Nos
-
Posts
1,164 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
13
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Nos
-
-
59 minutes ago, Goatforce said:
That is rather reductive. It depends on the extent of said "torment" on either side. If the torment is just rather aggressive non-consentual tickling in order to stop an army of murderous sociopaths, for example, is tickling worse than the mass murder of said sociopaths because it is done in the name of a good cause (stopping mass murder)? Obviously not. An extreme example obviously but then "Non conseual torment in the name of good is worse than non consensual torment that's honest about what it actually is" is also a pretty extreme take.
Also serve or die is generally the deal offered by the ruinous powers, presenting them as offering meaningful choices to their followers is rather questionable. Is it something less sinister than this sometimes? Yeah. But those who go to Chaos by choice tend to be psychopaths who would do anything for power, or simply enjoy killing, torturing and other unpleasant things which are enjoyed by the gods of chaos. Also Chaos "rewards" aren't necessarily good, and often have the effect of turning individuals into tormented masses of flesh and hate. Oh and they also punish on a whim, of course.
Oh Sigmar is no saint, I have never claimed that. But an insecure abusive maniac? He created a pantheon of gods with rather diverse views and goals, which is hardly the action of a megalomaniacal control freak. His most questionable acts are generally done to stop the advances of a cause that wishes to destroy everything and embody the very worst aspects of existence (war, hate, despair, disease, sadism, etc), they are not done out of a desire to cause pain to others (by which I mean innocents, rather than said embodiments of destruction who invaded a relatively peaceful reality), and intent matters. Also he likely would have done nothing nearly as unethical if his back was not put against the wall (I would argue that in a situation where your survival was at stake you would do some pretty shady things to get out of it, as would anyone).
I find it curious that you seem to regard Sigmar as badly or worse than the Chaos Gods, because he believes he is doing the right thing - which overall he is trying to do, even if his methods are highly questionable.
*Everybody* believes they're doing the right thing as they see it. That's not a virtue.
You judge people by their actions, not their intentions, intentions are worthless. Sigmar's actions, whatever their genesis or intent, are the actions of a tyrant.
So are those of pretty much all of the pantheon, of course. But Sigmarism clothes itself in a piety and assertion of riteousness which translates to a hypocrisy given the actual workings of its god
-
4
-
8
-
-
24 minutes ago, ArtistDog said:
You're welcome to as many "Sigmar secretly bad" headcanons as you like, but respectfully no, he's not an insecure abusive maniac & this isn't 40K.
Him not being the Emperor of mankind dosent mean he isn't a despot.
-
1
-
7
-
-
23 minutes ago, Magnusaur said:
I'm interested to see how the members of the Ruination chamber(s) are depicted. Simply casting them (no pun intended) as the Stormcast "elites" is a meaningless concept in an army, world, and franchise that is constantly one-upping itself with bigger armor and plates and taller super human warriors. The artwork of the female Stormcast transitioning from Sacrosanct to Thunderstrike and beyond looks ridiculous.
What I think is more interesting (and honestly wouldn't surprise me), is if they portray the on-their-final-forging warriors as a mix of retired veterans who now have taken on roles of governance and traumatized warrior-poets who have made peace with the fact that they too are mortal. I want the Ruination chamber to evoke this keen sense of bravery in the face of finality - not just hurr durr even bigger pauldrons.
Odds on they'll be the AOS spirit animal of 40k Dreadnoughts. Not like necessarily in size and concept but thematically speaking just preserved husks I reckon.
-
1 hour ago, Goatforce said:
Whilst yes, it is not the most ethical recruitment policy, ones morals tend to go by the wayside when one is desperate. Most of the Realms fell to Chaos and there was little anyone could do about it, and Sigmar has personally seen the consequences of Chaos winning before. Endless terror, ruination and torture by evil eldrich gods in which one's only hope is to join with one of the invaders and become part of the host destroying everything makes doing something pretty atrocious in order to resist said horror seem pretty small potatoes.
I think that Sigmar's actions are ultimately justifiable. Not good, in fact quite horrible, but asking beforehand risks reducing the army you need to fight the literal hordes of hell - indeed given the souls need to be stolen from the god of Death it might not even be possible to ask consent, though might be wrong on that one. That said if the situation was different, and this was peacetime or at least far less desparate Sigmar would be almost as much a villain of the narrative as Nagash.
