Koala

A lot of good advice here. tga at its best! I feel like the motivation vs goal distinction is both really helpful and not: Our hobby has SO many options the motivations and goals of people might differ by a lot. When your goal is to have some quiet time while painting your only "needs motivation" steps are buying and building. If, one the other hand, you want to have a full army with a theme/design of your choosing... suddenly there is not just more of everything but also kitbashing and painting on the list. And probably also "learn to kitbash/paint" as well. It can feel quite overwhelming. And if you procastinate from doing stuff you do not want to do by going into hobby forums... lets just say its usually leading into a negative spiral. Its easy to look at the "i just wanna paint in peace" guy and be jealous of his motivation. He is not motivated. He just does what he wanted to do in the first place. There is no shame in reevaluating a project and realising its not worth the effort to you any more (again: hobby, not job!). There are also good reasons to stick to some of the advises here, like a Hobby/socialmedia/whatever hiatus, small iterations, scedule, etc. They can all work wonders. But without an honest analysis of "whats the joy? what is not?" there is no way to decide what to do.

I dont know. Looks more like a cog than a GSC. I personally would also lean elves or Slaanesh (unlikely). In a more humerous note: another infantry character for GSC? They must have a worse character to unit relation than Fireslayers

Yeah. No. This is exactly NOT what i wanted to read: more generic command abilities. I am aware the more active parts of the community like them and am happy for everyone who does. Personal tastes and all. But i find them a major PITA and only good for gotcha/npe moments. Double turn at least creates tention/chaos. I will of course try it after release but chances i am going to skip playing yet another edition just increased significantly.

Well, i am not competing in big GW tournaments. So all this means for me is that i now KNOW there will be no new models instead of just being quite sure about that. Maybe(!) in three years i might not have working rules for AoS 5.0. And not paying 40€ for rules i might not actually use untill then honestly sounds like a deal. So yeah, surprisingly enough i am chill about this.

Aaand another Dawnbringer Article. ( Did i miss someone posting it already?) I have to say Glutos is beginning to grow on me. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/04/05/dawnbringer-chronicles-xxvii-a-feast-for-ages/

So after thinking about it a bit i have to say : the BoC Player (20+years) in me is actually okay with these news. They basically anounced i am clear to go for another 3years! That is because: a) i get an Index like everyone else b) i get points updates for a year c) since i do not play in big GW tournaments my dudes not being tournament legal after 2025 has zero impact on me. No doubt locally i can compete - If i like the edition enough to bother, that is. d) not getting a "new" Battletome sometime is okay... 40€ for the same text and artwork wasnt worth it. As with new models: we all knew it wasnt going to happen anyways... So untill all the warscrolls are rewritten/points reset AGAIN ( AoS 5th) i have an army to play! Take that, Dark Elves! (I sincerely hope you get your faction soon...) The same should apply to Bonesplitters.

I honestly still expect this to be the final goal. Writing rules and keeping it tournament legal for a year sounds oddly specific. My guess would be a full redesign of the concept of "monsters" without the expectations of the past in 2025/early 2026. BoC always felt like a soup army anyways and the odd "god" units did not help. My guess is GW will Pick one of the aspects ( wild Monsters, Minotaurs, DragonOgres, scavenging wooddwellers, dark rituals/mutated) and form a new and 110% AoS faction out of it. Maybe not even as Grand Alliance Chaos. ( And if it works maybe more)

People need to stop this thinfoilhat stuff. In 40k Tyranids also won the "vote" against Marines. I still see more Marines players than 'Nids and noone with access to sales data sees the Marines dominance go away. All this means is that people do no longer always vote for the "good Guys".

Nice Stormcast, even if i do not collect them ("Changecasts" are an option, though ). I do not think anyone reasonably expected GW to change the design by a lot. The current iteration is already awesome. But the fact they decided to redesign "old" models instead of inventing a new unit with a faux latin name and the same battlefield role is a welcome surprise. Also looks easy to paint and handle ( people forget starter miniatures tend to be handled quite roughly, aka thrown around a lot) Now give me contrast/drybrush Skaven and this might be the best starter for quite some time!

Well, i would say its everyone (at least a little bit). Most "oldtimers" both complain about "new" codexes/battletomes not having enough "new" stuff in them... AND buy them on principle - cause its my faction and i gotta own all of it. For new players they provide a full entry into the faction. Cool artwork, descriptions, rules. And GW has a well established way of monetizing the rules AND artworks team. (Sure, we might argue that rules and cool art sells models. But that is indirect and therefore harder to justify) Would digital rules (monthly payments) give both GW and the players a more direct and useful interaction? (What do people actually want? Lets lowkey try something and revert if people dislike it...) The option to actually change problematic (or just unfun) rules instead of the bandaid approach we currently see? Allow the arts team to be more creative like BL/SG ? Absolutely! Still not going to happen because everyone will fear loosing something while being unsure about the advantages.

GW has gotten SO MUCH better at this. With every new iteration the gap between options closes (better in AoS, but then it does not have a decades old player expectation of "this weapon is better than that weapon" ) . Could they have gone further? Absolutely! Can you find examples where rules feel off or even plain stupid? Sure. Welcome to the scale of the hobby ("too big" ) But we are honestly at a point where you need extended calculations to find the optimal loadout for a lot of units. Some players even complain about "all the options being the same". I for one am looking forward to the next iteration of datasheets. And am optimistic they will - in general - feel like they all have a place.

It's pure speculation based on the fact AoS and 40k tend to mirror each other. But i am honestly hoping for it. AoS used to be the lightweight, easy going "have fun together" version of Warhammer. Now it is quite convulted. Anyways, even if there is no reset you can expect new Battletombs to drop. The two starter factions in november and - if they follow the 40k 10th playbook - one double release before the end of the year.

25 years ago, when my friends started playing Warhammer Fantasy, i was late to the party and when i decided i wanted to join most factions were already taken.Except Chaos. So it was decided that was my faction. And somehow it stuck. Today i own every faction broadly labeled "Chaos" except Skaven ( might change in 4th.Ed ). In 40k as well.

I DO like Dechala. She has kind of been made obsolete by DoK Melusai ( looks) and Sigvald (being Slaanesh's arrogant little b****) tough.

I would agree that there are so many possibilities for new stories it might be a waste to just retell the old ones. But then i just recently had my old WHFB 5.Ed Champions of Chaos book in hand and mused about those that actually never got a model or more than a few pages of fluff Count Mordrek is just SUCH an interesting concept. Immortality as a curse might no longer count as "new" but it does work quite well in AoS over the top storytelling. https://whfb.lexicanum.com/wiki/Mordrek