I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
Yeah the whole "conversions are suppressed" seems like a really strange one to bring out these days. GW do conversion articles in WD all the time, sometimes on their website too. Plus their big events like Golden Demon feature a LOT of converted stuff.
Sure its using GW parts these days instead of deodorant cans, but at the same time the internet is FULL of conversion articles and guides. Youtube even has vast amounts of video guides.
Between them, 3rd party proxy armies, 3D printing and more there's a VAST wealth of conversion and "do your own thing" armies and such out there now. Way more than there ever was in the past.
Perhaps there isn't as much in the codex (honestly it was often a page or less on them); but its ripe all over the place unless your only information source is quite literally the codex and nothing else.
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
Well, in that case i stand corrected. Just I dont come across those things, and have for many years found their rulebooks, codices and armybooks really unispiring for anything out of the box. And now that you mention it, its true the 40k rules even allow for some variations of generic weapons like "accursed weapons" that actually let you use converions in game to some degree.
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
It feels especially weird after the 'unit filler' article.
And the Bretonnian Exiles army list has several units with 'How to represent this unit in game' sidebars. (Yeomen guard, Brigands and Bombard). The immediate suggestions are men at arms with other kits (empire militia particularly), but there is an implicit 'go nuts' feel to the army.
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
It feels especially weird after the 'unit filler' article.
And the Bretonnian Exiles army list has several units with 'How to represent this unit in game' sidebars. (Yeomen guard, Brigands and Bombard). The immediate suggestions are men at arms with other kits (empire militia particularly), but there is an implicit 'go nuts' feel to the army.
This only makes their decision to behave like AoS equivalents of certian models don't exist for the sake of ToW all the more infuriating, to be honest.
Not to burst a bubble or anything but is that actually happening?
Has there been any concrete evidence to suggest that certain models that existed at the tail end of fantasy won't be usable in TOW?
To kind of highlight my point, who is stopping you from using those models?
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
It feels especially weird after the 'unit filler' article.
And the Bretonnian Exiles army list has several units with 'How to represent this unit in game' sidebars. (Yeomen guard, Brigands and Bombard). The immediate suggestions are men at arms with other kits (empire militia particularly), but there is an implicit 'go nuts' feel to the army.
This only makes their decision to behave like AoS equivalents of certian models don't exist for the sake of ToW all the more infuriating, to be honest.
... what? where? when? Non-GW people online have been spouting various theories about.... stuff, but I'm not sure what imagined roadblock prevents you from buying the 'Vanguard: Slaves to Darkness' box and popping them on square bases and moving on with your day. Every single one of those units exist and they're exactly those models (though you'll need a bit of work to give the warriors additional hand weapons, but thats where conversions wander back into the picture).
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
It feels especially weird after the 'unit filler' article.
And the Bretonnian Exiles army list has several units with 'How to represent this unit in game' sidebars. (Yeomen guard, Brigands and Bombard). The immediate suggestions are men at arms with other kits (empire militia particularly), but there is an implicit 'go nuts' feel to the army.
This only makes their decision to behave like AoS equivalents of certian models don't exist for the sake of ToW all the more infuriating, to be honest.
... what? where? when? Non-GW people online have been spouting various theories about.... stuff, but I'm not sure what imagined roadblock prevents you from buying the 'Vanguard: Slaves to Darkness' box and popping them on square bases and moving on with your day. Every single one of those units exist and they're exactly those models (though you'll need a bit of work to give the warriors additional hand weapons, but thats where conversions wander back into the picture).
Nothing but that may be a poor example. They're a good chunk bigger iirc so might have issues getting on the base, they're not really designed to rank up at all, have sigmar bling on them all over. That and I imagine a 20 box of old chaos warriors won't be far off the price of 10 modern ones.
But your point is correct, people are as beholden to models and base sizes as they choose to be.
The newer Warriors don't have "Sigmar bling" all over them. They're bigger but that's it.
Spoiler:
The difficulty in ranking would be with the more outstretched arms but then with bigger bases factored in that isn't necessarily an issue. That or use them as Chosen/unit Champions.
Gert wrote: The newer Warriors don't have "Sigmar bling" all over them. They're bigger but that's it.
Spoiler:
The difficulty in ranking would be with the more outstretched arms but then with bigger bases factored in that isn't necessarily an issue. That or use them as Chosen/unit Champions.
Huh, I could have sworn they had more tokens/trophies and the like.
Gert wrote: Not to burst a bubble or anything but is that actually happening?
Has there been any concrete evidence to suggest that certain models that existed at the tail end of fantasy won't be usable in TOW?
To kind of highlight my point, who is stopping you from using those models?
There’s a small handful of things that haven’t got rules:
E.g. the two WoC units on daemonic mounts or the wizard wagons (though those don’t fit the timeframe).
But there does not appear to be anything stopping you using whatever models you want for the things that do have rules. Though some things could maybe be a bit constrained by the base size.
nathan2004 wrote: The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if they changed base sizes in part so you could rank up the newer models easier lol.
My initial impression to them bumping up the base size was "good, maybe now I can finally rank up <insert 50% of all WHFB models here>".
But then when I discovered a few seconds later they were also increasing the base size for models that ranked up perfectly fine (night goblins for example) I got more deflated and less interested in the game.
Bumping up bases to improve ranking up = noble cause.
Bumping up base sizes arbitrarily regardless of ranking up = annoying.
It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions.
There also might have been a general decision to boost all bases rather than just select ones so that some people don't feel that armies are getting unfair bonuses simply because of their sculpting style or model age. Eg old armies on smaller bases, new ones on bigger.
There's also likely an element of GW keeping costs down and picking/packing easier by reducing the number of bases. So instead of almost two systems of bases for smaller and bigger models; just compress it to one that leans on the larger size.
Rebasing guide I created in case you need it...no one has pinned it to the original post so I just keep reposting every few pages to make sure people have it haha
Overread wrote: It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions..
They could always try just not making new models bigger...
Gert wrote: The newer Warriors don't have "Sigmar bling" all over them. They're bigger but that's it.
Spoiler:
The difficulty in ranking would be with the more outstretched arms but then with bigger bases factored in that isn't necessarily an issue. That or use them as Chosen/unit Champions.
Huh, I could have sworn they had more tokens/trophies and the like.
A couple of the chosen and knight minis have sigmarine helmet trophies strapped to their gear, but not the baseline warriors.
Overread wrote: It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions..
They could always try just not making new models bigger...
To be fair sometimes its not even bigger, just going for more dynamic poses increases size.
Some stuff like cavalry also had some really tiny mounts in the past so boosting them up could easily make them too big for some bases, even if they aren't super-sized nor increasing the size of the rider. And like it or not more dynamic poses do attract attention and sell.
If everything is a minimum of 25mm without exceptions it makes it a bit easier to plan and balance. Perhaps night goblins are weak enough that it wouldn't be overpowered but maybe they would miss a unit here or there where the extra supporting attacks from back rank or increased mobility from smaller frontage made a unit better at a task than intended.
If it were main studio that did it I would just call them lazy and bad at their job for doing so but since the specialist games people have way less resources I can understand the decision from this point alone.
I for one like the increase in base size for most models. If TOW will be popular and I like it more than any of the older editions I will put in the effort to fully re base my empire army. Right now I just have the standard sand + static grass basing from 2 decades ago and if I redo it I will do the basing to a slightly higher quality and probably spend 5 min a model on some highlights and touch ups on the actual models while at it. Small effort per model to do a glow up on the entire army that fits more to my current painting skills.
If no model has a 20mm base, then it's an item GW doesn't have to manufacture and doesn't have to stock for people to purchase. That's enough of a reason for them to remove them from the game.
The Black Adder wrote: If no model has a 20mm base, then it's an item GW doesn't have to manufacture and doesn't have to stock for people to purchase. That's enough of a reason for them to remove them from the game.
This would make more sense if they didn't suddenly introduce 30mm bases.
You dont have to rebase them if you play only local or you can use base extenders or spaced movement trays.
The last, i will use because i have to many army's to rebase or use base extenders.
And i have the option to print them myself.
Overread wrote: It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions..
They could always try just not making new models bigger...
Overread wrote: It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions..
They could always try just not making new models bigger...
To be fair sometimes its not even bigger, just going for more dynamic poses increases size.
Some stuff like cavalry also had some really tiny mounts in the past so boosting them up could easily make them too big for some bases, even if they aren't super-sized nor increasing the size of the rider. And like it or not more dynamic poses do attract attention and sell.
Some older model stuff is very stiff in pose.
I know it's a contentious point.... but IMO rank and flank models SHOULD be in a stiff pose 90% of the time (with exceptions for skirmishers or berserker type units).
One review I saw mentioned that a lot of older models have a stronger silhouette, and I kind of agree. It's the silhouette that you see when they're all ranked up together.
Some models did just genuinely need bigger bases because the models themselves were too big regardless of poses, as you mentioned, cavalry, from the late 90's they probably should have added another 10 or 15mm to the length and 5mm to the width of the base.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
skeleton wrote: You dont have to rebase them if you play only local or you can use base extenders or spaced movement trays.
The last, i will use because i have to many army's to rebase or use base extenders.
And i have the option to print them myself.
I find base extenders and spaced movement trays aesthetically unpleasing
It might be because it's the first game that got me into warhammer, but the aesthetic of each model individually based and hard up against the model next to it is something I've always liked.
Gert wrote: The newer Warriors don't have "Sigmar bling" all over them. They're bigger but that's it.
Spoiler:
The difficulty in ranking would be with the more outstretched arms but then with bigger bases factored in that isn't necessarily an issue. That or use them as Chosen/unit Champions.
I was planning on doing the same thing for the 8th Ed group I was going to join! Now they'll just be in TOW.
Proxying and converting is absolutely still going to be seen with TOW.
Its the HH of AoS for crying out loud. It'll be scratchbuilds, conversions, and 3d prints abound.
Gert wrote: Proxying and converting is absolutely still going to be seen with TOW.
Arcane Journals literally list conversion ideas for the armies of infamy units.
I'm listening to Vince Venturella's podcast right now and he just said "here GW treats you as an adult and trusts you to figure out how to put a Tomb Guard on a chariot"
The first thing I pictured when reading that is someone walking into my office with a tomb guard mini glued to their forehead and random plastic bits from the chariot kit glued to their hands and clothes, saying "I need an adult".
Just checked games workshop and saw old world releases, finally (initial response)..
then put on snowboots and yelled "ackshually"..
I kindof am repelled by there only being two options on release (understanding that it is more realistic) and the worst is that one of the two release armies contain the Khem which I inteded to make my main army.
I am inflicted with the ailment known as "cannotmainstreamiatry" and therefor become extremely triggered even when merely imagining I would buy an army that 99.9% of players will have.
Therefor I will have to wait until more armies are released.. still hoping that they will release other armies in larger amounts (and less initual units for what I care) as in 3-4 different armies at a time (probably won't happen but eghhh) so that I will never hear that "one of us" chant in my head when I buy something.
Best would be if they would release some uninteresting armies first so that everyone buys those and then release chaos dwarves or something when everyone is distracted with their ratmen and goblins so that I can stay the original underdog.
It's important to me.
edit: Will probably cave and buy 200 euros worth of tomb kings next time I walk into a warhammer store anyway, because my money is mummy cursed.
If it makes you feel any better, its looking like Tomb Kings are significantly less popular than Bretonnia. The tomb kings subreddit is legit less than half the size of the bretonnian subreddit, for example.
I doubt player populations will end up different than what they were in previous editions.
Empire, and High Elves will be the largest. Bretonnia will eventually die out to one of the smaller armies due to being more niche than the Empire, and It doesn't look like Tomb Kings are going to make up a large amount of the player base either.
Thanks for the refreshing words, I may make a sphinx army.. not really interested in those serpentine things because their bellies look like hell to paint with all those ribs.
The Sphinx looks so badass I want ten of them, maybe more..
Maybe I should fill my entire room with sphinxes..
That might drain my bank account though, still.. hmm..
Heh, I bought 6 sphinxes myself I could probably add a few more in as character mounts but thats probably close to the max of what you'd reasonably expect to see in a 2000-2500 pt army.
But also 4 of the sepulchral serpentine dude kits (12 minis total).
I find some aspects of the Tomb Kings to be really fascinating and cool, other parts to be really derivative, vanilla, and boring. I hope moving forward GW finds a way to do more with the faction and the concepts there and moves away from the overly literal interpretation of skeletal undead egyptians.
Overread wrote: It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions..
They could always try just not making new models bigger...
Overread wrote: It might also be that GW know/hope they will sculpt more new models for the model line and thus the base size increase is future proofing those factions..
They could always try just not making new models bigger...
To be fair sometimes its not even bigger, just going for more dynamic poses increases size.
Some stuff like cavalry also had some really tiny mounts in the past so boosting them up could easily make them too big for some bases, even if they aren't super-sized nor increasing the size of the rider. And like it or not more dynamic poses do attract attention and sell.
Some older model stuff is very stiff in pose.
I know it's a contentious point.... but IMO rank and flank models SHOULD be in a stiff pose 90% of the time (with exceptions for skirmishers or berserker type units).
One review I saw mentioned that a lot of older models have a stronger silhouette, and I kind of agree. It's the silhouette that you see when they're all ranked up together.
Some models did just genuinely need bigger bases because the models themselves were too big regardless of poses, as you mentioned, cavalry, from the late 90's they probably should have added another 10 or 15mm to the length and 5mm to the width of the base.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
skeleton wrote: You dont have to rebase them if you play only local or you can use base extenders or spaced movement trays.
The last, i will use because i have to many army's to rebase or use base extenders.
