Jump to content

Unpopular opinion thread


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PrimeElectrid said:

Wasn’t this basically Vlads strategy in TOW?

Essentially: a vampire, but not a ****** about it

Together with one of the three or four functional relationships in the entirety of the Old World with Isabella.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AOS rules are terrible.

Too complex to serve as a quick, elegant system.

Too simple to serve as a complex, deep system.

GW's solution to controlling IP by renaming races through the device of adding a random selection of vowels to existing fantasy archetypes is just the dumbest s***

Edited by Nos
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Beliman said:

Unpopular opinion:

You can love Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar and visit r/Warhammer and r/Ageofsigmar and play Total War Warhammer.

I know, mindblowing.

 

But the question is who can afford both? 😰

As mentioned in my last post, I need to find some regiment trays accommodating 32mm round chaos warrior bases ASAP!

Edited by Neverchosen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yukishiro1 said:

Blades of Khorne has the best-designed allegiance ability in AOS. Fight me. No, really, fight me, it'll only illustrate the point.

Nobody fight him, that's what he wants and it is a trap. The correct response to Khorne is to either use magic on him, trick him, or shoot him.

 

This message brought to you by Tzeentch.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reinholt said:

Nobody fight him, that's what he wants and it is a trap. The correct response to Khorne is to either use magic on him, trick him, or shoot him.

 

This message brought to you by Tzeentch.

1itt8o4wnzwa.jpg

Remember that we stand strongest together... Or in the case of Nurgle a comfortable 6 feet apart.

I feel this is going to be a further unpopular opinion but...

With the return of Sigvald, I have been putting a lot of thought into how I would love to see a return and update for some of the iconic Chaos Lieutenants as a bridge between Slaves to Darkness and the God Specific factions. I would nominate Aekold Helbrass (Disciples of Tzeentch), Valkia the Bloody (Blades of Khorne), Feytor the Tainted (Maggotkin of Nurgle), Sigvald the Magnificent (Hedonites of Slaanesh) and Crom the Conqueror (Slaves to Darkness, Undivided). I would want them to share the Slaves to Darkness Keyword along with the faction keyword of their chosen God. I know there are potentially 'cooler characters', but I chose each model as they would be similar in size and with similar a rule set to Sigvald. Each would have a rule that when taken in a Slaves to Darkness army that any unit with the ability to choose a mark must take the mark of 'the Lieutenant's' chosen God. This would not forbid using any units in a Slaves to Darkness army but still limit your options in a fair and lore friendly manner. I know it is a dumb idea but I would still like to see Archaon make some friends 😅

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

2 hours ago, yukishiro1 said:

Blades of Khorne has the best-designed allegiance ability in AOS. Fight me. No, really, fight me, it'll only illustrate the point.

Blades of khorne was the best designed book in all of AOS 2. The repeated and inexplicable buffs to the blooodthirsters and subsequent loss of battalions have essentially ruined it, but at it's core it represents the pinnacle of army book design. I grieve with the knowledge that we will likely never see another book to match it again. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Beliman said:

Unpopular opinion:

You can love Warhammer Fantasy and Age of Sigmar and visit r/Warhammer and r/Ageofsigmar and play Total War Warhammer.

I know, mindblowing.

 

Sure you can, I never said you can't. Doesn't change  the fact that there are people on r/Warhammer that sill Harass and berate People who like AoS. When r/Warhammer  is supposed to be about all Warhammer.  

The point is, You can go on an age of Sigmar forum And talk about Old world(We even have a dedicated thread) or Warhammer Total War And have no problems. You cannot go on Old world or Warhammer Total War areas and talk about AoS Without someone saying something disparaging, Insulting or nasty.  I can also post some YouTube videos if you want. A while back, majorkill released a video that did not help either.

I have not seen anyone getting berated or harassed for merely liking old world or Warhammer Total War on here. Have you?

At least dakkadakka got better.

 

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

I don’t see the point of discussing whether some subreddit is mean to this or this other group. If someone crosses a line here, report and move on. It is not like moderators aren’t active around here.

I am starting to get the impression that some want to fight some proxy war using some outside strawmen. No need for passive aggressiveness, go be aggressive aggressive in the multiple echo chambers that allow for that to go unmoderated.

Unpopular opinion: 

The soulblight release is a mixed bag. Some miniatures are really good (new skellies, hybrid vampire lord, wolves, bats), but others suffer from excessive “gamefication”. The worse are, IMO obviously, blood knights.

I think that having a more grounded look spiked with fantasy elements lends credibility to the miniatures, whereas going full on crazy just makes it look more like a toy than a representation of something. Another example of this is the vampire lord with the crazy hair.

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

@Greybeard86 sorry for starting that.

