective C, and they use the same Data Bases, but the way it processes those DB's are very different. The operating systems in Android and iOS are VERY different in how they handle code. You can't just "port over" Android code into XCode and then let the interpreter compile into Swift and... it just doesn't work that way. They basically have to make two Apps or it will be nothing but bugs, problems, and DB errors all the time. An example would be something like 2 + 3 x 4 = X. In Android, that might be X = 20. But in iOS, that could be X = 14. But you notice they used the same numbers (the Data Base) and the same operations (the programming code). It was how the Operating system interpreted the numbers and operations that mattered.
  3. Yeah, I'm not sure HOW they are going to get this app on iPhone. Apple are tyrants about apps, requiring full access to the app for a very lengthy and technical approval process. Then, every time the app requires an update, it has to go through the entire process again. I have a feeling the hang up is GW trying to negotiate the fees. See, if an app is "free", then the creator is charged a one time fee to apply to have the App put on the store. If the app has micro-transactions or a monthly fee, Apple gets a percentage of that fee- and it's a hefty 15%-30% depending on the type and amount. The reason I know all this was due to the CS 483 Mobile Application Development class I took last year where we made apps for both Android and Apple, and we went through the entire process to get an App at the Android, Google, and Apple store.
  4. I was all hyped about taking the Banner of Macragge Inviolate on the new Bladeguard Ancient for my Ultramarines until I read that the Relic is for Ancients only. The Bladeguard Ancient's +1 to hit for Bladeguard Units is NOT tied to his standard. With the UM banner, they would have been +1 attack, +1 to hit, autopass morale. But he has the keyword "Bladeguard Ancient" which is annoying. I'm thinking I'll probably just use the Primaris Ancient with UM Banner, Victrix Honor Guard, and the Bladeguard Captain as a nice little CC unit. In an Impulsor I think. Yeah, looking like I'll be making some big changes to my UM. Exciting times!
  5. I'm interested, and thinking Imperial Fists. Time for a new Space Marine army!
  6. Just keep it simple. Either go with all PL, or points, but not both. Isn't the original Crusade Rules built around Power Level? And allowing a "pool" of models for players to create a list from just rewards the players that already have an army as they'll just pick the best units right off the bat. Allowing players, especially new players, a Power Level army makes army creation much, much easier, and allows limited customization for a unit from game to game. It's always a nightmare trying to "validate" an army list. The player used an out of date publication, they didn't check the FAQ/Errata, they used BattleScribe or some other software... It is so much easier to say "This is my squad, it has these guns and these grenades, PL 5" instead of "OK, five base models, 10 points each, where are the points for the guns? Here they are, 3 each, and 10 for that special gun. The Leader has a close combat weapon, that costs 5, but he loses the gun, so subtract 3, and the grenades 1 for that type of grenade, 0 for that type, and the unit has that one unit option that costs an extra 15 points. So 74 points." Another player looks at the list and says "Oh, hey! The Errata says these models are 11 point each, that special weapon is 15 points, and that unit option went down to 8." The Crusade has it's own detachment, right? Make everyone use that detachment? Or how about limit the number of detachments to 1 detachment per 50 PL? Four months is a long time for a league, especially a new format type and a new edition of the game. Things will be very dynamic and fluid the first couple months as people will want to try out new things and new army lists each game. Within four months, we'll probably have at least two new codexes released. Two months would probably be better. Even at one game a week, that's 8-9 games. Reward hobby/painting. Sure, you can play the Grey Plastic Tide, but fully painted? Here ya go. Stagger it though. The first couple weeks, no bonuses for fully painted (give people time to paint armies). Mark the unpainted units/models at the start, and as they get painted, reward the player with League points. Make an incentive for players to start a new army or try new units/models. If you already have a fully painted army, that's OK. Starting week 3, you'll get points for being fully painted, while the player that is making a new army won't be fully painted, but will score an equal amount of points for painting an unpainted unit. Don't want to paint anymore models? OK, donate a piece of terrain that WORKS FOR THE GAME. Talking a 6" long ruined wall, or smaller ruined building on a 6"x6" base. Ordo has a ton of terrain, but most of it needs a lot of TLC, or is just plain impractical for 50% of the games played at the clubhouse. I love to play, but the thing that ALWAYS turns me off in Leagues like this is week two or three, you play that guy with three pages of special rules that built his army around a loop hole in the league, and suddenly I'm facing an army that curb stomps, with a billion command points, strategems from books I don't have (and they don't either, but they read about it online, so must be true, right?), and they just walk all over me. If it's a fun league league, then I want to have fun playing, not face some WAC list and player who has zero empathy for how I'm feeling during the game with the curb stomp, kill everything list. God damn, it would be nice just ONE TIME to face an army that isn't maxed out on elites or heavy support, or every unit can cause d6 mortal wounds, or everything has a 3+/4++/5+ reroll everything. I hate the mindset of "Oh, you should have been ready for