And i have the option to print them myself.
I find base extenders and spaced movement trays aesthetically unpleasing
It might be because it's the first game that got me into warhammer, but the aesthetic of each model individually based and hard up against the model next to it is something I've always liked.
Unfortunately it's exactly those stiff figures that will look poor with gaps between them - I worry how the hordes of 8th ed ratman will look with substantial spaces between the figures. Can't help but wonder if retaining 20mm bases for at least goblins, skaven, and similarly trashy hordes of small minis would have been fine from a gameplay point of view, certainly would look so much nicer!
Don't think I have it in me to finally make a full Skaven army, but if I did, I might consider having only the front and back rank on individual bases, and multibase the middle ranks with a higher density of figures.
If TOW takes off locally, I might consider rebasing/removementtraying my wood elves at least, those thankfully fit a more loose formation perfectly well.
Fayric wrote: I remember when GW used to have guides in their rulebooks how to convert and make uniqe models and units. Usually you could se some uniqe models on display in armybooks to inspire diversity to their range.
Really sad how that creative part of the hobby has been supressed. I used to love rumaging in the bits box for every character and building weapons from stuff you found at home.
I used to laugh at the suggestion to buy expencive terrain when you could easily build stuff yourself. These days I would most likely not play with converted models at all and love expencive GW terrain .
Uhm... what? WD is full of conversions and there're articles on WarCom with conversions. Sure, they use their own terrain, but also with conversions. For LotR they had a guide to build your own terrain though.
It feels especially weird after the 'unit filler' article.
And the Bretonnian Exiles army list has several units with 'How to represent this unit in game' sidebars. (Yeomen guard, Brigands and Bombard). The immediate suggestions are men at arms with other kits (empire militia particularly), but there is an implicit 'go nuts' feel to the army.
This only makes their decision to behave like AoS equivalents of certian models don't exist for the sake of ToW all the more infuriating, to be honest.
... what? where? when? Non-GW people online have been spouting various theories about.... stuff, but I'm not sure what imagined roadblock prevents you from buying the 'Vanguard: Slaves to Darkness' box and popping them on square bases and moving on with your day. Every single one of those units exist and they're exactly those models (though you'll need a bit of work to give the warriors additional hand weapons, but thats where conversions wander back into the picture).
Um, everywhere? Marketing the god-awful treeman when a gorgeous new model (one that was originally made for WHFB, to add insult to injury) exists, same with chaos knights, warriors, daemon princes.
GW is bringing back all those into production, pretending the new ones don't exist - both in marketing and book art/photography.
Also, I'm very much aware why they are doing so, and I'm very much aware I can simply buy the new models and play with them (got two StD vanguards on the way just for that).
But I don't have to like GW's cynical approach and I'm at perfect freedom to speak out against it. Especially when they're encouraging kit bashing and the like in other cases.
hi there, just a quick question... how is the perception of TOW on dakkadakka?
didnt had time because of work to follow the discussion here. just want to know if it is worth spending a couple of hours combing through the threads to read interesting discussions or is this another instance of "GW bad - this is why they are evil and need to be put against the wall"?
RedNoak wrote: hi there, just a quick question... how is the perception of TOW on dakkadakka?
didnt had time because of work to follow the discussion here. just want to know if it is worth spending a couple of hours combing through the threads to read interesting discussions or is this another instance of "GW bad - this is why they are evil and need to be put against the wall"?
GW are bad but there's a lot of nice content for ToW on youtube, for instance Mountain Miniatures.
RedNoak wrote: hi there, just a quick question... how is the perception of TOW on dakkadakka?
didnt had time because of work to follow the discussion here. just want to know if it is worth spending a couple of hours combing through the threads to read interesting discussions or is this another instance of "GW bad - this is why they are evil and need to be put against the wall"?
I'm not sure I'd bother reading this thread. News threads on dakka are rarely worth going back to read, there's maybe 1 morsel of information per 2 pages of posts
Probably better off looking at some reviews and stuff from people who have the game, maybe some battle reports.
Personally, when TOW was originally announced, I was interested but not sold, the closer we've gotten to release the less interested I've gotten. The launch day hype got me thinking "maybe I'll grab something..." but once that hype subsided I'm glad I didn't. Would rather wait to see how things pan out.
There was a few blokes at the local gaming store talking about it, so maybe a community will kick off here, will have to see. WHFB was reasonably popular here back in the day (while generally speaking WHFB was a small fish compared to 40k, I think locally it was reasonably popular).
Unfortunately it's exactly those stiff figures that will look poor with gaps between them - I worry how the hordes of 8th ed ratman will look with substantial spaces between the figures. Can't help but wonder if retaining 20mm bases for at least goblins, skaven, and similarly trashy hordes of small minis would have been fine from a gameplay point of view, certainly would look so much nicer! Don't think I have it in me to finally make a full Skaven army, but if I did, I might consider having only the front and back rank on individual bases, and multibase the middle ranks with a higher density of figures.
If TOW takes off locally, I might consider rebasing/removementtraying my wood elves at least, those thankfully fit a more loose formation perfectly well.
Skaven are a bit of a weird one, I never collected them myself but a friend did, and the multi-pose models that came out I think in 6th edition were horrible spindly things with arms and tails spreading out in all directions, they did NOT rank up nicely on 20mm bases. I would also say they were generally not nice looking models.
The more recent Skaven models look a lot nicer, I assume they rank up better but I've never tried it and my skaven friend quit WHFB before they came out.
One consequence of moving Skaven to 25mm: the base width for the Screaming Bell and Plague Furnace is 60mm so they won't rank up properly to push the damn things. (Presuming that is still how they work in the legacy rules. Maybe they now just need a nearby unit to move as in AoS or magically roll as in Total War.) Seems a bit of an oversight.
RedNoak wrote: GW bad - this is why they are evil and need to be put against the wall"?
why do people always think that you must like a company to like their products, or that what a company is doing now must be ignored because of a setting/world/IP created by people no longer working there
like nobody thinks you can only be a Harry Potter fan (or like reading the books) if you agree with every single statement of JK and as a true fan never admit that she is "bad" but must defend her.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RedNoak wrote: hi there, just a quick question... how is the perception of TOW on dakkadakka?
as information is still limited and necessary details are missing, like you see with the post on how the bell nur works the perception differs depending on what the people have seen from the game
by now there are like different groups, one being TOW is Herohammer and infantry useless, the other that big infantry blocks are back and will dominate the game, and others are in the camp of this being 6th Edition 2.0 which then again is seen as positive by some and negative by others
Skaven are a bit of a weird one, I never collected them myself but a friend did, and the multi-pose models that came out I think in 6th edition were horrible spindly things with arms and tails spreading out in all directions, they did NOT rank up nicely on 20mm bases. I would also say they were generally not nice looking models.
The more recent Skaven models look a lot nicer, I assume they rank up better but I've never tried it and my skaven friend quit WHFB before they came out.
a friend collected Skaven during 5th/6th and my son is doing now, I had at least once everything in plastic on my desk
the older plastic ones were like most of the kits during that time, something you would call "advanced" now and nothing kids could easily do, like I could work with them as I did scale models before I started with warhammer, while for him those were the first models he ever put together
and glueing ever breaking tails and the need to to account for ranking during building them was a little much (also my 5th Edi plastic Empire state troops would not rank up on 20mm if you just build them without thinking were each model goes inside a unit)
the later basic infantry are just the easy to build Island of Blood ones, not bad and good for mass infantry but limited, and my son had both on the table, the current GW line and the Ratkin from Mantic and went with the Mantic ones because he liked them more (the overall look and how they go together)
RedNoak wrote: hi there, just a quick question... how is the perception of TOW on dakkadakka?
didnt had time because of work to follow the discussion here. just want to know if it is worth spending a couple of hours combing through the threads to read interesting discussions or is this another instance of "GW bad - this is why they are evil and need to be put against the wall"?
Nah, just your regular internet polarisation, hyperbole and cognitive dissonance defense mechanisms.
-I have some specific preferences A, B and C, so I'd rather GW did things differently with aspects X, Y and Z.
-You hate GW!
-You spoil our fun with X, Y and Z!
-Go play chess!
-If you don't have a positive opinion, it's not a place to share your opinion!
etc.
But really, actually most of the posts from the last 10 pages or so are not about the hobby of playing but rather the hobby of buying (or the frustrations of not being able to buy) products
Cyel wrote: Nah, just your regular internet polarisation, hyperbole and cognitive dissonance defense mechanisms
I'm trying to comprehend just how much irony was involved in writing that, then straight up inventing a bunch of hyperbole that bears very little relation to this thread:
Cyel wrote: -You hate GW!
-You spoil our fun with X, Y and Z!
-Go play chess!
-If you don't have a positive opinion, it's not a place to share your opinion!
RedNoak wrote: hi there, just a quick question... how is the perception of TOW on dakkadakka?
didnt had time because of work to follow the discussion here. just want to know if it is worth spending a couple of hours combing through the threads to read interesting discussions or is this another instance of "GW bad - this is why they are evil and need to be put against the wall"?
There is no reason to waste time going through 200 pages of the same argument back and forth endlessly. This is one of the dullest threads in the entire forum.
What it boils down to is some people like TOW and are glad Warhammer Fantasy is back in some form. Some people don't like GW, some people wanted a lot more from the release.
Cyel wrote: Nah, just your regular internet polarisation, hyperbole and cognitive dissonance defense mechanisms
I'm trying to comprehend just how much irony was involved in writing that, then straight up inventing a bunch of hyperbole that bears very little relation to this thread:
Cyel wrote: -You hate GW!
-You spoil our fun with X, Y and Z!
-Go play chess!
-If you don't have a positive opinion, it's not a place to share your opinion!
But that literally DID happen in here. Well, after we got through:
The "squares" post from GW was a prank, so just play AOS.
It's vaporware, so just play AOS.
It's not going to be WFB returned, it'll be mass battle AOS, so just play AOS.
It's not going to be WFB returned, it's going to be Warmaster AOS. So just play AOS twice.
The only people who've been consistent have been the people who were rooting for this from the beginning.
chaos0xomega wrote: Heh, I bought 6 sphinxes myself I could probably add a few more in as character mounts but thats probably close to the max of what you'd reasonably expect to see in a 2000-2500 pt army.
But also 4 of the sepulchral serpentine dude kits (12 minis total).
I find some aspects of the Tomb Kings to be really fascinating and cool, other parts to be really derivative, vanilla, and boring. I hope moving forward GW finds a way to do more with the faction and the concepts there and moves away from the overly literal interpretation of skeletal undead egyptians.
We do need mummys though.. but more egyptian-mytho monsters are welcome, imagine painting an armored sarcosochus...
But really, actually most of the posts from the last 10 pages or so are not about the hobby of playing but rather the hobby of buying (or the frustrations of not being able to buy) products
twoseventwo wrote: One consequence of moving Skaven to 25mm: the base width for the Screaming Bell and Plague Furnace is 60mm so they won't rank up properly to push the damn things. (Presuming that is still how they work in the legacy rules. Maybe they now just need a nearby unit to move as in AoS or magically roll as in Total War.) Seems a bit of an oversight.
My Skaven will remain on their 20mm-bases for various reason, this being one of them.
Others being that there's no way in hell I'm rebasing my entire 500+ model-count Skaven army and the fact that I'll still be using them in other fantasy-games (like WAP) where they're still on 20mm-bases.
twoseventwo wrote: One consequence of moving Skaven to 25mm: the base width for the Screaming Bell and Plague Furnace is 60mm so they won't rank up properly to push the damn things. (Presuming that is still how they work in the legacy rules. Maybe they now just need a nearby unit to move as in AoS or magically roll as in Total War.) Seems a bit of an oversight.
My Skaven will remain on their 20mm-bases for various reason, this being one of them.
Others being that there's no way in hell I'm rebasing my entire 500+ model-count Skaven army and the fact that I'll still be using them in other fantasy-games (like WAP) where they're still on 20mm-bases.
Yeah, it isn't lost on me that newhammer going to bigger bases means they're not directly equivalent to other games like KoW now... and frankly I'm more likely to play KoW than Warhammer at this point in time. I definitely won't be rebasing my Night Goblins, and if I ever paint more Night Goblins I'll need to source more 20mm bases to go with them.
nathan2004 wrote: Has anyone seen the rules for cannons? Are they still laser guided or do they scatter? Is damage d6 or d3/d3+1?
From what I've seen, they're still laser-guided with a chance to over/under-shoot as before. Even stone thrower weapons are more accurate in that you select a target unit and place the template directly in the center of the target unit, then roll scatter.
leopard wrote: so essentially zero point taking the larger base monsters if there are Empire players about?
Not really. Its pretty much impossible to one-shot a monster with a cannon. Most seem to do D3+1, while monsters tend to have about 6 wounds, and ridden mosters add to the character's wounds.
leopard wrote: so essentially zero point taking the larger base monsters if there are Empire players about?
Not really. Its pretty much impossible to one-shot a monster with a cannon. Most seem to do D3+1, while monsters tend to have about 6 wounds, and ridden mosters add to the character's wounds.
The obvious retort is: Have you ever seen an Empire player field less than two cannons? Because as an Empire player myself, I don't believe I have.
BertBert wrote: Does it still differentiate between rider and monstrous mount and, if so, does a rider's invunerable save translate to its mount?
Monster mounts now add T and W to the rider and so far I have managed to recognized a big problem in this game and that is dragons. They are simply way too strong. Lord on star dragon or chaos dragon is at the minimum T6 W10 AS2+ WS5+ fly(10) and deals at a minimum 10 S6 AP2 attacks. That is with NO magic items taken.
