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.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
If it has to be a choice, almost all Eldar-players would certainly agree that Aspect Warriors as a dated, pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concept probably should get squatted in favour of much more interesting concepts like Ynnari.

More interesting concepts like those same pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concepts painted red..?

Not if they actually started investing into a Ynnari range.

Tells us all how atoms are split next!

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
If it has to be a choice, almost all Eldar-players would certainly agree that Aspect Warriors as a dated, pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concept probably should get squatted in favour of much more interesting concepts like Ynnari.

More interesting concepts like those same pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concepts painted red..?

Not if they actually started investing into a Ynnari range.

The Ynnari range:



Yeah, that doesn't look Craftworld-y at all.

 Mangod wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
If it has to be a choice, almost all Eldar-players would certainly agree that Aspect Warriors as a dated, pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concept probably should get squatted in favour of much more interesting concepts like Ynnari.

More interesting concepts like those same pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concepts painted red..?

Not if they actually started investing into a Ynnari range.

The Ynnari range:



Yeah, that doesn't look Craftworld-y at all.

It looks like a Ynnari miniature combining visual cues from all Eldar. Gem/soulstones and rounded armour plates from Craftworlds, more spike elements and jagged armour plates from Drukhari, masks and similar cues from Harlequins. Etc...

Which was the point. It's roughly 1/3rd "Craftworlds".

Specifically, the design cues are for the Aeldari Empire pre-fall.

 insaniak wrote:

Bossdoc wrote:
Does anybody else think it's a slap in the face of all Harlequin players that the first Harlequin named Character is for Imperial Armys?

No. It's a game of toy soldiers. If you're interpreting an army's lack of special characters as a personal insult, there's a good chance you're taking it all just a bit too seriously.

I'm going to push back on this. If you're spending hundreds of pounds investing in anything, I would take it seriously.

Bossdoc wrote:
Does anybody else think it's a slap in the face of all Harlequin players that the first Harlequin named Character is for Imperial Armys? Still no Sylandri Veilwalker for us... At least, rules in WD will save money in comparison to a PA book with boring fluff and missions I will never play...

EDIT: Wouldn't it be great (and very fitting) if Quins got that Lumineth-AOS rule to activate 2 units at once in the fight phase?

No because Harlequins are a minor army with very little support, to play them would be to accept that reality imo. Those kind of armies are designed to be allied to other major faction armies.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Honestly I suspect that most Eldar fans would prefer to see GW replace the high quantity of fincast such as the aspect warriors rather than see them expand Harlequins/Yinnari model ranges. Considering that they all inter-link its a boon for all to update the original "core" range before investing huge resources expanding side armies into full diverse armies.

Just like all Imperium players should rejoice at getting more Space Marines before investing huge resources into expanding side armies like Custodes, AdMech or Guard?

Aspect Warriors aren't a particularly interesting concept to begin with, especially lore wise, where the Ynnari being tied into the more recent developments and setting feel much more relevant.

Of course, if GW can swing both, that's great for everyone. If it has to be a choice, almost all Eldar-players would certainly agree that Aspect Warriors as a dated, pseudo-Asian-80s-Warrior concept probably should get squatted in favour of much more interesting concepts like Ynnari.

Wow, no. 'Almost all eldar players' want nothing of the sort. They want their updated plastic aspects, and they want them five years ago.

I can't speak to Ynnari being interesting (it came out of nowhere and GW has done nothing with it), but craftworld eldar players largely want the core of their army to be available again in a decent material. They don't want their armies squatted.

 Kirasu wrote:

Bossdoc wrote:
Does anybody else think it's a slap in the face of all Harlequin players that the first Harlequin named Character is for Imperial Armys? Still no Sylandri Veilwalker for us... At least, rules in WD will save money in comparison to a PA book with boring fluff and missions I will never play...

EDIT: Wouldn't it be great (and very fitting) if Quins got that Lumineth-AOS rule to activate 2 units at once in the fight phase?

