Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Overread

Members
  • Content Count

    3,456
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    52

Overread last won the day on August 16

Overread had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,184 Celestant-Prime

About Overread

  • Rank
    Lord Celestant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Overread

    IMG_6858.JPG

    Really nice lighting effect going on there! I like the work around the eye of the catdragonlizard
  2. Honestly those sound quite believable though whats interesting is them using multiple subfactions and suballiances as well in the same book. A curious concept and I wonder how that pans out. Shame there's no mention of any new models or returned or such - still curious that we lost all those artillery guns in the culling.
  3. I've worked in more than one place which used a whiteboard to organise things. Granted those were more ad-hock situations where duties might shift around on a more weekly basis, but longterm targets were also shown. GW might well have a whiteboard that they keep in a main office which shows all the basic details of upcoming releases and scheduled. Something that is quick to refer too; continually casually reminds and also lets them chop and change. However such a thing might well be written in an internal code. Ergo "Phase out Seraphon" might not mean phase out the models/faction but move old out and new in steadily etc.... However they could also be proposals; the board might not have been updated in ages and it might be that its old ideas etc.... That's all IF you choose to believe the source - right now its just a post on 4chan which isn't exactly reliable. I think th rumours posted a few pages back from another source were more believable
  4. The AoS profiles won't affect Warcry at all - they are totally separate rules and points systems. Personally I think the Cultists tag is going to replace Chaos Marks. Right now a lot of Slaves units have identical "mark of chaos" text on them which eats up needless space once you make a Battletome in which you can write that segment once. So I'd wager they will make it that all "cultist" models can have a mark. GW might then make it that all the band must have the same mark from a Chaos God which would include the 4 greats and also a generic tab for "woreships their own god who isn't one of the big 4 or is one of the big 4 pretending to be another. That saves a huge amount of space on the warscrolls. GW could even make it so that each unit can be a cultist of a different cult so that the whole army doesn't have to share the same cult.
  5. Nice I like the sash on the mounts. Simple and yet stands out really well!
  6. Honestly if we go down the "what if" faction line we can go on forever. The Realms themselves have no defined boundaries to really stop any race or faction living within any realm and each realm is distinct enough to adapt any race that lives there into a diverse different kind. So even within each faction there's mutliple possible lore friendly subfactions that could arise to large enough numbers to be a full faction. Plus any niche can be expanded upon whilst any new themes can too. We can basically go on forever. GW did this intentionally; rather than the Old World where they sort of had to do certain armies even if they didn't have designers who wanted too - eg in Old World there was Araby, Cathay and Nippon as 3 established factions to develop likely before any others could be potentially added. Even then with the world being mapped out more and more you run out of space to hide a new faction. It's why some fantasy wargames never explore the whole world and leave huge regions undiscovered even if they've got the tech to explore them. Age of Sigmar can pop up a faction almost anywhere GW wants. A Nurgle faction based heavily around the Knights of Nurgle A human faction that rides horses in a knight in shining armour style force A Skaven sky raiders army - heck GW could go full SKYRAIDERS the minigame with every faction stealing or building their own airships; or taming wild beasts of the skies; or floating islands of rock; or demonic beasts or not chopping the wings off and having flights of burning dragonbeasts etc... An underground army of molemen, riled at the corruption of the land and of the Skavens tunnels bursting randomly into their domain. Striking forth from the earth with monstrous weapons and powerful earth magics; massive golems rising from stone; whilst gemsone and crystal encrusted creations focus the very burning powers of the stars above to blast the enemy into atoms. Or the dreaded dark magics of the deep; ancient forgotten spells that suck the enemy into the void of blackness deep beneath the earth.
  7. Thing is we are in a release cycle where GW hasn't got production slots to add stuff for what they've removed. Furthermore they've not got tomes tied to releases; in fact most tomes came with very little in way of a model release. This is because right now the focus is getting the game back together; getting armies equipped with tomes and rules to function. In the past with Old World this was important, but didn't matter so much because GW's attitude was different, but also because they had prior rules that kept working (sort of). And in addition to that most armies were pretty stable things. They got a few new models, a few updated and they kept going. You'd lose a few here and there, but by and large it was gains and updates. AoS shattered all of that like a bull in a china shop and gamers and GW have reeled from that and had to deal with it. It's been a mess that, honestly, GW could have and should have avoided, but they didn't. We can fire blame off and get annoyed by it (and honestly I'm totally there with those players of Bretonnia, Tomb Kings and High Elves and even Wood elves and old dwarves now in the frustration and anger and feeling of betrayal); but in the end things ARE moving forward. We can see loads of potential to update and its clear GW wants to update and expand the game, but right now they just can't do it all inside one year. In fact to try might even be dangerous for them as it would front load them very heavily with a huge amount of investment and flooding the market iwth new models that might not pick up as fast as they might if spread out a bit more. Gamers have limited budgets and GW is already tapping many gamer budgets hard as it is. It's very hard to see the direction GW is taking with AoS because we honestly don't know and the way the realms are made GW can take it anyway they want. It's also clear that the direction has changed several times over AoS's lifespan which further makes predictions really hard to guess at.
