Jump to content

Stormcast and Orruk Warclans Battletomes - First Impressions


Recommended Posts

Since the first full reviews of the new Stormcast and Orruk Warclans Battletomes are now out, I think it might be fun to talk about our first impressions of the books. Particularly because they are the first examples we have of books designed for 3rd Edition.

 

For Stormcast, I think we finally have a book that makes them play like we intuitively expect them to, as a small, elite force (but, you know, actually good). Lots of the preliminary lists I see people put up (even those not just spamming Stormdrakes) are comfortably below 30 models, so they might actually be a good beginner army now. The two dragon bros also give them a really nice centerpiece option.

On the topic of dragons, the Stormdragon units seem to be early favourites, and it's easy to see why. They really are a complete package (mobile, hit decently hard, tanky, do mortals...), and are aggressively pointed at that. I think the dragon spam list is going to be real, but it also seems like a prime candidate to be point-costed out of viability at some point. A small note in particular: I like that the rules give you the option to run a single Stormdrake after you build one of the two models in the kit as the hero option. That's definitely a change they should retroactively apply to Blightlords.

 

Warclans, and in particular Kruleboyz, seem much harder to evaluate. Many of their abilities seem strong, but their strength does not come from pure numbers. There are lots of targeting and movement shennenigans to be had, it seems. Their army-wide mortals on 6s to hit are also not to be underestimated.

Sadly, Kruleboyz magic still seems to fall into the old "Destruction Casino" archetype: Good spells, but with high casting values and no real magic bonuses in to be found. I think there is one in Big Waaagh, though, which is looking pretty interesting as an allegiance. I really like that it allows you to preserve the flavour of the different subfaction this time around by giving you access to their signature rule even if you mix them.

 

Overall, the design of the new rules seems more simplified, with a lot of filler options removed. It also appears that command abilites have been removed from warscrolls, although I have not checked them all yet. We might interpret this as the design direction of the new edition: Complex core rules, but less complex tomes. Instead of armies getting all kinds of different command abilites, they get to interact with the core commands in different ways. I can't tell if that change is good or bad, but I wonder whether GW will be able to balance old books that still have access to unique commands with new ones that don't.

  • Like 13
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

honestly the only things that i dont like is that these new tomes have clearly advantages on the others

 

-faction Grand strategies 

-no artifact/ca locked on faction

 

They could made a faq were they gave all the factions the same things

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yondaime said:

honestly the only things that i dont like is that these new tomes have clearly advantages on the others

 

-faction Grand strategies 

-no artifact/ca locked on faction

 

They could made a faq were they gave all the factions the same things

As far as I can tell, the rules writers are still being pretty conservative with faction specific grand strategies, battle tactics and core battalions.

For grand strategies and battle tactic, I think it's only a matter of time before some subfaction gets an overpowered one that is super trivial to complete. Although, to be fair, as far as grand strategies go that's basically already the case for Prized Sorcery in Tzeentch/Lumineth. As for core battalions, as long as the best thing they can give you is Magnificent, I am less worried about them. But I would still rather not have faction-specific grand strategies, battle tactics and core battalions at all. Introducing them just seems to reintroduce the problem they were originally supposed to solve.

I didn't pay particular attention to how the new subfactions handle artefacts, because that has always been pretty inconsistent between tomes. Some lock you in, some let you take generic stuff and some have a full suite of options for every subfaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we can take anything from the first two battletomes:

  • No more Command Abilities on warscrolls. Some subfactions can give a Commands but the point still remains. Some of the old Commands turned to be a less powerful ability.
  • Subfactions have only one ability without forcing to take artifacts and command traits. 
  • All Allegiance seems to have a second pro-active ability ("One use" or "Chose before the first turn"). Something like an Amendment/Footnote from KOs.
  • A lot less artifacts (with a lot of "one use"), traits, mounts, etc... and a lot of them are not tied to one specific unit (only Monster for some Mount Traits).
  • New Core Battalions with same rewards as Core Book Battalions.
  • A lot of profiles are mixed together.
  • Grand Strategies and Tactics for each army. Some of them are locked behind some keywords.
  • I think that there is anotehr Monstruous Rampage or Heroic Action. I had the feeling to see a lot more expanded forms of this two mechanics but it seems that's ot the case. /sadface.
  • First "new" mixed battletome, Orruk Warclans! Seems that all three factions can only use 1/3 of the Grand Strategies/Tactics and can't use other units in their own faction (Can't use Brutes in Kruleboyz as allies or coalition). Not a fan of that and I'm a bit more scared of mixing Dwarfs in one book...

