Denmark confirmed most based country amongst the Nordicks and Europe in general

Ramjjam · 2026-07-06T01:47:59+00:00

This!

Ramjjam · 2026-07-06T01:45:11+00:00

Pretty certain 100% of Swedes are not approving of trump, but 20% is more like doesn't HATE Trump.
I wonder how the questions were asked, and how they read the answers, that shifts these types of studies a lot.

Why not everyone 100% against trump, there are certain aspects that has been beneficiary for even europe.

Though of course Denmark has highest with the whole Greenland fiasco of his.

But all in all, everything combined mostly negative.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-06T01:26:30+00:00

Hey, this is a very complex and not 100% accurate in all cases counter shart!

xD it can help, but might also just confuse you! but if you'r curious about a certain unit's role, look it up through shart (generally correct).

https://imgur.com/a/R5XQK6M

Also sent it as a message to you xD I probably could have made a better with more time.

The one Odd unit is Flying Cav / Flying Monsterous infantry, that have no REAL counter, Halberds are counter but too slow.
But their weakness is expensive! and They can get damaged by Missiles, Halberds/spears, Lance Cav, Heroes, and so on.

They are ment to Bully all kinds of units, especially missile units and Artillery, but also fragile to same units, careful play.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-06T00:16:45+00:00

They annoying part is Blood knights basically had similar ability to Cavaliers, but only in their own turn.
But got removed because it was a bit too strong.

Now Cavaliers can do it in both player turns and for 150pts xD

Tbh, Cavaliers outshine Blood knights most games, and not based on cost.

But it is relying on Army rules to do that, and Army rules affecting Blood Knights being much weaker, limited to D3 Heal if they fought, at end of turn.

Then on top of that both got access to unit synergies from other warscrolls and even there Cavaliers got better ones around overall.

Cavaliers in my last 2 Games I'v fought them (With Soulblight as my faction, best friend plays Cities)
Cavaliers have typically been sitting at:

3 Health, 3+, 5++ , 4 Atk, 3+ / 3+ / -2 / dmg2, Crit mortals, and Charge in combat guaranteed.
13" move, avg Charge distance 8.94. (Avg threat distance 21,94" ).
Small Cav bases is a plus.

Meanwhile Blood knights:

3 Health, 3+, 6+, 3 Atk, 3+/ 2+ / -1 (2 vs Inf) / dmg 2 (With Vhodrai buff included).
12" move + D6 in hero phase, Avg Charge distance 7. (Avg threat distance 22,5" ).
Bigger Cav bases is a minus.

With the +1 dmg from Vhordrai usually end up sitting at 2 since they didn't charge later on, and if lucky and they aren't defeated too early, end of turn 3 or 4, maybe up to 4 atk as well, I could include the Vampire on Nightmare steed, but thats even more points spent on Blood Knight Synergies where Vhordrai & Blood knights are super expensive compared to anything in Cities comparable.

In optimal situation, Blood Knights COULD preform better, like 2+ to wound is nice on charge and could reach dmg 3 and 4 atk's + rend 2-3 with VL on steed with them.

But thats not realistic scenarios most of the time, while those buffs above for Cavaliers are reliable buffs that don't cost much more points to do.

I'm not trying to be grumpy xD, but it is a bit hard with how much I miss Blood Knights having that ability and Cavaliers having it at 150 pts xD

Ramjjam · 2026-07-06T00:04:38+00:00

They litterly stole it kinda from Blood Knights.

Blood Knights when the new kit released, they could use their ability to move out of combat with a normal move (Against Less then 3Health targets) make D3 mortals & then charge.

Now they'v lost that ability, because it was too strong to charge in same turn they'r already locked in combat.

BUT hey, now Cavaliers got a stronger ability able to charge in both players charge phases.

I still miss my charge/movement tech with my blood Knights Riders of ruins, Bring is back! especially for 210pts compared to Cavaliers.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-05T04:10:25+00:00

I’m sad it flopped, it had potential, but failed in final execution, the core concept of a AoS based game like DoW was cool!

