The Rumour Thread

[Forrix]

5 hours ago, GeneralZero said:

There are only 2 battletome missing now in the AoS 2.0 range: KO and tzeench (DoT). (and maybe  some ES for LoN and nurgle) I think that they'll be done in 2020 Q1. And then, everything will be 2.0. So, what next? new armies? new entries for some/many armies? Difficult for GW to maintain the hype 😋

I really hope they go back and start doing small releases to round out factions. Painting up the new Mawtribes Tyrant made me appreciate how terrible the current butcher and slaughtermaster are.

[MitGas]

18 minutes ago, Overread said:

*pic of Noise Marine*

Okay, you win. Fair point!

18 minutes ago, Panzer said:

Who says you can't strike your foes when being on music and banner-bearing duty?

Well, you could strike them better without a banner I guess.

[Grimrock]

2 hours ago, adreal said:

I never really got the whole 'mono pose is bad' idea.

Well, one possible negative is loadout. For example, the blood warriors in the old 2 player starter could only be built with axe and gore fist with no banner or blood glaive. Workable for 5 models but heavily incentivized to only get one set and move to the main kit after so you have the free options.

So in this case if GW switches things up for chaos warriors and makes, let's say, halberds the blatantly better option and includes those weapons in the multi part kit that comes later, then the SC warriors will likely be of no value to most players other than as a painting project.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Grimrock

[JPjr]

23 minutes ago, MitGas said:

Well, you could strike them better without a banner I guess.

spoken like someone who has obviously never been clocked in the face by a Chaos tuba or trombone, forged in the hellish brass forges of the Chaos Duardin 

EDIT: now I think about it, Trombone sounds a bit too Nagash'esque. A daemonic french (k)horn maybe?

Edited November 4, 2019 by JPjr

[Panzer]

13 minutes ago, Grimrock said:

Well, one possible negative is loadout. For example, the blood warriors in the old 2 player starter could only be built with axe and gore fist with no banner or blood glaive. Workable for 5 models but heavily incentivized to only get one set and move to the main kit after so you have the free options.

So in this case if GW switches things up for chaos warriors and makes, let's say, halberds the blatantly better option and includes those weapons in the multi part kit that comes later, then the SC warriors will likely be of no value to most players other than as a painting project.

Loadout is not an argument since monopose and multipart aren't exclusive to eachother.

[angrycontra]

6 hours ago, GeneralZero said:

The meta is already like this.

Which make them unique in a way. GW/we don't want all armies to be the same. BTW, magic make "kinda" war machine with wizzards.

Strong missiles have been there and they were OP in this game (skyfire, sylvaneth bows, SCE balista....) and they have been nerfed to the ground. Not good for the game. Now that we have OBR crawlers, powder armies (CoS) and magic (which is more and more shooty), I think that we'll see back some ranged units.

 

There are only 2 battletome missing now in the AoS 2.0 range: KO and tzeench (DoT). (and maybe  some ES for LoN and nurgle) I think that they'll be done in 2020 Q1. And then, everything will be 2.0. So, what next? new armies? new entries for some/many armies? Difficult for GW to maintain the hype 😋

You forgot seraphon. They still need a battletome.

[Kirjava13]

Monopose might work for some of you, but it's ridiculous to take things away from the hobbyist and expect them to pay more. There is a fine line to draw- I don't think many people advocate a return to the monkey-rats of the first multipart Skaven regiment- I will be a happy Clawlord if I never have to glue another tail on in my life. But in a horde regiment, the ability to mix and match small things like weapons and arm position makes a big difference, and in smaller, more elite regiments, monopose models become increasingly obvious. A huge part of the hobby is (or was) customisation, being able to build your guys the way you want them. For me personally, the verisimilitude of not having an army of clones is a big deal. I go to a lot of trouble to make my Stormfiends look different, and I can manage those conversions because Stormfiends are big models and cutting and changing is within the limit of my mediocre hobby abilities... but I look at my Chainrasps, and while I can appreciate the convenience of them being Easy To Build, that convenience is not so much that it overcomes the fact that I am left looking at a unit where every guy is absolutely identical to three others. I do not understand why I should pay for the privilege of having choice removed.