With fly 10 inches they can pick and choose their fights and are simply too strong to bring down. They do cost around 500 points but that is 500 points that they deny from their opponent and also means they can bring 2 dragons in 2000pts list.
Most armies have no way to deal with this. And cannons will not help you. This is looking troubling.
kodos wrote: like nobody thinks you can only be a Harry Potter fan (or like reading the books) if you agree with every single statement of JK and as a true fan never admit that she is "bad" but must defend her.
You'd be surprised how many people think the opposite of that: That by liking something, you automatically agree with everything the author stands for.
This happens with fictional things as well. I've seen people accuse others of excusing mass genocide because they like Darth Vader.
We live in an age where people are incapable of separating things for any reason, and an absence of explicit condemnation implies the opposite: Total support. The "Why aren't you wearing the ribbon?" scene from Seinfeld is a reality these days.
leopard wrote: so essentially zero point taking the larger base monsters if there are Empire players about?
Not really. Its pretty much impossible to one-shot a monster with a cannon. Most seem to do D3+1, while monsters tend to have about 6 wounds, and ridden mosters add to the character's wounds.
The obvious retort is: Have you ever seen an Empire player field less than two cannons? Because as an Empire player myself, I don't believe I have.
I prefer a mix. One cannon, 2 mortars and a hellblaster. (With the hellblaster first on the list to get cut. Not sure I like its misfire potential)
Grail Seeker wrote: I doubt player populations will end up different than what they were in previous editions.
Empire, and High Elves will be the largest. Bretonnia will eventually die out to one of the smaller armies due to being more niche than the Empire, and It doesn't look like Tomb Kings are going to make up a large amount of the player base either.
Tomb Kings were doomed as soon as they decided it was better to make a centerpiece model for them (even though they already had a freaking nice one with the necrosphinx/necrocat) instead of replacing these horribibles chariot and base skeletons. So pissed, How cool would chariots be with 2023 technology :( ?
And when TK sales fail, GW will, for a second time, conclude that people hate TK, not that people hate skeletons from 1998 (that were worse on the day they came out then the kit they replaced, somehow)
kodos wrote: like nobody thinks you can only be a Harry Potter fan (or like reading the books) if you agree with every single statement of JK and as a true fan never admit that she is "bad" but must defend her.
You'd be surprised how many people think the opposite of that: That by liking something, you automatically agree with everything the author stands for.
This happens with fictional things as well. I've seen people accuse others of excusing mass genocide because they like Darth Vader.
We live in an age where people are incapable of separating things for any reason, and an absence of explicit condemnation implies the opposite: Total support. The "Why aren't you wearing the ribbon?" scene from Seinfeld is a reality these days.
and no I am not sure if people honestly going for Imperium being the good guys in 40k or liking those factions not having a serious problem
I mean I can see why, but as long as the art is not an hidden expression of certain views, it should not be a problem of liking the art but not the artist
leopard wrote: so essentially zero point taking the larger base monsters if there are Empire players about?
Lower damage and you can't snipe off the character from the monster or the monster from under the character. Cannons aren't 1 shotting big things anymore.
I'm pretty sure GW will take notice if sales of things like sphinxes, Tomb guard, necropolis knights/sepulchral guard are really high, yet strangely none of their customers seem to be buying skeleton infantry despite that being a core element of the army. Those metrics would be an indicator that investing into a resculpt of basic infantry kits would be highly justified at that point.
chaos0xomega wrote: I'm pretty sure GW will take notice if sales of things like sphinxes, Tomb guard, necropolis knights/sepulchral guard are really high, yet strangely none of their customers seem to be buying skeleton infantry despite that being a core element of the army. Those metrics would be an indicator that investing into a resculpt of basic infantry kits would be highly justified at that point.
they got this metrics 2003 and 2011 but somehow they need to get them again in 2024
and I guess the conclusion will be the same as was made in 2003, that it is not worth making new core models for the next release in 2011 as those who want to good stuff need to buy the old stuff for a legal army anyway
and before the 2024 release, the conclusion was that is is not worth making new stuff for units that are bundled with a shiny new dragon, while Bretonnia needs a new unit which main purpose is to upgrade the old knights with bits
and if the dragon does not sell, the conclusion is that people don't want shiny new Khemri models
If people want to play Tomb Kings, I suggest buying Warlord's Skeletons. They are gorgeous, and will look perfect next to the rest of the GWTK range.
I need to stock up on some more. I'm done to my last 90 or so and its such a good kit! I would happily build a 1000 more if I had more time to paint them!
If people want to play Tomb Kings, I suggest buying Warlord's Skeletons. They are gorgeous, and will look perfect next to the rest of the GWTK range.
I need to stock up on some more. I'm done to my last 90 or so and its such a good kit! I would happily build a 1000 more if I had more time to paint them!
I always felt the separate feet on those kits was a bad move. Wargames Atlantic or Oathmark might be better options for those who want something less fiddly.
If people want to play Tomb Kings, I suggest buying Warlord's Skeletons. They are gorgeous, and will look perfect next to the rest of the GWTK range.
I need to stock up on some more. I'm done to my last 90 or so and its such a good kit! I would happily build a 1000 more if I had more time to paint them!
I always felt the separate feet on those kits was a bad move. Wargames Atlantic or Oathmark might be better options for those who want something less fiddly.
They really are not as bad as they are made out to be online. The trick with the feet it to slide them into the slots rather than jamming them in. I've built quite a number of them and never had a single one break and they are no more fiddly than trying to build say the chap in necromunda with the cigar.
I recently built the AoS Trugg model, and that was fiddly. The arcane yoke on his back has to be jammed on to the model as a funny angle making it really easy to get plastic weld over everything but the right spot as you try to lower it down.
I'd build warlord games skeletons all day over having to build that thing again.
The oathmark ones are superb, I just find I like the warlord games ones for fantasy a little more simple. Wargames atlantic make lovely models but their skeletons are just too big to mix with others and I'd already done a load of other skeletons by the time they appeared. Shame as their other kits are fantastic.
The WGA skeletons are slightly smaller than the TK skeletons, dunno why you're saying they're too big. The Oathmark Skeletons are also only slightly smaller - the parts are interchangeable and they look fine side by side.
Platuan4th wrote: They'd have to sell Skeleton Infantry first to actually get those metrics.
...do you really not expect them to put those on sake? There's definitely a second wave of releases coming for Brets and TK... there's previewed kits (mostly returning old kits) that aren't on sale yet.
chaos0xomega wrote: I'm pretty sure GW will take notice if sales of things like sphinxes, Tomb guard, necropolis knights/sepulchral guard are really high, yet strangely none of their customers seem to be buying skeleton infantry despite that being a core element of the army. Those metrics would be an indicator that investing into a resculpt of basic infantry kits would be highly justified at that point.
they got this metrics 2003 and 2011 but somehow they need to get them again in 2024
Data capture capabilities in 2003 were nowhere near what they were in 2011, and nowhere near what they are in 2024. There's levels of detail in metrics and data analysis that GW could not achieve back then that they can today. GW has grown their own direct sales channels pretty dramatically from where they were 10-20 years ago, which will provide them with a lot more data than they had about sales performance of specific SKUs. I'm the past they were heavily reliant on manufacturing data to get a complete picture of performance, but that's heavily skewed because it tells you how many boxes retailers ordered, but not necessarily how many they actually sold.
Besides that, the kit was pretty good in 2003, and serviceable in 2011. In 2024 the kit is an affront to God and there's a dozen other options out there that look better and cost half as much. Whatever data they had 10-20 years ago is irrelevant in the context today.
Plus, seems people are more than willing to buy them given that the TK box set is sold out everywhere.
chaos0xomega wrote: The WGA skeletons are slightly smaller than the TK skeletons, dunno why you're saying they're too big. The Oathmark Skeletons are also only slightly smaller - the parts are interchangeable and they look fine side by side.
Platuan4th wrote: They'd have to sell Skeleton Infantry first to actually get those metrics.
...do you really not expect them to put those on sake? There's definitely a second wave of releases coming for Brets and TK... there's previewed kits (mostly returning old kits) that aren't on sale yet.
chaos0xomega wrote: I'm pretty sure GW will take notice if sales of things like sphinxes, Tomb guard, necropolis knights/sepulchral guard are really high, yet strangely none of their customers seem to be buying skeleton infantry despite that being a core element of the army. Those metrics would be an indicator that investing into a resculpt of basic infantry kits would be highly justified at that point.
they got this metrics 2003 and 2011 but somehow they need to get them again in 2024
Data capture capabilities in 2003 were nowhere near what they were in 2011, and nowhere near what they are in 2024. There's levels of detail in metrics and data analysis that GW could not achieve back then that they can today. GW has grown their own direct sales channels pretty dramatically from where they were 10-20 years ago, which will provide them with a lot more data than they had about sales performance of specific SKUs. I'm the past they were heavily reliant on manufacturing data to get a complete picture of performance, but that's heavily skewed because it tells you how many boxes retailers ordered, but not necessarily how many they actually sold.
Gdubs had a pretty extensive network of their own stores back then too, so they still would have had pretty similar data to what they do now in terms of extrapolating from their own stores what might be happening at independent stores. I can't find a 2003 report, but the 2008 report I found on Google said by that stage they had 61% sales through their own channels (direct or hobby centres) and only 39% through independents. So the % of trade sales now was actually higher then than it is now.
Besides that, the kit was pretty good in 2003, and serviceable in 2011. In 2024 the kit is an affront to God and there's a dozen other options out there that look better and cost half as much. Whatever data they had 10-20 years ago is irrelevant in the context today.
Even in 2003 I remember thinking the TK skeletons were a bit crap. I liked the shields and Egyptian style details, but the underlying skeletons reminded me of the the 5th edition skeletons which themselves were a bit crap too.
Plus, seems people are more than willing to buy them given that the TK box set is sold out everywhere.
Or, they under produced
Here in Oz, at independent online discounters I saw Bretonnians sell out in a matter of maybe 10 or 20 minutes, the TK still had a few sets available the next day (EDIT: actually I found at least one discounter still listing the TK set as being on sale). The official GW store, the TK are still for sale but the Brets are gone.
And it's not like Bretonnians were ever a terribly popular army (except maybe when they were in the starter set so every man and his dog had 24 archers and 12 knights, which back in the day was a decent army).
I kind of like TK as an idea but not the outdated models. They're one of the factions that I had a campaign going with in Total War.
chaos0xomega wrote: Besides that, the kit was pretty good in 2003, and serviceable in 2011. In 2024 the kit is an affront to God and there's a dozen other options out there that look better and cost half as much. Whatever data they had 10-20 years ago is irrelevant in the context today.
the kit was acceptable in 2003 and people just argued that because a new army GW cannot take the risk to make all new kits but have to use existing ones with upgrade sprues
despite other armies got the core range re-fresh
in 2011, the main complain about the release was that you get almost 20 year old sculpts that you need to buy as core and no matter how good the new elite looks the bad skeletons make it a bad release
some of the Content Creators that are still around re-uploaded their old reviews from 2011
their data from 2011 might be useless, but what makes you think that because Khemri models got no new core in 2011 based on 2003 sales data and no re-work of the core during 8th edition based on the 2011 data, that if we just buy enough non-core models the outcome will be different now?
GW might make new Khemri core models, but with a new army book release not on the fly because everything else sold well
and doubt we see a new book release for them soon
It's weird because GW is a company that used to think nobody liked Sisters of Battle because nobody bought the 20 year old metal model army. But then this is also the same company that updated that range, and a whole load of other ranges in both 40k and AOS in the past 3 years, to be much more modern.
I think contemporary GW is very aware of the need to update stuff, but main studio and specialist games studio love to have slapfights with each other so I'm sure there was behind the scenes corpo drama going on.
kodos wrote: the kit was acceptable in 2003 and people just argued that because a new army GW cannot take the risk to make all new kits but have to use existing ones with upgrade sprues
despite other armies got the core range re-fresh
That was back when GW's production capacity was 8 new sprues for 40k and 8 new sprues for WHFB per year. Not kits, sprues. Split between two new codexes and two new army books.
TK got the normal allocation of 4 new sprues: chariots, cavalry, horses, command. With two of those pulling double duty across multiple kits.
The Tyranid refresh around the same time was also 4 sprues: 1 sprue of Genestealers and 3 sprues of Carnifex.
nathan2004 wrote: Maybe they’re planning to replace them just haven’t gotten there yet before gauging how successful old world will be received.
Sounds like every army will need a centerpiece model to compete with the big stuff like dragons other armies get. Or cannons.
Curious to see if a dragon charges, kills the entire front rank (and supporting if that’s possible), will the unit stick or bounce.
I must admit regardless of how well the sculpt is done doing the "superduper originul" choice of giving a dragon as the Tomb kings centerpiece is capslock downgrading my initial preference of Tomb kings to a low.
I think I'll wait for Chaos dwarfs first afterall and then see what do.
Aren't Chaos Dwarfs a legacy faction in TOW? What makes you'll think they'll be doing anything where that faction is concerned, bar releasing their PDF?
Chaos Dwarfs were always pretty much a legacy faction in terms of general events - they just stayed there, far, far away and minded their own business.
And, unless GW changed their plans, they will stay that way in TOW - too far, too isolated to be cared about.
Dysartes wrote: Aren't Chaos Dwarfs a legacy faction in TOW? What makes you'll think they'll be doing anything where that faction is concerned, bar releasing their PDF?
Rumors are Chorfs get a full release for AoS 4, so maybe they just meant wait and see the AoS model line
Look, if the chorfs want a dragon, they’ll get one. By enslaving it, like they do everything else. The chaos manticore already has an “unruly” type table to roll on so doing something like that for a bound dragon would make sense.
