GrogTheGrognard

After seeing the jokes on the rumor thread about the platypus dragons I now unironically want them to be a thing.

All Stormcasts Eternals are actually two skaven and a halfling stacked on top of one another in a suit of armor.

EVERYTHING IS GOING ACCORDING TO PLAN! On a slightly more serious note I do like how CA is trying to make every faction feel more unique on the campaign map as well as in the battles. I hope they continue to do this for all the new factions as well as the old ones. I mean beastmen used to get the short end of the stick but with their update now they are perfect for what beastmen should be.

My take on benchmarks for AoS would be as follows. 1. The 60ish wounds per 1000 points is a good starting point (obviously some exceptions. Looking at you BCR) 2. Have 1-2 good sources of MW per 1000 points (with the lack of good rend options I really have to recommend MW to get past good armor saves) 3. Have some sort of movement shenanigans (It could be a unit that moves faster than the standard 6 inches or can teleport around the board but being able to move and move quickly is very important. Turtling only works with a minority of factions) Beyond those I think it comes down to your personal playstyle and army.

Positive things about AoS 3.0? Well......... Let's start with absolutely gorgeous dragon riders and dragons being brought into the limelight! I love me some dragon riders and even though Stormcast isn't my main army I want those models so bad. GW does show that they have amazing sculpts to make and I can't seem to get enough of some of these new models. Also, there's the rumors of pirate Ogors which will hopefully flesh out the more Mawtribe side of the Ogors versus the BCR that most people seem to use. I just love to see my chonky boys running around the battlefield trying to take a bite outta everything. MOAR OGORS = MOAR GOOD! Other rumors about chaos dwarves is interesting as well and I'm waiting with baited breath to find out what they do with them. Finally, more Path to Glory stuff is always welcome in my book. It does need a few fixes but it's still a good move as I loved the crusade rules from 40k so bringing that more into AoS is great.

My idea for a good starter to AoS 3.0 would probably be Stormcasts for a few reasons. First, they're very easy to paint and I think that's important for helping newbies into painting and gaming is making it as easy to paint as possible to begin with. Secondly Stormcast Eternals are a faction that allows for some mistakes and can still recover which is important when considering how many mistakes a new player can make I wanted them to have a faction that can handle that. Thirdly, it's very easy to get second hand Stormcast Eternals stuff for cheap since many box sets offer them up as the order faction (you'll almost always be able to go half in for a battle box and still end up with models you'll use). Finally, Stormcast can really interact with all phases of the game to some degree which not all factions can do. Allegiance: Stormcast Eternals- Stormhost: Hammers of Sigmar- Grand Strategy:- Triumphs: LeadersLord Arcanum on Celestial Dracoline (200)*- General- Command Trait: Shock and Awe- Artefact: Hammer of Might (Aetherstave) - Mount trait: Aetheric Swiftness - Spell: Chain LightningBattleline5 x Judicators (200)* -Skybolt bow -1 Shockbolt bow5 x Liberators (115)* -Warhammers and shields -1 GrandhammersUnits3 x Evocators on Celestial Dracolines (280)* -2 Grandstaves Artillery Celestar Ballista (140)* *Battle Regiment Here's a list I feel can be taken many different ways with some shooting, magic, and melee so the new player can find their own play style and what they enjoy before expanding their Stormhost out. I also feel like most if not all of these models are still going to be good regardless, so there's little to no worry about invalidation of your army by points increases and the like. The only thing I wish I could add would be a monster so they can try out the monstrous rampage rules. EDIT: Updated list it was out of date. Had to make a few changes but the core remains the same.

Northstar Military Figures has a wide range of models from many different lines. Some are metal, resin, or plastic. I haven't gone through them all, but the Oathmark ones at least have some hard plastic options like the dwarven heavy infantry I mentioned before. Wargames Atlantic is also one I've heard about but they seem much more limited in what hard plastic options they have and aren't as good as GW miniatures, but are significantly cheaper. You can get a box of 30 guys for around £26. Which is pretty nice especially if you want test models to try out paint schemes on without feeling like you need to be perfect.

For me what is most important about the model depends on what the purpose/background of the model is. For example if we are talking about a dwarven battleline unit I want my dwarfs to be almost uniform in their looks with minor variants for the champion, standard bearer, and musician. My thoughts are that these dwarves are in a unit working together and dwarves would be almost lockstep in their uniformity so they should look solid, little to no difference between the models, and be able to rank together easily without fighting the models into place. In that case I'm not looking for a hyper-detailed model for each because that would be time consuming and somewhat counter intuitive for what I want those dwarves to be. A solid wall of dwarven steel ready to fight. That's why for battleline units I prefer Oathmark units (dwarven heavy infantry are amazing for this) if possible because they have reasonably detailed models that can be made to look very much the same. On the other hand if we're talking about a standalone model like a Lord of Change I want that model to be hyper-detailed because that model is supposed to stand out from the chaff that surrounds it and be a centerpiece of the army. As such I prefer a company like Creature Caster for their beautiful sculpts that while as expensive as the same GW models offer a new look and have such amazing detail in resin that I can't recommend them highly enough (The Queen of Malifica is a model that literally got me into play DoT). Such a model needs to be able to command attention while looking at it in my opinion because that's what such a creature would do on the battlefield. You don't ignore a Lady of Change when she's coming up to unleash magical destruction upon you. You sit up and take notice of the doom that approaches (even if sometimes the dice make her more of a bottle rocket than a massive explosion). Now when it comes to painting I switch between modes. Sometimes I just want to sit back and start slapping on some paint which is when I try to focus more on my battleline units because I don't feel bad if they turn out less than perfect because having 20 dwarfs next to one another makes it difficult to pick out flaws small or large. This is usually when I'm more painting as a side activity and talking with my mates around the wargaming table and let's me do some work while also enjoying their company. Other times I'm trying to be a perfectionist which is when I focus on those centerpiece models to get them juuuust right and even if I don't make it as good as I'd like I'm content that I put in some effort and they look decent. That all being said I do agree that GW has gone a bit overboard with the gubbins, gizmos, and dynamic poses every character seems to have now. Sometimes I prefer the less is more approach especially with foot heroes and battleline. If everybody has these crazy experimental looks I feel it lessens the majesty and mystery that more centerpiece models should have. If every chaos warlord looks as freakishly awesome as Archaon it lessens Archaon's impact to me. To quote The Incredibles "If everyone is Super then no-one will be." You need the basic to make the elite stand out.

