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.

Glorfindel is basically the Ace Rimmer of Middle Earth. he was too awesome for this edition anyway.

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
I don't really mind it. While wacky lists are amusing at times, it was always kind of odd seeing characters like Aragorn or the Witch King appearing in lists they couldn't possibly have been in and did feel gamey.

I'm all for thematic/canonically accurate lists in principle but, based purely on the examples shown, I'm just a bit concerned that they might have gone a bit too far and focusing on specific scenes strips away some player agency. For example, if say Boromir were only going to be available to Gondor as part of the Reclamation of Osgiliath list (not saying that will be the case, just an example), that seems unnecessarily reductive. Like it would remove the potential for him to be fielded alongside Citadel Guard or Fountain Court Guard; a scenario which doesn't necessarily happen 'on screen' directly but is incredibly plausible, to the extent that it would be weirder if it didn't happen 'off screen' in some capacity.

The leak has Boromir with the Leader (Citadel Guard) rule, so implies at least one list he can be in with them (it's possible the Leader rule allows access to take those models for Boromir's warband in any list he's in, that's one possible interpretation of the way they worded it in one of the articles).

 Baragash wrote:

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
I don't really mind it. While wacky lists are amusing at times, it was always kind of odd seeing characters like Aragorn or the Witch King appearing in lists they couldn't possibly have been in and did feel gamey.

I'm all for thematic/canonically accurate lists in principle but, based purely on the examples shown, I'm just a bit concerned that they might have gone a bit too far and focusing on specific scenes strips away some player agency. For example, if say Boromir were only going to be available to Gondor as part of the Reclamation of Osgiliath list (not saying that will be the case, just an example), that seems unnecessarily reductive. Like it would remove the potential for him to be fielded alongside Citadel Guard or Fountain Court Guard; a scenario which doesn't necessarily happen 'on screen' directly but is incredibly plausible, to the extent that it would be weirder if it didn't happen 'off screen' in some capacity.

The leak has Boromir with the Leader (Citadel Guard) rule, so implies at least one list he can be in with them (it's possible the Leader rule allows access to take those models for Boromir's warband in any list he's in, that's one possible interpretation of the way they worded it in one of the articles).

Looks like that's what the rule says

 Hellebore wrote:
Ah I must have missed that bit of news. I thought they were shrinking everything down to just what happened in the movies.

my understanding was they had two separate licences for the book content and movie content so they could make a range of stuff that didn't appear on screen. But Their licencing seems to have changed acronym, so no idea what they're allowed to make now.

They're removing glorfindel despite him existing in the books. I figured because he clashed with Arwen's appearance in the movie, but he could have still hung around as Elrond's best bro.

Glorfindel's not being removed. He's on the store right now and will be in the third book.

They're removing at least version of him:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/vozvvb0g/middle-earthtm-strategy-battle-game-the-upcoming-range-update-explained/


I didn't realise they'd made more than one if they have others for sale

 Hellebore wrote:
They're removing at least version of him:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/vozvvb0g/middle-earthtm-strategy-battle-game-the-upcoming-range-update-explained/


I didn't realise they'd made more than one if they have others for sale

One of their best Middle Earth models IMO:
https://www.warhammer.com/en-GB/shop/middle-earth-glorfindel-lord-of-the-west-2022?queryID=5b4894aed88c7394d55ea9c77cfb1f4c

That's the old metal version they're talking about, not the current resin.

Hera...nice to see you I guess?

By the looks of it this is when Hera challenges Wulf for a showdown. I'm guessing this isn't plastic as Hera doesn't normally go into battle wearing a bride's outfit...

 Coenus Scaldingus wrote:

JimmyWolf87 wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
I don't really mind it. While wacky lists are amusing at times, it was always kind of odd seeing characters like Aragorn or the Witch King appearing in lists they couldn't possibly have been in and did feel gamey.

I'm all for thematic/canonically accurate lists in principle but, based purely on the examples shown, I'm just a bit concerned that they might have gone a bit too far and focusing on specific scenes strips away some player agency. For example, if say Boromir were only going to be available to Gondor as part of the Reclamation of Osgiliath list (not saying that will be the case, just an example), that seems unnecessarily reductive. Like it would remove the potential for him to be fielded alongside Citadel Guard or Fountain Court Guard; a scenario which doesn't necessarily happen 'on screen' directly but is incredibly plausible, to the extent that it would be weirder if it didn't happen 'off screen' in some capacity.

Da Boss wrote:Nah not for me. Especially the focus on film scenes rather than book scenes. No interest from me, think it's a terrible decision.

The exact lists and the specific focus on books scenes does feel overly restrictive, agreed.