Overall, it seems that the books can be played a lot better than before, time will tell.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The tomes look fine. Not 2nd edition Slaanesh v1, but also not 2nd edition Slaanesh v2 either, so that’s good.

The problem, especially with the SCE one, is that it’s just bland. 3/3/-1/1 everywhere. Tons of abilities removed, leaving various degrees of +1 to hit/exploding 6s. Use a CA for free. Do a thing once per game. Solid fundamentals for sure but nothing exciting. Which I guess we’ve been asking for? IDK how to feel about this.

When we get to the point that everyone has a 3.0 tome and IF GW can restrain themselves on the faction stuff the game should end up in a great place. The problem, as ever, is that we play the game as it is now, not as it is in the future. SCE can use one faction CA once per game, meanwhile over here gargants are still standing on objectives and winning games and Tzeentch Archaon is still winning events by changing everyone’s dice. That being said I’d rather use this tome than the v2 one.

I’m also not convinced that GW can continue to hold themselves back (track record says no), and I’m concerned there will be an overreaction from the community to spice things up, which leads us back to Slaanesh v1 as the worst extreme.

 

Edited by PrimeElectrid
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Beliman said:

If we can take anything from the first two battletomes:

  • No more Command Abilities on warscrolls. Some subfactions can give a Commands but the point still remains. Some of the old Commands turned to be a less powerful ability.
  • Subfactions have only one ability without forcing to take artifacts and command traits. 
  • All Allegiance seems to have a second pro-active ability ("One use" or "Chose before the first turn"). Something like an Amendment/Footnote from KOs.
  • A lot less artifacts (with a lot of "one use"), traits, mounts, etc... and a lot of them are not tied to one specific unit (only Monster for some Mount Traits).
  • New Core Battalions with same rewards as Core Book Battalions.
  • A lot of profiles are mixed together.
  • Grand Strategies and Tactics for each army. Some of them are locked behind some keywords.
  • I think that there is anotehr Monstruous Rampage or Heroic Action. I had the feeling to see a lot more expanded forms of this two mechanics but it seems that's ot the case. /sadface.
  • First "new" mixed battletome, Orruk Warclans! Seems that all three factions can only use 1/3 of the Grand Strategies/Tactics and can't use other units in their own faction (Can't use Brutes in Kruleboyz as allies or coalition). Not a fan of that and I'm a bit more scared of mixing Dwarfs in one book...

Overall, it seems that the books can be played a lot better than before, time will tell.

Confused at the can't use there own faction. Surely they can ally with other units in the book?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AaronWilson said:

Confused at the can't use there own faction. Surely they can ally with other units in the book?

I don't think any book can ally with itself, can it?

In any case, I guess what the book tells us is that as soon as two Orruk subfactions mix, it's a Big Waaagh. It's not the worst, honestly, because it probably makes the individual subfactions much easier to balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

I don't think any book can ally with itself, can it?

In any case, I guess what the book tells us is that as soon as two Orruk subfactions mix, it's a Big Waaagh. It's not the worst, honestly, because it probably makes the individual subfactions much easier to balance.

Ermm.. well I guess not?

I just assumed that Kruleboyz, Bonesplittas & Ironjawz would all have their own Allies & would include them selves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AaronWilson said:

Confused at the can't use there own faction. Surely they can ally with other units in the book?

Me too. At least, I expected to see other keywords as coalition units, but it seems that not the case. To play Kruleboyz, all your warscrolls must have the Kruleboyz keyword. Same with Bonnespliterz and Ironjawz. And Orruk Warclans have Gloomspite Gits as allies...

