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.

What do you guys think of the base on the plastic farseer and the new ranger special character? Something bugs me about "terrain" moving with a model.... Think it would be tough to move them to normal bases?

That's an odd criticism. "Normal" finished bases have terrain on them, even if it's just mud, stone, reeds, swamp, grass or some combination of the those things and when the model is moved the terrain moves with it. I guess some people don't like or possibly even don't understand scenic basing.

Complete sculptor list:

ZeroNoRyouki over at Warseer wrote:This is the complete list:

Wraithknight: Samir Battistotti, Jes Goodwin, Tom Walton
Wraithfighter / Crimson Hunter: Ed Cottrell, Jes Goodwin
Wraithguards/blades: Jes Goodwin, Oliver Norman
plastic Farseer: Jes Goodwin
Spiritseer: Mike Fores
Illic Nightspear: Edgar Ramos

Good to see Jes was very involved. Hopefully he had some input into the fluff. Also hope there's some new artwork from him in the codex. I've always loved his drawings.

Poll:

Crimson Hunter or Wraithfighter? Or both?

Wraithblades: Axe and shield or swords? Or one unit of each?

Wraithknight: All guns or sword version? Or one of each?

 BrassScorpion wrote:
Poll:

Crimson Hunter or Wraithfighter? Or both?

Wraithblades: Axe and shield or swords? Or one unit of each?

Wraithknight: All guns or sword version? Or one of each?

Wait till we know what they do?

Jacob29 wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:
Poll:

Crimson Hunter or Wraithfighter? Or both?

Wraithblades: Axe and shield or swords? Or one unit of each?

Wraithknight: All guns or sword version? Or one of each?

Wait till we know what they do?

That thinking is not how things are done in IoM, it may even be a little heretical.

Both Hunter and Fighter.
Wraithblades: swords, they look so much cooler.
Wraithknight: double shooty. Put his fat ass on skyshield with unit of War Walkers and profit.

Griever wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:
So what is everyone going to deck their knights with? Most of my armies are CC so I always lack some heavy stuff so I am thinking the lances just to smash some pathetic cowardly vehicles preventing close combat in the face with a beam of ownage.

I'm not going to field one because it's a stupid, stupid model and I don't want to encourage GW to stick to their current "lets shoehorn a huge model into every army" shtick.

Seriously, the concept is awful. It's just a blown up Wraithlord.

You do realize that not every new army has a giant model right? Neither Dark Angels nor Chaos Space Marines got one. They just got fliers like everyone else.

 Macok wrote:

Jacob29 wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:
Poll:

Crimson Hunter or Wraithfighter? Or both?

Wraithblades: Axe and shield or swords? Or one unit of each?

Wraithknight: All guns or sword version? Or one of each?

Wait till we know what they do?

That thinking is not how things are done in IoM, it may even be a little heretical.

Both Hunter and Fighter.
Wraithblades: swords, they look so much cooler.
Wraithknight: double shooty. Put his fat ass on skyshield with unit of War Walkers and profit.

What's the difference between the Hunter and the Fighter?

Chaos got the forge fiend.

I'm surprised they resisted the urge to give the DA something. But then, apocalypse rerelease and that knight paladin rumour...

 BrassScorpion wrote:

Wraithblades: Axe and shield or swords? Or one unit of each?

I hope you can mix them in one unit.

warpspider89 wrote:

Griever wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:
So what is everyone going to deck their knights with? Most of my armies are CC so I always lack some heavy stuff so I am thinking the lances just to smash some pathetic cowardly vehicles preventing close combat in the face with a beam of ownage.

I'm not going to field one because it's a stupid, stupid model and I don't want to encourage GW to stick to their current "lets shoehorn a huge model into every army" shtick.

Seriously, the concept is awful. It's just a blown up Wraithlord.

You do realize that not every new army has a giant model right? Neither Dark Angels nor Chaos Space Marines got one. They just got fliers like everyone else.

CSM have the Defiler, Forgefiends, the Heldrake, and while technically Forgeworld, the Decimator.
Dark Angels got that giant speeder thing, as well as the flyers, and a skittles bag worth of flavours of terminator.