Non conseual torment in the name of good is worse than non consensual torment that's honest about what it actually is. + the Chaos Gods are actually give you a choice to serve them and rewards for doing so.
Sigmar believes all things should be as he wants them to be and is bent on using whatever he can, consenually or no, to that end. He's an insecure abusive maniac.
Not that this is anything new. I posted something similar when 2nd Ed was released.
-
3
-
-
17 hours ago, Sception said:
IMO there's no clear roadmap because GW is righfully taking a wait and see approach to TOW's success. Right now it looks like GW's plan for TOW is to invest the minimum possible amount of money and effort until they can more accurately gauge interest. And honestly, as much as I do think they should have redone the TK skeletons rather than bothering with the bone dragon, I do think the minimal approach is the correct one, and one more likely to lead to the long term success of TOW then diving in with entire brand new model lines, whether for existing factions like Bretts & TKs or new ones like Kislev or Cathay.
I mean, let's be real here, it's still an open question whether there will be a legitimate player base for the Old World at all. Yes, there's been a fair bit of online buzz and interest around the game, but that noise could turn out to be a mirage generated by bitter grognards eager to discuss any oldhammer news but who will never give GW another dollar no matter what they do plus computer gamers who like total warhammer but will bounce off of the inconveniences baked into the hobby aspect of a tabletop minis game no matter what the models looked like.
Starting with a minimum viable product like they're doing means the game doesn't have to be an immediate smash hit to justify its continued existence the way it would have needed to with a heftier initial investment.
A smash hit is admittedly far less likely this way - oldhammer players with existing Brett and TK armies are unlikely to buy much for this release since there's not really anything new on offer, where as I at least would likely have dropped us$500+ on new minis alone if they had redone the skittles & skittle horses. But on the other hand, a modest hit is ~possible~ in a way that it just wouldn't have been if TOW had needed to justify a major up front investment by GW.
If TOW fails on even its currently modest expectations, then we'll likely see nothing else. Just a stand alone ruleset that oldhammer fans can hold onto and play in their basements and local stores for as long as they like. And honestly, I'd be ok with that. That already constitutes more support for the Old World than I'd ever thought we'd see again a decade ago.
If on the other hand TOW's initial release is a success, however modest, then I'd expect another wave or two of oldhammer rereleases, with maybe a couple modest resin heroes, every four to six months until the officially supported factions have all made the rounds. By that point GW should know whether the game has legs - in which case I'd expect to see a second edition release with more significant new model support - or not.
Personally I'm hoping the game plan for TOW is extra flexible, including possibly re-examining the decision to focus on a specific locked historical timeframe. IMO oldhammer factions changed little enough in their composition over time that they could and should have just opened TOW up to the entire span of the old world's history, letting them zoom in on one major exciting event after another as the seasons and editions roll by, rather than remaining locked in one particular time frame when not much is going on with the idea of slowly ramping up to an interesting event maybe some time in the future.
They've made a lot of money and continous sales off of using the 20+ year old LOTR models and occasionally releasing a few new books and kits to keep things rolling. I expect exactly the same approach here.
Fundamentally Warhammer as a Wargame is not beginner friendly at all, the thing that makes it so appealing -scale and spectacle- also requires a high bar to clear, loads of painted minis and a big space to play with them. Most people wanting to play it will already have rank and file armies for Kings of War etc.
It's weird seeing this being described by Oldhammer by some as it is far more in keeping with the 7th and 8th Ed, the most modern Warhammer.
Oldhammer usually applies to Warhammer as a RPG-Skirmish game era, 1-3rd Ed or so.
-
1
-
-
On 8/17/2023 at 8:22 AM, Beliman said:
I like some of your points, but not sure about others (magic after moving, mw with magic, ranged points reduction, etc...). But what I really want is a solid game structure. Wall of text incoming:
-
Polish basic concepts and core mechanics:
- Write a "Bravery check" mechanic and use it when it matters (magic phase, some terror shenanigans, battleshock etc...). No need to write each time a bravery check is needed to "roll 2D6 and add X, if the result is more than bla bla bla).