In other words, you can't play Kruleboyz with a "mercenary" group of Brutes. Or Ironjawz with a MegaBoss that made a deal with Kruleboyz for some artillery. The Sloggoth can't even be taken in Kruleboyz (doens't have Kruleboyz keyword).

I suppose that it will be fixe'd in the next FAQ, but it's a bit weird at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Beliman said:

Me too. At least, I expected to see other keywords as coalition units, but it seems that not the case. To play Kruleboyz, all your warscrolls must have the Kruleboyz keyword. Same with Bonnespliterz and Ironjawz. And Orruk Warclans have Gloomspite Gits as allies...

In other words, you can't play Kruleboyz with a "mercenary" group of Brutes. Or Ironjawz with a MegaBoss that made a deal with Kruleboyz for some artillery. The Sloggoth can't even be taken in Kruleboyz (doens't have Kruleboyz keyword).

I suppose that it will be fixe'd in the next FAQ, but it's a bit weird at the moment.

Okay... so you can either play Ironjawz, Kruleboyz, Bonesplittas, Or Big Waagh and all four of them can ally gloomspite gitz?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, AaronWilson said:

Okay... so you can either play Ironjawz, Kruleboyz, Bonesplittas, Or Big Waagh and all four of them can ally gloomspite gitz?

Yep, exactly that. Big Waagh can have any warscroll with Orruk Warclans (so, all Kruleboyz, Bonnesplittaz, Ironajwz and the Sloggoth).

Edited by Beliman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My initial reaction to the Battletomes was that I was a little disappointed by how bland/simplistic they seemed at a glance, but on reflection, I actually think that's good design. Not necessarily exciting design, but good.

If most armies are drawing their power and intricacies from the same source (core rules), then the game will be far easier to balance over all, with point values becoming the main make-or-break element.

I was overall more impressed with the design elements on display in the Orruk Warclans BT than the Stormcast, but to be honest, the raw stats present in the Stormcast are much better.

I love the way they redesigned the Mawkrusha's destructive bulk to work as an add-on to the Stomp action, and the new ability added to Brutes for controlling objectives is sublime.

The rules are a lot less populated than they used to be, which feels a lot less flavorful, but should ultimately be for the better. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate what they are trying to do by simplifying down all the command trait, artifact and spell lists and I think in this case they've just about gotten away with, however there are maybe like 5 or artifacts across both books that can compete with Amulet of Destiny, if this is what 3e tomes will look like that artifact will be showing up in like 70% of lists.

I think you can get a taste of what it will look like if done badly though when you look at the Stormcast command traits. There are 4 options, 1 of which is easily dismissed because it's not availble to your allegiance (Stormhost/Stormkeep) another of which is only valuable if you go heavy on monsters. The Stormhost trait is just something you already had for free, handed back to you. I don't know if its just me but Envoy of the Heavens screams trap at me as well.

Getting rid of CA's on warscrolls for 'use generic CA for free' is proper boring, I think the way spells are written on the scrolls now is less clear which I don't like. I don't think this new version of sub-factions encourages interesting decisions, it's more just a little bit of seasoning to your army after the fact.

Liberators are still rubbish and the model I wanted the most improvement from, the Tauralon, is still not worth bothering with outside of a heavy shooting list.

This probably sounds like I am really negative about these books, I'm not, I think they are solid, neither book, the Stormcast one in particular, isn't really inspiring me to go write lists as of yet.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PrimeElectrid said:

The problem, especially with the SCE one, is that it’s just bland. 3/3/-1/1 everywhere. Tons of abilities removed, leaving various degrees of +1 to hit/exploding 6s. Use a CA for free. Do a thing once per game. Solid fundamentals for sure but nothing exciting. Which I guess we’ve been asking for? IDK how to feel about this.

 

1 hour ago, OkayestDM said:

My initial reaction to the Battletomes was that I was a little disappointed by how bland/simplistic they seemed at a glance, but on reflection, I actually think that's good design. Not necessarily exciting design, but good.

 

I remember many people feeling like this about the Soulblight Gravelords tome initially, as well (me included). But I have to admit that book has grown on me. In the Gravelords case,  I was initially not sure if the books had room for diverse lists. But it turned out to contain much more opportunity for strong, varied lists than Legions of Nagash ever did.

