harrocks Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 love the old figures - although am prob. not going to go Tomb Kings (love the mis-terming Tome Kings earlier in the thread) after all. But the 'good' and 'evil' thing - given the real world projection of actual peoples onto fantasy stereotypes (or vice-versa, if you prefer) which most certainly is a 'thing', is crass at best, and bloody dangerous at worst. Hard to believe that suits etc can be unaware of such considerations in 2024 (etc etc), so I have to continue to wonder about some of the idealogical strains that fester in the company. 4 1 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petitionercity Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 On 1/9/2024 at 10:23 AM, JackStreicher said: Edit: Added the Lance Formation 1,2,3 (6 Models) Updated with 75mm oval to rectangular (single and a unit of 6 (3x2). Additionally 50mm round to square in a unit of 3. You can do what you want with these files expect selling them. 😃 This should be all useful conversions. If you need more let me know! (I might create a thread for this a mod could pin if they wanted) Jack, is it possible to create a thread with all your stls in one place? And/or create a cults page? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStreicher Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 2 minutes ago, petitionercity said: Jack, is it possible to create a thread with all your stls in one place? And/or create a cults page? Thread! remind me in 12 hours (got the files on a different laptop) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabush Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 What are people thinking regarding formations? I like the look and compact size of 5x4 for infantry. But I’ve read some comments about people going 6 wide, and 3-5 deep. I’m gonna start by using my old dark elves collection. And right now looking at Spearmen 6x5, xbows 6x2, blackguards 5x4, corsairs 5x3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollow Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, harrocks said: But the 'good' and 'evil' thing - given the real world projection of actual peoples onto fantasy stereotypes (or vice-versa, if you prefer) which most certainly is a 'thing', is crass at best, and bloody dangerous at worst. Hard to believe that suits etc can be unaware of such considerations in 2024 (etc etc), so I have to continue to wonder about some of the idealogical strains that fester in the company. Sorry what? Chaos? Beasts of Chaos? Orcs? The Undead?.... These are archetypal fantasy baddies. If people are projecting actual peoples onto these fanasy stereotypes then that is very much a them problem and they would be best left to shout into the void that is Twitter. I can't believe that in 2024 we have this kind of non-sensical, uber sensitive anti-fun. Ewww. 6 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Red King Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Hollow said: Sorry what? Chaos? Beasts of Chaos? Orcs? The Undead?.... These are archetypal fantasy baddies. If people are projecting actual peoples onto these fanasy stereotypes then that is very much a them problem and they would be best left to shout into the void that is Twitter. I can't believe that in 2024 we have this kind of non-sensical, uber sensitive anti-fun. Ewww. Benefit of the doubt here that you actually don't get that it isn't the undead part of EGYPTIAN unded people take issue with calling evil right? It's the fact that most factions of "good" are either European humans or European versions of things like elves and dwarves and the evil things are either European versions of evil things (like beastmen) or conversely any faction that isn't European. Mongolian goblins and Norse, (loosely) native American spider riders and African "savage" orcs. Take it to AoS and you have "Persian inspired Slaanesh" "Babylonia inspired chorfs (hopefully)" and you start to notice a pattern of "others" = evil 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overtninja Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 I suspect such connotations are baked into western fantasy as a whole, right back to Tolkien, where the 'others' were indeed evil, and did indeed come from roughly geographic south and east. with that said, I think we can all agree that conquering mummy lords and their skeleton armies are baddies, regardless of how not!egyptian they are. the 'they have feathers and are thus Native American coded' for the goblins could be a questionable take in itself, and at least personally I've never read savage orcs as 'African' (whatever THAT means), but instead as actual bone-wielding stone-age orcs (ignoring the fact that the Stone Age sported surprisingly complex civilizations in various places and decent-sized populations, featuring industrial tool production and other things associated with 'modern' human life). given that most everything in WHF is based loosely on the real world, it just so happens that the center of the human and elf lands is Europe and is surrounded by places that correspond to not-europe, and the various folks coming from those lands have a whiff of corresponding real-world cultures aesthetically. I mean, a goblin living on the steppes would totally wear a furry hat, for example. I'd agree there is some unfortunate elements of racial or ethnic caricature in some of the older Warhammer models, given that they were created in a time and climate where such things were considered actually funny. I'm hoping that having new ranges for Kislev and Cathay (my goodness what a colonialist name that is!) will demonstrate that modern miniature design will not be repeating that sort of thing. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollow Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 (edited) I should have just ignored it. If you think Savage Orks are some kind of racial play-up that says so much more about you than GW. Edited January 28 by Hollow 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 4 minutes ago, Hollow said: I should have just ignored it. If you think Savage Orks are some kind of racial play-up that says so much more about you than GW. I think it is a cultural thing. I've noticed users from different countries get more or less affected by this kind of racial similitude. So there's no need to get mad about that (not talking specifically about you). In the end we are a bunch of users from different countries and each one has different cultural references. Just embrace the diversity and how cool it is that we are not clones that think completely the same. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard86 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 The hobgoblin rider tribes just happen to wear fur hats and use terms like khan? I mean cmon, we all know that back in the day GW was “inspired” by both fantasy tropes and somehow inappropriate caricatures of the different real cultures around the globe. The warhammer universes were mostly a parody of the real world and nerd culture, and they leaned heavily on it. they wanted you to recognize the source material, I guess they were not so concerned about copyrights back then (specially given how liberally they borrowed). For me, what makes it a little more ok is that they also were quite brutal with their own culture. This was more obvious in 40k, with the whole repressive state, but I believe that few cultures were unscathed in fantasy (who are the good guys exactly?). Insofar as they are a tad more sensitive moving forward while still leaning on the absurd (and no good guys!), personally im fine with TOW. But no good and bad guys, please. Make the “good” pretty bad and the “bad” have their moments. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarakUrbaz Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) Dividing the Warhammer Fantasy factions into Good and Evil actually dates back into 2005's Conquest of the New World campaign, complete with Tomb Kings being Evil. Edited January 29 by BarakUrbaz 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Red King Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 All of this discussion that's not about the game that I'm actually super excited to play is a great example of why they really would have been better off NOT doubling down on good versus evil. Maybe only a few people care (in the grand scheme of things I think very few people care about any given issue) but what exactly was the benefit that was worth even this level of disunity? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overtninja Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 14 minutes ago, The Red King said: All of this discussion that's not about the game that I'm actually super excited to play is a great example of why they really would have been better off NOT doubling down on good versus evil. Maybe only a few people care (in the grand scheme of things I think very few people care about any given issue) but what exactly was the benefit that was worth even this level of disunity? it's a good question, actually. perhaps the simplistic binary is meant to appeal to younger audiences, who generally think in terms of good guys and bad guys? that said, the dudes who literally want to burn everything down or unmake the world or eat everyone or subjugate the world or whatever would be considered generally negative and 'bad' by most measures, so it's not like it's beyond the pale. they probably would have gone with 'order vs. chaos' if that weren't already solidly a Warhammer thing (since warcraft 2, even) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarakUrbaz Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 42 minutes ago, The Red King said: All of this discussion that's not about the game that I'm actually super excited to play is a great example of why they really would have been better off NOT doubling down on good versus evil. Maybe only a few people care (in the grand scheme of things I think very few people care about any given issue) but what exactly was the benefit that was worth even this level of disunity? I believe designers specifically stated they wanted to go for a less morally grey tone, with the idea that things become worse as you get closer to the End Times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Red King Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) 27 minutes ago, overtninja said: they probably would have gone with 'order vs. chaos' if that weren't already solidly a Warhammer thing (since warcraft 2, even) That's the thing. I GET order versus Chaos. When one side wants to melt everybody down to spiritual primordial goo you take any allies you can get. But why GW felt tomb kings MUST be evil to the point of noticeably pushing that narrative multiple times is beyond me. The