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.

Dread Master wrote:
New boyz would be awesome! The Brian Nelson ones are way past needing replacing. Nice kit for it’s time, but it’s had it’s day.

Agree! Even if they got updated in 2008 like said it was just a little sprue update with addon, the model are the same! And they are fantastic model even now but please, i need new boyz after all these years . I love the bloodbowl orcs, i think it would be awesome if they will do something similar.
In truth i dont have hope for new boyz, but some greenskin model on foot... who know? I think it would be a shame to release such a BIG BOSS all alone! Lets hope!

Anyway Ghazghkull looks really cool, i really hope in an appropriate face, from the frame where its barely seen i like it, reminds me the ironjawz that i really like (they are brian nelson sculpt/concept not by chance) but i fear it will look too "normal", impersonal, i dont know hope to be wrong... i want to see the model cant resist helpppppppppppp

 Lord Perversor wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

OMG THE HORSES HAVE FLAMER FACES!

In fact it's Hounds with flamethrower faces as they have canine form, the horse version is the one withour flamers on them

They don't look more canine as models. While they're called Sulphurhounds, I think that's a name for the unit not indicative that the thing the riders ride are dogs. The kit uses the same bodies as the Raiders, just the head is the main difference.

If you look at the models the heads are, I think, supposed to give the impression of a different mount.
I mean one is VERY horsey and the other is VERY dogey... to the point that the hounds actually have a collar.
While we dont know what is under the mask, the aesthetic and name tries to invoke the image of a hound/a horse respectively.

I wager we won't see them until Seraphon are released. Having 3 armies (two of which are new) in the marketing at once is a risk of tripping over too much stuff coming too far off all at once. I'd wager GW will clear house a bit on these releases, don't forget its going to be a few months before its all out. Plus we've still at least one more wave of Slaves to Darkness models to come and the Warcry stuff.

I wound have liked the flamer hounds better if they weren’t being ridden. Huge cyber attack dogs with flamers for faces, I could get enthusiastic about, if their handlers were on foot.

The horsey boys still bother me because they look too Wild West for 40k. Had they looked more knightly or Napoleonic, I know I’d like them more.

 Thairne wrote:
If you look at the models the heads are, I think, supposed to give the impression of a different mount.
I mean one is VERY horsey and the other is VERY dogey... to the point that the hounds actually have a collar.
While we dont know what is under the mask, the aesthetic and name tries to invoke the image of a hound/a horse respectively.

They both have collars.

The heads both look canine to me. The skulls are much slimmer than horses, they have sharp teeth, forward facing predator eyes.

 ekwatts wrote:
The flamer horses and zoat are the clear winners here.

I was surprised by the Zoat popping up as a star player in Blood Bowl but I'm possibly more surprised by seeing a new 40k version. Looks great, though. Very chunky. And the armour really has an 80s sci fi vibe, but nicely updated. I wonder if it will have any options like a mask-less head? Not that it's a deal breaker. I'm probably going to be flipping through my Rogue Trader bestiary to try and figure out what might be next...

Yeah I think the zoat is the winner for most of us old farts.

Hope he gets rules for 40k. Wonder what armies he could be used in. Definitely doesn't fit in tyranids anymore. Could definitely be some kind of mercenary....

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
The 40k army is very Skitarii, not very Mechanicus. There is a distinct lack of lobotomized servitors going around, that's for sure! And not that many mechdendrites either.

I wonder if it's a throwback to last edition when Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus were separate books. Hopefully we'll get more mad Mechanicus stuff next.

We need a box of plastic repair and basic weapon servitors since both admech and techmarines can take them. I too maybe.

And servo-skulls!

You're right, the colour scheme hid them a bit for me.
The "horses" have bridles though, but it is not as clear cut as I thought it to be.

So at the risk of being lynched - did any OTHER companies release any info at the LVO?

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
I wound have liked the flamer hounds better if they weren’t being ridden. Huge cyber attack dogs with flamers for faces, I could get enthusiastic about, if their handlers were on foot.

The horsey boys still bother me because they look too Wild West for 40k. Had they looked more knightly or Napoleonic, I know I’d like them more.

Just waiting for them to get rules as a necromunda ash waste gang.

 Overread wrote:
So at the risk of being lynched - did any OTHER companies release any info at the LVO?

Pretty sure LVO didn't even actually START until today?

Corvus Belli is there, their info will be in the Infinity thread. Dunno who else.

 MajorTom11 wrote:
I am very relieved to hear many are sharing my dislike of the AdMech design direction... I very much agree that the whole steampunk/nature shapes/ animal analogue thing is so completely against everything I had every imagined or read about AdMech. Something more like a mix of borg, terminator pistons and hydraulics, gothic skulliness, meat and machine in uncomfortable looking shapes was always what I pictured. Almost stuff from that old Jamie Lee Curtis movie Virus. Archmagos Cawl, Engineseers and some other older stuff fit the bill close enough, but this new stuff is almost at odds with that aesthetic. Uniform shapes, lots of smooth plates. Maximum tech apparently means 16th century DaVinci canvas and wood bat-wings... I mean, in many ways they look almost the least advanced technologically.