I suppose having 3/3/-1/1 attack profiles in a lot of places is a bit bland. But in the end, I have personally come to see the good side of lots of units having access to a good, dependable melee profile even if it's kinda samey.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am actually a big fan of these books from what I have seen. The rules feel really fluffy but also pretty straight forward and there is an emphasis on building the army that you want create. I am loving the path to glory rules and I think that overall the rules just seem really fun. It feels strange to feel so excited about something in the Hobby and I hope they keep this level of quality going forward. My only moment of pause relates to balance and inevitable powercreep but starting with two large ranges seems like a smart solution as Orruk Warclans and SCE have enough tools to at least be adaptable enough to carry forward. Kruelboyz seem to come out a little weaker but also their rules are amazingly constructed for a guerrilla style force such as the use of camouflage and fog in rules. It makes me really excited to see what is in store for other ambush based armies like Sylvanth and Idoneth Deepkin. The Exorcist and Sequitor rules limiting resurrection is such an awesome themed rule that can impact games but has a focused target in Death and Demonic forces is another good design choice. I also think that armies like Nighthaunt and Flesh Eater Courts that have rich themes that are not reflected that well in terms of gameplay will be improved vastly. These books also clarify some of the design principals in Soulblight, Lumineth and Slaanesh for me with an emphasis on lore based rules and varied list building but not the greatest internal balances... which will hopefully get ratified in future point changes. 

So in other words I am a big fan of these books but I am pretty oblivious to the higher level competitive scene. I just like that there is enough variety represented to allow for some great thematic lists and fun potential games. I doubt this level quality will be retained overall as these are the premier armies but still this is a really fantastic starting point. 

Edited by Neverchosen
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only really looked closely at the SCE book. 

I tend to prefer stronger faction abilities with weaker warscrolls, as I feel like that creates more flavorful army construction. Ogors or Seraphon are books that come to mind for me. If I see a Seraphon list I can tell you what subfaction it is 99% of the time, because the different subfactions have very different play styles - they feel unique. 

SCE didn't go this way, which was disappointing at first but probably makes sense for them. The Stormhosts aren't particularly powerful, and most don't require a certain playstyle. Perhaps a couple exceptions like Tempest Lords being the obvious choice for Dragon spam. 

Instead they have provides some very unique battleline options. It will be interesting to see how this plays in list construction. Making a list without any battleline 'tax' is interesting, as now a lot of elite troops can be made battleline. I know I will definitely be painting up a Dracothian dominated list.

Personally, I'm encouraged. SCE just has so many warscrolls to write, but it seems like they tried to give reasons to take different units in different builds and metas. Even 'trash' like Liberators have a roll to be put on objectives in a Stormkeep - counting as 3 for objective control. 

I'm excited to make a bunch of different lists and try them out, and that's about all I can ask for from a Battletome. It's disappointing when there appears to be an obvious choice at every decision point. 

I think they did ok of having a couple artifacts that will at least make you look twice before taking the Amulet of Destiny. 

The removal of some extra abilities from warscrolls is a bummer. It seems like a lot of warscrolls were just trimmed back a bit, taking away retreat and charge from the Heraldor, taking away stopping pile in from Concussors among many examples. I get the simplification, and it definitely helps prevent players from being surprised by some ability their opponent's army has, which can be a feel bad gaming experience. I just enjoyed finding and using little options like that to try out new strategies. 

The biggest concern I have is that including Grand Strategies and Battle Tactics and Core Battalions in Battletomes is just asking for mistakes to be made. Those can't be fixed with points the way (most) army balance issues can be. So far it seems fine, but it's only a matter of time before a couple Battle Tactics or a Core Battalion slips by design and is very easy to abuse to give that faction a large advantage on a competitive scene. Of course I don't play competitive AoS, so I'm not sure why this worries me when I think about it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general i like the tomes, many rules fit the fluff. Dirty Tricks for Kruelboyz look fun to play. Subaligiances are not restrictive anymore.

