Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Irisado

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12
News, Rumours and Trading / Re: 8th Edition Announced: It's FREE??
« on: April 29, 2017, 11:22:21 AM »
I'm confused about the situation regarding the rules.  It's my understanding that, like Age of Sigmar, the core rules are free, and it's only if, like Age of Sigmar, players want all the narrative elements or certain expansions, paid rules are going to be needed.  Has it been explicitly clarified anywhere?  I've only seen GW say that the rules will be free.

I think that the new edition is looking a lot better than the awful seventh edition which made me give up playing the game.  I like the streamlining and simplification, but I do have concerns about the weapon profiles and excessive dice rolling and random damage rolls.  Is it really going to be necessary to roll damage dice for every specialist weapon and heavy weapon to see how much damage it's going to do?  I hope not.  Also, random hits were disposed of years ago when they ditched the concept for the Eldar Scatter Laser.  I do not understand why they want to bring that concept back with Flamers.

News, Rumours and Trading / Re: Upcoming changes to 40k core rules
« on: March 25, 2017, 10:57:24 AM »
It's a mixed bag in my opinion.  Variable movement rates and armour save modifiers returning could be good, but it depends on how other rules are changed in relation to them.  Hopefully, the changes would be more like those made to Warhammer when it was converted into Age of Sigmar, as reverting to second edition save modifiers would be a very bad idea in my opinion.

I am not convinced by the proposed changes to the morale system and charges.  Depending on how certain other rules, notably movement, actually work in practice, they have the potential to mess the game up in my view.  I'm also not a fan of homogenising morale in 40K.  Some units really ought to be immune to its effects.

Indeed, this is the problem.  It was one thing to ask for greater mission diversity, but the extent to which army composition has been changed, the different types of army design out there, the addition of so many new unit types, and the increased complexity in the rules went way beyond what many people were asking for.  The other issue was the quick turnover between sixth and seventh edition, that was the final straw for me.

It is such a shame.  I really do love these Thousand Sons models, and if I were a good painter, I'd save up just to buy them for that reason.  I'm not though and my finances are so tight that I'll just have to hope that others buy them and post pictures of them in action in their battle reports on forums.

The new Thousand Sons (apart from those awful Tzaangors) look incredible.  I would love to make my long delayed Thousand Sons army, but it's still not going to happen.  I cannot afford to buy the models, and I still dislike the current 40K rules intensely.  I am still excited by the models though.

Comments, Suggestions and Troubleshooting / Re: Spoiler tags are broken
« on: October 04, 2016, 10:28:18 PM »

Indeed it would seem that they are.  I've never used them myself, but I know others do like them, so it would be useful if they could be restored.

General 40k and Expansions / Re: Kill Team (2016) Review
« on: September 19, 2016, 09:42:26 AM »
I've never played Kill Team, but I quite like the sound of this.  A simplified version of 40K without all the layers of different Force Organisation Charts, and a reduction in special rules and their impact sounds like my kind of game.

Also, reading some battle reports would be a very good way to showcase the latest version of the rules ;).

I was in a similar situation.  I wanted to try out some of the roleplaying games, especially Black Crusade, but there was nobody around here who was interested.  Still, at least I have the book, so I may get to put it to use at some stage in the future.


This is disappointing news in my opinion.  I rather liked some of their role-playing collaborations, and even though the standard of editing and proof reading of some of the books was a bit of a let down, the concepts and narrative were well executed.

If anyone wants to pick anything up, I'd recommend making it a priority before the year is out, as it doesn't seem as though they will retain any of the collaborative works in stock come 2017.

News, Rumours and Trading / Re: White Dwarf going back to Monthly
« on: August 31, 2016, 12:55:48 PM »
Who wants to bet that is what most people are gonna buy the Mag for now? :P

I'm not someone who bets.  That said, I agree with you.  It's not an original piece of marketing by GW, but it's an astute move to encourage people to buy the magazine, which is likely to pay off.

News, Rumours and Trading / Re: White Dwarf going back to Monthly
« on: August 30, 2016, 10:19:05 PM »
Thanks for the run down of the contents.  That definitely looks to be a significant improvement on the later issues of the old monthly magazine.  I am more tempted to buy it than I expected, but I'm so cash strapped that I will have to resist.  It is good to see GW trying to make the magazine more appealing again though.

As for free characters, I ended up with quite a few of those over the years, including some of those mentioned above.  That first metal Necron, in particular sticks in my memory, even though I never used it for anything.  Including a free model is definitely a welcome blast from the past.

News, Rumours and Trading / Re: White Dwarf going back to Monthly
« on: August 30, 2016, 07:28:24 PM »
That sounds more promising than I was expecting.  Which armies were featured in the battle report?

News, Rumours and Trading / Re: White Dwarf going back to Monthly
« on: August 27, 2016, 02:49:25 PM »
It's a good move on the face of it, I agree, but they also need to improve the content and writing style significantly to persuade me to buy it ever again.  Well written turn-by-turn battle reports in which both sides have a chance of winning would be a great start, as would fewer pages just saying 'buy this amazing new stuff'.

Comments, Suggestions and Troubleshooting / Re: Mobile Forum Browsing
« on: April 27, 2016, 08:59:27 PM »
I'm not knowledgeable enough to give you a definitive answer, but I do not believe that there is much you can do.  Sorck's the person to ask about this though.  He knows a lot more about the inner workings of SMF than I do :).

Comments, Suggestions and Troubleshooting / Re: Mobile Forum Browsing
« on: April 27, 2016, 04:44:46 PM »
Tapatalk does not play nicely with SMF, so that's not likely to be a great solution.  The next version of SMF will have a responsive default theme, so that ought to solve the problem.  In the meantime, there is a mod which can help for the current version:  You could try to persuade Sorck to install it ;).

The vintage model looks good enough, but the weapon doesn't look right in my opinion.  Why didn't they just opt for a conventional Boltgun?  It would have looked better from an aesthetic point of view.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 12