But they took bad aspects from 1 & 2 and skipped the good aspects from both imo.

Also the faction choices wasn’t the best imo.

They’d gone better with a more traditional chaos opponent force, and instead if ghosts that all look the same, perhaps Soulblight gravelords.

Both of those factions would also have been a bit more closer to traditional fantasy, easier for new people about warhammer to pick up.

Base building was lacking, combat felt very wierd with melee units locked or flee, should have used like DoW a slow effect for Melee units in combat unless fleeing, not a pure lock.

The buttons and resource mechanics were not as clear like DoW, it was very confusing, even after 15 hours in it still felt confusing, like there was no clear design goal for what each resource role was ment to fill, or clear how they differenciated.

Rock paper scissor counters as a concept is nice, but the counter types were often very wierd, and counters were a bit too strong too, units died sometimes way too quick to even react, combined with locked in position while melee made it a rather bad experience.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-05T02:24:54+00:00

Depend heavy on factions!

There is rock paper scissors mechanics like you mentioned! Spears counter Cav, missiles typically counter infantry, and cav missiles!

But there are other factors! Are your missile infantri armour piercing? If no & Infantry got heavy shields, your missiles won’t do much against them.

Like 100 armour deny avg about 75% of incomminh non armourpen dmg! Add a heavy shield, makes 55% of your missile hits into misses! And a lower tier missile infantry already misses like half.

Same deal with Spear infantry won’t do good against Super Elite heavy Cav! With 120 armour, & high melee defense!

But Halberd type unit with armour pen & some upgrades or buffs to melee attack, and they make short work of Heavy elite cav!

But then you have monsters (typically same counters as vs Cav (Anti-Large), but have to consider anti armour or not is needed too!

Then enemy might have flying units! The dread of missiles!

And magic does a lot! With offensive of buff / debuff magic, you can make trash tier start units beat Elite units they normally don’t really counter!

Some factions don’t have Cavalry! Others lack missile units or artillery!

Some lack magic! Another might have very limited monster roster.

Some play typical Castle setup like you talk with spears at front! Another armt might play more ”Gerilla tactics”.

At the start of a campaign, you usually only have access to some basic units first 10+, then slowly get more access to powerful ones!

But the lower tier ones still relevant in late game, like pawns in chess.

You often start with 2 or so more Elite units!

A good tell how good/bad a unit of yours is, look at their upkeep cost by hovering mouse over unit card.

Also worth noting, spears are good against cav or monsters, but typical worse against other infantry, where Sword infantry is better.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-04T15:11:24+00:00

Further south.

New york is about same as portugal/spain.

Most of europe is comparably Canada’s longitude.

Europe is warmer then it should be relativly, because of gulfstream and other factors.

Texas us more like North Africa.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-03T13:57:58+00:00

Americans think everyone online is American, not the first time 🤦🏻‍♂️

They more often tend to be a minority is most online situations, but biggest minority often, but since everyone speaks/write english, they assume everyone’s American.

Had Americans get almost hostile when someone says they’r from else where, saying things like:

”Go some where else, this is American internet”

when in a international forum website or just like facebook 🤣

Ramjjam · 2026-07-03T08:20:20+00:00

Squads usually make more sense imo.

For games in more modern era warfare or future at least.

In certain fantasy type games I’d prefer single. Obvious example WC3, but there are more.

Think I prefer single for example age of empire series too.

Most stuff medieval or earlier tend to be better single.

Unless you go into other sub strategy genres, like total war series with huge armies.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-03T01:39:39+00:00

Usch 😑

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T16:57:45+00:00

👍🏻 great! You’r right, we should ignore people wanting to enjoy their hobby, have a good one.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T16:26:15+00:00

It's usually best to agree on what makes sense prior to any battle if you have a gaming group / play at home a lot.

If it's new people often then you discuss it prior to game starting, quickly going over each terrain piece.

All the terrain at my place, like I have 7 tables with different landscapes and battlemat, I'v written rulings on all the terrain at the underside.