I get what you mean with Soulblight, a subtle reveal that something is wrong entices me more than screaming it in your face. Kritza, Annika and Volga are subtly wrong, and I would have loved Lauka Vai to have a normal shape like Morathi and transform in game, and I plan to give her a dress and transform her (or something quite like her, local shop didn't have her and I can kitbash) in a showdown for my hapless d&d players.

I do like that new zombies and skellies are armed with stuff they could have died with, instead of somehow getting all death branded stuff from seemingly nowhere, like the Grave Guard. Too bad I already purchased both boxes of Oathmark undead (30 each), and it'll be a while until I need more.

I don't agree about the blood knights though, they look like vampirified Dragon Princes (except for a few skulls) which isn't all that strange to me. 

Maybe unpopular opinion: Nagash and the Mortachs look out of place in any death faction other than Ossiarch.

Edited by zilberfrid
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JackStreicher said:

Unpopular opinion: Slaves to Darkness should have access to ALL mortal chaos followers and maybe one greater Demon as coalition ally or simply 1 in 4 daemons (general‘s keyword).

I have mentioned this before but I really want this to happen, but for it to be tied to the general's mark (the starting general in the case of Ravagers). So a marked general can take coalition forces from the god specific faction of their mark. In the case of undivided they could have Beasts of Chaos as their coalition forces*. If this was done I would get so many more chaos models. 

I also think it would be cool for Skaven to have their clans associate with the gods through coalition forces but lack Slaves to Darkness as coalition choice showing that Skaven are kind of on the outside of Chaos worship. Maybe have it be a more limited coalition force like 1/5. Pestilens - Nurgle, Moulder - Khorne, Skyre - Tzeentch, Verminus - Beasts of Chaos and Masterclan not having access to any coalition allies just  rats. 

*Lets see if this idea remains relevant or if the beast soup rumours hold true. Eitherway I want some Dragon Ogors in my army.

Edited by Neverchosen
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zilberfrid said:

I get what you mean with Soulblight, a subtle reveal that something is wrong entices me more than screaming it in your face. Kritza, Annika and Volga are subtly wrong, and I would have loved Lauka Vai to have a normal shape like Morathi and transform in game, and I plan to give her a dress and transform her (or something quite like her, local shop didn't have her and I can kitbash) in a showdown for my hapless d&d players.

I actually do like Lauka Vai, enough that I bought her. It is horrifying, the stuff of nightmares, and I think that having some elements of that kind of horror in the faction is fine.

1 hour ago, zilberfrid said:

I do like that new zombies and skellies are armed with stuff they could have died with, instead of somehow getting all death branded stuff from seemingly nowhere, like the Grave Guard.

100% in agreement.

1 hour ago, zilberfrid said:

I don't agree about the blood knights though, they look like vampirified Dragon Princes (except for a few skulls) which isn't all that strange to me.

And I strongly dislike dragon princes 😜 To me, those kind of designs are immersion breaking, like elves in the lord of the ring movies (are elves automatons?), or those anime zodiac knights.

Black knights are golden in my eyes, as they do look like old knights re-awakened, for the most part. I would love for vampires knights to follow this a bit more, except that they wouldn't have rusty armors, but rather decayed but very fancy armors (and maybe some dark magic element here and there). Vampire knights (aka blood knights) should be old knights who are turned and continue their quest for martial proficiency. See for example: "The Knights of Irrana were a mortal order of Estalian knights until their grand master concluded that the techniques of Abhorash far outstripped those of Myrmidia and brought his whole unit into the darkness to join him".

That is why I bought a ton of black knights that I wanted to convert with old bretonnia sculpts (though metal ones are notoriously difficult to work with, in that regard, and I wanted to use errant knights). When bretonnia gets its release, I might buy some plastic kits to do this project.

Again, I understand mind is an unpopular opinion, but happy to have a thread for them :P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So this one might be slightly difficult to explain, but here goes...

So there is often a lot of talk about how old WFB models were more "generic fantasy" and games workshop have (to a greater or lesser extent) been trying to move away from that and make their ranges more unique.

For me though, this raises a few points, which I suspect might be a little controversial.

First I don't think that they will ever completely phase out their generic fantasy line, and if they did I think it would actually be a massive misstep. They've gradually done this with 40K, because 40K is the biggest tabletop game in the fantasy genre, and so the majority of people who are painting sci fi minis either want 40K ones, or want ones which are hyperspecific to a rival brand like Star Wars or whatever.

That isn't the case with fantasy, where actually the "standard fantasy setting" is so prevalent that it is kind of a bigger brand than AoS will ever be. If they stopped making normal dwarves, skeletons, elves, etc. I think they would just be leaving money on the table. People are always going to want those things. You need them for D&D, you need them for most other games on the market, and trying to make AoS more unique or distinct doesn't make all of the more traditional expressions of the fantasy genre less popular. I think GW know this, and that's why the unique and "weird" models for lumineth and gravelords have also come with a lot of reimagined versions of the really traditional high elves and undead stuff.

