|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 30, 2019 1:09:51 GMT
Good luck getting players to drop hundreds of dollars on models that are going to rotate out of 'standard' in a few years? MTG often retains value, or can be resold for a similar value if you pick the right time to do it. WMH cannot. MTG is a HUGE community, and can offer tournaments with prizes that actually make it financially 'worth it' to play magic professionally. WMH does not. I know I darn well would think long and hard about buying new models if they were going to become non-viable in a few years. ESPECIALLY given the cost of buying into this game. GW does this all the time. It's called, "releasing a codex," or "releasing a new edition".
Sure, most of the time it's not overt, like, "these models are not longer here" (though, that happens with a lot of Characters), it's just, "we've sold enough, so let's make them absolutely garbage."
Notice that I am here, playing WMH, not playing GW games?
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Jun 29, 2019 22:37:27 GMT
Standard Formats are about rotating shit out. Stuff that gets long in the tooth, or that limits design. And of course there's always room for rotating stuff back in after a time. But that's the thing, it takes more than 6 months to establish a healthy Standard meta. Magic The Gathering rotates stuff every year, practically every block. Fantasy Flights LCGs are in a slower 2 year rotation, and they even have ever green "Core" elements that never rotate out. They have even implemented a rotation for X-Wing with 2.0 release. I think a 3 to 4 year rotation for a Miniatures game is a pretty good span of time. If I were in charge I would do something like this: Year 0: Publish Warmachine and Hordes Mk 4 with Prime units that never rotate out, things like Choir, Stones, Runebearers, etc. These are your faction defining models. Year 1: Release a classic style Anthology Book with new stuff for all factions. Year 2 - 4: Release more Anthology Books. Year 5: When the new Anthology Book release, stuff from Year 1 become Legacy and is droped from Standard. Maybe even consider droping a Mk5 here. Year 6: Same as 5 but for Year 2 models now. Good luck getting players to drop hundreds of dollars on models that are going to rotate out of 'standard' in a few years? MTG often retains value, or can be resold for a similar value if you pick the right time to do it. WMH cannot. MTG is a HUGE community, and can offer tournaments with prizes that actually make it financially 'worth it' to play magic professionally. WMH does not. I know I darn well would think long and hard about buying new models if they were going to become non-viable in a few years. ESPECIALLY given the cost of buying into this game.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on May 2, 2019 6:22:30 GMT
I'm not super interested in playing the game, but Chuck Dogwood and the Wolf with No Name have my attention as Warmachine models. Plus whatever other wacky stuff they come out with for Minions. So, how sure are we that Chuck was not an April's Fools joke? I'm a bit hesitant to hear that the Warmachine versions of RiotQuest models might get released into the wild without going through CID. The only one we've seen so far is JAIMS I suppose, she seems fine, though powerful. If they're all of that caliber, then I'm good with it, but some might slip through the cracks. Or, for all we know, they will finalize the RiotQuest rules first, then do one big CID for the Warmachine versions. Time will tell. JAIMS is generally acknowledged to be terrible, so there is that.... As for Chuck Dogwood, I have no idea. They've said on stream that he's a serious release, but that could certainly be an extended joke. Regardless, there's probably going to be some interesting models in there for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on May 2, 2019 6:09:08 GMT
Riot quest is garbage and I don't want it. Whatever, this is good, the dust needs to settle a bit IMO. Riot Quest is going to add a bunch of cool new models to all the factions, and it sounds like they're going to be impactful (though I'd prefer it if they went through a CID, especially since they apparently have time). I'm not super interested in playing the game, but Chuck Dogwood and the Wolf with No Name have my attention as Warmachine models. Plus whatever other wacky stuff they come out with for Minions.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Apr 21, 2019 22:15:19 GMT
Warriors of the Old Faith give All The Cav boost impact attacks. And can charges are also boosted. Its not overwhelming. And cav hit as hard as Iona-feated ravagers, except they need no buffs to do it. IMO the power of boosting to hit charges with hearts on ravagers is VASTLY overstated in meta discussions these days. Like Skarre1 and Kallus1 bith do this turn over turn with a spell. A theme benefit that approximates a cav benefit or spell is solid and reasonable. Cavalry are very expensive, though, and those casters were designed with that spell in mind. Also that benefit (line breaker) already existed on a variety of similar models, Long Riders with solo, trollblood and Khador battle engines. Only giving one corpse to half the models would be a nightmare for bookkeeping, but it would allow so much more counterplay as people focus on those. Cavalry are not significantly more expensive than ravagers (20 points for 5 models, 20 points for Ravagers + CA), and they are almost always significantly harder to remove (Vengers are 12/18, and go to 20 after being damaged), Ulhans are 18 with unyielding. They also have a longer threat range (Ravagers match it if you get vengeance, which is not at all the same, given the dynamics of vengeance positioning (the forward models die so that the rear models can advance, vs. static threat of 13+ for cavalry), and tend to hit harder into non-single wound infantry. They also get boosted attack rolls EVERY time they charge, whereas ravagers start with one boost, and if they use it, that's it. It's very common for you to run out of hearts if the enemy isn't running infantry to re-up from. Hearts are a fantastic piece of flexibility for Ravagers. It makes them very good at dealing with most target profiles...once. They're not broken, though.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Apr 20, 2019 8:52:54 GMT
Void and Thamar are hands-down the best, and possibly the only functional archons out of the original rules.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Apr 18, 2019 20:36:07 GMT
I think that the only archons that are actually worth their points are the Thamar and Void Archons.
