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 - Konrad von Richtmark

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 117
The Count's Tavern / Re: Youtube Channel Recommendations
« on: July 07, 2018, 08:53:11 AM »
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Lindybeige. An informative and entertaining channel on history (particularly of the military kind), with occasional forays into other nerdy subjects like wargaming and RPGing. By far the most watched channel by me.

I used to watch his channel until he made a piece about WW2 weapons, and through a lack of actual knowledge (and not stuff like 'katana's can cut through anything' kinda fanboy drivel) made statements about German weapons that were just wrong. And when pointed out by some of his well informed followers (in a respectful way) basically reacted with a pissy "you're just nazi fanboys, so you're wrong and I'm right" video.

Unsubscribed right then and there. I don't mind people being wrong, but doubling down on your incomplete knowledge and insulting the other party as a reaction gets zero sympathy from me.

Do you mean his comparison between the Bren and the Spandau? I did watch that one and his response, and I didn't get the impression you got. That might just be my slight autism though.

I would say Lindybeige has a tendency to theorize quite a lot by his own initiative, but I think he adequately says so when he does it, rather than presents his pet theories as if they were academic consensus.

The Count's Tavern / Re: Boardgames
« on: July 04, 2018, 06:39:14 PM »
I know what you mean.

It manages to be a deep, complex and engaging strategy game despite the streamlining, heck, I'd even say the streamlining enhances all that by not burdening you with loads of minutiae. Still, it does lack some of that epic space opera feel that Twilight Imperium has.

Also, there is one thing that I think Twilight Imperium does really well, that Eclipse lacks. Objectives. In TI, they make you act like a real state, using your military might in pursuit of specific objectives which may or may not conflict with those of other players, rather than just generic expansion for its own sake like many 4X games do. Eclipse does offer a variety of different ways of gaining VPs, allowing for varied and adaptive strategies, but doesn't have anything like the specific objective-driven nature of TI, which is the one thing I did miss.

The Count's Tavern / Re: Boardgames
« on: July 04, 2018, 08:24:08 AM »
If you like Twilight Imperium but feel encumbered by having to commit an entire day from dusk to dawn to it, I can recommend checking out Eclipse. It plays in something like 4-6 hours. It's the same kind of space empire wargame, but with very smart and streamlined game mechanics, the most economically efficient use of complexity I've seen in such a game. Most importantly of all, the visual interface and presentation of information on the game board is a work of genius. The amount of mental bandwidth needed to keep track of getting a hang of the current situation and see what's going on is as low as reasonably possible in such a game. Leaving you as much mental bandwidth as possible at actually thinking about what to do.

I looked into Eclipse after yet another day-long Twilight Imperium game had had to be ended short in an agreed-on victory for the guy who seemed to be in the best position. Since then, I've never looked back.

The Count's Tavern / Re: Gamer thread
« on: June 06, 2018, 11:28:56 AM »
So, did someone try out Total War: Thrones of Britannia?

It looks to me, from a brief look, like it doesn't have anything spectacularly new, but very well thought-out improvements to the core game mechanics. Such as actual army food supply and resulting attrition, internal politics that seem actually feudal for once, and a division between walled major and unwalled minor settlements. A combination that should simultaneously make capturing fortified settlements harder, while providing other ways of effectively punishing your enemies for hiding behind their walls.

The Count's Tavern / Re: Youtube Channel Recommendations
« on: June 01, 2018, 07:55:00 PM »
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Lindybeige. An informative and entertaining channel on history (particularly of the military kind), with occasional forays into other nerdy subjects like wargaming and RPGing. By far the most watched channel by me.

The Count's Tavern / Re: Unhappy Random thoughts...
« on: May 30, 2018, 08:17:00 AM »
I know, right?

I understand rationally what a low probability 1 in 200 is. Still, it felt like way more when we found out that our then-unborn firstborn had that probability of having a chromosomal abnormality. Ended up pissing away over a thousand Euros on finding out just to be sure.

