|
Wasn't it one book for black legion and one for some non-founding legion?
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 12:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 21:41 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:Didnt they ice Slaanesh? So one per book... Not in 40k. Yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
LordAba posted:So there are rumors going around about Chaos Marine updates for 40k! So far it looks like they are split apart into like 3 books. They can't even get that right. Not a viking posted:Wasn't it one book for black legion and one for some non-founding legion? They just updated the two codex supplements (Black Legion and Crimson Slaughter) that they put out a few years ago. They're not splitting Chaos into 3 books. The updates do nothing to address the core issues with the army, they just add new formations Looks like Chaos players get to wait another year for a new codex. In the meantime, they can keep forging the narrative "Chaos loses" TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Apr 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
pretty cool diorama, right? But let's see what happens, after dark... 
boom boom boom fucked around with this message at 14:00 on Apr 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 13:57
|
|
Leperflesh posted:That said it's also possible that Milton Bradley's game had rules written by GW, in which case, yeah, they were probably indecipherable. The MB GW games all had the rules written by a single guy Stephen Baker who worked for MB. He tried to keep the rules as tight and accessible as possible and included lots of gameplay examples after each rule so players could see them in play. When GW did some additional rules in White Dwarf for the games they were not written by Baker and were pretty uniformly terrible. The biggest example was probably the rules for using Orks in Space Crusade which couldn't even specify how many orks you had in your war band.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:pretty cool diorama, right? That's really cool and I would probably opt to do real lighting at that scale of diorama too. I find that adding LEDs to just models makes them look cheap and uninspired (like what many do with the larger X wing models) but I think with a diorama where the light can reflect off a bunch of surfaces, it's much better. Just do OSL for a single model. It looks really weird when it's an LED. Also boom cubed you may have been resurrected but RIP your AV
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
I adblocked the picture so it doesn't bug me too much
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
LEDs on a single model can be cool
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
It just looks hollow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Eh while that has more surfaces for light to play on, that would still look better with OSL IMO. Then again I really like OSL since you can see things when it's not dark. Also cuz I love blending reds on my skin tones. LEDs inside models also underline that they are plastic models and break the illusion since you can tell they're hollow. It cheapens the look. E: lol ^^^
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Eh while that has more surfaces for light to play on, that would still look better with OSL IMO. Then again I really like OSL since you can see things when it's not dark. Also cuz I love blending reds on my skin tones. Well the Unicorn actually does have lighting panels underneath it, so it's not especially jarring. But for stuff that's not a robot that's actually got lights on it yeah I see what you mean.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
I much prefer real LEDs, because to me OSL never looks like anything but paint pretending to be light, and on 3D models I can't get past it short of prize winning quality work ie with that gundam in the wreck picture, there's nobody in the world who could use OSL instead of those LEDs and have it not look stupid
NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Apr 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
I definitely agree that LEDs are at their best when they're casting light/shadows on other parts of the model/diorama, but i've never seen laserbeams or melting parts that look this good with just paint
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
B3 how often do the plamo folks do a full paint job of their models versus just assembling them and maybe doing some panel lining?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
grassy gnoll posted:B3 how often do the plamo folks do a full paint job of their models versus just assembling them and maybe doing some panel lining? Probably the vast, vast majority just do straight assemblies with maybe panel lining. I mean, when the final product looks like this, there's not a tremendous amount of motivation to invest in an airbrush or bother with seam-welding 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Oh hey there's a ton of Gundams out of no where. I guess Boom3 is back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