The Thamar archon can reliably contribute to attrition from range, and has a fair bit of utility baked into the gun. He also synergizes very nicely with the few thamar models that exist (Fiona in particular loves him).
The Void Archon brings a respectable melee presence (like...close to the Menoth archon, honestly), a great boostable spray, and utility that Ret and Minions in particular really lack in entropic force and in a non-caster-specific universal damage buff.
By contrast, the others don't compete.
The primal archon is worth free, but 9 points for an okay combat solo with situational utility (and a very killable statline) isn't lighting the world on fire. As a free choice to dunk on clocks and LoTF, he's worth playing, but otherwise, I doubt I would pay 9 points for him.
The Dhunian archon is just a steaming pile of 'what even are these rules?' super-conditional soul tech, a super-conditional heal that your opponent has to trigger, and no combat stats. The only worthwhile part of the model is martyrdom, but even that is cornercase, given the 1/turn limitation. Certainly not worth 7 points of out-of-theme models and the minion slot.
The Morrowan Archon might be worthwhile just for the veteran leader, but it seems fairly low-impact otherwise.
The Menoth archon is a mediocre combat solo at a top of the line price point. IMO it's being held back by the fact that Harbinger exists (and fair enough) but outside of her, I don't see it as a compelling model.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Apr 5, 2019 3:45:00 GMT
*sorry this one got a bit ranty but people suggesting FF on the pot drives me nuts* To me the pot going friendly faction is the absolute worst solution of any I've heard so far. Making that change would constitute the most egregious bait and switch on a relatively expensive model that I've ever seen from PP. How many of us already own one or more witch doc crocs that became useless in the transition to MKIII while Ruhpert continued to strut his stuff on the WM side of things? Hordes needs minion options that actually function within our armies in a reasonable manner which is comparable to the utility that merc options bring to WM armies. Ragman, Sylys, Corbeau, Reinholdt, Ruhpert, A&H with various ranking officers, Anastasia, Gorman, Taryn and Orin all offer great non faction utility support in mercs (combat oriented solos are another matter). On the hordes side we get saddled with the likes of Targ, witch doc, Kwaak, for our "support" minions. Very few are actually usable for their support purpose with notable exceptions like Lanyssa (also in WM), Hutchuk (also in WM but a more expensive version of Gorman), the chef and mist speakers. The croc pot is a shining example of how that support can be done right for hordes using minions. Going friendly faction on the pot would be hitting the wrong model for the wrong reasons and slapping every non-minion player that bought one in the face. Focus the changes on the feast and other tharn models as required but leave the pot out of it. Ayup. It's infuriating to see people continuously suggest nerfing the pot. IF LoTF needs a nerf, make his sword 1" reach. But I don't see him as any more egregious than Sev0, the Derp Guardian, or the Derp Turtle, and I'll not be thrilled if we see a bunch of circle nerfs without bringing down those models too.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Apr 4, 2019 0:25:49 GMT
Again I'm not saying he's not good, he's great but you need models that are above the curve for there to be one and all this talk of nerfing him to me seems unnecessary I think the issue is that there's such a low level of available counterplay to it compared to other problem models. Even with the hellmouth, I can come up with a substantially longer list of answers to the following questions than LotF:
- Can I pit it against something it can't easily damage/kill?
high armor beasts/multiwound infantry are not something that the LoTF excels at damage, particularly if it's not being buffed by Baldur1 or Grayle. If we're considering Caster buffs, a Hellmouth under Anamag kills has no bad targets.
- Is the best defense a good offense (can I kill it first)?
Kill a 10 box impervious flesh model, probably with a BB armor buff, vs. kill an 8 box arm 19 model. One of these things is harder to kill than the other.
- Can I jam it? - Can I avoid/work around it?
You cannot meaningfully avoid a hellmouth parked on a scenario element. You CAN work around a LOTF by spacing models to avoid giving ideal threshers, it just takes a lot of time/effort.
- Can I counter it with special rules?
You can counter the LoTF with stealth, with shield guards, with - range spells, with rules that limit it's activation (stranglehold, blind, stationary etc).