writer in me (hobby not professional mind you) can't fathom anyone saying "I really just think it will be better if this mature setting is dumbed down to the level of an early Saturday morning cartoon." Edited January 29 by The Red King 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogregut Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 Put together another sorceress and made a couple of unit fillers for the dark elves 6 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skreech Verminking Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 6 hours ago, Ejecutor said: diversity and how cool it is that we are not clones that think completely the same. It be a boring world if that was the case😂 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStreicher Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) 10 hours ago, Sabush said: What are people thinking regarding formations? I like the look and compact size of 5x4 for infantry. But I’ve read some comments about people going 6 wide, and 3-5 deep. I’m gonna start by using my old dark elves collection. And right now looking at Spearmen 6x5, xbows 6x2, blackguards 5x4, corsairs 5x3. We figured this out after our last game. The best size for a unit is ~7 wide (between 6-8) 8 is too unwieldy, 6 not different enough from 5 5 lacks output, yet is very maneuverable Edited January 29 by JackStreicher 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beliman Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 5 hours ago, The Red King said: That's the thing. I GET order versus Chaos. When one side wants to melt everybody down to spiritual primordial goo you take any allies you can get. But why GW felt tomb kings MUST be evil to the point of noticeably pushing that narrative multiple times is beyond me. It's all about the story. We are not playing Warhammer Fantasy as a setting, we are playing TOW as a story, a "movie" if you like. Doesn't matter if the evil guy is doing the right thing for the whole setting, it's still portrayed as a villain in this narrative arc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerekKruger Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 6 hours ago, The Red King said: All of this discussion that's not about the game that I'm actually super excited to play is a great example of why they really would have been better off NOT doubling down on good versus evil. Maybe only a few people care (in the grand scheme of things I think very few people care about any given issue) but what exactly was the benefit that was worth even this level of disunity? It bothers me, though my solution is to simply head-cannon it away. Warhammer had always been defined by it's moral greyness to me (I cut my teeth with WFRP, where that's even more front and centre) and that is how it shall remain in my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabush Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 53 minutes ago, JackStreicher said: We figured this out after our last game. The best size for a unit is ~7 wide (between 6-8) 8 is too unwieldy, 6 not different enough from 5 5 lacks output, yet is very maneuverable Interesting! I will need to rethink my formations a bit. But would like to play a couple of games first before deciding. Another factor that could weigh in is the number of units I want to have in the frontline. 3+ units 7 models wide takes up a lot of space on the board and could be very cumbersome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStreicher Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) 2 hours ago, Sabush said: 3+ units 7 models wide takes up a lot of space on the board and could be very cumbersome. Exactly. I struggled with maneuvering and I had: 2x 5 wide 1x 8 wide (+ chariot) 2x 8 wide (croissbows) 1x 6 wide 1x chariot (Hydra) I've compilated all 3D files in this thread: Edited January 29 by JackStreicher 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamopower Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) 23 hours ago, Sabush said: Interesting! I will need to rethink my formations a bit. But would like to play a couple of games first before deciding. Another factor that could weigh in is the number of units I want to have in the frontline. 3+ units 7 models wide takes up a lot of space on the board and could be very cumbersome. With six wide you are also "always" getting full attacks. I believe 4 wide is very viable option as well for units like elven spearmen (edit: had only checked phoenix guard and the others were regular) or dwarfs, where few additional s3 attacks won't make much difference to the static resolution of keeping the max ranks as long as possible. And I also believe that having two units of 16 is often much better than having one unit of 30 with those units. Edited January 30 by Jamopower 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gotz Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 one quick random question... when getting a unit (let's say 20 minis) with a character... you have to spend points for 19 or for 20 minis? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollow Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 2 minutes ago, Gotz said: one quick random question... when getting a unit (let's say 20 minis) with a character... you have to spend points for 19 or for 20 minis? 19. Models have individual point values. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.