As mentioned before, faction Battletactics and grand strategies could cause problems for competitive games.

Internal balance in the Stormcast battletome is still off (hello dragons) , but hopefully gets better with the next changes in points. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Beliman said:

First "new" mixed battletome, Orruk Warclans! Seems that all three factions can only use 1/3 of the Grand Strategies/Tactics and can't use other units in their own faction (Can't use Brutes in Kruleboyz as allies or coalition). Not a fan of that and I'm a bit more scared of mixing Dwarfs in one book...

Yeah they're leaning way heavier into the Ogors battletome where it's not a mixed army but like 2 mini tomes in one with the sub-factions feeling very seperated.

AoS3 is emphasizing that to the 10 degree so much I propose we stop saying "Soup" and begin calling these combinations "Battle Trays":

97719797-serving-tray-with-delicious-foo

It's all very segmented so they don't mesh and obscure the Sub-faction individuality unless you specifically go for the sandwich holder.

And I gotta say while I still want the Duardin to have seperate and beautifully fleshed out Battletomes this would soften the blow in the event of a duardin tray when the tomes are around 30 pages bigger with less rules so now there's room for tons of glorious lore for all that Kharadron history and the factions in them are fully independent.  It'd at least feel like a stop-gap until 4th or 5th edition can seperate them again with bigger revamped armies and crazier units, gods and heroes.

(Though Dispossessed fans should probably pray to Grungni they're left out after what they did to Bonesplitterz. They make it very clear what shiny new armies are going forward as main meals and which are napkins in the lunch tray)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pros:

I like the simple approach, 3rd edition is more complex and the new tomes seem to bring the compexity layers down a bit for the individual army.

In addition more rules are baked into warscrolls instead of allegiance abilities, such as warchanters, no reason for their chants to be allegiance abilities.

Sub factions were always a bit hit and miss and often more limiting than diverse. Especially the stormcast book managed to present some interesting options, which unlock wildly different list types due to battleline unlocks. Warclans does this as well, but less options if you only enjoy 1-2 of the orruk types.

Stormcast manages to present some varied ways of play and doubling down on certain types of stormcast without being super limited.

Cons:

Artifacts seem underwhelming and niche. Universal artifacts seem better most of the time.

Command traits as well seem poorly balanced, with less choices and often 1-2 clear standouts. Not much different from before though, but nobody used them back then due to sub faction locking this often. Might be a pro then... eh

Does not seem super well internally balanced, unit cost and efficiency is a bit all over the place.

Core battalions and especially grand stategies + battle tactics seem mostly fluffy, but worst of all are those depending on random rolls, they are just so rarely going to be of any consequence, making them 90% pointless.

Unlike Stormcast the Warclans book presents limited variation. The different types of orruks are locked behind keywords for nearly all abilities and almost no units benefit other orruk types. Kruleboyz casters and monsters buff Kruleboy abilities. Ironjawz megabosses only command ironjawz, Boneplitter shaman spells only work on bonesplitterz. The Sloggoth is the only unit that actually does anything directly for other orruks than its own clan.

 

Conclusion:

A bit of a mixed bag. I play both Stormcast and Ironjawz and I do not feel my armies got worse. Gordrakk is still terrible and so is Kragnos. Ironjawz stayed mostly the same, Mawkrushas and Brutes got better, lost a few allegiance abilties, but Megabosses command multiple units make up for this somewhat. Stormcast was such a bad book it could not have gotte much worse. They play largely the same, but some lacking units got some buffs, some did not, mixed bag, but at least a bunch of lists will be playable at mid tier level. Too early to say for Orruks, I fear Kruleboyz will be lacking staying power and mobility though, despite decent damage, but we will see what peopel come up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm massively disappointed with the Stormcast book. I've been waiting years for my Soul Wars sacrosanct army to become playable and sadly that will never be the case. With overpriced units and weak warscrolls I can't see a way for the army to meaningfully play against Lumineth, Seraphon etc. I want to play this game but the risk that any army I buy will get neutered in a future book (re Sylvaneth and Slaanesh) is really holding me back.

