|
Post by Darnok on Feb 12, 2023 0:40:43 GMT
It is not that hard. Not is it impressive dropping platitudes, again, it just shows you have nothing to add. So don´t.
I really don't get what your problem is. Maybe take some of your own advice first before lecturing others?
|
|
|
Post by Luigino on Feb 12, 2023 1:33:38 GMT
This place is starting to remind me of warseer of old.
Please let's stay all civil.
We're specualting about a game made to move toy soldiers around.
|
|
|
Post by gangland on Feb 13, 2023 15:48:50 GMT
I'm too lazy to quote what I want so I'll just say TK v. Brets would be an auto buy from me if it is compatible with 8th and back. GW definitely want to sell us books and models, so as much as they say things will be compatible... Well they have said that before and it was true for maybe a month. And for the cost of entry into, well, any GW game, it is what it is and not getting cheaper.
|
|
|
Post by bastardfromhell on Feb 14, 2023 8:23:20 GMT
My expectations are low for TOW after seeing what GW made out of 40k in the 9th edition. In our local group we play using a homebrew version of the core rulebook.
But a little hope is there, they don't mess it up. What always bothered me in WFB are two things: - It feels too static to lead a unit around a building or other obstacles - Spears do not get a bonus against Cavalery
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Feb 14, 2023 17:20:11 GMT
Time and again I am amazed by peoples ability to know the intention of others, especially when it comes to companies. This last statement might be sarcasm. In general, if GW does something that increases both the number of models you need to play and thereby the amount of revenue and profit they earn from you playing, you can safely assume they intended that result. You mean to say they actually intended to make a profit?! [we really do need a sarcasm emoji]
|
|
|
Post by johngg on Feb 14, 2023 17:25:11 GMT
My expectations are low for TOW after seeing what GW made out of 40k in the 9th edition. In our local group we play using a homebrew version of the core rulebook. ToW will be to AoS what the Horus Heresy is to 40K. And you have to give GW credit for reinvogorating the Horus Herest with V2.0. Is the new edition to everyones taste? or course not, but GW are supporting that line well with regular updates and minis. I can only see them trying to do the same thing for ToW, Why? becuase it worked and it's making them money.
|
|
|
Post by bastardfromhell on Mar 14, 2023 8:18:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Grimfang Gogulk on Mar 14, 2023 9:01:26 GMT
Yes, totally agree and mentioned that BS about the ranks going from 4 to 5 recently.. I have fun playing smaller games but feel exactly the same, it is a clipped and cropped version - because of the rules benefit those bigger armies, that cost more.. But I can "contradict" myself again, those players I met here, they are pretty weak, unimaginative and don´t dare to challenge GW of how it should be played - they go along with it and buy that picture Luigino mentioned. Most players are, most players are just following.. But they don´t drive it either, that comes from GW. -----------Why do you come here and try to insult people? What is the point? Can you please try to make statements without attacking people? Keep the toxic stuff for social media, not here. Because I was never taught proper manners. I have no decency.
|
|
|
Post by Grimfang Gogulk on Mar 14, 2023 9:03:32 GMT
It is not that hard. Not is it impressive dropping platitudes, again, it just shows you have nothing to add. So don´t.
I really don't get what your problem is. Maybe take some of your own advice first before lecturing others?
That's it! I'm going back to social media platforms like twitter and facebook where I can continue to act like a foul human being with impunity and spread my negative attitude throughout the world... this forum has way too much decency for me.