Lest we forget, free roaming dragons were on the allies list for regular non-chaos dwarfs a while back…
Most armies have an excuse for wanting/needing a dragon.
Daughters of Khaine should have traded and tamed a few from the Dark Elf remains; Ossiarchs should have built a few (heck in Ghoul Slayer there is an undead faction running around with construct bone dragons); Sylvaneth would probably have some huge living tree beetle dragon; Lumineth clearly need a furry eastern dragon
leopard wrote: so essentially zero point taking the larger base monsters if there are Empire players about?
Not really. Its pretty much impossible to one-shot a monster with a cannon. Most seem to do D3+1, while monsters tend to have about 6 wounds, and ridden mosters add to the character's wounds.
The obvious retort is: Have you ever seen an Empire player field less than two cannons? Because as an Empire player myself, I don't believe I have.
The man speaks truth!
WorldEdgePlayer wrote:
BertBert wrote: Does it still differentiate between rider and monstrous mount and, if so, does a rider's invunerable save translate to its mount?
Monster mounts now add T and W to the rider and so far I have managed to recognized a big problem in this game and that is dragons. They are simply way too strong. Lord on star dragon or chaos dragon is at the minimum T6 W10 AS2+ WS5+ fly(10) and deals at a minimum 10 S6 AP2 attacks. That is with NO magic items taken.
With fly 10 inches they can pick and choose their fights and are simply too strong to bring down. They do cost around 500 points but that is 500 points that they deny from their opponent and also means they can bring 2 dragons in 2000pts list.
Most armies have no way to deal with this. And cannons will not help you. This is looking troubling.
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
leopard wrote: so essentially zero point taking the larger base monsters if there are Empire players about?
Not really. Its pretty much impossible to one-shot a monster with a cannon. Most seem to do D3+1, while monsters tend to have about 6 wounds, and ridden mosters add to the character's wounds.
The obvious retort is: Have you ever seen an Empire player field less than two cannons? Because as an Empire player myself, I don't believe I have.
I prefer a mix. One cannon, 2 mortars and a hellblaster. (With the hellblaster first on the list to get cut. Not sure I like its misfire potential)
Hmmm... see below, I'm unimpressed with hellblasters, but taking two GCs and two mortars...that's what I want, if allowed. Unfortunately, if I have to choose, it's a second GC long before a first mortar.
lord_blackfang wrote:It's not a particular hardship to bring 6 cannon tho.
This is also very likely to be army composition-limited. Brets get 0-1 field trebuchet per 1000 points. Expect similar restrictions. As an Empire player, I hope very dearly that it's 0-1 great cannon per 1000 points, not 0-1 piece of artillery. GCs are the only means we have of dealing with nasty beasties like necrosphinxes, and I'd still very much love to lob S2 pieplates from my mortars. I probably won't see any skaven, but the memories of removing them in job lots!!!
/EDIT/ Yo, admin! When do we get a TOW forum? I think we're getting a bit past the single news thread, at this stage?
It's 0-3 Great Cannon or Mortar and 0-1 Volley or Rocket per 1000 pts, so twice that in normal games. I don't think Dwarfs have any meaningful limits either.
When I started out with high elves I found it incredibly tragic how the Dragon Princes could not awaken the dragons of old, and instead tormented their poor horses with crazy dragon armour.
Dragons were supposed to be a very rare sight for the first editions of FB if i recall corectly. They were sleeping on ulthuan, and more or less hunted to extinction in the old world.
Anyone know if dragons were more common or vital at the time of this game?
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
lord_blackfang wrote:It's 0-3 Great Cannon or Mortar and 0-1 Volley or Rocket per 1000 pts, so twice that in normal games. I don't think Dwarfs have any meaningful limits either.
Source? I would LOVE that, two of each mortars and GCs for me!
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
Easy two Star dragons in a 2000 point list.
Per 1000 points? I find that hard to believe...but my great cannons welcome the challenge.
Overread wrote: (heck in Ghoul Slayer there is an undead faction running around with construct bone dragons)
The faction is Flesh Eater Courts which, surprise surprise, have both the Zombie Dragon and Terrorgheist(both of which are described in Ghoulslayer) already. They're simply always referred to as Mordants, which is the in-universe name for Ghouls(and is literally a keyword on any Ghoul unit).
Yep, I found it. And Ulrican priests, that's a pleasant surprise! He'll be indispensable for adding D3 to greatsword charges, given how useless they are when not charging.
I saw it somewhere, probably a batrep, but can anyone remind me what "veteran" does to a unit? I vaguely recall it had to do with morale, but I don't remember thinking "oh, that's good." It strikes me as odd that it would be limited to 1 per 1000 if it costs points and doesn't do much.
GW have replied to someone asking on facebook about the magic cards and they've said its unlikely they will ever get reprinted.
This is from the GW social media account/team, so probably worth taking with a pinch of salt. But tbh this is expected as they don't reprint the necromunda ones either.
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
Easy two Star dragons in a 2000 point list.
Seem clear that the 'standard' tournament game will be 1999 points then.
GW very rarely reprints any of their game cards until a new edition comes around. It's a very strange situation because they clearly design the cards to work well with the game and yet every time we have this same dance that the cards run out of stock in the first 5 mins of going on sale and then you might find them in stores in person up and down the country if you hunt around.
Old World has seen at least one restocking wave so potentially they might drip feed more stock back onto the market; but it might only appear in physical stores not on the internet. GW seems to at least split its stock somewhat between the two and a few other stores do likewise to help keep their physical store customers happy and appeal to that market.
Fayric wrote: When I started out with high elves I found it incredibly tragic how the Dragon Princes could not awaken the dragons of old, and instead tormented their poor horses with crazy dragon armour.
Dragons were supposed to be a very rare sight for the first editions of FB if i recall corectly. They were sleeping on ulthuan, and more or less hunted to extinction in the old world.
Anyone know if dragons were more common or vital at the time of this game?
The High Elves are in a golden age for the most part, their decline not obvious to them as they are for the most part at peace - the Dark Elves have not been sighted for decades or more. So those dragons that are awake are more likely to be free to aid anyone warlike who leaves Ulthuan.
Overread wrote: GW very rarely reprints any of their game cards until a new edition comes around. It's a very strange situation because they clearly design the cards to work well with the game and yet every time we have this same dance that the cards run out of stock in the first 5 mins of going on sale and then you might find them in stores in person up and down the country if you hunt around.
Old World has seen at least one restocking wave so potentially they might drip feed more stock back onto the market; but it might only appear in physical stores not on the internet. GW seems to at least split its stock somewhat between the two and a few other stores do likewise to help keep their physical store customers happy and appeal to that market.
Yeah, its just another thing that eats into hobby time though. I could go chasing later releases, but as legacy sets will need to be printed anyway + the chances of the GW webstore being totally broken and not letting people in for several hours meaning that I could easily miss the one or two sets I really wanted, I might as wait and get some community made versions printed once they've released almost everything (someone will make them for sure)
I'd rather buy them, it saves time which I'm in more short supply off than the cost of the cards. But GW obviously get exactly the money they want from each sets release, they won't change their ways.
I'll probably add any of the pre-order cards I do manage to receive with the pile of LE heresy novels that are going to be sold off. Cut the FOMO collection down a bit.
I'm certainly not going to make the 4 hour-ish journey to the nearest hobby store on the off chance they have them on release day.
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
Easy two Star dragons in a 2000 point list.
Then we adopt the 1999 pts as the standard and the problem becomes much smaller (though not fully removed).
lord_blackfang wrote: It's 0-3 Great Cannon or Mortar and 0-1 Volley or Rocket per 1000 pts, so twice that in normal games. I don't think Dwarfs have any meaningful limits either.
I hope that one of the sub-armies in their own book is the College of Pyrotechnics. 6 Rocket batteries per army!
nathan2004 wrote: Is that really a thing HBMC or did you make it up? Haha.
It's a thing from Total War Warhammer. They're a "Rogue Army" you can encounter, and they are filled to the gills with Hellstorm Rocket Batteries. They can totally wreck your gak if you encounter them in the early campaign before you're anywhere close to being able to handle that much incoming firepower.
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
Easy two Star dragons in a 2000 point list.
Which is why 1999 will be the pts size for comp games, maybe?
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
Easy two Star dragons in a 2000 point list.
Which is why 1999 will be the pts size for comp games, maybe?
RustyNumber wrote: Hah why the nonsense of 1999 instead of just capping individual troublesome units, or at least just saying 2k "but with 1k composition"?
One bonus of the "Rule of 3" is its really simple to remember when you're in the shop debating on if you want to buy something. You can recall how many you've got of a thing and you don't have to check a codex for the individual unit limit. If you've got 3 you don't "need" another one so you can buy something else. If you've got less than 3 you can choose to buy another.
That said individual unit limits can be very sensible, we already have them for special named characters. That said I think that it leans back to a long term balance over short term. Long term a unit limit on individual models works; short term it doesn't. In fact with the 3 year cycle it would be very annoying to see models go from a 0-5 in one edition to a 0-3 in the next and then a 0-2 and then back to 0-5 etc... It's already annoying that GW messes with unit loadouts (esp on Tyranids with GW changing the legal weapon combinations almost every single edition). Changing the unit allotment each edition would be another sore point for many seeing models they have that they can't use come around again.
RustyNumber wrote: Hah why the nonsense of 1999 instead of just capping individual troublesome units, or at least just saying 2k "but with 1k composition"?
Given nobody gives a toss about two or three points either way 1999 is very much a shorthand for saying "2k but with 1k composition" no?
There are players who don't like house rules (not me, I love tinkering ) so I guess 1999pts has the advantage of not changing any game rules, while 2k with 1k composition is already a house rule of sorts.
RustyNumber wrote: Hah why the nonsense of 1999 instead of just capping individual troublesome units, or at least just saying 2k "but with 1k composition"?
Basically a semantical way to force composition restraints on opponents, probably because of a history of LACK of constraint in those groups.
The issue is that it's too shiny here. If it was gold color, you wouldn't mistake it for hair, but GW painting team has this annoying, stupid obsession of ruining gold/copper items by slapping ton of 'aluminium' light grey metal paint on it (which I think they are going for 'shiny gold' look but it just looks like cheap 'made in china' gilding on plastic junk that just scraped off) which made it look hair color. Look at sword pommel, half of it isn't yellow, just looks cheap and tacky
GaroRobe wrote: I’m praying they don’t release the unreleased dwarf command set for the shieldbearers. I doubt it since the rules mention 3 holders but still
Sacredroach wrote: My first thought was "Eyebrows a Mentat would envy." But the circlet could have been painted shinier...or at least not hair color.
That's not Mentat eyebrows; THIS is Mentat eyebrows
"It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion."
Jokes aside, I'd like to see some alternate paintjobs for this new Bret character. I may have to break down and get him myself if GW's production/supply lines allow me to buy him.
GaroRobe wrote: I’m praying they don’t release the unreleased dwarf command set for the shieldbearers. I doubt it since the rules mention 3 holders but still
Why not?
It was made for the older style of plastic dwarfs, and I far prefer the more recent models. The sprue had some cool bits, like an oathstone and bsb, but I’d rather get a newer shieldbearer
I like him, and the helmet bearer is a nice detail. General availability of TOW though... They can hopefully fix this as soon as possible.
I'm looking forward to the reveal which is the next faction to be released, from WarCom, already mentioned by Mad Doc:
"Those lucky enough to attend the Warhammer: The Old World launch event at Warhammer World in Nottingham this weekend will get the first look at the next army due for release! And for those who can’t make it to Nottingham, we’ll have the details here on Warhammer Community."
Some of Hastings posts in the War of Sigmar comments section may give a hint:
" No, I was told the other races aren’t being made available at launch. More specifically I actually recall being told there will be big boxes for both empire and O&G towards the middle of 2024, along with their respective books AND book to advance the narrative. "
" My understanding is the narrative/timeline heads towards the chaos incursion, with a rumoured plastic war mammoth to accompany the chaos army, if it lasts that long. "
" I was also told there will be books that move forward the narrative/timeline towards the climatic chaos invasion… "
" The skeletons and cavalry are so dated, they look awful next to the new dragon. Im confused as my source definitely said there was a new chariot hero kit. "
Irbis wrote: How exactly you nail paper to the sword?
It could've been worse, like nailing swords to paper.
But yeah, I think you detected the most ridiculous thing so far on the new line (thankfully retracted) heh.
Shadow Walker wrote: This fella would have problems with those lower horns during the fight. That aside I like him.
Lord Ashferon:
"Grorben, slay that Bretonnian captain to the right of you!".. "Grorben!!"..
..
"damnit Grorben"..
Chaos knight Aymen:
"What happened lord Ashferon"
Lord Ashferon:
"Grorben was slain.."
Chaos knight Aymen:
"But.. he was the best swordsman we had!"
Lord Ashferon:
"yes.. but he couldn't see his opponent if they moved to his side because of the helmet we designed for him, he could not turn his head"
Chaos knight Aymen:
"But.. why did you design that helmet then.."
Ashferon:
"We wanted him to look really cool"
.. hmm..
".. ..what if we also put huge horns around our men's greaves, we would look even cooler"
-
2 days later..
Lord Ashferon:
"Aymen!" .."Aymen!".. "Aymen run from that incoming pegasus cavalerie!"
Dunno about you, but I’d have my opposable thumb behind the item it’s helping my hand to hold?
