Switch Theme:

[Adepta Sororitas] Squad preview p.30.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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




Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




A.T. wrote:
Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?
Returning them to the codex you mean. Zealots and the priestly delegations were among those cut when the sisters were shoehorned in with the inquisition, but were one of those things that helped the sisters be something other than T3 marines with most of the units missing.


If they add back arcos and crusaders then fine. Frateris militia and the like are 100% no go.

Why? Because if frateris militia get added in you'll never see a battle sister on the table again. Because that's how cheap infantry works in 40k.

2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader




ERJAK wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?
Returning them to the codex you mean. Zealots and the priestly delegations were among those cut when the sisters were shoehorned in with the inquisition, but were one of those things that helped the sisters be something other than T3 marines with most of the units missing.


If they add back arcos and crusaders then fine. Frateris militia and the like are 100% no go.

Why? Because if frateris militia get added in you'll never see a battle sister on the table again. Because that's how cheap infantry works in 40k.


By that logic, sisters won't sell at all because people will just bring Guard.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in pl
Fresh-Faced New User




 Souleater wrote:
 Yodhrin wrote:
I've still got my fingers crossed for Ecclesiarchy stuff. I know that would annoy some of the Sisters purists...
.


Sisters of Battle had Ecclesiastical units from the get go.

And as you say, GW is quite likely to add female priests in this time around.

Is it? If it were AoS, I'd be reasonably expecting a mix of female and male models, but 40k seems to be, modelwise, holdout of Boys Only club, even excluding marines, which "have to" be male.

I fully expect the logic to be "The Sisters are female, so the militia and priests have to be male so they stand out". Just like the initial fratris militia from 2nd ed were. Ladies apparently can only wear power armor (SoB) or fetish gear (death cult assasins, penitents/pentient engines).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/11 17:28:57


 
   
Made in de
Poisonous Tomb Scorpion






ERJAK wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?
Returning them to the codex you mean. Zealots and the priestly delegations were among those cut when the sisters were shoehorned in with the inquisition, but were one of those things that helped the sisters be something other than T3 marines with most of the units missing.


If they add back arcos and crusaders then fine. Frateris militia and the like are 100% no go.

Why? Because if frateris militia get added in you'll never see a battle sister on the table again. Because that's how cheap infantry works in 40k.


That's how power gamers work. If GW makes elite infantry sucky, they'll use Frateris Militia. If GW makes horde stuff sucky, they'll play Sisters. With the caveat that they'll likely play neither regardless because other factions have flat out better rules than anything in the Sisters codex.

To normal players Frateris Militia will be an additional unit. If someone plays Sisters for Sisters, they'll keep using Sisters. If someone wants a mixed Ecclesiarchy army, they now have the option. Outside the fabled competitive high end of 40k, there's no downside.

Cronch wrote:
 Souleater wrote:
 Yodhrin wrote:
I've still got my fingers crossed for Ecclesiarchy stuff. I know that would annoy some of the Sisters purists...
.


Sisters of Battle had Ecclesiastical units from the get go.

And as you say, GW is quite likely to add female priests in this time around.

Is it? If it were AoS, I'd be reasonably expecting a mix of female and male models, but 40k seems to be, modelwise, holdout of Boys Only club, even excluding marines, which "have to" be male.

I fully expect the logic to be "The Sisters are female, so the militia and priests have to be male so they stand out". Just like the initial fratris militia from 2nd ed were. Ladies apparently can only wear power armor (SoB) or fetish gear (death cult assasins, penitents/pentient engines).


Kind of a scheduling issue. Since GW found out there's two varieties of man-things, they haven't really released any normal human models for 40k. Notably Genestealers got some in their second wave release, and while it's hardly enough two Necromunda gangs also feature a token female.

Baby steps. GW is slow to change, but the change is there. There's no guarantee Sisters/Ecclesiarchy will benefit from GW's changed attitude, but theoretically they've been conceived at a time when it's at least a possibility worth considering.

Interestingly when Combat Arena releases we'll have more female Rogue Traders than male ones. GW seems to like spearheading the push for more female models with characters.

Nehekhara lives! Sort of! 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




Cronch wrote:
 Souleater wrote:
 Yodhrin wrote:
I've still got my fingers crossed for Ecclesiarchy stuff. I know that would annoy some of the Sisters purists...
.


Sisters of Battle had Ecclesiastical units from the get go.

And as you say, GW is quite likely to add female priests in this time around.

Is it? If it were AoS, I'd be reasonably expecting a mix of female and male models, but 40k seems to be, modelwise, holdout of Boys Only club, even excluding marines, which "have to" be male.

I fully expect the logic to be "The Sisters are female, so the militia and priests have to be male so they stand out". Just like the initial fratris militia from 2nd ed were. Ladies apparently can only wear power armor (SoB) or fetish gear (death cult assasins, penitents/pentient engines).


Pretty sure the lady sculpt on the penitent engine is wearing like a full body white robe and hood, isn't she?

In terms of recent 40k model releases, we haven't had a ton of humans in a while. We had the recent Genestealer Cult releases (which all had women in the more human kits and where we got an alternate sculpt female magus), the new specialist games rogue trader boxes like Arena and Blackstone fortress, all of which had female humanoids. The only weirdly sexualized models in those releases were the ninja lady in Rogue Trader and the eldar pathfinder in BSF, whose pose I can only describe in "That one Beyonce picture from the superbowl a couple years back". The female genestealer cultists and renegade guard, the female rogue trader and medical officer, the female commissar and female necromunda gangers have all been relatively tasteful IMO. At least, I gauge that based on whether people whine about them being too ugly, anyway.

But like...there's just a much smaller fraction of the factions where you actually can put humanoid females in in 40k. Only big one that's still lacking is guard, and I can't really fault them that hard when they haven't had a model release since like...the start of 7th, and their basic troop kit is one of the most ancient plastic kits still in use.
   
Made in fi
Hunting Glade Guard





Same in new/expanded AoS ranges: both the Sigmarines and the mortal followers of Chaos (in the Shadespire gang as well as the previewed Warcry warbands) feature, what, around 30-50% female models? Idoneth too, but being (sort of) Elves that's not as revolutionary. In other words, if it's new, and if it fits, there's a lot more gender diversity than you would have seen even just a few years ago. Quite interesting how they quite suddenly decided to go for it. (In a similar vain, those same figures, Idoneth excluded, have been painted in the examples to display a range of ethnic origins.)

We also have yet to see what a modern version of the repentia will be like.


I wonder just how many additional kits they might create for the Sororitas release. Purely recreating the existing options in plastic is a decently sized release, but given the big deal they're making out of it, you'd expect at least one or two surprises, something novel for existing players and to draw in new ones.
   
Made in gb
Rampaging Carnifex






I'm hoping they take a similar approach to AdMech, Custodes and Genestealer Cults by making it a two-part release. Bring out another Talons of the Emperor or Deathwatch Overkill style boxed set with the basic troop & HQ models so people have time to work on those, before the main codex release with the rest of the range. Otherwise there just won't be much depth to the army.
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




 xttz wrote:
I'm hoping they take a similar approach to AdMech, Custodes and Genestealer Cults by making it a two-part release. Bring out another Talons of the Emperor or Deathwatch Overkill style boxed set with the basic troop & HQ models so people have time to work on those, before the main codex release with the rest of the range. Otherwise there just won't be much depth to the army.


There's really nothing stopping them from just releasing a bunch of kits all at once other than the fact that they just haven't in a while.

Plus again, the army is incredibly small. Even a deathguard size release will have the potential for new units is they make things like seraphim, celestians, and penitent engines dual kits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Voss wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?
Returning them to the codex you mean. Zealots and the priestly delegations were among those cut when the sisters were shoehorned in with the inquisition, but were one of those things that helped the sisters be something other than T3 marines with most of the units missing.


If they add back arcos and crusaders then fine. Frateris militia and the like are 100% no go.

Why? Because if frateris militia get added in you'll never see a battle sister on the table again. Because that's how cheap infantry works in 40k.


By that logic, sisters won't sell at all because people will just bring Guard.


People already shouldn't be buying sisters in favor of buying guardsman.

The only justification for taking sisters currently is getting to say you're running a Sisters army and MAYBE the whole 4++ bubble thing. If you add a unit that is still technically under the banner of 'sisters of battle/adepta ministorum' but is cheaper, then there really isn't any reason to ever run battle sisters in even semi-competitive sisters builds anymore. If they also get the 4++ then there's no reason to even make BSS kits.

Look at how terrible having cultists is for actual CSM. I have literally never seen an actual chaos space marine in all of 8th edition because of how horrendous they are compared to cultists.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Geifer wrote:
ERJAK wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Cronch wrote:
There's enough male-only armies in 40k, do we really need to bring them into the one army that isn't 100% sausagefest?
Returning them to the codex you mean. Zealots and the priestly delegations were among those cut when the sisters were shoehorned in with the inquisition, but were one of those things that helped the sisters be something other than T3 marines with most of the units missing.


If they add back arcos and crusaders then fine. Frateris militia and the like are 100% no go.

Why? Because if frateris militia get added in you'll never see a battle sister on the table again. Because that's how cheap infantry works in 40k.


That's how power gamers work. If GW makes elite infantry sucky, they'll use Frateris Militia. If GW makes horde stuff sucky, they'll play Sisters. With the caveat that they'll likely play neither regardless because other factions have flat out better rules than anything in the Sisters codex.

To normal players Frateris Militia will be an additional unit. If someone plays Sisters for Sisters, they'll keep using Sisters. If someone wants a mixed Ecclesiarchy army, they now have the option. Outside the fabled competitive high end of 40k, there's no downside.



See this is a myth. It's not about 'high end competitive' it's about feeling handicapped when playing your friends.

The best example is CSM. Even in casual games you almost never see CSM. I'm not even sure the chaos players in our area even still own any CSM. Sure, in some areas there are people still clinging along to their old models, but they're very much aware of how bad they are and how much better running cultists would be. Same for tac marines. Running tacs over scouts is silly, which is why every tac marine on the planet has an inch thick coat of dust on it.

Releasing a troop unit that does the exact same thing as another troop unit, only cheaper always ends up with one of those units never coming off the shelves.

The best thing for them to do would be to release a specialized unit in the troop slot. Maybe troop bikers? Or a unit with infiltrator that has some kind of gimmick to it like they all have to take snipers or they have deepstrike denial or provide auspex scan style protection.

Anything other than 'this unit is a cheaper version of that unit'.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/11 23:00:31


2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in nl
Moustache-twirling Princeps




We'll find out soon enough eh.

GW being garbage at balancing for competitive play isn't a particularly persuasive argument for not releasing a unit which is part of the faction in the lore, would add to the army visually, would give non-hardcore competitive types more options in listbuilding, and which would likely just be very cool models.

If there are problems with cheap infantry in 8th, advocate they fix that problem rather than bolting the stable door after the horse is six counties away and still running.

EDIT: Also, I call nonsense on your claim that literally nobody uses Tacs/CSM any more(except for the people you mention who're using them even though they know they're bad, but they don't count because...?), or that any local meta where people exclusively select the most "efficient" units is even remotely casual/non-competitive.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/11 23:03:04


I need to acquire plastic Skavenslaves, can you help?
I have a blog now, evidently. Featuring the Alternative Mordheim Model Megalist.

"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal 
   
Made in us
Consigned to the Grim Darkness





USA

"I think this unit is bad, and if anyone uses it, they're not a serious player even if they enter and win tournaments." -- Dakka in a nutshell.

The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

 Melissia wrote:
"I think this unit is bad, and if anyone uses it, they're not a serious player even if they enter and win tournaments." -- Dakka in a nutshell.

That's not 'Dakka' at all. That's a small subset of people with a specific mindset towards the game. 'Dakka' is not a gestalt hivemind that all thinks a certain way... as evidenced by the disagreement right here in this thread over that mindset.



   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





Belgium

the_scotsman wrote:

Pretty sure the lady sculpt on the penitent engine is wearing like a full body white robe and hood, isn't she?


Not really...more like a hood and a piece of cloth barely covering her front body...

Spoiler:




Let's be honest, GW's change of attitude about females in their miniatures is fairly recent in comparison with time. Yes, they began to add more females in 40k - the last Genestealer Cults do indeed have women, but it still is far from being a shower of girls everywhere. Presence of the ladies is also more showing in their novels/stories, they tend to add a woman in position of power as soon as they can. Still no female Space Marine, of course.

I also expect the new range of sisters to follow the same recent pattern.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/12 08:41:00


Cuteness for the Cute Goddess! 
   
Made in us
Lord Commander in a Plush Chair





Seneca Nation of Indians

 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


This sig was deemed too political for Dakka.
Meanwhile, Cato Sicarius is appearing on Alex Jones.
 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


Other than legs, I had a pretty good time customizing my eschers. I also thought the faces and hair being separate was a pretty neat touch.

There were a couple paired arms but for the most part they were one hand holds, so I could make some creative cuts to make weapons that didn't come in the box.

Only thing that annoyed me with the necro boxes was the 2x duplicate sprue thing.
   
Made in us
Consigned to the Grim Darkness





USA

 insaniak wrote:
 Melissia wrote:
"I think this unit is bad, and if anyone uses it, they're not a serious player even if they enter and win tournaments." -- Dakka in a nutshell.

That's not 'Dakka' at all. That's a small subset of people with a specific mindset towards the game. 'Dakka' is not a gestalt hivemind that all thinks a certain way... as evidenced by the disagreement right here in this thread over that mindset.
Yeah, I know. Was an exaggeration.

The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
 
   
Made in fi
Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 BaronIveagh wrote:


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.

The Escher are quite customisable. Even more so if you buy a knife.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in gb
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader






 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


I’ll let you into a secret. Unless you converted, kitbashed or resculpted all of your troops, your army always did look like everyone else’s.
   
Made in us
Auspicious Aspiring Champion of Chaos






 Melissia wrote:
 insaniak wrote:
 Melissia wrote:
"I think this unit is bad, and if anyone uses it, they're not a serious player even if they enter and win tournaments." -- Dakka in a nutshell.

That's not 'Dakka' at all. That's a small subset of people with a specific mindset towards the game. 'Dakka' is not a gestalt hivemind that all thinks a certain way... as evidenced by the disagreement right here in this thread over that mindset.
Yeah, I know. Was an exaggeration.


Apparently the Aussies are too busy hiding from the plethora of venomous creatures infesting their country to teach their children about the literary concept of "hyperbole".

2750 Unliving Legion of the Zarith Dynasty
840 Imperial Knights of House Janis
2000 Khorne Bloodbound of the Skullfiend Tribe (Aqshy)
2000 Tzeentch Arcanites of the Cult of Searing Light (Hysh)
3000 Slaves to Darkness of the Legion of Rusted Chains (Allpoints/Azyr)
2500 Sylvaneth of the Seelie Court (Ghyran)
 
   
Made in gb
Malicious Mandrake





England

 EnTyme wrote:
 Melissia wrote:
Apparently the Aussies are too busy hiding from the plethora of venomous creatures infesting their country to teach their children about the literary concept of "hyperbole".


I think hyper bowl was what they used against us in the cricket when I was growing up.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Please don’t necro to ask if there’s been any news.
 
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

The Aussie understands hyperbole just fine, and is a little sick and tired of seeing it used to miscategorise an entire community of people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:

See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs.

My Escher gang is metal, but still has conversions in it. Would have been so much easier if the models had been plastic...

Monopose doesn't mean you actually have to build them stock standard. It just means it can take a little more work to modify them... But the end result is more likely to actually be unique.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/12 21:19:12


   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut



Tacoma, WA

Anyone with the skill and desire to make a good looking converted army will do it regardless of the medium. For all of us, it's much better looking to let the professionals handle the sculpting. It looks better.

Bring on the monopose
   
Made in au
[MOD]
Cutting stuff up and bunging it back together in new and interesting ways.






Under the couch

 insaniak wrote:
The Aussie understands hyperbole just fine, and is a little sick and tired of seeing it used to miscategorise an entire community of people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 BaronIveagh wrote:

See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs.

My Escher gang is metal, but still has conversions in it. Would have been so much easier if the models had been plastic...

Monopose doesn't mean you actually have to build them stock standard. It just means it can take a little more work to modify them... But the end result is more likely to actually be unique.



...and having said that, I still tend to lean towards multi-part minis where possible, simply because having some ability to modify the look of the model without having to cut things up certainly helps to avoid cookie-cutter squads.

