Ejecutor Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 6 hours ago, Dragon-knight77 said: So updating the list Red= gone Blue= going into a supplement so chances Super low Green= Updated already oh from SG Warhound list what left is Vizzik Skour the new Verminlord nu-Queek Warlord with Bodyguards Globadiers Arch-warlock Weapon team Stormvermin New Wolf rat Master Moulder Warlock Engineer with Warpvolt obliterator I would do two little tweaks. Errant Questor, gone. It is not the same as the Knight Questor. And the Doom Flayer shouldn't be also red? Or is it part of the Weapon Teams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xil Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 10 hours ago, MitGas said: The Lawsuit-Invocator, on a quest to find sanctuary for his daemonette girlfriend (yes, my totally new lore is really good), feels more at home in Diablo. Is that a photoshop? I can't find the hooded model on the website. I am not even a Diabolo player, but i immediately thought it looks Diabolo-esque! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStreicher Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Xil said: Is that a photoshop? I can't find the hooded model on the website. I am not even a Diabolo player, but i immediately thought it looks Diabolo-esque! It is. They PS-ed it to look like a Diablo Angel. I will steal that idea however (and change the leg pose) The Model makes me hopeful for a new Celestant Prime. Edited June 13 by JackStreicher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lost Sigmarite Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 GW should have given the generic Azyros the sword and kept the big spear for Tornus, because right now the named character looks only like an alternate paint scheme. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grungnisson Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 3 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: GW should have given the generic Azyros the sword and kept the big spear for Tornus, because right now the named character looks only like an alternate paint scheme. I've got at least two of the old ones, so they can be the generic option ; ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 30 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: GW should have given the generic Azyros the sword and kept the big spear for Tornus, because right now the named character looks only like an alternate paint scheme. Yeah. Let's see how it is managed rules-wise. Maybe they just messed around with the paint or it even has more pieces that were not shown, like Abraxia that had a helmeted head that wasn't shown until it was put for sale, or the prosecutors with the old mask. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyrus Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 DEATH TO THE FALSE AVATAR OF DESTRUCTION !! 🐐 LONG LIVE TO THE MOUTH OF MORK !!! KRULEBOYZ RULE !!! 7 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draznak Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 50 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: GW should have given the generic Azyros the sword and kept the big spear for Tornus, because right now the named character looks only like an alternate paint scheme. I hope this isn't a precursor for next named characters because there is absolutely NO difference in sculpting between the two. Only the paint scheme indicates that Tornus belongs to the Hallowed Knights (but a random knight-azyros would look exactly the same). Generally speaking, I don't think it's a good idea to have generic/named character double-kits. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcvs Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 (edited) 54 minutes ago, The Lost Sigmarite said: GW should have given the generic Azyros the sword and kept the big spear for Tornus, because right now the named character looks only like an alternate paint scheme. Agreed on the lack of visual distinction (also weird to use a weapon as the only distinguishing factor at a time when they are going in the direction of loadouts having less impact on the rules)... but I like that with an old azyros and two magnets (and a spare Vindictor arm) I'll get both a new azyros and a named character. EDIT to avoid double posting: 2 minutes ago, Draznak said: Generally speaking, I don't think it's a good idea to have generic/named character double-kits. my counter point would be that by doing this they can kill Tornus down the line and players will still be able to use their mini as the generic version. Edited June 13 by Marcvs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarff Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 12 minutes ago, Draznak said: Generally speaking, I don't think it's a good idea to have generic/named character double-kits I actually think it's a great idea. Gordrakk, Eternatus, Avelanor, Hurakan, Gobsprakk, etc. are all great kits and look very distinct from the generic version. It's the best of both worlds, allows players who like named characters to play a named character and allows players who prefer making a generic version and giving it their own lore to do so too. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 27 minutes ago, Marcvs said: Agreed on the lack of visual distinction (also weird to use a weapon as the only distinguishing factor at a time when they are going in the direction of loadouts having less impact on the rules)... but I like that with an old azyros and two magnets (and a spare Vindictor arm) I'll get both a new azyros and a named character. EDIT to avoid double posting: my counter point would be that by doing this they can kill Tornus down the line and players will still be able to use their mini as the generic version. Poor Tornus Don't kill it! We are running out of named SCE between kills and cuts... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 16 minutes ago, Snarff said: I actually think it's a great idea. Gordrakk, Eternatus, Avelanor, Hurakan, Gobsprakk, etc. are all great kits and look very distinct from the generic version. It's the best of both worlds, allows players who like named characters to play a named character and allows players who prefer making a generic version and giving it their own lore to do so too. Yeah, but all of those you mentioned are a step ahead of this kit in terms of differentiating the named and the normal kit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asbestress Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 21 minutes ago, Snarff said: I actually think it's a great idea. Gordrakk, Eternatus, Avelanor, Hurakan, Gobsprakk, etc. are all great kits and look very distinct from the generic version. It's the best of both worlds, allows players who like named characters to play a named character and allows players who prefer making a generic version and giving it their own lore to do so too. cough Tahlia Vedra can't be built as a generic Marshal on Manticore even though that would have been perfect as a replacement for the old General on Griffon that's probably going to Old World cough 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejecutor Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 2 minutes ago, Asbestress said: cough Tahlia Vedra can't be built as a generic Marshal on Manticore even though that would have been perfect as a replacement for the old General on Griffon that's probably going to Old World cough But I get that point. IMO, when you do that with kits so big and unique, the named character loses his uniqueness. A bit of what happens with Gobsprakk. It is not so cool when you have a Killaboss using "the same mount". 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnusaur Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 (edited) 7 hours ago, Matrindur said: While it does seem like alot to get four kinds of Warlocks (assuming its not three with the leaked one, the box one and the Arch-Warlock) Necrons had something similar happen with their Crypteks in 9th. Before the update they just had a "Cryptek" model but then got another one in the big box and two others in the releases afterwards and they just renamed them into different types of Crypteks. So the existing one turned into a Technomancer, the box one is a Plasmancer and the two additional ones are Psychomancer and Chronomancer. Since the already revealed Warlock is specifically meant for Warlock Jezzails, I could see something similar for rats where each Warlock just gets a specialization with the Warlock just being the overall unit-type. Of course personally I would still prefer different units instead of just four sub-variations of the same one but it is possible thats what they are going for That's a good point. Like you say, I would expect them to share the love a bit more (Master Moulders, Plague Priests, etc.) but I guess this wave is pretty fixated on the Skryre/Moulder stuff. Tyranids got a bunch of Lictor-variants too. 3 hours ago, Ejecutor said: I would do two little tweaks. Errant Questor, gone. It is not the same as the Knight Questor. And the Doom Flayer shouldn't be also red? Or is it part of the Weapon Teams? Historically has been, but as others pointed out it's almost certainly going to be it's own kit/unit, if it doesn't get squatted completely. A unit of three Doom-flayers would be so cool, though. Edited June 13 by Magnusaur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nezzhil Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 Bad news. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarff Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 14 minutes ago, Ejecutor said: But I get that point. IMO, when you do that with kits so big and unique, the named character loses his uniqueness. A bit of what happens with Gobsprakk. It is not so cool when you have a Killaboss using "the same mount". Not every character kit needs to be dual, but I really like it when normal heroes have a named build to them. It just gives the kits something extra and usually allows characters who would never get a model otherwise to still have a model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 2 minutes ago, Nezzhil said: Bad news. Is there a reason to think the kit is not just out of stock temporarily? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nezzhil Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 Just now, Neil Arthur Hotep said: Is there a reason to think the kit is not just out of stock temporarily? They are moving them to Old World, so the AoS ID is removed for both kits, and that the reason it says is OUT OF STOCK. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rachmani Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 5 minutes ago, Nezzhil said: Bad news. You say: Bad news! I'm like: CoS refresh that looks the part? When?? 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matrindur Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 2 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said: Is there a reason to think the kit is not just out of stock temporarily? Well it says "Sold out online" instead of "temporarily out of stock". Granted GW does have some problems with their webstore where products get labeled with the wrong one but it also wouldn't be too surprising for another Cities purge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nezzhil Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 Just now, Matrindur said: Well it says "Sold out online" instead of "temporarily out of stock". Granted GW does have some problems with their webstore where products get labeled with the wrong one but it also wouldn't be too surprising for another Cities purge The 99% of the "webstore problems" are because they change the ID of the product before updating the website. I don't understand why they do it in that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Arthur Hotep Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 7 minutes ago, Rachmani said: You say: Bad news! I'm like: CoS refresh that looks the part? When?? Yeah, not seeing the bad news so far. We know dwarves and elves are part of the Cities index for the time being. They are certainly not removing them from play before the next battletome. And at that point, new cities dwarves are at least as likely as another squatting. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lost Sigmarite Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 21 minutes ago, Nezzhil said: Bad news. Don’t wanna be rude, but the writing was on the wall for these guys as well as for other WFB kits remaining in CoS. They’re going back to TOW, and hopefully this paves the way for new COS sculpts. Look, CoS is moving away from humans/elves/dwarfs subfactions. When you look at the indexes, the “subfaction specific” battle formations are no longer elves/dwarves, but wizards and ironweld war machines… in that logic, it’s better to bring back Dispossessed to TOW, and have some castelite/ironweld duardins to replace them if we get any. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snarff Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 27 minutes ago, Nezzhil said: Bad news. I see this as good news! The models never really felt fitting for CoS, I can't wait to see how they'll integrate them properly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.