Fyreslayers: discussing their design

[Fulkes]

6 minutes ago, sandlemad said:

Oh definitely. Primaris offered something like a clean slate in that regard, it's just when GW keeps putting out new variations on Malibu Stacey with a new hat "primaris infantryman with bolter" it makes me wish they'd put some of that energy into something fresher, you know? In fairness most 2019/20 AoS stuff was a lot fresher than what was coming out for 40k so it's not the worst.

I think GW is trying to take a lot of things out of the boxes they're in so they have more creative room to expand model lines without being stuck just remaking kits. Marines are just getting the bulk of it since they're replacing the old Marines with completely new ones to break the most conventions all at once.

[Greybeard86]

16 hours ago, sandlemad said:

There's some cases where I agree with the sentiment. When we have primaris intercessors for 40k, the addition of heavy intercessors, reivers with carbines, incursors, infiltrators... all power armoured space marines with bolters filling the same function and with almost interchangeable names (as well as butting up against the role of veteran intercessors, tactical marines, sternguard veterans), it feels like it's just padding. The illusion of options, minimal creativity, lots of units doing almost the same thing.

It'd be a stretch to say it hurts but when you think of all the design effort and resources that went into that that could have gone into, I dunno, fyreslayers (😉), it's rather irritating. That's a 40k issue in general though and it's pretty wild to turn that into "actually it's good that fyreslayers have only one kind of unit instead of being fleshed out to even the level of ironjawz or FEC".

I think that's coming from a totally different place. Clearly GW is pulling a "mini end times" for marines to replace them with new marines (primaris). Thus the bloat in releases and so on. But I think we generally agree anyway

[Kyriakin]

Based on the size of their threads here on TGA and the general anecdotal things you hear (or don't hear) about the army, they are the second-least successful thing starting with "Fyre", after the Fyre Festival.

If Chaos Dwarfs are gone, Forgeworld should just give Kdaai FIreborn to the Fyreslayers. They would make the army look more themetically interesting.

Edited January 12, 2021 by Kyriakin

[EccentricCircle]

51 minutes ago, Kyriakin said:

Based on the size of their threads here on TGA and the general anecdotal things you hear (or don't hear) about the army, they are the second-least successful thing starting with "Fyre", after the Fyre Festival.

If Chaos Dwarfs are gone, Forgeworld should just give Kdaai FIreborn to the Fyreslayers. They would make the army look more themetically interesting.

I kind of did the opposite, and gave a magmadroth to my Chaos Dwarves.

[Popisdead]

On 1/8/2021 at 1:45 AM, Greybeard86 said:

Yes, 8th edition dwarf sculpts are where FS come from and, for my taste, the worst sculpts in the citadel/marauder/GW range for dwarves. They have better proportions but awful faces (as in almost no face or emotionless faces). Likely both things are connected. Is this a plastic limitation? I don’t think so. IMO this is a design choice. 

Now, I do think they went more than spartan than the  north berserker theme with fyreslayers. That’s a design choice, which we may like or not but it is what it is. The issue I see are the obvious but somehow unsatisfying connection with old slayers.

I dont think old all slayer armies look that nice, I guess FS armies are just reminding us that. Let’s see where GW takes hem, but I think that dispersing the dawi themes across armies has done more harm than good to them.

yeah I don't think I disagree.  It's tricky being an old grumbler (well,. for me I still look back to my 1987 Jes Goodwin Wood Elves), and think 'has this improved in character or style?  

AoS needed to separate itself more and more from old WFB.  

I think if GW made Fyreslayers look as dynamic and amazing as say Khineri Heartrenders we wouldn't be having this discussion.   They could indeed have new ones that are significantly better.  Along with new fanciness of having an in-house plastic GW had to figure out how to do what they wanted.  

I see the culprit as maybe sculptor, time era, and you could toss in a few other reasons like project time-pressure, etc.  They pump out SO MUCH STUFF that the top dog sculptors aren't going to do it all.  