I dunno why it bugs me but it does lol.

Well, I kinda share your design views. I started an AdMech army long before the Codex (Skitarii) with freaky Tech-Priest conversions and more 'normal' troopers (mostly Renegades from Forgeworld and converted servitors) and tanks. Except for the Tech-priests and Kataphrons none of the 'new' models are really fitting.

But it doesn't bug me. It's a different design and aesthetic and even if I don't like a specific kit it's usually a source of good bits for conversions.

I wouldn't start a new army using solely the AdMech models, but I'm often tempted to use them in a project.

For example these new models. I think they'd look great in a Vostroyan army, where the bulk of the troops are, well, Vostroyans, and the riders and flyers just add the perfect amount of weirdness. Or in a Chaos army (Dark Mechanicum style) with the Lord Discordant, Anacharis Scoria, Daemon engines and lots of cultists.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MajorTom11 wrote:
I am very relieved to hear many are sharing my dislike of the AdMech design direction... I very much agree that the whole steampunk/nature shapes/ animal analogue thing is so completely against everything I had every imagined or read about AdMech. Something more like a mix of borg, terminator pistons and hydraulics, gothic skulliness, meat and machine in uncomfortable looking shapes was always what I pictured. Almost stuff from that old Jamie Lee Curtis movie Virus. Archmagos Cawl, Engineseers and some other older stuff fit the bill close enough, but this new stuff is almost at odds with that aesthetic. Uniform shapes, lots of smooth plates. Maximum tech apparently means 16th century DaVinci canvas and wood bat-wings... I mean, in many ways they look almost the least advanced technologically.

I dunno why it bugs me but it does lol.

Frankly, I'm glad we have a unified vision at last for the Skitarii. There used to be a dozen different things that qualified as "tech-guard" from dudes rocking techy monocles and lasguns with two scopes(!!!) to hulks decked out with cannon arms.

But it's not unified... You've got the Raygun gothic look, Steampunk DaVinci, Robo-wild-west
Everything alone individually is well sculpted but all feels jumbled.

So we know the Adeptus Mechanicus kits are slated for April, so where does the other stuff slot in around that?
Pretty much has to all be before then given the three-month window.

Some alternate views of Teclis: https://twitter.com/StoneMonkGamer/status/1220716920833560578

Cryptek of Awesome wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MajorTom11 wrote:
I am very relieved to hear many are sharing my dislike of the AdMech design direction... I very much agree that the whole steampunk/nature shapes/ animal analogue thing is so completely against everything I had every imagined or read about AdMech. Something more like a mix of borg, terminator pistons and hydraulics, gothic skulliness, meat and machine in uncomfortable looking shapes was always what I pictured. Almost stuff from that old Jamie Lee Curtis movie Virus. Archmagos Cawl, Engineseers and some other older stuff fit the bill close enough, but this new stuff is almost at odds with that aesthetic. Uniform shapes, lots of smooth plates. Maximum tech apparently means 16th century DaVinci canvas and wood bat-wings... I mean, in many ways they look almost the least advanced technologically.

I dunno why it bugs me but it does lol.

Frankly, I'm glad we have a unified vision at last for the Skitarii. There used to be a dozen different things that qualified as "tech-guard" from dudes rocking techy monocles and lasguns with two scopes(!!!) to hulks decked out with cannon arms.

But it's not unified... You've got the Raygun gothic look, Steampunk DaVinci, Robo-wild-west
Everything alone individually is well sculpted but all feels jumbled.

Part of that feels like the point. The other imperial factions use a handful of basic stc designs with minor variations that any menial with a hammer and a prayer can pump out of assembly lines on industrial worlds. Meanwhile the admech keeps all the strange and exotic stuff that was probably developed over 20000 years across thousands of human worlds with only fragments recovered.

ubik2000 wrote:
Some alternate views of Teclis: https://twitter.com/StoneMonkGamer/status/1220716920833560578

worst thing about that mini is how fragile it will be, sometimes I just wanna slap GW's designers, it's like they don't think about things like that, and in fact go out of their way to make their minis as fiddly and fragile as they can.

I think its a byproduct of designers born with CAD And computer designs rather than those who had to putty sculpt everything. When you putty sculpt you generally have to have a pretty stable platform to work on so I think by its very nature you avoid more fragile construction.

With 3D chances are they don't have to do anything like that so its much easier to make models that have really thin or small connection points supporting a lot of model. Heck Daughters of Khaine have khinerai which are the same - they wobble and are only held up by their tails

They look astounding and I love them, but they are still far more fragile than ideal for a tabletop model.

