|
Verr posted:two Morans (1 w/spitfire) Um, what? You sure the third Moran wasn't a Prowler? Morans have AVA2 in vanilla and no spitfire option.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 12:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
You're right, there were only two Morans, I was mixing them up with a Spitfire Wildcat. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Euuuugh the Avatar is a lotta points and SWC.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:Euuuugh the Avatar is a lotta points and SWC. No sympathy for Avatar-users. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Sir Teabag posted:It's too close to Christmas so I'm not allowed to pick up any models, otherwise I would probably get a box of Alguaciles with heavy weapons and hacking devices. Moran Masari look badass, but I don't know if I could pull off the tattoos yet. Plus the set of *cats that come with the weird robot-helipack doctor unit. Moran Masai are good, I like them but they're quite old models. Just remember they're more about positioning Koalas and scoring objectives (or acting as a repeater) and don't expect too much from them as strikers. In a pinch though, a model with mimetism on suppression fire can be a good obstacle on your opponent's flank. If you don't fancy the Tomcats box set (and buying 3 AD troops at once is a bit overkill, plus I don't like the drop-servant either) consider buying Carlota Kowalsky, or the Hellcat blister. But once you're allowed to buy new stuff, Alguaciles are the starting point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Wonderful - first ever ITS event on Thursday - and it's the same one laughing boy posting above is threatening to take an Avatar to (Like I even know what that is)... I've played 4 non-Icestorm games at present, and all at 200pts. Comp is 300.. Do I go sectorial and take 3 link-teams (Gulam, Odalisque and Hafza), with change for a couple of other guys (Never used a link team before), or just go balls-out and take the Haqq TAG that I've also never used before ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Damnit - first ever Quote is Not Edit
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:I like them but they're quite old models. Cornrows Alguacil + greenstuff + random koalas, bam, new-style combi Moran.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 09:48
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:Euuuugh the Avatar is a lotta points and SWC. The only problem with the Avatar is that you're spending 137 points and 3.5 SWC on something that isn't specialists; thing's a beast other than that it can't do objectives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Also part of the problem with 20x20 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 10:49
|
|
|
WAR FOOT posted:Also part of the problem with 20x20 Just use Sepsitor Plus to steal enemy specialists
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 11:07
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:The only problem with the Avatar is that you're spending 137 points and 3.5 SWC on something that isn't specialists; thing's a beast other than that it can't do objectives. E; Rem, take the Maggie bud, you seemed quite pumped to try it last week. Flipswitch fucked around with this message at 12:08 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 12:06
|
|
|
I feel very few TAGs are actually worthwhile, but the Avatar is one of them. It is an undeniably devastating platform that can be neutered if not used correctly. The others are just really expensive HMG platforms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 12:24
|
|
|
If I make another army I'm torn on Qapu Khalqi for an Odalisque link (because just one girl power army isn't enough) or Combined Army for the Avatar because it looks cool and has cool stats.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
Painting my Akalis and his arms broke off and one slid under the base board. I'm never going to get these things finished. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 15:54
|
|
|
I really should assemble this Marut I impulse bought 3 months ago.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
Oh for gently caress's sake... Because two people got into another imbecilic argument, CB is going to re-write their whole ARO declaration system. Or, more likely, write a sentence or two that causes a whole cascade of further questions on a problem that was already solved. Does CB even pay attention to their own rules? I'm starting to wonder if they actually know what they've published. N3 was supposed to be the end of having to ask your opponent before the game which of half a dozen rules interpretations you'd be playing under.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
lol if you think a rulebook is going to end nerds arguing. What was the dumb argument? I haven't been reading the forums for a bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
To be honest this game is so complex I'm not sure if anyone truly understands it completely
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:lol if you think a rulebook is going to end nerds arguing. Arguing about what the FAQ term "ZoC ARO" meant.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
Corbeau posted:Arguing about what the FAQ term "ZoC ARO" meant. What is even the ambiguity? Someone acting in your zone of control can be reacted to in a limited fashion even if they're out of the line of fire because the unit can hear them or whatever; I just started and I know this poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:What is even the ambiguity? Someone acting in your zone of control can be reacted to even if they're out of the line of fire because the unit can hear them or whatever; I just started and I know this poo poo This is what any reasonable person would think. The official forums are not reasonable. One guy insisted that they should be able to measure before declaring hacking AROs even if there's LoF. The worst part is that I know the guy. 