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: Tilea ... do you have figures?
« on: May 27, 2018, 06:20:20 PM »
As far as memory recalls, the following DoW units should be Tilean: All the pike units, Braganza's Besiegers, Vespero's Vendetta, The Birdmen of Catrazza.

Cavalry needs to be in denser formation to be proper Caroleans.  :happy:

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: Will GW Ever Return To WFB?
« on: May 22, 2018, 07:54:57 AM »
I suspect that still, WFB sales have been in a death spiral for some time. I just had the following realization: If the WFB active player base decreases, it doesn't decrease GW WFB sales proportionally. It would decrease sales by more than the proportion that stops playing.

Demand for new WFB miniatures would be proportional to the size of the active player base. The supply that will meet that demand wouldn't, though, just be new GW sales, but also partly the second-hand market. A supply that would be roughly proportional to the rate at which people stop playing.

I wouldn't be surprised if GW kept a close eye on the WFB second-hand market and now concluded that the dark pixies have gotten rare and expensive enough that they can make bank by doing a made-to-order.

Talabheim, because I'm an unimaginative scrub who just paints figures like they look on the box. Or because I liked the colours. I did, however, reverse the places of the colours on the red and white quartering the GW showcase state troops.

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: Will GW Ever Return To WFB?
« on: May 16, 2018, 10:54:13 PM »
Zygmund, I would defer assessment on whether T9A's growth has levelled off until 2.0 gets out of beta and is finally released. That should, if everything goes according to plan (which looks rather likely at the moment), put an end to the rules instability that seems to have made a great many old WFB players reluctant to get on board.

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: Will GW Ever Return To WFB?
« on: May 15, 2018, 07:43:30 PM »
I'm actually thinking that if the bosses at GW know what they're doing (which they've shown surprising indications of in the last year or two), the success of T9A may have snuffed out the last hope of GW returning to WFB. As in, actually resuming it with a new edition and release, not just keeping rereleasing their old stuff.

What T9A is currently doing is eminently convenient for GW. GW doesn't need to bother with game development, but can still reap the rewards of the development work done by hordes of volunteers. GW can just keep cranking out miniatures of its old ranges. Ranges that are, and will be for the foreseeable future, the by far best suited ones for playing T9A. I actually think there's a significant probability that GW is doing just that, pretending not to notice T9A but observing it closely in order to benefit from it.

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: Will GW Ever Return To WFB?
« on: May 14, 2018, 06:57:40 PM »
I don't think GW would ever bring back WFB as such. What they might do, and what would probably make business sense, would be to re-release old game books and miniature ranges as "GW Classics" or something like that, on a more permanent basis than their current made-to-order thingy.

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: What would it take?
« on: May 12, 2018, 07:05:41 PM »
For me it would mean a overhaul of the humans. I HATE Sigmar Marines whatever!!! HATE them SOOooo much!!!  :icon_evil: :icon_evil: :icon_evil: (I think you get the point)

Sir, please be informed that the proper word for what you are describing is Ground Marines  :closed-eyes:

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: What would it take?
« on: May 11, 2018, 07:25:07 PM »
Don't know really. A necessary, but far from sufficient, condition would be that I actually found the time to read the rules without having any better use for my time.

WHFB The Electors' Forum / Re: Will GW Ever Return To WFB?
« on: May 11, 2018, 06:35:52 PM »
It would have to be a rather small motorbike to accommodate his stature.

9th AGE / Re: T9A forum - engaging with game creators - does it work?
« on: April 06, 2018, 08:50:57 PM »
You should see the T9A High(born) Elven subforum. That towering High Elven superiority complex has rubbed off on a significant fraction of their player base.

The Count's Tavern / Re: How out of date is your first post?
« on: April 06, 2018, 08:24:24 AM »
I too dredged up my first post on the forum:

I wonder, are you allowed to have a magic armour AND a magic shield on a hero?