Plus, on the 'blown up wraithlord' thing, it's more a scaled down Revenant / Phantom Titan aesthetically, and functionally.

 BrassScorpion wrote:

What do you guys think of the base on the plastic farseer and the new ranger special character? Something bugs me about "terrain" moving with a model.... Think it would be tough to move them to normal bases?

That's an odd criticism. "Normal" finished bases have terrain on them, even if it's just mud, stone, reeds, swamp, grass or some combination of the those things and when the model is moved the terrain moves with it. I guess some people don't like or possibly even don't understand scenic basing.

I think you're misinterpreting.... Scenic dioramas or centre piece models make sense.... But for the average game model some people might prefer something generic... Mud, snow, grass, etc. It seems odd to have something distinct moving around the field. Plus I'd rather decide what my model is on than have it shipped with something odd looking ( Like what is that ranger doing? Surfing around the field on some eldar rune thing?)

 Ovion wrote:

warpspider89 wrote:

Griever wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:
So what is everyone going to deck their knights with? Most of my armies are CC so I always lack some heavy stuff so I am thinking the lances just to smash some pathetic cowardly vehicles preventing close combat in the face with a beam of ownage.

I'm not going to field one because it's a stupid, stupid model and I don't want to encourage GW to stick to their current "lets shoehorn a huge model into every army" shtick.

Seriously, the concept is awful. It's just a blown up Wraithlord.

You do realize that not every new army has a giant model right? Neither Dark Angels nor Chaos Space Marines got one. They just got fliers like everyone else.

CSM have the Defiler, Forgefiends, the Heldrake, and while technically Forgeworld, the Decimator.
Dark Angels got that giant speeder thing, as well as the flyers, and a skittles bag worth of flavours of terminator.

Plus, on the 'blown up wraithlord' thing, it's more a scaled down Revenant / Phantom Titan aesthetically, and functionally.

Space Marines have the contemptor dreads, stormravens, orks had the stompa, dark eldar had the talon GW have been doing big models for a while.

To be fair, the Contemptor Dreadnought isn't much larger than a standard dread. I have both.

 warpspider89 wrote:

Griever wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:
So what is everyone going to deck their knights with? Most of my armies are CC so I always lack some heavy stuff so I am thinking the lances just to smash some pathetic cowardly vehicles preventing close combat in the face with a beam of ownage.

I'm not going to field one because it's a stupid, stupid model and I don't want to encourage GW to stick to their current "lets shoehorn a huge model into every army" shtick.

Seriously, the concept is awful. It's just a blown up Wraithlord.

You do realize that not every new army has a giant model right? Neither Dark Angels nor Chaos Space Marines got one. They just got fliers like everyone else.

Dark Angels got that god awful giant landspeeder and chaos got the daemon engines and the Heldrake which I consider a largish model.

KaiyaA wrote:
What's the difference between the Hunter and the Fighter?

The Fighter is a bomber and the Hunter is a fighter.

 Absolutionis wrote:

KaiyaA wrote:
What's the difference between the Hunter and the Fighter?

The Fighter is a bomber and the Hunter is a fighter.

But can you make them both from the same box?

Curious what the D-Scythe does on the bomber. Hopefully it's AWESOME! :p

KaiyaA wrote:

 Absolutionis wrote:

KaiyaA wrote:
What's the difference between the Hunter and the Fighter?

The Fighter is a bomber and the Hunter is a fighter.

But can you make them both from the same box?

It's meant to be either or. You can build a Fighter bomber or the Hunter fighter. But if you're good with magnets, you can make a HunterFighter fighter-bomber or switch between the Hunter fighter and the Fighter bomber.

Nocturnus wrote:
Curious what the D-Scythe does on the bomber. Hopefully it's AWESOME! :p

It seems to have managed to destroy a Monolith (although it seemed to be a fluke) in the battle report.

What about building a Hunter Hunter or a Bomber Fighter?