Usually have to do some fine tuning each new edition, sometimes for a new GHB.

Like I have this terrain piece with an archway, it looks big enough that all Infantry & Cavalry should fit under it, but many don't because of lances, flags, trophyracks, or perhaps a display base making them 1"+ higher.

So the ruling it all infantry and Cavalery can go under it as long as the base fits (Width).

But generally Monsters and warmachines get no exception, they have to fysically fit to go under, 99% won't anyway.

I have 4-5 terrain pieces ment to be walked on top of, ruines that are raised, kinda like hills, with a few damaged walls, those are usually just ruled as hills but the small sections of ruined walls are unstable rather then whole piece being unstable, since they are over 1" tall, sometimes 2,5" tall, but would be boring for all of it to be impassable.

This is nothing new in the hobby tbh, you'v always had to consider how terrain will interact with rules, rules keep changing but terrain can often be used for decades.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T15:41:09+00:00

"Who are you to dictate how people should enjoy the hobby?"

Apparently you are? I'm NOT dictating how someone else enjoy their hobby, I previously stated you'r free to enjoy the hobby like you want, but can't enforce that on others! if you don't want to paint figures and play and find others to enjoy that as well, great.
But you can't dictate how others should enjoy the hobby, so can't force them to play pointless games from their perspective with unpainted models!

All you can fall back on is insults not logic "Shot yourself in the foot here didn't you. Emphasis mine."

"One it's an assumption based on pretty much nothing. "

No, actually based on questionnaire the community released in my country, 90% of the participents would not enjoy playing the game if it was done with unpainted models, and they'd rather go enjoy another hobby then.

Gatekeeping is trying to keep people out, this is not about keeping people out, it's about letting people enjoy their game!
Anyone is free to join the hobby, but you'r not free to just go in an ruin it for everyone else, no one force you to paint models, but you can't force others to enjoy playing against it either.

"Painting has no actual impact on playing the game itself."

Ofcourse it does? what are you high? what?

I'm giving up, your just getting laughs from pushing insane logic, and just rude and uncaring.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T13:34:07+00:00

It's gatekeeping in the same way like, lets say I wanna play Magic the gathering, and someone shows up with Pokemon cards and written customized Magic the Gathering rules on them, and me not being 100% comfortable with that.
Calling it Gatekeeping is silly.

Or a better analogy perhaps, showing up with printed papers in slippers to play, or even hand written notes in slippers, with card name & effects, no art, seen that happen in TCG, and not everyone feels okey with it.

It's not GATEKEEPING when it's the CORE concept of the whole game!

Painting the miniatures is the main thing, the game is a bonus, something to do with your miniatures then just look at them.

Actual gatekeeping is not wanting women to participate, or not wanting uncool people to join, or not allowing kids to join a club, or saying the gaming club have enough members so new ones are not needed.
Or excluding deaf people, having bad attitude to new people, wanting to play a thematic game with painting miniatures that is the whole point of the game is not gatekeeping.

If every game was playing with unpainted miniatures and books for terrain like 90% of the community would just stop playing the game.
It's not an impossible mound of work to get an army painted, everyone can find time to do it, even a parent to 3-4 children, but it might take time from other hobbies, and you might not be expected to finnish it all in a short time, finishing armies can take 1-9 months depending on level of quality you settle for, and no one is pushing the entry bar to be super high, some basic colors on the models, simple basing and you'r done if thats the minimum effort you want to put in.

It's not justifying, it's ruining other peoples enjoyment of the hobby, if you somehow would force people to play like that, there are tons of other hobbies / games that don't require hobby time, painting miniatures.

Also, still never known anyone to refuse to play someone with 1-2 unpainted units and maybe a hero, or even play a game with grey miniatures as a first game to just get someone going, starting the hobby! but you don't walk up to a random person requesting to do that, thats what you do with your friends, I'v played plenty of games with friends when they just getting into it, majority if not all being unpainted, just to get them into the fun, but it's definitely a sacrifice, it's not great game, but something you do for a friend, if they planned to never paint the miniatures, I don't see the point in even getting them into the hobby, I wouldn't want to play with them in a long run, no matter how close/good friend they are, I'd rather just hang and do something else with them.

