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.
jeff white wrote: Different weapons now give different keywords? And stratagems? Jeebus, stop with the card gamey baloney and make a decent tabletop wargame already GW holy moly… buying into current 40k is like buying an economy hatchback with all the glitzy plastic spoilers and wheel covers with a three cylinder engine and a transmission made of unicorn nuts.
For the Harlequins, yes. Different weapons can give different keywords.
There's already been stratagems tied to weapons. Not their problem you missed out on that.
Well yeah, the brain knows the image of a skull is defined by negative spaces. It's literally all about what's not there.
When you put an exaggerated teeth line on what looks like a full face, it will always look wrong.
Compare the previews to something like this.
Spoiler:
That just makes them look like they've sucked on a lemon, frankly.
From comparing the faceplates to Jes' sketch, the issue seems to be that the sculptor has over-exaggerated the slant on the eyes, and made the mouth line perfectly straight where Jes' has a slight downward curve. And so the end result is vaguely disapproving rather than menacing.
stahly wrote: Loud minority. Long-time Eldar fans like myself are just happy that Jes Goodwin's designs are faithfully recreated with today's advancements in plastic miniature design and are not tampered with like during 3rd Edition.
I was ok with them adapting the designs way back when but I'm also glad to see a return now almost 20 years later. Both work for me.
We Munch for Macragge! FOR THE EMPRUH! Cheesesticks and Humus!
H.B.M.C. wrote: Wraithlords as Elites? So I can't even fake an Iyanden army anymore with lots of Wraithguard Elites and 3 HS slots filled with Wraithlords?
Wonderful...
Just take a Vanguard detachment?
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
That just makes them look like they've sucked on a lemon, frankly.
From comparing the faceplates to Jes' sketch, the issue seems to be that the sculptor has over-exaggerated the slant on the eyes, and made the mouth line perfectly straight where Jes' has a slight downward curve. And so the end result is vaguely disapproving rather than menacing.
Except Goodwin's original concepts have even more slanted eyes and the mouth line is not slanted downwards.
They do however create negative space under the "cheekbones" the same way Space Marine helmets do, so the overall shape is that of a skull, not a marmoset's cuddly face.
Most of the people perceiving issues won't be able to paint them better though so I don't think they'll be any happier with their own interpretation than they are with these.
They show the exact same thing I mentioned in relation to the earliest designs - clearly undercut cheekbones and the maxilla and mandible portion visibly narrower than the upper portion of the mask. Neither the new aspect, nor exarch model actually follow those rules well enough, which is why they look off.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Wraithlords as Elites? So I can't even fake an Iyanden army anymore with lots of Wraithguard Elites and 3 HS slots filled with Wraithlords?
Wonderful...
Just take a Vanguard detachment?
EXACTLY! I don't know why people make these "end of the world" "eye-rolling" comments.
List building is so incredibly flexible this edition and you don't give up that much in the way of CPs.
And there's very likely going to be some list building shenanigans that we haven't seen yet.
Maybe there's an Iyanden detachment that let's you take a Vanguard detachment for free and makes Wraith units Objective Secured?
That would easily satisfy anyone that wants to build an Iyanden list with lots of Wraithguard AND Wraithlords.
EXACTLY! I don't know why people make these "end of the world" "eye-rolling" comments. List building is so incredibly flexible this edition and you don't give up that much in the way of CPs.
Some of us really don't like the crutch of just taking more detachments to get around (what should be) the strictures of the FOC.
It means that Iyanden can't be faked/represented with just the normal bog-standard FOC.
ceorron wrote: They are getting harlequins in the book? I though they would be allies only with their own codex.
The way you build armies since 8th ed, it doesn't matter if units are in the same book or not. Harlequins do not have the <Craftworld> keyword, nor do Craftworld Eldar have the <Masque> keyword.
So they'll have to be in separate detachments regardless. The same would happen if you wanted to take Dark Eldar; they'd be a separate detachment.
Ynnari might be an exception, but you trade the relevant <Craftworld>, <Masque>, <Kabal> or whatever abilities by taking a Ynnari detachment.
I really don't understand why people are either puzzled, or in some cases lose their $h!+ over Harlies being rolled into the main Aeldari codex. Marines were the same. All their Chapters are in the same book now, with supplements for most of them.
Dark Eldar have their own book because they are so different, just like Grey Knights
-
I don't like it. They are as different from normal eldar as dark eldar are and they are about the right size for their own book. Taking them as allies makes much more sense to me fluff wise too.
Did you even read my whole post?
Let me rephrase myself: Just because Harlies are in the same book as CWE, DOES NOT MEAN HARLIES ARE PART OF CWE.
Blood Angel and Dark Angels didn't magically become part of an Ultramarine army just because they rolled them into the same codex. And they then got their own supplement.