[Grimrock]

49 minutes ago, Panzer said:

Loadout is not an argument since monopose and multipart aren't exclusive to eachother.

Well specifically for this case they're said to be push fit, which usually does exclude multiple loadouts. I guess I should have been clearer. 

[Charleston]

Part of me is like "Yeah, finish your MArines and Khorne Backlog and StD will be in perfect time there to start a new project.

Another Part of me is currently like "Hurrdurr, When does some Rules get Previewed or Leaked?!

Spoiler

WHEN FOR THE SAKE OF THE DARK GODS!!!!"

 

[JangutzKhan]

5 hours ago, Sleboda said:

Do you remember pewter?

Unfortunately I do not 😂 metal is as far back as I go and even that’s a stretch. 

[Rogue Explorator]

I can't see them removing musicians and banner bearers from Chaos Warriors, for me they are the perfect unit for that sort of thing. After all, they aren't just about crushing their enemy, but also making a spectacle of it to catch the eye of their gods. They ought to get theatrical and carrying the instrument or banner is not an impediment but an honor. And a proper Chaos horde just wouldn't be the same without a sea of demented banners.

I wouldn't mind getting back a battlestandart bearer hero though. Get some use for that totem keyword.

I think it's just another case of Snapfits with minimal loadout followed eventually by a full kit. Let's just take a moment to remember that the full Infiltrator/incursors kit has just been released all this time after Shadowspear and the new Codex with their full stats.

There's only really the precedents of Chainrasps, Myrnmourn and Poxwalker in recent memory where a snapfit unit didn't get a multipart kit and those where new units without any options, two of them horde to boot, not one of the games longest standing units with a lot of optional pieces.

We'd have to go back all the way to Dark Vengeance for something like them releasing these Warriors and no multipart to follow up. I really hope they learned not to repeat that one.

 

We will know in about a month, if the experience with Shadowspear and the Space Marine Codex is anything to go by. If there are new Multipart kits for Warriors and Knights, they'll feature in the BT and will likely get previewed before that one gets released. If there aren't, I can still convert a sizable amount of SCs into enough units for my Slaanesh, but my joy about the release will likely be spoiled.

 

P.S.: Looking at Overread I sort of feel like I've shown up in the same dress as the Prom Queen. Well, it's a new experience I guess.

[Austin]

3 hours ago, Kirjava13 said:

Monopose might work for some of you, but it's ridiculous to take things away from the hobbyist and expect them to pay more. There is a fine line to draw- I don't think many people advocate a return to the monkey-rats of the first multipart Skaven regiment- I will be a happy Clawlord if I never have to glue another tail on in my life. But in a horde regiment, the ability to mix and match small things like weapons and arm position makes a big difference, and in smaller, more elite regiments, monopose models become increasingly obvious. A huge part of the hobby is (or was) customisation, being able to build your guys the way you want them. For me personally, the verisimilitude of not having an army of clones is a big deal. I go to a lot of trouble to make my Stormfiends look different, and I can manage those conversions because Stormfiends are big models and cutting and changing is within the limit of my mediocre hobby abilities... but I look at my Chainrasps, and while I can appreciate the convenience of them being Easy To Build, that convenience is not so much that it overcomes the fact that I am left looking at a unit where every guy is absolutely identical to three others. I do not understand why I should pay for the privilege of having choice removed.

[ManlyMuppet88]

I think monopose models are an unfortunate limitation of the technology being used. Plastic models are getting more and more complex (in terms of detail and posing) but that limits flexibility of build.

We can either have the current standard of detail and dynamism in our models with limitations on customisation or we can have more static models with easier to change parts. I’d prefer detail and dynamism.

Most multi-part kits I’ve bought for AoS only really give options for head and hand changes anyway, and those are simple enough on monopose models.

It’ll change eventually though. Plastic has come in leaps and bounds and it’s not going to stop developing any time soon.