No because Harlequins are a minor army with very little support, to play them would be to accept that reality imo. Those kind of armies are designed to be allied to other major faction armies.

Well, even Imperial Knights have a named Character - actually, the only factions without one are Chaos Knights and Harlequins...

And GSC...

shadowsfm wrote:
am i the only one that thinks angel of death tops astartes? i'm a sucker for space battles

It looks bad. Like CGI from 15 year old game. I feel Dawn of War II had better space animations, and it came out in 2009.

My big issue is it doesn't really feel like ancient, really durable warships. They shatter like they were made out of glass, no feel of toughness or ability to absorb damage, no feel of ponderous weight of massive warship, it's like someone dropped a small clay figurine (or rather, discovered particle breakup effect in modelling menu). Astartes - Part 1 and 2 has space combat too, and it feels and looks much better IMO.

Dudeface wrote:
Honestly nobody knows at present, but I didnt think deathwatch generally took marines from the 10th companies?

They don't (even though Wolfwolf member of Cassius team is technically one), but the vanguard gear is by no means 10th company only. It's supposed to be used for all infiltration and recon missions, something DW is supposed to do all the time. It's arguably better match for DW than Intercessors and other line infantry, even.

A competent writer could even change the units to fit DW even more (say, Veteran Reivers with access to power weapons and DW shotguns, or Veteran Infiltrators who can take xenophase swords/combi-weapons) - alas, it would require competent writer who uses more keys than just C and V...

SamusDrake wrote:
I think now we may have to accept that this crisis is going leave a terrible mark on our lives. I'd much rather know that the staff at Nottingham - and those who run stores across the globe - are okay and will hopefully one day be back to work doing what they enjoy most; bringing fun to our tabletops.

You know, I don't fault Nottingham staff. Preview was small, meh, okay, they will show more stuff next time. No big deal. All I am disappointed about is the fact that one of the coolest armies in setting was given into the hands of someone so incompetent that since 2016, all it did receive was nerfs, unit and wargear loss, and worse and worse fluff each time. With the only upside being primaris units trickling down from books made by other writers, and even with these, Kelly and Cruddace couldn't be bothered to give them access to signature DW weapons like xenophase blades or melta fists, they even went so far as to ban multiple units from lots of entries on wargear lists, something no other book in the game has

Funnily enough, their lack of creativity goes so far the core DW unit, veterans, was lifted wholesale from Matt Ward fifth edition Space Marine codex, giving him arguably more credit for rules even though he no longer worked at GW for a decade now at this point. I wish I could get a job this cosy at GW, being allowed to just copy-paste stuff from other books with my only creative input being inane nerfs and rule/gear deletion decided seemingly by dice roll.

I kind of envy AoS players, their books seem to be given to new writers not afraid of trying new, original stuff, while 40K team seems to be half made up from people who lucked into being hired decades ago and now work there far too long to be fired (or even criticized/edited, really), people who I am sure are excellent to hang out with, but who also are terrible at writing rules and fluff (just check out Kelly's Tau books, he has no excuses or other team members to hide behind here) and the setting suffers for it. Hell, I am wondering if Kelly was assigned to DW because that was smallest army they could sacrifice and others were too important to completely mess up. Joke's on GW though, I was ready to double my DW army with new vanguard units with funds I set aside over a year ago but I guess I can go with a new polar or something instead.

Voss wrote:


Wow, no. 'Almost all eldar players' want nothing of the sort. They want their updated plastic aspects, and they want them five years ago.

I can't speak to Ynnari being interesting (it came out of nowhere and GW has done nothing with it), but craftworld eldar players largely want the core of their army to be available again in a decent material. They don't want their armies squatted.

Just 5 years ago?

Put me in the camp of Craftoworld player who doesn’t care one bit about Ynnari, but wants my army to actually have units available in plastic.