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Mar 14, 2023 9:10:26 GMT
Why would this ever happen? it makes no sense. Not from a marketing standpoint nor from a commercial one. On the contrary, it makes perfect sense. The unnecessary and callous execution of those armies is the biggest symbol of the stupidity GW showed during the period when they also eradicated Fantasy. In the past few years, however, to their credit, GW seem to have been committed to apologising to fanbases they offended over the years by squatting/mistreating armies (if their successful resurrections of Genestealer Cults and Squats and their dedication to making plastic Sisters of Battle are anything to go by), and releasing a starter box with those two armies for the revived Warhammer Fantasy game would be the ultimate display of apology to all the people GW offended in the 2015-16 era. TK and Bretonnia were NOT popular armies, had they been we would not have seen them linger behind and have their model line canned at the first occasion. And despite what a loud minority of people online might clamour, they're still not among the most popular armies. So this automatically denotes them as being unworthy of a place in the starter box? That's a good way to insult two extremely dedicated cult fanbases. Even if only a minority does play them, they still deserve to have their favourite armies treated with respect, and including them in the starter box would be the ultimate expression of that. Not to mention it would give these dedicated fanbases some much-needed new blood as a lot of new players will enter the game through the starter box, and perhaps turn those minorities into majorities, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all. It's about time some of the underdogs were given some time in the sun. From a marketing perspective, it makes little sense as a starter box should provide an appealing army more than anything else. Tomb Kings and Bretonnia are both highly appealing to those with taste , and seeing them appear in the starter box would make a fantastic change from the usual suspects of Empire, High Elves and Greenskins, as much as I like the latter two. In that sense they could have Bretonnia (with a mix of infantry and cavalry models), but then TK makes absolutely no sense. Why? Bretonnian infantry make even basic Skeletons look elite, so you could easily have the Bretonnian army consist of a couple of units of Knights, a unit of Peasants and perhaps a Trebuchet, vs a Tomb King army with Skeleton Warriors, Tomb Guard and Ushabti. That would pit two significantly different armies against each other - one a heavy-hitting charge-reliant cavalry army, one a slower but more numerous and resilient wall of melee infantry that can resurrect its casualties. Job done. Furthermore, if Bretonnia and TK do make a serious comeback, they'll rework them to be as GW-esque specific as possible, As of now, both ranges (excluding perhaps a few unique units) are far too generic by GW standards. But as others have said, if GW reinvent the Bretonnian and Tomb King range too much, it won't be similar enough to Warhammer Fantasy to appeal to the market they've been aiming for with TOW (i.e. us disgruntled fantasy players who refuse to bow to AoS). Additionally, look at Warhammer: Total War, it's kept Tomb Kings and Bretonnians pretty much as they are to nobody's complaint. GW also seem to be intending to capitalise on the market created by these games, so they would also end up turning away that customer base as well. In short, changing these cult-favourite factions too much would put off a lot of their fans, as well as compromising the ability of existing players to use their collections of them in the game.
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Mar 14, 2023 9:13:11 GMT
-----------Why do you come here and try to insult people? What is the point? Can you please try to make statements without attacking people? Keep the toxic stuff for social media, not here. Because I was never taught proper manners. I have no decency. I really don't get what your problem is. Maybe take some of your own advice first before lecturing others? That's it! I'm going back to social media platforms like twitter and facebook where I can continue to act like a foul human being with impunity and spread my negative attitude throughout the world... this forum has way too much decency for me.
Now that is absolutely enough.There really is no need to be this aggressive, especially as I can't see anything that could have started this. We're all friends here, we all share a love for the greatest GW game ever made, and this forum is no place for such insults. @grimfang Gogulk You've by-and-large been a good contributor on this forum up to now with your excellent Greenskin army, why on Earth have you started behaving like this?
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Mar 14, 2023 9:22:48 GMT
I saw that yesterday, and I can safely say this will likely be the reaction of most of us here:
|
|
|
Post by Darnok on Mar 14, 2023 10:22:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lordofskullpass on Mar 14, 2023 10:42:58 GMT
The Bretonnian helmets and weapons look solid all round and are a great tribute to the 6th Edition kit, which I still thought still looked decent even now. I love how the Tomb King axe and sword pay homage to the old 6th Edition metal Tomb King/Tomb Prince models, and those who have a fondness for 4th Edition-era Undead models will recognise that flail. The shield though I'm less fond of, because the skeleton with crossed arms reminds me of Space Marine Storm Shields and the 'sun halos' on the skeleton's head and on the top of the shield are too much like Stormcast aesthetics. However that can be replaced with one from the inevitable Tomb Guard kit that will come along (whether that's the 8th Edition one resurrected or a new one made). I was dead worried that GW would try and find some excuse to make new Bretonnians and Tomb Kings in Forge World Resin or something, so this news is just music to my ears.
|
|
|
Post by bastardfromhell on Mar 14, 2023 10:45:44 GMT
Seems like sails are set for a Brets vs Tomb Kings starter set, as it was mentioned in some roumors, but let's see.
|
|