Hollow
-
Posts
601 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Hollow
-
-
1 minute ago, Flippy said:
I really like Warcry, but the initial focus on Chaos warbands was holding the game back. The recent approach with the Hunters of Huanchi serving double duty (not just random addition to Seraphon, but an integral element of the army book) is much, much better.
I agree, and it is great to see the system, setting and squads evolve over time. I do think that the success of the system was partially due to it being so Chaos heavy at the beginning (As previously mentioned, Chaos is a very popular faction) So in some ways, the heavy Chaos leaning in the beginning has allowed for the system to expand into giving other factions a look in.
I do hope that the next WarCry setting is a settlement of some kind. The Gnarlwood is ok but lacked personality IMO.
-
I've said the exact same thing in regard to what the potential ToW roadmap looks like. Makes perfect sense to me. Get the core 9 factions out of the gate in 2024. Allowing for expansions and updates in 2025 and beyond.
-
I think people are overlooking WarCry as it's own system. (Which is a lot of fun) Yes STD has a lot of options that can be used from WarCry but Warcry is it's own thing, not just a means to add to AoS armies.
-
8
-
-
1 minute ago, Ganigumo said:
Centerpieces sell armies better than troops
Do they? Don't get me wrong, I love a good centerpiece, I just want a bit more meaty substance to factions.
-
I just wish the AoS design studio would round out (most) factions with an infantry/cavalry/ranged unit or two. I always feel like so many of the factions feel very "top heavy" with lots of characters and big centerpiece models, without much diversity in terms of "standard" boots-on-the-ground infantry/cavalry/ranged 5/10 man units (which is what should really make up the bulk of most forces)
-
8
-
2
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Big Kim Woof-Woof said:
I wholeheartedly agree... but is there really as much profit to be made in exploring the background as there is in the models? I can't see there being so much clamour to buy a dedicated book of lore compared to a really swish new miniature.
I might be wrong. In fact, I'd love to be wrong.
I really don't see why not. Infact, I think it would be cool if Black Library branched out and did more exposition and lore based books in collaboration with established fantasy artists and writers (rather than just focusing on novels)
This is an off topic tangent so I will leave it for now, although if GW/BL were to release a series of 9 super ornate fantasy style tombs detailing the realms I would be more than happy to fork out a bunch of cash for them and I suspect I wouldn't be the only one. Imagine a 9 book series in a similar vein to what I just knocked up using Bing Image creator below. It would be so sweet. Drools*
-
5
-
10
-
-
3 hours ago, Noserenda said:
I don't think we need a character for every realm, for every faction, because let's be honest, adding that many means half of them will be phoned in and forgotten.
There is absolutly no need for that to be the case. There are only really 8 realms. Each with a mountion of thematic potential. If you can have 18 different Space Marine factions with characters in both 40k and 30k, I think the prospect of having a few pages in a Battletome detailing the adventures of a specific faction within each realm isn't that big of a deal.
Most of the Battletomes in AoS are barely 100 pages long, each could easily accomodate a section of 8 parts with realm specific characters, settlements and POI's. I am a big advocate for making the Mortal Realms a truly deep, dynamic and multi-layered fantasy setting. It's something that AoS (whilst improving upon) needs to do a lot more work around.
The Characters themselves would not all need to be major warriors or leaders. Infact, I would like to see more politicians and civilian characters that could bring a bit of grounded relatability to the setting. A great way to incorporate character depth would be to explore lineages, marriages and family trees. (ASOIAF has 1000/2000 "named characters" in it's relatively miniscule setting over half a dozen books from a single author) you're telling me the design studio of a multi-billion pound market cap company doesn't have the creative wherewithal to have a single new faction character for each of the 8 realms? Come on!
3 hours ago, Noserenda said:Whst would be awesome is every battletome spending half a page or more (plus art!) On each realm letting us know how that faction exists there, you can be a bit flexible, as some factions aren't in every realm but might have an eight points entry or something instead.
This is not how I view the Mortal Realms at all. I see each faction represented on the table top as "factions of note" (out of hundreds) with a significant presence in each of the realms, with huge swathes of territory, cities, townships and hierarchys.
Each of the realms are massive. I would love for the AoS design studio take a note out of ToW book and have a "living" interactive map similar to that on the Old World Website (x8 for each realm) adding new and interesting aspects of each faction as/when their Battletome is released.
Ultimately it comes down to resources and what GamesWorkshop wants from it's flagship fantasy setting. The handful of maps they have (which are merely dusted over in photoshop and copy-pasted across their publications) smacks of minimal effort.
I've said it before (and I'll keep saying it to hopefully manifest it into being) AoS needs to have a series of weighty leather bound tombs (several hundred pages each) detailing each of the 8 Mortal realms with a swathe of newly commisioned art work, fiction and cartography. They need to invest as much time, effort and energy detailing the setting as they do their miniatures.
-
10
-
1
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, Morglum StormBasha said:
Most of the 80s and 90s minis were scaled down using pantographs
Oh No they weren't!