- Critical Hit and Critical Wound: Unmodified 6 to hit/wound always succeed (we already have that). Use this concept as a main mechanic like "If this unit has this ability, hit rolls made by Unleash hell targeting this unit only succeed on a Critical Hit".
- Attach Character (new rule) : Same as Warhammer 40k. Remove all bubbles, abilities that target units wholly within or within 3" and all this stuff. Only Avatar units can have bubbles, auras or wholly within abilities(read below)
-
Core Keywords: We have Hero, Wizard, Priest, Totem, Monster and Warmachine. Some of them have inner abilities/tables (Wizard, Priest, Hero, etc...), and some of them have some interactions with other mechanics (Totem, Warmachine, etc...). What about other keywords?
- Mounted Hero: Can only be attached to "Cavalry" units (no need to arbitrary say that models with X wounds or less).
- Horde: Add 1 to bravery for every Y models that this unit have
- Monster X+: Can only be wounded on a roll of X+. Remove Monstruous Rampage and writte some of this rampages to their warscrolls (if needed).
- War Machine: Ignore Monster X+ when targeting a Monster.
- Transport X: Friendly Faction X Units can Embark and Disembark
- Cavalry: Can run + Charge/shoot
- Chariot: Mw at the end of charge phase
- Infantry: No bonus.
- Hero: Add that can be attached to Infantry units.
- Avatar: Can't be killed with abilities that "slain a model", can issue a comands like a Hero/Mounted Hero, and have their own "Monster X" (pseudo-Primarchs for AoS, write this in any God-like or Gotrek-like warscroll).
-
Add another role: Fast Attack 0-3 (1000p games) and 0-6 roles (2000p games).
- Chariots and Cavalry are going here. Some Heroes or flying units too if needed.
-
Command Abilities:
- Rally: Can only target Horde units.
- All-out Defense: Can only target units with [SHIELDS] (see below).
- Challenge: Only Heroes/Avatar/Mounted Heroes. In the combat phase, you can pick 1 enemy Hero/Avatar/Mounted Hero within 6" of this HERO. Until the end of the turn, ignore the melee range characteristic for both HEROES, but each HEROE must target the other one when they are selected in the fight phase. Wounds allocated as part of this Command Ability must be completely allocated to the models in the same Challenge, even if they have a retinue for being Attach Characters. All wounds that are not allocated to the enemy Hero are discarded.
-
Rewritte all warscrolls abilities. Add or combine abilities to make all of them follow the same structure, but that doesn't mean that one Hero or one special unit could still have their own weird ability. All this abilities are still Warscroll Abilities (exactly as we already have), not USR persé or Keywords. But having a [LABEL] attached to an ability make the whole process of playing the game a lot easier for players and designers. Issues like RAW vs RAI will be easier to fix with just a FAQ:
- Rewritte all abilities that have mortal wounds made on hit and wound rolls: [TOXIN X]: On a unmodified wound rolls of X, that attack (profile) causes a number of mortal wounds to the target equal to the weapon’s Damage characteristic and the attack sequence ends.
- All breath attacks, gas attacks, etc: [BREATH] Each time an attack is made with this weapon, that attack automatically hits the target.
- All units with shields: [SHIELD] Add 1 to Save characteristic (and can interact with All-Out Defense, see above).
-
All deploys, movement shenanigans, setup shenanigans:
- [AMBUSH]: During deployment, if every model in a unit has this ability, instead of setting up this unit on the battlefield, you can place it to one side and say that it is set up in ambush as a reserve unit. At the end of your first movement phases, you can set up any friendly reserve units that are in ambush on the battlefield, wholly within 9" of the battlefield edge and more than 9" from all enemy units
- [SCOUT X"]: At the start of the first battleround, after chosing the first player, if every model in a unit has this ability, you can make a X” move with this unit.
- [INFILTRATE]: During deployment, if every model in a unit has this ability, then when you set it up, it can be set up anywhere on the battlefield that is more than 9" horizontally away from the enemy deployment zone and all enemy models.
-
Add any ability that can interact with what we already have:
- [BEASTHUNTER] Ignore Montser X.
- [MARKSMAN] Can target Attached Characters with ranged attacks.