[King Under the Mountain]

I have accidently been ignoring this thread which is ironic because Fyreslayers were my first Age of Sigmar army.  Obviously I am a big fan of Dwarfs in-general and Fyreslayers were a good way to tip my toes in before going all in with Kharadron.  Also Slayers were my favorite aspect of the Warhammer Fantasy Universe.

PROS - 
- I like the "Fire" theme of the army.  
- Feels proper Dwarfish with big axes and beards
- Magmadroths are one of my favorite centerpieces 
 

CONS - 
- Too different from traditional Slayers (monster hunting, grudges, honor)
- "Horde" Army.  When I picture a Slayer army at the start, I pictured a small army of elite fighters, instead I ended up painting close to 50 naked Red Dwarfs.
- Do not like the "Ur Gold" background.  
- Too "samey", not only is it a Horde army, but an Army where everyone looks the same.

SUGGESTIONS - 
- Lore wise, let Grimnir get resurrected and change the theme of the army from mercenary gold finders to a cult of monster killers, each trying to outdo each other by finding a bigger beast to kill.  Make them a natural enemy of SoB.

- Model  wise, just more variety.  Smaller mounts, female models (PLEASE), Warmachines.  Honestly anything that isn't Naked and Bearded.

-Game play wise - Make the army smaller and more elite.  

 

[SorryLizard]

Personally I really like the Fyreslayers - the tough grinding play style appeals to me a lot, Vulkites fighting on death just feels good in game as a little bit of spite to the enemy, priest magic invocation are cool and lots of different prayers. Hammering the runes at the start of the turn, etc. Just maybe change it up so that you don't only have berserkers. We don't need Vulkite and Hearthguard to both be berserkers in an army with 3 bloody units!

All good stuff.

The biggest weakness in their design is that someone let the GW painters paint them with pale skin and orange hair and it looks dreadful (IMO, your mileage may vary, etc., etc.) as a colour scheme. Mix it up with different skin tones, different hair colours, etc. These aren't old world slayers and there is no cutural requirement to dye your hair orange any more. If I were to paint a full army of them at some point I'd make sure the different unit types had different hair colours to help add some visual variety to things. Hearthgurd with yellow tips, vulkites with red, aurics with blue, etc.

The cost of getting the army has kept me away from them (20 hearthguard cost WHAT!?).

Edited January 20, 2021 by SorryLizard

[Greybeard86]

24 minutes ago, SorryLizard said:

The biggest weakness in their design is that someone let the GW painters paint them with pale skin and orange hair and it looks dreadful (IMO, your mileage may vary, etc., etc.) as a colour scheme. Mix it up with different skin tones, different hair colours, etc. These aren't old world slayers and there is no cutural requirement to dye your hair orange any more

They wanted to capitalize on the old slayer's following, that's why. But they failed at it, badly.

24 minutes ago, SorryLizard said:

 

The cost of getting the army has kept me away from them (20 hearthguard cost WHAT!?).

 

It is not only that; all the non mounted heroes are barely different from the baseline troops in terms of sculpt, hardly justifying their price tags. I got all of mine second hand, it felt like a bad decision to buy a single heroe form 20+ euros with the same level of detail as a 45 euros 10+ box. Same idea with hearthguard.

Honestly, go the custodes way. Most "regular" shield captains (leaders) can be constructed from the basic box of "battlelines" just using some of the "upgrades" it has (a cape, etc.).,

Greed kills the cow, sometimes.

[Beliman]

30 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

They wanted to capitalize on the old slayer's following, that's why. But they failed at it, badly.

They used the old slayer design to build something diferent. Btw, I think that everybody in this forum knows what you think about Fyreslayers XDDD.

[Greybeard86]

On 1/20/2021 at 1:31 PM, Beliman said:

They used the old slayer design to build something diferent. Btw, I think that everybody in this forum knows what you think about Fyreslayers XDDD.

Me an aprox. half the people voting in this poll.

The point is not to crab on Fyreslayers, there is no need for that. Overwhelmingly evidence tells us they were a bust.

What I intended is to have a conversation on why that was the case, which we did, to a certain extent.