I don’t think anybody’s faction should be cut. But I do think that there could be a bit of consolidation. Codex proliferation is not good. This was at it’s peak with the mono-unit or 2-3 unit codexes back in 6-7th. You end up with odd half armies like harlis that don’t have HQs, or full books for 1 datasheet and a handful of pages of rules. Keep the models, keep the rules, just package them a little different. The old Agents of the Imperium book was a great way for them to do this.

Did they ever finish Daemonifuge? Last I remember, they wound up a chapter with a 'to be continued', then the Warhammer comic got canned.

Same as Titan.

Well I'm glad they are stretching the reveals out- nice to have something to look forward over the foreseeable as we have no idea when this is going to end- end of May hopefully... Its just the community team working with little resources[no studio access to make new content] and trying to keep going over the next couple of months so fair play to them.

I was surprised Nids made an appearance- granted in the animation.. I know they won't but it would be nice if when they release Battlefleet Gothic they expand it by adding factions first not deepening the initial factions..

Not expecting much of my particular interest but still looking forward towhead else is coming out for everyone else.

Liked the Treeman and the giants sound fun..

Put me in the "no idea" place on Eldar.

For all the complaints - the finecast aspect warriors are some of the best finecast models, so the need to have them replaced diminishes. A bit like when they released plastic wracks, although that's a long time ago now.

And I'm too utilitarian to replace models just because they are in plastic now. I'm sure its true of some people somewhere that they've held off buying... dark reapers for this edition, or warp spiders in 7th or whatever over the last 5-15 years, because "gotta be a plastic kit soon" but I don't have that kind of patience.

Who is going to buy these new banshees therefore except someone starting a new Eldar army? There will undoubtedly be some each year - but anyone who has an Eldar army and has got say 10 old banshees probably has the itch scratched. If they 10/10 meta relevant there would be perhaps be an urge, but they are not and so there isn't.

I'd at least be interesting in new Ynnari stuff because its new in itself. See also Exodites, Croneworlders, countless possible DE subfactions that currently have one unit but could be expanded and so on to give the pointy ears as many flavours as Marines. But that's because I'm always on the look out for an ex-latest army, while many people are not.

Also I think the sister and Harlequin models look fine. Its not inspiring the *I want it, I want it, I want it* of new Fabius, but few things in recent times have.

I am in the minority that likes the new Stern. Like, maybe not the best model in the range, but I love me some more sculpts anyway. May just play her as count-as canoness, maybe, depending on her rules.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
40k - a Mary Sue SoB and Harlequin buddy! 2 (two) new models for a faction that has literally just been updated. Try to contain your excitement Necron players!

As a wise guy once said, factions get updated according to popularity. Remember that guy? I think he followed by "Sisters aren't popular enough to get new models" .

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Hopefully storyforge is working on an Ork themed thing at least. Perhaps a dark comedy or something.

Nothing of the sort was implied, but we got confirmation of some animated movie with a Sister of Battle, which frankly more than enough makes up for it, especially since Sisters are apparently much more popular than orks and sell better, these days.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
As a 40k only player this preview was garbage, again.

As a 40k player only I though it was pretty nice for me!

 godardc wrote:
actual footages and trailer from TWO Warhammer TV SHOWS (!!)

I'd say 3: the cartoon one, the black and white and red space battle one, and the photorealistic CGI one.

Voss wrote:
Descent? I thought she was going super saiyan.

If she's just falling, there isn't any reason for the building foundation to be falling apart before she gets there.

Sister Stern don't need no silly drop pod to drop from orbit.
And I'd like to see if YOUR foundations don't fall apart when a Sister of Battle drop from orbit onto them.

Voss wrote:
The gargant video is clever, but I don't like the implication that these are all named characters

I think (and hope) that those are types of gargants rather than named gargants. Gargants that specialize in using a big stick to smash gates, gargants that just eat everything that more and some that doesn't, ...

Darsath wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Bossdoc wrote:
Does anybody else think it's a slap in the face of all Harlequin players that the first Harlequin named Character is for Imperial Armys?

No. It's a game of toy soldiers. If you're interpreting an army's lack of special characters as a personal insult, there's a good chance you're taking it all just a bit too seriously.