- [PARRY X] Can't be hit with better rolls of X+ to hit.
- [BULKY X] Count as X for Transport keyword.
- [PIKE FORMATION] Only units with Pikes/Spears: Enemy units that charge a unit with this ability can't use any Charge Bonus.
- [SHIELD WALL] Only units with [SHIELDS]: Enemy units that charge a unit with this ability can't use any Charge Bonus.
- [CHARGE] Lance Profiles: Add 1 to rend and damage characteristic when the unit charge.
My whole vision is to polish the game, make core mechanics, keywords and warscrolls abilities part of the same layer of rules. There are more things that I would like to see changed or tweaked (buy artifacts with points,more customizations options, ranged profiles that can't target engaged enemy units, rules for terrain, etc..) but my main issue at the moment is that the game doesn't feel finished and it seems that there are a lot of layers of rules that don't need to be separated from the main game.
Edit: I edited a bit my brainstorming of possible abilities that I would like to see in the future. There are 2 rerolls (rerolls 1 to hit for ranged and for melee attacks), but I think it's enough to make some units truly "Elite":
Brainstorming_WarscrollAbilities.pdf 1.53 MB · 1 downloadRemove seperate Player Turns and introduce I Go You Go within individual phases and this comprehensive keyword system is a big part of how, and why, MESBG works so well at heart. It means despite there being dozens of different armies which play asymmetrically it's pretty easy to parse how each one plays if you know how the keywords work. All Army lists are contained within a few books solely dedicated to that purpose, while the Rulebook establishes these keyword mechanics. Rules are just rules and lists are just lists.
Unfortunately the evidence of Tenth 40k suggests that they will persist with introducing complex information and new systems within new faction releases and Handbooks rather than creating a navigable and comprehensible core system that army lists then riff off of.
What fundamentally pushed away from gaming AOS was the knowledge that even if I learn the clunky and contradictory nature of the basic rules of the game and my army, there is the chance that every subsequent release will alter that and the guarantee that within a three year cycle I'll need to start over.
That and the complete passivity of having to wait for a player to take an entire turn, sometimes two, before I get mine. Every other skirmish or wargame level game I play allows me to do stuff in at most 15-20 minute intervals, usually much less. All the other games I play are essentially collaborative, they establish a dialogue and flow in their mechanics between players.
AOS and 40k played at anything besides a top level creates a passive or antagonistic experience in which one player does everything and the other little besides move a bucketful of their troops from the table. If you get double turned its not at all unusual that you do nothing for 40+ minutes besides the gaming equivalent of being repeatedly punched in the face.
-
3
-
Polish basic concepts and core mechanics:
-
10 minutes ago, KingKull said:
I need more Frazetta-inspired models in my life and the new Nurgle herald is out. Of. This. World.
Now holding fingers crossed for a nurgle cavalry on actual horses!
The best GW stuff has always been at its best when unashamed and open about its artist's Influences. All the most important GW artists have a portfolio in wider fantasy as well as in GW universe.
-
2
-
-
The new Nurgle model holds up to the original which is saying something. Think I still prefer the older one but as a Heroic Glow Up its very well done. It has a definitive silhouette and shape and has quote obviously borrowed from Frazettas Death Dealer which is about as perfect a design as Fantasy art gets.
The rest look like 3D designers having a go at Age of Sigmar pretty much. Which isn't an insult more just an observation that 3D sculpting is removing a lot of the artisanship and "hand" of the sculptor. For stuff like 40k with an established aesthetic it's harder to crack, but with AOS which is a bit less fixed and more experimental/still trying to find its signature look its kind of open season.
I like the idea of the Cavalry but I think they're poorly executed, the have a terrible silhouette and sort of just loom like Grim Dark Buckaroo. Which, even if that was the point which I think maybe it was, you can do that with better lines than they have. They don't look functional.
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, Snorri Nelriksson said:
That's the appeal of the settings(40k\whfb also) imho...while aos is more "heroic"to some extent there's only shades of gray and black(and the worst is obviously chaos).
Still my post was about the fact that imho Greenskins are too often seens as comedic while they are "much more scary" and "vile"(and that's a nice point imho).
