AoS Realmshaper Engine - Let's Crack It!

[Jason839]

We have been playing it as you place the faction terrain and then pick sides and it’s been fine rules wise, it sucks though because most of the time the tables are made pretty symmetrical to fight balance complaints so there is really no incentive not to take the side with my engine if they win the roll.

 

[LizardWizard]

Do you still randomize the rolls for terrain feature rules?

 

[Jason839]

Do you still randomize the rolls for terrain feature rules?

Most TO do that before the event starts and they don’t change the whole event, so the rules are established already when you reach the table. Honestly I hate terrain feature rules. I love the fact that I can ignore them with coelesced.

 

[LizardWizard]

I have played at events that do it both ways. Where players roll for terrain features or the TOs just set the table up with terrain rule already on it. I really like terrain features. I think it helps make the table more than just cover and obstacles.

 

[Nart]

I think, that preplaced terrain with predetermined rules is better way of handling tournament tables, since it saves a lot of time.

 

[LizardWizard]

I think, that preplaced terrain with predetermined rules is better way of handling tournament tables, since it saves a lot of time.

It normally only takes like 30secs to roll for all the terrain, but it is still time none the less. We always just roll two dice per piece. Normally one of the opponent's dice and one of your own. One dice is a d2 to determine which table and then the other is a d6 for the feature.

 

[Grotpunter]

It normally only takes like 30secs to roll for all the terrain, but it is still time none the less. We always just roll two dice per piece. Normally one of the opponent's dice and one of your own. One dice is a d2 to determine which table and then the other is a d6 for the feature.

I have scenery dice for both the old and the new chart, so we roll both + 1D6 to determine which dice counts. Takes no time at all.

I really like the scenery rules, my only complain is that many of them dont matter too much. Stuff like Sinister, Inspiring, Deadly etc. dont really have an impact. Even Volcanic is often whatever since it errupts so rarely.

In general I feel like “just” 6 pieces of terrain is a little too little. Often really hard to gain cover in a meaningful location etc.

 

[Canas]

It seems to me like terrain-rules are almost intended for a fully fleshed out & pre-planned battlefield. Dumping a handfull of terrain pieces on the table and giving them random effects doesn't seem to achieve much. However, if you make a nice battlefield and have for example a river going across and you make the entire river deadly it actually becomes relevant as now you have to interact with it constantly. Whereas if it's just some trees, or a little bit of ruines, in a corner it doesn't really matter. At most 1 or 2 units will interact with it throughout the game.

 

[Jason839]

My biggest complaint is that they are random chosen. It absolutely is bad feels when the tzeentch player gets arcane terrain or when all of your stuff is deadly to you. Biggest change I hope for 3.0 is permanent consistent rules for terrain types.

 

[Grotpunter]

My biggest complaint is that they are random chosen. It absolutely is bad feels when the tzeentch player gets arcane terrain or when all of your stuff is deadly to you. Biggest change I hope for 3.0 is permanent consistent rules for terrain types.

The issue is that the big tournaments will preplan all the terrain on the tables regardless of GHB19 or GHB20 rules etc., so the smaller tournaments mimic this behaviour. Players that are semi competitive and strive to play in a tournament one day will by default want to train and prepare for these, so even in their “casual” games they will apply the same rules. I dont think any changes to the terrain rules will ever “solve” this. It is a trickle down effect where the change has to come from above.

 

[LizardWizard]

Big GTs and MTs actually have a lot of variance. There is always some consensus, but ITC for AOS has way less rules than the 40K side. It really comes down to the individual TOs.

 

[Grotpunter]

Big GTs and MTs actually have a lot of variance. There is always some consensus, but ITC for AOS has way less rules than the 40K side. It really comes down to the individual TOs.

But at the end of the day, isnt it still 6 pieces of terrain with random scenery effects? I mean regardless of TO having rolled prior to your game, or you do it before rolling for sides, the outcome is still the same.

 

[LizardWizard]

It should be 6 major pieces and 4 minor pieces.

 

[Jason839]

It should be 6 major pieces and 4 minor pieces.

As someone who also plays sylvaneth, im glad they dont use 10 pieces in most events. Its hard enough just getting my 1 free wood down, even after they realized how bad they messed up the rules and erratad.

 

[Ge32]

Hi guys, I am learning how to use Blender, and I am in need of new incentives.

My intention is to create a 3D levitation platform for the pyramid. To do this, I need the measurements of the base of the pyramid, that is, the measurements of the largest outer contour (The square base), and if possible, the internal width of the walls of the pyramid.
(As indicated in the image)

As a thank you, to the first person who gives me the measurements (if possible in millimeters), I will give you the free STL file, so you can print it in your home.

