Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Inquisitor Gideon wrote:

 Astmeister wrote:
Again the Tomb Guard models are effectively cheaper than they were when released first 10-12 years ago.

They were 32,50 Euro for 10
Now they are 60 Euro for 20

And the Ushabti are now triple the price. What's your point?

£31.50 for them as Finecast in 2015 to £52.50 as Metal in 2024 is not "triple the price".

It's a £10 difference with inflation.

They were £6 each when i last bought them. That's triple to me.

When I bought them in 2007-2009 in metal, they were $20 USD/ model. When I bought the ushabti archers, they were $25 USD/model in fine cast. So I don't see too much of a change - they are selling for $85 per the recent rumor mill so I think they are going to be $28.33 each now. Still, much cheaper than eBay. It's still less than inflation for once. The grail knights were $10-$12 back in 1996-1998 and they have doubled per model which isn't too bad since a number of models have doubled in cost since then and they still hold up.

 Vulcan wrote:
Did Marvel create their Malekith before GW did? I was never a big Thor fan.

Marvel Malekith is from 1984. Not sure when GW Malekith came about.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
Did Marvel create their Malekith before GW did? I was never a big Thor fan.

Marvel Malekith is from 1984. Not sure when GW Malekith came about.

Google suggests the 1992 High Elf army book was the first mention.

Having now watched the GMG reviews, I see there are a few stat tweaks to units across the range.

Initiative has been dropped from high I units - elves are only max I6 now instead of I8.

WS is also down. Chaos lords have been trimmed a lot.

The Initiative charge bonus being +1 per inch charged to a max of 3 means will most likely see charging units get relatively high I.

Dwarfs will be charging at I5 most of the time.


They've given elves lower I and then given them either +1I in the first round, or strikes first (I10) to get around these charging I values.

These initiative shenanigans seem a bit convoluted to me.



But it's the Bretonnian Baron that confuses me the most - since when are they chaos lord juniors? More wounds and attacks than any other lord level character that isn't a chaos lord... just seems really weird and arbitrary, knightly grand masters don't get similar statlines.

 Hellebore wrote:

But it's the Bretonnian Baron that confuses me the most - since when are they chaos lord juniors? More wounds and attacks than any other lord level character that isn't a chaos lord... just seems really weird and arbitrary, knightly grand masters don't get similar statlines.

Maybe trying to differentiate Bretonnians from the Empire. Which is hard to do if the Empire gets everything the Brets do plus more, which was sorta how it was for most of the existence of WFB.

Something about being able to take the grail vow, meaning they’re supped from the holy grail bestowing on them Chaos like powers is what someone said several pages back. I don’t really know but that was the reason given I think. Someone that knows Bret lore better can probably provide a better explanation.

I'm fairly interested in trying a Brettonia army - is the box set they are offering a good starting army for them?

I'm also cautious about ruleset - are the new rules a continuation of 8th, altogether new or a "best of" older editions? I still have my 8th ed rules (and my High Elf, Lizardman & Vampire army) and I'd like to get some feedback on ruleset I should go with - forward with the new, back with an older set or sideways - with Kings of War or what.

 catbarf wrote:
Looking back a few pages and I'm really not sure where this idea that everyone's negative and critical is coming from.

Now that we've got a pretty complete picture of what TOW is, I'm cautiously interested in the game system. But I have to say, putting 2024 prices on kits from 2004, with the design and mold costs long since paid off, is a lot. WHFB was never a cheap game to get into but at GW prices for two-decade-old models it's going to be a hard sell to anyone not already invested in WHFB or at least in the GW sphere.

Maybe just appealing to grognards is the entire raison d'etre for this product and will be enough to keep it going, time will tell. I'll certainly be pulling my Ogres out of storage and giving it a try.

Well pegasus knights got whopping 2.5 pound more.

You didn't expect to not get inflation adjusted did you?

 Stormonu wrote:
I'm fairly interested in trying a Brettonia army - is the box set they are offering a good starting army for them?