I see many times also something similar is said for chaos imho sometimes that is seen by many as "misguided" or "anti-heroic"while they are obviously not .One of the better things about the hobby over the past decade is I think there's been more of tonal variety. There's multiple iterations of greenskins from comedy to really quite scary, and it's the same for most factions. That option to choose your ratings level as it were is better catered for.
I always felt that Dark Elves and their 40k equivalent where a tough proposition because they're just excessively horrible and sadistic. You can't have a society made up of sociopaths, it's an oxymoron.
-
3 minutes ago, Snorri Nelriksson said:
Greenskins gets delight also from torturing and pillagin though...is too "exaggerated" calling them "not vile" (while still being a force of nature as Gorkamorka intended).
Even in wh40k people downplay too much their "vile side" and focus too much on the "funny side".
Considering the 6th edition book of whfb i remember a nice quote about that:
"I'm gonna stomp 'em to dust. I'm gonna grind their bones. I'm gonna pile 'em up inna big fire and roast 'em. I'm gonna bash 'eads, break faces and jump up and down on da bits dat are left. An' den I'm gonna get really mean."
Skarnik book is even worse,they clearly love acts of pure sadism.I like Kruleboyz embodied that side of Mork worship that not only is "Cunning" but mostly is "malice that comes from being too cunning(for their own good i'd say)".
But maybe i'm biased as a dawi fan XD (tbh "Greenskins vs dwarfs" will be always my iconic idea of rivals in warhammer,as i love them both).Every faction in GW's universes are bad in some respect. That's why Chaos is so central and so key. It's not about morality so much as moral Entropy.
-
On 3/27/2023 at 3:52 PM, Clan's Cynic said:
Won't post them all here because SPAM, but well worth taking a look at some of the incredible work.
Golden Demons at interesting place at the moment. Obviously I understand that primarily it's not really for any purpose other than the promotion of Games Workshop so it's not strictly an art competition, that's a naive perspective. But it's achieved its prominence now because it *used* to be exactly that, and is less interesting now as a consequence.
For the past 5 years or so I would say that there's the dominance of style now very specific, an incredibly technical form which is always going to win. There's no chance that you're going to win without high saturation of colour, non metallic metal, incredibly smooth blending.
And I think what's a shame about this is while these things are all very impressive, they're nonetheless just artistic choices; others exist. Predominantly they're choices as well which require tens if not hundreds of hours of work. They make investment of time a virtue, and there's no artistic reason why that should be the case. Many great artistic masterpieces from different eras in different mediums where not laboured over for hundreds of hours.
As somebody who's got more into art in general over the last couple of years one of the reasons that it's still vital and still exciting is because art *evolves*. It's not just people replicating the single style again and again. If you look at say the difference between the pre-impressionists and what their contemporaries were doing at the time, it's moments like that which makes things really exciting and which move art forms forward, and I think if the miniature hobby ever has any aspirations for that it needs to have a brain trust to be able to admire and celebrate that rather than just repeat and request and respect only the same things over and over.
Just thinking as a starter for ten, you can inspire greater creativity I think with more abstract categories; Things accomplished in a short space of time, mixed media, you could do something which rewards a particularly aesthetic eg bright, Dark.
GD used to be the highlight of my hobby calendar but its become quite dull to me really because they're always just a parade for the same people providing ever more polished iterations of the same thing. One of the joys of the old Golden Demons was that there were so many different styles and takes, many of which were particularly notable because they *wernt* an 'Eavy Metal Replica. The Slayer Sword Winner each year nearly always had a different aesthetic or take on it's subject to those it beat. GD used to be this amazing synergy where the Art of GW and its models almost became one and the same thing. Now, while the painting quality from a technical perspective is frankly light years more advanced, it's essence and connection to me to that world seems much more disparate. I don't see these models and find them evocative, I see models which shout "Look at how *painted* I am".
The other thing as well is that theres now an industry, a professional one whereby incredibly talented artists do this for work, and they deserve all of the success they have for it. But I can't help but feel a lot of GD is now just watching a reality show of Content Creators vying amongst themselves.
