Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

VBS

Members
  • Content Count

    315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

432 Celestant-Prime

About VBS

  • Rank
    Dracothian Guard

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I disagree with all the narrative vs competitive antagonism. As with most things, it serves for a close minded white/black explanation, a shortcuts to a simple conclusion that doesn't really work if you think a bit more in depth. Because... what is narrative in wargames? Is it opposed to the so-perceived competitive approach? These are not separate entities, they complement each other. It is perfectly possible to play a complex campaign with loads of fluff to give a narrative framework all whilst using netlists for competitive games. It is also possible to play a game with no narrative background per se yet introducing thematic elements through custom scenarios, home-rules, etc.... It is also possible to assist to a tournament, with all the official rules, rigidity and share of netlisters, bringing a fluffy list revolving around your general's epic saga. All these are just a few examples where you clearly have narrative and competitive elements mixed. Narrative games vary wildly depending on the person and the objective. Same thing can be said about competitive games. Where do you draw the line between both? It really is not clear. There a many many thousands of wargaming players around the globe with different approaches to the hobby. So is there an authority who decides which camp you belong to? Some ten commandments to blindly follow if you want to belong to one group or the other? I don't get it when some posters say "narrative players do X" or "competitive players are Y". As for online presence, I think it boils down to simple interest to engage in conversations and debates in general. To quote myself from a previous topic: For wargaming in general, I think narrative sections will always be in the shadow of the "official" way of doing things (unless it's historicals). Your average creative player/collector will often be found in his man-cave, garage or small gaming group, paying little attention to online toy soldier opinions as the topics discussed will rarely add value. On the contrary, I think it is quite obvious that people interested in crunching numbers, netlisting and chasing the meta will want to engage in endless discussions over the internet, as it offers a way wider public and immediate responses, enriching their particular interest in discussing numbers. Such access is more complicated IRL so turning towards the online world makes it easier, as with many other topics and hobbies. YMMV as many, if not most, wargamers are somewhere in between (that's the whole point of this post!), but comparing the sheer number of posts per section across multiple wargaming forums seems to make this explanation quite reasonable.
  2. The squatting in CoS was disappointing, but we can now give old models some rules without going full homebrew. So this guy I painted last year has rules for my CoS project.
  3. A while back, I hastily adapted to AoS the WHFB 500p. games you mention: You might find it useful. It mainly adapts army building and has custom battleplans with different objectives. Best used for fun, not min/max in mind.
  4. If you mean playing a rank&file wargames , I'm currently into Conquest: The Last Argument of Kings. Game system is very solid, miniatures and lore gorgeous. I still have the option of KoW and WHFB 6th, both are fairly active (depends on where you are of course) and always great fun. As for AoS, I dropped it since finishing my army. It was enjoyable at first, for what it was, but I can't find a reason to return despite trying. I have yet to read an enticing book, the game has evolved too much into ccg-combo/roll buckets of dice for my taste, and the miniature design in the last couple of years has been less and less appealing to me. I am aware this is an AoS forum but I hope a non 100% pro-aos opinion is acceptable. I wouldn't mind dusting off the models if things became more interesting in the future or if I could find a like-minded gaming group (more creative, less competitive).
  5. Tbh, you can more or less guess the answer to all those questions just by looking into their business model (where are there stores located, sales % around the globe, etc...) and understanding how basic demographics work ( @Kyriakin gave a good hint). Add a little research such as reading their annual report. Heck, it's clearly state what donations they make (spoiler alert: none). On top of that, see what consequences might occur if JP Morgan or BlackRock saw the miniatures company using funds to make sociological studies instead of churning out even more money. Or make announcements that could could imply legal complications such as actively recruiting a specific type of person instead of the usual "recruits and employs staff regardless of gender identity, sexual orientation, race, religious, cultural and ethnic backgrounds or disabilities", etc... It's quite simple to understand.
  6. I wouldn't consider prices to be the reason that made me stop buying GW products, but it is a factor. A minor one probably. There are more minis/hobby/wargaming companies than ever (a true golden age) and it gets to a point that others are doing more interesting things than GW (imo, of course). So I'm more inclined in buying non-GW models simply because I prefer them way more. If they are cheaper (which is the case 99% of the time), well that's a sweet bonus. Same goes for gaming systems: I find other games to be more enjoyable and don't require constant book recycling (some of them are even in free-pdf format, great!). I guess my purchasing habits just evolved along my tastes, beyond what GW offers, which is no longer worth it for me. The price is more of an underlying annoyance that deters things even more but not a deal breaker by itself (I have other hobbies that are waaay more expensive...). However, I do draw the line of pricing for painting material. If I can get pots that cost less and have more quantity than Citadel products, yet have similar quality (or sometimes even better), no point in giving money to geedub in that department. Never liked brand loyalty for anything.
