25 coaches online • Server time: 11:14
Forum Chat
Log in
Recent Forum Topics goto Post DOTP Season 4goto Post Skittles' Centu...goto Post Secret League Americ...
SearchSearch 
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Poll
Satyr Jumps Nymph...
Hilarious, and no big deal!
48%
 48%  [ 19 ]
OMG! OMG! OMG! Rape!!! Oh noes! Won't someone think of the children!
51%
 51%  [ 20 ]
Total Votes : 39


Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 16, 2015 - 21:37 Reply with quote Back to top

I understand you're not totally down on the idea. Although I disagree that this roster is "too close" to the Albion roster to exist as designed, even if later tweaks were made to both to differentiate. I liken the situation to the Clan Moulder discussion. Attempting to make slaves the bulk of the Moulder team would tread on the Skryre team, yet they need not be considered "together" in order to be considered for entry. Ultimately I think that call is just simply Whatball's alone...

BTW (for the lazy Wink) Here's a repost of the proposed Roster under discussion: (Note this is NOT the OPs suggested Roster, and at this point I probably should have just started a new thread)

0-1 Firbolg Giant 4/8/1/10 Loner, Bone-head, Mighty Blow, Really Stupid, Stand Firm, Thick Skull S (GAP) 160K
0-1 Dryad 5/3/2/8 Dauntless, Side Step, Thick Skull A (GSP) 90K
0-1 Satyr 6/2/3/7 Bonehead, Dauntless, Frenzy, Thick skull, Horns GS (AP) 90K
0-2 Sprite 7/1/4/5 Animosity, Dodge, Side Step, Stunty, Titchy, A (GSP) 70K
0-16 Nymphs 6/1/3/6 Dodge, Side Step, Stunty A (GSP) 40K
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Jan 16, 2015 - 22:13 Reply with quote Back to top

Just to make it clear, I'm totally fine with the idea. I'm not opposed to an Athelorn/Atheloren roster at all. I also think this thread can produce some good stuff.

Commenting on the balance and make up of your roster. As mentioned, I really like 'really really stupid' on a brute like that.

I'm totally anti any player having G and S access. I also don't think you should throw out hypnogaze just like that. A nymph and a fairy are going to be similar, we can't get around that. Again big no to the ag 4, for me.

I think eventually will have to go with 'Spite' instead of Sprite. Garion threatened to bomb whatball towers if we didn't. Also it's a good play on words; Spite the character and spite as verb. This adds a darker side. Personally I think that could be the name. 'Atherlorn Spite', adds an edge.

Dryads are a must, and yup there's the G access right there. Satyr I think is basically an Ungor in Warhammer, unless they're a distinct part of the WE world (which I don't think they are) they wouldn't work.....and would make a Bray roster in the future messy.

I don't think this is the roster for the giant. Keep giants with their really really stupid in the store cupboard for now. This is the roster for Treemen.

As for Nymphs, faries, Sprites, Spites, netlings and other spirits. I think we need to do more background homework.

Positives: There's room for it, it's a good 'warhammer' theme, brings the treeman (if it had a treeman/men) back to the 'foresty' rosters.

Negatives: A lot of work, treads on the Albion roster, doesn't add a new concept (as of now).

Personally, that's what I'd like to see. A brand new concept style.
Craftnburn



Joined: Jul 29, 2005

Post   Posted: Jan 16, 2015 - 22:58 Reply with quote Back to top

harvestmouse wrote:
Personally, that's what I'd like to see. A brand new concept style.
Try looking here. Wink
Sigmar1



Joined: Aug 13, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 18, 2015 - 08:20 Reply with quote Back to top

For the record, as the CREATOR of this team concept, I'd like to make the following points:

I love the idea of a super huge giant, but think the non-giant 'G' team on the OP is a better roster. Really not a fan of a ton of 0-1 positionals, and don't care for the list without the Spriggan, as he's what pulls the team together.

Contrary to HM's opinion, I think the Albion Fae team can be shelved, regardless of what we do with this concept. The building blocks of this team are different enough from the Albion roster that no change to that roster is absolutely necessary just due to the addition of this roster.

