Chikout
-
Posts
2,920 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
44
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Chikout
-
-
5 minutes ago, Magnusaur said:
Just reposting this here, in case it might stir our resident rumor-oracles from their ancient slumber... Stolen from reddit, in turn taken from some Discord server:
I don't think any of this is reliable. Some of it is probably solid guess work but noone even knows what the next faction is or what new models are coming. The other rumours we've had have mostly proven false. Did anyone predict Youngrim? It looks like they've got things sealed up pretty tight over there.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:
After a day thinking about I think i finally realize why i had such a lukewarm reaction to the reveal. They picked the most mid unit and possibly the awkward model to showcase. Like i understand that Liberator are the infantry model of SE but the fact that they pick that unit who been redesign to be a vindicator carbon copy (and put it in comparison) doesn't really generate hype
also the pose doesn't really convoy any sort of movement or fighting stance more like he waddling then the Fatcast itself. Compare to the @SG Warhound 1/6 leaked image
Honestly feel like they would have put out the new Persecutor or even those Ruination paladins there be more to look forward. that or just put out a preview of the skaven to boost more interest
just aside it seem almost every one is see (reddit/4chan/Dakdak) in agree that it would been better if they kept the pteruges
I disagree with almost all of this. First of all you don't start the hype train with your best thing. Even then this model has generated plenty of interest. The liberator video already had more views than the Abraxia video on YouTube. I like the relatively neutral pose. I'm not sure why you think he's waddling. This is a model that looks like it could actually walk, rather than getting his pteruges (thank you for that word ) caught on everything. I much prefer the chainmail. I I'm painting some Vindictors right now and it's also much easier to paint.
It does look very similar to the Vindictors.
Stormcast are an army that I think should have a fairly unified look to them. There's definitely an argument that this should have been a dual kits, but I'm hoping this kit will come with plenty of bare heads and a different banner.
-
16
-
3
-
-
4 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:
Looking at this model, only makes me question, when the skaven will get their showcase of new models
We will almost certainly see the first Skaven next Monday.
-
1
-
-
Just now, Nezzhil said:
As expected, the helmet looks much better on the real miniature, at least it does to me. I also like that it's still a bit bulkier than the Vindictors.
-
12
-
-
26 minutes ago, Garrac said:
Can't find my original quote, but again, if GW chops the clans I'm dropping AoS forever and never looking back, too many other generic flavourless systems to use my rats in to just conform with one, etc. Not gonna waste time on an experience/game system I would struggle to enjoy with those decisions, life is short.
I'd hype up just the skaven minis releases, buy them, sell the rulebook, sell the fantasy marines, and be happy with my OPR group for the rest of my existence
Integrated doesn't necessarily mean dropping clans. It just means that you can have a list which mixes the clans together without suffering. A major complaint about the cities book is how little interaction between the humans, Daurdin and Aelves. People don't want them to disappear but do want to be able to play them together. I think the same is true about the Skaven clans. Moulder, Eshin and Pestilens are icon elements of the Skaven lore and I'm quite sure they're here to stay.
-
2
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
Super news 🙂!
The scope of the project has changed. 😉
One of the most unique sentences mentioned in a Warhammer Community ever. The future looks very bright for TOW. That said I don't want it to be treated in the same way as AoS or 40K. Let those two games use the majority of GW resources.
For TOW 2 Arcane Journals released per 3 months and after that Campaign books. In the same way as Hail Caesar / Blackpowder does it. Zooming in on certain major campaigns / battles. Please no recycle of the rules per 3 years.
The confusing thing is it seemed like the scope of the project did change but in a negative way. Kislev and Cathay were originally said to be coming to the game but then weren't but now maybe are again?? With a project like this it definitely does make a certain amount of sense to start small, guage demand and then go from there but it doesn't seem to have been a very smooth process.
I am very curious what 'the scope of the project has changed' actually means. It would be great if it meant adding support for the other legacy factions in the future or doing 3 plastic kits pet faction instead of one.
