Marcvs

I like the Hisui Guard by Lost Kingdrom Miniatures, it's in their Night Elves range https://www.lostkingdomminiatures.com/en/night-elves/408-hisui-guard.html

I find this way to "help" underperforming armies really sad. You've a bad/outdated battletome, here, have some free points

one important exception IMHO: reroll charges. Without it, you're creating a very big disincentive for melee which doesn't seem to be your overall goal

I wouldn't be so harsh but yes, I also feel it will be the ward most of the time, until you get out of your deployment , then it will be the ward, and the d3 wounds only after that. This might chang in very specific situations where killing the small heroes is the path to victory, and in that case it will be great

That's exactly my setup: IKEA BILLY with the upper part for models and lower for storage. It's important to add something to use the vertical space of the shelves though (or add new ones)

Err in you vision of "capitalism" what is that makes these companies invest in R+D instead of remunerating their shareholders?

that ability is so "4+ you win the game" in some matchups, I think they are worth their points even as allies in Stormcast 😅 my feeling is that at current points they will be worthy of consideration in any list which is not trying to go for 1drop

they are 150pts in the new book, so max 2 units even at 2k points and (imho) a bit too pricey to justify bringing them but I agree that they are among the interesting units.

First impression is not much, most of their power comes from synergies, order and lore spells (tenebral blades for the elves notably). Two stand outs: - a Kharybdys to stop rally/inspiring presence in a very decent range (12" bubble + 8" move + either 1d6 run or 2d6 charge), also very good to use the behemot slot in a Battle Regiment if you're going for low drops. - a Command Corp just for the crazy good 4+ to stop a command (plus they can heal/resurrect themselves)

Love the Crossbow Lady and Stormcast Vesemir but I am a bit disappointed with Neave: the generic hero pose (put it side by side with the Imperatant for instance) and no scenic base means she feels a bit "just another SCE hero". The pose also looks more static than the present one. Pity, let's hope they give her some cool rules at least!

shhh, dont' look at Neave's rules!

Correct, sadly

*Per turn

Yeah that's sad, it wil invalidate many people's armies and (imho) take away a part of the identity of the book. I was hoping that they would just nerf Coalition units (no access to the city keyword), because it was a balancing problem, but still allow flexibility in army construction. Speaking of army identity, another small disappointment is that most/all new Cities of Sigmar armies will be 100% humans because no one would suggest new/newish players to pick up the non-human models which could be just gone at the next cull.

The duardin stats are like: why did they need to forge the Stormcast at all 😂

It's a matter of feelings so I can only respect your different point of view. Personally I think the mortal realms are (on purpose) so vast and varied that it's difficult to say clearly this fits / this doesn't. The "breaking of immersion" is also a very difficult thing to handle objectively. I might find immersion breaking that miniatures have bases that do not match the battle map and similar things.

I mean, virtually all products brought to the market by companies are made by some number of people, so this point is rather moot. The respect for their labour should come from the money the company pays them -which, in GW case is really not much. Additionally I find very hard to take seriously all these "feelings" in the context of a company which does not credit anyone. In the end we don't have the voice of this people so I don't find the whole argument very compelling as a negative of leaks. Maybe they are happy to see such an interest for their creation and all the chatter like it was some secret? We don't know. Disagree. The relationship between GW and these content creators means that all their content is intrinsically strongly suspect for consumers, because the power is entirely in the hands of GW who can decide at a whim to whom grant access (and views, and money). The entire sub-economy you mention which is put at risk by leaks is the perfect proof of this: if this economy exists on the basis of early access alone, it means it's entirely dependent on the goodwill of GW and hence suspect. The potential of leaks forces creators to add some value that is not the access to information alone, so I find it also healthy. As for the breaking of a contract between private parties in the context of a market exchange I am not particularly fazed by it or see it as a moral thing but this may vary depending on background, legal system and so on.

As one of the confused people, here's a bit more context to that reaction. I don't see how potato pics reduce in any way your enjoyment of the final reveal "in all its intented glory" on Warcom. Pics of minis are not a story that can be spoiled for you. If the leaks detract from that, than the only value of the "intended" way is the information itself and not any quality of the presentation. Which leads to my next reason to be confused: the intended way to be presented on Warcom has been for quite a while and for most releases (even important ones) a couple of pictures of the minis, with a notable absence of any "wow" (like an animated video with voiceover). Finally, leaks are pro-consumers, giving us advanced knowledge to make more informed choices so, under the conditions I just stated, I would always welcome them for my fellow hobbyists.

The sad thing is that this generally means banning proper alternative ranges and 3d printed minis*, whereas actual recast models are still perfectly fine because it's very hard to spot them. *Which in itself is perfectly within the legitimate choices of a LGS

I don't see why the size of tournaments is relevant here: playing with matched play rules just means 1) playing with points and 2) not using path to glory or similar additional "narrative" set of rules. Outside of some purely introductory games using the content of a starter box, I've never met someone who was playing without using points, even at home, playing on the floor using books as cover and beer cans as trees. So, basically, our anecdotal experience disagrees and we have to leave it at that. From my perspective I can maybe agree that taking into account every possible person who has ever thrown a dice with an AoS mini as a "player", then some relevant percentage of these players don't play with matched play rules. But, if instead we focus on the number of games being played, based on my experience, I am firmly in the camp that the vast majority of games is played on the basis of matched play rules (with or without some tinkering)

Based on my experience and every discussion with someone in my community, I'd say the vast majority of players are playing with matched play rules (whether in a casual environment or in a more competitive one).

But that (the second half) is exactly the point. The vast majority of GW customers will never play a game with their minis or will do so once/twice a year. So, the experience of a random player looking for a game is likely to be that the vast majority of games being actually played is played using matched play rules.

Yeah, nice of them to finally say something. Of course they had this exact information for the last 1 to 3 years but it's still an improvement (which says a lot about the expected level of customer-friendliness, but I digress). Personally I am very happy to have completely halted my Cities project as soon as this was even rumored. I am happy to see GW officially embrace proxying with a very loose interpretation of WYSIWYG rules (wildwood rangers weapons don't look like Executioners' at all, and they are also very different in terms of armour). Hopefully all TOs everywhere embrace this standard. Final point, it makes me a bit angry to see the article itself use the line "don't worry, they're going to The Old World". If someone in your community is upset about their models being "bretonniaed" my suggestion is that you tell them that they can still use them however they like in their games with you, and not that you tell them that they can use them in a system which is a) unreleased; b) entirely different (rank 'n flank, to just mention the glaring one); c) not necessarily as popular as AoS (network effects being one of the reasons why many people invest in AoS)

The overhang is pretty impressive. I'd say they remain on 25mm bases?

of course we'll see how it works in practice, but these make sense if you consider them in context: sentinels are heavily impacted by the new Look Out Sir, the most "competitive" subfaction (Helon) was directly nerfed, and Teclis is actually a loser in the Primal Dice game (casting on a flat 10 is not so great when the opponent can unbind on 3D6). So most of the army list you ever saw in tournaments for LRL this season are made worse by the new rules, which kind of explains the points drop.