Jump to content

Greybeard86

Members
  • Posts

    613
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Greybeard86

  1. Pretty much this, it was so refreshing but widely inconsistent with recent narratives. I imagine some of the newer recent players must be astonished, given the recent heroic portrayals of the whole empire thing. no bit of information whatsoever about kurnothi?
  2. WH30k is a very ambitious project with what, at least from outside perspective, looks like no true backing. It was marketed a bit like the "wargame" version of 40k, for "adults", with "more realistic rules", yet a bigger focus on "thehobby and lore". Also, more expensive than 40k and based (mostly) on resin. While some elements of WH30k appeal to me, I am not sure I'd want TOW to follow it too much. The resin and prices get old fast, as do the lack updates.
  3. Or just give high rend to magic attacks, and potentially add a "magic" ward save for certain creatures if need be. Why exactly are "mortals" needed?
  4. I apologize since I couldn't summarize what others were saying. I agree 100%. What made warhammer so iconic was, IMO, the fact that it was: satire of sci/fantasy a bit more grounded on history (as opposed to fantasy, which gave it a more solid foundation) had elements of political satire still "serious" enough to engage in "deep" word building Others have described this as "punk nerd" or something similar, which I really like. It all had a bit of an ironic flavor, as if the narrator had an ironical smile while telling you the story. I think this unique combination is what gave it the "edge" over other settings, as it has something beyond the stereotypical "paladin lvl 200 with dragonkiller sword" that is ridiculed so often. I apologize if I haven't read enough about them, but stormcast seem like warcraft paladins to me; cartoony gaming inspired archetypes designed to be easily painted (drybrush armor). And I don't mean this as an attack on those who like them! Right now, I am missing bits of most of these 4 elements. It seems that, like others said, it takes the fantasy both too seriously (as in straight up I should not laugh and what I am being told) and too lightly, in a way I don't like. When I read about Roboute Guilliman as the saviour of the empire, which is a flawed but ultimately noble thing, I can't help but be surprised. The empire had never been touted as a good thing, there weren't "good" and "bad" things in 40k, it was pretty awful all around. And too lightly, because by losing its "historical" core, it is now much harder to ground. As others have said, it seems to me that before warhammer was looking outwards for inspiration AND commentary, and now it just looks inwards. The parody (also been said here), if it still exists, is at most of warhammer itself.
  5. Kragnos is truly a Kurnothi who is just a bit confused.
  6. I actually do like Lauka Vai, enough that I bought her. It is horrifying, the stuff of nightmares, and I think that having some elements of that kind of horror in the faction is fine. 100% in agreement. And I strongly dislike dragon princes 😜 To me, those kind of designs are immersion breaking, like elves in the lord of the ring movies (are elves automatons?), or those anime zodiac knights. Black knights are golden in my eyes, as they do look like old knights re-awakened, for the most part. I would love for vampires knights to follow this a bit more, except that they wouldn't have rusty armors, but rather decayed but very fancy armors (and maybe some dark magic element here and there). Vampire knights (aka blood knights) should be old knights who are turned and continue their quest for martial proficiency. See for example: "The Knights of Irrana were a mortal order of Estalian knights until their grand master concluded that the techniques of Abhorash far outstripped those of Myrmidia and brought his whole unit into the darkness to join him". That is why I bought a ton of black knights that I wanted to convert with old bretonnia sculpts (though metal ones are notoriously difficult to work with, in that regard, and I wanted to use errant knights). When bretonnia gets its release, I might buy some plastic kits to do this project. Again, I understand mind is an unpopular opinion, but happy to have a thread for them
  7. Yes to African inspired factions, but from a place of pride and respect; we all know what went wrong the first time. Also, please allow for some cross compatibility with AoS. There are multiple Minos that could have a home in both systems. Related, approach basing more like KoW and less like greedy Scrooges. Enough of cramming a million figures without space to sell more minis: 1 to 1 is a terrible representation, units should feel like a dynamic abstraction regiments. If this is a battles game, take that seriously and don’t try to monetize that aspect to the point of what we saw in 8th edition. I said this is related to AoS cross compatibility because a known problem is ranking AoS figures with dynamic poses.
  8. I don’t see the point of discussing whether some subreddit is mean to this or this other group. If someone crosses a line here, report and move on. It is not like moderators aren’t active around here. I am starting to get the impression that some want to fight some proxy war using some outside strawmen. No need for passive aggressiveness, go be aggressive aggressive in the multiple echo chambers that allow for that to go unmoderated. Unpopular opinion: The soulblight release is a mixed bag. Some miniatures are really good (new skellies, hybrid vampire lord, wolves, bats), but others suffer from excessive “gamefication”. The worse are, IMO obviously, blood knights. I think that having a more grounded look spiked with fantasy elements lends credibility to the miniatures, whereas going full on crazy just makes it look more like a toy than a representation of something. Another example of this is the vampire lord with the crazy hair.