 Absolutionis wrote:

KaiyaA wrote:

 Absolutionis wrote:

KaiyaA wrote:
What's the difference between the Hunter and the Fighter?

The Fighter is a bomber and the Hunter is a fighter.

But can you make them both from the same box?

It's meant to be either or. You can build a Fighter bomber or the Hunter fighter. But if you're good with magnets, you can make a HunterFighter fighter-bomber or switch between the Hunter fighter and the Fighter bomber.

Thanks for clearing that up

gravitywell wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:

What do you guys think of the base on the plastic farseer and the new ranger special character? Something bugs me about "terrain" moving with a model.... Think it would be tough to move them to normal bases?

That's an odd criticism. "Normal" finished bases have terrain on them, even if it's just mud, stone, reeds, swamp, grass or some combination of the those things and when the model is moved the terrain moves with it. I guess some people don't like or possibly even don't understand scenic basing.

I think you're misinterpreting.... Scenic dioramas or centre piece models make sense.... But for the average game model some people might prefer something generic... Mud, snow, grass, etc. It seems odd to have something distinct moving around the field. Plus I'd rather decide what my model is on than have it shipped with something odd looking ( Like what is that ranger doing? Surfing around the field on some eldar rune thing?)

I am sympathetic to this complaint, but you are making it about 10 years too late. Check out the older eldar exarchs.

Let's remember that the reason the single-frame plastic characters come with a base is so they don't have to be packaged with a separate regular base. Sure, they could make them flat I 'spose, but that'd be boring.

I'm really hoping the Crimson Bomber is as advertised. This may be the first time I use the bomber version of the new bombers. I like the armament and -ld modifiers. Seems like a solid option.

But we'll see in a week when things are "real" and not "guess".

I wish they made the bomber more of a strike bomber, they already failed with one synergy inducing bomber in the DA Codex. I don't have high hopes for this bomber to be more versatile than a pulse laser and two lances..

Unless they properly cost these synergy units better, they won't get much use.

Nocturnus wrote:

 warpspider89 wrote:

Griever wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:
So what is everyone going to deck their knights with? Most of my armies are CC so I always lack some heavy stuff so I am thinking the lances just to smash some pathetic cowardly vehicles preventing close combat in the face with a beam of ownage.

I'm not going to field one because it's a stupid, stupid model and I don't want to encourage GW to stick to their current "lets shoehorn a huge model into every army" shtick.

Seriously, the concept is awful. It's just a blown up Wraithlord.

You do realize that not every new army has a giant model right? Neither Dark Angels nor Chaos Space Marines got one. They just got fliers like everyone else.

Dark Angels got that god awful giant landspeeder and chaos got the daemon engines and the Heldrake which I consider a largish model.

QFT. I remember when I saw the Forgefiend/Maulerfiend in White Dwarf... I thought they were massive. It seems there is a sequential approach to making bigger and bigger models.
Maulerfiend? Riptide tops that. Riptide? Wraithknight tops that. Wraithknight? ... ... ...

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
I'm really hoping the Crimson Bomber is as advertised. This may be the first time I use the bomber version of the new bombers. I like the armament and -ld modifiers. Seems like a solid option.

But we'll see in a week when things are "real" and not "guess".

Technically rules should start poping up Wednesday as that is the day in arrives in stores in North America, provided memorial day didn't bugger it.

 Crimson wrote:

 BrassScorpion wrote:

Wraithblades: Axe and shield or swords? Or one unit of each?

I hope you can mix them in one unit.

So much this. Having a few shields mixed in with more attacks would be nice.

 Farseer Faenyin wrote:
I wish they made the bomber more of a strike bomber, they already failed with one synergy inducing bomber in the DA Codex. I don't have high hopes for this bomber to be more versatile than a pulse laser and two lances..

Unless they properly cost these synergy units better, they won't get much use.

If your looking for versatile, then your looking at the wrong codex. Every units really only does one thing exceptionally well. Though 2 BL and pulse laser= anti tank and anti flyer. Which means it is pretty versatile...If you want anti horde there are PLENTY of other units that will do it for you and can be on the field turn one.