They don't want a situation where someone walks into a Games Workshop store and says "Can I have some skeleton warriors please" and the cashier has to say "No sorry, we don't sell those, these are the reasons why Ossiarch Bonereapers are awesome, and you should want those instead" and the new player doesn't care because they don't actually play warhammer. They should always want to be able to sell that box of skeletons, regardless of whether they convert someone to warhammer or not, not have the sale be dependant on the conversion.

Now the really controversial bit...

the more unique and Age of Sigmar specific they make those models, the more like off-brand toys they look. Ironically in striving to avoid genericity, they make them look really, really generic to an audience who isn't already primed to know about and like AoS models. I find this makes the game a really hard sell for people who I game with, whereas WFB always gave newer players a foot in the door, by being on the surface a setting they were more familiar with.

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:

the more unique and Age of Sigmar specific they make those models, the more like off-brand toys they look. 

Definitely agree here. The new models themselves are fantastically detailed and high quality, but I find the design choices themselves to be largely terrible. All of the WHFB factions had a certain charm to them that is lost with many of the AoS factions. It's easy to mock Lumineth as perhaps the worst offenders but I find about half of the factions in the game to be very unappealing.

It's a weird design choice. The factions are so out there and 'love it or hate it' that it's probably easy for most people to pick something they really like, but equally easy to find the opposing army goofy. I can appreciate a good paint job across the table and get that the other person loves their army but they often just don't look cool to me, which detracts from the experience. It's a big change from WHFB when I genuinely would have loved to own almost every single army.

Edited by Orbei
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:

So this one might be slightly difficult to explain, but here goes...

So there is often a lot of talk about how old WFB models were more "generic fantasy" and games workshop have (to a greater or lesser extent) been trying to move away from that and make their ranges more unique.

For me though, this raises a few points, which I suspect might be a little controversial.

First I don't think that they will ever completely phase out their generic fantasy line, and if they did I think it would actually be a massive misstep. They've gradually done this with 40K, because 40K is the biggest tabletop game in the fantasy genre, and so the majority of people who are painting sci fi minis either want 40K ones, or want ones which are hyperspecific to a rival brand like Star Wars or whatever.

That isn't the case with fantasy, where actually the "standard fantasy setting" is so prevalent that it is kind of a bigger brand than AoS will ever be. If they stopped making normal dwarves, skeletons, elves, etc. I think they would just be leaving money on the table. People are always going to want those things. You need them for D&D, you need them for most other games on the market, and trying to make AoS more unique or distinct doesn't make all of the more traditional expressions of the fantasy genre less popular. I think GW know this, and that's why the unique and "weird" models for lumineth and gravelords have also come with a lot of reimagined versions of the really traditional high elves and undead stuff.

They don't want a situation where someone walks into a Games Workshop store and says "Can I have some skeleton warriors please" and the cashier has to say "No sorry, we don't sell those, these are the reasons why Ossiarch Bonereapers are awesome, and you should want those instead" and the new player doesn't care because they don't actually play warhammer. They should always want to be able to sell that box of skeletons, regardless of whether they convert someone to warhammer or not, not have the sale be dependant on the conversion.

Now the really controversial bit...

the more unique and Age of Sigmar specific they make those models, the more like off-brand toys they look. Ironically in striving to avoid genericity, they make them look really, really generic to an audience who isn't already primed to know about and like AoS models. I find this makes the game a really hard sell for people who I game with, whereas WFB always gave newer players a foot in the door, by being on the surface a setting they were more familiar with.

 

Hard disagree on the final point, the uniqueness of the setting and the armies is a big reason i came back  and usually makes it easier for me to sell the game to friends, they've all seen elves before but elves riding eels and giant turtles? sign my aquarium loving wife up!  Having said that it's great to strike that balance right? some people will want a more grounded army (as grounded as skeleton warriors and vampires can be) and that's fine too, i actually think GW has done a great job of balancing that dichotomy where StD fit in the same world as Tzeentch etc.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at this thread again, some posts get way too many likes in here to be unpopular opinions. I think we should ban the respective posters from this thread for clearly going off-topic with their agreeable input and not honoring the discussion. 

  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tzeentch should‘ve gotten a proper selection of mortals before Slaanesh. Tzaangors, while cool, are not a worthy equivalent. 
 

Failing to make proper rules for units like the chaos spawns for Tzeentch knows how long shows how frikkin incompetent the rule designers are.

 

AoS would be better if the realms were way more finite. Might not give everyone the chance to do what they want with their army‘s background, bit most player fluff sucks anyways. 
 

booyah, hattrick!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MitGas said:

Looking at this thread again, some posts get way too many likes in here to be unpopular opinions. I think we should ban the respective posters from this thread for clearly going off-topic with their agreeable input and not honoring the discussion. 

Like this post if you agree that posts with likes should receive bans.

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1
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...