Marcvs

Not really feeling that reduction in range and rend for now

Light of Eltharion Sigvald to some extent: Bastian carthalos, the Celestant Prime, the Akhelian King (with the right setup) on the cheap end: Grimwrath Berzerker

So I also dabbled with Infinity (only got 1-2 people interested in my broader area, otherwise it would be one of my favourite games), here's my return from experience: 1) I used my usual hobby tools (notably, the much-maligned GW mould line removal tool) 2) I used normal super glue, but added a tiny bit of green stuff for the bigger things or the very very small ones 3) I used my usual primer (I use brush-on primer) but did a second coat on some of the minis 4) I varnished after painting, but I tend to do it anyway cause I am a bit of a brute with my mini storage 5) I started with CodeOne. It's a good way to learn, as everything you are learning is relevant for N4 anyway (N4 only adds stuff on top) 6) What I like about Infinity is that the hard part happens before the battle (yes, there's quite a few rules), but during the battle there's not so much stuff to remember. Even my first games had a very good flow -however, I was playing at smaller point. 7) I don't know about tokens (didn't need more), but for terrain, it really depends on what you are after. For MDF, TT Combat has a line which fits with Infinity. For pop up, check out Acid House cyberpunk (although they do limited runs, so it can be sold out). Finally, Infinity cardboard terrain is really decent.

My bet is: same profile as now with +1 wound, weapon profile: 5/3+/3+/-1/2

In every turn yes. So you still get to cast a spell in your turn and unbind one spell in the opponent's turn. That's how it works now with dispelling endless spells (you give away a cast/unbind to do it). Where things get different is that in 4th you can cast in the enemy turn.

Don't tell me. We're about to get unimpressive hero statlines. Yep 4/3+/3+/-1/2 ? Most likely Bring it on.

At first blush I'd say nothing in terms of rules, but I noticed my lists have changed points, so there must have been some changes on that side.

apparently we get a surprise battlescroll today? [insert Pacific Rim meme about Battlescrolls coming faster and faster]

and considering that the enemy is going to pile in 3" with a further 3" of attack range, even the possibility to reduce the number of enemy models in range will be quite limited

another point on the broader picture: with units having a smaller footprint (due to reduced coherency range) and objectives getting smaller as well, this might result in more "space" on the table so maybe (even more) emphasis on high mobility?

my feeling is that the new coherency, the wound pools (albeit not hugely impactful at first blush) and other little signs (the 3" range will mean most units will just have all their models in range) point to the focus switching from single models to "units" as the game piece -likely won't be achieved entirely in this edition of course. It is surely a direction to go if you want the game to be faster.

from the last article I got the feeling that the Scions/Stormkeep choice is not a thing anymore -they didn't qualify the access to the Scions of the Storm battle trait in any way.

cloaks and dual wield also make them a decent proxy destination for Evocators on foot

I'd say it will be at the end of your movement phase (as all abilities which happen in a phase without a specific trigger) so you won't be able to move anyway (too late). Personally, I find the two NuSubfactions incredibly bland but that might just be the stormcast curse again (where "beginner's faction" means "stack of warscrolls" faction)

well, that's 2.5 months more or less, so around 13 weeks? with two articles per week it's "just" 26 articles, and they have at least 23 articles just for faction focus on how 4th edition will impact each faction (really really hoping they are better than last time: "well, unit X can use all out defense/attack now so it's much better")

It's a small thing but I like the new timing of Redeploy, avoids interruptions in the flaw of the movement phase (and having to leave the opponent the time to decide to use it / asking them if they want to use it)

love it, but also a bit concerning for the duration of a game. Have they ever stated that we're still playing 5 rounds in the articles so far? or even just 1 (basically, if you have 1 you might as well go full auxiliary). Also: if having auxiliary units is so (negatively) impactful, it reinforces the mandatory inclusion of heroes -and the actual flexibility of list building (sure, you can do whatever you want, but you'll be at massive disadvantage for it.

That is why I think the "separate rules for old models" system is a bad way to handle this. My favourite way would be a system of official equivalences for new/still existing models, where you can use your old ones for broadly similar ones in GW Stores/GW Events (which of course propagates to all other communities). It doesn't even need to have the same base size, as rebasing (especially for bigger bases, which is in general the movement) is a reasonable ask. This would ensure updated rules and avoid the risk where an OOP model somehow get rules which are too good. Of course, this is harder where an entire faction with a specific look and playstyle is cut (BoC).

Tbf, a) other miniature manufacturers exist (and TOW factions being fairly generic helps) and b) you don't need a 3d printer to buy 3d printed miniatures.

Yes in general it's a big plus for using 3d prints/alternative ranges/proxies. Most of my tournament community allows for this as long as you respect WYSIWYG and this is certainly making it easier. I still find it a bit sad and it gives a "wrong kind of simplification" feeling

Tbf, you could already do that unless you played into (a subset of) tournaments -WYSIWYG is not really a thing in casual play. What this does is to take away some depth for the players who enjoyed that part without actually giving anything for casual play

My problem is less with WYSIWYG (never cared about it, just tell me what they do) but more with the loss of meaningful choices in list building. I am all for streamlining the playing experience, but I believe there's not much need for it in the "pre game part" (i.e. list building)

It seems that liberators have the same weapon profile with two hammers or hammer and shield. Great for modelling and rule of cool, but it feels a bit extreme in terms of simplification

From the Stormcast point of view, all would have been completely different if this was stated in the article (you will be able to use X, Y, Z for new stuff that is coming). The reassurance in a facebook answer by a community account is surely nice but it means nothing -as we have seen with the precedent of the LVO Q&A. I can already imagine the posts on this forum when, a year from now, GW proper contradicts the facebook reply "eh, it happens in a big company"

Yes, I agree with this reading, but the comment was not mentioned in order to say "it's their fault", it is more to say from the perspective of the customers the writing was very much not on the wall. To me, it seems fair to say that customers are entitled to have a legitimate expectation that, when somebody from the company makes such a precise public statement, they know what they are talking about.