Why? Because I like slayer sculpts and I'd rather see them getting support than axed because they missed the mark with FS.

[Beliman]

7 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:

Me an aprox. half the people voting in this poll

I didn't want to say that. I was talking more about what people like and what they don't.

One thing is clear, 99% of the people in this thread (doesn't matter if voted yes or no) don't like a roster of miniatures that all of them look the same (and 98% don't like that they have a small roster of troops).

Appart from that, I must say that it's dificult to predict anything else. Some people say that their "faceless" thing didn't help (maybe... or maybe not). Others say that their models are a bit static for being "berzerks" (maybe... or maybe not). Others say that the painting did more harm than anything (maybe... or maybe not). Etc.

What I wanted to say is that you made a clear point (and I'm with you in some of them) but most important thing is that all points are valid. Maybe not as globaly accepted as the uniformity in the model range, but still, they are opinions of possible buyers.

Btw, sorry If my last post was a bit agressive, I didn't want that. English is not my mothertongue and my phone doesn't help a bit with the corrector.

Edited January 22, 2021 by Beliman

[Greybeard86]

3 hours ago, Beliman said:

I didn't want to say that. I was talking more about what people like and what they don't.

One thing is clear, 99% of the people in this thread (doesn't matter if voted yes or no) don't like a roster of miniatures that all of them look the same (and 98% don't like that they have a small roster of troops).

Appart from that, I must say that it's dificult to predict anything else. Some people say that their "faceless" thing didn't help (maybe... or maybe not). Others say that their models are a bit static for being "berzerks" (maybe... or maybe not). Others say that the painting did more harm than anything (maybe... or maybe not). Etc.

What I wanted to say is that you made a clear point (and I'm with you in some of them) but most important thing is that all points are valid. Maybe not as globaly accepted as the uniformity in the model range, but still, they are opinions of possible buyers.

Btw, sorry If my last post was a bit agressive, I didn't want that. English is not my mothertongue and my phone doesn't help a bit with the corrector.

Same boat, do not worry. Exactly why people don't like that varies by person, as expected. This is just a collection of such opinions.

I am not claiming any opinion carries more weight than another, but it is clear that they are not a popular army. Hopefully if anyone at GW drops by these forums now and then (and they do), this might give a tiny bit of an insight to them.

Again, I love slayers, I hope they turn it around for FS.

[MitGas]

Keeping myself short here as I'm not an expert on Fyreslayers but what I hate about the model range is how much they look alike. Different hair colors would help paint_wise but I think they should also add  more differences to the dwarf models in the range.... and while this might not be what some want, i think something that's NOT a dwarf could work well. Yes, I know, it's Fyreslayers but maybe more lizardy things or magma-golems /whatever would help break up the "nude little dude " spam look... monotony's seldom a good thing.

Edited January 22, 2021 by MitGas

[Kramer]

9 hours ago, Greybeard86 said:

Me an aprox. half the people voting in this poll.

The point is not to crab on Fyreslayers, there is no need for that. Overwhelmingly evidence tells us they were a bust.

What I intended is to have a conversation on why that was the case, which we did, to a certain extent.

Why? Because I like slayer sculpts and I'd rather see them getting support than axed because they missed the mark with FS.

I’m still wondering by what metric they were a bust and if by GW metrics they are bust. Which could result in them being axed.

(Although I find that highly unlikely for the next decade for any AOS released faction.)

you say roughly half the people agree with you. Honestly from the comments it seems half agree with you up to a point. But it’s a good question if not liking them equals that. Your guess is as good as mine. 

but pulling on that thread, how many people need to like an army for it to be a succes? (And as a result how many need to buy them). 
thinking of the last two releases:

lot of push back on the lumineth on reveal as well, at least online. Where would the score land if the question was do you like the new iteration of high elves. 

soms of behemat seems to have gotten a lot more positive response. But how many players have actually bought into that crazy expensive kit? In the mini sales funnel. Do they need a higher positive attitude to convert into sales? 

From a GW perspective sales are a clear metric. So have they sold enough? I don’t know, and beyond tournament data, which is very skewed, we don’t really know. 