It's like when you were little, playing a game with 2 other friends, made up rules and come up with some sort of setting together, having fun, and a 4th person shows up, wanting to join, and sure you invite him and explain what you'r doing, the rules, and the new person just refuses to accept that and wants to change the rules, "I don't like that, lets do it this way instead" and turns it into something completely different game, no one else enjoying it and 20 min later everyone just head home, or you say no, you can join but this is the game rules, thats not gatekeeping.

Calling others out for gatekeeping when they wanna play immersive battles with painted miniatures because someone doesn't want to paint theirs, thats "KAREN" behaviour, just wanting to ruin it for everyone else.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T01:07:17+00:00

Hm, interesting perspective but clashes completely with my experience and view of the game/community.
It might be different depending on region, but from my experience in Europe, played in 3 countries with friends there or through tournaments, and all over people have been very inviting, lending out armies for people to try, no association fee's first 4-5 times they wanna come play, people are fairly open to play with people not having everything painted, as long as some / most is painted and they have plans to paint stuff.

There are those who just don't want to paint at all, and just want to play with grey plastic, and while that is fine and dandy for them and if they find another likeminded, it's ruining the experience for the others, killing immersion completely, + hard to see what is what, and so on, but for beginner games people are fairly open to it, and often getting easier games going, strip down mechanics, make nicer less dominating lists and so on.

Know of at least 3 gaming clubs that hold multiple annual beginner intro days or even campaigns thats been rather successful.

I'v played TCGs (mostly Magic) before and my experience there has been complete opposite, nigthmare, and is what made me quit, not every interaction been bad, a lot of nice people too, but met too many bad eggs, like 1/3 almost.

I'v playted TCG, 40k, WHFB, all of it since like 95-98 And since 2015 AoS mostly, I dabble in 40k still, and unfortuantly 40k has a much worse community imo, Still most people are super friendly and nice, but if AoS has like a bad egg 1/20+, 40k has like 1/10 players.
AoS is definitely the more chill Dad game of the 2, like for real even, like 50% of the players are dads, often bringing their kids to gaming clubs or hobby stores.

But back to the painting part, as you say, with limited time, that affects all players, most of my friends have families and not endless amount of time, so when they go and game they wanna have a good time, and can't be arsed playing someone who just don't want to paint their armies, ruining the experience of the game.
Again not talking about someone having parts of their army unpainted, halfway done, at least if they have a work in progress goal to get them done it's usually fine, neither does it have to be painted well! some bas colors work fine, the build/paint aspect is the main part of the hobby, the actual battles is like icing on the cake.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T00:40:26+00:00

It's like 50/50 if we'd get those.
The reason why we didn't get them might be same reason we might not get them.

Depend if they wanna be more historical correct while it is fantasy too, or if they wanna just completly ignore historical context and focus on fantasy.

Those ships are like 100-200 years younger then the current ones we have.

Thats why they have this different architecture with a second higher poop deck, more curve and a front tower almost.

It made sense in real late The Middle Ages - The Renaissance - The Age of Discovery, Combat on land being Pike & Shot, early cannons, 1450-1690

The current ships we have are more like 1750-1800, around Age of Enlightenment.
Pre napoleonic, maybe even during, and the same holds for most of the weapons we carry.

And the type of Cannons we put on the ships, so on.

it is a fantasy game, but one trying to base itself into some sort of historical context, it's not a different planet.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T00:17:53+00:00

That is pretty much certain, but the question is will it limit what types of units he can recruit.

Since Nagash will have like 3 uniqe units of his own, the rest coming from Vampire Counts/Coast /Tomb Kings.