I'm going to push back on this. If you're spending hundreds of pounds investing in anything, I would take it seriously.

I love how people use the toy soldiers argument and forget how much the toy soldiers cost. For the amount of money that's put into the game, we have the damn right to complain about mistakes or broken crap, especially when we are catching them once we have rules previews!

Sunny Side Up wrote:




Aspect Warriors aren't a particularly interesting concept to begin with, especially lore wise, where the Ynnari being tied into the more recent developments and setting feel much more relevant.

??? Aspect warriors are the core of craftworld Eldar identity, taking away aspect warriors would eliminate a lot of what makes eldar interesting. Without aspect warriors, Craftworld eldar are just guard with hover vehicles and pointy helmets.

 Irbis wrote:


My big issue is it doesn't really feel like ancient, really durable warships. They shatter like they were made out of glass, no feel of toughness or ability to absorb damage, no feel of ponderous weight of massive warship, it's like someone dropped a small clay figurine (or rather, discovered particle breakup effect in modelling menu).

Very much this; they shatter like glass. What happened to the void shields and the meters thick adamantium armor, not to mention a long list of possible damage results after the shields and armor have been penetrated. A few hits and these ships die...

T

Aspect warriors and then by extension the phoenix lords and avatars of khaine are absolutely the most interesting thing about eldar. More so than farseers etc in my opinion.

The only time farseers and warlocks ever were cool were seer councils back when they first turned up because they were basically units of jedi knights.

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Aspect Warriors aren't a particularly interesting concept to begin with, especially lore wise, where the Ynnari being tied into the more recent developments and setting feel much more relevant.

??? Aspect warriors are the core of craftworld Eldar identity, taking away aspect warriors would eliminate a lot of what makes eldar interesting. Without aspect warriors, Craftworld eldar are just guard with hover vehicles and pointy helmets.

For some reason, some people seem to want to see key elements of the setting, either at the macro-level or the faction-level, get destroyed in the name of "moving things forwards".

Makes no sense to me, because if you remove enough tent-poles, the tent collapses on top of you.

Only issue with the plastic Aspects right now is cost. I have not bought the Banshees yet, and that pricetag is alarming. Granted, I probably would only ever get 1-2 boxes of each one, but still...

 Dysartes wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Aspect Warriors aren't a particularly interesting concept to begin with, especially lore wise, where the Ynnari being tied into the more recent developments and setting feel much more relevant.

??? Aspect warriors are the core of craftworld Eldar identity, taking away aspect warriors would eliminate a lot of what makes eldar interesting. Without aspect warriors, Craftworld eldar are just guard with hover vehicles and pointy helmets.

For some reason, some people seem to want to see key elements of the setting, either at the macro-level or the faction-level, get destroyed in the name of "moving things forwards".

Makes no sense to me, because if you remove enough tent-poles, the tent collapses on top of you.

The rotting leaves in the folds from those first few camping holidays back in the 80s aren't tent-poles though

 Vermis wrote:
Did they ever finish Daemonifuge? Last I remember, they wound up a chapter with a 'to be continued', then the Warhammer comic got canned.

Same as Titan.

The comic did get canned unfinished, but it was completed in the graphic novel versions.

 Dysartes wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Aspect Warriors aren't a particularly interesting concept to begin with, especially lore wise, where the Ynnari being tied into the more recent developments and setting feel much more relevant.

??? Aspect warriors are the core of craftworld Eldar identity, taking away aspect warriors would eliminate a lot of what makes eldar interesting. Without aspect warriors, Craftworld eldar are just guard with hover vehicles and pointy helmets.

For some reason, some people seem to want to see key elements of the setting, either at the macro-level or the faction-level, get destroyed in the name of "moving things forwards".

Makes no sense to me, because if you remove enough tent-poles, the tent collapses on top of you.

