Jump to content

Noserenda

Members
  • Posts

    575
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Noserenda

  1. You can tell FS units apart? Its an odd choice certainly, it seems they are one of the lower selling lines so you might expect a better value box to encourage people to invest?
  2. Yeah its a real shame that we had the awesome rollercoaster of broken realms (I think, the end of 2nd ed books anyhow) and then essentially nothing since.
  3. My point on them being an odd choice was that they obviously have limited resources and production time, why waste some of it on an extremely dated kit that has a modern alternative? Just include them in the rules, sell bases separately and show some of them in the studio army. Worrying about pricings and such is well beyond the scope of the rules studios anyway.
  4. I think GW are setting it up to fail, just the needless veil of secrecy has meant people built their own versions in their heads and now GW has to compete with visions that dont have to worry about the physical logistics of release. They havent helped themselves with some of the articles though...
  5. I seem to recall they said everything from old warhammer will be useable, but then thats hardly been true in HH and thats not been out of production for years Verminlords should be fine though. Not a squeak about Skaven specifically yet though?
  6. I cant imagine after the abject failures of Warhammer forge they would try for resin fantasy ranges again surely? To clarify, the Warhammer forge stuff was mostly lovely, just so expensive it barely sold which is why it never went anywhere, just not enough pull compared to Guard or space marines. They might have altered plans since the plastic waves for HH have seemingly done well, im certainly hoping we get decent plastic releases, even if they are a bit slow. Wolf riders would be a weird choice given how much nicer the new ones are.
  7. It occurs to me that we might have just had a soft confirmation of new questing/grail knights, they were talking about the changed focus on heraldry and it would have been an ideal time to include the counter examples they must have painted for the studio army, but they didnt... I quite like the last lot of Questing knights but i suspect Grail knights could do with a glow up to emphasise their more supernatural nature maybe?
  8. I have a pounding headache, so im not up to checking, but are the artillery crew on new bases? Interested to see if they are models or tokens in the new rules as i prefer artillery on one base together.
  9. So they showed the core troops (Bar errants?) of one of the starter armies are all old models, which is good and bad, i quite like the old men at arms unit, (converted a lot into guardsmen) but the knights are poor. Even by 7th edition standards they were outshone by historicals. (They were on the list for a cavalry army i fancied at the time, ultimately went with Chaos warriors ) Still, its nice to get an answer on base sizes! I may have a lot of dwarves to rebase, but then ultimately htye are also the army most likely to never change formation so the movement tray idea might work, got plenty of those lying around in old boxes!
  10. The problem with that is that base size has a very real impact on the rules of warhammer, smaller bases are considerably better for both manoeuvring and getting/avoiding more attacks in combat, they must be aware of that writing the rules? Not sure there is any way around that fact either as its so intrinsic to the mechanics of the game. The Monstrous infantry base size sounds enormous too... Something i hadnt thought about actually was all the cost of designing and making new bases, they cant go back to the old ones really due to scale creep and trying to avoid clone armies. Which implies theyd want to recoup some of that money selling them to folks for rebasing. Specialist games is, if anything, too conservative, so i cant imagine them doing a loss leader on something like that?
  11. I mean, if you didnt think a new edition meant a new marine wave youve had your head in the sand the last few decades
  12. That always depended on the monster tbh, i particularly recall the bloody skaven abomination thing being annoying hard to stop, and my forest dragon in earlier editions was just fine, despite being one of the weaker types of dragon. Id expect the experience as a kid to differ a lot too, mine is pretty foggy from back in 4th edition but as a born dwarf player i know i was lugging cannonballs downrange with gay abandon
  13. Yeah a lot of computer game fans like to rag on AoS but they arent going to play the game regardless, its the same IP but computer gaming is nothing like actual wargaming as a hobby. Took me a few years to realise why i just dont like most computer wargames, including total war, well except Arena, the best TW. Not even sure rules are ultimately the decider on success, because huge numbers of models will be bought and never used to play OW. Collectors, painters, piles of shame, AoS players, 40k conversions, D&D, even other versions of warhammer will all go on the sales numbers after all. Fixed units sizes would be ******, there is a significant element of strategy to unit sizes and formations in warhammer, if you reduced that down to fixed blocks it would be dire. I think that was a big chunk of the problem with hordes, for mainline combat units you were semi forced into these huge unwieldy blocks that look great but essentially decide the fate of a huge chunk of your army in the deployment phases. But that could work for chaff troops! one of my buddies was using units of 50+ zombies in 6th or 7th (forget which) as giant 10x5 roadblocks with a necromancer up to no good behind them. Fun times But yeah decisions about width v depth, manoeuvrability and flexibility are all big parts of making warhammer fun, just make units useful at whatever size.
  14. Giant monsters and cool weird centrepiece models absolutely sold, if anything people begrudged having to buy so many infantry to function in 8th when that got fully out of hand. The influence is obvious on both AoS and 40k where big centrepieces are essentially standard issue now and they pretty much abandoned updating basic troops for all too many years. Nothing is popular everywhere but those things absolutely succeeded as far as GW was concerned. Though even AoS has been getting lower fantasy these days the same broad strokes are true.
  15. They really dont have much more than passing similarities side by side, the chest armour and upper legs maybe? Even the helmets are slightly off as the guy on the right has pulled his up off his eyes. Something i noticed when looking closely though is how irregular their armour is outside of the mail shirt (and ball slapper ) and chest armour (which is very covered) which kinda implies the core of their armour is issued munition stuff and they scavenge/buy the rest of their armour? That said its a small sample size so far. Gotta say mail on modern minis is reeeeally nice
  16. Its more "realistic" armour coverage but i wouldnt call them particularly historically accurate, they seem out of one of a dozen generic feeling fantasy worlds, which is pretty sad given that warhammer was once one of the pioneers of stepping out of that design space with the Landsknecht inspired Empire troops.I guess the lowest common denominator does sell though. Are these even meant to be freeguild though?
  17. Generally good, especially the underworlds bands, which might tempt me back to the game until i see the inevitably too high price lol Those Dawnbringer crusaders are a big dissapointment, im torn between describing them as freeguild with all the character/flair removed or as Oh ******, we corrupted the files heres some D&D watchmen we can sub in. Dire.
  18. Didnt they do a Warmaster Araby army at one point? Id fully expect Total war to generally be years ahead of Old World when it comes to new armies given their lead time!
  19. Still not had any issues despite being charged, Hachette support being particularly incompetent again
  20. I mean if they developed Cathay it only makes sense to hit up Araby too
  21. I hope they dont copy the AoD release model, pick a couple of armies, NO RULES FOR THEM, SUCK IT NERDS. Want anything but yet more tanks? You guessed it... I suspect Kislev and Cathay were part of some earlier plan since abandoned given how the focus has shifted entirely away from them again, if they are promising support for all old armies and at least some amount of new plastic i cant imagine they will be back for entirely new ranges for a few years at least. But maybe its not all overpromise over overpromise and they can deliver, not holding my breath.
  22. Might just be a meta thing but Skaven have always been fairly popular round me, and i remember marshalling for a GW event where Skyre lists felt like 1/4 of the players, they may have been a bit good at the time
  23. I suspect Resin minis get previewed a lot more when GW is having logistical trouble because they are less affected by it, and have trivial back end compared to plastic so are easy to shift up and down the schedule as needed.
×
×
  • Create New...