Try holding glove like this. You will have big kink where the middle lily is to fit finger, his glove is totally straight up to his wrist. His thumb just doesn't exist. Also, unless you have hands like chimpanzee, your little finger should be visibly shorter than middle finger and its base recessed into hand. On this fail of a mini, it's longer and the finger base is straight
Also, looking at details, this mini reminded me why I prefer CAD minis to hand sculpts, they are just awful even why done by pros. Look at bottom right pic, his sword grip doesn't line up with blade, it's way off center. His helmet is too small for his head. The little shields on the rim of his cloak are crooked, uneven, with bad spacings. Others said enough about his face, so I will skip it, but that too. The bottom of scabbard on his back doesn't line up with top (and don't say 'it's soft', not only leather used for swords was hard for protection, they also often had wooden stiffening lining and in any case, even if scabbard was cloth it doesn't line up in wrong way).
And that's just details that are badly done, if I were to nitpick I'd point out spikes on pommel stabbing into his hand if he wants to switch grip to the rear for more reach/grab it with both hands are stupid (and in best case, make 1/3 of grip unusable). On real swords, lily bases were elongated to move it away from grip, points blunted and made much less prominent if not bent the other way, and lily made small enough to grab it in emergency. Or just engraved/cut onto your standard disc/square pommel (or worked onto rainguard/crossguard, visible parts that user never needed to touch, precisely for the stabby reason). Here, it's another fail by someone who didn't stop to think for 5 seconds what he is doing, same with nailing stuff into the blade
Some of Hastings posts in the War of Sigmar comments section may give a hint:
" No, I was told the other races aren’t being made available at launch. More specifically I actually recall being told there will be big boxes for both empire and O&G towards the middle of 2024, along with their respective books AND book to advance the narrative. "
" My understanding is the narrative/timeline heads towards the chaos incursion, with a rumoured plastic war mammoth to accompany the chaos army, if it lasts that long. "
" I was also told there will be books that move forward the narrative/timeline towards the climatic chaos invasion… "
" The skeletons and cavalry are so dated, they look awful next to the new dragon. Im confused as my source definitely said there was a new chariot hero kit. "
Putting out a big box of Empire and O&G in the middle of 2024 is waaay to close to AOS 4.0 release IMO
Everything else sound probable the Plastic War Mammoth is definitely will be better receive then the Crocdargon that for sure. With the scope TOW is going by i can't really think of any other models i would prefer they update then the Mammoth (that may be just because AOS updated any units i would wanted i know they aint use those)
I understand his post like the seperate Bret and Khemri boxes : -) Not a 'faction X versus Y', two player starter- or campaign-set. Yes,that may collide with any big box AoS 4.0 releases. But army sets, I think, won't be a problem.
Maybe they will replace the rulebook with an arcane journal in future army boxes.
Same here. From a distance on the gaming table and average lighting he will look like lord Chadson himself. Great model and amusing to get him in metal.
GW: This New Bretonnian Lord Was Sculpted in 2008
Me: Yes, I can see that.
Warhams-77 wrote: " I was also told there will be books that move forward the narrative/timeline towards the climatic chaos invasion… "
If the 7th ed Warriors of Chaos army book is to be believed, the Great War Against Chaos starts in 2271. Current year for the Border Princes thing is 2276 according to Warhammer Community.
I can't stand people who are late for their own war.
Dragon-knight77 wrote: Putting out a big box of Empire and O&G in the middle of 2024 is waaay to close to AOS 4.0 release IMO
The current approach is a launch box in mid June, starter sets a few weeks later and then the army books and individual kits no sooner than September. That leaves all of August if GW were concerned about Empire and Orcs getting in the way of Sigmarines and Skaven. Which is probably not the biggest concern.
Plus, it's not like GW is going to make enough Old World stock to sell to everyone. I doubt a lot of people will find themselves prioritizing one over the other even if they're interested in both.
Unfortunately TOW is not listed to be shown at the LVO preview.
@Geifer Okay, good point, but I think it is meant more in a sense of release order than an actual timeframe. They can go back in time for important events of a chaos incursion with campaign books.
Warhams-77 wrote: Unfortunately TOW is not listed to be shown at the LVO preview.
@Geifer Okay, good point, but I think it is meant more in a sense of release order than an actual timeframe. They can go back in time for important events of a chaos incursion with campaign books.
No worries, I'm just poking a little fun. I don't even know if they feel beholden to the old timelines. Or if timelines even matched across books for that matter.
GW has gone out of their way to toss dates out of 40k and never even started in AoS, presumably because keeping everything lined up is a lot of work that nobody these days at GW seems to want to do. I'm just curious to see the Old World writers' effort. See if they're taking the whole thing seriously or if it's a mess of inaccuracies and retcons.
Some of Hastings posts in the War of Sigmar comments section may give a hint:
" No, I was told the other races aren’t being made available at launch. More specifically I actually recall being told there will be big boxes for both empire and O&G towards the middle of 2024, along with their respective books AND book to advance the narrative. "
" My understanding is the narrative/timeline heads towards the chaos incursion, with a rumoured plastic war mammoth to accompany the chaos army, if it lasts that long. "
" I was also told there will be books that move forward the narrative/timeline towards the climatic chaos invasion… "
" The skeletons and cavalry are so dated, they look awful next to the new dragon. Im confused as my source definitely said there was a new chariot hero kit. "
We can write this off as a work of fiction. Half his posts are basicaly expressing surprise about things, he was very wrong about there being mummy infantry and a new chariot kit, etc. Plus, GWs own statements contradict him, per warcom they are *not* narratively headed towards the chaos invasion, and as of now the narrative hasn't even really started.
Geifer wrote: GW: This New Bretonnian Lord Was Sculpted in 2008
Me: Yes, I can see that.
Warhams-77 wrote: " I was also told there will be books that move forward the narrative/timeline towards the climatic chaos invasion… "
If the 7th ed Warriors of Chaos army book is to be believed, the Great War Against Chaos starts in 2271. Current year for the Border Princes thing is 2276 according to Warhammer Community.
I can't stand people who are late for their own war.
The Great War starts in 2301, mightbhave been retconned but that's the date most sources agree with.
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I can see why it was unreleased in the first place, the head and hands in particular are not good.
More likely they had no slot to release it in considering they weren't yet in the mindset of releasing individual models for an army piecemeal in 2008 and still were generally on the "models released when books for them are" train. As well, GW even in 2008 wasn't above releasing less than stellar looking metal models.
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I can see why it was unreleased in the first place, the head and hands in particular are not good.
More likely they had no slot to release it in considering they weren't yet in the mindset of releasing individual models for an army piecemeal in 2008 and still were generally on the "models released when books for them are" train. As well, GW even in 2008 wasn't above releasing less than stellar looking metal models.
The article says it was intended to be a Games Day model.
Hehe people are checking out the Lord but I'm looking at his little helper with his little face.
Where GW says this is a Bretonnian Lord with loyal retainer, I see a Watcher in the Dark with his Calibanite Lord of the Hunt even reminds me of the one carrying Azraels Hemet too.
Anyway it's nice at least to have another option whether people agree with the sculpt or not. The inclusion of this model should mean rules for Lord's on foot really. How best to use him I'm not entirely sure, stick him in with a unit of Foot Knights maybe. If he's a cheap option maybe hang out the backfield with a trebuchet. Depends if he gives bonuses or has vows etc.
GaroRobe wrote: The dwarf dice were leaked so maybe they’re ready to go? Half their kits are readily available in AoS soooo
Anyone else notice all the dwarf kits are out of stock on the GW site under COS section of AOS?
that because a bunch of WHF models got mass bought over the week from
Ork warclans maniaks boarboys, wardokk & Wurrgog prophet
beast of chaos Ghorgons/cygors, chariots, giants chaos hounds, bullgors, bestigors & gors
Gloomspite gitz Archanarok, spider-rider
Cities of sigmar Freeguild general/Karl franz, flagellants, steam tank, wizards and some dark elf models
probably by people preparing for TOW or/and more probably sadly scalpers trying to get a head start
GaroRobe wrote: The dwarf dice were leaked so maybe they’re ready to go? Half their kits are readily available in AoS soooo
Anyone else notice all the dwarf kits are out of stock on the GW site under COS section of AOS?
that because a bunch of WHF models got mass bought over the week from
Ork warclans maniaks boarboys, wardokk & Wurrgog prophet
beast of chaos Ghorgons/cygors, chariots, giants chaos hounds, bullgors, bestigors & gors
Gloomspite gitz Archanarok, spider-rider
Cities of sigmar Freeguild general/Karl franz, flagellants, steam tank, wizards and some dark elf models
probably by people preparing for TOW or/and more probably sadly scalpers trying to get a head start
While some of the items you listed might be correct, the Dwarves were OOS long before the ToW release date was even know.
Most of the CoS units that could be in ToW were OOS when CoS was released, as noted, several pages ago.
I had a lot of fears for TOW/9e but it's good to see it's basically 6e. 2.0 for the most part. The only things that feel off to me are the reduction overall of cavalry saves and dragon lords being disgusting but everything else looks surprisingly... good for once from GW. Kind of surprised to see a more old school ruleset that's tactically deep but I guess somebody in the company is still capable of making a competent wargame. Prices are fairly outrageous for the most part and if I do finally make the jump a 3d printer is going to be involved, but this looks like a great upcoming release overall. Someone might want to FAQ Chaos Warriors though as the 6e style saves put several WOC players I know on suicide watch.
Wyzilla wrote: Someone might want to FAQ Chaos Warriors though as the 6e style saves put several WOC players I know on suicide watch.
They want the save to become even worse? We can work with that...
Don’t they all get chaos armour wards now? So two saves per hit?
Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Wyzilla wrote: Someone might want to FAQ Chaos Warriors though as the 6e style saves put several WOC players I know on suicide watch.
They want the save to become even worse? We can work with that...
Don’t they all get chaos armour wards now? So two saves per hit?
Assuming ward saves work like in the past yes. However it is still wierd that chaos armour is now a ward save on a Heavy ? Full plate? Didn't yet got my terminology right.
Don’t they all get chaos armour wards now? So two saves per hit?
Chosen and characters do, I don't think normal warriors do.
OOF, if that is the case then just no. Just no. Why ever field something other than chosen and barbarians then, you just flat out are worse off in an army that still has no tactical ranged tools beyond a piece of artillery.
Wyzilla wrote: Someone might want to FAQ Chaos Warriors though as the 6e style saves put several WOC players I know on suicide watch.
They want the save to become even worse? We can work with that...
Don’t they all get chaos armour wards now? So two saves per hit?
Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Chaos warriors seem to sit on the same place. One pip less of armor but attacks have less AP, so they stay the same. Some gain ward save on top, so they are actually better protected (plus harder to hit by low WS attackers)...
Vorian wrote: WS5, 4+ armour, -1 AP and enemies rerolling 6s to hit for 16pts doesn't seem so awful?
Chaos warriors initially were 15 pts, with the same armor and AP since they were baseline S 4 and flatline access to a 6+ wardsave through the mark of tzeentch. You didn't see very many of them then i doubt you will see very many of them now. Especially if morale gets more important and they seem to have lost their "will of chaos" rule.
chaos0xomega wrote: Chosen are 0-1 units per army so you can't really build an army around them. At least not until they release an army of infamy that says otherwise.
Hellcannons appear to have been heavily nerfed as well.
All artillery has been reduced - same as magic for the most part - although annoyingly the hex spells still seem to "remain in play "but are not "remain in play" spells so can;t be dispelled for... reasons.
Armour saves seem to be much more important now as Ap is much rarer, you more than just having high strength
Yes, but the hellcannons nerfing has a lot to do with its own special rules - misfires cause some serious problems for it (and potentially the rest of your army).
From the Link Tank thread? Something of interest to Old Grognard. Around 11 minutes in, straight from the Horse’s Mouth, some interesting history on the origin of Tammurkhan and in turn, AoS.
Basically? The CEO asked Rick Priestley to do Tammurkhan as a reboot of WHFB, then plans changed.
This is not stuff I’ve seen people really discuss before, so seems to be new information.
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Who knows! I’m sharing solely as “I didn’t know that, and I don’t recall anyone else mentioning it before”. And given this is about as primary a source as we can reasonably expect, figured it was well worth sharing,
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Bizarrely, no. You’d think they would, but they don’t. And so they never particularly appealed to me as a player.
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Normal halberds, no.
Phoenix guard have special halberds that do.
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the hellcannons nerfing has a lot to do with its own special rules - misfires cause some serious problems for it (and potentially the rest of your army).
Well it used to go on a ramage and eat its crew / other people?
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the hellcannons nerfing has a lot to do with its own special rules - misfires cause some serious problems for it (and potentially the rest of your army).
Well it used to go on a ramage and eat its crew / other people?
or blow up ALL mages.
The issue is however more, that WOC only have this thing as ranged and artillery available.
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the hellcannons nerfing has a lot to do with its own special rules - misfires cause some serious problems for it (and potentially the rest of your army).
Well it used to go on a ramage and eat its crew / other people?
or blow up ALL mages.
The issue is however more, that WOC only have this thing as ranged and artillery available.
Well, and horsemen with throwing spears.
And if you really want, ungors with bows and cygors as allies.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: From the Link Tank thread? Something of interest to Old Grognard. Around 11 minutes in, straight from the Horse’s Mouth, some interesting history on the origin of Tammurkhan and in turn, AoS.
Basically? The CEO asked Rick Priestley to do Tammurkhan as a reboot of WHFB, then plans changed.
This is not stuff I’ve seen people really discuss before, so seems to be new information.
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the hellcannons nerfing has a lot to do with its own special rules - misfires cause some serious problems for it (and potentially the rest of your army).
Well it used to go on a ramage and eat its crew / other people?