And it's not competition which is producing innovation- its just everybody trying to do the same thing but better. The vast majority of painting "masterclasses" on YouTube say that the best most impressive way to paint is related to smoothness, repeat processes, thin paint etc. These are what win GDs so these are the true great and best ways to paint. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
From a perspective of art for art's sake I think we're actually in quite a Tedious place at the moment unless youre willing to look pretty hard outside of the most popular spaces . The hobby has incredible masters of different formats of painting, it's not that they they don't exist, but they don't have official recognition and I think the hobby really requires its equivalent of punk or the impressionist school, which is recognised for its excellence of different techniques and focus and outlook which are not the same as the ones which are the most popular at the moment but ones which are nonetheless vibrant and exciting and which bring models to life.
-
14
-
-
New Lizards are perfect
Excited to see if 40k is actually playable/accessible for new players. I remember simular claims around the release of every last edition pretty much but maybe 10th time is the charm.
-
I moved back to GWs consistently excellent LOTR game last year and found its had a hugely beneficial impact on my to do pile for several reasons
1) Size + details.
GWs models just seem giant these days, a basic infantry trooper is now approximately the height of an old Stone Troll and about 18x as detailed. From a basic scientific viewpoint there's just More To Do when painting an AOS model compared to painting an MESBG or Oathmark etc equivalent. It's not an exaggeration to say I can paint a small MESBG army in the time it takes one AOS regiment.
2) Off the hype train.
MESBG gets a few new things a year, as thankfully GW have the sense to leave their impeccably balanced and comprehensive game pretty much alone. As a result, I'm not experiencing FOMO every Sunday and Monday (at least) every week with new reveals. GW are (as I predicted with WH +) more and more pushing the Marvel model of a comprehensive infastructure in which you collect AOS, as opposed to just one faction. Sure, if you're disciplined you *can* just do your thing but more and more of their products are designed with the idea of a buy in to the license as a whole. This in my experience leads to a curious oscillation between hype and then fatigue almost simultaneously. The sense of MORE STUFF 😁 becomes more stuff 🫠 and you drown underneath it. All this is compounded by the fact that the online Hobby Community are for the most part involved in this ecosysyem and Content Creators and Influencers increasingly invested in it, like literally dependent on it for money.
Step outside of the Big Two though and stuff is pretty chill and there's more space for you to enthuse or step back as your mood takes.
3) More painting begets more painting.
I really like painting models but I was terrible at consistently painting them. Mainly because I was never "Finished". But it turns out thar a smaller less detailed surface to cover, plus the absence of weight generated by FOMO and keeping up with whatever is going on in AOS this week etc, leads to actually finishing stuff. And the more you paint and finish stuff the better and quicker you get, most of the below models are at 40 mins now. Its not "Speedpainting" as I see it because I rarely ever paint for longer and im not going for fast; it's just my painting window, where I'm content and engaged with creativity, much longer per model and I lose interest.
And the thing with finishing stuff is you get to do new stuff. The Last 8 months or so I've painted men, ghosts, trolls, multiple species of orc, wargs, heroes, banners, siege weapons. With that has come different opportunities to try all sorts of textures, different ways to paint skin and different skin tones, leather, metals, colour schemes, basing and so on. In the equivalent time with AOS I would have started and stopped multiple things without ever finishing them, at best.
Please dont read this as an attack on AOS. If you enjoy it then great, all that matters. But if you're finding all the hobby abit too much, just some thoughts as to how often the product and its culture can be as much of an impediment to motivation as anything else. Could be that you enjoy the hobby just as much but you need to give yourself an easier approach like i did.
I've found that the issues around size and detail also apply to basically anything 3d sculpted. The more is more school of thought seems to dominate among 3d sculptors where the thought seems to be more about creating a fantastic image and very little thought goes into the idea of translating that as a 3D object.
If you feel overawed or overwhelmed, my advice is paint something simple, finish it, and repeat, see where it takes you. Just like when you were a kid. Paint a wee guy with a face and Shield and armour or whatever. Enjoy bringing them to life.
If you don't enjoy painting and finishing something basic, chances are you'll never enjoy painting, let alone finish, something complex and intricate.
-
17
-
2
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Chikout said:
I think it's safe to say that we might see some conversions of these makes their way over to AoS.