I'm also cautious about ruleset - are the new rules a continuation of 8th, altogether new or a "best of" older editions? I still have my 8th ed rules (and my High Elf, Lizardman & Vampire army) and I'd like to get some feedback on ruleset I should go with - forward with the new, back with an older set or sideways - with Kings of War or what.

Seems to be a "best of" with some tweaks, there was a long and pointless debate if this was 9th edition a few pages back, but it is distinct from 8th. But as people keep noting nobody has played it yet really to answer properly. I would add though that what rules you use is up to you regardless, why not try all 3?

 Hellebore wrote:
I would love to hear from anyone that has played the game how Elite high Ld vs chaff low Ld plays out - the rules as described so far give me little indication your chaff units are going to be very useful.

I've not seen any rules to indicate the game won't split the effectiveness of these units bimodally, rather than in a normal distribution - ie that the rules now make elite units even better and chaff units even worse, pushing further apart.

This is the aspect of the game that will make or break my interest. So far, the WS, I and Ld rules as advertised by GW only support a bimodal worsening of chaff and improving of elite.

The lack of step up further compounds this already compounded scenario.

Well you could borrow page from aos players and flank elite units. Chaff being cheaper you outnumber them in models and　units.

Or have all who know classic tactics of flanking moved on to aos? Aos players will rule tow tournaments if tow players don't understand to flank and just march head on.

Also ability to force rout rather than orderly fallback by outnumbering enough is neat. Flanked you lose and roll lower than ld sooner or later.

tneva82 wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
I would love to hear from anyone that has played the game how Elite high Ld vs chaff low Ld plays out - the rules as described so far give me little indication your chaff units are going to be very useful.

I've not seen any rules to indicate the game won't split the effectiveness of these units bimodally, rather than in a normal distribution - ie that the rules now make elite units even better and chaff units even worse, pushing further apart.

This is the aspect of the game that will make or break my interest. So far, the WS, I and Ld rules as advertised by GW only support a bimodal worsening of chaff and improving of elite.

The lack of step up further compounds this already compounded scenario.

Well you could borrow page from aos players and flank elite units. Chaff being cheaper you outnumber them in models and　units.

Or have all who know classic tactics of flanking moved on to aos? Aos players will rule tow tournaments if tow players don't understand to flank and just march head on.

Also ability to force rout rather than orderly fallback by outnumbering enough is neat. Flanked you lose and roll lower than ld sooner or later.

I haven't played much sigmar 3rd ed admittedly, but I don't remember any advantage for flanking in it unless I'm missing something? Largely because units don't have ranks or facings.

Dudeface wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
I would love to hear from anyone that has played the game how Elite high Ld vs chaff low Ld plays out - the rules as described so far give me little indication your chaff units are going to be very useful.

I've not seen any rules to indicate the game won't split the effectiveness of these units bimodally, rather than in a normal distribution - ie that the rules now make elite units even better and chaff units even worse, pushing further apart.

This is the aspect of the game that will make or break my interest. So far, the WS, I and Ld rules as advertised by GW only support a bimodal worsening of chaff and improving of elite.

The lack of step up further compounds this already compounded scenario.

Well you could borrow page from aos players and flank elite units. Chaff being cheaper you outnumber them in models and　units.

Or have all who know classic tactics of flanking moved on to aos? Aos players will rule tow tournaments if tow players don't understand to flank and just march head on.

Also ability to force rout rather than orderly fallback by outnumbering enough is neat. Flanked you lose and roll lower than ld sooner or later.

I haven't played much sigmar 3rd ed admittedly, but I don't remember any advantage for flanking in it unless I'm missing something? Largely because units don't have ranks or facings.

Sure there's no rule called "FLANK ADVANTAGE". And to be specific AOS players have learned to attack weakest direction of a unit. Flank is convenient term for it(and seeing units tend to be line wider than deeper it also usually is on the side rather than rear/front)

But there's definitely advantage to be gained by attacking from weakest direction aka where you don't want opponent to want. I learned it the hard way when opponent charged me and from my murder unit that would have annihilated enemy unit only 2 models were able to legally attack(out of 10) and found myself in situation where I can't win combat(or at least not in time frame that would allow me to win the game).