 

[Overread]

If you compare Tyranids, which have a lot of build options, they use a ball and socket arrangement for the arms and other key parts. Visually on Tyranids this works as they are spacebugdinosaurmonster things. You can even look at real world bugs and see the very same exposed ball and socket joints on display so it fits with them. However for many other races it doesn't and it can be hard to disguise the ball and socket (the standard of multi-pose models) whilst at the same time achieving a higher level of sculpt quality. 

Heck in the wargame world very few companies actually use multi-pose models and the vast majority are mono-pose. Even companies like Reaper and Privateer Press or Infinity are all using monopose (often no option) builds. 

Also I've found that with multi-pose you often end up with functional limits. Core body and legs are often still fixed if varied in a few stances. Articulated legs can work, but often only on bigger or robotic kits (like the new Warlord Titan) where, again, the joints don't look out of place. Furthermore articulated legs on small models are often more hassle than they are worth for many and increase build complexity and increase chances of errors. 

As a result the core body already has a fixed pose and arms are often then only given a limited range of viable positions to be in. 

 

 

Personally I think that provided GW keeps up with some alternative parts and also keeps up with releasing more generic style monopose we'll be fine. The Warcry warbands, for all their great sculpting, fall down in this one area as they do have a good few "I'm a hero being heroic" posed models in each band which can look a bit odd when posed together in a larger group. However thoes bands were clearly made to be warbands first. The new Chaos warriors and knights we've seen don't have that same issue - they are more "generic" monopose styles and should sit well near each other. 

[MitGas]

You know, a bit off-topic but if we're talking about static models and poses... Why does one of the Varanguards (and to a lesser extent, one of the new Chaos Knights) have a horse that looks like it's it's going to trip or at least throw its rider off? That pose with the horse's front part being so low looks kinda weird to me... 🤔

[Overread]

Just now, MitGas said:

You know, a bit off-topic but if we're talking about static models and poses... Why does one of the Varanguards (and to a lesser extent, one of the new Chaos Knights) have a horse that looks like it's it's going to trip or at least throw its rider off? That pose with the horse's front part being so low looks kinda weird to me... 🤔

If you freeze the frame on action then there are a lot of very odd looking positions that happen in very fluid motion. We don't tend to see them but you can see them with a camera. It's why some authentic sculpts of a high action moment can appear strange because its not a moment we can normally visualise nor see without the camera allowing us to freeze action at that very moment.

 

You get the same range of oddities if you watch a TV show and pause as people are talking. The range of odd faces they go trough is really quite amazing and odd looking. Sometimes "good actors" appear more "normal" because they are posing each and every word, whilst someone talking more naturally is more relaxed and less focused and thus slips in all the oddities. It's why newspapers who want to bad-mouth a person can just take a whole range of shots and then pick out the mood they want to promote. 

 

 

For a horse a good example I know of is if they are jumping. If you take a photo when their hind legs are still connected with the ground whilst the front half is jumping they actually look more like they are leaning on an invisible bar rather than leaping over. A splitsecond later as the legs at the back leave the ground you get that sense of motion and power back. 

[skeen77]

11 hours ago, WarbossKurgan said:

I could be mistaken but I really think it is the back of the Fomoroid Crusher. I will update the image when we see a better angle from the 360.

Or remove it completely if I am wrong  (it won't be the first time!)

Ah, that could be.  I thought those were nipples to each side, but on closer look the musculature may not be right for the front.

[Sleboda]

4 hours ago, JangutzKhan said:

Unfortunately I do not 😂 metal is as far back as I go and even that’s a stretch. 

Stay a while and listen...

Back in 1984, when I bought my first Warhammer models, the material used to make miniatures was lead. It. Was. Awesome. The models felt substantial, and conversions were a breeze because of the softness of the metal. Its only flaw was that if you dropped the model on a hard surface, it would dent. Well, that and the fact that large kits were pretty much not possible. Other than that, lead was great.

Then came the New York State lead trials. I attended them as a guest of the industry (the retail portion of it). Science proved that lead in these models was not a threat, but the cost of fighting in court was high, and this was just one state. The math dictated a switch to a new material.

