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.

Voss wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Voss wrote:
The model on the throne is neat. I don't like all these models loosely attached to a base by a thin ' ghost tail,' though. Seems overly fragile, and in this case, lopsided and unbalanced.

I think GW has gone way overboard chasing 'dynamic' poses. Give me something solid with feet on the ground.

Yes, because solid with feet on the ground perfectly evokes ghosts.

. No physical model is going to perfectly evoke ghosts. Doesn't mean a fragile tab/tail stuck to the bottom of a throne is anything but a problem.

But. Its also been a larger problem throughout multiple model ranges for years now. Lots of jumping, leaping and bad connections.


Though for the record, the old wraiths and banshees did have feet.


@Entyme- which models are you referring to? The discs and chariot have thick plumes of fire that have a solid central pillar and reinforcing flames that curl back on the layers below them.

I think, as usual, it's another exaggeration of a very minor issue. Pinning is easy if you feel you need more stability.

 aracersss wrote:
biggest reveal ... the mortarch is HE!!!

Where does it say that?

Kurdoss Valentian, the Craven King, is one of the named champions who leads Nagash’s Nighthaunt legions. Serving at the side of his master, the Mortarch of Grief, this arch-plotter and schemer is an incredibly astute – if embittered and cruel – commander. He’s also not afraid to smash some Stormcast skulls with that mace…

There is nothing there that refers to the gender of the Mortarch of Grief.

 aracersss wrote:
biggest reveal ... the mortarch is HE!!!

https://scontent.ftpa1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/34105935_778899679164433_1958510687613353984_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=7794bb9e1fe0315f38915b6a2088873a&oe=5BBA66A2

That is (most likely) the Mortarch. The guy on the throne is just her right hand.

Lemondish wrote:

Voss wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Voss wrote:
The model on the throne is neat. I don't like all these models loosely attached to a base by a thin ' ghost tail,' though. Seems overly fragile, and in this case, lopsided and unbalanced.

I think GW has gone way overboard chasing 'dynamic' poses. Give me something solid with feet on the ground.

Yes, because solid with feet on the ground perfectly evokes ghosts.

. No physical model is going to perfectly evoke ghosts. Doesn't mean a fragile tab/tail stuck to the bottom of a throne is anything but a problem.

But. Its also been a larger problem throughout multiple model ranges for years now. Lots of jumping, leaping and bad connections.


Though for the record, the old wraiths and banshees did have feet.


@Entyme- which models are you referring to? The discs and chariot have thick plumes of fire that have a solid central pillar and reinforcing flames that curl back on the layers below them.

I think, as usual, it's another exaggeration of a very minor issue. Pinning is easy if you feel you need more stability.

Ah, I didn't realize I was ' exaggerating' a preference for more stable and solid models, let alone that it was 'usual' for me.

Also not sure how you 'pin' a thin curved surface.

Voss wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

Voss wrote:
The model on the throne is neat. I don't like all these models loosely attached to a base by a thin ' ghost tail,' though. Seems overly fragile, and in this case, lopsided and unbalanced.

I think GW has gone way overboard chasing 'dynamic' poses. Give me something solid with feet on the ground.

Yes, because solid with feet on the ground perfectly evokes ghosts.

. No physical model is going to perfectly evoke ghosts. Doesn't mean a fragile tab/tail stuck to the bottom of a throne is anything but a problem.

But. Its also been a larger problem throughout multiple model ranges for years now. Lots of jumping, leaping and bad connections.


Though for the record, the old wraiths and banshees did have feet.


@Entyme- which models are you referring to? The discs and chariot have thick plumes of fire that have a solid central pillar and reinforcing flames that curl back on the layers below them.

The Tzaangor Shaman has the smallest point-of-contact, and I haven't have any issues with it. The Nighthaunts models I've seen previewed seem to have about the same area of contact between the model and the base.

The realm rules are bad for matched play and will hopefully be rejected by the tournament community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Chikout wrote:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
Did they just seriously brag about deep point discounts on Thundertusks???

Not sure what your point is. Beast claw have pretty much been at the bottom of the barrel competitively since their rules got tweaked.

Yes, but thundertusks were still extremely good, it was everything ELSE that was too expensive.

Oooobviously the way to fix everything else being too expensive is to lower the cost of the best unit. Nobody would eeeever abuse that by taking more of them. Clearly the only logical response would be to field those other units that cost too much.

GW are going to make me start a Nighthaunt army with these models. I honestly don't think I have any choice in the matter

AoS 2.0 seems more and more like "Hey guys, we need a new AoS edition because it's received pretty well right now. Throw every idea you have in it, we'll fix them in the next 3 years."

I actually think the changes are positive - I'm pretty excited for the effects of realms, I think it could serve to make the games more thematic. Before we really didn't care where our battles were taking place, could have easily been the Old World again, this really helps solidify the new setting. It's probably unbalanced. You don't just add that many new artefacts, spells and in game effects to the game and expect it to be balanced but over time the worst offenders will be rooted out.

I'm excited to at least try the new rules.

