|
Unrelated: Devastation of Baal is real good so far and I'm pretty hype for BA Codex.
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
Yeah I just physically write any points updates in my books - I also go through every datasheet and write unit points values down. It helps for reference and for getting a real feel for how everything compares to each other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
Would anyone here happen to have extra Dark Lances or Blasters they'd be willing to sell? I've picked a few up off eBay and they're expensive as hell of you can even find those bits.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Unrelated: Devastation of Baal is real good so far and I'm pretty hype for BA Codex. I am pumped for BA. Just got my 2 sets of Primaris Marines from the DI set and a unit of aggressors. Looking forward to making my pure BA Primaris force.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Mef989 posted:Would anyone here happen to have extra Dark Lances or Blasters they'd be willing to sell? I've picked a few up off eBay and they're expensive as hell of you can even find those bits. I have a bits my wife is done with that I was packing to send to a reseller; what do they look like? I'll see how many I can gather. Also, do you want to buy more DE? 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
Proletariat Beowulf posted:I have a bits my wife is done with that I was packing to send to a reseller; what do they look like? I'll see how many I can gather. Should look something like these Dark Lance: http://imgur.com/bY2wuCy Blaster: http://imgur.com/RJrFCBZ I might be interested in picking up some more DE. What do you have? It doesn't look like you have PMs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
 Yes, this is meant to be a female Space Marine, I wanted them to be obviously female while fitting the rest of my army, which is entirely helmeted, the only part of Space Wolves I don't like is helmetlessness. As to the helmet proportions, the SoS models are ever so slightly taller than normal Marines, so given that any helmet worn is going to be bigger than a head, I think that part fits fairly well, but there's no working around it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
To clarify; I’m not heralding the fall of GW over a codex or anything, I just feel like I was taken for a fool with them FAQ’ing the book a week after release, then again a few weeks later. Does the iBooks version get a free update to reflect the new rules & points?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Yeast posted:Does the iBooks version get a free update to reflect the new rules & points? Historically, that has been the case
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Yeast posted:To clarify; Yeah it loving sucks for print owners.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
and digital since they only update the ios only fancy editions
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Raphus C posted:
I don’t think the portportions work to well, might of been better off simply going with normal Marine bodies and putting a few SoS heads on them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
Raphus C posted:
I think the beakie helms look pretty rad on there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
The shoulder pads definitely feel out of place. I'd probably just use female heads on regular SM bodies, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Games Workshop is really insisting on calling the Tau the T'au now aren't they I just saw the battleforce advertisement pop up on my Facebook feed and aaaaarrrghhh T'au
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Maximum copyright my dude.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Please don't tell me they're gonna rename Orks
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
They're already Orruks in age of sigmar so I would not be surprised.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
I think if they were going to rename Orks they would have done it with the 8th index like they did with T'''''a''u.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Fingers crossed for Ullanorians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:They're already Orruks in age of sigmar so I would not be surprised. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Huh, points drop on exorcists is welcome, and the drop on storm bolters would be really nice if the model wasn't such a pain in the rear end to acquire since they were already really good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
Giant Isopod posted:Huh, points drop on exorcists is welcome, and the drop on storm bolters would be really nice if the model wasn't such a pain in the rear end to acquire since they were already really good. The drop on storm bolters was in the FAQ's that hit right after the Indexes dropped. It was a mistake that they had 4 points listed there. And yeah, I have like 15 of the drat model. Storm bolters on SOB's are great, and will be even better if I can spend command points to shoot for free if a character dies
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 06:09
|
|
|
Mef989 posted:Should look something like these Should have plenty of Warriors with both. I also have Ravagers, Raiders, Reavers, and even some units whose names don't start with "R" at all. HMU at herpderpspamcatcher AT gmail DOT com.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 08:18
|
|
|
Floppychop posted:I think if they were going to rename Orks they would have done it with the 8th index like they did with T'''''a''u. Warhammer 40,000: 8th Time's the Ch'arm
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 08:28
|
|
|
Skails posted:W'arham'me'r 40,000: 8th T'ime's t'he Ch'arm
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 09:38
|
|
|
Black_Nexus posted:The drop on storm bolters was in the FAQ's that hit right after the Indexes dropped. It was a mistake that they had 4 points listed there. I ran 5 dominions with storm bolters in a immolator with a canoness with a storm bolter. Fun combo!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 10:43
|
|
|
Raphus C posted:
This is all kinds of trash.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 10:46
|
|
|
Broken Record Talk posted:Fingers crossed for Ullanorians. You mean Armageddonians 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
adamantium|wang posted:You mean Armageddonians Arma-gedd on outta here!
