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.

Wow... Wraithknight? Really?

Codex Eldar: We're just not trying any more!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Wow... Wraithknight? Really?

Codex Eldar: We're just not trying any more!

Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

Ever since Codex: Tyranids, we've gotten Pyrovores, Venomthropes, Bloodstrike missiles, Psilencers, Dreadknights, and several other batches of names devised by a 10-year-old.

The game isn't meant to be serious. Mad Uruk Thraka is rolling in her grave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Wow... Wraithknight? Really?

Codex Eldar: We're just not trying any more!

Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

"Wraithlord" is much more creative than the term "Eldar Dreadnought" that it replaced.

 Absolutionis wrote:
Ever since Codex: Tyranids, we've gotten Pyrovores, Venomthropes, Bloodstrike missiles, Psilencers, Dreadknights, and several other batches of names devised by a 10-year-old.

The game isn't meant to be serious. Mad Uruk Thraka is rolling in her grave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Wow... Wraithknight? Really?

Codex Eldar: We're just not trying any more!

Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

"Wraithlord" is much more creative than the term "Eldar Dreadnought" that it replaced.

This is a very good point. But, if this turns out to be true, and we have an Eldar walker that is Dreadknight size or bigger, it seems strange that the smaller walker is the WraithLORD, while the big hulking walker is the WraithKNIGHT...

-C6

 Absolutionis wrote:
Ever since Codex: Tyranids, we've gotten Pyrovores, Venomthropes, Bloodstrike missiles, Psilencers, Dreadknights, and several other batches of names devised by a 10-year-old.

The game isn't meant to be serious. Mad Uruk Thraka is rolling in her grave.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Wow... Wraithknight? Really?

Codex Eldar: We're just not trying any more!

Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

"Wraithlord" is much more creative than the term "Eldar Dreadnought" that it replaced.

And yet, we still have "War Walkers"...

Honestly though, I'll take 'war walkers' descriptive naming scheme over the psilencer (or psycannon) naming conventions any day, thank you very much.

 catharsix wrote:

This is a very good point. But, if this turns out to be true, and we have an Eldar walker that is Dreadknight size or bigger, it seems strange that the smaller walker is the WraithLORD, while the big hulking walker is the WraithKNIGHT...

Knights typically were better fighters than their lords.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

Were you, much like Peter Parker, bitten by a radio-active Red Shirt at one stage in your life, leaving you with a sixth sense – a “Kirby-Sense” you might call it – that lets you leap to GW’s defence over literally any criticism levelled GW’s way?

That’s an attempt at humour, before you use your home-made liquid green stuff launchers to stick me to a wall (and that was me continuing the Spider-man metaphor! Clever huh? ).

But Wraithguard were the original name. “Eldar Dreadnought” was the logical-if-uninspired name for the bigger walker. Then they decided to further link them so we got Wraithlord. Wraithknight is just on the nose, and you shouldn’t jump up to defend it. It stinks of laziness, especially when so many big Eldar units have various other names (and not just Bright Stallion either). I’d have expected greater creativity for the Eldar.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

Were you, much like Peter Parker, bitten by a radio-active Red Shirt at one stage in your life, leaving you with a sixth sense – a “Kirby-Sense” you might call it – that lets you leap to GW’s defence over literally any criticism levelled GW’s way?

That’s an attempt at humour, before you use your home-made liquid green stuff launchers to stick me to a wall (and that was me continuing the Spider-man metaphor! Clever huh? ).

Criticize all you want; it doesn't change the fact that "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were not really creative names to begin with. The Nemesis naming conventions, etc are irksome--but is it really so bad if a new Wraithbone construct which utilizes the whole Soulstone thing is called the "Wraithknight"? Or is this just more of your ire for the "Dreadknight" cropping back up?

But Wraithguard were the original name. “Eldar Dreadnought” was the logical-if-uninspired name for the bigger walker. Then they decided to further link them so we got Wraithlord. Wraithknight is just on the nose, and you shouldn’t jump up to defend it. It stinks of laziness, especially when so many big Eldar units have various other names (and not just Bright Stallion either). I’d have expected greater creativity for the Eldar.

Of course, the creativity of the Eldar war constructs is so varied. We have the "Phantom" and the "Revenant" to go with the "Wraith" constructs.