Yes, but it was more controllable and harder to make that happen before. Now it has two chances to misfire per turn instead of just one as before - if the caged fury test fails it misfires rather than running rampant like it used to, on top of the potential to misfire when attacking. When it misfires, a 1 on the table removes the cannon from play and everything within 3d6" takes d6 S5 AP-1 hits. On a 2-4 it eats one of its handlers, on a 5-6 it moves 3d6 using the random movement rules. Now that partial hits are back, even if it doesn't misfire its potential damage output is curtailed somewhat.
chaos0xomega wrote: Yes, but the hellcannons nerfing has a lot to do with its own special rules - misfires cause some serious problems for it (and potentially the rest of your army).
Well it used to go on a ramage and eat its crew / other people?
or blow up ALL mages.
The issue is however more, that WOC only have this thing as ranged and artillery available.
Well, and horsemen with throwing spears.
Technically yes, practically never.
And if you really want, ungors with bows and cygors as allies.
Shortbows. As it were, they were diffrent from normal ones afaik.
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Normal halberds, no.
Phoenix guard have special halberds that do.
Because of course they do! Just another reason I hated fighting High Elves...
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Normal halberds, no.
Phoenix guard have special halberds that do.
Because of course they do! Just another reason I hated fighting High Elves...
Well, if it makes you feel any better, the complaints about the unit being nerfed are real loud. (The 4+ ward save went to a 6+, iirc) And white lions are their own set of complaints, for their axes not being special enough (still 'strike last,' (plus elven reflexes and/or charge modifiers))
I like a retro sculpt as much if not more than the next guy but that Bretonnian Lord is a huge pile of nope. He looks more like some kind of weird elf character with that messed up face.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, the complaints about the unit being nerfed are real loud. (The 4+ ward save went to a 6+, iirc) And white lions are their own set of complaints, for their axes not being special enough (still 'strike last,' (plus elven reflexes and/or charge modifiers))
The White Lions I remember didnt get any special axes or waepons abilities. The lions instead had some woodsmen ability to ignore difficult terrain, and, I think, some bonus to leadership for beeing the traditional bodyguard of the lords. Likewise, phoenixguard didnt get any special weapons or great ward save, their niche was fearles/causing fear together with the regular +1S bonus to halberds. This was ofcourse pre 6th edition I think.
White Lions are pretty cool though, and had fairly new models in 8th, so I would not mind if they got some gimmik that made them popular in YT battlereports.
He wasn’t an Everchosen (the last one was Asavar Kul who will be important for TOW)
He was a Nurgle Chaos Lord who invaded the Empire via Blackfire Pass and attacked Nuln.
FW did a book about him and made a model.
The book we got was a rewrite of the intended first book of a trilogy. It wasn't a reboot, though, it was meant to be an alternate timeline where the End Times happened. For reasons we are now aware of(GW leaving themselves open to do the End Times in the mainline), those plans were changed.
Wasn’t the plan for the Forge World warhammer books to lead up to the destruction of the old world? I’ve heard that was the plan king before the end times. Honestly, it would likely have been better written
Well, if it makes you feel any better, the complaints about the unit being nerfed are real loud. (The 4+ ward save went to a 6+, iirc) And white lions are their own set of complaints, for their axes not being special enough (still 'strike last,' (plus elven reflexes and/or charge modifiers))
The White Lions I remember didnt get any special axes or waepons abilities. The lions instead had some woodsmen ability to ignore difficult terrain, and, I think, some bonus to leadership for beeing the traditional bodyguard of the lords. Likewise, phoenixguard didnt get any special weapons or great ward save, their niche was fearles/causing fear together with the regular +1S bonus to halberds. This was ofcourse pre 6th edition I think.
White Lions are pretty cool though, and had fairly new models in 8th, so I would not mind if they got some gimmik that made them popular in YT battlereports.
White Lions were base S4 (high for an Elf) and the pelts they wore gave +2 armour against ranged.
Because of course they do! Just another reason I hated fighting High Elves...
To be fair, PG went from 5+/4++ to 4+/6++, them getting to support in 1 extra rank seems fine.
They're still "only" S4 even with Halberds, so not too scary.
Well, if it makes you feel any better, the complaints about the unit being nerfed are real loud. (The 4+ ward save went to a 6+, iirc) And white lions are their own set of complaints, for their axes not being special enough (still 'strike last,' (plus elven reflexes and/or charge modifiers))
The White Lions I remember didnt get any special axes or waepons abilities. The lions instead had some woodsmen ability to ignore difficult terrain, and, I think, some bonus to leadership for beeing the traditional bodyguard of the lords. Likewise, phoenixguard didnt get any special weapons or great ward save, their niche was fearles/causing fear together with the regular +1S bonus to halberds. This was ofcourse pre 6th edition I think.
White Lions are pretty cool though, and had fairly new models in 8th, so I would not mind if they got some gimmik that made them popular in YT battlereports.
White Lions were base S4 (high for an Elf) and the pelts they wore gave +2 armour against ranged.
Some editions WL's had different stances with the axe - bit like Dryads and aspects or Wardancers and dances
Lion Claw: A killing blow to the neck employed against large monsters.
Lion Leaping: Using their agility and speed, the warrior catches his foe off balance by barging over them.
Lion Rampant: The warrior uses the thick haft of their axe to blunt the force of the enemies onslaught
I'm going to have to hoist the BS banner. You will be limited to 0-1, the same way the Brets can only take up to one duke.
0-1 Prince or Archmage per 1000pts, 50% character limit.
High elf Prince with full plate armor, shield, lance, Star dragon, Dragon helm, Seeds of rebirth 462pts High elf Archmage with lv4, Star dragon, Seeds of rebirth, Silver wand 510pts
Easy two Star dragons in a 2000 point list.
Seem clear that the 'standard' tournament game will be 1999 points then.
Wouldn't it be easier to just impose a one behemoth limit? 1999 would punish those who take stuff that exceeds what they could take at 1000, but don't max it out. For example, I want two great cannons and two mortars at 2000 points, why should I be treated like the guy taking 6 great cannons?
Dragon-knight77 wrote:
Bretonnian=Hapburg
That's Habsburg-Lothringen, peasant!
chaos0xomega wrote:
Hellcannons appear to have been heavily nerfed as well.
~cries crocodile tear~
Lord Zarkov wrote:
FW did a book about him and made a model.
Aye, but the best model from that book was this fair lady. Intentionally miscasting boosted purple suns into the flanks of chaos stunties at Adepticon was GLORIOUS!!!
I've just watched a review of the standard magic lores. My main concerns were boosting the chances of my state troops not fleeing and boosting the chances of my greatswords getting the charge and/or having equal or higher initiative. Sadly, I found really just one thing in the first category, glittering robe. Happily, I can just take that on a cheap as chips L1 illusionist, and he can cower at the back of the unit if challenged. Sadly, I was planning two blocks of swordsmen in 2k points, so that means I need two L1s, I can't just take one and throw the buff where it's more urgently needed.
For the greatswords, no question. They get a L3/4 daemonologist, depending on whether a magic item to get a bonus spell is cheaper than the bonus level. Three of the six spells are really good for making the response to "will it blend?" and emphatic "yes!" Gathering darkness ensures that anything but elves will strike, if it can, after the greatswords, on the charge, and dramatically increases the likelihood of them breaking. Daemonic vessel just makes them ever so much nastier on a per model basis, which doesn't really help with initiative, but if they don't go first, more than doubles the effectiveness of the models that do still get to fight. Daemonic vigour is the best one, though, increasing their charge range and their initiative, really boosting their chance of functioning as intended. All of this is of course on top of the Ulrican priest's battle howl, although if winter's chill is natural 6s, then that in combination with glittering robe would let them shrug a lot of enemy swings and just wait for initiative step one to wreck face.
They are now unit upgrades and you are limited how many you can have - same with Lords/ heroes so its hard to make a full army of them - hopefully will get a Journal list.
Ahh the lovely Elspeth - great model and character - much more interesting (IMO) than Gelt
You can't really do them as any army anymore, as Savage Orc units don't exist as separate choices. They're upgrades to a limited amount of units in your army.
I'm curious how they're going to handle future releases.. I assume like Bret/TK, so a box and then slowly re-release the boxes. I may need to jump onto Empire when that comes out (although personally I think the GW state troops models are atrocious compared to 3d printed, they look like ape-men).
For now though, picking up TK box this weekend, although I'm not looking forward to dealing with those 20 year old sculpts. The Dragon is kinda meh to me, it looks out of place in the rest of the army, but I'm not sure why.
The Dragon is kinda meh to me, it looks out of place in the rest of the army, but I'm not sure why.
You don't think it has something to do with it not being a 20 year old sculpt?
Very well could be. The aesthetics don't seem to match the rest. I think before that the last model made for TK was the Necrosphinx, right? Which ties into the army visually. The dragon does not. Maybe it will look better in person. TBH would have preferred the Necrotitan or whatever it's called (Hierotitan? No that's a Tyranid I think) since it exists but never had a model.
You can't really do them as any army anymore, as Savage Orc units don't exist as separate choices. They're upgrades to a limited amount of units in your army.
My unit of 40 will become regular ork boyz with spears and shields.
Fortunately I don't have any savage orc cav, but they would just become regular orc boar boyz if I did.
My great joy is that snotling pump wagons are still available so I can use mine:
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Halberds in Fantasy just give you -1 AP and +1 strength while not losing your initiative as with great weapons.They counter cav by allowing you to wound them on 3's and punching through a -1 of their tough armor, but that's it. However considering hand weapons are still S4 for warriors, they get a +1 to their save from shields, and they get a -1 to their AP from enscrolled weapons (which strangely are lost if they take two HW's), there's really no point to the halberd on warriors. Or Chosen for that matter.
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Normal halberds, no.
Phoenix guard have special halberds that do.
Because of course they do! Just another reason I hated fighting High Elves...
Unlike Chaos Warriors, Phoenix Guard also get full plate.
Wayniac wrote: TBH would have preferred the Necrotitan or whatever it's called (Hierotitan? No that's a Tyranid I think) since it exists but never had a model.
Hierotitan is correct. AFAIK, the first "official" appearance of it was in TW:WH2.
Wyzilla wrote: Only Chosen, Warriors with halberds are looking pretty garbage with no step up and only 5 ups when taking a cavalry charge. Wonder how wide formations will get with no step up to account for that, or Warriors, if taken at all, will be sticking to HWw/S or GW.
Don't halberds allow them to fight in an extra rank?
Normal halberds, no.
Phoenix guard have special halberds that do.
I guess Halberds don't count as polearms, then?
According to Sprues & Brews:
The Combat Phase probably has some of the bigger changes in the game. One biggie is the number of models that can fight. With the old Horde rule gone, in the majority of cases it’s only the first rank that can fight (Spears can fight in two ranks in they are charged, and some weapons such as polearms can always fight in two ranks)
I really like how GW is encouraging conversions in arcane journals and suggesting a creative use for the helper for the new Bret lord. May seem like nothing to some people but it feels like it’s harkens back to a time long past before they were a publicly traded company and obsessed with copyrighting every single thing ever. Back when it was a hobby and the focus was on having fun not selling models. Now figure out your production issues GWubs!
nathan2004 wrote: I really like how GW is encouraging conversions in arcane journals and suggesting a creative use for the helper for the new Bret lord. May seem like nothing to some people but it feels like it’s harkens back to a time long past before they were a publicly traded company and obsessed with copyrighting every single thing ever. Back when it was a hobby and the focus was on having fun not selling models. Now figure out your production issues GWubs!
Agreed!
I was quite surprised at that article about making your own rank fillers to boost your infantry units up in size as well. Especially now it seems wider frontage units can have more attacks or something. So it's a win for creative themed units/forces and good in rules too hehe.
Anyway it's great to see GW encouraging conversions. I thought for some time now that Blood Bowl was probably one of the last games that allowed for conversions with the rules inclusion of mercenaries but it's fun the original 'Old World' game setting reboot is going this way too.
Aesthete wrote: I guess Halberds don't count as polearms, then?
According to Sprues & Brews:
The Combat Phase probably has some of the bigger changes in the game. One biggie is the number of models that can fight. With the old Horde rule gone, in the majority of cases it’s only the first rank that can fight (Spears can fight in two ranks in they are charged, and some weapons such as polearms can always fight in two ranks)
The Dragon is kinda meh to me, it looks out of place in the rest of the army, but I'm not sure why.
You don't think it has something to do with it not being a 20 year old sculpt?
Very well could be. The aesthetics don't seem to match the rest. I think before that the last model made for TK was the Necrosphinx, right? Which ties into the army visually. The dragon does not. Maybe it will look better in person. TBH would have preferred the Necrotitan or whatever it's called (Hierotitan? No that's a Tyranid I think) since it exists but never had a model.
The names you're looking for are Bone Giant or Necrolith Colossus in the post-Chapterhouse world, and Hierotitan for the priest version of the Bone Giant (which never got a model).
As for the crocodragon, I don't think the dragon itself is an issue. There's bone, limited ornamentation and a head crest to tie it in with the other models in the army. Also the crocodile skull fits thematically. As far as I'm concerned the howdah is to blame for it looking out of place. It doesn't just look tacked on but is also just a heap of random stuff that juts out and gives the model a large, jarring, vertical element that isn't present on other models. Chariot carts are very practical and the sphinx howdah is designed along those same lines. Other riders don't unduly stand out, whether they're surfing or firmly in a saddle. The dragon howdah on the other hand is an exercise in cramming everything and the kitchen sink into a small area of the model. You get a similar thing on the new army standard bearer, though on a smaller scale obviously.
I reckon that's a consequence of getting sculptors on the job that don't know restraint and have no experience with or connection to the army. It's a lot easier to just throw suitably large amounts of what's considered iconic bling on higher ranking models and call it a day than trying to figure out what makes an army's aesthetic work. It's not helped by the various generations of models that comprise the army varying in style either.
You can't really do them as any army anymore, as Savage Orc units don't exist as separate choices. They're upgrades to a limited amount of units in your army.
My unit of 40 will become regular ork boyz with spears and shields.
Fortunately I don't have any savage orc cav, but they would just become regular orc boar boyz if I did.
My great joy is that snotling pump wagons are still available so I can use mine:
Wayniac wrote: I'm curious how they're going to handle future releases.. I assume like Bret/TK, so a box and then slowly re-release the boxes.
Would be great to learn more about how the re-release schedule looks - how many armies how soon, and how many boxes permanently available or only as made-to-order. While I tried to fill some gaps in my collection with sets that (temporarily) transferred to early AoS, there are a few minis I've been trying to get my hands on for years, and even GW's re-release prices are largely more reasonable than the second-hand market unfortunately...
Uh oh. I’m gonna guess the casket of souls may be forge world resin now, and not back in metal? Wish they had changed the skulls on the base to look less dated. At least the whip guy is coming back, and the vultures and tomb scorpions look great.
Scorpiguy looks cool, anubis like giant units also..
I think I'm still waiting for a chaos dwarf army and skipping my initial intent to build tomb kings though, I'm looking at them in terms of how hard it will be to paint rather than how cool they look painted being experienced in that area now heh..
Still have an immense pile of shame of aos nurgle mortals and orks, and new pile of votann too now LOL.
Some parts of this project really feel like there's a level of thought and care that seems to be missing with quite a few of their releases these days.
Releasing rules for some units without specific models and saying do whatever you like, encouraging conversions and making your own additions, the unreleased lord and also that he includes a helper miniature just because, not just re-releasing a few old models but going through the process of recasting them, even updating them and going beyond just what they were before to add new parts or extra model sculpts or just making them easier to build. Even just that they're using metal again.
GaroRobe wrote: Uh oh. I’m gonna guess the casket of souls may be forge world resin now, and not back in metal? Wish they had changed the skulls on the base to look less dated. At least the whip guy is coming back, and the vultures and tomb scorpions look great.
It sounds like anything they had to partly resculpted due to not having the masters or original moulds will be in resin if I'm reading between the lines correctly.
Meanwhile anything that they still had the moulds for get to be metal (since Finecast models used the same moulds as metal minatures, it doesn't matter if there were an 8th edition release that was only ever available in Finecast)
I also misread your post yesterday (or on Monday?) but dont know why I thought you meant NVO would be showing an upcoming army. Maybe because I was browsing WarCom with its NVO banner at the time.
I don't see a reason why they can't show one army at a time.
The original release date for TOW was December so they could release the next faction or two in Q1 or early in Q2. Like they did with LI.
Scottywan82 wrote: The polearms they are referring to are the weapons for Men At Arms for Bretonnia.
I see. Thanks for the clarification. I guess I'm bringing too much old school D&D with my assumption, because in that system halberds are a subtype of polearms... but that's neither here nor there for TOW
Mentlegen324 wrote: Some parts of this project really feel like there's a level of thought and care that seems to be missing with quite a few of their releases these days.
Releasing rules for some units without specific models and saying do whatever you like, encouraging conversions and making your own additions, the unreleased lord and also that he includes a helper miniature just because, not just re-releasing a few old models but going through the process of recasting them, even updating them and going beyond just what they were before to add new parts or extra model sculpts or just making them easier to build. Even just that they're using metal again.
I have heard some say GW management were brought kicking and screaming into this project. And that's probably true. Five years to get eight new models on release. Probably followed up with an old army rerelease a quarter taking us through 2026. And if it's doing quite well, then we'll pay to develop a new faction line. I think it's all on a shoestring budget and in-between employees other duties. Though you don't really need much more than that to bring back a product you were already making.
Mentlegen324 wrote: Some parts of this project really feel like there's a level of thought and care that seems to be missing with quite a few of their releases these days.
Releasing rules for some units without specific models and saying do whatever you like, encouraging conversions and making your own additions, the unreleased lord and also that he includes a helper miniature just because, not just re-releasing a few old models but going through the process of recasting them, even updating them and going beyond just what they were before to add new parts or extra model sculpts or just making them easier to build. Even just that they're using metal again.
I have heard some say GW management were brought kicking and screaming into this project. And that's probably true. Five years to get eight new models on release. Probably followed up with an old army rerelease a quarter taking us through 2026. And if it's doing quite well, then we'll pay to develop a new faction line. I think it's all on a shoestring budget and in-between employees other duties. Though you don't really need much more than that to bring back a product you were already making.
This has been proven to be pretty untrue. This is the specialist team doing this. It's very much appears to have had a LOT more development love than GW gives even to it's main games. They've released new plastic kits, just shown you how they restored older kits, and have literally had to handsculpt stuff for this (something they haven't done in over a decade). This isn't a shoestring budget. But they also aren't going to release more than a persons pocketbook can take at a time. To do so would kill the sales numbers and the game. I expect we'll be done with the main factions by end of year but it may run out to May of next year. A full army release in the down months between AoS and 40k probably looks pretty appealing to their release schedule and pocketbooks.
I disagree. Theres certainly a lot of love behind what they've done, but that love doesn't translate to a big budget, rather it seems more indicative to me that the budget was in fact shoestring and they had to stretch their resources out to make it work. They had to work harder and put more effort into the finished product to make up for the fact that its a resource-limited project. I can't imagine them having gone through the trouble of remastering old metal kits and putting ancient models back into regular production if money was no object - if you threw the 40k budget at them they very likely would have launched with completely new plastic ranges for both Bretonnia and Tomb Kings instead. Granted I think frankele has it wrong on pacing - like you, I say all 9 core factions will be released by years end or possibly stretch a bit into next year. Likewise I think a significant amount of what resources TOW had available has already gone into developing a fully fleshed out model range for Kislev that will be out within the next 12-15 months max which is why the 9 core factions are getting such a drip-feed of new plastics.
I have heard some say GW management were brought kicking and screaming into this project. And that's probably true. Five years to get eight new models on release. Probably followed up with an old army rerelease a quarter taking us through 2026. And if it's doing quite well, then we'll pay to develop a new faction line. I think it's all on a shoestring budget and in-between employees other duties. Though you don't really need much more than that to bring back a product you were already making.
Oh christ more guys who have zero clue how big companies work. Guess you think they send to stores right away what they did?
I'll let you in for a secret. what got released now was ready likely late 2022.,
They needed to design new models. Are you sure there's not more for other armies? Redo old masters. Read today's article. New art, books and of course actual production as unlike what some people might think gw can't just snap fingers and hey presto hundreds of thousands of products ready to ship.
Then of course other products. Rest of armies don't get new masters etc magically either.
Oh and then came case legions that pushed release further.
This on team that's smaller than main studio working on more games.
Oh yeah, thats another thing that I wanted to point out - same guys doing all the TOW stuff? Also doing Middle Earth, Horus Heresy, Necromunda, Blood Bowl, Legions Imperialis/Adeptus Titanicus/Aernoautica Imperialis. The team has grown a bit (and there are certain resources who are tapped full-time to certain projects from what I understand), but thats still a lot for one relatively small team to manage in terms of a project portfolio.
I would like to join however many other people invoicing my happiness for the fact that the previously unreleased head for the tomb Kings bone Giant will be released
Grail Seeker wrote: I hope that isn't the case. Bretonnia is a niche army. Empire being released sooner rather than later will be better for the game.
I suspect some of the new blood getting into the game with Brets will have buyers remorse as it is.
I mean a niche army that's basically your classic knights in shining armour army. You can't really get more classic fantasy humans without adding a Round Table and Robbin Hood
I can sort of see Empire being last on the argument that they are - arguably - the faction that needs the most change for the era. And arguably has the most scope for expanding for the setting if you want to put emphasis on the 3 Emperors situation.
Maybe its a lack of imagination - but High Elves for instance feel kind of complete. You could do new versions of certain models - but nothing is obviously missing from the range. (Bring back both versions of the Tiranoc Chariot you cowards.)
I do feel a bit conflicted. All the effort put into new TK is great. But then you are left with the ancient sculpts for the basic troops. Which feels kind of weird and bad.
Tyel wrote: I can sort of see Empire being last on the argument that they are - arguably - the faction that needs the most change for the era. And arguably has the most scope for expanding for the setting if you want to put emphasis on the 3 Emperors situation.
Maybe its a lack of imagination - but High Elves for instance feel kind of complete. You could do new versions of certain models - but nothing is obviously missing from the range. (Bring back both versions of the Tiranoc Chariot you cowards.)
I do feel a bit conflicted. All the effort put into new TK is great. But then you are left with the ancient sculpts for the basic troops. Which feels kind of weird and bad.
HE got a big update near the end of Old World as I recall. Although a few models got caught in that Island of Blood single sprue issue; but they still had a lot of well updated models and were in a very solid spot. It was kind of a surprise that so much of their army got removed from AoS over time.
So yes they'd likely not need much if any change and would land with a fairly modern/suitable army on the table. Perhaps with GW then raiding the archives for some unique older heroes and characters and stuff.
Grail Seeker wrote: I hope that isn't the case. Bretonnia is a niche army. Empire being released sooner rather than later will be better for the game.
I suspect some of the new blood getting into the game with Brets will have buyers remorse as it is.
I mean a niche army that's basically your classic knights in shining armour army. You can't really get more classic fantasy humans without adding a Round Table and Robbin Hood
You mean Bertrand le Brigand & the Bowmen of Bergerac? They better come back.
Grail Seeker wrote: I hope that isn't the case. Bretonnia is a niche army. Empire being released sooner rather than later will be better for the game.
I suspect some of the new blood getting into the game with Brets will have buyers remorse as it is.
I mean a niche army that's basically your classic knights in shining armour army. You can't really get more classic fantasy humans without adding a Round Table and Robbin Hood
You mean Bertrand le Brigand & the Bowmen of Bergerac? They better come back.
Shame it's the wrong period in time for them - pretty sure they were meant to be active in the Old World as it came to its end.
Tyel wrote: I can sort of see Empire being last on the argument that they are - arguably - the faction that needs the most change for the era. And arguably has the most scope for expanding for the setting if you want to put emphasis on the 3 Emperors situation.
Maybe its a lack of imagination - but High Elves for instance feel kind of complete. You could do new versions of certain models - but nothing is obviously missing from the range. (Bring back both versions of the Tiranoc Chariot you cowards.)
I do feel a bit conflicted. All the effort put into new TK is great. But then you are left with the ancient sculpts for the basic troops. Which feels kind of weird and bad.
Considering the 3 emperors situation I do find it surprising a priest of Taal wasn't included. I do think Talabheim/Talabecland put a ban on the cult of Sigmar during this era. If someone were to do a Talabecland themed army then a warrior priest of Sigmar/Ulric doesn't make much sense.
Empire will likely get a plastic captain/general on demigryph, similar to the Bretonnian lord on pegasus. Empire already had a pretty solid range of models, aside from the knights which haven't aged quite as well as the Bretonnian ones. And a plastic warrior priest kit wouldn't hurt as i'm not too keen on them bringing back the metal ones. They're probably one of the easiest of the armies to put back into production, with Wood Elves needing the most work.
Aesthete wrote: I guess Halberds don't count as polearms, then?
According to Sprues & Brews:
The Combat Phase probably has some of the bigger changes in the game. One biggie is the number of models that can fight. With the old Horde rule gone, in the majority of cases it’s only the first rank that can fight (Spears can fight in two ranks in they are charged, and some weapons such as polearms can always fight in two ranks)
If that's the case, I guess "polearms" mean things like pikes?
The polearms they are referring to are the weapons for Men At Arms for Bretonnia.
I was thinking of mercenaries like Leopold's Leopard Company and the Alcatani Fellowship, but weren't their pikes so long that they fought in three ranks?
Manfred von Drakken wrote:The Empire being last
As long as the rules in Forces of Fantasy are decent, I'm happy. I have nearly 200 Empire minis rebased as it is...
Mentlegen324 wrote: Some parts of this project really feel like there's a level of thought and care that seems to be missing with quite a few of their releases these days.
Releasing rules for some units without specific models and saying do whatever you like, encouraging conversions and making your own additions, the unreleased lord and also that he includes a helper miniature just because, not just re-releasing a few old models but going through the process of recasting them, even updating them and going beyond just what they were before to add new parts or extra model sculpts or just making them easier to build. Even just that they're using metal again.
I have heard some say GW management were brought kicking and screaming into this project. And that's probably true. Five years to get eight new models on release. Probably followed up with an old army rerelease a quarter taking us through 2026. And if it's doing quite well, then we'll pay to develop a new faction line. I think it's all on a shoestring budget and in-between employees other duties. Though you don't really need much more than that to bring back a product you were already making.
,
Saying this sort of thing really come across as simplifying it far too much just to find something to try to disregard the whole thing, saying "Five years for eight models" as if the only thing that matters is the number of new models released and that's the entirety of this project.
It's not a big mainline game, it's specialist. Not counting re-released/reboxed stuff, scenery or things that weren't fully out at launch: Legiones Imperialis had (from what i can see) 5 kits at launch. Necromunda 2017 had 2. Aeronautica Imperialis launched with 5. Titanicus launched with with 2. 5 For the new Horus Heresy, outside weapon upgrade parts. Those games would have also taken years of work. Did you say the same thing about those too at their launches? That they were just reluctant to do them in the first place and gave the smallest budgets possible because they just couldn't be bothered?
