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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Nos last won the day on July 21

Nos had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

892 Celestant-Prime

About Nos

  • Rank
    Lord Castellant

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I mean if you can’t tell the considerable difference between skeletons that have fists as large as their heads and curtain rods for spears and the newer versions were not going to find common ground for debate here
  2. No, most people use these ones https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Deathrattle-Skeleton-Warriors-2017 Not the ones that come in a box of five which says "Warhammer" on it and have square bases Unrelated but one of the things I'm interested in with these is that it's maybe the first full army that 'Eavy Metal have painted using NMM techniques. Just an observation. I think they will look quite a bit different with a less comicsy paint job, which dosen't accentuate their stupid faces. They're like Michael Bay's Skeletons.
  3. I didn’t say they were skeletons. I was talking about their design in respect to some of their concept but primarily in respect to their visual identity, which is what interests me. Within that context, I said aesthetically, they are primarily, fat skeletons. Necrons aren’t skeletons either, they’re blah blah blah fluff blah. But they’re robot skeletons in aesthetics . I mentioned Skeletor from Heman not because I think he’s from Hyssh but to illustrate my wider point. After which I then specifically went on to compare them to Stormcast because I know that was at least in part the intention of them. I really don’t follow how after very clearly explaining my interest in their design you can miss all that just to paste a press release at me. Suffice to say that I do not think they are literally fat skeletons, but that nonetheless they look like fat skeletons, which for me rather undermines the fact that they are meant to be something special, but nonetheless just look like fat skeletons. They’re not remotely dynamic, which I think is meant to highlight their sort of visual statue/automata quality. But they’re not that either! So you have a design choice which contradicts what they arent on two counts, without giving any real confident suggestion as to what they are, reducing them to fat skeletons The one guy who they got right, the Mortarch, is astounding. But he is a completely separate design from the rest of the faction. He’s a C’taan essentially.
  4. Hey Necrons 👋 The Mortarch is an outstanding kit but faction is otherwise a conceptual and aesthetic mess. Fundamentally- fat skeletons. That’s your problem. Even forgetting the already very concrete archetype of fantasy skeletons, your Ray Harryhausen guys, We are conditioned by nature to understand skeletons as being a fragile form which needs protection. Which, they do. The creators of He-man appreciated that you can’t have a guy whose name is skeletor, one letter away from skeleton, and have him be an actual Skelton if you also wanted a buff dude. GW themselves designed a race of metal skeletons with big guys but they still followed the essential laws of the natural world, they just accentuated the areas we associate with strength-chest, back, shoulders, upper arms-and kept the rest of the body in appropriate proportion to that. But these Ossiarch guys never miss leg day, they’ve piled on the beef. Except-they have no beef. They’re bone. Buff skeletons are conceptually a violation to us as human beings. It would be like to trying to make a race of water people who are perpetually on fire. Every time you look your brain will just establish a disconnect. The other (better) alternative was a living Terracotra army but conceptually speaking that’s Stormcast. I *think* the idea was specifically to sort of give a mirror image of SC and where the excesses of its eugenics are headed if Sigmar doesn’t chill out, but designing a character to make a narrative point usually just leads to the creation of a week unfocused character, because the character only exists in the first place to make a point, otherwise they wouldn’t be there. To justify their existence you have to make them into living exposition which just because new sermonising and tedious. Case in point: saying so and so is the greatest strategist ever is an utterly meaningless piece of fluff in the circumstances . What made actual generals the archetypes we still look to after hundreds, thousands of years in some cases comes down to mastery of logistics, morale and the capacity to manipulate tens/hundreds of thousands of men despite there being sometimes hours between their instruction/vision and it’s execution. Pretty sure if you gave anyone an army that immediately executes orders at your will without the considerations of morale, psychology and the general constraints of mortality and physics acing upon them, they’d probably manage pretty well. But it’s also a lazy device. Most great generals were also men