this Imperial Knight I brought at 500 points." If it's a friendly League, then I should NEVER have to face two Greater Plauge Deamons and Mortarion. That kinda crap should be "Hey! I'm thinking of taking Morty's and his two friends, want to make a list to play against it?" I guarantee you someone is going to try and do something like that right off the bat at PL 50, like bring an Imperial Night and enough chaff to fill out 50 PL and curb stomp everyone else that didn't do the same thing. That is not "fun" unless everyone agrees to it, or can tailor a list for it. One of the things that I love about Warmachine and Hordes- you create two lists, and after you see the scenario and both players have looked at both lists, you decide on which list to play. That was a fantastic way of getting around a lot of "Power Lists", and later, more rules were added to list creation such as named characters can't be in both lists, or you must play both lists during this tournament. I always thought that was a fantastic way to play the game, and often wondered why GW never adopted it. Or the idea of reserves- units you can swap out after the scenario is generated and right before armies are selected. Upto 20% of your force can be changed in this way. At PL 50, 10 PL worth of models/units could be swapped out for reserve units. This kind of stuff complicates things, but really helps vs. that Blood Thirster or Imperial Knight at 50 PL in one game, but in another game of a wave of Ork Hordes, you swap out for units with blast weapons or more close combat. week 1: 50 PL, no painting Week 2: 50 PL, no painting, reserves (10 PL), but you have to purchase them with League Points, so you really have a PL 60 army but playing PL 50 Week 3: 50 PL, painting scores, 10 PL reserves Week 4: PL 70, painting, now 15 PL reserves (rounded up from 14) Week 5: PL 80, painting, 15 PL reserves Week 6: PL 90, etc. etc. you get the picture. PL 100 in 9th is going to be like a 1500 point game of 8th, give or take. The new points/PL will change the amount of models on the table (fewer models). I wouldn't go much further then PL 100 at the beginning of the edition, as no one knows what the tournament scene or "standard army size" is going to look like. It's a lot easier to build up to a standard that will shake out after 6 months, then it is to make a PL 150 army, but never play that size of a game. How many players have 4,000 points worth of armies but never play beyond 1,850? Units in the bag that never see the light of day or sitting on the back of the shelf gathering dust? Also, new edition, means new codexes means some units will fall out of favor while others will suddenly be "must take". Wall of text, sorry. Thanks for stepping up to run a Crusade League! I look forward to getting involved/playing again! Especially at the beginning of a new edition where everyone is experimenting and trying new things and not "net decking"- downloading a list from online or some tournament.
  7. Small sized games >1000 points have never suffered from rules problems, but from army selection issues. The idea that you can bring a battalion of a bare bones Space Marine Captain, a LT, and then three squads of MSU Intersessors, and I can bring a Superheavy detachment of, oh, why not a Imperial Knight and then 100 points of Guardsman in a Patrol detachment to maximize CP and play a game... I wonder who will win? It looks like 9th edition limits games by Power Level, and not so much points level. Maybe the days of a 1,850 point tournaments are over, and instead we'll see PL 100 instead. It would certainly make army creation so, so much easier, and the TO's job easier in verifying army lists.
  8. A squad of characters? No way! LOL That would be like, the most broken thing ever. About Reivers- hot garbage, and unless they receive some kind of massive rework... what's the point? Their deployment options kinda suck, and require at the best 6" within a table edge and 9" away from enemy models. The Bolt Carbine and Heavy Bolt Pistol are nice, but the unit gets the most out of being a close combat unit, forcing you to swap out that Bolt Carbine for a combat knife that gives you one extra attack at no AP. Shock grenades are... well, with the changes to overwatch, it's a bit of a nerf. The -1 to hit in close combat would be nice, but the thing that kills it... 6" range and d3 attacks. The Grapnel launcher? If vertical movement was an actual thing that mattered more in the game, then yeah, might be worth it. It also sounds like terrain rules are changing such that vertical distance isn't as much of a factor anymore. Otherwise, you are paying points for a different deployment method when in the new edition, you'll be able to use CP to do the same thing. The Terror Troops ability means even less then it did before. Even after every armies abilities to ignore LD tests, or retake failed one, or whatever, and with the auto 1 pass, -1 LD... OK. What happens if you fail? Roll a d6 for each model and on a 1, they are removed as a casualty. It's a non-factor. Last, and certainly not least, Reivers are in the elites section. Do you know what else is in the elites section? Apothecaries, Ancients, Company Champions, Company Veterans, all the Terminators, the Dreadnoughts, Invictus Warsuit, Vanguard Veterans, Sternguard, Aggressor squad, and Centurion Assault Squad. All better options in every Space Marine army over Reivers. The Reivers will need a significant rework to make them desirable or worth taking. Possible things to do: Give them deployment shenanigans for free. Give them some kind of bonus for being in cover. Make them into a melee assassination unit, like all the combat knives are poisoned and wound infantry on a 2+, maybe give them a bonus vs. Characters (+1 to hit?). Or make the Bolt Carbine assault 2, and allow the Reivers to charge the turn they advance. Those would make the Reivers worth taking. Otherwise... what's the point?