On an unrelated note I have a stormcast army that is up for sale and painted nicely, PM me if interested

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After read all the book my first impresion about stormcast is......huge nerfs.

Alegiances nerfed.

Items wsrlord traits etc nerfed(and worse than generic)

Mounts traits nerfed.

Warscrolls nerfed 15/50 % in points and deleted every cp for some minor buffs of 1 extra rend and so.

 

In general the book feel only as a huge nerf,every unit nerfed in cost,every cp deleted etc

But new dragon cavalry is op and so sce gonna can have a chance in competitive

In general almost every old warscroll have got 1 or even some units as palladors 2 habilitys deleted, and got a huge increase in points

Edited by Doko
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doko said:

In general the book feel only as a huge nerf,every unit nerfed in cost,every cp deleted etc

But new dragon cavalry is op and so sce gonna can have a chance in competitive

In general almost every old warscroll have got 1 or even some units as palladors 2 habilitys deleted, and got a huge increase in points

Are you sure that they are nerfed? I'm not an SCE but to me at least, they seems good. Not something OP (maybe dragons...) but they look fine. Of course there are units nerfed, but others have improved their rend, dmg, attack or save. That's without looking at their new synergies that become easier to accomplish than before.

Btw, Yes, the books seems simplified, but that's a 3.0 feature and not an SCE nerf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GW is so schizophrenic. We just had Lumineth Part II which is like fifty bajillion layered rules on top of datasheets that have forty bajillion rules each too. And then we get 3rd edition tomes where everything has had the hatchet taken to the rules they used to have. I'm not actually opposed to the latter necessarily, but why or why do they do these weird 180 degree spins over and over? 

And while I'm not necessarily opposed to rules that are narrower but deeper, these seem to be both narrower and shallower. A lot of stuff lost abilities they used to have, but they didn't gain anything in return to make them more interesting. Bonesplitterz are the ultimate example of this, the whole faction was cut off at the knees, with most of the interesting and unique features removed only to be replaced with a once per game 4+ ward in the combat phase instead. Zzzz. 

The artefacts and command traits are also another great example of narrower and shallower at the same time. Again, it would be ok in theory to reduce the number of these things in each book if each one was interesting and unique and thought-provoking. Instead we get a selection of mostly extremely bland and underwhelming choices, with a few clearly more powerful choices thrown in - which is especially confounding given how powerful the basic artefacts are. Look at these traits and artefacts and then look at, say, the Sylvaneth book - a book that has its own problems, to be sure - and the contrast is stark. There are just so few interesting ideas on offer here, and it's a shame - you would think having to only come up with 3-4 choices should result in more interesting rules, not less interesting rules. 

And then we have the new units...that get most of the powerful and interesting rules that do exist in the new tomes. Which feels bad. I'm not going to get into the old debate on whether they push new models, because I think it's a waste of time and historically it hasn't been true. But it is hard to escape the feeling here that the new models got dramatically different treatment than the old ones, and I struggle to justify a good reason for that. Compare the dragonriders to old stuff like evocators or the old dracolith stuff and it ain't pretty, and it's hard to see how they could have got internal balance this badly wrong. 

Overall it feels like a decent idea that they haven't managed to execute well on at this stage. I genuinely hope my tomes aren't coming out soon, because this feels like the sort of thing where they're going to take a while to figure out what they're doing and if your book is in the early cohort you're going to be cursing that fact a year from now, because your books are the beta books from before they figured out how to do what they wanted to do. 

Edited by yukishiro1
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, yukishiro1 said:

GW is so schizophrenic. We just had Lumineth Part II which is like fifty bajillion layered rules on top of datasheets that have forty bajillion rules each too. And then we get 3rd edition tomes where everything has had the hatchet taken to the rules they used to have. I'm not actually opposed to the latter necessarily, but why or why do they do these weird 180 degree spins over and over? 

There are a lot of answers for that question. Chose your poison:

  • Change on philosophy for new edition.
  • Different teams with diferent frameworks to work.
  • Different dates of delivery.
  • New edition with a big shakeup.
  • Covid destroying all pipelines.
  • Different lead designers working in the same products.
  • Etc... [You get the point]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...