One thing I've always wondered is do the Eldar actually call them "Wraithguard" and "Wraithlords" or are they designations the Imperium has given to identify enemy equipment?
If it's the former...well, that's just terrible. If it's the latter it becomes a bit more acceptable but still silly.

Edit note:
I can't remember, but were you critical of Forge World's introduction of the "Wraithseer" construct?

I imagine we won't get pics or information for quite a while, as absurd and immature as this whole secrecy policy is, the GW stasi has been quite effective at keeping stuff classified until a week or two before the release.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I can't remember, but were you critical of Forge World's introduction of the "Wraithseer" construct?

I know I was. I believed I called it "a name fit for a 10-year-old".

Keeping up on rumors sucks now that my fave rumors site got SPESS LAZERRRED.

And lol at giant Eldar walker. Silliness ensues

Next: introducing the eldar "Flying monstrous walker", shaped like a longlegged wraithbone crane, loaded with pulsars.

Also the eldar prince will get a chariot pulled acros the sky by a wyper jetbike.

Just kidding folks, but GW these days... Well, actually I dont mind the whimsy so bad. People complain about GW not having any humor anymore, but when they release silly stuff, the crowd just let out a dissapointed sigh.

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 catharsix wrote:

This is a very good point. But, if this turns out to be true, and we have an Eldar walker that is Dreadknight size or bigger, it seems strange that the smaller walker is the WraithLORD, while the big hulking walker is the WraithKNIGHT...

Knights typically were better fighters than their lords.

That wasn't too seldom because the lords were the larger of the two


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Because the "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were so creative?

Were you, much like Peter Parker, bitten by a radio-active Red Shirt at one stage in your life, leaving you with a sixth sense – a “Kirby-Sense” you might call it – that lets you leap to GW’s defence over literally any criticism levelled GW’s way?

That’s an attempt at humour, before you use your home-made liquid green stuff launchers to stick me to a wall (and that was me continuing the Spider-man metaphor! Clever huh? ).

Criticize all you want; it doesn't change the fact that "Wraithlord" and "Wraithguard" were not really creative names to begin with. The Nemesis naming conventions, etc are irksome--but is it really so bad if a new Wraithbone construct which utilizes the whole Soulstone thing is called the "Wraithknight"? Or is this just more of your ire for the "Dreadknight" cropping back up?

Wraith-X isn't very imaginative, but it is uniform. You have the "small X" the "large X" and forgeworld introduced the "mage X". What we're looking at now is the "largest X with a tinier name" which is where the table flips for most people who criticise the name, I think. The important part of the Wraith-naming convention is that it unifies them around the Wraithsight rule and the fact that none of the Wraiths are actually alive, contrary to the rest of the army. Wraithhmhmhm is good, they just need to figure out how to say "really fething huge" in a single word that doesn't make the Lord sound larger.

Easy solution; change the name of the current 'wraithlord' to 'wraithknight', call the new big thing a 'wraithlord'.

*shrugs* I have no idea what's so bad with the Wraithknight name since it fits the role, but as someone previously mentioned, Wraithking is ... awesome

Out of curiosity, why do people hate the new gigantic MC models? They look and feel awesome (well, except the Grey Knights one, but with some conversion it's ok) and are really good centerpieces for your army. Seriously, why the hate?! They ARE awesome.

P.S: Is it just me, or we are getting much less information for the eldar than we had for the Tau?

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
*shrugs* I have no idea what's so bad with the Wraithknight name since it fits the role, but as someone previously mentioned, Wraithking is ... awesome

Out of curiosity, why do people hate the new gigantic MC models? They look and feel awesome (well, except the Grey Knights one, but with some conversion it's ok) and are really good centerpieces for your army. Seriously, why the hate?! They ARE awesome.

P.S: Is it just me, or we are getting much less information for the eldar than we had for the Tau?

IMO, I think it's because they are just constantly spamming new, big kits with questionable aesthetics rather than updating existing kits that could use it. The Eldar would be an excellent example if (key word) they left all the Aspect Warriors as FineCast and instead release a MC and a flyer; the Eldar need many more "basic" plastic kits than an army like the Tau or Dark Angels or Chaos Marines do because honestly, Aspect Warriors are a core feature of an Eldar force. The recent High Elf release would be another example as their basic spearmen and archer kits could use an upgrade to current GW standards, but they were deferred until later in favor of mostly-new units (I believe the Shadow Warriors were the sole existing unit converted to plastic).

Obviously, GW is going for the "nobody has new stuff, so we need new stuff" approach rather than gambling on new core boxes that may or may not sell due to a glut of older models available secondhand. People who want older models updated/converted will naturally be unhappy with the idea, and then GW's ham-fisted designs and naming are just the icing on the cake.

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
*shrugs* I have no idea what's so bad with the Wraithknight name since it fits the role, but as someone previously mentioned, Wraithking is ... awesome

Out of curiosity, why do people hate the new gigantic MC models? They look and feel awesome (well, except the Grey Knights one, but with some conversion it's ok) and are really good centerpieces for your army. Seriously, why the hate?! They ARE awesome.

P.S: Is it just me, or we are getting much less information for the eldar than we had for the Tau?

IMHO 40k should be an infantry based game. Where you have squads of troops fighting it out over a blasted battlefield. 6th edition added flyers and a lot of giant monsters, which pull the focus away from the guy in the trenches. In all fairness, this is not a new thing. 2nd edition hero-hammer was about tooled up characters, not about the rest of your army.

I don't think chaos needed the giant deamon/monster things they got. Detracts from the chaos marines. I do like the riptide though, it kinda fits Tau, and does make for a nice centerpiece. Assuming you don't get 3 spammed at you, that takes away from the whole "centerpiece" thing.

If the eldar stuff looks cool, I might restart my second army, which has been languishing on a dark shelf for a while now.

 Redemption wrote:
In relation to the flyers, Best_Pone (who also got the new High Elf models right) on Warseer posted this:

best_pone wrote:The main hull and wings are common across both builds. It's amazing how different tail and fin positioning can alter the look of the aircraft though

Common features:
- Downward angling of the primary wings (about 30º I'd estimate)
- Canards are very slightly angled down, but near horizontal
- Engines are mounted in pods in the wings
- One weapon mounted centreline under the hull, and one in a pod in each wing

Hemlock:
- Has a single vertical stabiliser mounted on the centreline of the aircraft

Nightshade:
- Twin "vertical" stabilisers (they're actually about 30º from horizontal), one mounted on each engine pod.

So the new Eldar flyer will be a dual kit, making either a flyer called the Hemlock or the Nightshade. He also mentioned they somewhat remind him of a flyer from an anime show called Battle Fairy Yukikaze.

In relation to the new Wraith construct, he said it is called the Wraithknight and that it is very tall, large enough to look down upon current flyer models.

I think the name are off on the Eldar flyers. The Hemlock and Nightshade are already used for their Eldar range of Battlefleet Gothic destroyer-class vessels. I did hear rumors of Lamia and Moonsiren before though.

 Nevelon wrote:
IMHO 40k should be an infantry based game. Where you have squads of troops fighting it out over a blasted battlefield. 6th edition added flyers and a lot of giant monsters, which pull the focus away from the guy in the trenches. In all fairness, this is not a new thing. 2nd edition hero-hammer was about tooled up characters, not about the rest of your army.

Agreed.

I think in GW's rush to sell "centerpieces" they've actually taken away some of the players' ability to decide what is the centerpiece for their armies. Now there are obvious kits that because of game rules and meta-game realities will likely need to be taken to maintain a playable army. For example, one of the things I really wanted to do if I ever got back into Eldar was make a unit of guardian battlefield engineers. Yes, Eldar are all about speed and maneuverability, but every once in a while they surely have to hold some territory, and since guardians are the only soldiers in the army who have a day job I thought they'd be the perfect unit for the task. They could be led by a Bonesinger and maybe have an anti-grav platform earth mover of some kind, but half the fun was trying to figure out what Eldar trenching tools would look like, how they are different from Imperial tools. I think there's a lot of potential for making something characterful there, even if game mechanic-wise it does nothing. I also wanted to try to combine the current wave serpent kit and the new Dark Eldar raider kit to make a wave serpent that looks more like the 1st edition/Armorcast bireme waveserpent. But instead I am worried I will be pushed by the rules to buy new shiny MCs and flyers in order to also enjoy winning a game once in a while, and honestly I just don't care about these things. It will distract from the real centerpiece of my army, both visually and in terms of the time/money I can invest.

Part of what got me into GW in the first place was the ability to use my miniatures to tell a story about my army, and as the focus moves away from the infantry more and more the whole experience just seems to be getting blander and blander.

Wraithguard actually made sense in 3rd edition, as they were the only models to screen, or "guard" the wraith lord.

And the wraith thing makes sense, because they are made out of wraith bone, and also powered by dead eldar.

If the big gribbly is a wraith construct without a pilot, by all means call it "wraith-."

I just feel like "wraithknight" is kinda dopey. Wraithtyrant maybe?

There's not much else they could go with really. Knight works.

Wasn't Wraithknight just silly speculation on someone's part. It isn't actually a rumored name.

I believe Best Pone confirmed it, I just hope he's wrong about the name of that as well as the names of the aircraft.

shade1313 wrote:
I believe Best Pone confirmed it, I just hope he's wrong about the name of that as well as the names of the aircraft.

Best Pone used the name but he didn't confirm it. In fact, he may have just been using it as shorthand. Darnok is the one who actually said that was what the unit was called. Darnok is somewhat reliable (37T, 14F) so we'll see.

I stand corrected. Still hope that's not its name. There are other, similarly themed words they could use if they want to fit the "ghost" theme that goes from Wraithguard up through Phantom (Knights being the exceptions).

And I really hope that they aren't actually graverobbing names from the recently killed BFG for the planes.

shade1313 wrote:
I stand corrected. Still hope that's not its name. There are other, similarly themed words they could use if they want to fit the "ghost" theme that goes from Wraithguard up through Phantom (Knights being the exceptions).

And I really hope that they aren't actually graverobbing names from the recently killed BFG for the planes.

Mmm. Phantom Knight, one of my favorite prestige classes!

Krinsath wrote:
IMO, I think it's because they are just constantly spamming new, big kits with questionable aesthetics rather than updating existing kits that could use it. The Eldar would be an excellent example if (key word) they left all the Aspect Warriors as FineCast and instead release a MC and a flyer; the Eldar need many more "basic" plastic kits than an army like the Tau or Dark Angels or Chaos Marines do because honestly, Aspect Warriors are a core feature of an Eldar force. The recent High Elf release would be another example as their basic spearmen and archer kits could use an upgrade to current GW standards, but they were deferred until later in favor of mostly-new units (I believe the Shadow Warriors were the sole existing unit converted to plastic).

Obviously, GW is going for the "nobody has new stuff, so we need new stuff" approach rather than gambling on new core boxes that may or may not sell due to a glut of older models available secondhand. People who want older models updated/converted will naturally be unhappy with the idea, and then GW's ham-fisted designs and naming are just the icing on the cake.

Nevelon wrote:
IMHO 40k should be an infantry based game. Where you have squads of troops fighting it out over a blasted battlefield. 6th edition added flyers and a lot of giant monsters, which pull the focus away from the guy in the trenches. In all fairness, this is not a new thing. 2nd edition hero-hammer was about tooled up characters, not about the rest of your army.

I don't think chaos needed the giant deamon/monster things they got. Detracts from the chaos marines. I do like the riptide though, it kinda fits Tau, and does make for a nice centerpiece. Assuming you don't get 3 spammed at you, that takes away from the whole "centerpiece" thing.

If the eldar stuff looks cool, I might restart my second army, which has been languishing on a dark shelf for a while now.

I see, I understand both your points.

I guess it's also a matter of personal taste. I really enjoy these new giant kits.

@Nevelon: I understand that! It's a bit sad when people bring the minimum ammount of troops just because they are forced and store them away in some corner hoping they just don't die. The game isn't all about shiny new toys. Ah well, to each his own.

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
The game isn't all about shiny new toys.

Ha! It has always been about shiny new toys. That is the driving engine of the game/universe. New models, new armies, new codexes, new editions.

Aaaaanyways, back on topic. Still waiting for some more concrete rumors.

 pretre wrote:

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
The game isn't all about shiny new toys.

Ha! It has always been about shiny new toys. That is the driving engine of the game/universe. New models, new armies, new codexes, new editions.

Aaaaanyways, back on topic. Still waiting for some more concrete rumors.

haha, touché! You caught me there what I meant is that your other units need some love too, mostly the troops they are the little guys that work hard for you! Oh, and yes, new stuff is always awesome. Including the codex... I like them so much I'm collecting all the new 40k ones

Anyway, /offtopic, sorry for sidetracking