  9. AoS has abused the otherwise interesting concept of thematic armies. Oftentimes lists don’t look like armies and are just very spammy (3x units of whatever is meta), including the very odd multiple centerpieces and 2 units of chaff lists. Fyreslayers could have been find within a dwarf roster but alone suffer from overuse of excessively samey design schemes. AoS was set up as a skirmish game and has morphed into army level clashes, yet rules remain distinctively skirmish. Too many different factions have been released and some are now sort of unsupported. I could go on
  10. Having detailed heroes is, I feel, a tad different. Though jeez that vengorian lord! The designer is evil. I know it is a polarizing sculpt, but I like the horrific combination (it truly is nightmarish). IMHO this is what flesheaters should have looked like. However, yesterday I opened a box and I can guarantee (money back 100% ) that those spikes at the end of the wings and that breaking sword will break at some point. Why would you design things like that? Is this a gaming piece at all?
  11. Related to this, I hate bits that are clearly going to break. This is a problem of many new plastic sculpts, as GW loads them with small pointy bits and they just break too easily. I am finishing up some 40k scions and the antenas are already broken for half of them. My gitz battleforce box came (unopened) with several pointy bits broken. 40k custodes spears have, at least, 3 parts that will most certainly break at some point (trigger guard, spike at back, eagle bit back). Take Trajan valoris, it could do without the plume by the sigil shield, the weird front armor hanging bit, the leg covers. These is connected with the over design as I feel that very frequently those hanging bits, coils, and whatnots contribute a fair bit to the busy feeling of miniatures. I end up cutting and not adding bits to my minis in an effort to simplify them. I understand this is very personal, though.
  12. It doesn't need to be so drastic, all or nothing. For example, in the case of the NDA, you could stop supporting (no patreon, no views) reviewers that take GW's deals. We know that there is at least one "big" youtuber who revoked his "reviewer" deal with GW. If you do care about the "integrity" of reviews, this is an easy move which would nullify GW's attempt to control them. In general, small gestures are powerful. If reviewers do not get GW deals, they can cover other miniature ranges freely (without fear of retaliation by GW). If other ranges get attention, people will buy more, and this will put competitive pressure on GW, which can only benefit us. There are many more such things we can do as a community, ranging in the level of involvement. If you are against "only GW no 3rd party bits", do not go to GW events (or tournies that impose those rules). If you don't like GW's rules, embrace, within your community, older versions of the ruleset, or event third party rules. If you don't like GW's prices (e.g. gargants), print 3rd party giants (or by them printed on etsy). These are just some examples of being a consciencious consumer without going full on revolutionary. Don't feel discouraged, that's what corporations bank on, blind spots and the feeling of indefension. You have plenty of power ;).
  13. Exactly. The mental gimnastics required to blame on the consumers the shady behavior of the corporation are next level. Strong arming reviewers with private NDAs is bad behavior an anti consumer regardless of anything else. Then blaming FOMO on us is like criticizing people for buying a chocolate cookie by the cash register. They are out to get you and, as a consumer, you play at a disadvantage since companies are going hard after blind spots. Maybe, just maybe, if we actually condemned shady behavior when we find out about it we wouldn’t have to be so freaked guarded when dealing with certain corporations, such as GW.
  14. I think the old dogs of war encapsulate what border princes should be. Renegades, misfits, adventurers all banding together for gold and to build a new home and the Wild West. I would like the option to have allied units from other armies build around a core that might be contingent on the particular state being represented. For example, a Breton renegade can have a core of bretonnian units, then the Mercenaries rounding it up. I have to admit I really liked regiments of renown, though it d be cool if you could build our own via point upgrades.
  15. It is obvious there is a demand fit things like bretonia and tomb kings. Just look at the prices on eBay and the thriving 3rd party industry around them. It took a long while to build the whole world as an iconic place, and AoS is still riding the nostalgia from those times. Throwing away all that capital seemed like a very stupid move to me and GW is backpedaling big time. Good, now give me my kurnothi, deep sea monsters, and heartless capitalists infernal dwarfs.
  16. Again the same? Aren’t we all in the era of influencers and online reviews? Are we all aware that people make this for a living? I mean at this point I wonder what the motivation for posting yet again: “don’t like don’t sign” is. Informed consumers lead to better markets. This is well established and a strong policy focus nowadays. GW paying tit for tat with reviewers is bad for us, a shady business strategy and not inconsequential. It is not only an ethical question, it affects our bottom line same as it affects GW’s.
