Marcvs

This is very ironic when multiple people on this forum (so, generally, very involved in the hobby news cycle) where pushing back against the very idea. For reference, here's also a reddit thread after The Honest Wargamer started talking about the possibility of BoC going away with like 100% of initial reactions saying he was wrong (or worse): https://www.reddit.com/r/ageofsigmar/comments/195jk3n/where_does_the_rumor_that_beasts_of_chaos_are/ and I quote from the most upvoted comment: "It pretty much exclusively comes from the YouTube/twitch personality theHonestWargamer's opinion almost no one else thinks it's going to happen"

Yes it must be that! I have never bought them myself so I don't know the denomination of the magazines. It's the one which gave you lots of souls wars stuff basically

Yes, we're actually paid actors. What I find sad about your comment is that it basically tells me you find incomprehensible that people would be upset by this, so you must find another explanation (they must have an ulterior motive). I have spent the evening reassuring the two new AoS players of our club in our discord. They both have a stormcast army built via the stormbringer (EDIT: no, it's Mortal Realms) magazine (so, mostly if not all Sacrosanct if I understand correctly). I told them that nobody at the club would have a problem playing them, that they will be able to proxy their minis for other/new stuff, and that even our tournament community is likely to be fine with it. They were still shaken and sad at the end, so, while I am able to rationalize all this, it's still a bad day and it has drained a lot of my energy and enthusiasm for the game.

Lol, fair

yes, I'd say the only ones which seems difficult to "proxy" are 1) the ballista, and 2) the tauralon (although, he's the same base size as Inous, just saying). All the others should have an easy way to "count as", sometimes some kitbashing will be required if WYSIWYG is a requirement. it still bad of course to see models which aren't even 6 years old gone.

The problem with this is that, at least in my anecdotal experience (and speaking of tournaments, because outside of that everything is always possible), there are two ways in which tournaments handle this: - GW official miniatures only or - 3d prints and alternative ranges/proxying is allowed but (since you have to draw a line somewhere) some form of WYSIWYG is required. Evocators (on foot and on dracoline) have a weapon loadout which is not similar to other existing units, so that's the reason of my reply.

bit of a sweeping statement, what about: celestar ballista tauralon and, without kitbashing (because if you count kitbashing, every stormcast is any stormcast): evocators on dracoline evocators arcanum on gryph

Ok, this at least goes in the right direction. It's still only from the socials team, but it's a start

or 6-ish, for the Sacrosanct Chamber

What would have helped to "calm the waters" would have been to say that, for example (as we have seen them already) "you will be able to use your old liberators as new liberators in GW stores and events" (since you know, same loadout, same base size, 100% GW), instead they seem to be suggesting that they will not allow this.

aand that's 7030 pts (at pre-last-battlescroll points) of my SCE gone luckily I play in a community which has been so far very open to 3d prints and alternative ranges, so it shouldn't be that bad. Maybe. I hope.

AKA people were playing within the ruleset that a very big succesful game company gave them. I also hate it when those ultra-competitive people build hotels on Park Place!

I am all for the talk of merging Stormcast warscrolls, but before discussing judicators/vigilors/hunters I'd say there's both lower hanging fruits (single warscroll for the 3 paladin variants, 3 melee dracothian guards, prosecutors) and a much more pressing need to reduce the number of Leaders

also practical that foot heroes are the most overpriced miniatures of the catalogue

"Uhm actually" moment: not really, at least not with the core rules (real line of sight is in there)

I am probably in a (tiny) minority, and it's a matter of tastes anyway, but I don't really vibe with the new design. I wasn't very happy with the idea of the resculpt anyway (a lot of other armies need that attention) and this feels quite underwhelming: nothing more than a scaled up knight with hammer and shield. On the plus side, they are only a post-diet version of old Liberators, so using the old ones would be perfectly fine (if I need standard bearers, I have plenty of those from the Vindictors or even the multiple knight vexillors).

Last year we ran a Mordheim campaign at my club. The problem we had was not about balance (we policed ourselves a lot) but about the incentives structure about the game: consequences are brutal so you don't want to risk your leaders (I *could* charge jumping down a building but why would I??) + "winning" a scenario is not that beneficial compared to just surviving it, so basically our games were just a little scrap among our henchmen until one side had the option to withdraw and inevitably took it. The parts before and after the games were the best part of our experience, so ultimately most people lost interest in actually playing.

I would wait to see the actual rules before applying any textual interpretation

The GW store in Strasbourg (France) is battling over the city of Astrid's Gate

1) I can carve my expensive models into pieces alone at my hobby desk, whereas I need another person to play a game. 2) this requires an agreement on which version of the game to play 3) in my anecdotal experience, it's much easier to find a game playing what is (right or wrong) considered the standard way to play

they mentioned a "modular" rules system so maybe we're (finally) getting a "casual version" without battle tactics and other stuff, and a "tournament" one with the added seccondaries. After all, the lack of a "casual battlepack" was a common critique to 3.0

yeah, that sounds stupid. it's also the first time I read this argument. it's minis, not armies: the new Darkoath stay in AoS, the old ones go to ToW. Therefore (right or wrong, at least, legitimately) seeing current AoS dwarves in ToW is taken as a sign that they are going.

yes, but again using the "pity victory points" approach that they used for balance in 3rd ed (like, giving new easy battle tactics to struggling factions). So you might still get crushed by a double turn*, but hey you'll win on points. *my problem with the double turn is only that it makes me sit without doing much for 1 hour+ not about the actual impact on the game

apart from the balancing problems (fully agree) my issue is also with out they break the flow of the game (the "start of hero phase" phase is the worst moment in the game for me) and impact how you build and think about your army -that is, as a tool to score 5/5 battle tactics first, and only second about fighting a battle.

the trailer has nice moments (not the janky stormcast movements) but I feel very disappointed in terms of story progression. This could have been a trailer for 2nd ed. I am kind of relieved that "new" stormcast so far look very similar to the old ones. ALthough that's boring, it means I can just kitbash them with my already vast collection -then again, I'll surely pick up the stormcast half of the box cause there's like a queue of clubmates who want the skaven part. Weridly, the choice of not showing any actual mini for 4th ed has put all the emphasis on rules, which is generally not what makes people excited. I am curious to see what they do. Everything I want is for the game to be more fluid and play faster. The second point could be achieved by actively supporting smaller points games, but Spearhead (i.e. combat patrols) is a very different beast: it's good if you only play rarely or play multiple armies, but if you play semi-often and only play one army, it gets stale super quickly.