The only difference I can see is the one sent to NQA had the person's real name as they had signed the NDA. It still has the fact that the NDA is confidential information and therefore illegal to share in any form without prior GW written consent. Still has the odd definition of restricted customer that included anyone who was a client employee or in the habit of dealing with GW. It has the weird noncompete clauses from the original. Also the indemnity clause from the original as well. If you want to find the screenshots of the doxing and other events I found a link to them on reddit which is also where I found people trying to get NQA Pateron removed (which is extremely terrible behavior and I whole heartedly condemn). It seems like from the screenshots I saw Goobertown Hobbies may have been pushing NQA buttons to the point she doxed the guy (still doesn't excuse what she did as doxing is a horrible thing). On the point of assuming it's real. I say the next action to take depends on GW's action. If GW decides to go after the whistleblower I would say to help the whistleblower's legal defense through crowdfunding and let GW know that it is not okay to go after whistleblowers like that. If GW instead comes out and admits the NDA is real, but they are not going to try and enforce it and will change the NDA to be much better I would say to keep a close eye on GW and maybe even ask to see what this new NDA would look like just to make sure they aren't trying to pull a fast one of admitting they will change and then doing nothing to actually change the NDA.

I'm just going to point out that I checked out who was doxed and they're not even a major battle report content creator. It's a painter. Not a playtester or battle report maker. A painter was asked to sign the NDA and was doxxed when they decided to whistleblow. EDIT: Honestly this entire situation is so terrible. NQA shouldn't have doxxed anyone and I'm still struggling to understand the reason why she did so, but I also can't stand the fact that some people on reddit are trying to get NQA Pateron banned because of this. Its become so crazy on the lengths people will go to both attack and defend things now.

A bit off topic but as I recall wasn't that actually a leak of the playtest rules for 6th edition 40k? It was rules that were given to play-testers for GW and some of them leaked the files so it wasn't an actual fake, but it wasn't the real 6th edition rules either? Honestly, can't remember I can only remember those rules included alternating activations for units which is one thing I'd like to see for both 40k and AoS.

Just a quick note I didn't get a chance to read the whole thread before posting this so if someone else answered just ignore this part. Part 1.1 (ii) notes that the existence and terms of the agreement is confidential information. Which would make them unable to disclose the agreement terms and existence unless they were to have GW prior written consent I believe. As for whether or not I believe this is real.... I honestly don't think GW has been making a lot of good moves lately but this feels like a step too far that not even GW would be foolish/malicious enough to make. The legality of this document seems suspect to the point I couldn't believe competent lawyers made it. That being said if someone else believes this is true I honestly couldn't fault them for holding that opinion. My inability to believe any lawyers wrote this is not evidence to it's authenticity or lack thereof.

Well one army I can say has some of the worst/best points to cost ratio is Disciples of Tzeentch horrors. A unit of splitting 10 pinks costs 215 points that could split into 20 blues and 20 brimstones which would require three boxes. 1 box for the pinks and 2 boxes for the blues and brimstones. Total cost £75 for one unit! That's double what it cost for a single stonehorn model and is less points. Funnily enough if you go the alternative route of vengeance pink horrors it flips since you pay 215 points for a 10 man unit only worth £25 which is better points to cost ratio than making that single stonehorn a FLoSH. Also, you could take a box of blue/brimstone horrors and make two units of horrors one costing 140 (blues) and the other 115 (brimstones) points for only £25. Just thought I'd share that gem since I find it funny. 😆

Interesting charts, one quick question though. What is the snowflake and DnD award? I can't seem to figure out how those ones were awarded.

One quick question I have is are we sure that warscrolls are no longer going to be free? The only reason I ask is because I can still see the downloads for the old stormcast models like Evocators but not for the new ones like the Stormstrike Chariot. I could see them waiting to drop the warscrolls when the book is finally for physical sale, but I also don't know if GW has put out any information regarding if they are discontinuing the free warscrolls. Because while I do agree that getting rid of the free warscrolls is a bad move I want to make sure GW is actually making this move and it isn't just something to do with updating their website. I'm all for offering GW criticism when they do something bad, but I want to make sure they're doing something bad first and not just taking time.