Not trying to argue that they are or aren’t a bust. Just that a binary choice ‘do you like them’ isn’t really enough data. 
(including the qualifier as ‘the new iteration of dwarven slayers’ further muddies the water Imo) 

 

[Aloth_Corfiser]

@SorryLizard's paint scheme is a perfect example of what you can achieve with a brush. I love the contrast and the dark brown skin. It really conveys the "hotness" (pun intended ) of the new Slayers and their theme. 
Even though I voted "no" on the poll: The general theme appeals to me. Warrior Monk / Mercenary Lava - Duardin are a cool and unique concept. 
I would like if GW could more go into the Monk Theme - in my mind it fits so well with AOS being a game with Gods who have agency.

The reason for my "no" vote was basicly the official GW paint scheme I think - it shaped my impression of the Fyreslayers a bit too much. I almost immediately think of pale naked thighs.
In the end it has a lot to do with the colours, in my opinion, the official paint scheme doesn't do them any justice, but others have discussed this before.

We will just have to see what GW comes up with in the Future - I would not give up hope.
The things I would like to see explored are: (obviously I don't know anything about Fyreslayer Lore)  
-Fyreslayer engineering, Siege Weapons
-a unit of Priests or a unit of Iniates/Novices

[Beer & Pretzels Gamer]

Okay, I had no (orange hued) skin (with gold tattoos) in this game but have to admit some of the negativity I’ve been reading in this thread and others lately re:Fyreslayers got my contrarian instincts up because from the outside looking in I just didn’t get it.  While I get that they all have the Mohawks and similar dwarfish builds I’ve never had any real trouble telling the units apart.

Below is my simple mental guide for the distinguishing the non-Heroe foot units which has never taken me more than a glance and a few seconds to run through:

1) Are they short naked guys with Mohawks on 32mm bases?

No: then they aren’t Fyreslayers so why are you using this guide?

Yes: congratulations, you are looking at a Fyreslayer so please continue to next question.

2) Are they carrying single-handed weapons or double-handed weapons?

Single: Congratulations, you have identified a Vulkite Berzerker.  If you would like more information please continue with question 3V).

Double: Congratulations, you have identified Hearthguard.  If you would like more information please continue with question 3H)

-X-X-X-

3V) Are they carrying a weapon in both hands or do they have a shield in one of them?

Both Hands: Congratulations, you have identified a Vulkite Berzerker w/Paired Fyresteel Handaxes.  They’ll be rerolling Hit Rolls against you.  Good luck!

Shield: This unit will be throwing those shields at you when they charge (sounds silly but hey, these are naked dwarves were talking about so...) and getting a Save bonus when they don’t.  If you would like more information please proceed to question 4V)

4V) Is the weapon they are carrying “choppy” or “pointy”?

Choppy: this is an Axe.  It has a better chance of wounding but no Rend units base profile.

Pointy: this is a War-pick, which probably means it is angrier than a normal mining pick, or at least has fewer headaches because it isn’t being slammed into a rock wall all day.  But I digress.  It has a slightly worse chance of wounding you but has Rend if it does.

-X-X-X-

3H) Does the weapon have a big Dragon Head on it?

Yes: Congratulations, you have spotted the increasingly rare on the table Auric Hearthguard!  They will be shooting at you and a bullet sponge for those all important Fyreslayers Heroes.

No: Condolences, you have identified the all too common Hearthguard Berzerker.  They are probably in a bunch of 20x and there’s probably two sets of them on the table and good luck getting them off the table if they are fully buffed.  The best idea having identified them is probably to identify a way to avoid them... If you can’t avoid them and thus need to determine which type you are facing please continue to question 4H) 

Not Sure: my good friend, if you can’t identify a dragon head maybe fantasy wargaming isn’t for you?

4H) we are so glad you are interested in agriculture and are looking to raise farm animals to compete at your local fair... wait, not that Four H?  Ahh, back to Hearthguard Berzerkers.  Is there a very large chain, longer than the model is tall winding around the model?

Yes: That is the Flamestryke Poleaxe.  Better hope your opponent isn’t rolling 6s because they’ll be dealing out 2 MWs to ya.  It’s normal attacks though don’t have Rend...

No: That is Broadaxe.  You don’t have to worry about MWs on 6s but you do have to worry about Rend.

And because there are not any other non-Hero units (sorry Chosen Axes, you really aren’t played enough to count... but if any readers are confused they’re the ones running in too small a unit size.) that’s really all it takes.  

All of which is a long way of saying that there is more to each of these models the the Mohawks.  The design of the weapons is very distinctive, in my opinion, making them not just easy to differentiate on the table but providing a pretty cool aesthetic.  The Magmapike may be a top five non-Hero weapon aesthetic for me (making me wish they had a better place on the table, but that’s a different thread).

And, as others have noted, this is all before you use paint schemes to further differentiate them.  My contrarian instincts were so catalyze by the naysayers here that I’ve actually gone out and bought a Fyreslayers army where I am giving a different back story to each unit as the basis for a unique color scheme.  Will switch to the Fyreslayers thread though for that.

 

Edited January 23, 2021 by Beer & Pretzels Gamer

[EccentricCircle]

This thread has also convinced me to finally get some fyreslayers. I've decided that I want to try a darker colour scheme, and make something really not orange to see how that looks. We shall see...

[Noserenda]

Worth a mention here that im hoping the Wandering White Dwarf story in White Dwarf means GW is casting their eye over the poor Fyreslayers. It was interesting to see behind their scenes a bit and a good little story.

I think it was interesting that Grombrindal is sad at what the Fyreslayers abandoned/lost, i suspect we will see him similarly encountering Kharadon and Dispossessed, maybe even Chaos Dwarves, have similar thoughts and then perhaps look to "fix" things somehow? 

Ofc whether he steps up himself, Kicks Grungi or brings Grimmnir or Valaya back could have wildly different outcomes but a Fyreslayer revamp or expansion could be on the cards either way.

[Doko]

I hope fyreslayers get the same second wave that lumineths got only some months after their release......

[Kramer]

On 1/23/2021 at 10:53 PM, EccentricCircle said:

This thread has also convinced me to finally get some fyreslayers. I've decided that I want to try a darker colour scheme, and make something really not orange to see how that looks. We shall see...

Haha I dug out my underworlds warband out of the pile of potential as well 🙈

[Clan's Cynic]

12 hours ago, Noserenda said:

Worth a mention here that im hoping the Wandering White Dwarf story in White Dwarf means GW is casting their eye over the poor Fyreslayers.

Vostarg got some rules/a short story in White Dwarf a couple of years ago too so I wouldn't hold your breath

On another note, I stuck my head over at the Chaos forum and that Legion of Azgorh has more pages on their discussion than Fyreslayers should really tell us something.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Clan's Cynic

[eciu]

2 hours ago, Clan's Cynic said:

On another note, I stuck my head over at the Chaos forum and that Legion of Azgorh has more pages on their discussion than Fyreslayers should really tell us something.

That feeding people for several years with a simple diet of only  cooked potatos (some of them still with skins)  is bad ? 

[Enoby]

2 hours ago, Clan's Cynic said:

Vostarg got some rules/a short story in White Dwarf a couple of years ago too so I wouldn't hold your breath

On another note, I stuck my head over at the Chaos forum and that Legion of Azgorh has more pages on their discussion than Fyreslayers should really tell us something.

That said, number of pages of discussion isn't always a good measure of popularity - from what I know, Fyreslayers are pretty mono-list.

[Greybeard86]

On 1/25/2021 at 6:26 PM, Enoby said:

That said, number of pages of discussion isn't always a good measure of popularity - from what I know, Fyreslayers are pretty mono-list.

I thought the community surveys I linked had settled this one

[Enoby]

19 minutes ago, Greybeard86 said:

I thought the community surveys I linked had settled this one

Oh yeah, that's a better measure 😛 was just talking about pages of discussion on its own