-
22 minutes ago, Mutton said:
I feel like if an entire faction in AoS is getting executed, it would have been one of the first bits of information we received.
Dragging it out would be truly diabolical.I agree. They should have made that announcement as soon as they announced 4th edition but if they have to do it the announcement should be:
'We are sorry to announce that Beasts of Chaos will not be recieving a 4th edition battletome and the range will be moving to the Old World. If you wish to continue playing your army with your friends in 4th edition we will be releasing a battle pack for the faction but it will not be recieving balance updates in the future and as such will not be a legal army in official tournaments. We are excited to bring the army to the old world later this year complete with several new models."
Any way they phrase it the news is awful but if they'd shared the news in March it would have given people time to rebase their army, choose a different army or go and play Conquest so by the time the new edition launches there isn't a shadow hanging over it.
The longer they wait, especially with rumours floating around, the worse it will be.
-
3
-
-
Given the continuing confused reactions from @Whitefang the future of BoC doesn't look that bright. If they are dropping BoC I really hope they give them an index even if it's similar in style to the old world factions. GW could even say they won't be allowed in official tournaments as most other events just ignore that. People were still playing Brettonians and Tomb Kings for years after AoS launched. At the very least, I'd like to see them get the chance to take part in AoS4.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Whitefang said:
Nah it's just they aren't able to release them at the moment.
Aren’t able to is a curious way to phrase it. Is there some kind of legal issue with Creative Assembly or have they just been given a limited production budget?
Given that the game seems to be doing well, a second edition launch box with those two factions would be pretty amazing.
-
Will this be the look of the new model?
-
5
-
5
-
-
1 hour ago, papary said:
20th pre order. First weekend of May to actually release.
This makes sense. After the Warcry stuff will probably be Orks then Dawnbringers 6.
There's been some speculation about June 22nd being either the preorder date or the launch date for AoS 4. As it stands there isn't enough stuff to get us to a June 22nd pre-order.
We get warcry etc on April 6, Orks on the 13th, Dawnbringers 6 on the 20th, then probably Tau on the 27th and Dwarfs on May 4th. Then we have 4 weeks to fit more warcry, more Kill team, and Chaos. So even if agents of the imperium gets announced that still only takes us up to a June 8th pre-order.
-
57 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:
I've said this on various other threads before, but my point still stands. I've never known as many people get turned off AoS as when they find out or remember that Double Turn is a thing. Ultimately, if you're struggling to get people through the door due to a single mechanic that is already controversial among people actually playing the game, something is up. No amount of "trust me bro, you'll totally get used to it after you've played the game at 2000pts for a while!" is going to convince people who were already looking for an excuse to keep playing 40k or going to another game instead.
I also find the argument that people who dislike Double Turn need to "git good" very much contrary to what I've seen many of the same people try and sell AoS on - that it's a far more accessible, casual friendly, relaxed wargame compared to 40k.
Frankly, if the designers believe Double Turn is this amazing, unique mechanic that all their playtesters and influencers adore, why I have I pretty much never seen anybody pushback or gripe when it's been increasingly neutered every edition going forward? Everybody knows a GW hobbyist's favourite thing to do is complain about basically everything, so it's funny that - anecdotal as my experience may be - watering it down is largely seen as a positive. Why do they feel the need to do that if it's so good as the marketing insists?
I think the thing people like is the priority roll, rather than the double turn specifically. The thing people like is the variability of the turn order, the three moves ahead planning and the risk reward mechanism. Making the double turn less effective doesn't really affect these things, unless it's nerfed to the point of not being effective at all which hasn't happened yet.
I don't want to make grand assumptions but if someone was to make a ven diagram of "does losing really upset you?" and "do you like the priority roll?", I wonder how close the overlap would be. There are people who really hate randomness, and those who love it. Again I wonder what the overlap would be with this discussion.
