All Activity

Well yeah that was the biggest bummer both codexes came out the same time and the quality between the OrK and Custodes was so stark. Granted this is pretty common with GW and it’s where the meme “Bin or Sin books” comes from

The ork one is outstanding though 🤷 As for AoS, the rules we've seen so far don't feel like complete rewrite so much as an evolution. I'm not currently concerned. Anyone else in the same boat?

to get back on the rumor and speculation for 4th edition: Anyone believe that their going to gut the lore section for Stormcast & Skaven tomes like they did with the Space marines and Tyranids codex? The Necron codex was surprisingly bounce back almost like they change course after the feedback that sort of the appeal of physical book now with WAAAG!pedia a thing

I really hope codex en tomes get squatted. At least for the army rules part. Just make them narrative books for the faction with some battleplans and path to glory and other fun stuff. But keep the rules out of it. They get invalidated before they hit the shelves anyway. Just make army rules and warscrolls a free pdf. I think this will only result in more sales of minis without the tome tax.

Seems the trend so far is that every other Codex is pretty bad. Bright side is that it means every release we don't get a crazy overpowered faction that will have to get a ton of nurfs. Will be interesting to see how AoS codexs will go.

TBF for Custodes player their Codex release has been pan as one of the worst written one so far in 10th editions. So anger is everywhere

Someone is collecting the wrong army.

There already are men in sisters of battle. The priest stuff is mixed gender already. If you mean as in making the core sororitas mixed gender, there would have been a backlash yes. Gender is a core part of the faction, since sisters have always had a strong Joan of Arc/nun theme. Many players were drawn to them because of that theme. Like space marines have a strong warrior monk theme, with chapter monasteries and the like. Custodes have never had that gendered theme. People have dug out references to “men” and “sons” and the like. Sure. We also refer to “mankind” and use man pretty much to refer to humans in general. Given each one is meant to be individually sculpted into something that barely resembles a human, gender hardly matters. I do have sympathy for the custodes fan who got into them entirely due to the fantasy of being surrounded entirely by incredibly buff, oiled beautiful men though. I feel many people complaining wouldn’t list that as a reason though.

I just assume we fail to curb Global warming by then

The Year is 2074, 10 years after the Civil strife in Warhammer World HQ. The Warring Clans - Warhammer the Old World, AoS, and 40K have destabilised the Peace Treaties due to a disagreement on the Spelling of “Snotlings”. The Neutral Faction of “Specialist Designers” celebrate their first release in decades, “Bill The Pony- Get Back on the Road”. The internet brays with excitement at rumours that Malerion and his Aelves are just a couple of editions away.

Straw meets man

She’s stepping down in Jan 2025. Selling her shares in stages would be part of this process. I’m not sure there’s really anything more to read into this.

Do you think the backlash would of been equal had they added men to sisters of battle? Edit: Irrelevant I suppose and meant no offense. Just trying to have a discussion.

For the record I’m fine with female Custodes. Saying they’re ruining the lore or whatever is laughable considering there’s 50-something Horus Heresy books and Primarchs walking around in 40K. The way it seems to me is that the people who are upset see it as a cynical corporate move, and they just don’t have the sense to frame it in adult terms.

I think it’s real interesting that a lot of people suddenly care super hard about changes to the lore pretty much entirely when it involves anything getting less straight, white and male. The custodes thing has been very handy for finding out which content creators can happily go on the block list.

Well also the global market in general is going down because of fear of the Middle East escalation and UK market in general hasn’t been great. Selling now is probably the best time if you see the stock price going down

She obviously played BoC.