  9. Not gonna comment too much on the new rules, because GW is only showing us a small sliver of the overall picture. They are generating hype and all that for a new edition. What I will comment on from what I have read: Points values for everything going up 15%+ means smaller armies. If it's 15% across the board, that means a 2,000 point game in the new edition will feel like a 1700 point game in 8th. I'd expect points values to go up a lot more for some units then others. Pure speculation on my part, but I bet a 2,000 point game in 9th will actually feel like a 1,500 point game in 8th. The push by GW for a weird, smaller table sizes is a bad thing, though GW has since backed off and said those are "minimum table sizes". More a marketing gimmick then anything else because the terrain tiles and mats that GW makes have been too small/odd sizes for the years. To suddenly expect players/TO's/Tournaments to "resize" their tables... yeah, that ain't gonna happen. More pure speculation, armies will be smaller, MSU will be back with a vengeance due to increased points costs and new leadership rules, and we'll see more single detachment armies so they can have CP, or armies with multiple detachments but a lot less CP. If anything, I think every player is going to feel CP starved. Forget the simplicity of 8th edition. 9th is going to have a lot more rules, and they are going to be more complicated. Good or bad? /shrug won't know until we see ALL the rules. Just some thoughts so far. I am looking forward to the new edition!
  10. This is fantastic!
  11. What do I think it will bring to the game? A lot of changes. Probably 90% of all the ITC rules will be in it, especially since Mike Brandt is now on the GW team and was a play tester for 8th edition (and presumably, 9th as well). Don't care too much about anything else because Intersessors get chainswords! That is AWESOME! Exactly what the Primaris needed. I will field an entire army of Lt's if they can all take volkite pistols, Storm Shields, and Power Swords. Oh my Emperor YES!
  12. I can't believe the digital version of White Dwarf costs $9.99 vs. $9.00 for a physical copy. WTF. That makes no sense at all. Everything posted so far about the Harlequin rules is very exciting! This is a proper update for an army. Now, if they could just do this for the Ynnari...
  13. I'm not sure what detachments you are trying to make. Detachment #1 is a Patrol Detachment, but gives 0 CP. Detachment #2 is a Battalion Detachment, Which will give you +5 CP. Being Battle Forged, you'll get another +3 CP for a total of +8 CP. I'd say try and make Detachment #1 into another Battalion, so you will have a total of +13 CP. Yes, you will need that many CP. There are too many great Strategems for Ultramarines not to have as many CP as you can get. A few thoughts on your army: Space Marines are all about tactical flexibility and synergy. Ultramarines have a army wide +1 LD, and the ability to fall back from close combat and still shoot (at -1 BS). There are Combat Doctrines now- Devastator (improve heavy and grenade AP by 1), Tactical (Rapid Fire and assault AP by 1) and Assault (Pistol and melee AP by 1). Turn 1 Devastator. T2 Tactical, and T3 is Assault (recently FAQ'ed). The Ultramarines have a start that allows them to stay in Tactical for one extra turn. You might want to play into that changing doctrine every turn by taking units that will excel in those turns. Eighth Edition is all about specialization. I could go on for a long time about playing Ultramarines, especially Primaris Marines (my current army). Basically, your army is NOT durable. a 3+, 4 toughness and 1 wound is not very good considering the large amount of basic weapons in the game with strength 4 AP-1. There are a TON of weapons in the game now that are -2 AP or better. Missile Launchers are WAY overpriced due to their "flexibility". They don't do enough vs. horde armies or big stuff. Specialization is much more efficient. The Bolt Rifle is RF1, and you get x2 shots if you stand still, or are within 15" of the enemy. A five man squad of Intersessors with Bolt Rifles can put out a lot of firepower. A couple squads of them can deal with hordes of just about anything. You want Melta or Lascannons for the big stuff. Space Marine Scouts have a fantastic ability to target characters with Sniper Rifles, and those Sniper Rifles are one of the few units that can deal mortal wounds. Scouts without Sniper Rifles but with Cloaks are a bit... well, cover has changed a lot, and unless the Scouts stay in cover, the cloaks will give them no benefit. The Rhino's aren't bad. They give you some maneuverability to scoot over and take objectives, or give you mobile line of sight blocking terrain. The Talon... I used to play with one, but man, it's far too easy to kill, even with the -1 to hit it. It's too expensive for any role you give it. BUT there was one or two games when my opponent brought something that could fly, and it was worth it's points. Otherwise... meh. If you like it for the cool factor, then heck yeah! Keep it! As you said, not very flexible, and doesn't really play into any of the strengths of the Ultramarines. Play against it? Sure! Why not?
  14. How about 4pm? Sorry took me so long to respond!
  15. I'm not in the League, but I can play a couple games if you want. 750 this week, right? On Sunday?
×
×
  • Create New...