My friends and family just assemble them and do some pan lining. These are people from HK, japan, PI, and the US. They consider me odd for painting them but they understand since I need to do it to enter the competitions someday.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Anyone else got a peek at the Crimson Slaughter update? It's better than the Black Legion stuff, even if that's a laughably low bar to clear. I still have to chuckle at how lazy it is, though. Grab a formation of a Dark Apostle and cultists to make said cultists Ld 10....when a Helbrute formation can make them fearless AND offer better benefits for the 'brute, while not requiring an awful tax HQ. The big formation that requires 2500+ points out of the gate causes the enemy army to get -1 Ld, plus another -1 Ld/BS if close to two of your units. Not too bad, but at that point level, getting Tau from BS 6 to BS 5 within rapid-fire range won't do much, and while the Leadership penalty is not bad, the game is still lousy with ATSKNF, Fearless, Stubborn and such. I'd normally at least give GW a casual golf-clap for making the effort at a fix, however weakly, but....eh. Really hammers home how design is a long-term project and commitment. In a meta where all supplements/formations are roughly at the same power level, this would be quite acceptable: some bonuses for staying fluffy. But once you mess up and make one book too strong or too weak, you've wrecked the whole shebang for years. Especially if for some insane rationale you basically give up on FAQs and large-scale fixes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
why don't they just give the lovely armies really good formations? I mean, formations seem like a terrible idea to me, but if you're gonna do them, give the really good ones to the lovely armies. lovely army players will be happy that they finally have some good options, and it might tempt some good army players into buying lovely armies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:why don't they just give the lovely armies really good formations? I mean, formations seem like a terrible idea to me, but if you're gonna do them, give the really good ones to the lovely armies. lovely army players will be happy that they finally have some good options, and it might tempt some good army players into buying lovely armies. In many cases it seems as though the lovely armies are that way in the first place because they're supposed to be a cinematic opponent for the fascist supermen. Asking 'why don't they make the lovely armies better?' misses the point because what's happened to the lovely armies is, if not deliberate sabotage, then at least deliberate neglect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:why don't they just give the lovely armies really good formations? I mean, formations seem like a terrible idea to me, but if you're gonna do them, give the really good ones to the lovely armies. lovely army players will be happy that they finally have some good options, and it might tempt some good army players into buying lovely armies. Beyond it being a band-aid fix issue (Warmachine tier lists have this issue to an extent, where giving a crappy warcaster an OP tier list means you basically have one list option where your warcaster choice isn't a liability), you actually have to know your game well enough to know who would benefit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Formations aren't about balancing the game, it's just people saying 'whoa wouldn't it be rad if this group brought like, five titans and that made them even better!' Unsurprisingly, the factions that the designers jack off about get both the cool formations and the decent armies to begin with, so if you playing an army they don't like you are just hosed. Sorry!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Why do people kept posting anime in this thread? Same reason: They are dumb fucks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:Anyone else got a peek at the Crimson Slaughter update? Someone pointed out that you can't take daemon princes based on the rules. Which is odd. There really is no reason why they have to split each faction up into 100 different parts. Formations are a cancer on most systems. Why can't the 40k people do like the Warmachine players do and just ignore it (I have yet to see someone interested in the Apocalypse version of warha-hordes). LordAba fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Apr 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
LordAba posted:Someone pointed out that you can't take daemon princes based on the rules. Which is odd. Tbh I can see the appeal of formations with GW's whack-a-mole approach to balance. Like let's say you want to play an army of war bikes and killa kanz but sorry! GW nerfed them into the ground in the new book to sell more infantry! If you have a massive army from years of playing but 75% of it is hot garbage thanks to the pursuit of more money, it's easier to play formations than it is to buy into whatever poo poo GW is pushing in your current armybook
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
I was gonna let "pictures of Gundams" slide but four on one page is just too much. Have some Mexican thrash metal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQ1a7o254Vk
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:I was gonna let "pictures of Gundams" slide but four on one page is just too much. You have no idea, I saved so many cool pictures of Gundam models and dioramas over my probation. I'm gonna space it out better in the future, but there's some cool models coming in this thread's future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:Tbh I can see the appeal of formations with GW's whack-a-mole approach to balance. Like let's say you want to play an army of war bikes and killa kanz but sorry! GW nerfed them into the ground in the new book to sell more infantry! I don't get this. If GW makes killa kans bad, and you really like killa kans, how are formations of things that aren't killa kans helping you? If GW consistently swings balance like this what makes you think that the formations are going to be balanced at all?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