I'd also contend that it's not quite right to simply add the points of support on to the LotF when expressing it's expected output by points cost. Those pieces aren't expended like LotF is (more or less) when it goes in, and will do more work over a game.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 12, 2019 7:51:00 GMT
because I already bought one Well, and I don't want two identical wells? Because it aesthetically fits better with a Tharn list? Because I'm not made of money, and a herdstone is $30 in Canada, vs. a Well being $80? Lots of reasons. Inidividuals like yourself might mean I have to magnetize the herdstone to 'prove' it's actually got PP parts inside, but anyone who disallows that substitution is, IMO, being really damn shitty, given that it conforms to the letter of the conversion rules. I wouldn't want to attend any event where the TO is that stringent about that conversions. The Elitism about conversions and (reasonable) proxies is one of my least favorite things about this community. I find it particularly astounding that, in a game so focused on RAW, people seem to be highly insistent on applying RAI to exclude conversions. yup. i kind of think that same ideology has had a detrimental effect on the hobby and artistic side of the game. Some of the most beautiful armies i have seen in 40k or AoS were heavily, HEAVILY converted. Taken to the extreme, I am reminded of the guy who had the absolutely drop-dead gorgeous Cygnar army fully painted, but he put the models on clear bases instead of normal bases. They weren't round lipped bases, which it specifies in the rules, so he was told his army wasn't tournament legal. I am fairly certain I saw that army up for sale, though that may just be me. I mean, there's definitely a limit. If your opponent has to be told multiple times what a proxy is, or if it's actively confusing, or if it actually interferes with gameplay...sure. That's fair to ban it. But most of the shitty attitudes I've seen have been directed towards conversions that would not rise to that criteria.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 12, 2019 4:59:33 GMT
There is no such rule. The rules are: - 50% PP parts by volume (check, stone is hollow and has sufficient internal space that filling it with random PP bits brings you over 50%) - iconic elements of model represented (There aren't really any iconic elements of a Well of Orboros, and the weapon is not represented on the model itself) - no trademark infringement (meaning no use of copyrighted logos, symbols, text, etc. - Mounted on an appropriately sized base (check, the stone fits easily on a 120 mm) - Easily identifiable (check, there are no other structures in Circle which it could possibly be). Hmm. Better crack open your model and prove those are PP parts rattling around inside. You should keep a full list of the part stock numbers from the PP web store just so your TO can verify during the event... on your clock, of course. Also, I don’t see any waterfalls on that herdstone, and the waterfall is clearly the most iconic element. I could see somebody confusing it for the Celestial Fulcrum. Sorry, that model is DQ’d. But seriously: why are you jumping through hoops to avoid paying an extra $20 for an awesome model? Geez. because I already bought one Well, and I don't want two identical wells? Because it aesthetically fits better with a Tharn list? Because I'm not made of money, and a herdstone is $30 in Canada, vs. a Well being $80? Lots of reasons. Inidividuals like yourself might mean I have to magnetize the herdstone to 'prove' it's actually got PP parts inside, but anyone who disallows that substitution is, IMO, being really damn shitty, given that it conforms to the letter of the conversion rules. I wouldn't want to attend any event where the TO is that stringent about that conversions. The Elitism about conversions and (reasonable) proxies is one of my least favorite things about this community. I find it particularly astounding that, in a game so focused on RAW, people seem to be highly insistent on applying RAI to exclude conversions.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 11, 2019 17:07:05 GMT
Why not both? Personally I ordered A Well, and i plan to use a Herdstone for a second 'Tharn' Well. Given that PP still uses the very silly "50% PP Parts by volume", I should even be able to make it tournament legal with very little effort. This would not be tournament legal because you are using parts from another manufacturer that also produces tabletop miniatures (this clause is in there to prevent Gw bitz entirely). And I think even Gw terrain is not an exception. There is no such rule. The rules are: - 50% PP parts by volume (check, stone is hollow and has sufficient internal space that filling it with random PP bits brings you over 50%) - iconic elements of model represented (There aren't really any iconic elements of a Well of Orboros, and the weapon is not represented on the model itself) - no trademark infringement (meaning no use of copyrighted logos, symbols, text, etc. - Mounted on an appropriately sized base (check, the stone fits easily on a 120 mm) - Easily identifiable (check, there are no other structures in Circle which it could possibly be).
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 11, 2019 7:56:34 GMT
Why not both? Personally I ordered A Well, and i plan to use a Herdstone for a second 'Tharn' Well. Given that PP still uses the very silly "50% PP Parts by volume", I should even be able to make it tournament legal with very little effort. PP stuff is solid while GW stuff is usually hollow. Add 2 Tharn models amd call it a day? Or fill the inside of the rock with chopped up warpwolf bits.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 10, 2019 7:30:54 GMT
And the very nice looking GW Herdstone costs 30$ RRP... I wonder which one will be used more often to represent this tribal structure of savage forest people... i was just thinking this exact same thing. Cause half of the price, (a little under cause you can find them at discount vs BAHI you cannot) for a better looking model seems like an attractive option for a lot of EU players. Why not both? Personally I ordered A Well, and i plan to use a Herdstone for a second 'Tharn' Well. Given that PP still uses the very silly "50% PP Parts by volume", I should even be able to make it tournament legal with very little effort.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2019 19:39:59 GMT
Ravagers and LoTF are slightly overtuned, and I can see them being toned down slightly. The screaming about Circle is Firetrucking hilarious, though, given that Skorne is currently significantly stronger as a faction (and has more broken shit) than Circle does.
LVO? sure, there were 4 Circle players in the final...but there were 6 Skorne players. The winner of the event? Skorne player.
Most of what needs to happen to answer Circle (as usual, and as was the case with Anamag, Kolgrimma, etc before them) is a meta adjustment.
|
|