nathan2004 wrote: I'm hoping high elves and Warriors are next...makes sense quintessential good versus evil plus some of their better sellers. And Valrak has a pretty good track record I believe
Now, now. Don't say that. Just because they're elves doesn't automatically make them evil.
I wouldn't mind seeing Warriors of Chaos sooner than later, if only to confirm if we can expect Forsaken to return. I'd buy a box of them.
Cool dudes with chainsaw swords make us happy and maybe when folks can't afford a 5k cruise, you can make a killing on 50$ boxes of chainsaw swords.
Ahh, but that hit just afterGW had massively restructured after LOTR ended, and had done so with only modest borrowing - which if very hazy memory serves was to pay a dividend,
Staff cuts, non-profitable stores closed or relocated or restaffed, no doubt lots of other changes behind the scenes such as studio reorganisation etc.
It’s another example of GW’s bizarre good luck. Sure, it’s married to business sense, but luck has been a major part of its success over the decades. The main business sense was not borrowing to expand, but doing it from cash on hand. That they moved largely unopposed into British High Streets helped, and explains why we just don’t have the FLGS culture of the US hobby scene. And that bedrock has ensured a constant online presence, even from the days of Warseer and whatever IRC came before that.
I mean, another company would be able to try GW’s “write the theme tune, sing the theme tune” approach of wholly owned stores selling sole branded products, sure. But unlike GW when it was getting going, they’re competing with GW. Not just for customers, but overall quality of products. No that’s not saying GW are the best quality across the board - but it’s still the benchmark. And so to compete, you need to be some element or combination of a) cheaper b) higher quality c) greater range.
A lot of the early GW stores were opened really close to independant gaming stores which often resulted in them closing
at that point GW stores weren't one brand shops but sold a much wider range both of licenced stuff like CoC, Stormbringer, AD&D, Runequest, Paranoia and even stuff made by other manufacturers
they slowly dropped the other manufactures lines and then canned all the licenced stuff they had left (and even put it on sale to get rid of it, I even have some of the CoC and other stuff from that final cull in the Edinburgh store) Edit: By then a couple of other gaming stores had closed, one near the kings theatre (Mutant Chronicles focused so probably down to that crashing) and one near the Grayfriars Bobby statue about 5 mins walk from GW. I think the third independant just down the road from the GW on the Royal Mile (Mac's Models) was still going at that point)
Also they went through a huge process of moving stores to other locations off the UK high street to spaces with considerably cheaper rent which made a huge difference.
And was probably essential - the main highstreets are so insanely overpriced now to operate on a good many are ghost towns* where only food outlets and what seems like an ever revolving number of new clothing/shoe stores seem to open up on
To say nothing of the crippling taxes that government set which further adds to the question of why open a highstreet store when all its going to to today is burn your money when you can open an etsy/ebay store from home.
*I'm not even sure how the rents work and part of me wonders if we've not got a lot of "investors" sitting on properties where they either don't care to receive a rent or where its some tax dodge that if they have unrented properties they can write off tax so they only want them occupied at high rates.
Rent, Business Rates, uncapped power rates, water rates, staffing costs, insurance costs (including public liability).
And unlike GW Stores, a FLGS has to, y’know, buy in its own stock. Which for getting open in the first place is a significant cash investment, and risk that you’ve bought in what’s going to sell in your local area.
GW also benefit from a centralised recruitment process. They know the personalities that’ll fit the plan and model, and recruit accordingly.
Not only that but they can also move new staff around to train them up to a good standard as well.
But yeah I recall when Indominius was selling decently but some stores were having to basically shift it at-cost just to get the money invested back to buy other things that would fast sell. There's a reason a LOT of hobbyshops in this market live and breath cardgames because its just such a fast turnover of cash.
Gone are the days when stores could more easily buy huge inventories and have stuff shelf-sit until it was needed. These days they can't afford to have too much money tied up in unsold stock.
It doesn't help that a lot of games have huge inventories of models and items. Which is another boon for GW - they can stock 1 product line really well. Every other store wants to do the GW stuff AND everything else and often in very tiny footprints of storesize. I've been in some in the UK when Warmachine was at the height of 2nd edition and they had tiny amounts on the shelf squashed in next to boardgames and other stuff.
There are a few big names - Firestorm seem to be going from strength to strength, Wayland and few others
My FLGS, Chaos Cards (directly opposite the pub I’m currently in for a gig) carries some TTWG stuff, but even their GW stuff is pretty limited. They’re mostly TCG and Board Games.
Decent sized store though, with four permanent 6x4 gaming boards I’ll be co-opting for a Necromunda campaign in due course.
I think the reason people look for paired releases is because that's what GW seems to be doing. The game launch pairing of TK & Brets was pretty explicit: the Bret's Arcane Journal has a specific scenario pairing up TK with Bret Exiles. The next 2 armies are O&G & Dwarfs, another logical pairing. So, while there is no guarantee that GW will follow this process, it certainly looks like a trend.
Perhaps not paired in the same sense as Brets & TK but paired as in "these are logical matched opponents," particularly from a story standpoint. Having the expectation of GW launching two armies simultaneously, while attractive, is pretty far-fetched & unrealistic. But there is, so far, a pretty logical pattern to the releases. It remains to be seen what the two next releases will actually be, but this idea has traction based on the pairing of these armies so far.
with 3+ months between releases there are no pairs, or something like "logical opponents"
Goblins and Dwarfs match, but the time between them is the same as between Brets and Orcs and will be the same as Dwarfs and the next one
Greenskin and Dwarfs are a paired release the same way as Dwarfs and Chaos will be (if Chaos is the next one) with a 3 month wait between.
By now there is no logical pattern just because 1/2 half out of 3 release matches the upcoming release
not even the stories are connected in a way as it would be expected with a release that way
I suppose we won't even see a back and forth between factions from the Forces of Fantasy and the Ravening Hordes, since the former has one faction more, but the first army after launch was one from Ravening Hordes.
GW launched with two factions, which is the bare minimum to play a game that isn't a Space Marine civil war, and folks still extrapolate that this means armies will always come in pairs.
And lets face it, in the Wargaming market Space Marines are about the only army you can launch a new game with 1 faction and have it as civil war and have it actually work.
Outside the literal civil war games
WG launched a game with only one faction and generic models for American Civil War and did it again with English Civil War
kodos wrote: Outside the literal civil war games
WG launched a game with only one faction and generic models for American Civil War and did it again with English Civil War
They did also do it at a small scale. And let's be honest at that scale you could do quite alot of historical conflicts with one set of models that covered both sides.
Overread wrote: And lets face it, in the Wargaming market Space Marines are about the only army you can launch a new game with 1 faction and have it as civil war and have it actually work.
We have a lack of the most essential Faction - The Empire.
I wouldn't be surprised if they were the last one, and were paired up with the first campaign book - using a new faction's worth of manufacturing for any unique characters and units from that.
clodax66 wrote: Looks like they removed all dwarfs from AOS cities of sigmar. Maybe it's a sign that dwarfs are really close to be released
They had been no longer available for the past 2 months.
They were there 2 weeks ago when I was looking to see if they had dwarfs back in stock and when I checked today they weren't even there. At least in the US I am not sure about other places
What's weird is that the Cities of Sigmar faction focus specifically called out Dwarves - hell, one of their orders even has enhanced effects for Dwarven units. One has to assume that they haven't been yoinked from the book (yet).
Perhaps this is an indication that Cities are losing their Dwarves soon?
If they’re in the book still, they could be getting new models with a more unified “Cities” aesthetic, with the diamond heraldry and those funny helmets.
Olthannon wrote: The slayers and Kharadron are also down as Duardin though right? So presumably they can just mean that.
I'd figure GW also want to make clear they are still in universe within Cities of Sigmar armies for all those people who have the minis.
They may be Duardin but they’re not Cities of Sigmar; they’re talking about things like the orders that say “a CoS unit can do X and if it’s also Duardin it can do Y” type stuff.
Olthannon wrote: The slayers and Kharadron are also down as Duardin though right? So presumably they can just mean that.
I'd figure GW also want to make clear they are still in universe within Cities of Sigmar armies for all those people who have the minis.
They may be Duardin but they’re not Cities of Sigmar; they’re talking about things like the orders that say “a CoS unit can do X and if it’s also Duardin it can do Y” type stuff.
A pretty good indication city duardin get a brand new kit. I mean, if they dont I would be really worried about where all the non humans gone in the glorious cities of sigmar. The whole point of the army is the free races working together. I cant imagine how they explain the Phoenicium dont have phoenix guard any more.
Edit: sorry, didnt even realise this was The Old World thread before posting. I guess AoS have some relevance to the near future of TOW though.
Kanluwen wrote: The Phoenicium is gone, as are the Phoenix Guard.
I should have known. I will need to look up what happened to them.
Abraxia happened to them.
I suppose it was just a matter of time. Many of the stormcast units are high elf units "recast" as stormcast, and the Praetors are clearly phoenix guard on steroids. I remember early on I figured most stormcast were elven heroes recast, because GW didnt want to do anything with the high elves and many units looked like HE style with dragon cavalry and rangers with lion helms and fur cloaks.
threw my hands up in exasperation with GW and bought the Oathmark army deal for the dwarves. I literally do not understand what the holdup was with their dwarves, but not they aren't getting my money. Oh well. I still need to get gyrocopters printed...
It's more simply that they stumbled upon a naturally monopoly first. In basic terms what GW does hasn't had to change in almost 40 years. Games are naturally monopolies since they thrive from having a community of people to play with. (See also how most sports in the late 19th century had all kinds of local or house rules before being codified with the advent of new transportation methods and the growth of cities to accommodate more complex and large-scale competition between distant places.) They also lucked out in that their universes perfectly crafted settings to justify endless wargaming were also perfect for video games, giving them not only another revenue stream (Which they had no risk on since it's licenced.) but a massive way to create customers for their products. They also basically covered every aesthetic and archetype meaning any competitor will always seem like they are ripping off GW no matter what they do.
The other thing that GW had was visionary artists whose work could be relied upon for inspiration long after they left. Compare even bad GW designs to attempts by competitors and it's night and day. Many people enjoy Mantic's game rules but their miniatures are poor not for technical reasons for design aesthetic. They lack good art direction even if many of the staff are former GW people. Which in a hobby where you're always trying to make new units for a fake contrived sci-fi or fantasy military is a big deal, it's not easy. We see even GW has had many fails where units clearly existed to exist and be "new" despite nobody clearly having found a good idea or visual only to be left to rot for years afterwards on shelves after they sales tail off in the first few months. (Hi Hammerfall bunker!)