That horse looks like the end of a game of Buckaroo
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Gitzdee said:
Reveals of already leaked models are the worst.
Edit: Dont like the armour paint job, something is off about all the heavy blue lines everywhere. The point of focus shifts from the mount or the rider to the armor plates imho.
Edit2: Model is great.
Not sure it's the paint job, model itself has about 18 points of focus.
The irony with modern GW sculpts is that simple jobs often bring out the models the best. The 'Eavy Metal edge highlight everything approach turns a lot of them into magic eye puzzles.
-
1
-
2
-
-
Disclaimer: if you disagree with the below, thats fine. I'm glad you ate happy with your hobby- that's all that counts. I'm happy with mine too, it's a golden age for wargaming.
But my thoughts are coherent and detailed. If you want to disagree, please do, but actually contend with *what I'm saying*.
For me- with every GW preview, for all of their systems, I can't help but feel that in respect to the models, it's more of the same. I don't mean thematically, I mean that irrespective of the theme or faction etc, there is a shared aspect to the design of every model.40k just revealed an entirely new race, and with one or two exceptions, they are exactly what I expected them to look like following the first preview. Chaos in particular for me are really suffering from this- they look increasingly uniform, humans in costume. Nothing remotley chaotic about them. The New Gargant looks like he's made from the literal corpse of all the other ones. The new LOTR sculpts are beautiful in their dynamism but they also look souless in every other department.
In part I think it's an issue with the studio painting approach- it's increasingly unsuited to such a variety of GW's ranges and painting say the hordes of Chaos in the same neat manner as Lumineth definitley kills their personality abit, like forcing them into a starched suit. It wasn't so much of an issue in thr past because model ranges were different In every sense, even proportion.
I think it's probably also a wider event horizon for 3D sculpting, because most 3D sculpts share the same issue. It might be an uncanny valley thing, there's definitley an aspect where the sculpt reveals the automation behind it. It reminds me of an era in comics in the late 90's where printing technologies dramatically increased the availability of colours that could be printed. The consequence of this brave hew world was flashy comics that all looked the sane and were devoid of the draughtmanship and invention that used to thrive in the medium.
Increasingly GW feels to me like what it is- a franchise factory pumping out content, cobtent that increasingly is no superior to what freelancers can design and distribute. And it always has been thst sort of factory, don't get me wrong.But the rate at which it's doing it is flattening the personality of its stuff, for multiple reasons. I'm getting the same sense of overload as with all the other IP behemoths, a sense that it just exists to produce without much of a vision or sense of soul. And especially in this climate, I think that's going to genuinley hurt it it dosent chill out a bit. If in a few months time people are struggling to keep up with food and energy inflation, the fifth similar looking warcry set of men in chaos fancy dress in 7 months or whatever is going to feel egregious in multiple ways.
-
3
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:
The original announcement of TOW was certaily at a very early stage. The whole pandemic situation will certainly not have helped them hit their initial targets, either.
I kind of wonder if announcing TOW as early as they did was really a good strategy. Even though it's probably not true, it might feel to casual observers like no progress is being made. I have also observed TOW taking away some interest from AoS.
"Should I rebase my Fantasy army to rounds with TOW coming soon?" , "I was planning to ge into AoS, should I wait for TOW instead?" or on the more extreme end " AoS will be dead from lack of players/get discontinued in 3 yearsn TOW comes out. " are all questions/sentiments I have seen online since TOW was announced.
When they made a big announcement as advertisement for making a big announcement I knew it was going to be a weirs project
Realistically going to be 4 years minimum before TOW is established for itself. By which I mean, as a unique product with its own fanbase and draw.
If people want to play Warhammer they already can and do. There's also frankly much better and easier and cheaper systems like Oathmark and KOW both of which are friendly to using Warhammer armies on round or square bases
For GW to get back in on square based rank and file action without hurting AOS is going to take a long time, regardless as to when they release.
-
2
-
-
Love the Kroot.
Warcry figures are cool but I yearn for something...chaotic. Appointing a team uniform or like a halloween costume theme (we're the spider guys, ok we're the swamp guys etc) for a bunch of humans ain't it. The first round of stuff had beastmen and ogres in with their crews. More asymmetry needed for me.
