I know it's been a good 5 months since I've posted last on this blog but life has been a bit hectic for me and I haven't found the time or the focus to post at all. The few posts I came up with were used for the Eternal Warriors front page and I refuse to simply cut&paste blog posts from one to the other.
A couple weeks ago I went to Adepticon and had an amazing time. Not only was it fun seeing all of the other podcasters, fans of the show, and playing tons of 40k and hordes games, but it was awesome seeing all of the cool armies and models people have done.
Seeing the cool armies that other people have done have made me decide on my own hobby project. While I do enjoy the 40k fluff, I really want to aim at trying something unique, hence why I chose what I did.
I know it's not quite 40k fluff or canon, but I aim to have the entire army be built with as many citadel minatures bits as I can and intend to use it at the 40k championship next year at Adepticon. While I'd like to try and compete with it as best as I can, the point would be a hobby project completely.
It is a drop pod army based on this. I want to build lunar landers as close to this as possible, but using as many citadel bits as possible. The first part of the plan is to order one of these kits from revell miniatures to get all of the pieces, to see what parts I can easily swap for for citadel miniature bits. Figuring out how to build the first one will be the toughest part.
I figure that this project will help me post more regularly as well as the blog helping to keep me motivated on the project. From time to time, I'll post other random thoughts but it will still be mostly dedicated towards the hobby.
Sorry I have been away from the blog for more than two weeks. I hit a period where I was running out of ideas that I wasn't using for The Eternal Warriors main page, where I contribute once a week on Tuesdays. I didn't want to just cut/paste entries from there to here or vice versa. I do have quite a few more ideas ready to go so I'll be posting much more regularly over the next several weeks at least.
A few weeks ago I finally had my Ogryn conversions completed via commission from my buddy John (aka The Baron). I like how they turned out, though it will still be up to me to flock and base the models properly (which I wanted to do myself to match the rest of my IG army.) I used Warhammer Fantasy Ogre Bulls as they're much less expensive than Ogryn and in plastic. I can get a box of 6 Ogres for $40 retail, instead of the $25 for a single Ogryn blister pack. Kept them mostly the same as the fantasy versions, although the bandoleers were made from greenstuff and small pieces of plasticard, and then used Ork shootas as the Ripper Guns. Also conversions were done to represent the Bone'Eads (metal plate on the forehead).
I have now three squads of 6 Ogryn (which is the limit of Ogryn that I can fit into a chimera transport.)
Squad #1 - Yes, the Bone'Ead is comin at you with a Bear Trap!
Squad #2
Squad # 3
Yeah there is a guy who is a different shade than the rest in Squad #3. He was done as part of a test, to see which color I preferred. Once the others had been painted the regular color, I couldn't stand to have the last guy repainted, so I kept him the way he is. His clothing is consistent with the rest of the army, just the flesh color is different.
Last weekend, I played in a tournament with an IG list that utilized all 18 Ogryn. I did better than I expected, finishing 4th out of 10 players. Later this week I hope to have a detailed battle report posted. Also I received an order I had made from The Broken Forge. I received three Ravagers and a box of new wyches for my Dark Eldar.
Very pretty models - Almost makes you forget about the Storm Raven.
While most of my army still consists of the older models, I didn't have any ravagers, so I ordered three boxes to keep me covered. I have also been using the new wyche models as Hecatrix bloodbrides. I'll definitely be providing more updates on my hobby progress with them as I get them assembled and painted.
There will be more posts coming over the next several days.
After a decade of stagnation, the fresh new Dark Eldar codex was officially released today. While other people have been already trying to dissect this book, I'll give my early impressions of reading through the entire thing after purchasing it today.
First, I really do like the cover art. It gives the early impression of the shadowy nature of the army, and gives the impression that they're very different from the other races. While most of the other codexes (especially imperium codicies) use bright colors and showcase heroic acts, this shows a night time raid of them slaughtering some helpless imperial guardsmen. It gives the image of the Necromongers from the 'Chronicles of Riddick.'
In the early sections, it gives a good telling of the dark eldar fluff, how they're different from their Craftworld cousins (Dark Eldar are not psykers, nor do they have psychic powers!), and some background about their city of Commorragh hidden in the webway. There's also some interesting stories about the rise of Asdrubael Vect as the Supreme Overlord of Commorragh.
Once you get to the actual rules, it's laid out similarly to other 5th ed codices (page with overall army rules, each unit with fluff and a few rules, wargear section, and then army list section in the back).
I do have to say that I really like that this codex is written much better than other recent codicies. The special rules and abilities are written in clearer language and often come with specific examples to illustrate them. It really goes a long way in clearing up many potential rules issues. I'm sure there will be some rules issues that arise. Nearly all of the them that I could see regarding many special character abilities and army rules are very well written, leaving little question as to what they mean.