-
7
-
-
Not having enough "AoS-Specific" Characters is a real problem for the game and setting IMO. Each of the factions should have a character of note for each of the 8 realms at least. It would help flesh out each of the realms and it would also be great fodder for more Black Library AoS novels, of which there is a severe lack IMO. I really liked how the CoS touched on each of the realms within their Battletome and would like to see something similar in other faction battletomes, not only detailing significant settlements, but characters making an impact there.
-
9
-
-
I wonder if they are going to stick with the 2 armies at a time following on from Brets and Tomb Kings? Or will we see a change up and have 1 army at a time each couple of months?
-
The designers were also tiny so it was ok for them.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I like him. I like the old school metal model vibe.
-
1
-
-
When sculpting by hand the models were done 1 to 1. They were scuplted in the size they were cast. Crazy.
-
23 hours ago, The Lost Sigmarite said:
The Aqshy crusade has the benefit of having named CoS characters within it (Vedra and Zenestra) since the start, that gives them plot armour.
Whilst I suspect you might be right, I really hope that AoS doesn't paint itself into a corner by never killing characters with current models.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Ragest said:
Well, we know the next edition is going to be in Ulgu
Do we? I'm pretty sure there has been no confirmation regarding realm yet. I have Chamon on my bingo card.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Gitzdee said:
I agree with the Destruction part to get rid of faction forums. Its a bit too thinned down. Dont know about the other grand alliances.
Yeah.. the content and activity is just spread too thin. They would feel a lot more alive and worthwhile if they were compressed. Infact, I would go a lot further. I'd cut a lot of the forums and put them together. Like this.
The Grand Alliance Community
Warhammer: Age of Sigmar
General Age Of Sigmar Community Discussion
Warhammer: The Old World
General The Old World Community Discussion
Other Games
Warcry, Underworlds, Warhammer Quest, Bloodbowl Discussion.
Organised Play
Events
Gaming clubs
Rankings
Choose your Alliance
Order
Chaos
Death
Destruction
The Painting Table
Painting and Modelling
Gallery
Online Communities
Youtube, Podcasts, Blogs, Facebook, Reddit and Twitch
Market
-
4
-
2
-
-
ToW sub forum please! (I'd also suggest getting rid of the faction forums and just have Order, Chaos, Death and Destruction sub forums)
-
8
-
2
-
-
I'm not surpried to see a new type of army box for AoS factions. It's a very straightforward and relatively simple way to drive interest and sales. Keeping the Vanguards around (or any type of larger box) for too long and it will generally stagnate. You want to keep shaking things up (It also allows you to use models that are perhaps not as popular for whatever reason) As others have mentioned, I do hope that we will see some new models as part of Spearheads for some factions as we have in 40k for Comabt Patrol.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, EonChao said:
Give Fyreslayers a full range refresh like they deserve and use a bunch of those to make up the new box.
It's not so much that Fyreslayers need a "range refresh", it's that they need an actual range. All the models they have are pretty decent, it's just that there is so few of them, with next to no variation. 3/4 more actual units and the range would be really strong.
-
9 minutes ago, Starfyre said:
I’d have thought that 4.0 will come with a redesign.
Not necessarily. 40K has kept the same colouring and branding between recent editions. I can see AoS keeping the same logo and red/gold branding in 4th (which I'm ok with as I think it looks good)
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, TrawlingCleaner said:
Although it is a bit unclear if these replace Vanguards or not
The Stomcast Eternal Vanguard seems to be gone from the store so I suspect these are the replacements running up to 4th. It makes sense as there are 20+ to get through before summer if this is going to be its own little mini game like combat patrol. (Which I suspect is going to be the case)
-
10 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
I know many users who complain even when they talk. They just want models, models, models. I love the idea, but I think would be a failure once ppl realise it is not that.
Those rude entitled dummies should be ignored. I think GW would generate a far larger and robust audience if they had a scheduled regular Preview Show.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I've mentioned this before, but I really wish that GW would move to a monthly (Last weekend of the month) "WARHAMMER PREVIEW" show (at a scheduled optimum time) with a section for each of their 4 "Warhammer settings" (40k, AoS, HH & ToW) and the games contained within them. Each section wouldn't need to be only models, models models, but could have Warhammer+ trailers, Black Library Interviews, lore dumps, computer game previews, rules updates and miniature previews.
-
4
-
-
3 minutes ago, JerekKruger said:
I can definitely see them wanting to release at least one more versus pairing pre-AoS 4 to keep momentum going. There's a real rush people lose interest if nothing gets released for a long time. After all, at the moment if you don't want to play Bretonnian, Khemri or Chaos (Warriors or Beastmen) your kinda out of luck.
Although ironically you do have access to lots of newly updated and currently available models for all of the Legacy factions (apart from Chaos Dwarfs) As well as older model ranges for the Skaven, Dark Elves and Beastmen. The only factions that are hard to get right now are the actual Core factions. 😆
-
3
-
Warhammer - The Old World
in Warhammer: The Old World
Posted
I think it makes a lot of sense to have the 9 core factions released in 2024. It allows for the game/setting to become "established", maintains the hype train across the year and for 2025 to be focused on expansions and additions. (It would be amazing to see Kislev in the first half of 2025 and Cathay in the Second half of the year)