For those of us who have always had an interest in 40k but don't want to give GW money and aren't familiar with the rules, what exactly do formations do? How do they work different to regular squads/ models?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:For those of us who have always had an interest in 40k but don't want to give GW money and aren't familiar with the rules, what exactly do formations do? How do they work different to regular squads/ models? If you bring a particular set of units you get a bonus (e.g. a new special rule, better gear, free units). If your army is already good, chances are the formations you can field are really good. If your army is weak, the formations probably suck. It's ostensibly a way of getting people to buy more models but it's really more of a way of adding insult to injury.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
ilmucche posted:For those of us who have always had an interest in 40k but don't want to give GW money and aren't familiar with the rules, what exactly do formations do? How do they work different to regular squads/ models? You used to take a Force-Organisation chart, with an HQ and 2 Troops as a minimum, with allowed you to take Elites, Heavies and Fast units; now not only can you take as many force-orgs as you want in any size list (So Eldar spamming Dire Avengers can take more HQs than before), but Formations can be taken Instead (or as well as) the standard Force Org list. To begin with, standard lists got 'Objective Secured' which made them much better at capping objective points than other lists, but the bonuses you get with Formations are now so unbalanced, and some formations also now give Obj.Sec. that it doesn't matter any more. It used to be a method to get players to spend money on unpopular or rare units (Assault marines didn't get taken as there where better choices, and people didn't field 3 Knights in a mixed force before the formation that gave them Even Better Saves), as you needed to take them to get the whole formation and the bonus that came with it. Now it looks more like there bundling formations with every box set so you can play with Everything right away, with no care at all for force-organisation or balance Renfield fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Apr 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:You have no idea, I saved so many cool pictures of Gundam models and dioramas over my probation. I'm gonna space it out better in the future, but there's some cool models coming in this thread's future. Just throwing out ideas, why not post them in anime forums, or start a new thread specifically for anime-based models? They are neat, especially the dioramas. But they have absolutely nothing to do with Warhamms, table-top gaming, board gaming, traditional games, or (and this last part is especially specific to this thread,) GamesWorkshop and their possible demise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 00:51
|
|
Their flashing tongues, spitting out blood and poison.
|
I mean, they're nice models, which are tabletop games related. People post stuff like dioramas to the miniatures thread all the time. And the death thread is basically a chat thread with more shitposting at this stage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
malal posted:Just throwing out ideas, why not post them in anime forums, or start a new thread specifically for anime-based models? wow next you're gonna tell me not to post pictures of possums huh???!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
There's also the possum thing hey moola do you not have any cool skelebros you can post also? possums are good but they ahve too much meat on them
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Moola posted:wow next you're gonna tell me not to post pictures of possums huh???! we off-topic posters must maintain solidarity
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
spectralent posted:There's also the possum thing please dont ask me to post nudes in this thread ~namaste~
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:we off-topic posters must maintain solidarity I may not agree with your anime, but I will defend to the death your right to post it !!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
malal posted:Just throwing out ideas, why not post them in anime forums, or start a new thread specifically for anime-based models? Because he's an rear end in a top hat
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 21:41 |
|
|
Moola posted:wow next you're gonna tell me not to post pictures of possums huh???! Possums are a specific response to how insipid the AoS rules are, quite literally a form of reductio ad absurdum as a clear counter argument to the silliness of what we are all experiencing. Same as including hails to Saran in every post, adding sig- before every word, and changing every vowel to a Y to properly show how stupid the new naming practices are for GW. BoomBoomBoom just really likes gundam models, and shoehorns them in at every possible moment. Even the modeling threads make more sense as a platform. Hell, even the metal derail was a result of B3 posts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 01:15
|
|