From reading the rulebook I used to think that it's impossible, BUT there is one thing that recently made me think otherwise.

In White Dwarf #262 (Yes, that one introducing the Tau and the Steam Tank) there was a battle report Empire VS Bretonnia. If you have that dwarf, you can look up page 104. According to the Empire army list, his grace Otto Schepke Elector Count of Talabheim had BOTH a Dawn Armour and an Enchanted Shield.

Does anyone have an answer to this controversy? Is it just a mistake/misprint, or have the rules changed?

That was me being a wee lad having just discovered Warhammer. Looks like my posts from that time had a very gamistic/tactical focus. I wouldn't have known the difference between Frundsberg's landsknechts and Wallenstein's mercenaries. Also looks like introductory posts weren't my thing back then.

The Count's Tavern / Re: How out of date is your first post?
« on: April 06, 2018, 08:05:15 AM »
When I've actually managed to get my Empire army both T9A-ready and fully painted, I'll certainly do that, Zygmund. With fluff and all.

The Brush and Palette / Re: A poll ... metal, plastic, resin ...
« on: April 05, 2018, 02:22:56 PM »
Also, the poll format could do with some better data visualization, hard to see the relative prominence of each material at a glance. I'd suggest giving answers as percentages, then calculate running averages.

I'd say I'm 80% plastic, 20% metal.

The Brush and Palette / Re: A poll ... metal, plastic, resin ...
« on: April 05, 2018, 02:17:46 PM »
Put me in on 10. I prefer it that way too. Plastic is so nicely versatile and convertible. Multipart plastic boxes are love, life and waifu  :icon_mrgreen:

The Brush and Palette / Re: Empire Secessionists Army
« on: March 31, 2018, 07:51:50 PM »
Have you considered increasing the colour depth of the clothes, particularly by making the slashes darker? They look a bit bland in such flat colours at the moment. The detail on the faces show that you can do highlighting if you decide to.

A simple and straightforward technique I've used for the job is to do the entire cloth area in a darker wash, then re-highlight everything except slashes and other cracks and recesses with the original colour. Here's a showcase of what such a simple method can achieve:

In the case of this handgunner (just like pretty much everyone else wearing puff and slash in my army), the darker wash was Nuln Oil, leading to a rather sharp contrast between the slashes and the cloth, I like the result but not everyone does. A softer variant of the same concept would be to use something like a grey wash, or maybe a darker blue for the blue cloth areas.

I always thought the notion of chaos dwarfs having orcs as subjugated slaves used as unreliable cannon fodder in battle who might run away if unattended was never really properly thought through.

Orcs literally live to fight. If enslaved for labour, they would just rebel, since that's the only way they'd get back into fighting again, and if they'd die, at least they'd do so fighting. Orcs don't do self-preservation, apart from very temporarily when breaking in battle. Furthermore, if orcs would actually be formed up into combat units by their chaos dwarf overlords, why would that make the orcs unreliable? Wouldn't they much prefer fighting to labour?

Goblins would make far better slaves. They are cowardly enough to be suppressed by threat of punishment, and cruel and cunning enough to snitch on each other for a little bit of favour from their masters. What goblins would lack in individual ability at hard labour, they'd make up for with sheer quantity.

The Count's Tavern / Re: Gamer thread
« on: March 21, 2018, 07:29:42 PM »
To me, the Total War franchise has been very much hit and miss. Mainly depending on whether the tactical AI is any good. Last Total War game that really did it for me was Shogun 2.

Great painting, again.  :eusa_clap:

Funny that he went all the way to protect himself, but then left the helmet off.

I'd skulpt some garlic somewhere on him. For the story, and for more colourful painting.  :laugh:


I too have wondered how one can sensibly combine the usual Van Helsing witch hunter look together with plate armour. Because WFRP 2e witch hunters apparently do, going by their career trappings.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 117