It's subtle use of rules but when you attack from direction oppponent doesn't want to attack and gain advantage what is that if not flank attack? It's just not rammed in your throat "+1 combat result" type of rule.

tneva82 wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
I would love to hear from anyone that has played the game how Elite high Ld vs chaff low Ld plays out - the rules as described so far give me little indication your chaff units are going to be very useful.

I've not seen any rules to indicate the game won't split the effectiveness of these units bimodally, rather than in a normal distribution - ie that the rules now make elite units even better and chaff units even worse, pushing further apart.

This is the aspect of the game that will make or break my interest. So far, the WS, I and Ld rules as advertised by GW only support a bimodal worsening of chaff and improving of elite.

The lack of step up further compounds this already compounded scenario.

Well you could borrow page from aos players and flank elite units. Chaff being cheaper you outnumber them in models and　units.

Or have all who know classic tactics of flanking moved on to aos? Aos players will rule tow tournaments if tow players don't understand to flank and just march head on.

Also ability to force rout rather than orderly fallback by outnumbering enough is neat. Flanked you lose and roll lower than ld sooner or later.

I haven't played much sigmar 3rd ed admittedly, but I don't remember any advantage for flanking in it unless I'm missing something? Largely because units don't have ranks or facings.

Sure there's no rule called "FLANK ADVANTAGE". And to be specific AOS players have learned to attack weakest direction of a unit. Flank is convenient term for it(and seeing units tend to be line wider than deeper it also usually is on the side rather than rear/front)

But there's definitely advantage to be gained by attacking from weakest direction aka where you don't want opponent to want. I learned it the hard way when opponent charged me and from my murder unit that would have annihilated enemy unit only 2 models were able to legally attack(out of 10) and found myself in situation where I can't win combat(or at least not in time frame that would allow me to win the game).

It's subtle use of rules but when you attack from direction oppponent doesn't want to attack and gain advantage what is that if not flank attack? It's just not rammed in your throat "+1 combat result" type of rule.

Not to make light of it but that's a factor in a lot of games? AoS aren't going to be old world wizards any more than a 40k player would be for example. You still want to pick on isolated units and attack from angles and model placements that minimise return damage.

 Hellebore wrote:


But it's the Bretonnian Baron that confuses me the most - since when are they chaos lord juniors? More wounds and attacks than any other lord level character that isn't a chaos lord... just seems really weird and arbitrary, knightly grand masters don't get similar statlines.

I think you mean the Dukes. They are suppose to be imbued with the most powerful grail powers so they are kind of super human, but yeah, I was also surprised by the strength 5.

Anyway, the biggest problem for me are the incoherency, the Paladin has I 4 (lower than in 6th) and Ld 8 but the Grail knights have I 5 and L 9, so a paladin with the Grail Vow has a couple of stats lower than the Grail knights.

Also the Green knight should have been a little better, now that we know he's Guilles he should have at least the same strength as the Dukes but more WS and I.

They also toned down the Empire Captains. I think they do not want the battle standard bearers to be too strong.
A BSB with Pegasus, First Charge and the Banner would be quite annyoing otherwise.
People used to play lonely BSBs on horses in 7th edition already on tournaments.

Darkial wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:


But it's the Bretonnian Baron that confuses me the most - since when are they chaos lord juniors? More wounds and attacks than any other lord level character that isn't a chaos lord... just seems really weird and arbitrary, knightly grand masters don't get similar statlines.

I think you mean the Dukes. They are suppose to be imbued with the most powerful grail powers so they are kind of super human, but yeah, I was also surprised by the strength 5.

Anyway, the biggest problem for me are the incoherency, the Paladin has I 4 (lower than in 6th) and Ld 8 but the Grail knights have I 5 and L 9, so a paladin with the Grail Vow has a couple on stats lower than the Grail knights.

Also the Green knight should have been a little better, now that we now he's Guilles he should have at least the same strength as the Dukes but more WS and I.