The other thing that's weird about so many humans all at once, as a player who plays various wargames, is that humans are everywhere as minis. The Witch Hunters are cool but I've seen so many similar models because they're based on an aesthetic which not only long predates AOS and is represented in mini form, it's also an aesthetic which heavily influences 40k as well. The more stuff like this, I fear the less AOS maintains it's identity as diverse reimagining of global fantasty/mythic archetypes .
OK its more grizzled European style Witch hunters. There they are. Looking like many other models that are Witch Hunters do. Weird that they look just like updated versions of 16th century real world archetypes rather than something informed by the context of the fantastical realm they reside in. They could literally create a new idea as to what a Witch hunter is, does, how they operate etc. After all they're not fighting in Sylvania anymore right? But no.
Blowing up the Old World to bring it back in slightly more dynamic and anatomically correct sculpts isn't the future I want for AOS but stuff like this suggests they're a bit lost in how to move forward with humans without just straight repetition.
But all subjective yadda if you like it then great stuff obvs
-
6
-
2
-
-
11 minutes ago, Flippy said:
Trying to get as many model as possible within reach while maintaining coherency leads to arguments, especially in a crowded melee. Even here people were showing elaborate drawings of weird formations aimed at this - and if you give extra attack to a unit you just further encourage this approach. Checking if the bases are in touch is way more elegant and actually encourages people to rank the infantry, which, I believe, is good for the game.
I've been playing quite a bit of MESBG of late which has really highlighted to me how unintuitive it is in AOS to have units which act like units in most instances but not in combat
-
1
-
-
Definitley pick some up to try. Been painting nighthaunt with a quite lot of contrast paints lately, if you have a model which dosent require fighting the contrast properties (ie can afford it to look very varied and non-uniform) it's a lot of fun.
-
15
-
8
-
-
7 minutes ago, Mutton said:
Yeah I know what primer is, haha. I didn't know that's what some people considered a "base coat". I kind of always assumed people just meant it was the base layer you put down over primer. I guess it's a malleable term.
Don't think it will be anything that would replace primer. Will either be additive to the existing painting method OR something that reduces painting process but thereby encourages more purchasing of models to add to your newly finished ones that otherwise woypd gave been languishing on the shelf or in a box etc.
-
26 minutes ago, Flippy said:
You can do that. You can also put the contrast on a metallic base. But, mind you, that is how you paint and not how you do the business on paints. If GW can deliver quality armour paints (i.e. colourful metallics) they will have another success.
Oh absolutely
Vastly superior paint lines and tools already exist (for cheaper than GW's inferior stuff) but GW have a ready made audience to sell existing products at a mark up. I'm frankly a bit baffled as to why they've been so slow to do so if anything.
-
2
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Archibald said:
My guess will be metallic contrast paints.
These already exist.
Take a good metal paint and mix in contrast paint.
Voila.
-
1
-
-
Design of a model and kit are two different things
In terms of kit though, Rockguts by a mile. Believe there's something like 60 variations available, and the models are outstanding, not really a weak bit or piece among them.
Nothing else comes close in a pound for pound contest.
-
11
-
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
You're repeating the classic colonial power justification for war crimes; Its for the greater good, means justify the ends, it will secure peace/save lives etc. Morality as equation rather than through something which respects dignity and sanctity of life.
That's what Sigmar is. My perspective on Sigmarism is through the lense of studying history in which the worst excesses of humanity have been excused by a mandate of good intentions. Sigmar embodies humanity in that regard; a capacity to perpetrate wrongs with the delusion that it is a moral imperative to do so even though the people doing sausage wrongs are terrified of others doing the exact same thing to them. The crusades are a case in point. Anyone with the most basic understanding of what that word means knows that they have never been anything besides, at best, a gross moral compromise and more than not an act of tyranny and total depravity in the name of something holy.
I haven't at any point *defended* Chaos. I've simply stated that they are honest about their ambitions and naked lust for control. Which they are. Some of them are deceitful within their wider machinations of how to bring their ambitions about but there is no mistaking what they are doing in the round, and why. That's always been the joke with chaos since the beginning- entropy that nonetheless has 4 very specific and simple elements to it.
I haven't said its good, or cool or anything of the sort.