  7. Well, whfb always offered the possibility to go very high/low fantasy and anything in-between. Varied from games and editions but it was varied enough for everyone to accommodate their own individual vision of the Old World. You could go from extremes of super-magic everywhere (storm of magic) to quasi-historical battles (that old WD article that explained how to recreate low fantasy lists by leaving out wizards, magic items, monsters, etc...). I think it's safe to say that giving that liberty in a setting made it attractive and is still part of its great popularity. From what I've read/heard, I think the concern for some people with TOW is if it ends up being 8th cracked up to 11. Basically: massive emphasis on the super magical aspects. Obviously, I consider it too early to jump to conclusions but for now we have only seen magic-weapon-guards and war-bears. Rather high-fantasy ended, but this can be addressed by kossars/winged lancers for Kislev, for example. What I basically mean is that a lot of people would be happy if TOW retained that balance and flexibility the old whfb offered, and not push a particular direction within the fantasy-themed spectrum. m2c of course.
  8. I try to keep the pile of shame low, but there is always some. The consequences of switching between projects, I guess! For all the folks that are drowning in sprues and have rooms full of untouched boxes, if you don't have the will to control impulsive purchases, I'd recommend one simple thing: at least unsprue the minis. This step is really fast (don't bother in cleaning/removing mold lines for now) and get rid of the box and sprue. You save a lot of storage and psychologically, reducing 90% of the space it takes really helps to keep you motivated (it's no longer a mountain of boxes twice your size...). That's what I do. Unsprue and arrange in small bags until I get them done. A huge box with a load of sprues (pic1) suddenly becomes a "small" amount of plastic (1/5 of original size) that seems fairly reasonable to go through (pic2):
  9. Sooooo AoS28. I painted this SCE I had lying around to try out a paint scheme. Wanted something grim, testing some paints on the metal for a dark look. Would have preferred it to look MORE grimdark, but this will do.
  10. Those massive helmets could easily snap their neck. So goofy. The models vastly improve without the cow theme (below, from reddit/dakka).
  11. It's Specialist Studio. So most likely following the same formula as Middle Earth, Blood Bowl, Necromunda,... Plastic unit kits on GW site + resin characters on FW site. Also, Age Of The Three Emperors period seems more or less confirmed by this comment of the AoS FB Page: This article might give you a hint what time The Old World plays in *link to the previous article* Kislev was founded during this time.
  12. I'm ok with Kislev being back. Still have some good ol' kossars and winged lancers. This could be interesting if they concentrate on the uncharted/less common areas of the Old World: Kislev, Nippon, Cathai, Albion, Araby, etc... The art reminds me of Sisters of Avelorn. I could do without the magical ice bits, but let's see where it goes. No info about game format/scale yet, maybe something else on the weekend previews? Surely they must have at least decided by now.
  13. IDK are the new Dark Elves. Left alone in the dark whining about Teclis being a bad boi. Can't wait till Malekith shows up a teaches those pesky water elves who is the true master crybaby with daddy/mommy issues.
  14. Thank for the extra unofficial infos @RuneBrush. Im eager for more news, hopefully adepticon will show they already have some meat on the project. As for the scale or type of models, one can only guess the consequences. Its impossible to control what everyone wants and how they enjoy their toys. So a compatibility between TOW and AOS models can very well mean a cut on sales if someone decides to drop one in favour of the other. Similarly, it could also increase sales if that person sees value in using models accross multiple systems (it is my case ) and buys even more (ex: instead of just having 1 army for each separately, I might directly buy 3 armies knowing that I can use them regardless and have more value in variety and compatibility). So you never know! Plus, I suspect GW is just happy if you throw them your money, regardless of the game you play. I dont see them complaining about the huge amount of KoW or T9A players that use AoS/WHFB models, so this should be no different IF it is actually the same scale. Moreso, it might suck out players from those systems back into the GW-R&F world instead of looking at other companies. I'd be fine too if they went 6-10-15mm anyway, I might simply buy less stuff if it were the case.
  15. I'm a huge fan of the Malazan series. When AoS was released, the whole concept of mortals ascending into godhood or being able to be consummed or just killed (like during the ET) made me think of how similar it is to the way it works in the Malazan world. Particularly how the Pantheon in AoS are ex-mortal that retain much of their mortal characteristics (personal ambition, agendas, feelings, etc). So not immaterial/untouchable type of gods such as the Chaos Gods (created and maintained by belief and worship), but rather mortals that accumulated so much power that "ascended" (to use Malazan terminology) to a divine status. I like the concept of godhood not being linear and having both that kind of ominiscient/impossibly powerful immaterial/invisible gods and also more grounded/mortal types of gods. I could be cool if they expanded on these concepts, such as an azyrithe scribe discussing about the nature of godhood in the mortal realms or something like that (Γ  la liber chaotica?). Also making the regular gods such as Sigmar or the others vulnerable and subject to being replaced by others (again like in the Malan series). It makes the barrier between mortals and gods unclear (some mortal do possess poeers rivaling with gods after all), and the mortal realms seem to be a setting fitting this concept. As for god models, I have the impression we will only see a Teclis model for the elf release. A dual diorama with Tyrion would be cool, but Teclis always seemed more active often taking the battlefield around the Old World instead of chilling at home. Plus a model with 2 gods, one a beast in combat and the other being the most powerful wizard alive would be kind of OP in game .
Γ—
Γ—
  • Create New...