I think the art direction is also something GW has a good luck on for the time being as the shift to digital art has utterly destroyed not only the art (I just don't feel anything looking at it, stop trying to make oil paintings with digital art, it doesn't work even when they don't leave giant square "brush strokes" the colour depth isn't there) but the valued role of an artist in residence which GW had and used to cultivate a vast art movement essentially through it's products. Now things are done remotely through outsourcing and freelancing meaning you might only have an artist for one piece. Thus everything becomes samey because you can't allow 50 different art styles to haphazardly appear (You got a few distinct art styles in 40k and WHFB books but since it's the same artists over and over across many years you come to not find it weird) and thus artists are more and more controlled and told to paint to your house style only. See also MTG which now has a massive array of digital artists who converge to the same weird uncanny oil painting style. (And apparently are given pretty strict instructions of what the image must be like)
I will say the only thing GW is truly lucky with is that they survived destroying their prime line of kits, the space marines, that was an insane risk. (And it is one they wouldn't have with any other line because the potential sales increases wouldn't have justified it. Ironically Space Marines were so popular GW New Coke'd them) Taking away the genius modularity and all the different marks of armour and turning them into monopose clone troopers with boring helmets instead of just making the legs on the marines as long as the ones in the Rubric marine kit is something I'd have thought would have been disastrous. (GW made the Primaris heads like that I suspect because the Red Scorpions were so popular but they were so popular because they were different) But it succeeded in getting the vast reserve army of Space Marine players and lapsed Space Marine players to rebuy their whole armies and then covid happened and a whole new generation of players who had no comparison enjoyed them. I think the way GW discourages conversions and kitbashing now does help them. If you don't really spend a lot of time making the models your own you make them you're done and you want the next thing much more. They become more objects to collect than projects. Sure you can still do kitbashing on them but it's needlessly harder (And you can't repose their torsos or swap them, not that there is much need since they are all the same anyway) and if you only collect Primaris you won't have any bits to make them anything other than clone troopers. I also think that it shifts things more to painting which GW makes a lot of money from. (Look at the ridiculous list of paints GW proscribes you use in their official guides now)
GW updated the Warhammer site menu, TOW is now listed under the "More" category along with Heresy, Necromunda, etc.
40k and AoS (along with "New") remain the only top level headings.
I think we can put to rest any tosh about TOW being a "main game" on the basis of it being arbitrarily listed next to 40k and AoS (along with MESBG, HH, etc) on a website menu.
There isn’t even a tab beyond 40K and AoS on the mobile site. I did log in to browse the Old World range but since I couldn’t find it I thought “Oh well” and bought Skaventide instead.
Obviously this didn’t happen, and will only ever happen in the daftest recesses of GW ideas. I cannot fathom why a company would make it so difficult to buy their products.
Luke82 wrote: There isn’t even a tab beyond 40K and AoS on the mobile site. I did log in to browse the Old World range but since I couldn’t find it I thought “Oh well” and bought Skaventide instead.
Obviously this didn’t happen, and will only ever happen in the daftest recesses of GW ideas. I cannot fathom why a company would make it so difficult to buy their products.
Based on my mobile viewing currently, there is New, 40K, AOS, More. If you click more you get HH, Old World, LotR, Other Games, Build and Paint,...
Under other games is where Kill Team, War Cry, Blood Bowl etc sit.
Even with the old Page I found it hard to find Underworlds and warcry, they were hidden somewhere and I only ever found them through Search. You'd think failings like that are exactly what you'd want to fix with a new page.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Even with the old Page I found it hard to find Underworlds and warcry, they were hidden somewhere and I only ever found them through Search. You'd think failings like that are exactly what you'd want to fix with a new page.
They were under "Other Games", alongside of Necromunda and Blood Bowl.
So people were right, no Malakai with goblin-hewer. Seems a bit strange, since he invented it but oh well.
No Grimm Burloksson either. Burlok is apparently getting rules, but I'd have figured his son would be regulated to a generic engineer. Glad I picked one up off ebay, since the Cogsmith has been gone from AOS for months
I love and hate the miner kit. The bits alone were incredible, but I put a few together for my girlfriend a few months ago and realized the mold lines are terrible on them.
I also just realized the plastic dragon slayer isn't included either. Figured he'd be the "slayer of legend" but maybe he's in wave 2? Its still around in AOS as "Grombrindal"
Kicking myself, had a chance to buy a classic flame cannon for a great price last week and didn't thinking it would be the sculpt coming back and had already spent a kings ransom on old models recently.
The one they went with its awful, had really thought the classic model would be the one to return.
Love the imperial dwarves are coming back though. I was intending to buy three battalions for the plastics, but honestly could honestly just buy old marauder sculpts at this point. Just picked up a unit of thunderers this week so I'm going to need some big units of the imperials to go with them!
Great to see the Dwarf miniatures finally releasing, there's a few I've been after. Was considering the Engineers but it's not clear if they're resin or metal though? I was hoping they'd be metal.
Still not sure on the proportions of the 3 new miniatures either. They're nice models and I like them, but something seems a bit odd about them.
Edit: Just watched the Video. Bugman, Engineers, Anvil of Doom are all Metal. Nice!
Ohman wrote: Not as many old sculpts as the Orcs & Goblins got but these ones are pretty sweet. Used to be called Imperial Dwarfs I think?
Gives me hope we'll see a lot of old classics for the Empire when their time comes.
Spoiler:
Used to be Dwarf Warriors with Pikes but good to see that they have brought them back as Imperial Dwarfs - hopefully one the Empire can use - it was always a nice flavourful idea!
Mr Morden wrote: Used to be Dwarf Warriors with Pikes but good to see that they have brought them back as Imperial Dwarfs - hopefully one the Empire can use - it was always a nice flavourful idea!
I saw that the prices for the Necromunda boxset are floating around, so do we have prices for any of the Dwarf stuff yet? Or are we gonna have to wait till tomorrow?
JWh85 wrote: Love the Dwarfs, especially the Imperial Dwarfs and the Beer Cart!
It is weird though that Ogdruz Swampdigga still haven't been released, right?
We're still missing squigs, netters & savage orcs. None of which have even been mentioned or shown as reveals but all have rules. I guess we'll still have another wave of Orcs N goblins to come at some point in the future then.
bong264 wrote: The bugman's cart looks so tiny on that base I still wanna know what exactly GW still has mold wise hidden deep in the vault...
I'm imagining something akin to the storage at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. It really is rather good fun to see what they end up digging up for these Old World releases. Even when I don't collect a faction nor have any plans to start doing so anymore, just seeing some of the (sometimes very) vintage sculpts resurface is quite a treat. Even with the clear market for nostalgia, I wouldn't have bet on them going this far back for this system.
Really keen on the Dwarfs myself. Always hated that army back in Fantasy day (static gunline army and all), but now with Old World, I think I'd like a small force of them. The army box is pretty good, but would have to ditch the Gyrocopters (then to figure out if the box discount is worth it without the copter). I'm just not a fan of the late Dwarfs design so the copters and and ironbreakers are not up my alley unfortunately and gonna skip those.
The rest is brilliant though and like it a lot! Outside of the core stuff from the army box, interested in some Hammerers, the regular Slayers of course, the Anvil would be a must (though the old one on wheels would be great too), and the Bugman's cart is ace! Missing some Cannons there thought, so might get some later I hope.
Also not shown in the recent article, but there was some other older sculpts going for made-to-order that would make decent Ironbreaker stand-in:
RazorEdge wrote: Had a talk with a friend, we had a discussion if we ever will see a similary game but for 40k.
With sort of some OOP 2nd to 6th Edition stuff.
What do you think?
-
Very unlikely. The reason Old World works is because it got blasted and GW destroyed the game. 40K has never had that happen ;sure its changed a LOT over the years but GW never outright just destroyed the entire thing.
The closest relationship comparing AoS to Old World is 40K and 30K; though evne then its a bit wonky because 30K really only focuses on the Imperial factions and some Chaos (Xenos don't get a look)
“ There are Royal Clan Warriors, which you build from the Hammerers kit using the hand weapons and shields found on the frame.”
So that’s different from longbeards? Are they saying longbeards are exclusively the two handed axe models and the shield and hand weapons are used to represent more elite dwarf warriors?
I’m wondering if it’s the red armor dwarfs you see in some pictures. Though those models date back to the 8th edition dwarf rule book and were just a clan of longbeards in colored armor
I was planning of converting longbeards to represent generic warriors so this may complicate things ?
every kit they have has 2 option of being build, so somehow someone thought that each kit option must be its own unit so no customer has a bad feeling or get confused with having options on a kit that have no use
RazorEdge wrote: Had a talk with a friend, we had a discussion if we ever will see a similary game but for 40k.
With sort of some OOP 2nd to 6th Edition stuff.
What do you think?
-
Very unlikely. The reason Old World works is because it got blasted and GW destroyed the game. 40K has never had that happen ;sure its changed a LOT over the years but GW never outright just destroyed the entire thing.
The closest relationship comparing AoS to Old World is 40K and 30K; though evne then its a bit wonky because 30K really only focuses on the Imperial factions and some Chaos (Xenos don't get a look)
The only thing I could see them do is basically release a game centered around mk7/8 power armor since that stuff is basically now OOP or heading in that direction. Badab War would be a good candidate.
RazorEdge wrote: Had a talk with a friend, we had a discussion if we ever will see a similary game but for 40k.
With sort of some OOP 2nd to 6th Edition stuff.
What do you think?
-
Very unlikely. The reason Old World works is because it got blasted and GW destroyed the game. 40K has never had that happen ;sure its changed a LOT over the years but GW never outright just destroyed the entire thing.
The closest relationship comparing AoS to Old World is 40K and 30K; though evne then its a bit wonky because 30K really only focuses on the Imperial factions and some Chaos (Xenos don't get a look)
The only thing I could see them do is basically release a game centered around mk7/8 power armor since that stuff is basically now OOP or heading in that direction. Badab War would be a good candidate.
Perhaps they realise they can just re-release the old gorkamorka models and battlefleet gothic and people will buy it
RazorEdge wrote: Had a talk with a friend, we had a discussion if we ever will see a similary game but for 40k.
With sort of some OOP 2nd to 6th Edition stuff.