There is a massive amount of wargear in this book, nearly all of it is completely new or has been changed since the last book. Even familiar items such as Dark Lances, Agonizers, and shadow fields have had points costs changed or details changed (Agonizers no longer glance vehicles on a 6). I highly recommend everyone that either goes to tournaments or plays against dark eldar players to get this codex, just so they can have an idea of what all of the wargear and stuff does.
As to how the army will do, there is alot of potential for a variety of things. The overall theme of the army is a glass hammer / glass cannon. The army can deal a heavy amount of damage, but is relatively fragile and has a low model count. There's 8 different unique characters, where I could see myself choosing between 5 or 6 of them deciding what I want to run. Every slot is packed in a similar way (especially the elites slot), but unlike other codexes, the layout of the army doesn't force you into taking any particular choice, it really is up to what you want to run.
What to do with the army? There's many possibilities.
There is only one bad unit I see out of this whole book, which unfortunately is still the mandrake. Despite the awesome looking models coming out, they seem to be the weakest unit in the book. They have some improved abilities (so they're not as bad as a chaos spawn), but overall everything else in the elites choice seems better.
One of my complaints of the codex is just the wargear being scattered similarly to other 5th ed codicies, but it's really a problem with this book as there is so much new and different wargear (not like imperium weapons, where the majority of it is standard from space marines to blood angels and space wolves). It makes it kinda time consuming to sort through all of the sections to figure out what each piece of wargear does.
As people are already dissecting this book and deciding upon tournament builds, I'd just suggest everybody just experiment and try new stuff out with this army. Don't rely on internet lists, as everyone is starting from scratch with this book. The power level of the codex seems similar to a blood angels level, I don't think it'll overtake Space Wolves or Imperial Guard as a game-breaking codex, but is good enough that good players should be able to win well with this.
As people have complained forever that GW doesn't support xenos races; this has answered that claim strongly. It is a well written book launched along with fantastic looking models. It appears to be pretty balanced and will provide a different style of game apart from the MEQ dominated games normally seen. If GW can replicate the quality of this release with their upcoming xenos codicies, then the game will just keep getting better and better.
Yesterday night, we recorded the first episode of The Eternal Warriors and it was really fun to do after the last several weeks of the end of DLT and sudden change to the new show. I think the new show is going to be very good, going off of the experience plus lessons learned from the last show.
The show should be out around Sunday, Nov 7th. It will also be available on Itunes. Check out and add the show to your RSS feed at http://theeternalwarriors.com/?feed=rss2.
Originally we were not planning to have a forum with the new show, but due to a heavy demand by listeners and users of the previous forum, a new forum was established earlier in the week. On the main page now, each of the hosts will be making regular blog posts; my day is going to be Tuesdays, which I'll mirror those posts to here. You should expect to see about a new post every day, also having guest posts as well.
I will have regular posts on this blog that will be seperate from the eternal warriors site. My schedule has been somewhat hectic so it has been difficult to nail down an exact day, but it seems like it will be Wednesdays and Friday/Saturday for now.
Throughout a variety of forums and blogs, there are a numerous amount of battle reports that people post. They range from being really good to really bad. There are many numerous formats people use. Most often a written report is used, though video reporting is also very popular. While my experience writing battle reports has been primarily with written reports, many of the points can be applied to video reports.
Here are some things to think about when you're making a battle report.
Don't get wrapped up in stating the obvious (basic game mechanics, simple things people can get from reading the rules, etc). I have personally been guilty of doing this from time to time, but explaining that a WS 4 models need's 4+ to hit another WS 4 model is just a waste of space that makes a reader lose patience reading your report. They'll be less likely to offer you helpful advice regarding your list and/or tactics and consider you more like this guy.
"If a model takes a wound and fails their armor save, then they're probably gonna take a wound."
Consider why you are making a battle report and keep that purpose in mind while writing. Nearly all players write them to demonstrate a list and/or the tactics they used. Often this is the best way for people to give you feedback about your list and/or tactics because a well made report can give them crucial insight to how you use all the models in the list.
Clearly communicate what actually transpired during the game. If you're using a camera, give clear pictures to aid your description of what happened. Your pictures and/or video should not be a full substitute for a clear concise written or narrated report. The person reading your report was not there to see your game as it transpired, so they're relying on you to clearly communicate what occurred.
The most important thing to keep in mind is that other people are going to read the report. When you make a report, take a moment to think from the reader's perspective. It sounds obvious, but many reports are made that skim over major details that people want to read (deployment, tactics, terrain, etc) and make you puzzled as to why the person made the report in the first place.
"I'm Vulkan He'stan?"
These are just a few of the many general tips out there to improve your battle reports. One more thing I'd like to add is when reading and commenting on a battle report, try to be as constructive as you can to help other people out. It makes it easier to learn and improve not only your reports, but your list building, tactics, and the hobby overall.
While I was at Rock-Con at the tournament, I had a situation come up with 3 of my 5 opponents during the tournament games. The situation involved an enemy unit either failing a pinning test and being forced to "Go to Ground"or voluntarily choosing to "Go to Ground." In each case, they were under the impression that once they had been pinned ("Gone to ground" as the rulebook defines it), they would be able to avoid having to take a morale test at the end of the shooting phase (despite suffering 25% or more casualties in the phase).
They're not going anywhere, they've gone to ground!
In each case, I was able to direct them to the main rulebook page 24, "Going to ground" section, to the last paragraph that very explicitly states that the unit is affected normally by enemy actions, giving the example of taking morale tests as normal. When I showed them the section in the rulebook, they went along with the ruling, but begrudgingly with a comment close to "we don't play it that way" or "that's not the way it used to be."
My reaction to hearing "That's not the way it used to be."
I'm not going to claim that I haven't ever been wrong about a specifically written rule, but I just find it a weak cop-out to say something like "I don't play it that way" or "That's not the way it used to be." The times people have pointed out a mistake I have made in the rules, I check out the rules on that, admit my mistake and move on.
With a complex rules system like this, it can be easy to miss rules here and there. We're all human and can miss bits and pieces here and there. Also I can understand either if someone is brand new into the game, or 5th edition. Everyone deals with the transition between new rules editions , but it's been more than two years since 5th edition came out and regular players still cop out with excuses of old rules.
I don't even see the validity of the excuse of "that's not the way it used to be," because nobody has qualms with using the beneficial aspects of 5th edition (Going to Ground voluntarily for improved cover saves, etc). These people don't mind going to ground voluntarily to get an improved cover save, but as soon as the negative portion of the rule creeps up (affected normally by enemy actions), they put up the defense "we don't play it that way" or "that's not what the rules used to say."
"What do you mean that's not how the rules are? I hate these new rules"
They're picking and choosing which rules they want to follow for their own advantage, whether deliberately or sub-consciously (remembering rules they like and forgetting rules they don't like). I don't mind gaming groups that wish to "house rule" or play the game in the way that makes them happy, but when you're at a regional tournament that is going by the regular 40k rules, "house rules" don't fly.
At some point, we all need to take some personal responsibility to have a general understanding of the game rules and when presented with something that we're unaware or unfamiliar, look at it rationally and resolve it amiably.
I am back from Rock-Con and I have to say it was an absolutely fun time. I met many interesting and cool 40k players (several of who listened to DLT) from around the region (Chicago, Rockford IL, Milwaukee, Madison WI, and Minnesota). I did some open gaming friday with another IG player and spent time with a couple of players exchanging ideas and tactics.
I played in the tournament saturday and sunday. The turnout was a little less than expected (22 out of the planned 30). I was also surprised with what armies showed up. There were four IG players, two space wolves (with exactly identical lists, every piece), one blood angels, five Space Marines, 3 chaos space marines, 1 daemons, 1 ork, 2 necrons, 1 eldar, 1 tau, 1 witch hunters. I'm too used to my local meta game being dominated by Space Wolves and Orks.
I'll give some more in depth battle reports throughout the week, but I'd have to say that I was disappointed with my overall performance. I had 2 wins and 3 losses in the tournament, with my three losses coming by very close games to Witch Hunters, Chaos Space Marines, and all biker Orks.
"Best General? You Kidding Me!? Don't Talk about Best General!! I just hope I can win a game!" - Myself at RockCon
Those three games were the most fun I had during the tournament because each of those games were just total slugfests between both players, resulting in very little left on each side. My two wins were both 4th turn wipeouts. One was against an Ultramarines player who was used to chaos marines and very new to space marines. The last one was against Necrons, phased him out after 4 turns.
After all 5 games though, I ended up 11th place in terms of win/loss record, but tied for 5th in mission points, mostly due to me gaining full points during my two wins. Every game I played, I felt as though I had the much better list, but in each of my three losses, I just could not do enough damage. The psyker battle squad was big money, but my infantry platoon was useless. The autocannons killed almost nothing over 5 games, and they gave up many extra kill points. I'll probably replace the platoon with two melta vet squads in chimeras.
Despite my army not performing as well as it could have, I did have to say that I learned quite a bit about my army and had some really fun games. Not only will I be going next year, I'm much more excited and eager to travel out to other Cons and tournaments next year.