I'm very exited for AoS 2nd ed, outside of competitive play where I will wait to see the full deal but am prepared to give up entirely. What I am confused by is how GW seems to be pushing matched play as a ruleset based around two forces of equal points being reasonably balanced while pushing trends that will make it so even players not min-maxing could easily show up with lists at wildly different power levels--this forces a process of players balancing things themselves if they are interested in an even playing field, turning matched play into a set of tools for the job. Which is entirely what narrative play is supposed to be. Compare to 40k where matched play is supposed to be the balanced version (the degree of success is debatable but the intent is pretty clear) and is treated as such. What passes for matched play in AoS is just like playing 40k off only power levels; we have no option for points.

But circling back to the narrative side of things, hyped for all the new elements to play with. We are at the point of playing more Path to Glory in my community than matched play anyways and I needed something new for the next league.

These are very good! They bring back a simpler time of the Old world where the story has just gotten all the spell 'types' for wizards. I am pleased to see magic get the spotlight.

SOON
From : https://www.facebook.com/aos.shorts/

Someone with the White Dwarf has stated the contents of the new starter set are the following:

So all these items plus a full rulebook, ala Dark Imperium.

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


So....surprising right? Could be troll but....c'mon it was obvious this is starter set for a while.

Warhammer Community confirms base to base measuring and a document of recommended base sizes will be posted on the release of the new edition.

Were there other models we expected to see in the box but weren't?

Seems like an awful lot of Death units, but seems like you tend to get a lot of Death bang for your buck anyways.

You are changing the Korgorath for those 4 ghosts with scythes. 5 "elite" dudes, 20 horde dudes and 3 heroes.

Just as the khorne side of the old starter.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Someone with the White Dwarf has stated the contents of the new starter set are the following:

Any word on the future of the Thunder and Blood mini starter box?

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
Were there other models we expected to see in the box but weren't?

Seems like an awful lot of Death units, but seems like you tend to get a lot of Death bang for your buck anyways.

seeing how death is mostly a horde faction and stormcast more an elite force, it makes sense

GoatboyBeta wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Someone with the White Dwarf has stated the contents of the new starter set are the following:

Any word on the future of the Thunder and Blood mini starter box?

Per GW shops on Facebook, the main Aos1 starter set will be discontinued with the release of Soul Wars so maybe T&B will follow it...

From the Faction Focus: Bonesplitterz on Warhammer Community:

Unlike other predatory endless spells, the Aethervoid Pendulum moves constantly in a straight line, cleaving across the battlefield – making it less risky to your forces. Should it make contact with a unit, it’ll deal a decent chunk of mortal wounds to them, too.

I like how the Endless Spells have so many different movement mechanics. Some are moved by the player, at least one has a set movement pattern, and then you have the static mirror spell.

Not sure how I feel here. Death looks awesome and new spells (models and abilities) seem very cool.

SCE: I already have a HUGE force with Judicators/Liberators. I didn't do anything with the Vanguard updates and the only thing that interests me at the moment is the ballista.

Have SCE changed so much to need such a large line?

 Uriels_Flame wrote:

Spoiler:

Not sure how I feel here. Death looks awesome and new spells (models and abilities) seem very cool.

SCE: I already have a HUGE force with Judicators/Liberators. I didn't do anything with the Vanguard updates and the only thing that interests me at the moment is the ballista.

Have SCE changed so much to need such a large line?

The new Stormcast Eternals are from the Sacrosanct Chamber which specialize in fighting magical foes. In case you haven't seen it, they did an article on Warhammer Community giving a sneak peek at the new models.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:

Spoiler:

Not sure how I feel here. Death looks awesome and new spells (models and abilities) seem very cool.

SCE: I already have a HUGE force with Judicators/Liberators. I didn't do anything with the Vanguard updates and the only thing that interests me at the moment is the ballista.

Have SCE changed so much to need such a large line?

The new Stormcast Eternals are from the Sacrosanct Chamber which specialize in fighting magical foes. In case you haven't seen it, they did an article on Warhammer Community giving a sneak peek at the new models.

Makes me think of the Centurion release.

Thanks for the link, Ghaz.

 Ghaz wrote:
Warhammer Community confirms base to base measuring and a document of recommended base sizes will be posted on the release of the new edition.

Yeah. Honestly they should have lead with the base to base measuring. Its a welcome piece of sanity overwriting some of the dumber decisions of AoS 1.0.


Though they should have made an official call on round bases as well, not just a list of recommendations. I get why they didn't (having rebased more than once) , but it leaves the rules open to gripes about corner cases.

Voss wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:
Warhammer Community confirms base to base measuring and a document of recommended base sizes will be posted on the release of the new edition.

Yeah. Honestly they should have lead with the base to base measuring. Its a welcome piece of sanity overwriting some of the dumber decisions of AoS 1.0.


Though they should have made an official call on round bases as well, not just a list of recommendations. I get why they didn't (having debased more than once) , but it leaves the rules open to gripes about corner cases.

GW has never dictated base sizes or shapes outside 3rd edition WHFB, not even in 40K which is generally considered their most competitive game (they seem to share that sentiment as well, treating AoS as more casual). Just seems to be something they are not interested in doing.

They get the best of both worlds that way. Casual/friendly settings let players use the bases they happen to have their models on with TFG basing for advantage being dealt with as one does. Meanwhile tournaments will enforce the standard sizes like they already have been.