Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About AngryMojo

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Orlando, Florida, United States
  1. Hey, we just started posting some acessories. http://angrymojogames.com/tabletop-game-accessories/armada/
  2. It's also worth noting that while siege range is infinite, the disk still needs LoS.
  3. I've been running it as untyped damage, thus resistance and immunity doesn't apply. My roommate e-mailed FFG about this, they confirmed it.
  4. Dat's pansy thinkin. Da pinned boyz just got a good laugh from da pinnin' boyz gettin demselfs duffed by da big pansy-choppas. Alwas more boyz around. Waagh. That is all.
  5. I'd love to see low-quality, slow disks that can be reinforced from the casualty pile with a focus action. Like zombies being 3 flip, 3/3/3 with slow on both attack and counter. Something just about anyone can take out, but just won't go away unless you tag the necromancer.
  6. To back this up, the definition of "Engages" on page 19 of the rulebook states "A disk engages an enemy disk when one of those disks pins the other. Both disks are considered to have engaged each other.
  7. No worries, there are a lot of questionable wordings in the rulebook. I'm really looking forward to the FAQ.
  8. No he would not, the damage is being dealt simultaneously and the wording on page 21 indicates that "When a disk with stamina is dealt damage, no more than 1 wound token is placed on it regardless of how much damage was dealt." The sidebar for stamina on page 10 reads "When a disk with stamina takes a wound, it is only removed as a casualty if it already has wound tokens on ite equal to its stamina. Otherwise, remove all damage tokens from it and replace them with a wound token." This states that no matter how much damage is dealt in excess of the targets toughness, only one wound is dealt per incident of damage. This is why in the previous example where Karl Franz is dealt six wound markers, he receives one wound total and the excess damage is removed. As another example; Azhag the Slaughterer is flipped into the middle of a large formation, pinning four disks. He winds up taking 12 damage, far in excess of his toughness of five. He takes a total of one wound, assuming none of the disks he's pinning have swift on counter. All excess damage is removed, leaving Azhag with a single wound token.
  9. I'll echo Tomb Kings, as well as my beloved Ogre Kingdoms. They're both considered neutral in Warhammer Fantasy Battles, I'd like to see them be the same in this.
  10. In addition to the wording on page 21, the example on page 10 helps. In the example, Karl Franz takes six damage, one over his toughness of five. The Orc Boyz takes five, one over their toughness of four. The second step illustrates the results, Karl Franz has a single wound with no damage tokens while the Orc Boyz are removed as a casualty. This same example shows Franzs damage being taken simultaneously, implying that encounter damage is dealt at one time, thus is in the same pool. Another specific thing I'd like addressed in the FAQ.
  11. The exact wording on page 7 reads "A battle ability is optional and can only be used once, before or after using that command card to activate a disk." This implies that any disk can use the ability whether activated or not, and the later statement that "Disks using battle abilities do not have to activate to perform the ability, and can even use it while pinned." supports this. Otherwise a pinned or activated disk couldn't use the ability at all, as both conditions prevent you from activating said disk. I can understand the confusion on that particular point, and it's one of the items in the game I'm looking forward to the FAQ for.
  12. MarthWMaster said: Why do you think so? Having run numerous tournaments I've found tournament rules that encourage agressive play wind up wrapping up smoother than those that favor defensive play. You're less likely to have players time out, you wind up with fewer draws, and people just wind up having more fun when it's not just people playing a waiting game. I've also found that in timed formats, if agressive play is not rewarded then you wind up getting lots of stall tactics. If you want a good example of this, take a look at WarMachine by Privateer Press and their top-tier tournament results for the first year. Every one of the top ten spots was filled by the same faction, using the same leader figure. It was, go figure, the defensive faction with the stall-tactic leader. This isn't to say tournaments and games that favor agressive play can't have the same problems, but I've found that when the clock is against the players the game winds up being more interesting overall. Besides, it's not like the tournament rules as they stand favor agressive play that much, if you win both rounds you never even resort to the objective tie-breaker.
  13. divinityofnumber said: The tournament rules do favor aggro DS builds. As it stands, I wouldn't even consider running pure Sith at a tournament. The environment that FFG has created favors aggro. I for one find this a good thing. And I'll still bring my Sith deck, I run it very aggressively. Both Dark Side factions can be played from either an agressive or defensive posture, and I've found in both circumstances that finishing the game early and not allowing my opponent to get a foothold only benefits me.
  14. It appears I'll have tomorrow off from work, if anyone would like to meet up and sling some cards I'll be available.
  15. Honestly, I've found that Heart of the Empire deserves a lot more credit than it gets. The downside of losing the game is only relevant if you draw into it as an initial objective, if it pops in later in the game the downside is pretty much nullified. Combine the three resources with There Is No Escape, which effectively resets the game in a deck that relies on attrition, and you've got some pretty solid cards to work with.
  • Create New...