Corbeau fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Corbeau posted:Arguing about what the FAQ term "ZoC ARO" meant. AROs that require the target to be in ZOC of the AROing model, either at all or because the AROing model doesn't have LOF to the active one? Was there even any doubt? Pierzak fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Dec 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
In a way I see his point - hacking is entirely predicated on someone being in your ZoC. LoF is completely immaterial. So if your HI trooper comes blasting around a corner with his first short skill and he's really close to that magic 8" mark, you need to know whether he's close enough to hack, otherwise your ARO declaration is illegal. This is made doubly difficult by that throw-away line in the description of the hacking device whereby it allows you to know instantaneously if a model in your ZoC is hackable, which pretty much requires you to measure in order to determine whether you need to reveal that information or not. Hell, you could even argue that this applies to the active turn, which is crazy-talk but well within the rules as written. When you guys (successfully) argued that you measure ZoC for AROs before declaring them, this is the kind of poo poo you signed up for.  Had it gone the other way, you'd have had to guess and hope for the best, just like you do by AROing with a direct template weapon. It might have sucked in those occasional corner cases, but at least it would be consistent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
Ilor posted:When you guys (successfully) argued that you measure ZoC for AROs before declaring them, this is the kind of poo poo you signed up for. We've been through this repeatedly on the official forums. Suffice to say that it was definitely not consistent and opens up a whole bunch of new corner cases. Corner cases that I fully expect CB won't cover with their reversed ruling.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Nerds ruin thing; more news at 11.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
Corbeau posted:We've been through this repeatedly on the official forums. Suffice to say that it was definitely not consistent and opens up a whole bunch of new corner cases. Corner cases that I fully expect CB won't cover with their reversed ruling. What corner cases does it open up? I'm not experienced enough to really get a grasp on exactly how this ruling is so divisive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbU1GtKksBc
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Hipster Occultist posted:What corner cases does it open up? I'm not experienced enough to really get a grasp on exactly how this ruling is so divisive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
The new Tohaa unit got previewed today on Beasts of Wars channel, the "Kerail Perceptors with Symbiobeasts". Has there been any word on what the profile is going to look like? Is it just going to be an antipode type situation? Or will the three models make its own triad?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
Hipster Occultist posted:What corner cases does it open up? I'm not experienced enough to really get a grasp on exactly how this ruling is so divisive. The most obvious part is the thing about declaring illegal orders that later become legal. Which can be dealt with, and if CB had said that they just wanted to avoid any hint of pre-measuring then it would make sense. The strangest part is CB's rationale, though: they wanted to avoid confusion. Which they were one sentence away from doing, already, and now they have to write a whole bunch more because the CB post in that thread even referred to changing stuff that's been previously written. So it all-round just doesn't make any sense to me. Also, those dogs are super-buff.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 22:51
|
|
|
I never considered using an Avatar, but after making a list in mayanet I'm considering getting an Anathematic because its awesome looking and proxy it for an Avatar 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
What's the maximum number of points one should spend on reaction-only troops? That is, guys with sniper rifles, or HMGs etc. with Total Reaction or Neurocinetics whose job is to sit in a good spot and never move so they can pop off ARO shots at enemies? As Bakunin I can take up to three Sin-Eater Observants if I wanted to, but that would be about 100 points and a lot of my SWC. Edit: It's tempting though since that's fewer guys I have to care about spending orders on during my active turn
BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Dec 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
I think it depends on the terrain, the scenario, and your game plan. I usually see 2-4 strong ARO pieces per list though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
I've been weak on the defense. Any Ariadna players want to weigh in on what they think about our defensive units in Vanilla ITS?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
Flipswitch posted:I am the terror of my meta drat it I'm taking me an Avatar. Are you ? I've been here 6 weeks and yet to see you play at all !
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Renfield posted:Are you ? I've been here 6 weeks and yet to see you play at all ! Unknowable horror?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Renfield posted:Are you ? I've been here 6 weeks and yet to see you play at all ! joys of being the guy who organised stuff means I drop to make numbers even too, it's pure hitler. I blame Corbeau. I also didn't take an Avatar, I took a Charontid & Anathematic in the lists. One per. Anathematic Hacker seemed like he'd be quite annoying to deal with in Nimbus Zone. Flipswitch fucked around with this message at 12:37 on Dec 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
I just noticed that the male Moderators have knives in sheaths even though they don't have knives in their profile. WYSisn'tWYG >:( Is there a good way to paint exactly 180 degrees of the base edge? I've noticed a lot of people don't seem to bother but I feel like I'd rather have it showing so no one can argue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 11:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
Flipswitch posted:I think I mentioned this earlier in the thread but I did this to Ajax the other week with a Unidron, it was priceless. My god that must have been embarrassing for your opponent.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2015 18:21
|
|