Along came pewter. The models were not as heavy, were shiny, could be brittle (no bending of arms, for example, for quick re-posing like you could do with lead), and had to be sawed apart with tons of effort to do things like head swaps. On the plus side, they were solid. No worries about dents from drops. It wasn't great, but pewter had its points.

Pewter contains lots of tin. Tin prices could fluctuate, and at one point, this became too much for the industry. GW's way to deal with this was Finecast.

Ouch.

Poor quality castings. Tons of clean up. No heft. When you got a good casting, the detail was sharp. Conversions were a breeze. An exacto knife cut through this resin material with ease. Unfortunately for those who liked the conversion ease, the downsides were insurmountable, and Finecast died. RIP (or RI Blazes, as you may prefer).

All along the way, plastic developed. The future (our present) was plastics. Converting is really, really easy! Large kits are possible. Detail is on par with what you could get in lead. The down sides are they have no heft, no feel that the models are substantial, and the old fan/converters favorite - bits - pretty much died. In the old days if you wanted 25 of that one left arm, you ordered 25 of that one left arm. Now you get all the parts on one sprue, so good luck trading for or sourcing more than a few of that one left arm.

Plastic is really great. It took me a long, long time to get over the loss of lead, but the positives of plastic are hard to ignore, including that conversions are still really easy compared to the pewter we had to endure for a huge stretch of time.

Converters are in a great place right now, even if you start with a push fit kit.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Sleboda

[Sleboda]

5 hours ago, Kirjava13 said:

I look at my Chainrasps, and while I can appreciate the convenience of them being Easy To Build, that convenience is not so much that it overcomes the fact that I am left looking at a unit where every guy is absolutely identical to three others.

It's genuinely interesting to me how much variation there is in hobbyists. Given a choice, all models in one unit would be identical, other than the command group. I like units to look like units, not free roaming bands of loosely associated peeps. 

It also lets me keep two units close to each other, even intermingled, by being able to say "unit one is arm up, unit two is both arms down."

Edited November 4, 2019 by Sleboda

[RandyRyan]

I used to have a full unit of these, so yeah not bothered by these new Warriors being monopose 🤣

[PaniuBraniu]

Before the above photo was taken in late 19th century, there was a serious discussion on whether there is a moment in gallop when all four legs are in the air. As you can see there is no instant in which horse touches the ground with more than two legs. The new GW sculpts reflect gallop very well. 

[Overread]

@PaniuBraniu good find and yes that shows off the "odd poses" very nicely. There's a few poses in there which show what we'd generally accept as a running pose; yet there are a couple (bottom left) that look "odd" even though they are perfectly natural and normal parts of the horses gait when moving. 

 

Which is another aspect many don't realise which is that different breeds will run with a different posture (gait); plus its even possible to train different gaits into a horse. Much like a person can walk differently to another. 

[MitGas]

While I'm thankful for your long and informative replies, I still think that the horse pointing downward in motion is simply wrong. The horse on the left simply looks weird pointing down like that, the angle is too steep even if the overall movement pattern is kinda correct. It can be easily fixed but a tiny bit less dynamic pose might've made for a better kit. But it's fine if everyone disagrees here too. I know less than ****** about horses but it doesn't look ideal to me with its butt far up in the air like that.

Oh and regarding movies: The biggest thing apart from proper screen-acting (which is very different to theatrical acting) is simply the low frame-rate IMO. Neither Will Smith nor Gandalf can make high framerates not lose some of cinema's magical quality and stop things from looking kinda mundane as soon as the framrates goes above 25p (maybe 30p if we're generous).

 

[Overread]

Try viewing it on 360. viewed side on the model isn't actually going "down" its going forward. It's only in the photo that you've posted there where that angle of camera and model makes it appear as if its going down . 

[PaniuBraniu]

These are not horses. The sculptor probably tried to manifest the idea, that these creatures are more dynamic and stronger than regular horses, so that their poses are taken to 11. However, in general terms, the pose on the left corresponds to the first photo.