of great vision and it was their interest in science, philosophy, geography and Human behaviour that gave them the tools to be able to outwit other generals. Frequently they were outsiders and opportunists whose lack of comparative social advantage was used as a strength to outwit the battlefield truisms of aristocracy who at least in Western history comprised the majority of generals, men who commanded soldiers not by dint of military virtue but by dint of social hierarchy. +++ MOD HAT +++ Edited to remove political "joke" - let's keep TGA a politics free zone First misstep AOS has made in its faction design, for my money. They are baaad. Very PS3/Xbox 360 era generic videogame, that is to say a hollow amalgam of visual inspiration with no clear identity or focus.
  5. Puss in Boots from Shrek was a bold accent choice to give this new Mortarch
  6. No you’re right, I apologise there. People have the right to feel frustrated about anything I suppose. But the act of frustration does not vindicate the reason for being frustrated I guess is what I was trying to say.
  7. I said I felt as though I were being demeaned, which I did. I didn’t” freak out” and I didn’t threaten to sell my model collection. If I start hounding the poster, digging up old posts and badgering the poster repeatedly about their opinion, which was the reason I felt demeaned, not the mere act of someone disagreeing with me, I would suggest they also would feel right to feel demeaned. Haven't done that though.
  8. I don’t think anyone has a right to be frustrated about any of it. GW are a company out to make money. Not a religion or political party. They’re not abusing anyone, they’re not defrauding anyone or failing to represent the interests and rights of citizens or threatening anybody’s livliehoods. They’re just not making the toys and stories that some people want them to make fast enough for their liking. That’s literally all this is about. To which I would say again: manage your expectations. Expect GW to act in their own interests rather than yours. That’s what I do and I’m never disappointed by these things. At some point their commercial interests and my hobby tastes will align and it will work out for both of us. Up to that point there’s the rest of the other GW stuff I already like/ life to keep me occupied. If GW were making a big thing of Slaves and making it seem as though they were coming soon and to be expectant about it that’s a completely different issue. But they haven’t/aren’t, so.
  9. Or you could manage your own expectations like an adult? You’re not owed an imminent Chaos book. People on here speculate, sometimes with good evidence, other times with none what so ever. It’s up to the individual to parse what’s likely/credible and what isn’t. Keep your chaos, sell your chaos, join a church, whatever. This isn’t a forum for announcing your life choices.
  10. What did the people who went to the Open Day get for their money? Genuinely curious
  11. I get that but it’s manifestly a piece of Deus Ex Machina. If they started AOS from scratch there’s no way they would have all the free people factions looking as they currently do. There would still be racial and cultural diversity between the disparate elements but they wouldn’t look like a dozen armies who have nothing to do with each other. That’s the fundamental problem for me, there’s no cultural dialogue in the concept other than “Yeah they fight together sometimes”. They don’t look anything like groups who have ever even met each other, let alone live in proximity to each other and established new civilisations alongside each other. They look like races more or less hermetically sealed away from each other over the ages. Mainly because that’s literally what they are, conceptually speaking.
  12. Aesthetically speaking I think the Free Peoples are awful, they’re manifestly a grab bag of multiple different factions who have very particular distinct identities. They look like what they are in that sense. Lore and game wise I have no issue with it but you’ll never convince me it’s not a concept borne entirely out of commercial compromise.
  13. Interesting thing watching the Warcry Choose a Warband Trailer just now: just how removed the faction design is at this point from Olde Worlde Warhammer. Obviously they have been moving this direction for a while but it finally feels like the paradigm has totally shifted with this. Aside from the quality of the sculpts you could have shown me the various factions and had I not known they were for a GW Game I could have believed they were from an entirely different company/system.
  14. Looks like that Tomb Kings prediction based on a vague silhouette didn’t work out ☹️
  15. Also some-not all, but a good amount-of Stormcast are essentially pro-human. Whereas all Space Marines are fascists who believe humanity is pitiable at best and tainted and deserving of blanket condemnation at worst and not infrequently commit genocide in the millions at the merest whisper of heresy among a population
  • Create New...