Thanks!!
Ge32






Hola chicos, estoy aprendiendo a utilizar el Blender, y estoy necesitando nuevos incentivos.

Mi intención es crear en 3D una plataforma de levitación para la pirámide. Para ello, necesito las medidas de la base de la pirámide, es decir, las medidas del contorno exterior más grande (La base cuadrada), y si es posible, el ancho interno de las paredes de la pirámide.
(Como lo indico en la imagen)

Como agradecimiento, a la primer persona que me facilite las medidas (si es posible en milímetros), le obsequiaré el archivo STL gratuito, para que lo pueda imprimir en su casa.

Gracias!
Ge32

 

[RandomTsar]

Hi guys, I am learning how to use Blender, and I am in need of new incentives.

My intention is to create a 3D levitation platform for the pyramid. To do this, I need the measurements of the base of the pyramid, that is, the measurements of the largest outer contour (The square base), and if possible, the internal width of the walls of the pyramid.
(As indicated in the image)

As a thank you, to the first person who gives me the measurements (if possible in millimeters), I will give you the free STL file, so you can print it in your home.

Thanks!!
Ge32

View attachment 99593

View attachment 99594


Hola chicos, estoy aprendiendo a utilizar el Blender, y estoy necesitando nuevos incentivos.

Mi intención es crear en 3D una plataforma de levitación para la pirámide. Para ello, necesito las medidas de la base de la pirámide, es decir, las medidas del contorno exterior más grande (La base cuadrada), y si es posible, el ancho interno de las paredes de la pirámide.
(Como lo indico en la imagen)

Como agradecimiento, a la primer persona que me facilite las medidas (si es posible en milímetros), le obsequiaré el archivo STL gratuito, para que lo pueda imprimir en su casa.

Gracias!
Ge32

I can't really take credit for this, Killer Lizard/chefofwar gave these measurements:
it's 16x16 cm and 17,5 cm high,
6.3x6.3 inches and 7 inches total height

Based on those measurements, and some other pictures on ebay with grids Each level is ~1" tall and 1/4" offset at each step. So the base of the second layer is ~5.75, while the top of the second layer is ~5.5 and so on.

Note, these measurements are from in-line photo measurements using the 16cm for a side as a reference. I use: https://eleif.net/photo_measure.html
Because of the perspective in pictures, it's best to measure near your 'anchor' points.

So: First Picture as reference:

A_1=160mm
A_2=160mm

B_1=31.5mm
B_2=7.5mm

C_1=2.5mm

Second Picture as Reference:

D_1=101.8mm

GW Pic as reference:

A_1=160mm
A_2=160mm

B_1=33.1mm

D_1= 102.8mm


So with some averages/tiny bit of rounding:
A_1=160mm
A_2=160mm

B_1=32.25mm
B_2=7.5mm

C_1=2.5mm

D_1=102.5mm

I know this isn't me measuring the physical model, but this method gets you within a mm or two (which honestly if someone used a ruler would have the same accuracy). More images to average more numbers will get you even closer.

 

[Ge32]

I can't really take credit for this, Killer Lizard/chefofwar gave these measurements:
it's 16x16 cm and 17,5 cm high,
6.3x6.3 inches and 7 inches total height

Based on those measurements, and some other pictures on ebay with grids Each level is ~1" tall and 1/4" offset at each step. So the base of the second layer is ~5.75, while the top of the second layer is ~5.5 and so on.

Note, these measurements are from in-line photo measurements using the 16cm for a side as a reference. I use: https://eleif.net/photo_measure.html
Because of the perspective in pictures, it's best to measure near your 'anchor' points.

So: First Picture as reference:

A_1=160mm
A_2=160mm

B_1=31.5mm
B_2=7.5mm

C_1=2.5mm

Second Picture as Reference:

D_1=101.8mm

GW Pic as reference:

A_1=160mm
A_2=160mm

B_1=33.1mm

D_1= 102.8mm


So with some averages/tiny bit of rounding:
A_1=160mm
A_2=160mm

B_1=32.25mm
B_2=7.5mm

C_1=2.5mm

D_1=102.5mm

I know this isn't me measuring the physical model, but this method gets you within a mm or two (which honestly if someone used a ruler would have the same accuracy). More images to average more numbers will get you even closer.

May the Old Ones be with you!

When I have it finished, I will send it to you the file in STL format, by private message.

In your place I would start saving to have physical RSE, because what I plan to design is an accessory for the original Pyramid.