There IS NO predominately ST1 roster with no big guys (Slaves come close, but MV are HUGE). An interesting balance-mechanism for mostly ST1 with 3-4 mid ST positionals might be hypnogaze linos. That concept should be evaluated further. In fact, that roster idea (ST1 roster with no big guys) has tons of options which this team concept could capitalize on.

A second roster with an ag4 stunty positional is hardly a non-starter. The PFlings work just fine with their Catchers, and a 2nd roster with an AG4 stunty player isn't that big of a deal given it'd be only the third roster with an AG4 player. Virtually unlimited movement is not an auto-game winner. Especially when balanced with low ST and low AV.

'Spites' are just stupid. Srsly. In the history of fantasy there's never been a 'Spite' until GW decided to make one. Just because GW chose to rename something to be different solely for the purpose of being different doesn't mean the Leeg needs to follow suit. We may as well call Dryads Druads, or Treemen Wooddudes.

In the same vein, I don't think any team we're working on here 'has' to follow a 'woody' concept. I.e., if Trees don't fit, don't force it. The addition of ST6 Trees makes this team MORE like Albion. Sure, my OP concept has Dryads. They're neither necessary or critical, and neither are Trees. This community is free to develop any team the way we see fit. Yes, staying true to 'GW cannon' is somewhat desirable, but not a baseline requirement imo.

In short, let's not make this team, or any other, veto-able strictly on the basis of 'GW cannon'. Cripes, Bogeys are one of the better team concepts, but have UTTERLY NO PRECEDENT in the GW world. So. What. HM might have an aneurysm if that team was ever added, but that isnt' a good reason not to add it.

_________________
Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!
harvestmouse



Joined: May 13, 2007

Post   Posted: Jan 18, 2015 - 08:50 Reply with quote Back to top

Well you are the CREATOR of this thread, not necessarily the Athel loren 'fairy' team concept. The fact this is 'the' thread on that team concept means that we all have our own opinion on what that team should be like.

One of the reasons the 2 rosters need to be different, and why the other one can't be shelved is: 'New coach, why choose one over the other, and why are they different to you?'. On first look, 2 Foresty, good but a bit nasty fairy rosters look pretty similar in theme. It's necessary to make the 2 rosters as different to each other fluffwise as possible. I think the theme and fluff are the most important parts of the original concept. I can see however that we aren't going to agree on a lot of things.

I also think that the GW cannon part is a lot more important than you think. Looking at all the rosters added in the past, you can see that past Stunty Commissioners have deliberately taken each theme from the GW World. I think there probably is room to veer a bit (like the Gnome theme), but then you need to be extra careful. It would be too easy to spoil what has been done before.

Tying it to the Warhammer World also means that new players to Stunty, but familiar to GW will have some knowledge and most likely more interest in what is available. They might also have had a passion to play such a team, but would not have been able to in the past, another hook.

Regarding Spites, hmmmmmm I'm not overly bothered by sprites or spites, however you're missing a big point here. This is a GW inspired universe. So if they name something or change the name (I'm not really convinced by a lot of their new work either) then it need to be taken into account. Comparing changing Sprites-Spites to Treemen to Wooddudes though...

I guess it comes down to one thought "This community is free to develop any team the way we see fit." We're black and white here and we won't agree on that. If we go in which ever direction we see fit, it will destroy the uniformity of the division.

Classy remark about the aneurysm btw.
Sigmar1



Joined: Aug 13, 2008

Post   Posted: Jan 19, 2015 - 07:14 Reply with quote Back to top

harvestmouse wrote:
Classy remark about the aneurysm btw.


Well, I did say 'might'. I suppose if you were definately going to have an aneurysm we'd call it off.

You know I'm kidding here right? Joking works so poorly in type...

Anyhoo, we definately disagree on a lot of things, so we should just leave it at that. I'm not into starting a flame-thing like CnB and Shadow have going <<<shudder>>>

_________________
Badges? We don't need no stinkin' badges!
Display posts from previous:     
 Jump to:   
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic