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.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
GW have to make a lot of new units in order to validate the AoS business model in which people will buy smaller but more expensive collections of figures to replace their existing WHFB armies, or simply as newcomers buy AoS model armies that need to exceed the revenue per customer of the now-missing WHFB players..

Minor changes in a stat line, or a new special rule, or a variation on it, are how a new unit is created.

To be honest, if it's just the weapons that change, they can use the same entry and just say each miniature use the weapons it carries.

Most of the time, when they make a different profile, it's because there is a special rule attached to them.

I'm guessing the lance knights will have something when they charge, the hammer knights will certainly have the same rules than hammer paladins and axe knights as well with axe paladins. And crossbowmen will certainly have something with their bolts.

 Haechi wrote:

I also do find the SE names ridiculous... But I find it very hypocritical to mention. I mean, Devastators, Terminators, Crusaders, Redeemers, Predators, Vindicators, Ravagers, Raiders, Reavers, Defilers, Obliterators, Mutilators, etc. Nothing new under the sun guys.

'New' isn't the issue. The fact that other things have names doesn't make these names any less silly.

 insaniak wrote:

 Haechi wrote:

I also do find the SE names ridiculous... But I find it very hypocritical to mention. I mean, Devastators, Terminators, Crusaders, Redeemers, Predators, Vindicators, Ravagers, Raiders, Reavers, Defilers, Obliterators, Mutilators, etc. Nothing new under the sun guys.

'New' isn't the issue. The fact that other things have names doesn't make these names any less silly.

Bah, if they want to copyright these, they have to use names that can't be too generic. Since it's a high fantasy world, with impossible realms and quite specific background, these names are as good as anything else. You'd rather have Blood Warriors of Blood Murder?

And a terminator with lightning claws is still a terminator. A terminator with an assault cannon is still a terminator. They don't become "pulverators" when you give them hammers and shields, or "bolterators" when you're running shooty guys. That's the difference.

 Sidstyler wrote:
And a terminator with lightning claws is still a terminator. A terminator with an assault cannon is still a terminator. They don't become "pulverators" when you give them hammers and shields, or "bolterators" when you're running shooty guys. That's the difference.

Right, and Predators aren't either Destructors or Anihiliators with a change of weapons. Same with Land Raiders, which are either Redeemers or Crusaders. All warhammer names have always been borderline ridiculous, quit your act. Those guys are Dracothian Guards. The names are to differentiate their roles, which is decided by the weapons they use in battle.

 Sidstyler wrote:
And a terminator with lightning claws is still a terminator. A terminator with an assault cannon is still a terminator. They don't become "pulverators" when you give them hammers and shields, or "bolterators" when you're running shooty guys. That's the difference.

Main difference is in the fluff and profiles.

For example, Prosecutors may use different weapons but they still have the same name. Same for Judicators or Liberators.

The Paladins are different because they actually have different fighting styles and roles. I guess this is the same for the new knights on dracoth.

Not really shocking in itself.

 Sarouan wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Haechi wrote:

I also do find the SE names ridiculous... But I find it very hypocritical to mention. I mean, Devastators, Terminators, Crusaders, Redeemers, Predators, Vindicators, Ravagers, Raiders, Reavers, Defilers, Obliterators, Mutilators, etc. Nothing new under the sun guys.

'New' isn't the issue. The fact that other things have names doesn't make these names any less silly.

Bah, if they want to copyright these, they have to use names that can't be too generic. Since it's a high fantasy world, with impossible realms and quite specific background, these names are as good as anything else. You'd rather have Blood Warriors of Blood Murder?

So they generate silly names and generate 4 entries where 1 would be enough to archieve...What? Competitors will make equilavents happily as usual if they deem it's profitable.

(and yes it was silly to have empire crossbowmen and handgunner. Just because you made mistake before doesn't mean you have to make mistake in future yes? You could say...Fix the mistake? Improve your product? Maybe it's just me but that sounds logical step)

I don't see what was silly about Empire crossbowmen and handgunners. Both are real weapons that co-existed in armies for decades (as did bowmen) during the gradual transition to fully gunpowder battle.

Anyway, names can't be copyrighted. GW can trademark them, but don't need to invent new words in order to so this, although it makes it easier. The thing is, registering trademarks is fairly expensive.

I think GW are making up these names accordinng to rule of cool. Otherwise why pick real words for the units like Prosecutors and Retributors? They just sound kind of militant.

I like the names and different war scrolls, as it gives each variant a little more character and space in the fluff, rather than just Paladins with different weapons.

Edit: Also, in the Paladins' case at least, the different variants have different armour styles as well. From a business perspective, I think it's largely about packing as much perceived content in the box as possible and giving reasons to buy more than one.

 Sarouan wrote:

Bah, if they want to copyright these, they have to use names that can't be too generic.

That's not how copyright works.

Since it's a high fantasy world, with impossible realms and quite specific background, these names are as good as anything else. You'd rather have Blood Warriors of Blood Murder?

An even sillier name is not the only alternative to a silly name.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
.
I think GW are making up these names accordinng to rule of cool. Otherwise why pick real words for the units like Prosecutors and Retributors? They just sound kind of militant.

I think that's part of it. And, as much as we give them stick for the whole trademark thing (and as much as they've earnt it with their behaviour in recent years), I think in large part it's about creating a unique, distinct setting in place of the relatively generic WHFB Old World. And on that level, at least, they seem to be succeeding.

 Haechi wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:
And a terminator with lightning claws is still a terminator. A terminator with an assault cannon is still a terminator. They don't become "pulverators" when you give them hammers and shields, or "bolterators" when you're running shooty guys. That's the difference.

Right, and Predators aren't either Destructors or Anihiliators with a change of weapons. Same with Land Raiders, which are either Redeemers or Crusaders. All warhammer names have always been borderline ridiculous, quit your act. Those guys are Dracothian Guards. The names are to differentiate their roles, which is decided by the weapons they use in battle.

You are mistaking something there - those are pattern names for tanks, not terms for infantry. The point still stands that, to do the same thing namewise, the Assault Terminators with Twin LC would have to be the Clawzerators, while the ones with TH/SS would be the hammerators, and the Powerfist ones would be the pulverators, with the odd guy with the chainfist being the angryfisterator.... the list goes on. It's a completely different thing.

Now, while you can defend that there are specific units within certain chapters that are pretty much just Terminators with different weapons (Such as the DW Knights) those are altogether a different organization within the Chapter. There's no act to be quit - it's quite a simple realization.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:


Now, while you can defend that there are specific units within certain chapters that are pretty much just Terminators with different weapons (Such as the DW Knights) those are altogether a different organization within the Chapter. There's no act to be quit - it's quite a simple realization.

And that's exactly what those new entries are. They are different armed branches of the Extremis Chamber. They fight with different doctrines and have different roles on the battlefield. It's all described and explained in the fluff and books. And they don't work like a devastator squad that can mix weapons. Those guys won't be able to mix weapons. They are as different in terms of fluff as Tacticals, Assaults, and Devastators are.

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:

 Haechi wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:
And a terminator with lightning claws is still a terminator. A terminator with an assault cannon is still a terminator. They don't become "pulverators" when you give them hammers and shields, or "bolterators" when you're running shooty guys. That's the difference.

Right, and Predators aren't either Destructors or Anihiliators with a change of weapons. Same with Land Raiders, which are either Redeemers or Crusaders. All warhammer names have always been borderline ridiculous, quit your act. Those guys are Dracothian Guards. The names are to differentiate their roles, which is decided by the weapons they use in battle.

You are mistaking something there - those are pattern names for tanks, not terms for infantry. The point still stands that, to do the same thing namewise, the Assault Terminators with Twin LC would have to be the Clawzerators, while the ones with TH/SS would be the hammerators, and the Powerfist ones would be the pulverators, with the odd guy with the chainfist being the angryfisterator.... the list goes on. It's a completely different thing.

Now, while you can defend that there are specific units within certain chapters that are pretty much just Terminators with different weapons (Such as the DW Knights) those are altogether a different organization within the Chapter. There's no act to be quit - it's quite a simple realization.

It's not completely different at all, in fact it's exactly the same thing. Patterns for tanks, roles for infantry, what's the practical difference and why is it a problem? It amounts to the exact same thing, which is silly names that are supposed to sound cool. And if you think some of them sound ridiculous, than the problem is not the fact that they have different names, but rather that the names are silly. Which is certainly a valid opinion.

This is how I imagine the AoS name making department

RoperPG wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Kaboomors lol... I say Derpcast Derpdederperz, Age of Derp.

Lord Kaboomor on Derpoth, best of both worlds heh.

Anyway Dracoths are fat, which kind of fits the fat sigmarines. Terrible models, bloated like World of Warcraft ingame ones. It's weird because starter dracoth looked kinda ok.

Honestly, I don't get why you keep visiting this thread. You really don't add anything worthwhile to the discussion.

I think he adds plenty.

Not bad that cavalry, better than I expected it would be, still no interest in this army though, just seems boring to me.

I really wonder how well this line is doing, its seems to sell well but I have not met anyone that really likes it.

 Rayvon wrote:
Not bad that cavalry, better than I expected it would be, still no interest in this army though, just seems boring to me.

I really wonder how well this line is doing, its seems to sell well but I have not met anyone that really likes it.

We don't have to meet them. Remember those statistics about games vs collector a while back. Lets assume those are sort of true as long as there are persons who like to collect them GW will sell them.
And those extravagant Sig Daemon armours really look like some of the modern RPG games out there so my guess would be that they just might sell better then we all expect them to do. But I am still not entirely convinced.

 mdauben wrote:

 VeteranNoob wrote:
Yeah, I agree. I'm not sure what it would be called so I just wrote Wyvern.

Based on the releases to date, tt will probably be a Savage Wyrme ridden by a Savage Oruck Savager, wielding a Savage Axxe, who will lead the Savage Orucks riding Savage Pyges waving their Savage Slissers.

Yeah, the 40k Terribad Naming Convention Infection spread to AoS pretty thoroughly.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Devastators could have Lascannoners, missilers, etc.

You realize how stupid of a name "Devastator" squad is? You're just used to it. In the context of a military squad formation, it's fething slowed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 angelofvengeance wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
Kaboomors lol... I say Derpcast Derpdederperz, Age of Derp.

Lord Kaboomor on Derpoth, best of both worlds heh.

Anyway Dracoths are fat, which kind of fits the fat sigmarines. Terrible models, bloated like World of Warcraft ingame ones. It's weird because starter dracoth looked kinda ok.

Honestly, I don't get why you keep visiting this thread. You really don't add anything worthwhile to the discussion.

I'm going to go to a forum that talks about The Hundred Years War. I'll complain about how it's not interesting. Someone replies that if you read about it you will find it interesting. I reply that I read a few paragraphs but couldn't pronounce any of the French names, got frustrated, and haven't read any further. But I'm sure as hell going to squat in that forum like a coiled turd and comment on how the Hundred Years War is dumb.

It's weird. I don't jump on a forum to specifically say I will not be buying something. There's not enough hours in the day to do that for every item I will not be purchasing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Haechi wrote:
I also do find the SE names ridiculous... But I find it very hypocritical to mention. I mean, Devastators, Terminators, Crusaders, Redeemers, Predators, Vindicators, Ravagers, Raiders, Reavers, Defilers, Obliterators, Mutilators, etc. Nothing new under the sun guys.

But... but... space marines! They're just SO COOL GUYS. They get exempt because 40k is ripped off from Dune, Foundation, Aliens, 2000AD, and a dozen other sources whereas AoS is the only mostly original IP that GW has created in nearly it's entire history. It's a lot easier to latch onto something that's full of familiar generic tropes.

this is just internet argument

"MY TOY SOLDIER IS BETTER THAN YOURS"

"NO, MY TOY SOLDIER BETTER"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Haechi wrote:

 Lithlandis Stormcrow wrote:


Now, while you can defend that there are specific units within certain chapters that are pretty much just Terminators with different weapons (Such as the DW Knights) those are altogether a different organization within the Chapter. There's no act to be quit - it's quite a simple realization.

And that's exactly what those new entries are. They are different armed branches of the Extremis Chamber. They fight with different doctrines and have different roles on the battlefield. It's all described and explained in the fluff and books. And they don't work like a devastator squad that can mix weapons. Those guys won't be able to mix weapons. They are as different in terms of fluff as Tacticals, Assaults, and Devastators are.

Stop expecting anyone in this thread who solely visits to criticize AoS has literally any idea what they are talking about. There's been a dozen AoS books now with tons of background and fluff and none of these guys have bothered to read it other than to see some names, add "derp" to them (brilliant!), and criticize the names while they lovingly purchase a Space Wolves... (fething stupid name #1)... Wulfen... (#2).... Murderpack (#3). There's absolutely nothing in Age of Sigmar that is as stupid sounding as those four words together. Space Wolves Wulfen Murderpack. Nor as stupid as a concept or execution as Thunderwolf Cavalry. But there you have it.

I completely agree with you, I'm so tired of seeing hipsters just pure badmouthing AOS because they have nothing better to do!!! AOS background is epic and I am really enjoying it. The best thing GW ever did was to nuke WHFB.

BECAUSE APPARENTLY IT NEEDS TO BE SAID AGAIN:

 Manchu wrote:
Friendly reminder #5649:

From my OP:

 Manchu wrote:
NOTE: This thread is for discussing new AoS releases. It is not for discussing AoS or GW generally. Rule Number Two is Stay On Topic.

There are dozens of threads about whether/why Poster X loves/hates AoS. This is not that thread. Feel free to join that debate in the AoS subforum. Thanks!

IF YOU SEE A POST THAT YOU FEEL GOES AGAINST THE RULES OF THE SITE (ESPECIALLY RULE #1 AND RULE #2) - REPORT IT.

FINAL CHANCE - BEYOND HERE LIE WARNINGS AND SUSPENSIONS.

ALSO, PLEASE NOTE THAT 'COMPLAINING ABOUT COMPLAINING' AND OTHER SUCH COMMENTS WILL BE DELETED AND NET THE POSTER A WARNING AND/OR A SUSPENSION.

Ook, we need something else.

https://twitter.com/Rhellion/status/707229037572132864

or

http://imgur.com/a/auQ2v

or

I dont care what they are named, I digging the heck out of em cant wait to see more

Rules have dropped:

How is the pricing on those furminators would it be more affordable to just buy the catdragon thingy from a bits site / ebay ?

So, is Fulminate even a word? What does fulminating mean?

I'm gonna stick with concussors I guess, so they'll match my starter set guy.. or maybe try magnetizing the arms or hands?

Yep, it means 'to strike violently or flash like lightning', from a Latin root, fulmen/fulmin meaning lightning.

Yes, Fulminate is a word, and more than a few posters in this thread could be considered Fulminators

 Necros wrote:
So, is Fulminate even a word? What does fulminating mean?

I'm gonna stick with concussors I guess, so they'll match my starter set guy.. or maybe try magnetizing the arms or hands?

fulminate
ˈfʊlmɪneɪt,ˈfʌl-/
verb
1.
express vehement protest.
"all fulminated against the new curriculum"
synonyms: protest, rail, rage, rant, thunder, storm, declaim, inveigh, speak out, make/take a stand; More
2.
literary
explode violently or flash like lightning.
"thunder fulminated around the house"
synonyms: explode, flash, crack, detonate, blow up, go off; rumble
"thunder fulminated around the house"

Pretty apt either way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghaz wrote:
Yes, Fulminate is a word, and more than a few posters in this thread could be considered Fulminators

Ninja'd! But also tried to figure out your point...
Perhaps in future "OK mate, here's yer glaive, there's yer Dracoth..."

are you kidding??? 7 wounds??? with a 3+ to save??

antohammer wrote:
are you kidding??? 7 wounds??? with a 3+ to save??

The Lord Celestant on Dracoth, yes. The "normal" knights on Dracoth have 5 wounds...yeah, and still 3+ to save. Quite big beasties in themselves.

Axe knights are funny; they more they are, the more they attack. Ouch.

Could be fun to make an army out of those. Well...it will certainly hurt your wallet, but if you don't mind, still could be fun!