As for the appeal to newcomers, I'd much rather have game be fantastic for a small audience than be fine for a large audience. There are so many games now even if you don't go outside GW's catalogue, that I think it's actually a positive to have a game that's a bit marmite. GW makes IGOUGO games, fully alternating activating games and AoS. There are also dozens of other games that use a variety of mechanics and many of them are perfectly happy for you to use GW models of that's what you want to do.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Ookami said:
What do you guys think awaits us next week? Will we see a new Liberator miniature on Monday or GW will keep waffling on obvious info. My hopes are that we see at least one miniature and maybe new warscroll composition.
It's April 1st on Monday. That will probably have an affect on this things. I could see them doing something Skaveny with April fools but they might decide to skip new miniature Monday especially as it's also Easter weekend.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Sception said:
Yeah, warcry's a good game, very fun, but it's appeal isn't the same as what Mordheim offers.
That said, you really don't need GW support for mordheim. Where Warcry is a pick up / bring and battle game, and thus needs some amount of current support to stay relevant, Mordheim is a campaign game where you need a regular group of pals to play with, and if you have that then the old Mordheim rules work just fine. Get together for a weekend, order some pizza, pull up the rules online, cut & scotch tape the empty pizza boxes into ruined building terrain, and play some games on the kitchen table. Even when it comes to minis support, if you have enough people to play a mordheim campaign, chances are one of them can get access to a 3d printer.
Yeah. In a way Warcry is kind of the anti Mordheim. It's easy to learn, it plays fast and has great replayability due to the way missions are generated. There is a narrative side to the game but it's not massively in-depth.
Mordheim on the other hand is difficult to learn with a lot of rules to remember. It can be pretty clunky to play, but the narrative side is very in-depth and can be incredibly engaging with the right group of people.
-
4
-
-
12 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
I think it is Mandrakes time, then book 6 comes the week after or the following. Maybe Warcry is the next week's preorder.
They done Warcry and Kill team together before. I wouldn’t be surprised if that happened again.
-
4
-
-
16 minutes ago, Sarouan said:
You never played old FB RPG books, didn't you. Damn were they grim, dark, brutal and merciless. Mordheim invented nothing, it was just the natural continuation of what already existed before.
Have you read them recently? They are a lot less grim than I remember them being as a teenager.
-
3
-
-
12 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:
Unless I am seriously misgiven, my understanding was while Cursed City sold well because of the minis (and suffered costing, planning and logistics issues that mad it dip into the red) it's actual gameplay was received mostly positive among GW enthusiasts but poorly with general board and tabletop gamers, missing a chunk of those sales that BSF was able to capture successfully (and part of the transitional market the product is intended to capture).
It was considered by GW to be a popular line for sales, a poorly performing line for finance and an unsuccessful product for development.Either way, I liked it and am (clearly) hopeful for more Warhammer Quest.
Yeah. There were a couple of homebrew fixes that improved things quite a bit, but it's definitely true that the gameplay was decent rather amazing. Here are some homebrew rules which enhance the experience considerably.
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2642992/first-impressions-fixes-and-additional-content
-
1 hour ago, Dragon-knight77 said:
Warhammer quest? no there was Valrak rumors of a space hulk remake but that went full silent for so long
When Warcry does move I do hope it nowhere located in Aqshy or Ghyran but rather in anywhere else where we can feel the Edition big event; the Vermindoom can be felt everywhere. With the whole Blight city bursting into reality they could do a sorta spiritual successor to Mordheim and have the season be set in a devastated Free city
maybe even gave multiple CoS warbands go up against Skaven, Slaanesh & other?like look below the artwork and tell me that you can picture that with how the edition going go offas for the Talaxis it strange that there no massive finale to the Gnarlwood saga in Warcry, no battle inside the actual Eye of Chotec, No Arno Talaxis return as a Ghoul or Chaos or just a straight up CoS warband, no revelation of it crash nothing. We end it with Bone doggos fighting a sprite revenant with weeds. I know that sorta happen with the Varanspire but it just stick out more when you have two specialist game explore the jungle and then does nothing especially when Hunter v Hunted was building up to the rumbling and WyrdHollow was talking about the Realmshaper going nuclear. Maybe the Beastgrave getting nuked spoiled my expectation for Specialist game finales
There's still another year of this edition of warcry to go. They could do another year based on the interior of the eye of Chotec. We also don't know what the narrative of the last two sets will be. I'm very curious about the future of Warcry. It is comfortably my favourite GW game ever and I've played almost all of them. I really don't want them to change the core rules at all but there's plenty they could do on the narrative side.
A year of the game set in a ruined city of Sigmar could be very cool.
As for Warhammer Quest, Cursed City upset quite a few people, but the reason it did so was because it was a massive hit. GW would be foolish not to try again. Skaven are the perfect antagonists for a Warhammer Quest game. It could be an inverse of Silver Tower with small elite units from other Chaos factions joining a mostly Skaven force.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:
If I win the priority and let my rival to have a double turn then he will score less
Unfortunately it says you only give up the battle tactic if you "choose" to take the double. No Skaven shenanigans here.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Clan's Cynic said:
Priority Roll article for 4.0. Nothing new here, just more marketing talk and another reiteration that it'll stop you selecting Battle Tactics if you take it. Also a tease that list building/composition has changed somehow, but that'll be in another article.
Isn't this the first time they've said that outright?
-
I'm exasperated by how much everyone is getting exasperated! Firstly I think there's a misunderstanding of what modular means.
Imagine a 3x4 piece modular gaming board. It's not infinitely flexible. The corner pieces still need to go in the corner. The pieces still need to line with each other. You can leave the centre pieces out and build a 2x2 board, but you can't leave off one of the corner pieces.
So in the AoS example you can play with just the core rules but that model is essential for every other version of the game and every subsequent module has to refer back to the core. You can play with just the core rules and commands, presumably coming from your general or something but you can't add the command models module unless you already have the comnand module.
There's a weird problem in Warhammer. People largely treat the rules as sacronscant, but will happily carve expensive models into pieces. I've always found this weird. There have been lots of complaints about blizzard in the most recent ghb but few events leave the spell out. Comp is a dirty word in the community.
GW have tried numerous times to tell players to do what they want with their rules but there's still a blind insistence to follow the full rules of a new GHB. I think gw is emphasising modularity in order to try and break that habit.
Why does everyone just use the new GHB in every event? It would be a bit like the Halo team having just one playlist that everyone has to play for the next year. Creating a system that encourages player choice is a good thing even if most people just end up playing the most popular mode.
The idea is that a new GHB isn't just an update to how the game plays but includes optional methods of play that can be added to the game or substituted for existing parts of the game. A GHB could introduce a new magic module that can be used instead of the previous one but doesn't replace it.
How is this good for us? We'll have to see how it turns out in practice but in theory it lets them be more experimental with seasonal rules. They can add new modules that experiment with ways to play without forcing players to use them. I really hope TOs don't just blindly use everything in the next edition.
-
18
-
-
The fact that path to glory stops at 5 suddenly makes it much more appealing. I really hope battle tactics have had a complete rethink. They need to be much harder to achieve and require more interaction with the opponents army.
-
2
-
-
If AoS to lose one thing in 4th edition, I'd be most comfortable with saying goodbye to endless spells. They can be cool thematically but I wouldn't call any of the models amazing.
-
4
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, Luperci said:
Having 1:1 refreshes of stuff forever is kinda lame imo, it's a shame to lose models from an army though. I guess I'm different to many here as I never was into whfb when it was around so I don't have much nostalgia for older kits. It would be nice if GW just declared their intentions for stuff like this, it's not like people will stop buying these kits if they announce they're going oop. We've seen before that the fomo will cause the remaining stock to sell out really fast
I don't mean 1:1 necessarily. I'd be perfectly happy to see beasts of chaos get a Lumineth or cities style update. I just don't want to see something dropped with no replacement at all.
-
2
-
The Rumour Thread
in Age of Sigmar Discussions
Posted
The real question is the scenery. How much of it will there be and does that mean fewer models? I could imagine a couple of sprues of scenery and a similar number of models to the Soul wars box.