The high elf stuff is nice. Spearmen are good, cavalry are good but the horses look a bit off. Something about their legs, don't seem natural. It obvious they were CAD sculpted, which is a problem I'm seeing all over the place atm. I shouldn't be able to tell, the fact I can is a sign of a poor job.
Teclis is terrible. His face is ugly, the head on the creature is awful. Why couldn't it just be a griffon or a hippogrigh or something (I know it's IP, but that doesn't make it right)

Ad mech are ok, that wing design works much better on the jump troops.

Gaz and malaria look good. Will wait for the full reveal but nothing stands out as bad so far.

The lizardmen pyramid, seems a bit to steep. Also a shame if that's all they get.

 Tamereth wrote:
The high elf stuff is nice. Spearmen are good, cavalry are good but the horses look a bit off. Something about their legs, don't seem natural. It obvious they were CAD sculpted, which is a problem I'm seeing all over the place atm. I shouldn't be able to tell, the fact I can is a sign of a poor job.

They are in a standard running set of poses that GW has been using for a while. Some of the motions might look a bit "off" but they are clearly based on actual photography of horses running.

My reaction in a nutshell


I am glad that Horus Heresy and Forge World stuff are getting some attention.

It’s 2020, and finally showing the merest glimmer the future Wee Me was promised.

Still no flying cars though.

Teclis is atrocious. The 'composition' of the model as it were is totally off. I love the hollow knight armour though.

AdMech stuff is garbage - which isn't a surprise. I can't stand the Steampunk look - feels totally off. Forge World sculpts are way better.

ubik2000 wrote:
Some alternate views of Teclis: https://twitter.com/StoneMonkGamer/status/1220716920833560578

That tweet- "Everyone is wrong. Teclis good".

Nope. Close up of that face makes it look worse, and is that a mould line running down the leg?

 Grimtuff wrote:

ubik2000 wrote:
Some alternate views of Teclis: https://twitter.com/StoneMonkGamer/status/1220716920833560578

That tweet- "Everyone is wrong. Teclis good".

Nope. Close up of that face makes it look worse, and is that a mould line running down the leg?

Yeah that looks even worse than I initially thought. Like, if I started the army, and Im considering it, I would pass on Teclis. Hard pass. The pose is just bad, face is bad, everything is bad about him. Beast thing is fine.

Also I do think thats supposed to be like a pant seem.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

ubik2000 wrote:
Some alternate views of Teclis: https://twitter.com/StoneMonkGamer/status/1220716920833560578

That tweet- "Everyone is wrong. Teclis good".

Nope. Close up of that face makes it look worse, and is that a mould line running down the leg?

Yeah that looks even worse than I initially thought. Like, if I started the army, and Im considering it, I would pass on Teclis. Hard pass. The pose is just bad, face is bad, everything is bad about him. Beast thing is fine.

Also I do think thats supposed to be like a pant seem.

To circle back to my original post ITT- looking at the face and how stony it is, would it look better simply painted as a mask? Anyone able to Photoshop the first pic to see if it rescues it? Please?

 streetsamurai wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Dread Master wrote:
New boyz would be awesome! The Brian Nelson ones are way past needing replacing. Nice kit for it’s time, but it’s had it’s day.

I dunno, I think they still hold up pretty well, particularly given the cross-compatibility with all the other kits. Wouldn't have any massive objections, but what I'd hate to see is something that looks incongruous if you mix the two – something that adds to the variety of existing stuff, rather than hitting a hard reset button, would be hugely preferable imo.

But yeah, maybe Ghaz will bump up interest in Orks. I just do not understand the enthusiasm for Named/Special Characters though, rather than generic options you can use to create your own characters. It just leads to a narrowing of narrative scope and boring armies that are all the same few guys.

yeah, this is my main gripe about current GW. It's all about named characters. Was much more interesting when it had the ''build your own hero'' appraoch

100% agree.

To the point back in the 2e and early 3e days you weren't even -allowed- to take Special Characters in tournaments. And even regular play they were supposed to be by mutual consent.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

ubik2000 wrote:
Some alternate views of Teclis: https://twitter.com/StoneMonkGamer/status/1220716920833560578

That tweet- "Everyone is wrong. Teclis good".

Nope. Close up of that face makes it look worse, and is that a mould line running down the leg?

Yeah that looks even worse than I initially thought. Like, if I started the army, and Im considering it, I would pass on Teclis. Hard pass. The pose is just bad, face is bad, everything is bad about him. Beast thing is fine.

Also I do think thats supposed to be like a pant seem.

Very obviously a seam, looking at the other angles.

His pants had another lines in the back. And from the front you can see it's a very noticeable raised seam.