Sure, there certainly have been many armylists from tournament players in the past that were clearly constructed for optimal game effect rather than any thematic purpose. Even if all individual profiles and points costs were perfectly balanced, this is probably unavoidable when allying in a wizard or even just some cavalry is clearly beneficial in basic gameplay and specific scenarios, to allow for things (magic, speed) that your army may otherwise lack. At the same time, there are many scenes from the books not covered in the movies, or depicted very differently. Morever, there are many plausible what-if scenarios one might want to play out in their games. Combine highly specific army lists with restrictive wargear loadouts with the recent removal of a chunk of the range, and a lot of space for creativity is lost. Some things will be improved I'm sure, but I am not so sure if this has not taken these restrictive designs too far. (Especially when many lists rely strongly on named heroes, which to me always feel more restrictive than anything: they avoid Saruman or a Nazgûl showing up in every list, but now force players to take Boromir or Théoden in their respective lists, even though Boromir surely wouldn't have been around for every single fight on every square metre of Osgiliath...)

Yeah, it's a terrible approach. The only battles you can fight are the ones explicitly featured in the films and/or books? As if there isn't stuff going on before, after and around that (let along 'what if' etc) - heaven forbid people use their imaginations! And the idea that there won't be some broken lists in there which any power gamer types will want to use/misuse is just wishful thinking (unless the thinking is, 'well it doesn't matter if it's OP as long as its "themed"!'). Maybe it's just the community I game with, but I don't think I've ever come across the random splashing in a wizard thing that people talk about.

The biggest frustration really is how utterly arbitrary it is. There are some characters who don't feature in the films that look to still be in the Armies of LOTR book and there also look to be some options which appear in the films that won't be possible due to the new everything is a LL approach (might be wrong but having seen the 'main' Isengard list doesn't include regular orcs, I suspect the only place they'll appear now is Ugluks Scouts - despite us seeing them at Isengard/Orthanc in the films). Plus you end up with "lists" like the Harad one that might as well not exist in the first book. Presuming the future Armies of Middle Earth book will have a more complete list for the Haradrim with Suladan etc, kind of makes this one a waste of paper. Its pretty obvious that this is just a way to sell another big book, in part because the new Armies of books will have a ton of extra pages with the new army lists in which they didn't need to include before.

As a different example, I also have a Rivendell & Khazad Dum allied list - was always slightly annoying it was a yellow alliance (I guess because the version of Durin GW have done is technically Durin VII?), I played him as Durin IV allied with Elrond - the dwarves and elves fighting together is explicitly mentioned in the appendices so it's very much a theme-y list (albeit a particularly niche one) and there clearly won't be any way to ever play that legally in the new ruleset which means no more events for that army.

Was open to the idea of a new edition, but pretty disappointed with how it's looking to have taken on some of modern GWs worse habits. Pile on the increasing restrictions to wargear options and the list building stuff, it really looks unappealing compared to the current rules. Kind of hoping my gaming group will stick with the current ruleset but we'll see, I'm definitely going to wait for the third armies of book to be released before I buy any of the new stuff anyway.

Piousservant wrote:

As a different example, I also have a Rivendell & Khazad Dum allied list - was always slightly annoying it was a yellow alliance (I guess because the version of Durin GW have done is technically Durin VII?), I played him as Durin IV allied with Elrond - the dwarves and elves fighting together is explicitly mentioned in the appendices so it's very much a theme-y list (albeit a particularly niche one) and there clearly won't be any way to ever play that legally in the new ruleset which means no more events for that army.

I feel your pain, both as a Khazad-dum player waiting for the next book and a someone who was planning a book accurate black gate opens list (i.e Easterlings allied with mordor) which now looks to be impossible. I might be able to twist one of these lists into something similar but looks like I'll never get a Mouth of Sauron led mordor + easterlings as planned. Because PJ said so. Ugh.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:
That's the old metal version they're talking about, not the current resin.

Must have completely missed the release of the resin one - this is the only glorfindel i'm familiar with.


Does anyone know what warcom article talks about 3 books for release?

There is also the metal armoured glorfindel as well. So he's currently got two armoured iterations.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pre-orders are up on the Australian site. $370 for the Box set. $90 for both the Rulebook and Hobbit army book, $105 for the LoTR army book.

Taking some liberties with the pricing of the Rohan house (Which has mysteriously vanished off the site ) and the 4 mounted heroes, and assume $83 for the houses (same prices as the lake town house) and $60 each for the heroes (same price as Eomer) then the boxes content comes out at a touch over $660AUD. Which with 20% off at a online retailer comes out as a stonking deal even though the contents of said box are somewhat lackluster.

From what I've seen of the rules and more importantly list building, I can't honestly say I'm overly keen for the new edition. At this point I'll probably just keep playing the current (now old?) edition if my other regular opponents are willing.

Khazad dum doesn't appear in either of those books.

Are we sure there's going to be a third book of army lists?

Yes, gw announced that armies of middle earth would be book #3 to follow sometime after release, containing everything that didnt appear on screen.

Unrelated to the new edition, for anyone who purchased the "Rohan Commanders" from the Made to Order back in May (for which the 180 day time allotment has now expired), there's been a manufacturing delay with them and they're expected Late December/Early January.

So anyone who hasn't got theirs yet, that's the reason.

 Hellebore wrote:
Khazad dum doesn't appear in either of those books.

Are we sure there's going to be a third book of army lists?