I do recognise, though, that not every design is suited to making multi-part models.

   
Made in ca
Trustworthy Shas'vre






 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


I’ll let you into a secret. Unless you converted, kitbashed or resculpted all of your troops, your army always did look like everyone else’s.


Not if you paint them.

   
Made in us
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit




San Jose, CA

 John Prins wrote:
Spoiler:
 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


I’ll let you into a secret. Unless you converted, kitbashed or resculpted all of your troops, your army always did look like everyone else’s.


Not if you paint them.


Something so simple, yet impossible for some. You'd be surprised how different a fully painted army looks compared to the same army in gray.
   
Made in gb
Multispectral Hsien





Gosport, UK

Racerguy180 wrote:
 John Prins wrote:
 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
Spoiler:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


I’ll let you into a secret. Unless you converted, kitbashed or resculpted all of your troops, your army always did look like everyone else’s.


Not if you paint them.


Something so simple, yet impossible for some. You'd be surprised how different a fully painted army looks compared to the same army in gray.


That works for monopose or multipose models though, and I dunno why we’re assuming they didn’t paint their models. And I don’t think anyone is really surprised that a full painted army looks different to a grey one.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/13 07:35:35


 
   
Made in gb
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader






 John Prins wrote:
 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.


I’ll let you into a secret. Unless you converted, kitbashed or resculpted all of your troops, your army always did look like everyone else’s.


Not if you paint them.


We were talking monopose versus multipart
   
Made in ca
Trustworthy Shas'vre






 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

We were talking monopose versus multipart


I was being somewhat facetious, but to imply that two armies of the same models cannot be distinguished from another once painted is absurd as well. SoB players have been working with a set amount of sculpts, zero pose options for decades and I didn't see the complaint being "my models are the saaaaaaaaame as everyone else!", it was cost and having to work with/lug around metals.

We don't have images of sprue layouts, we don't know how many different sets of arms and heads there are to go with each body. We don't know if these renders are ETB or "Versus" box set miniatures with zero options or if they're the baseline kits. If all three of these things exist, you've probably got 23-odd different baseline sisters sculpts, including 2-3 Sister Superiors, and head swapping from the baseline kit to ETB/Versus kits adds more variety. So how many unique baseline sisters sculpts do we need before the monopose/multipart argument because largely immaterial? My multipart CWE Guardians are all so terribly unique, after all.



   
Made in gb
Sword-Bearing Inquisitorial Crusader






 John Prins wrote:
 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

We were talking monopose versus multipart


I was being somewhat facetious, but to imply that two armies of the same models cannot be distinguished from another once painted is absurd as well.



I really don’t think anyone has implied that.

On every other point I totally agree with you.
   
Made in nl
Veteran Inquisitorial Tyranid Xenokiller






your mind

 BaronIveagh wrote:
 Overread wrote:
I'm really liking the poses they've given them! It might cut down some on the alternate builds, but at the same time they really look outstanding. Full of motion and energy and when they stand to pose they are choosing some really iconic poses for them to hold.

There's arn't warriors just standing around or on parade they are marching and charging into battle bolters firing!


See, I couldn't even finish my Escher gang I got so frustrated with this monopose limited bs. It's totally killed my interest in these new Sisters. When they said 'Plastic' I got behind the idea because I said 'Hey, more customization, so my army won't look like EVERYONE ELSES!' well, F U very much GW, I refuse to buy this.

This is exactly where I was standing in the GW shop looking at those new ork buggies that I wanted to want so badly, but in the end just didn't want, for those very reasons.
Too paint by numbers, now.
Just a card game with expensive cards.
Ick.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/13 18:12:57


   
Made in us
Lord Commander in a Plush Chair





Seneca Nation of Indians

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:

I’ll let you into a secret. Unless you converted, kitbashed or resculpted all of your troops, your army always did look like everyone else’s.


*Points to his gallery.*


You must have missed my posts in the conversions threads. Generally speaking, if its plastic or resin, I may have a mini or two that's not modified in some way in an entire army or fleet.


This sig was deemed too political for Dakka.
Meanwhile, Cato Sicarius is appearing on Alex Jones.
 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: