Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Check it out for yourself.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?aId=15400016

I enjoyed the article, particularly because they actually explained a bit how being the attacker is different from the defender in terms of the FoC.

I mean ultimately the article only serves to say "hey, check out and buy these awesome new terrain model kits" but at least the article was decent - I liked they gave a Turn 1 example of play.

The bit of custom Tau terrain they show is nice.

Also the bit about intercept shots was interesting. I hadn't heard about those yet.

I apologize if this has been posted already, but I didn't see it.

Hey,that ironclad dreadnoughts seismic hammer looks different, how come, anyone knows?

Greets
Schepp himself

P.S. Yeah, nice article.

Don't tend to read their "Getting started with..." articles. They usually contain lots of phrases along the lines of "you will need the following..."

Flashman wrote:Don't tend to read their "Getting started with..." articles. They usually contain lots of phrases along the lines of "you will need the following..."

Getting started with being a general fourms user of dakkadakka.com..... You will need the following....

^_^

This yet another picture of the pending new plastic Daemon Prince kit?

Man, I hope that is not the new plastic Demon Prince kit. It would not reflect the massive girth and ominus presence of what is described in the fluff or the artwork through out the years. But then again, when have they ever done that?

The sword on that guy is übercheesy. The skull on the handle is way too small!

Greets
Schepp himself

Uhm...that is most certainly NOT the new plastic demon prince. That is a kitbash between the metal bloodthirster and the metal 40k demonprince, with a horribly huge plasticard mockup of a bloodletter sword.

It's actually a good idea, since the bloodthirster has a horrible lower torso/legs, so maybe that conversion has promise. The arms I would do a little differently though.

Yes, this model was shown in WD a couple of months ago as part of an "Army of the Month" type article. It is indeed a conversion and not a bad one at that.

Schepp himself wrote:Hey,that ironclad dreadnoughts seismic hammer looks different, how come, anyone knows?

Greets
Schepp himself

P.S. Yeah, nice article.

I think that might be the chainfist.

And lo and behold! They are still Doing It Wrong (TM) with the Valkyrie . Same thing as in the WD battle report. The Valk is on the ground without its base and stand unloading troops. Sure it makes for a great action shot and all that but could they at least try following the rules in a public example such as this?

A-P wrote: And lo and behold! They are still Doing It Wrong (TM) with the Valkyrie . Same thing as in the WD battle report. The Valk is on the ground without its base and stand unloading troops. Sure it makes for a great action shot and all that but could they at least try following the rules in a public example such as this?

You're forgetting the first rule of GW. Sell more models.

AdeptArtificer wrote:Man, I hope that is not the new plastic Demon Prince kit. It would not reflect the massive girth and ominus presence of what is described in the fluff or the artwork through out the years. But then again, when have they ever done that?

He needs a bigger sword...
[/sarcasm]

Superscope wrote:

Flashman wrote:Don't tend to read their "Getting started with..." articles. They usually contain lots of phrases along the lines of "you will need the following..."

Getting started with being a general fourms user of dakkadakka.com..... You will need the following....

^_^

1. A bitter, jaded hatred of GW for hooking you on this plastic crack. (Check.)

But seriously, it looks like a fun opportunity to have a narrative, terrain-rich board without doing the full Cities of Death thing. I'll have to check it out.

dashrendar wrote:

Schepp himself wrote:Hey,that ironclad dreadnoughts seismic hammer looks different, how come, anyone knows?

Greets
Schepp himself

P.S. Yeah, nice article.

I think that might be the chainfist.

Whatever it is, it's quite nice. Nicer than the seismic "hammer", imo.

And on the article. I mean it's no crime to advert a new product. And it's done with a lot of information and in an objective (kind of) way.

Greets
Schepp himself

Yes, not a bad web article actually. Gives you a pretty good idea of what's involved and the "You will need the following..." bit isn't until the end.

@ Doctor Optimal - Planetstrike arguably requires just as much scenery as Cities of Death, if not more. See this month's WD battle report!

Flashman wrote:
@ Doctor Optimal - Planetstrike arguably requires just as much scenery as Cities of Death, if not more. See this month's WD battle report!

Yes, but the fire channels are a bit wider.

I really really like scenery/terrain-heavy boards. It's just that city fight gets old (and sloooooowwwww) quickly.

Doctor Optimal wrote:

Flashman wrote:
@ Doctor Optimal - Planetstrike arguably requires just as much scenery as Cities of Death, if not more. See this month's WD battle report!

Yes, but the fire channels are a bit wider.

I really really like scenery/terrain-heavy boards. It's just that city fight gets old (and sloooooowwwww) quickly.

Looks like you'll have fun then I really loved the before and after shots of the battle report in WD (probably the best one they've done for a while, because they weren't trying to push any one army), but the amount of terrain required to achieve that look scares me!

I really like the Tau Bastion. Can't wait to get that. Twin-linked Railguns for FREE!!! Fill that sucker with markerlight pathfinders and rain hell on the attackers!

Warlord Imp wrote:I really like the Tau Bastion. Can't wait to get that. Twin-linked Railguns for FREE!!! Fill that sucker with markerlight pathfinders and rain hell on the attackers!

Yes with whats left after they drop 5 STr9 pie plates on you...

Warlord Imp wrote:I really like the Tau Bastion. Can't wait to get that. Twin-linked Railguns for FREE!!! Fill that sucker with markerlight pathfinders and rain hell on the attackers!

Hold on to your enthusiasm, Warlord Imp (sigh, only in this community would I be typing those words). Tau Bastion was a modelling project by GW staffer and therefore not scheduled for release.

WTH is with that daemon prince's sword?

WAAAY too big.

Still, this is a nice article, me thinks.

What I still don't understand is how many objectives should there be in a 1,000 point game or 1,500 point game for balanced play?

The force org chart gives me a in my with a healthy side serving of .

Most importantly, they have come up trumps in the Terrain stakes.

The defence line is pretty spanky, and you certainly get a more than reasonable amount from each set, which I was worried about.

So, we have Planestrike, for the opening of the campaign, standard and Cityfight for the meat and bones of the campaign, and of course, Apocalypse for the last hurrah. Only one thing is missing....

How long until they finally do a Combat Patrol / smaller, more detailed expansion for sabotage missions? Just a book with additional rules for asploding terrain pieces, specific objectives (ruin the fuel, burn the ammo etc) to aid in the wider campaign, as well as provide interesting luncheon hour based shenanigans? They have to do this. Surely!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Most importantly, they have come up trumps in the Terrain stakes.

The defence line is pretty spanky, and you certainly get a more than reasonable amount from each set, which I was worried about.

So, we have Planestrike, for the opening of the campaign, standard and Cityfight for the meat and bones of the campaign, and of course, Apocalypse for the last hurrah. Only one thing is missing....

How long until they finally do a Combat Patrol / smaller, more detailed expansion for sabotage missions? Just a book with additional rules for asploding terrain pieces, specific objectives (ruin the fuel, burn the ammo etc) to aid in the wider campaign, as well as provide interesting luncheon hour based shenanigans? They have to do this. Surely!

I'm guessing... quite a while?

GW wants to sell lots of models.

A 'skirmish' setting doesn't really accomplish that quickly enough for them, I think.

Though, to your point, a natural feeder system of 'Skirmish' to "Planetstrike" to "Apocalypse" would help...

OK, I hope it is next!

Indeedy!

Doesn't have to be big, and they can get additional model sales in the following way....

Release boxed sets of special 'Saboteurs' for each race. Cooler poses, special equipment etc. Make them cool enough with the extras, and people might buy them just for the Bitz as well. Even if it's repacks with a new sprue, it's a new way to sell. Oh and of course, some nice new metal Sargeants equivalents for each race to lead the brave troops into battle!

Ways and means!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Most importantly, they have come up trumps in the Terrain stakes.

The defence line is pretty spanky, and you certainly get a more than reasonable amount from each set, which I was worried about.

So, we have Planestrike, for the opening of the campaign, standard and Cityfight for the meat and bones of the campaign, and of course, Apocalypse for the last hurrah. Only one thing is missing....

How long until they finally do a Combat Patrol / smaller, more detailed expansion for sabotage missions? Just a book with additional rules for asploding terrain pieces, specific objectives (ruin the fuel, burn the ammo etc) to aid in the wider campaign, as well as provide interesting luncheon hour based shenanigans? They have to do this. Surely!

Don't forget that Space Hulk is coming! It could go:

Space Hulk (pre-landing space combat) -> Planet Strike (landing) -> Standard/Cityfight (main war) -> Apocalypse (Götterdämmerung)

And that's without adding Specialist Games (BFG for the initial fleet battles, Epic for larger-than-Apocalypse, even modified Necromunda for squad combat.)

Yarr. Still, here is hoping for some kind of return to the Warhammer Campaign packs.

In case you missed those, they contained a history of the Campaign, a timeline etc, a cardboard building or three for the battles, and a series of scenarios to be played through.

And looking at the Cities of Death buildings etc, they are reaonsably priced enough that you put an extra £2 on the price, bung in the booklet about it and biggedy biggedy bong, dual role for the product. Don't have a buddy with the right force for an Imperial V Necron campaign? Not to worry, it's still a luvverly new building (or even just panels if they do it on the cheap) for your collection. Surely thats a win win?

Might fire that off as an idea email to them actually. I'd buy it just for the extra terrain.

the terrain side of planetstrike is great lol
have a look in this month white dwarf they show a batrep and the terrains great.
but i think GW is just calling out for is to buy more stuff of them lol

inzeos wrote:

This yet another picture of the pending new plastic Daemon Prince kit?

Nah, it's another example of why the Imperial Guard are always recruiting.

...

The FOC's are pretty slick, but the strongpoints bother me. Not playwise but structurally. I sense a lot of people with LOS-on-the-brain will be stacking piles of books beneath their emplacements to make sure they can aim at things below the the "horizon" of the rooftop.