That's... a weird comparison. Almost backwards, in fact. The units that makes those armies distinct (such as it is) are entirely in those supplements, specifically NOT in the same (main) codex.
Who's to say Harlies won't eventually get a supplement?
Me. Because they're in the main book.
Do you want GW to start reprinting chunks of a codex and selling it separately as a supplement? Because that's how we get there.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/19 00:58:41
H.B.M.C. wrote: Wraithlords as Elites? So I can't even fake an Iyanden army anymore with lots of Wraithguard Elites and 3 HS slots filled with Wraithlords?
Wonderful...
Just take a Vanguard detachment?
EXACTLY! I don't know why people make these "end of the world" "eye-rolling" comments.
List building is so incredibly flexible this edition and you don't give up that much in the way of CPs.
And there's very likely going to be some list building shenanigans that we haven't seen yet.
Maybe there's an Iyanden detachment that let's you take a Vanguard detachment for free and makes Wraith units Objective Secured?
That would easily satisfy anyone that wants to build an Iyanden list with lots of Wraithguard AND Wraithlords.
-
FYI, Vanguard detachment costs 3 CP and does not provide the benefit of refunding CP if your Warlord is in it, unlike some other detachments.
Jesus Christ changed my life, He can do the same for you!
The new ones are so close to the current ones that anyone suddenly deciding that they dislike these, but not the current ones come across as a bit odd.
Strange that no one complained about the heads being weird when they were the go to broken power unit in the army, they were flying off the shelves then!
EXACTLY! I don't know why people make these "end of the world" "eye-rolling" comments. List building is so incredibly flexible this edition and you don't give up that much in the way of CPs.
Some of us really don't like the crutch of just taking more detachments to get around (what should be) the strictures of the FOC.
It means that Iyanden can't be faked/represented with just the normal bog-standard FOC.
So the issue is that a specialist build requires a player to use a more specialized detachment?
EXACTLY! I don't know why people make these "end of the world" "eye-rolling" comments. List building is so incredibly flexible this edition and you don't give up that much in the way of CPs.
Some of us really don't like the crutch of just taking more detachments to get around (what should be) the strictures of the FOC.
It means that Iyanden can't be faked/represented with just the normal bog-standard FOC.
So the issue is that a specialist build requires a player to use a more specialized detachment?
But, you see, it's not a specialist build, it's the normal build for Iyanden, yadda yadda, etc, etc, my faction has been so flanderized there's only one specific "true" list for them, etc.
I should be able to take my army in the modern ruleset using the rules and restrictions of a 2 decade old ruleset, and it should work fine and great. Ignore that at that time many/most depictions of Iyanden still included 2+ units of guardians/rangers backing up the wraithguard. GW has ruined the game.
That just makes them look like they've sucked on a lemon, frankly.
Funny, because that's exactly my thought right now - they look like toothless grandma pouting and sucking lips in...
Esmer wrote: I feel they would look a lot more sinister, aka better, if they had actual skull masks, like the ones the Harlies have.
Yeah, I don't get why the unit leader has perfectly fine stylized skull on his shoulder then a garbage one on his face. The smooth faceplates people did earlier don't look like skulls but are vastly better than this gak.
I also wish they went with rectangular sensors Jes made, not with the terrible upward widening ones. They literally look like drunk Wania who forgot to tie up his ushanka:
Spoiler:
[picked SFW photo for this one because you don't want to see drunk Slavic look]
Galef wrote: EXACTLY! I don't know why people make these "end of the world" "eye-rolling" comments
Look at who poster is, they must have a daily quota of complaining posts. It's getting so bad (two mutually contradicting posts one after the other) that I am genuinely starting to wonder if they forgot to switch accounts sometimes
Another fix, beyond patching over the mouth, head-swapping, etc., would be to just extend the line of the grin. The current models kind of look like this (although I haven't seen them in person for ~8 years).
Part of the goofiness of the resculpt is that they look like they're on the verge of opening their mouths and saying something in uwu voice. Extending it to the edges of the outer helmet layer makes it look more static, imo, and would be trivial to achieve with paint (and only slightly more difficult to actually engrave into the plastic).
Siegfriedfr wrote: These new Reaper's whole head is a major design failure; it's surprising because most GW designs are spot-on and exciting.
The body is fine, but i guess most kits will have the bare heads to compensate for this uglyness.
It's cool to have plastic eldars, but it was also the moment to redesign questionable stuff, made during an era where CAD wasn't widespread and everything was done by hand, like this.
Well hopefully the Avatar and Maugan Ra will be more impressive.
Better heads found in 10 seconds on google for example' sake:
this is a ton better than GW new reapers
lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039
Jeebus, stop with the card gamey baloney and make a decent tabletop wargame already 