If you look at the pre-order for Buhrdûr and the Hill-Trolls, they've got an "Armies of Middle-Earth" logo in the main image, and their product description says they can be used in Buhrdûr's Horde and Army of Carn Dûm forces, so you can be very confident in the upcoming third book containing lists not found in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit

Difficult to tell from the sprue pictures, but looks like the Rohirrim do not have any clearly interchangeable parts, with heads probably only attaching to specific cloaks on account of the hair connection, and while a few melee-weapon arms look similar, others are cut off at different lengths so will require partial assembly and cutting before being interchangeable. At least the shields can be mixed freely, as also highlighted in the product description.

Also of note: although the box will contain more plastic and not just one duplicated sprue (now 2 x 1.5 sprues), the price is at least the same as those of other plastic troops.

Not sure why the Great Eagles were re-released (had noticed they were gone earlier and happy to have them back though; they're excellent); the box displayed still seems to have the same name (not the longer "Great Eagles of the Misty Mountains™" in the product description), and while they apparently can represent an additional profile now ("Fledgeling Great Eagles"), I don't know if that's referenced on the box anywhere and would warrant a rebranding. Box contents seem the same: 2 eagles, flying stands, 60mm bases?

 Coenus Scaldingus wrote:
Difficult to tell from the sprue pictures, but looks like the Rohirrim do not have any clearly interchangeable parts, with heads probably only attaching to specific cloaks on account of the hair connection, and while a few melee-weapon arms look similar, others are cut off at different lengths so will require partial assembly and cutting before being interchangeable. At least the shields can be mixed freely, as also highlighted in the product description.

Also of note: although the box will contain more plastic and not just one duplicated sprue (now 2 x 1.5 sprues), the price is at least the same as those of other plastic troops.

Not sure why the Great Eagles were re-released (had noticed they were gone earlier and happy to have them back though; they're excellent); the box displayed still seems to have the same name (not the longer "Great Eagles of the Misty Mountains™" in the product description), and while they apparently can represent an additional profile now ("Fledgeling Great Eagles"), I don't know if that's referenced on the box anywhere and would warrant a rebranding. Box contents seem the same: 2 eagles, flying stands, 60mm bases?

I think the Eagles are just rebranded and painted white because of their appearance in the new movie, but they're the old models.

 Coenus Scaldingus wrote:
Difficult to tell from the sprue pictures, but looks like the Rohirrim do not have any clearly interchangeable parts, with heads probably only attaching to specific cloaks on account of the hair connection, and while a few melee-weapon arms look similar, others are cut off at different lengths so will require partial assembly and cutting before being interchangeable. At least the shields can be mixed freely, as also highlighted in the product description.

Also of note: although the box will contain more plastic and not just one duplicated sprue (now 2 x 1.5 sprues), the price is at least the same as those of other plastic troops.

Not sure why the Great Eagles were re-released (had noticed they were gone earlier and happy to have them back though; they're excellent); the box displayed still seems to have the same name (not the longer "Great Eagles of the Misty Mountains™" in the product description), and while they apparently can represent an additional profile now ("Fledgeling Great Eagles"), I don't know if that's referenced on the box anywhere and would warrant a rebranding. Box contents seem the same: 2 eagles, flying stands, 60mm bases?

They just changed the bases they're packaged with from the old transparent flying bases to 60mm.

There we go, Hera in plastic as expected. I thought it would be in that outfit. Damn fine looking model too.


https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/r2tyuwb8/middle-earthtm-strategy-battle-game-heratm-daughter-of-helm-hammerhandtm/

Can't wait to see what she does to make the concept of a female warrior in Rohan unacceptable for centuries to come!

How do the LotR models scale with 40k models? The on foot version would look great in an inquisitorial retinue.

Nice looking model but I'm not a fan of the leather daisy duke riding chaps personally. I'd have preferred this look from one of the posters. I have no idea if this is from a scene that made it into the film though. Admittedly, it's more of an impromptu battle look as opposed to something purposefully practical like the riding attire.

Mr Insomniac wrote:
How do the LotR models scale with 40k models? The on foot version would look great in an inquisitorial retinue.

The newer sculpts will be slightly larger than the original range but they're still likely to be absolutely tiny compared to 40K.

 warboss wrote:
Nice looking model but I'm not a fan of the leather daisy duke riding chaps personally. I'd have preferred this look from one of the posters. I have no idea if this is from a scene that made it into the film though. Admittedly, it's more of an impromptu battle look as opposed to something purposefully practical like the riding attire.

That's the bride of death model on the previous page.

We also have our day 1 errata (no more S4 mirkwood elf warriors!) and the Angmar/Arnor profiles and army lists PDF.

Notable change is how little changed! Except Glorfindel, he is now a beast as he should be.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/downloads/middle-earth-strategy-battle-game/

Hope for Helm Hammerhand, on Horse and with full Armour (in Pseudo-Gothic-Germanic Canoply).

That's already been confirmed, in plastic like Hera up there.

Mr Insomniac wrote:
How do the LotR models scale with 40k models? The on foot version would look great in an inquisitorial retinue.

Very small.

Looking forward to the release of the kit, although I'd probably use her in Rangers of Shadowdeep. It would be nice if the other lady in the film gets her own similar plastic kit.