Just that TOW got a launch novel, they're remastering moulds or making newer ones, they're going through the archives to find things to release, that they're adding in extra bits and sculpts when they didn't have to, and that they're even going back to metal miniatures shows this isn't just some small thing. Don't judge it by comparing it to 40K or AoS and how much they get.
Saying this sort of thing really come across as simplifying it far too much just to find something to try to disregard the whole thing, saying "Five years for eight models" as if the only thing that matters is the number of new models released and that's the entirety of this project.
It's not a big mainline game, it's specialist. Not counting re-released/reboxed stuff, scenery or things that weren't fully out at launch: Legiones Imperialis had (from what i can see) 5 kits at launch. Necromunda 2017 had 2. Aeronautica Imperialis launched with 5. Titanicus launched with with 2. 5 For the new Horus Heresy, outside weapon upgrade parts. Those games would have also taken years of work. Did you say the same thing about those too at their launches? That they were just reluctant to do them in the first place and gave the smallest budgets possible because they just couldn't be bothered?
Just that TOW got a launch novel, they're remastering moulds or making newer ones, they're going through the archives to find things to release, that they're adding in extra bits and sculpts when they didn't have to, and that they're even going back to metal miniatures shows this isn't just some small thing. Don't judge it by comparing it to 40K or AoS and how much they get.
I'm just noting the reality. There's plenty of special pleading in the other direction's favor. But it remains a very strong argument, no matter how many sprues Aeronautica Imperialis was worth at launch. I'm not a GW stan or a hater, so it's not a big surprise to me that they would pursue maximum profit for minimal effort, that should always be a realist's assumption when it comes to them.
Saying this sort of thing really come across as simplifying it far too much just to find something to try to disregard the whole thing, saying "Five years for eight models" as if the only thing that matters is the number of new models released and that's the entirety of this project.
It's not a big mainline game, it's specialist. Not counting re-released/reboxed stuff, scenery or things that weren't fully out at launch: Legiones Imperialis had (from what i can see) 5 kits at launch. Necromunda 2017 had 2. Aeronautica Imperialis launched with 5. Titanicus launched with with 2. 5 For the new Horus Heresy, outside weapon upgrade parts. Those games would have also taken years of work. Did you say the same thing about those too at their launches? That they were just reluctant to do them in the first place and gave the smallest budgets possible because they just couldn't be bothered?
Just that TOW got a launch novel, they're remastering moulds or making newer ones, they're going through the archives to find things to release, that they're adding in extra bits and sculpts when they didn't have to, and that they're even going back to metal miniatures shows this isn't just some small thing. Don't judge it by comparing it to 40K or AoS and how much they get.
I'm just noting the reality. There's plenty of special pleading in the other direction's favor. But it remains a very strong argument, no matter how many sprues Aeronautica Imperialis was worth at launch. I'm not a GW stan or a hater, so it's not a big surprise to me that they would pursue maximum profit for minimal effort, that should always be a realist's assumption when it comes to them.
No, it is not a "very strong argument" at all. Trying to dismiss it with "Only 8 kits at launch!" despite just that alone already seeming to be a bigger launch than the specialist games released over the past few years, even their latest ones of the new Horus Heresy edition, and Legions Imperialis. Somehow a bigger release than either of those (even without all the other stuff they're doing for it) suggests to you that they had basically the smallest budget possible and didn't even really want to do the game in the first place.
It's a mainline game, or rather, it has joined the mainline games.
It now sits with its own menu option alongside Age of Sigmar, 40k, LOTR and Horus Heresy. It's not under "Other Games", where everything from LI to WarCry to Blood Bowl to Necromunda to Kill-Team is kept.
Grail Seeker wrote: I hope that isn't the case. Bretonnia is a niche army. Empire being released sooner rather than later will be better for the game.
I suspect some of the new blood getting into the game with Brets will have buyers remorse as it is.
I mean a niche army that's basically your classic knights in shining armour army. You can't really get more classic fantasy humans without adding a Round Table and Robbin Hood
Well, Bretonnia feels... narrow. Empire has a lot of playstyles built into it, but Bretonnia leans really hard on one. You can kind of do infantry (and the foot knights help in that regard) but historically, if you're going to do that you're better off just running an Empire army. And now an exiles army.
I personally wouldn't mind seeing High Elves and Warriors of Chaos at the end of the queue. As far as a Border Princes campaign goes, they're... a bit of a stretch. The Empire, Orcs and Goblins, Dwarfs and Beastmen have a direct presence, Bretonnia has settlements and interests, Tomb Kings have a definite interest and conquest plans, and wood elves have some forests they care about, but large bands of chaos warriors this far south when chaos is at a low ebb feels very strange indeed. (An empire cultist army of infamy feels more appropriate). High elves... I'm not even sure what they do with their colonies and outposts- are they gathering tribute or... what? Trading with dwarves still, or have issues with that relationship already come and gone?
When they jump to another location and +/- a couple decades, those two factions could well feel more appropriate.
Grail Seeker wrote: I hope that isn't the case. Bretonnia is a niche army. Empire being released sooner rather than later will be better for the game.
I suspect some of the new blood getting into the game with Brets will have buyers remorse as it is.
I mean a niche army that's basically your classic knights in shining armour army. You can't really get more classic fantasy humans without adding a Round Table and Robbin Hood
You mean Bertrand le Brigand & the Bowmen of Bergerac? They better come back.
Shame it's the wrong period in time for them - pretty sure they were meant to be active in the Old World as it came to its end.
Yeah, shame because the models and character concepts were a lot of fun.
McDougall Designs wrote: I would like to join however many other people invoicing my happiness for the fact that the previously unreleased head for the tomb Kings bone Giant will be released
But... but... how could you take something other than the CHIQITA BANANA HEAD!?
there are 7 factions left
if there are double releases, 1 need to be a lone and Empire being at civil war with Sigmar and Ulric priests having models, as well having old models for 2 knightly orders for 2 sides it makes the most sense doing them last
something interesting came up in the local forum from one of the TOs of the bigger 40k events, as that they were told by GW that the game won't be ready for tournaments until August/September
It astonishes me that TOW's 2 army boxes, which are essentially re-releases of sprues that were first produced decades ago, are already showing as 'temporarily out of stock online'. Either they only had a handful ready to go, or there really is a big demand for these ancient models.
I loved the Empire range in previous editions, and have a big box of unbuild Skaven (who, sadly, aren't reappearing in TOW), but I won't be buying into it again. I think this game should have been re-done in a smaller scale, so that people could field seriously massive armies.
I'm just noting the reality. There's plenty of special pleading in the other direction's favor. But it remains a very strong argument, no matter how many sprues Aeronautica Imperialis was worth at launch. I'm not a GW stan or a hater, so it's not a big surprise to me that they would pursue maximum profit for minimal effort, that should always be a realist's assumption when it comes to them.
you just are flat out wrong as has been pointed out to you multiple ties. And same thing has been said for years.
One can only conclude you intentionally ignore all the proofs from years just to keep saying conspiracy theory again.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Snord wrote: It astonishes me that TOW's 2 army boxes, which are essentially re-releases of sprues that were first produced decades ago, are already showing as 'temporarily out of stock online'. Either they only had a handful ready to go, or there really is a big demand for these ancient models.
GW has supply issues constantly. Producing sprues takes time. Having re-release doesn't fasten it that much as it saves just mould design time.
In fact the old sprues are casting time INEFFICIENT(more different sprues and less models per sprue=more casting needed). It takes longer time to produce 1000 old style box than 1000 box with new more efficient sprue design.
GW had 0 bretonnia/tk sprue in stock before they started to cast them for this release
Tyel wrote: I can sort of see Empire being last on the argument that they are - arguably - the faction that needs the most change for the era. And arguably has the most scope for expanding for the setting if you want to put emphasis on the 3 Emperors situation.
Maybe its a lack of imagination - but High Elves for instance feel kind of complete. You could do new versions of certain models - but nothing is obviously missing from the range. (Bring back both versions of the Tiranoc Chariot you cowards.)
I do feel a bit conflicted. All the effort put into new TK is great. But then you are left with the ancient sculpts for the basic troops. Which feels kind of weird and bad.
Considering the 3 emperors situation I do find it surprising a priest of Taal wasn't included. I do think Talabheim/Talabecland put a ban on the cult of Sigmar during this era. If someone were to do a Talabecland themed army then a warrior priest of Sigmar/Ulric doesn't make much sense.
Empire will likely get a plastic captain/general on demigryph, similar to the Bretonnian lord on pegasus. Empire already had a pretty solid range of models, aside from the knights which haven't aged quite as well as the Bretonnian ones. And a plastic warrior priest kit wouldn't hurt as i'm not too keen on them bringing back the metal ones. They're probably one of the easiest of the armies to put back into production, with Wood Elves needing the most work.
Talabheim does have very strong links with Ulric as well - Ar Ulric even relocated there between 1360 and 1547. However I really hope they do all the major priests - Warrior Priests of Taal, Myrmidia, Verena and Priests of Morr and Shallya could all be really good models and have interesting rules
Snord wrote: It astonishes me that TOW's 2 army boxes, which are essentially re-releases of sprues that were first produced decades ago, are already showing as 'temporarily out of stock online'. Either they only had a handful ready to go, or there really is a big demand for these ancient models.
I loved the Empire range in previous editions, and have a big box of unbuild Skaven (who, sadly, aren't reappearing in TOW), but I won't be buying into it again. I think this game should have been re-done in a smaller scale, so that people could field seriously massive armies.
I think it bodes really well for the game- GW will have produced enough stock to make it profitable for them and they sold it all quickly. It could show there is a big market for the game and that will be further tested as they bring the rest fo the armies out. Good sales means they can invest more in the game and bring out more plastic kits etc..
If we do get all the armies this year as Dana Howl is suggesting, they might then revisit the armies next year with additional kits and releases. Didn't they do that with Necromunda- go back and release additional kits after the initial gangs were released?
Mentlegen324 wrote: No, it is not a "very strong argument" at all. Trying to dismiss it with "Only 8 kits at launch!" despite just that alone already seeming to be a bigger launch than the specialist games released over the past few years, even their latest ones of the new Horus Heresy edition, and Legions Imperialis.
I might have missed something, but aren't 6 of those new kits resin FW stuff? They're not really equivalent to new plastic sprues.
I'd rather forego the characters and have gotten some new sprues for the core units.
That said I'm not really saying WHFB is no effort or even low effort as a whole... it just doesn't seem like how-ever-many-years-they've-been-working-on it worth of effort More like it's been on the backburner for much of that.
Voss wrote: ...large bands of chaos warriors this far south when chaos is at a low ebb feels very strange indeed.
On that part, the old fluff places a large Chaos incursion into Nehekhara during or right after the current Border Princes setting. Even in the past it was considered quite possible to take a fleet of ships to that part of the world.
I wouldn't think about the bs explanation for why some factions aren't in the game too much. GW didn't and they'll just gloss over it whenever it gets in the way.
McDougall Designs wrote: I would like to join however many other people invoicing my happiness for the fact that the previously unreleased head for the tomb Kings bone Giant will be released
But... but... how could you take something other than the CHIQITA BANANA HEAD!?
While it's nice to have options I personally don't care whether there's another head in there or not. I like the bare one just fine. Mostly I'm interested in whether the Bone Giant remains in metal or is ported over to resin. Not sure if the article answers that. In metal it's not the nicest model to handle on account of the weight of the chest.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I might have missed something, but aren't 6 of those new kits resin FW stuff? They're not really equivalent to new plastic sprues.
I've just taken a quick look at the online store for TOW, and my count on new models "available" at this time looks like this:
Plastic
Duke/Baron on Royal Pegasus
BSB on Royal Pegasus
TK Character on Necrolith Bone Dragon
Resin
Handmaiden of the Lady
Questing Knight Paladin
BSB Mounted and on Foot
Tomb Swarms
TKBSB TK Tomb King
I have the feeling one of the resin characters might just be an old model I'm unfamiliar with, though. We also know there's more new plastic in the next wave, such as the Foot Knights.
It's a mainline game, or rather, it has joined the mainline games.
It now sits with its own menu option alongside Age of Sigmar, 40k, LOTR and Horus Heresy. It's not under "Other Games", where everything from LI to WarCry to Blood Bowl to Necromunda to Kill-Team is kept.
LOTR and HH are also specialist games.
Both and TOW are literally coming out of the Specialist Games Studio team, rather than the main studio team that handles AOS and 40k.
Mentlegen324 wrote: Some parts of this project really feel like there's a level of thought and care that seems to be missing with quite a few of their releases these days.
Releasing rules for some units without specific models and saying do whatever you like, encouraging conversions and making your own additions, the unreleased lord and also that he includes a helper miniature just because, not just re-releasing a few old models but going through the process of recasting them, even updating them and going beyond just what they were before to add new parts or extra model sculpts or just making them easier to build. Even just that they're using metal again.
So you're complaining about the good stuff we're getting?
Mentlegen324 wrote: Some parts of this project really feel like there's a level of thought and care that seems to be missing with quite a few of their releases these days.
Releasing rules for some units without specific models and saying do whatever you like, encouraging conversions and making your own additions, the unreleased lord and also that he includes a helper miniature just because, not just re-releasing a few old models but going through the process of recasting them, even updating them and going beyond just what they were before to add new parts or extra model sculpts or just making them easier to build. Even just that they're using metal again.
So you're complaining about the good stuff we're getting?
.
) so I guess 1999pts has the advantage of not changing any game rules, while 2k with 1k composition is already a house rule of sorts.
even reminds me of the one carrying Azraels Hemet too.