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
My new hobby is to make posts agreeing with recent GW decisions on Dakka. It's a bit like using a bug bomb, except instead of cockroaches you get lots of lovely people crawling out of the woodwork:quote:GW doesn't get credit for doing something so spectacularly incompetent that we'd arguably be better off if GW hadn't done CA at all. In a better-run company everyone involved in this debacle would have been fired and CA would have been pushed back until the book was ready. What we want is updates that are done well, not updates that are completely out of touch with the current meta. And until we get it there will be criticism. Praise for trying your best as you smear your all over the wall and make "art" ends when you're a small child. quote:Now, I don't think this is necessarily the correct answer. I think it's giving GW way too much credit for having a calculated plan when the "GW's rule authors are :bleep: ing idiots" theory has been proven true over and over and over again, and the more likely answer is that someone at GW lost a game to those particular units and, in the grand tradition of "casual at all costs" TFGs everywhere, concluded that their opponent was cheese and powergaming and their WAAC army needed to be nerfed quote:This is a company-wide problem, and anything short of firing everyone is just delaying the inevitable. It would be far better to fire everyone up front and admit that you're starting over than to keep pushing out broken rules until you finally acknowledge that the process isn't working and fire everyone. quote:>No one in their right mind would walk into a GW open day and tell a writer to their face that they deserve to be unemployed and their family made homeless because their favourite plastic model now costs 9 points instead of 7. quote:CA is just proof that the whole pre 8th speil was blatent lies none of this has been play tested by anyone they are just flailing hopelessly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
Also, WIP on my latest project - a Swarmlord conversion that looks suitably unique compared to my other Hive Tyrants. I think despite it's age, this sculpt still stands up pretty well and it's certainly a lot more dynamic than the current HT model. The arms are magnetised as I'm hoping to get a full set of larger bonesword arms from ebay, and use the smaller pointy ones on Flyrants.  
xtothez fucked around with this message at 14:28 on Nov 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
xtothez posted:Rad nids Those are drat neat! All the Tyranid players popping out of the woodwork with their cool paintjobs and conversions really makes me wanna start up my own force, but the same thing that stops me from playing a full guard army hit. So many models! I think I would go crazy painting them all, especially at the level of detail I see most people putting out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 14:27
|
|
|
Have the prices of the Xmas boxes been announced yet? Going to get the ork and gsc sets if I have any spare cash after gift shopping.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
xtothez posted:Also, WIP on my latest project - a Swarmlord conversion that looks suitably unique compared to my other Hive Tyrants. I think despite it's age, this sculpt still stands up pretty well and it's certainly a lot more dynamic than the current HT model. poo poo I didn't realise forge world had a sculpt for the xenomorph queen hive tyrant of old, thats gonna look great.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
xtothez posted:Also, WIP on my latest project - a Swarmlord conversion that looks suitably unique compared to my other Hive Tyrants. I think despite it's age, this sculpt still stands up pretty well and it's certainly a lot more dynamic than the current HT model. That’s a great model you don’t see much of any more. Very menacing and a great Swarmlord choice. Back when the 5th codex hit I tried to make a literal conversion of the image, which I think came out decently. Still need to do some more rescuing for it, the resin bits melted to the point where it’s legs were bent forward at a 45-degree angle. 
PierreTheMime fucked around with this message at 15:14 on Nov 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 15:08
|
|
|
xtothez posted:My new hobby is to make posts agreeing with recent GW decisions on Dakka. It's a bit like using a bug bomb, except instead of cockroaches you get lots of lovely people crawling out of the woodwork: This is good stuff. The salt on Dakka is unreal right now; after years of complaining that GW releases broken stuff and never fixes anything, they've now pivoted hard to the opposite angle because everything is changing too much and they can't cope. It's particularly fun because there's a strain of them who are adamant that literally everything in the game should have been perfect on release day, and remained perfect throughout the rapid release of codexes (itself a response to people complaining about the slow as balls release cycle which used to leave armies behind for years at a time). The loudest ones are, of course, the people whose posts regularly expose them as unsuitable to deliver a pizza, let alone a major project. My special favourite is the Finnish guy who thought that businesses using Microsoft stuff for enterprise-level IT would just switch to OpenOffice if they thought MS was too expensive, and therefore MS was a luxury product.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
I don’t think all those negative comments are spot on but honestly at this point the amount of changes that have been needed to fix 8th is quickly approaching what was needed to fix 7th. There was a level of detail that I really enjoyed about 7th and with its own chapter approved you could’ve largely accomplished the same thing they are doing here. It does feel like a lot of the claims were overblown especially in terms of game simplification, turns out Less rules can make things worse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Uroboros posted:I don’t think all those negative comments are spot on but honestly at this point the amount of changes that have been needed to fix 8th is quickly approaching what was needed to fix 7th. There was a level of detail that I really enjoyed about 7th and with its own chapter approved you could’ve largely accomplished the same thing they are doing here. It does feel like a lot of the claims were overblown especially in terms of game simplification, turns out Less rules can make things worse. I think that's fair. I don't know 7th well enough to discuss it, but I think to some extent fixing 7th vs. releasing 8th is much of a muchness - to make 7th significantly better they were going to have to make major structural changes, and once you get far enough with that then you've effectively released a new edition anyway. Plus they clearly had an active intention to introduce stratagems, the new FoCs, unified vehicle profiles, the new damage chart etc. - if you're at the point of bolting all that on to 7th, does it make any difference whether you call that 7.5 with a Chapter Approved book or call it 8th?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
gently caress that. 7th edition was trash and if I never play another game of it, it'll be too soon Strategems alone make 8th significantly better, but in particular, gently caress formations forever
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2017 15:50
|
|