Not if they kept putting up new ones. In 1999, removing Tactical Squads, Devastators, and Assault Squads from the Marine codex would have been unthinkable, but today? You could do it and be left with a reasonable and consistent army,

Personally, I think it's a travesty that nobody at the GW studio has, for close to 30 years, looked at the Avatar and thought "You know, I bet I could sculpt a better one." Even the Forgeworld one is mostly just bigger and better-proportioned, but by no means a transformative remake of the basic concept.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
Aspect Warriors aren't a particularly interesting concept to begin with, especially lore wise, where the Ynnari being tied into the more recent developments and setting feel much more relevant.

??? Aspect warriors are the core of craftworld Eldar identity, taking away aspect warriors would eliminate a lot of what makes eldar interesting. Without aspect warriors, Craftworld eldar are just guard with hover vehicles and pointy helmets.

For some reason, some people seem to want to see key elements of the setting, either at the macro-level or the faction-level, get destroyed in the name of "moving things forwards".

Makes no sense to me, because if you remove enough tent-poles, the tent collapses on top of you.

The rotting leaves in the folds from those first few camping holidays back in the 80s aren't tent-poles though

You arent moving rotting leaves though. You are blowing up entire tent with bazooka

Until we get the rules for Stern and Kyganil we don’t know how or if they are going to break battle forged like the last characters from Black Library. I was told by a GW store manager the rules for those two are getting fixed soon my guess is in war of the spider.
The problem with aspect warriors is that no ones buying them. People with eldar armies already have them and rarely look to replace what’s built and painted. People starting a new army have to mail order them and l’ve seen them go “no I’ll order them some other time give me that other box off of the shelf” or turn them down because they’re resin.
I think GW always intended for Harlequins to be a support to the other two eldar armies and that is why there’s no great harlequin, warlocks, additional troop types, or alternate weapons or poses for the death jesters.
Does anyone else think the Yannari is GW attempt at making a official soup list? Yeah you lose a couple of rules, but you get new and different rules.

GW flat out said they will be "fixed" in PA. That's no mystery. Rules so far are basically preview for osme reason

As a wise guy once said, factions get updated according to popularity. Remember that guy? I think he followed by "Sisters aren't popular enough to get new models"

Except this needn't be a full army redesign or multi kit release. All they needed to do was make a new character model. The Silent King is the obvious choice. If you can't even be bothered to do that but you're quite happy to make yet another new character for a faction that literally had it's full release a month ago I think that sends s message to necron players that GW simply can't be bothered putting the effort in.

Also this theory doesn't always play out. Tyranids seem pretty popular, their army boxes are always the first to sell out (like last christmas) but they've had nothing for years and got nothing in PA either.

Smaug wrote:
The problem with aspect warriors is that no ones buying them. People with eldar armies already have them and rarely look to replace what’s built and painted. People starting a new army have to mail order them and l’ve seen them go “no I’ll order them some other time give me that other box off of the shelf” or turn them down because they’re resin.

Isn't that the same logic that plagued the SoB though? They don't get new models because nobody's buying them; nobody's buying them because the models are old and outdated.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Darsath wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Bossdoc wrote:
Does anybody else think it's a slap in the face of all Harlequin players that the first Harlequin named Character is for Imperial Armys?

No. It's a game of toy soldiers. If you're interpreting an army's lack of special characters as a personal insult, there's a good chance you're taking it all just a bit too seriously.

I'm going to push back on this. If you're spending hundreds of pounds investing in anything, I would take it seriously.

I love how people use the toy soldiers argument and forget how much the toy soldiers cost. For the amount of money that's put into the game, we have the damn right to complain about mistakes or broken crap, especially when we are catching them once we have rules previews!

The poster I was responding to wasn't complaining about mistakes or broken crap.

Smaug wrote:

The problem with aspect warriors is that no ones buying them. People with eldar armies already have them and rarely look to replace what’s built and painted. People starting a new army have to mail order them and l’ve seen them go “no I’ll order them some other time give me that other box off of the shelf” or turn them down because they’re resin.

All problems that would be fixed with a multi-option plastic kit.