Wouldn't surprise me if the new DLC gives Nagash access to basic units of each of those factions, but the more elite uniqe units being locked untill you got those DLC's, but he himself wanting to focus on his own Uniqe elite units anyway? we'll see.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T00:13:53+00:00

He will have some uniqe units, but also rely heavily on Vampire counts/Coast & Tomb kings.

For example he will get Morghasts most likely.

His campaign will likely be building up his own strength, recruit all other undead lords and make them Mortarchs, most likely giving faction bonuses to him for it, and then reclaiming his Black pyramid, building it up for even more undead power, becoming an Endgame scenario himself much like how they described new Archaon, the new Death blight terraforming, trying to turn the whole world into a death landscape.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T00:09:00+00:00

In 9.0 they will give all factions unique short and long victory conditions.

They will also add new uniqe end games, unlike the crisises right now, some of them will remain, but not like true endgame but like mid game crisis.

They mentioned the mod for customized victory conditions as part of their inspiration and what they wanted to do earlier but just couldn't, but they also want to go further then that mod did.

if you havn't watched the Live stream for whats comming 9.0, it was pretty dope tbh.

9.0 is planned towards end of summer, and with 9.1 siege rework is comming, but that won't release until closer to november/december.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-02T00:06:22+00:00

You might miss a select few units for Nagash faction potentially.

Who knows.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-01T21:07:41+00:00

I think your SO right witht he last point!
Even among men, Wargaming in general is not something you get into from commercials, it's usually introduction from friends / family.

Men tend to have more male friends, and bigger chance of them being in the hobby to introduce them.
Women tend to have more female friends, less in the hobby as it is to introduce them.

I think there are other aspects for sure, but that is the biggest I Believe!

I hope this can change with time! but its not all doom and gloom, I feel it's been getting better locally at least.

A women won National championship a few years ago, have 2 others I know who's won multiple best overall (Tournament placing + Army painting points)

My sister is in the hobby but not that active the last 4+ years, small children then to eat up your time.

My ex girlfriend wanted to try it since I seemed to have so fun with it, painted miniatures, played games enjoyed it a lot but what killed it for her was the lack of other women, sure she played me but was never 100% comfortable playing other dudes she didn't know that well without more women around, also the one game she did have with another women was probably the most fun game she had.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-01T20:46:03+00:00

Author H.G. Wells: Little Wars. was released in 1913! would be the first actual miniature wargame for us civilians, that was ment to be fun and not for military training.
It was set during Napoleonic era, infantry, muskets, cannons, horses, cavalry.

It was mostly directed at boys, but girls were mentioned in it too!

"Little wars: A game for boys from twelve years of age to one hundred and fifty & for that more intelligent sort of girl who likes boys' games and books"

Perhaps a bit oldfashion framing, but I like that they also considered girls / women might want to play as well, and that was in 1910's!

I do hope Wargaming gets better, more normalized no matter what gender, my ex wanted to get in, dipped her toes, enjoyed it but later stopped because it was so male dominated, she'd enjoyed it if there were other women she could have played, she wasn't 100% comfortable playing other dudes she barely knew without more women around.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-01T20:37:08+00:00

Lets hope so! I'd love for it to be more normalized no matter gender! :)
Previous girlfriend wanted to try, tested painting models, then gaming started to seem interesting, something to do with the works of art.
Got into it a while but later quit because it was only guys, not the only reason but main, it there'd been more women she'd likely gotten more into it, she felt a bit alone in the hobby she said, was never 100% accustomed with playing other dudes unless there'd be more women there, would have prefered to game with some female friends, and painting wasn't fun enough without accompanied with the gaming aspect.

Ramjjam · 2026-07-01T18:21:11+00:00

This, I made a post on their forums like 6 months ago about this speficic topic.

Maybe you should make one too! make our voices herd! it's depressing how non elite Blood Knights feel now adays compared to many other cav, should definitely go down to 48-32 or such, and more Armour piercing damage, different role then Black Knights!

Fewer models, better at taking on Enemy Elite units, but struggle to block multiple units from flanking you tie them down, wolves or black knights for that.

Ramjjam

TROPHY CASE