  8. Artillery in general was stripped out, but I figure that it will return. Cannon are very well established as a feature for Free Peoples in the lore and in general cannon on the battlefield have years of support. Skaven still have all their artiliery as to Seraphon and a few others. I just figure its one more thing that GW wants to and will add just hasn't got the production slot to add for everyone at this stage. Heck we might even see them split artillery off into its own subdivision one day.
  9. I can see Slaves being the target for Christmas and then getting pushed a month out into January, though honestly I'd sort of expect GW to push things to get it there before. They've done duel battletome launches before and whilst it might not be ideal I'd take GW running out of stock over GW slowing down releases if it was only affecting one month. Then again I've no idea what GW's production end looks like and considering the stocking issues they've had before it might be that they are already pushing things to the comfortable limit. Still hitting Christmas with Death and Destruction complete and Order basically completed (only a couple of out-dated tomes to update so those armies are pretty safe investments) is still a VERY good achievement when we consider what we started the year with and how things were only just leading up to last christmas.
  10. It's really hard to say what GW is going to do with the Warbands for Warcry. Right now they fit into a nice troop slot for AoS and lets not forget GW's overall plan is clearly to have people start with Warcry and blend into full AoS just like they did with Killteam. What surprised me more was that they didn't use this as an excuse to make a Dark Oath warband and then also bring the two leader models from the core game into Warcry that way. The other risk is that they bloat the warbands with too many unique models, which means that they could end up top-loading Slaves to Darkness with too many models. Already many of the warbands have quite similar stats. That said I'd be surprised if they didn't give the warbands something else; though what that something might be is hard to say. They could go for cavalry or mages or heroes or leaders and such.
  11. I'm not sure if the fenrisian hounds would work as mounts, like I said they are shorter than GW horses, but they've a stock build that would suit them as pulling a chariot. So chances are whilst they can pull something, they'd likely be a touch short for most current rider sculpts. - they'd have their legs on the ground. You'd need them riding in a kneeling position (like the old Demonettes rode on seekers when they were a single metal sculpt) As an aside @zilberfrid if you're always looking for more mounts have you ever put seeker riders onto another mount? I've got spare ones from the chariot kits and it would be neat to put them onto a mount other than more seekers. I've wondered if they'd fit marauder horses or chaos knight horses (from what I gather they are a bit thin/need a bit of thigh cutting off to fit chaos knight horses)
  12. I was going to say surely the warqueen should be riding the chariot - those pulling should be some large hound models! Either chaos Warhounds https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Monsters-Of-Chaos-Warhounds-Of-Chaos-2018 Or perhaps fenrisian wolves https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Space-Wolves-Fenrisian-Wolf-Pack-2017 I'm not sure how they compare size wise against each other. I've got some Fenrisian and two of the sculpt have a good forward running pose that would work on a chariot and they are not too much smaller than standard GW horses, though still a bit shorter.
  13. You've linked to this thread its an endless cycle!
  14. I'm confused how GW redoing the SoB army in plastic is causing you problems? They might get a few new units, but by and large the army core is going to remain the same. So any models you might already own will be readily useable and might need only a base change (if any); whilst if you don't own any then waiting a few months until the plastics hit is an ideal idea. I mean heck go for it with the 3rd party stuff if you've got 3rd party stores and clubs to play at! If I were building a Sisters army I'd throw some Wargame Exclusive in too! https://wargameexclusive.com Theyv'e some great sisters including a knight pilot as well as Imperial Assassins (Heresy hunters) and Guard options too!
  15. Darkoath have always been in Slaves tab whilst Everchosen is also in the store tab and has been since the store revamp around Christmas. In addition Darkoath and Everchosen basically have nothing to their name. Everchosen has 2 kits unique to itself whilst Darkoath only has 2 leader models and a warband from Underworld (which doesn't really influence the main game as the warband rules are ok but not outstanding for AoS regular - the Underworld bands are clearly not designed to be core game units unlike the Warcry Warbands which are clearly better suited in design to slot into an army). Honestly the only surprise is that GW didn't do a Dark Oath warband. It might also be that GW is going to change Slaves to Darkness into Darkoath or somesuch. Even when DarkOath were appearing everyone was all "but these are just slaves to darkness". I mean I can still hope that we see Warqueen with a chariot pulled by warhounds but I don't think so.
×
×
  • Create New...