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it is lazy design. They have shown what, 3 heroes, none of which are combat heroes? I am I missing something here? The slaughter priest is a priest, the weird nob is a wizard and the Skaven is a sniper. We have seen relatively few war scrolls just in general, but of those it looks like there have been some significant changes. I really like the design change of the vindictors, that anti charging rule is very cool, and separates them out from other choices. Kroxigor now look like they match their big imposing models. I was gonna quote myself from the other thread, but it’s easier just to retype. There are issues with having small foot heroes be massive blenders. They have an absolutely tiny footprint and are easy to miss on the battle field. Yes, you can have absolute blender units like Gotrek and Eltharion, but those are fairly specific units and are very distinctive. You don’t risk mistaking them for anything else. Chaos Lords get mentioned a lot, but frankly they do not stand out on the battlefield. I think you’ll get a lot more bad feelings from people not realising that that chaos armour wearing caped looking guy fights as hard as a unit, whereas the other one is a buffing piece. I once played a game with maggotkin where I accidentally including a lord of plagues with a unit of blight kings and only realised that the unit champ and the hero had switched at the end of the game. I think it must have happened turn 2. Do I think they could do more for differentiating heroes? Sure, I’m just waiting to see if they do, rather than getting annoyed preemptively that they might not. Personally I think there is more room for using the universal special rules and custom special rules to represent the power of the combat heroes. Give doomseekers anti monster buffs, give a hero the ability to stop pile ins if he kills an enemy. Just cranking the numbers up feels like a much more lazy way.

But it is none the less and it's good to acknowledge that and try to understand why.

She announced that she was stepping down back in January. It's not entirely surprising that someone leaving a long term job would sell their stake. The stock price is down for two reasons. The first is that GW announced the reduction of their dividend. GW has been paying a lot of it's profit to share holders in the form of dividends for a while to point that they are in danger of eating into the company's cash flow. They are still giving a dividend which means they still believe they have excess profit to share with stock holders. The second is that the whole sector's growth is slowing. We've seen this slowdown in board and card games which collectively saw their sales fall last year. The video game space has seen mass lay offs over the last year or so. GW'S biggest rival Asmodee who owns Mass atomic games of MCP fame just got spun off by the Embracer group and saddled with a bunch of debt. GW is comparatively in a very safe place. Their performance has been solid but their rate of growth has declined since COVID boom. Most of the people buying and selling GW shares probably wouldn't even know what a space marine is.

It would've been worse if they made it into a big performance of "look how progressive we are", as a retcon, warhammer lore gets and has gotten retconned constantly, it's definitely a much bigger deal than people are making it out to be. Even if you do care, they're your toy soldiers just don't have them be women who cares.

I've seen a little bit of that. i'll repost my edit: you're allowed to be disappointed, sad, angry, whatever at decisions made in a narrative you care about. but GW has constantly done this throughout their history, just like Tolkien did with LOTR and basically everyone else does with their own IPs. in the grand scheme of lore changes, this is truly nothing but GW filling in an omission in a faction they're trying to develop further. it should not be blowing up the fandom...

@CommissarRotke Idk if it's a real thing either. I think the general feeling of the "slap" was how it was handled. @Luperci If it is real than you've got to start somewhere. Also I'm not trying to rile anyone up. I'm just passing along info pertaining to the company that makes the subject of this forum as well. Just fyi.

Even if it was some kind of quota they were trying to fill, you'd see it in a new custodian guard kit or something, not a random lore excerpt.

the assumption of this "quota" thing drives me up a wall... even if it does exist it is a purely vapid, profit-driven decision and based on nothing else. and why would be a slap to intelligence..? why would anyone assume ANY IP's lore is immutable? this isn't a history book, it is fiction. you're not getting "gaslit" and we should already know by now that trusting corporations is a fool's game. this is one of the most nothingburger lore additions they've done. The Primaris debacle was 10x worse than this. edit: you're allowed to be disappointed, sad, angry, whatever at decisions made in a narrative you care about. but GW has constantly done this throughout their history, just like Tolkien did with LOTR and basically everyone else does with their own IPs. in the grand scheme of lore changes, this is truly nothing but GW filling in an omission in a faction they're trying to develop further.