What do you think?
-
Very unlikely. The reason Old World works is because it got blasted and GW destroyed the game. 40K has never had that happen ;sure its changed a LOT over the years but GW never outright just destroyed the entire thing.
The closest relationship comparing AoS to Old World is 40K and 30K; though evne then its a bit wonky because 30K really only focuses on the Imperial factions and some Chaos (Xenos don't get a look)
The only thing I could see them do is basically release a game centered around mk7/8 power armor since that stuff is basically now OOP or heading in that direction. Badab War would be a good candidate.
Perhaps they realise they can just re-release the old gorkamorka models and battlefleet gothic and people will buy it
A rerelease of BFG with a full catalogue would get me to spend money on new GW stuff instantaneously.
RazorEdge wrote: Had a talk with a friend, we had a discussion if we ever will see a similary game but for 40k.
With sort of some OOP 2nd to 6th Edition stuff.
What do you think?
-
Let's see which faction we get next for WOT.
That's pretty much Heresy. It's 3rd to 7th ed 40K with all of the single wound marines, Force Org charts AP nullification values, blast and flame templates and vehicle facing rules that modern 40K has streamlined away.
Plus redesigned Rogue Trader era stuff like the Landspeeder and jump packs.
Far as Dwarfs go, I don't think I ever knew you could make hw&s Longbeards out of the hammerers kit.
I'll be excited to take a look at the "Royal Guard". I've got a kit around here somewhere for the hammerers. I was hoping one of the "renown" groups would be tunnel fighters and feature Iron Breakers, Miners, Organ Gun and Flame Cannons just because that's my favorite theme but I knew it was a long shot. I'm excited for this tome as I have a lot of Dwarves
Gert wrote: Yup, 20 to a box. Would be interesting to see what happens to the AoS ones seeing as they're only 10.
There are no AoS ones, they were removed a while ago.
Which is why they sold a whole bunch of them off cheap in those cheap(er) regiment sets to clear stock a little while ago.
If they were web bundles, maybe. If they were individual boxes containing multiple kits, then that would have been new stock made for the purpose. As explained ad infinitum in numerous threads on this forum, GW don't repackage existing stock to clear it. It isn't practical or economical to do so (and, in this regard, they're pretty typical of bigger companies that both manufacture and sell their own product).
Adding a new profile for "Longbeards, but use Hammerer heads" is funny to me - I prefer the Longbeard heads from the kit, and used them for my Hammerers instead. Going full circle now by doing the Royal Guard? Mayhaps...
Tastyfish wrote:Far as Dwarfs go, I don't think I ever knew you could make hw&s Longbeards out of the hammerers kit.
They were always branded as a dual kit. I do not remember the details during WHF times, but for AoS the same box had two listings on GWs online store - one for Hammerers, one for Longbeards. It was the same for Ironbreakers and Irondrakes.
Hulksmash wrote:I was hoping one of the "renown" groups would be tunnel fighters and feature Iron Breakers, Miners, Organ Gun and Flame Cannons just because that's my favorite theme but I knew it was a long shot. I'm excited for this tome as I have a lot of Dwarves
The Expeditionary Force could give you some tools to support the very same idea. Make your mine into one led by an enterprising Engineer, use the EF list and lean into Ironbreakers and Miners for some of the infantry. I guess we will get the details of the list coming Saturday, but I assume this idea would work just fine.
GaroRobe wrote:“ There are Royal Clan Warriors, which you build from the Hammerers kit using the hand weapons and shields found on the frame.”
So that’s different from longbeards? Are they saying longbeards are exclusively the two handed axe models and the shield and hand weapons are used to represent more elite dwarf warriors?
Historically, long beards have always been armed with great weapons. So if they specify hand weapon in the build then it's definitely not long beard unit.
Unless, of course, they change that in 8th edition, in which case ignore anything I posted.
Just Tony wrote: Unless, of course, they change that in 8th edition, in which case ignore anything I posted.
7th, as the new plastic kit replaced the metal ones and as those were just the regular warriors with face mask you could have them with shields
so we have now the 7th plastic infantry that can either be Warriors or Longbeards, and the 8th Edi plastic elite infantry that can be Longbeards, Royal Warriors or Hammerers
Longbeards were historically just better warriors. They always had the option for hand weapons & shields and also great weapons. At least from 6th onward from what I remember. And I played dwarves all the way back in 5th but that was short lived
So how many versions of Longbeards have there been over the years, either plastic or metal? I remember, possibly around 6th ed, there being some I loved but sadly never bought. Don't recognise them in any of the kits about to be released, one of which has more of an AoS vibe.
rollthebones wrote: So how many versions of Longbeards have there been over the years, either plastic or metal? I remember, possibly around 6th ed, there being some I loved but sadly never bought. Don't recognise them in any of the kits about to be released, one of which has more of an AoS vibe.
I count 4, the pre-5th Edition metal ones, 6th Edition metal ones, 7th Edi plastics, 8th edi plastics
kodos wrote: 6th they were their own entry that came with great weapons by default, so you had to use them in melee
Their first book in 6th appears to be an outlier there, because in 3rd they were hand weapons with option for great weapons. In 5th they had hand weapons full stop. In 6th book 1 they (apparently - I don't own it) have great weapons by default, and in every book after that they had hand weapons by default with the option for great weapons.
Hulksmash wrote: Longbeards were historically just better warriors. They always had the option for hand weapons & shields and also great weapons. At least from 6th onward from what I remember. And I played dwarves all the way back in 5th but that was short lived
Less 'better warriors' and more 'more experienced warriors'. Older veterans rather than new recruits. Thus, they'd had more time to grow their beards out and the title 'Longbeards'.
kodos wrote: 6th they were their own entry that came with great weapons by default, so you had to use them in melee
Their first book in 6th appears to be an outlier there, because in 3rd they were hand weapons with option for great weapons. In 5th they had hand weapons full stop. In 6th book 1 they (apparently - I don't own it) have great weapons by default, and in every book after that they had hand weapons by default with the option for great weapons.
it is simply just linked to the official models
old models came with hand weapon + shield, the 6th Edi ones with great weapon + shield, 7th edi plastic came wit both in the kit as did the 8th edi plastics
which is again the reaon why TOW is written the way it is, to fit the models made available and why we may not got the 6th edi metals as regular release
Hulksmash wrote: Longbeards were historically just better warriors. They always had the option for hand weapons & shields and also great weapons. At least from 6th onward from what I remember. And I played dwarves all the way back in 5th but that was short lived
Less 'better warriors' and more 'more experienced warriors'. Older veterans rather than new recruits. Thus, they'd had more time to grow their beards out and the title 'Longbeards'.
I was speaking in rule terms and not in fluff terms. They just literally had better WS, sometimes better Strength, and rules that made them and others more steadfast with the same loadout as warriors are a slightly higher cost. Sometimes they were limited in number of how many you could take because again, they were simply better warriors and in a game where only 5 models fight it was better to pay the premium for longbeards as core vs. warriors.
KidCthulhu wrote: Before that, there were a lot more metal models to choose from, so they likely had more variable load-outs:
Spoiler:
Were there even distinct Longbeard models in those days, and not just whatever dwarfs you wanted to use? That guy in the middle in the lower image certainly doesn't look like he has a particularly long beard.
Poking around the old catalogues on Stuff of Legends, the earliest minis I could find that were advertised as Longbeards were some Marauder miniatures from 1990. They were armed with hand weapons and shields.
Shakalooloo wrote: Were there even distinct Longbeard models in those days, and not just whatever dwarfs you wanted to use? That guy in the middle in the lower image certainly doesn't look like he has a particularly long beard.
I think those pictures have been supplemented by a couple of non-Longbeards, but some of them are definitely offically Longbeards:
Talks about there being a new model for Burlock Damminson, that wasn't mentioned before was it?
I do not think it was mentioned before. New model would be nice as long as he does not end as Kharadron cosplayer. Old model of his below.
I'm assuming this is him here on the left, with Ungrim in the middle and Thorgrim on the right (who seems might get a model too as he's a character in the journal):
Talks about there being a new model for Burlock Damminson, that wasn't mentioned before was it?
I do not think it was mentioned before. New model would be nice as long as he does not end as Kharadron cosplayer. Old model of his below.
I'm assuming this is him here on the left, with Ungrim in the middle and Thorgrim on the right (who seems might get a model too as he's a character in the journal):
Yeah, it is him on the art but his model may end up looking differently, or not
Talks about there being a new model for Burlock Damminson, that wasn't mentioned before was it?
I do not think it was mentioned before. New model would be nice as long as he does not end as Kharadron cosplayer. Old model of his below.
I'm assuming this is him here on the left, with Ungrim in the middle and Thorgrim on the right (who seems might get a model too as he's a character in the journal):
Yeah, it is him on the art but his model may end up looking differently, or not
I doubt it'll look substantially different, really. The pose could, but if this is new art for TOW of him, then it would be closely based off the new design (or the other way around).
Wow, just noticed that the minimum unit size for Night Gobbos is 10+... Yeah, that's a necessary change.
Plus, my favorite part is when they include flavor in their answers. Like how the answer to the question of Fanatics vs. Peasant Bowen stakes start with, "Nothing good."
GaroRobe wrote: Have we seen Belegars model at all in any army shots? Obviously he’d just be a generic lord but I’d be sad if we lost plastic oathstone
He's in the trailer in the top right (next to the resin BSB) with what I think is a new paint job.
The Phazer wrote: I think the change to Fanatics is probably right, death star small units of screening Gobbos that could launch three of them was a bit scary.
Yeah - I'm running 19 (archers) plus Shaman with 3 Fanatics, so I need to re-work my list a bit.
Their decision to sell the Goblin-hewer without Malakai Makaisson seems a bit odd considering they've taken other WHF miniatures who don't make sense in TOW, and just turned them into generic characters so they can sell the model again anyway.
Other than the Imperial Dwarfs, the prices for the Dwarf releases don't seem too bad really other than the new resin miniatures for some reason being slightly more than usual Forgeworld Miniatures like this are (usually about £24). Will have to get a few things at some point. The new Ungrim has sold out already though.
lost_lilliputian wrote: Damn was hoping that little Bugman's Cart with the xxxx pony xpress was up today for pre-order. It's pretty cute but I feel it's price won't be.
It's there though? At least for EU pre-orders. 34€, same price as Ungrim.
Btw how do people think the prices seem for the lead/pewter mail order kits?
As has I guess been the case for many Old World (re-)releases, it depends! Some seem very decent value, others acceptable, others vastly overpriced. The inconsistency is nicely exemplified here: Imperial Dwarfs 41€ for 5. Dwarf Slayers 67.50€ for 12. So 8.2 or 5.625 per model. All are single-piece castings, all metal, all troops, all of similar size. Yet one is 46% more expensive than the other.
lost_lilliputian wrote: Damn was hoping that little Bugman's Cart with the xxxx pony xpress was up today for pre-order. It's pretty cute but I feel it's price won't be.
It's there though? At least for EU pre-orders. 34€, same price as Ungrim.
Btw how do people think the prices seem for the lead/pewter mail order kits?
As has I guess been the case for many Old World (re-)releases, it depends! Some seem very decent value, others acceptable, others vastly overpriced. The inconsistency is nicely exemplified here: Imperial Dwarfs 41€ for 5. Dwarf Slayers 67.50€ for 12. So 8.2 or 5.625 per model. All are single-piece castings, all metal, all troops, all of similar size. Yet one is 46% more expensive than the other.
I still couldn't see the Bugman's cart listed for some reason but after you said it's there I did a search insite for 'bugman' and it showed up. This website is a bit hit and miss for me, frustrating at times. So yes it's there, thank you muchly for giving me the idea to search for it!
The pricings don't seem too bad considering everything on the whole I guess, for the old world re-releases but yes I gave up trying to understand the differences comparing figures, even within the same factions for the same materials used. Just doesn't add up. Anyway lucky I don't need to start a whole army from scratch, that would hurt.
I do like the idea of the dogs of war or mercenaries.
lost_lilliputian wrote: Damn was hoping that little Bugman's Cart with the xxxx pony xpress was up today for pre-order. It's pretty cute but I feel it's price won't be.
It's there though? At least for EU pre-orders. 34€, same price as Ungrim.
Btw how do people think the prices seem for the lead/pewter mail order kits?
As has I guess been the case for many Old World (re-)releases, it depends! Some seem very decent value, others acceptable, others vastly overpriced. The inconsistency is nicely exemplified here: Imperial Dwarfs 41€ for 5. Dwarf Slayers 67.50€ for 12. So 8.2 or 5.625 per model. All are single-piece castings, all metal, all troops, all of similar size. Yet one is 46% more expensive than the other.
I still couldn't see the Bugman's cart listed for some reason but after you said it's there I did a search insite for 'bugman' and it showed up. This website is a bit hit and miss for me, frustrating at times. So yes it's there, thank you muchly for giving me the idea to search for it!
Spoiler:
The pricings don't seem too bad considering everything on the whole I guess, for the old world re-releases but yes I gave up trying to understand the differences comparing figures, even within the same factions for the same materials used. Just doesn't add up. Anyway lucky I don't need to start a whole army from scratch, that would hurt.
I do like the idea of the dogs of war or mercenaries.
Edit for spellings
Glad you found it! Yeah, that website is and remains pretty garbage, in ways that continue to amaze me on a regular basis.
Do they make like 10 of the new resin minis? Every time they sell out in a flash while the older ones rarely do. Surely GW realise by now what people are buying. A four month delay after orcs should be enough time to get their manufacturing in order.
Chikout wrote: Do they make like 10 of the new resin minis? Every time they sell out in a flash while the older ones rarely do. Surely GW realise by now what people are buying. A four month delay after orcs should be enough time to get their manufacturing in order.
New miniatures are going to be more popular than re-released ones. They'll sell out faster because no one has any.
I doubt 4 months is going to be enough time to sort out manufacturing more, scheduling production isn't really something where they can just suddenly increase it without affecting something else.
And we don't know if they did make more and they still sold out fast, anyway.
I think FW was unprepared for how popular letting you order stuff from the regular GW site was going to be. Nearly every resin, new and old, across Heresy and TOW is sold out pretty much all the time, except for things people are expecting to go plastic soon (EG the 30k vehicles).
Arbitrator wrote: I think FW was unprepared for how popular letting you order stuff from the regular GW site was going to be. Nearly every resin, new and old, across Heresy and TOW is sold out pretty much all the time, except for things people are expecting to go plastic soon (EG the 30k vehicles).
Seems to be exacerbated even more by the fact that not every region has been treating this the same.
AUS/NZ have "Ships from the UK" for FW products from their webstore.
The US is sent stock to sell.
Has the Bugman's Cart retconned the lore for Bugmans ale? Looking at the wiki it says that "Bugman's XXXXXX" beer was first brewed by Josef Bugman, but then the store description for the cart mentions "the famous ‘Zamnil Bugman’s XXXXXX’" and just calls that "Bugman’s XXXXXX’.
Woud be ncie when the Dwarfs also could get their Stuff from the Skull Pass Starter released.
I don't think the Dwarfs and Goblins can really be separated from that set. It's pretty much an all or nothing. Ideally I'd like them to do some "famous battles" boxed sets to get this and Isle Of Blood back out on the shelves.
Mentlegen324 wrote: Has the Bugman's Cart retconned the lore for Bugmans ale? Looking at the wiki it says that "Bugman's XXXXXX" beer was first brewed by Josef Bugman, but then the store description for the cart mentions "the famous ‘Zamnil Bugman’s XXXXXX’" and just calls that "Bugman’s XXXXXX’.
Josef Bugman mentions in the End Times novel Rise of the Horned Rat that his mug and brew are inferior to the equivalents of his father and wishes that Throgrimm had had a chance to taste them. A slight retcon, but one that's been touched on before.
lost_lilliputian wrote: Damn was hoping that little Bugman's Cart with the xxxx pony xpress was up today for pre-order. It's pretty cute but I feel it's price won't be.
It's there though? At least for EU pre-orders. 34€, same price as Ungrim.
Btw how do people think the prices seem for the lead/pewter mail order kits?
As has I guess been the case for many Old World (re-)releases, it depends! Some seem very decent value, others acceptable, others vastly overpriced. The inconsistency is nicely exemplified here: Imperial Dwarfs 41€ for 5. Dwarf Slayers 67.50€ for 12. So 8.2 or 5.625 per model. All are single-piece castings, all metal, all troops, all of similar size. Yet one is 46% more expensive than the other.
Warhammer Community did mention last week that they needed to make new moulds after they dug out the REALLY old stuff, so there is a tiny extra cost to the Imperials over the relatively recent Slayers. Quite why the Imperial command group costs £1 more than the Slayer group when the former has a standard that is just a stick when the latter has full sculpted detail is just weird.
chaos0xomega wrote: They could do it as a split made to order for AoS Skaven and TOW High Elves. It's all in the marketing.
Mixed sprues
Doesn't really matter, you sell one box and sat "start a skaven army for age of signar and a high elf army for the old world to experience the best fantasy miniatures gaming games workshop has to offer".
Mentlegen324 wrote: Has the Bugman's Cart retconned the lore for Bugmans ale? Looking at the wiki it says that "Bugman's XXXXXX" beer was first brewed by Josef Bugman, but then the store description for the cart mentions "the famous ‘Zamnil Bugman’s XXXXXX’" and just calls that "Bugman’s XXXXXX’.
Josef Bugman mentions in the End Times novel Rise of the Horned Rat that his mug and brew are inferior to the equivalents of his father and wishes that Throgrimm had had a chance to taste them. A slight retcon, but one that's been touched on before.
Is it a retcon though? Josef Bugman’s story starts when he returns home from a delivery to find the brewery looted by goblins and takes his convoy guards and the few survivors to go look for the goblins to either rescue or avenge any who were captured.
I don’t recall it ever said that he founded the brewery; indeed that makes no sense - you don’t send the master out on a journeyman’s job.
chaos0xomega wrote: They could do it as a split made to order for AoS Skaven and TOW High Elves. It's all in the marketing.
Mixed sprues
Doesn't really matter, you sell one box and sat "start a skaven army for age of signar and a high elf army for the old world to experience the best fantasy miniatures gaming games workshop has to offer".
There's hopium, and then there's simply delusional.
If you all look at the figure spreads in the books for HE, you can see that they feature the IoB Swordmasters, Reavers & Sea Guard. This is a pretty strong indicator that these figures are going to come back. I did NOT see either the wizard or the lord on griffin models, I don't remember the sprue layouts anymore, but if those two models were shared with the Skaven sprues, then it would be feasable to repop just the HE side & sell it.
They have recut mixed sprues before. Can't for the life of me remember what set it was, but it has been done. Probably not worth their while in this case, as aside from the weapons teams, everything else on the skaven side has just been redone.
But if they cut all the rats off and mushed the elves together onto a sprue, that'd make for a nice little start collecting type box.
Snrub wrote: They have recut mixed sprues before. Can't for the life of me remember what set it was, but it has been done. Probably not worth their while in this case, as aside from the weapons teams, everything else on the skaven side has just been redone.
But if they cut all the rats off and mushed the elves together onto a sprue, that'd make for a nice little start collecting type box.
As recently as last month GW re-cut Pious Vorne - from Blackstone Fortress - to be a solo release, when originally she'd shared a sprue with some of the other explorers in the box.
Baragash wrote: They did at least cut an additional Sea Guard sprue so you could buy additional ranks of 5 to pump up the unit size IIRC.
I think they might re-cut the Dark Vengeance cultists too. That might have been the kit I was thinking of.
Shakalooloo wrote: As recently as last month GW re-cut Pious Vorne - from Blackstone Fortress - to be a solo release, when originally she'd shared a sprue with some of the other explorers in the box.
Mentlegen324 wrote: Has the Bugman's Cart retconned the lore for Bugmans ale? Looking at the wiki it says that "Bugman's XXXXXX" beer was first brewed by Josef Bugman, but then the store description for the cart mentions "the famous ‘Zamnil Bugman’s XXXXXX’" and just calls that "Bugman’s XXXXXX’.
Josef Bugman mentions in the End Times novel Rise of the Horned Rat that his mug and brew are inferior to the equivalents of his father and wishes that Throgrimm had had a chance to taste them. A slight retcon, but one that's been touched on before.
I don't quite see how what you're saying there also doesn't work with whats in the store description. If what the Bugman cart is transporting is "Zamnil's" Bugmans ale, and that's one of the most famous beers and the typical Dwarf ale for the time, then surely Thorgrimm would have had a chance to try it.
Regardless though it does sound like a retcon. If they had named the beer something else entirely that would be absolutely fine, but that it's specifically called "Bugman’s XXXXXX" and it's made by Zamnil means that Josef is no longer the one who first brewed it.
I like how they've broken down the minis. You can buy as many ranks as you want. I don't have any interest in this particular unit, but I could imagine wanting to buy some other Regiments of Renown in future MTO releases.
I don't know how much it qualifies as a wave, but the Bretonnian foot knights came later than the main release, and they're both new and a plastic kit.
Whelp, it'll be expensive but I guess I can chase down 10 Pit Ponies for that DOW unit I wanted to make. I'm sure I can't find 10 baggage carts at all, let alone at a sane price.
In January we expanded our fantasy offer with the return of Warhammer: The Old World (first launched in the 1980s). Sales suggest that it is appealing to both new and veteran hobbyists alike. As with everything we do, we have grand plans for the years ahead.
From GW's financial year report. I know that it's just PR speak but it's positive for the future of the game. Just releasing another 5 re-released factions doesn't say 'grand' to me.
That's overstating it. The report also discusses Legions Imperialis which most seem to think was something closer to a failure. Fact of the matter I'd that it's an annual report discussing the business activities of the prior fiscal year - both games launched in that period and were major business initiatives, they would get mention even if they were abject failures.
I dont doubt that TOW release was a success. Almost everything was sold out minutes after getting released. Unfortunately, I seriously doubt it will keep being a success once the nostalgia effect wear off, unless they start investing way more time and money in it
LI has also had issues with pacing of its release and mistakes that increased its cost of production before it went out. I think there's also a bit of an issue that it lacks Xenos races and is "Imperial mirrormatch" still. That has worked for HH really well, but I think LI needs to get Mechanicus and a few more forces out at least to really gain traction.
That and that scale of games has always under-sold compared to 28-32mm.
Pariah Press wrote: Yeah, I generally wouldn't expect to see it mentioned there unless it was a big success.
I'm not too sure the wording used there quite indicates it's a big success, though. What GW said previously about the game was that it had done well enough for them to increase the scope of their future plans for the game, which seems like the sort of thing that you'd expect to be clearly mentioned in the report if it was that much of a success. Instead it's just what appears to amount to pretty much "It did well" and saying it'll be treated like all their games, with no indication it's something that vastly exceeded their expectations to the point of changing the scope.
It's interesting that they say "return of" and refer back to WHFB itself too. A while back some were saying it's not a new version of WHFB as such, but that suggests GW pretty much thinks it is.
Pariah Press wrote: Yeah, I generally wouldn't expect to see it mentioned there unless it was a big success.
I'm not too sure the wording used there quite indicates it's a big success, though. What GW said previously about the game was that it had done well enough for them to increase the scope of their future plans for the game, which seems like the sort of thing that you'd expect to be clearly mentioned in the report if it was that much of a success. Instead it's just what appears to amount to pretty much "It did well" and saying it'll be treated like all their games, with no indication it's something that vastly exceeded their expectations to the point of changing the scope.
It's interesting that they say "return of" and refer back to WHFB itself too. A while back some were saying it's not a new version of WHFB as such, but that suggests GW pretty much thinks it is.
I think that’s a difference in language due to the expected audience. TOW to players is a nostalgia trip and development of a little-explored part of a setting. TOW to investors is a returning product line with a proven history and promising future.
It's interesting that they say "return of" and refer back to WHFB itself too. A while back some were saying it's not a new version of WHFB as such, but that suggests GW pretty much thinks it is.
They previously stated, very directly and explicitly, that it's a different game.
It's interesting that they say "return of" and refer back to WHFB itself too. A while back some were saying it's not a new version of WHFB as such, but that suggests GW pretty much thinks it is.
They previously stated, very directly and explicitly, that it's a different game.
The same way GW said that there is no starter box and discussions about semantics and definitions of what that is came around
GW talks about their games in a different way than those who play them and throw around with terms that mean different things depending on who is using it
GW in general means the IP and the game using it, not the rules.
That they sell new games under the same IP and name should not be something new to anyone here and in case of Warhammer Fantasy Battles, they even changed the name while it is still the return of Warhammer Fantasy (the IP)
It's interesting that they say "return of" and refer back to WHFB itself too. A while back some were saying it's not a new version of WHFB as such, but that suggests GW pretty much thinks it is.
They previously stated, very directly and explicitly, that it's a different game.
And it is a different game, except for using the same core stats, the same rank and file concept, nearly identical combat scoring, almost identical shooting….
This could turn into a Monty Python skit if I’m not careful… “our two chief similarities are movement, shooting, and close combat!”
It's interesting that they say "return of" and refer back to WHFB itself too. A while back some were saying it's not a new version of WHFB as such, but that suggests GW pretty much thinks it is.
They previously stated, very directly and explicitly, that it's a different game.
And now they're saying here, that it's not - it's a "return" of the game they first launched in the 1980s.
ingtaer wrote: Can we take that tangent somewhere else please?
Is discussing GWs description of The Old World in the latest information from them not something relevant to news about the Old World, though?
No. News would be, "GW just announced [faction]!". Dissecting marketing verbiage to try to glean some clandestine insight into how GW sees the game and relates it to their investors is not news.
ingtaer wrote: Can we take that tangent somewhere else please?
Is discussing GWs description of The Old World in the latest information from them not something relevant to news about the Old World, though?
No. News would be, "GW just announced [faction]!". Dissecting marketing verbiage to try to glean some clandestine insight into how GW sees the game and relates it to their investors is not news.
ingtaer wrote: Can we take that tangent somewhere else please?
Is discussing GWs description of The Old World in the latest information from them not something relevant to news about the Old World, though?
No. News would be, "GW just announced [faction]!". Dissecting marketing verbiage to try to glean some clandestine insight into how GW sees the game and relates it to their investors is not news.
ingtaer wrote: Can we take that tangent somewhere else please?
Is discussing GWs description of The Old World in the latest information from them not something relevant to news about the Old World, though?
No. News would be, "GW just announced [faction]!". Dissecting marketing verbiage to try to glean some clandestine insight into how GW sees the game and relates it to their investors is not news.
Exactly, well put, thank you.
GW stating to investors what they see The Old World as being in a statement in their financial report talking about how the game is doing somehow isn't an announcement of new information with relevance to the discussion of the Old World? It's GW quite clearly stating what they see the game as, that sounds like somethings that's news as it's not something they'd said before. If what's included in their financial report isn't something relevant as news about their games, then that implies there shouldn't even be a thread discussing the overall report in the news & rumours section.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
I fervently hope, then, that their mentions of expanding their plans mean bringing back the other legacy armies, because the more time I can live my life without risking running into the TWWH version of Kislev on the table the happier I'll be when the reaper finally calls.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
the TWWH version of Kislev
How Kislev is in TWW and how Kislev was in WHFB aren't really that dissimilar.
It would be very disappointing if the "expanding their plans" refers to later on releasing Kislev and Cathay, when those (at least, one of them was) were previous stated to be getting models though.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
I fervently hope, then, that their mentions of expanding their plans mean bringing back the other legacy armies, because the more time I can live my life without risking running into the TWWH version of Kislev on the table the happier I'll be when the reaper finally calls.
Having not played TW:W myself, what's wrong with how Kislev is depicted in there?
Old World tabletop models were historically quite "low" fantasy in presentation for many armies. Yes even though the armies would have lizardmen and skeletons - a lot of your basic army was regular troops armed with fairly regular weapons for the most part.
Demons were the most "out there".
This is despite the fact that the lore around Old World was distinctly what most would consider high/epic fantasy.
Over time GW got more bold - AoS became bolder still and the Kislev is a modern army which means its more bold again on effects and so forth.
Things that ARE around in the lore and are valid; but which aren't the grim-dark gritty lowmagic era of models.
That said I agree, Kisleve and Cathay will either be "end of 1st edition" armies or start of 2nd edition launch armies. After the old ones are out. I'd also expect that as GW continues to work on Old World we will see them steadily replace old sculpts with totally brand new ones; as normal for GW games. This might well come with the new models getting more modern styles and designs or even the addition of new fancy models.
Eg I can well imagine that some new enchantress models for Bretonnia will start to have floating rocks; power effects and so forth appearing
Has anyone actually looked at the Kislev roster for TW:WH3? Cos there's still very normal basic troops such as Warriors, Kossars, Horse Archers and Hussars while Bear Riders and Ice Guard are more similar to the likes of Greatswords and Demigryphs.
The Ice Guard are just interesting designs compared to what is essentially Bretonnian peasants but Eastern European.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Having not played TW:W myself, what's wrong with how Kislev is depicted in there?
It's that quite a few people's Idea of how Kislev is is based on just their very limited model range/army book, which consisted of primarily quite grounded units without much in the way of more fantastic elements.
How Kislev is in TWW3 has a lot more fantastical units compared to the tabletop model range, like bear cavalry, the ice guard (magic ice witches), magical sleds pulled by bears, a giant ice spirit bear etc. So they think that they've just completely changed the tone and feel of Kislev, because those aren't things that were present on tabletop.
But if you actually look beyond that small model range to see how Kislev was depicted in other places like the novels, WHFRP books and just their lore in general, those are all elements that actually are quite in-line with how Kislev were.
4th edition Warhammer Armies: The empire, released in 1993 (...or 1996? Found both dates), has Kislev included but is very brief. They are depicted as more of a grounded human faction at this stage, but it's very, very brief; it basically amounts to a small amount of lore of pretty much "There's a place called Kislev" and 3-4 units. Winged Lancers, Katarin etc. Mentions Kislev is ruled by warrior-sorcerers with their magic based on the land itself and Frost/ice focused. Magic Ice Hawks, Ice Bridge that can carry units, Fearfrost as a magic frost sword etc. Art of Boris Usra riding a bear is shown, albeit it seems he isn't actually talked about at all so appears to not be a character...just a guy riding a bear. Also unclear if this is meant to be the same as Boris Ursus a few years later.
The 1996 Citadel Journal list had fantastical elements, including Bear mounts for heroes, Bear Cavalry, packs of bears and Baba Yaga. Common later lore things like their bear god, bears being sacred etc are mentioned here as similar to later lore but i'm unsure what was and wasn't already established in more "official" sources before this article, so while it's debatable as to how canonical the stuff here is (Citadel Journal is an official publication, but people could submit stuff), some of the things included here did also appear in definitely more official sources - I'm just unsure when specifically some of that first appeared and what is and isn't already established for them by the time this article was written.
Their Warmaster army list in 2002, had packs of tamed bears and bear mounts and a spell to transform into a giant bear (and mentions they build temples in which they keep pits full of bears to send out to war). That old art of Boris Ursa on a bear appears again.
The Ambassador series, Written by Graham Mcneill in 2003/2004, supposedly had those mystical fantasy elements included - Katarina apparently summons spirits of Kislev warriors in bodies of ice, for example. Bokha palace also has parts entire sections made of ice.
Their 6th edition army in 2003 did not have much in the way of that side of things, mostly just Boris Ursus as the most out-there in terms of units, albeit the book did depict conversions of both a hero on giant bear and bear cavalry. Their connection to various spirits are mentioned but its unclear as to if they book considers them as real or not. It mentions the religion involving bears with a God of Bears who takes the form of a bear - so despite the lack of bear units, bears are still said to be a very important thing to Kislev overall. Magical lore for different Gods are mentioned. The palace having sections made of ice are mentioned by the book too.
The Warhammer RPG "Realm of the Ice Queen" expansion released in 2007 once again follows the fantasy Kislev side and is the most comprehensive depiction of Kislev out of the lot - because its an RPG there's a lot of stuff. The various spirits mentioned previously are defined more specifically, there's magical creatures like Frostfiends and Firebirds, Hag Witches (like Baba Yaga was) are there, the map of the city of Kislev shows Bokha palace with the ice structure parts, Katarina has the enchanted Ice Palace, it details the importance of the Ice Witches, all the ice magic like ice weapons, the other cults/gods appear again with magic for them etc.
Some just seem unaware that Kislev has had elements like that for years and so think that TWW3 and TOW is retconning them into something significant different, despite it being stuff that was present to some extent within their lore at least as far back as 2007.
I think it helps highlight how many people only ever engaged with the models and codex/wd and never really read the books that BL has put out over the years. Because you crack them open and the super-stuff is there
Heck living siege engine towers were right in one of the Gotrek and Felix books on an assault on the Kislev capital (or if not capital a major city - I forget its name)
Overread wrote: Heck living siege engine towers were right in one of the Gotrek and Felix books on an assault on the Kislev capital (or if not capital a major city - I forget its name)
Gotrek and Felix novels are the perfect example of the weird mix of high and low fantasy the setting was. Everyday human warrior poet running around with a Dwarf Slayer that's essentially a Living Ancestor fated to a very specific doom by the Ancestors working as sewer jacks and tavern bouncers to be able to keep in booze who associate with a wizard of a secret order and a vampire and end up going on a trip to a magic hell dimension in an airship(complete with a bay for gyrocopters), multiple times near single handedly fight off a Chaos invasion, tussle with a demon made up of possessed cannons, have an adventure with Teclis through the Passages of the Old Ones containing Bubble Dimensions, and more.
It's not quite Flanderization, but a related cousin. Novels and RPG books go pretty top shelf in terms of pushing the boundaries and having elements be too wacky or OP, like warpstone originally, and people who get it, people who have the talent necessary to write for these properties, get it. They understand that subtlety, and the back and forth dance, and realize one flying ship (or two or three) isn't setting defining. That's not the point.
But common fans and amateur writers don't understand what's going on, that airship goes sailing smooth over their heads, and then by the time it gets to be a video game, decades removed from when it was really being worked on by talented people, you get some real laughers. Some people love that new stuff though.
Gotrek and Felix is a good example of how the game changed over time
the very first short stories came up during a time were 40k and Fantasy were still linked and Chaos Warriors had access to laser weapons
so a lot of what was going on in the novels that came out during 3rd-5th Edition got retconned/changed later on, specially regarding the nature of Chaos
Overread wrote: Heck living siege engine towers were right in one of the Gotrek and Felix books on an assault on the Kislev capital (or if not capital a major city - I forget its name)
Gotrek and Felix novels are the perfect example of the weird mix of high and low fantasy the setting was. Everyday human warrior poet running around with a Dwarf Slayer that's essentially a Living Ancestor fated to a very specific doom by the Ancestors working as sewer jacks and tavern bouncers to be able to keep in booze who associate with a wizard of a secret order and a vampire and end up going on a trip to a magic hell dimension in an airship(complete with a bay for gyrocopters), multiple times near single handedly fight off a Chaos invasion, tussle with a demon made up of possessed cannons, have an adventure with Teclis through the Passages of the Old Ones containing Bubble Dimensions, and more.
Honestly I think they are the perfect series to get introduced to the game and setting. It's a little shame that Gotrek isn't quite as "settled" in AoS (keeps starting grand ideas to reunite the dwarves every book and gives up by the end --- also a certain character is missing in the latest book!)
And yes they do blend that high and low fantasy element so well! One book they hold off armies the next its a challenge just dealing with a very local ghoul problem or raiders. It's not like a lot of modern material where characters are almost like RPG characters and each adventure they "level up" so that eventually small things are so far beneath them they never happen again.
Olthannon wrote: I was going to maybe pick up those Prince Ulther dwarves but like hell am I paying 31.50 for 5 models.
At just over $10/model for metal/plastic GW hybrids, they'd be almost reasonable... if they weren't Dwarves...
Yeah the models themselves are small, but the price for 5 models isn't something that new for GW. Here in CAD it's 63$ for 5, while I can turn around and see 5 Sister of Silence for 70$ (for a pretty cheap in pts, chaff-like units). They are bigger models with more option and all sure, but white metal itself isn't cheap like plastic either. I'm sure there's other similar example around. Only thing is for the dwarfs you'd want/need a few packs to have something playable for the game (I say minimum of 2 packs of troops and the command), that's a big asking price for a single unit!
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
I fervently hope, then, that their mentions of expanding their plans mean bringing back the other legacy armies, because the more time I can live my life without risking running into the TWWH version of Kislev on the table the happier I'll be when the reaper finally calls.
Having not played TW:W myself, what's wrong with how Kislev is depicted in there?
Tabletop Kislev was written in 6th when the formula for WHFB factions was still being devised by history nerds rather than ascended fanboys, so it was a collection of various slavic and russian influenced infantry and cavalry units that were basically slightly more flamboyant versions of the real ones that inspired them. They had magic in the form of Ice Witches and one special character who rode a bear which was supposed to illustrate that he was just that badass.
TWWH Kislev is the same hyper-Flanderization that's been gathering steam in earnest since 8th edition; all-female elite units wielding glowing magical ice-encrusted weaponry(creatively named the Ice Guard), whole regiments of monstrous bear riding cavalry, streltsi go from having handguns and halberds that double as gun rests like the IRL version to having gun-axes like that meme vampire hunting movie, sled-chariots pulled by bears that ride on a cusion of magical ice including an artillery version that shoots a siege bombard like they're doing drivebys, and yes gigantic elemental ice-bear spirits. It has all the subtlety and creativity of a brick to the face.
Cathay is even more ridiculously OTT, but at least they didn't have an actual complete and defined version outlined in multiple novels and with its own army list for people to be attached to already.
I'm not sure Flanderization is the right term - but "everything is magic all the time" is I think a legitimate comment. 8th's choices seemed to clearly be leading up to Age of Sigmar. Maybe they felt they'd filled in those gaps - but you see more monsters as centre pieces, monstrous cavalry and/or all weapons are somehow magical.
I suspect though the ship has probably sailed. Its got to be hard to sell various kits of basic humans when Empire and Brets are standing right there. Unless you really doubled down on style differences.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
I fervently hope, then, that their mentions of expanding their plans mean bringing back the other legacy armies, because the more time I can live my life without risking running into the TWWH version of Kislev on the table the happier I'll be when the reaper finally calls.
Having not played TW:W myself, what's wrong with how Kislev is depicted in there?
TWWH Kislev is the same hyper-Flanderization that's been gathering steam in earnest since 8th edition; all-female elite units wielding glowing magical ice-encrusted weaponry(creatively named the Ice Guard), whole regiments of monstrous bear riding cavalry, streltsi go from having handguns and halberds that double as gun rests like the IRL version to having gun-axes like that meme vampire hunting movie, sled-chariots pulled by bears that ride on a cusion of magical ice including an artillery version that shoots a siege bombard like they're doing drivebys, and yes gigantic elemental ice-bear spirits. It has all the subtlety and creativity of a brick to the face.
The thing is, having actually played the game, those over-the-top units are elites who cost more. You want to take Kossars and Armoured Kossars or Jade Warriors/Peasants because those are the stolid line of battle types.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
I fervently hope, then, that their mentions of expanding their plans mean bringing back the other legacy armies, because the more time I can live my life without risking running into the TWWH version of Kislev on the table the happier I'll be when the reaper finally calls.
Having not played TW:W myself, what's wrong with how Kislev is depicted in there?
TWWH Kislev is the same hyper-Flanderization that's been gathering steam in earnest since 8th edition; all-female elite units wielding glowing magical ice-encrusted weaponry(creatively named the Ice Guard), whole regiments of monstrous bear riding cavalry, streltsi go from having handguns and halberds that double as gun rests like the IRL version to having gun-axes like that meme vampire hunting movie, sled-chariots pulled by bears that ride on a cusion of magical ice including an artillery version that shoots a siege bombard like they're doing drivebys, and yes gigantic elemental ice-bear spirits. It has all the subtlety and creativity of a brick to the face.
The thing is, having actually played the game, those over-the-top units are elites who cost more. You want to take Kossars and Armoured Kossars or Jade Warriors/Peasants because those are the stolid line of battle types.
Putting aside that they are certainly more frequent now than when they didn't exist, I'm not concerned with TWWH beyond it being the source of the design. I just don't want to have to see it on the table across from me.
Honestly the only Kisleve unit that I think is missplaced in Warhammer TW is the sledge and that's only because it feels out of place on any map that isn't a snowy tundra.
Otherwise units of all women - heck Old World had the Amazonian army. Sure it sadly never really got developed outside of I think a Bloodbowl team or Mordhiem band? But it was 100% there in lore.
New Bretonnia lore has also dabbled in women knights in the Boarder Princes region and honestly it feels fitting.
Heck the new Bretonnia novel feels much more like it focused on the "horsemaster" angle than the "abuse the serfs". Which is the polar opposite of the classic books which focus much more on abusing serfs whilst he horses are hardly mentioned.
Two very different takes on the same faction and yet both are very valid; just different approaches.
Much of the appeal of the old stuff is that it was grounded in reality. Human armies at least were very much inspired by real counterparts, with fantastical elements used sparsely. They enhanced the feeling and were special, not the norm.
The newer - anything goes, who cares? approach is what is putting many people off, me included.
Its like with Lovecraft - the fascination lies in the unknown, the very rare occurence of something special. If you are fistfighting Nayarlathotep on a daily basis, that isn't interresting anymore...
That being said, to each their own, it all comes down to taste.
In a well written rulesset, you can pick and choose what units to use or omit and still have a chance of winning. Noone forces you to use Icewitches, Griffinriders or Pegasus knights if you find them unacceptable. Only if these units are such badly balanced gamechangers that you *must* take them, there is an issue. So, it's up to GW to do their job.
Gert wrote: Dragons, Wizards, Helicopters, Skeletons, Daemons, Trolls, Ogres - Ok
People riding Bears - Unacceptable
LOL, far be it for me to argue against such quality snark but...
My feeling is that the humans in the Old War were always the POV race, a human army might have one griffon or pegasus or steam tank while all the outsider races could have as much magical nonsense as you choose. The humans had a historical grounding and texture that (say) Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms never had.
So giving the humans whole units of pegasus riders or dudes with ice swords or steam horses turns a (semi) grounded, historical faction into another fantasy cliche mishmash.
Gert wrote: Has anyone actually looked at the Kislev roster for TW:WH3? Cos there's still very normal basic troops such as Warriors, Kossars, Horse Archers and Hussars while Bear Riders and Ice Guard are more similar to the likes of Greatswords and Demigryphs.
The Ice Guard are just interesting designs compared to what is essentially Bretonnian peasants but Eastern European.
Are you suggesting that greatswords are not a historically-inspired, grounded unit? They are pretty much copies of real landsknecht-type soldiers. These days, even the flamberge blades are thought to be actual (if rare) combat weapons and not just ceremonial.
Well, Greatswords are a fictional unit in Warhammer as the Landsknecht type soldiers would not have been able to fight in close formation or keep ranks and would rather be skirmish unit or skirmish detachment adding impact hits on the charger rather than what they are in the game
Almost all units in the game are fictional in that regard (also the use of shields or armour in general) and the difference is simply how they are connected with modern pop culture
A dragon rider is seen as something typical fantasy, a bear rider is more related to Putin memes.
Making a difference in style and lists for the western European factions but throwing all of eastern Europe into one does not help either
kodos wrote: Well, Greatswords are a fictional unit in Warhammer as the Landsknecht type soldiers would not have been able to fight in close formation or keep ranks and would rather be skirmish unit or skirmish detachment adding impact hits on the charger rather than what they are in the game
Almost all units in the game are fictional in that regard (also the use of shields or armour in general) and the difference is simply how they are connected with modern pop culture
A dragon rider is seen as something typical fantasy, a bear rider is more related to Putin memes.
Making a difference in style and lists for the western European factions but throwing all of eastern Europe into one does not help either
Without going into the nuances of Renaissance warfare and how well it is proxied by the WFB ranked units system (which would definitely warrant its own thread), the conversation is more about aesthetics and feel. Greatswords are a very low fantasy, grounded unit.
Warhammer Fantasy's world has long mixed the grounded and more fantastical elements, with WHFB itself arguably a bit in the middle ground of the various extremes - between the grittiness of WFRP and the more extensively magical and monstrous world seen in, say, Man O' War.
Personally, I prefer both the overall setting, and Kislev specifically, when magic and monsters are rare. Thematically, Kislev feels far more interesting when it tries to stand against the enormous forces of Chaos with arrows, axes and courage than if it appears to have fantastical creatures and magical abilities equal to those of their terrifying foes. Often, the human factions in fantasy worlds are meant to represent the more grounded reality to which we can relate, surrounded, infiltrated and undermined by fantastical forces. A Winged Lancer charging a hulking Warrior of Chaos is, to me, far more epic than if he had been riding a massive war bear and had a magical ice-tipped lance. Which is not to say I have anything against bear-mounted figures, but they are rather more interesting when rare.
In Total War, bears are not only a character mount (to several melee, wizard and support classes), but also available as mounts for a regiment of renown, as a regular monstrous cavalry unit, pulling both light and heavy chariots, pulling artillery, as feral stand-alone troops, and a massive elemental monster. Now, when I think if Kislev culturally, I do think of bears. But when I used to think of them militarily, the first animal to come to mind is the horse. Light ranged cavalry, the famed winged lancers, the even more famous Gryphon Legion. If they have some drawn cart (like their War Wagons in Warmaster) or artillery, I would expect it to be pulled by horses. (Who in their right mind would even design one pulled by bears and call it a "light" chariot?!).
Of course, the abundance of semi-fantastical bear-use and equally common magic (the war sleds slide around on magical ice, instead of just sliding around with skis, or having wheels on other terrain) fits well in the trend culminating in WHFB 8th and AoS. With AoS's lore having the heavy magical influence WHFB was moving towards, I hope WHFB can stay/move in the other direction and be the more grounded setting. And with Kislev delayed compared to earlier indications, I hope their potential eventual release will see some modifications to the Total War line-up, staying more within the boundaries seen in Mordheim, Warmaster, WHFB 6th ed and the 5th ed Citadel Journal, with bears, yes, and ice magic, sure, but in moderation.
Garfield666 wrote: Didn't they show some Kislev characters ages ago when first promoting ToW? What happened to that faction? Binned for the Brets?
Further down the line, no doubt as a launch faction for when they make a second edition of ToW, once all the old plastics are done in a few years.
I fervently hope, then, that their mentions of expanding their plans mean bringing back the other legacy armies, because the more time I can live my life without risking running into the TWWH version of Kislev on the table the happier I'll be when the reaper finally calls.
Having not played TW:W myself, what's wrong with how Kislev is depicted in there?
Tabletop Kislev was written in 6th when the formula for WHFB factions was still being devised by history nerds rather than ascended fanboys, so it was a collection of various slavic and russian influenced infantry and cavalry units that were basically slightly more flamboyant versions of the real ones that inspired them. They had magic in the form of Ice Witches and one special character who rode a bear which was supposed to illustrate that he was just that badass.
TWWH Kislev is the same hyper-Flanderization that's been gathering steam in earnest since 8th edition; all-female elite units wielding glowing magical ice-encrusted weaponry(creatively named the Ice Guard), whole regiments of monstrous bear riding cavalry, streltsi go from having handguns and halberds that double as gun rests like the IRL version to having gun-axes like that meme vampire hunting movie, sled-chariots pulled by bears that ride on a cusion of magical ice including an artillery version that shoots a siege bombard like they're doing drivebys, and yes gigantic elemental ice-bear spirits. It has all the subtlety and creativity of a brick to the face.
Cathay is even more ridiculously OTT, but at least they didn't have an actual complete and defined version outlined in multiple novels and with its own army list for people to be attached to already.
It only appears that way if you choose to completely ignore everything they had that shows otherwise like the RPG books and how they were in the novels, and even the fantastical elements they did have in the tabletop stuff. None of the things TWW3 and TOW have now are something completely out of nowhere.
Even during the early mentions of Kislev in 4th edition (which was only a few paragraphs of lore and some rules) had mentions of magic ice creatures, bears used as mounts, and frost warrior witches.
Personally, I prefer both the overall setting, and Kislev specifically, when magic and monsters are rare. Thematically, Kislev feels far more interesting when it tries to stand against the enormous forces of Chaos with arrows, axes and courage than if it appears to have fantastical creatures and magical abilities equal to those of their terrifying foes.
This post perfectly represents my own opinions on the matter and I don't think I could phrase it better.
My vision of Kislev is based on their portrayal in Warmaster and Realm of the Ice Queen, which still comes across as fantastical but nowhere near to their portrayal in TWW3. Kossars, Lancers and Horse Archers should be the core. Sleds, Royal guards and bear cavalry are alright but could do with a little reigning in. Snow Leopards and Elemental Bears are way past the point of reasonable to me.
A war sled pulled on wooden skis by horses is a far better image than one on enchanted ice by bears, in my eyes. Save the magic for the Ice Court and the bears for Ursun, its still plenty of whimsy to fit the setting without encroaching on Elf-levels of fantasy.
kodos wrote: Well, Greatswords are a fictional unit in Warhammer as the Landsknecht type soldiers would not have been able to fight in close formation or keep ranks and would rather be skirmish unit or skirmish detachment adding impact hits on the charger rather than what they are in the game
Almost all units in the game are fictional in that regard (also the use of shields or armour in general) and the difference is simply how they are connected with modern pop culture
A dragon rider is seen as something typical fantasy, a bear rider is more related to Putin memes.
Making a difference in style and lists for the western European factions but throwing all of eastern Europe into one does not help either
Without going into the nuances of Renaissance warfare and how well it is proxied by the WFB ranked units system (which would definitely warrant its own thread), the conversation is more about aesthetics and feel. Greatswords are a very low fantasy, grounded unit.
that is one of the points, it does not feel very grounded to me because I have something different in mind when thinking about Greatswords (and given that the current version of the unit is the old Knights on Foot and Greatswords merged together) but it is fantasy and not realistic so I don't mind it
so Kislev feeling off or not "grounded" enough comes from the expectations of people connected to the real life blue-print and/or how it was written in the past army books they know
And if several different cultures, time periods, and types of warfare are thrown together into a single faction, people will be angry depending on what part they expected to dominate (if one thought Kislev being models after Poland and connects bear riders with Russia of course they be upset if those are there, someone who don't see a difference there is not)
someone who played Kislev during the original Storm of Chaos is looking different on that army as someone who just read the novels or someone who knows it only from TWWH
Personally, I prefer both the overall setting, and Kislev specifically, when magic and monsters are rare. Thematically, Kislev feels far more interesting when it tries to stand against the enormous forces of Chaos with arrows, axes and courage than if it appears to have fantastical creatures and magical abilities equal to those of their terrifying foes.
This post perfectly represents my own opinions on the matter and I don't think I could phrase it better.
My vision of Kislev is based on their portrayal in Warmaster and Realm of the Ice Queen, which still comes across as fantastical but nowhere near to their portrayal in TWW3. Kossars, Lancers and Horse Archers should be the core. Sleds, Royal guards and bear cavalry are alright but could do with a little reigning in. Snow Leopards and Elemental Bears are way past the point of reasonable to me.
A war sled pulled on wooden skis by horses is a far better image than one on enchanted ice by bears, in my eyes. Save the magic for the Ice Court and the bears for Ursun, its still plenty of whimsy to fit the setting without encroaching on Elf-levels of fantasy.
The problem seems to be people look at one particular source of Kislev lore and then based on just that go "This is how they are", completely ignoring or unaware of all the other things that show them as more in line with how TWW3 and TOW has them, because they're all elements that were mentioned or have a basis in their existing lore. The snow leopards were mentioned in the novel Ursun's Teeth back in 2004, and summoning magical ice creations imbued with spirits was in the same series too, and the spirit of the land of kislev was said to be a bear in some of their lore.
Garfield666 wrote: Much of the appeal of the old stuff is that it was grounded in reality.
Do you meet many ratmen and lizardmen knights riding pegasi and strampunk engineers riding mechanical horses leading a bunch of steam powered land Ironclad into battle where you're from?
Personally, I prefer both the overall setting, and Kislev specifically, when magic and monsters are rare. Thematically, Kislev feels far more interesting when it tries to stand against the enormous forces of Chaos with arrows, axes and courage than if it appears to have fantastical creatures and magical abilities equal to those of their terrifying foes.
This post perfectly represents my own opinions on the matter and I don't think I could phrase it better.
My vision of Kislev is based on their portrayal in Warmaster and Realm of the Ice Queen, which still comes across as fantastical but nowhere near to their portrayal in TWW3. Kossars, Lancers and Horse Archers should be the core. Sleds, Royal guards and bear cavalry are alright but could do with a little reigning in. Snow Leopards and Elemental Bears are way past the point of reasonable to me.
A war sled pulled on wooden skis by horses is a far better image than one on enchanted ice by bears, in my eyes. Save the magic for the Ice Court and the bears for Ursun, its still plenty of whimsy to fit the setting without encroaching on Elf-levels of fantasy.
The problem seems to be people look at one particular source of Kislev lore and then based on just that go "This is how they are", completely ignoring or unaware of all the other things that show them as more in line with how TWW3 and TOW has them, because they're all elements that were mentioned or have a basis in their existing lore. The snow leopards were mentioned in the novel Ursun's Teeth back in 2004, and summoning magical ice creations imbued with spirits was in the same series too, and the spirit of the land of kislev was said to be a bear in some of their lore.
Any sensible person reading this should go "well I guess my perspective was wrong or at least based on false pretenses", sadly it's the internet and that won't happen.
The craziest thing is people are arguing that a faction best known for holding back (and occasionally being overrun and screwed by) waves of otherworldly horrors, daemons, warpspawnrd monstrosities, etc. needs to be "grounded".
So, you know how the Forces of Fantasy FAQ has an errata for the Axe of Dargo - I figured, fair enough they missed something, maybe it was printed as S-2 or something silly like that but I went and looked and my copy at least has the correct strength value already.
So, did anyone receive a copy with the wrong value, and what was it?
Mentlegen324 wrote: The problem seems to be people look at one particular source of Kislev lore and then based on just that go "This is how they are", completely ignoring or unaware of all the other things that show them as more in line with how TWW3 and TOW has them, because they're all elements that were mentioned or have a basis in their existing lore. The snow leopards were mentioned in the novel Ursun's Teeth back in 2004, and summoning magical ice creations imbued with spirits was in the same series too, and the spirit of the land of kislev was said to be a bear in some of their lore.
It also implies that these elements are common place, when the reality is said elements (for all factions) are rare or uncommon, usually reserved for when a battle or campaign requires them. I doubt you'd find bear cavalry involved in a skirmish, for example, unless they happened to be nearby or already present at a location.
Personally, I've always liked the way 6th/7th, and to a lesser extent 8th, weave the mundane and fantastical together. Of course, someone who's only read the 6th Edition supplement is going to have a different view on Kislev than someone who started with TW:W3, with many not being aware of WFRP or the novels that do feature Kislev.
Fundamentally the core of Kislev armies is still the mundane, not the fantastical. If there's a place where the fantastical (bear cavalry, palace guard, bear elementals, etc) forms the core, it'll be in an Arcane journal. Besides, if you dislike them you don't need to have them in your army.
Mentlegen324 wrote: The problem seems to be people look at one particular source of Kislev lore and then based on just that go "This is how they are", completely ignoring or unaware of all the other things that show them as more in line with how TWW3 and TOW has them, because they're all elements that were mentioned or have a basis in their existing lore. The snow leopards were mentioned in the novel Ursun's Teeth back in 2004, and summoning magical ice creations imbued with spirits was in the same series too, and the spirit of the land of kislev was said to be a bear in some of their lore.
It also implies that these elements are common place, when the reality is said elements (for all factions) are rare or uncommon, usually reserved for when a battle or campaign requires them. I doubt you'd find bear cavalry involved in a skirmish, for example, unless they happened to be nearby or already present at a location.
TWW3 makes no claims as to how rare or common such things are, If you wanted you could have an Empire army of 20 steam tanks, despite 20 steam tanks not even existing. Both that game and TOW are armies consisting of things that exist as part of that faction and that's the only real criteria - that unit could show up because they are a thing somewhere for them, but its without any real consideration as to how likely or feasible that happening even is. Kislev having those more fantastical units is not an indication that they're all extremely commonplace and will show up all the time, more so just that they exist.
chaos0xomega wrote: Do you meet many ratmen and lizardmen knights riding pegasi and strampunk engineers riding mechanical horses leading a bunch of steam powered land Ironclad into battle where you're from?
When you take a lot of the fantasy models for Warhammer TW they can appear far more regular when given just a regular paintjob and where you don't have bloom and glow effects all around the weapons and such.
Honestly its amazing that Old World can have this conversation - that it managed to (mostly by situation and accident) be a low magic and high magic and epic magic setting all in one stonethrow.
Mentlegen324 wrote: If you wanted you could have an Empire army of 20 steam tanks, despite 20 steam tanks not even existing.
We know now that that bit of fluff just isn't true, though.
We know its not true for The Old World now and there's more than 12 of them around hundreds of years before, but that does not make it the case during the time of WHFB / TWW. There's still only 12 by that point.
Mentlegen324 wrote: If you wanted you could have an Empire army of 20 steam tanks, despite 20 steam tanks not even existing.
We know now that that bit of fluff just isn't true, though.
We know its not true for The Old World now and there's more than 12 of them around hundreds of years before, but that does not make it the case during the time of WHFB / TWW. There's still only 12 by that point.
It doesn't fit with the time of WHFB, either. "There's only ever been 12" except that one that was turned into the Rat Tank by Klawmunkast and the several turned into War Altars in Age of Reckoning. GW has given several hints that that's always been hearsay.
Hey guys, got a few reports that things have been going off-topic hard here, so a kind request: take the chatter elsewhere and let this thread lie until actual news and rumours are posted here again, cheers! ??
Mr_Rose wrote: So, you know how the Forces of Fantasy FAQ has an errata for the Axe of Dargo - I figured, fair enough they missed something, maybe it was printed as S-2 or something silly like that but I went and looked and my copy at least has the correct strength value already.
So, did anyone receive a copy with the wrong value, and what was it?
One of the influencers said it was strength = 2 rather than = S+2
kodos wrote: Well, Greatswords are a fictional unit in Warhammer as the Landsknecht type soldiers would not have been able to fight in close formation or keep ranks and would rather be skirmish unit or skirmish detachment adding impact hits on the charger rather than what they are in the game
Almost all units in the game are fictional in that regard (also the use of shields or armour in general) and the difference is simply how they are connected with modern pop culture
A dragon rider is seen as something typical fantasy, a bear rider is more related to Putin memes.
Making a difference in style and lists for the western European factions but throwing all of eastern Europe into one does not help either
Without going into the nuances of Renaissance warfare and how well it is proxied by the WFB ranked units system (which would definitely warrant its own thread), the conversation is more about aesthetics and feel. Greatswords are a very low fantasy, grounded unit.
The fantasy in Greatswords is how they can swing six-foot swords around in battle and not hit the guys three feet to either side of them.
Oh look, more alerts! To repeat, got a few reports that things have been going off-topic hard here, so a kind request: take the chatter elsewhere and let this thread lie until actual news and rumours are posted here again, cheers!
Same here, ordered some Ulther's company on Saturday and received them on Monday. Ordered more of them yesterday (Tuesday) as I know I would regret not getting more before they're gone, and they are already shipped and will be here tomorrow. The stuff I pre-ordered two weeks ago also got delivered on Monday. The Bugman's cart got back in stock Monday, so I ordered him and got it today.
My made-to-order Marauder Giant is sitting in my backlog since May the 4th
I did email GW last week as the 180 days had officially passed and got a response that there was a delay in getting stuff from the UK so they at least know I'm still waiting on them, but did not provide a timeframe for fulfillment.
I've also got a big order from the Marauder Giant MTO wave, hoping that doesn't follow a similar path because I'd like to use him and the Orc Sorcerer on Wyvern for an army.
I did email GW last week as the 180 days had officially passed and got a response that there was a delay in getting stuff from the UK so they at least know I'm still waiting on them, but did not provide a timeframe for fulfillment.
I've also got a big order from the Marauder Giant MTO wave, hoping that doesn't follow a similar path because I'd like to use him and the Orc Sorcerer on Wyvern for an army.
I’m in the same boat. I emailed them on July 27 and asked about the status of my order. They told me the same thing about the shipment but also told me that I should expect shipment by the end of August and I should email them back if I haven’t received my order by then.
Haighus wrote: Will be glad to see those return. Lovely kits.
Aesthetically anyway, I hear some were a pig to assemble...
From having them all from back in the day, I don't have anything to say about them being hard to build. They were pretty straight forward from what I remember.
The biggest flay I found was visually with the Arcane Ruins, where the sides were pretty flat with no textures. But then I took my dremel with a large round bit and replicated the surface texture on them and magic, they were awesome all around!
warf_Warriors_Pike_M01.jpg
%2520(Island%2520of%2520Blood)%2520%5BSW%5D%2520Sprue.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e41a53c08e89102028fda8ddca78980afe071fb2361cfba1885974721d235f1b&ipo=images)
%2520(Island%2520of%2520Blood)%2520%5BSW%5D%2520Sprue.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=e94fbb25cd35af8ff7a68412b3e8976d72df86ffeac0de04ce0d3ba31ec417f5&ipo=images)
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the release schedule for this game makes 0 sense...