  17. I am baffled that, at this point in the conversation, we still need to explain that: 1) a company strong arming reviewers into giving positive reviews is bad for us and 2) GW can make or break channels with early access, coverage in warhammer community and similar tools. So no, it really isn’t optional for those covering warhammer, not getting this sort of support is a big deal (at the very least they d need to think very carefully about it). It is a phenomenon happening with video games as well, and it is a well known perversion of what reviews are meant to be. As for being accused of negativity, that is also extremely surprising to me. Given the above, of course a lot of people are going to dislike this sort of actions. I thought this was a place to discuss the hobby, and this most definitely is part of it.
  18. Let’s face it, a lot of us have extreme pro GW model bias. It is normal, we worry about other model lines fitting with our current collections. Also, will that random miniature with a very specific look get discontinued when The company fails, leaving us with the inability to continue building a collection around it? Plus a model it is not a model, it is also the story behind it, that we know and feels more unique that whatever random fantasy sorry someone comes up with for a game that, again, might fail in a couple years. I guess it is no surprise that many companies build around GW aiming to be a close substitute, as opposed to trying to replace the entire system. Personally, I fall for all of the above and the sad part is that I know I am playing right into GW s strategy. Which is then used against me charging higher than average prices and the whole FOMO, inconsistent support and so on. For this reason, I am making an effort to look into alternative models for GW backgrounds. The cold one riders we linked so many times are an excellent example of that. If enough of us did that, maybe we d breath life into other companies and might get us a true competitor in the market, which can only be good for us.
  19. Agreed, and I live in those dusty libraries. I am mostly concerned with what this does to the "community", which is organized around such personalities (to an extent). The fact that they call their marketing outlet "warhammer community" makes me cringe so hard. That they would attempt (I think they succeeded) to strong arm reviewers with NDAs that "ban" criticism is just ugly. I completely understand why reviewers accept it, though. But that doesn't make it any better.
  20. And that's great, but GW churns sprues for much less. An industrial process, despite the costs associated with it, is still far less costly than a 3d printer. PS - I do not disagree with the overall sentiment of the post, though.
  21. Baseless speculation. Within the next two years, we'll see: Dawi (combined, some new sculpts) Cities v2 aka crusades (more squatting of cities, new sculpts). Chorfs. Kurnothi. And TOW released, with GW finally tapping into those sweet bretonnia monies.
  22. There is something crazy revolutionizing about 3d printing, and I do not believe it is only the ability to mess around with minis at home. It is the fact that it makes production technologies available to a wider population. Quite frankly, 3d printing is horrifically more costly than GW's mass production systems, it is not in the same galaxy. The fact that you can get 3d printed things for cheaper (even printed by others) is just indicative of the vast margins GW enjoys (much higher than many other industries). So, I am not sure everyone will have a 3d printer home, but I do believe that printing services will be more prevalent. This is quite certainly already predating on GW sales, as I see people using alternative sculpts and pieces for many of GW's main system. Obviously for things like bretonnia, but it goes beyond that. GW is attempting to push back on this tightening restrictions around alternative sculpts, but it is a losing battle, IMO. When you can get THIS, why would you buy THIS? And the lore is equally well represented by both models (better by the less derpy one, I'd say). I welcome this competition. GW has a massive advantage over cotage industries. Lower prices, increase quality, become more consumer friendly. All good things for us.
  23. I mean look at this, the scupt above is on par with anything anything GW has ever released for troopers. Coherence of sizes and styles, like others have said, is a big factor. Then, the lore: it is not some random piece of plastic, it is a saurus knight or whatever. This is a big factor and something that GW did very well, creating an appealing background that gives value to the plastic / resin, beyond what it would be worth otherwise. And, while not free (writers), it certainly isn't as expensive as the physical side of the business. I do not begrudge the lore, but I certainly believe that it is being used as both a barrier to competition and (asd a consequence) lower value (older sculpts kept too long, high prices), which isn't good for us.
  24. That is exactly what GW (and many other companies in gaming and other contexts) want. Because by tying us in via the lore, they don't rely so much on model quality and value (those eye watering prices...). Which is a double etched sword: we as consumers want good lore, it makes it more fun! But it is like having a charismatic salesman, the lore, it can uptalk the product. This is objectively bad for the consumer (lowers competition, and so on). Are there better mass produced fantasy models out there? I am not sure. Are there better models produced by smaller companies (files for printing and so on)? From a technical level, absolutely, no doubt.
  25. What I fear is a hexfire sort of treatment. No new models except for some foot hero. I'd like to see more sea monsters / creatures. I think it is pretty safe to assume the dawi will get some love soon anyway, but what about the finboys
×
×
  • Create New...