Do we know for sure that taking the Grail Vow doesnt add to the Paladins stats? If the Duke has to have taken the Grail Voe they could have baked that in to the stat line, while the Paladin can probably take any of the Vows, and therefore could get a bonus if they take the Grail Vow (for an increased cost).

As far as I could see in the kind of blurry pages of a YouTube video, there was nothing like that. In a Warhammer Armies Project (fan army book) there was something like that "if a character gets the Grail Vow he gets +1 Ld".
Maybe it's what Astmeister said and it's to avoid a BSB too powerful but yeah, it's still weird in my mind.

After having seen various reviews, I'm being cautiously optimistic. To me, TOW feels at a first glance as 50% 7th, 25% 8th and 25% "new" (or LoR) mixed together.
I'm also quite surprised, I thought for sure that GW was gonna focus on making it a updated variant on 8th, but it seems like the main focus has been 7th (and I suppose, to some extent 6th)

 Hellebore wrote:
Having now watched the GMG reviews, I see there are a few stat tweaks to units across the range.
Initiative has been dropped from high I units - elves are only max I6 now instead of I8.

Out of curiosity, what "edition of stats" are you comparing TOW to?
In 7th, regular elven units where all either I5 (the majority) or I6 (the really speedy ones, like Witch Elves and Phoenix Guard).

 MinscS2 wrote:
After having seen various reviews, I'm being cautiously optimistic. To me, TOW feels at a first glance as 50% 7th, 25% 8th and 25% "new" (or LoR) mixed together.
I'm also quite surprised, I thought for sure that GW was gonna focus on making it a updated variant on 8th, but it seems like the main focus has been 7th (and I suppose, to some extent 6th)

 Hellebore wrote:
Having now watched the GMG reviews, I see there are a few stat tweaks to units across the range.
Initiative has been dropped from high I units - elves are only max I6 now instead of I8.

Out of curiosity, what "edition of stats" are you comparing TOW to?
In 7th, regular elven units where all either I5 (the majority) or I6 (the really speedy ones, like Witch Elves and Phoenix Guard).

Princes were i8. They appear to be i6 now although they also have strikes first so not sure what the point is.

But the normal elves are i4 (+1 in first round of combat) and most elites are i5 - theyve all taken an I cut. So have chaos warriors and lords.

Normal orcs are i3 now.

 Hellebore wrote:
Princes were i8. They appear to be i6 now although they also have strikes first so not sure what the point is.

Always Strikes First only applies when fighting in combat while I6 matters for Initiative tests and the like

Is there a comprehensive list of the Elven Honours anywhere and what they give? I'm sure I've watched a vid with them all mentioned but double checking GMG it seems Ash goes to go through them but just goes over the lore master before getting distracted by the unique weapons.

Well I did it. Bought 4 Tomb guard boxes, 4 sepulchral stalkers boxes, and 6 necrosphinx/warsphinx boxes.

Oh no.

Now, if I could find a nice alternative set of skeleton horses, I have plans to kitbash myself 6 or so chariots from the sphinx and necropolis knight leftovers. Other things on my to buy list- 2 units of bow ushabti, necrolith bone dragon.

Strike first and two handed weapon strike last cancels, so the Ini 6 comes into play from the High Elves General when you use a two handed weapon.

 Astmeister wrote:
Strike first and two handed weapon strike last cancels, so the Ini 6 comes into play from the High Elves General when you use a two handed weapon.

Well. A Lion Axe or a generic great weapon. A magic weapon, a lance if mounted or, if on foot, a Sword of Hoeth is far more likely unless you're leaning into a Chrace theme.

Though with the ways the rules work, 'Strikes Last' is... deceptive. Charging White Lions are striking at I5 (unless the target is very close), so still going before most non-elf units.

 Astmeister wrote:
They also toned down the Empire Captains. I think they do not want the battle standard bearers to be too strong.
A BSB with Pegasus, First Charge and the Banner would be quite annyoing otherwise.
People used to play lonely BSBs on horses in 7th edition already on tournaments.

In the past that sort of worked when there was just 1 or 2 attacks coming back. Now with the entire front rank fighting it could be 4, 5 or more attacks back easily. Plus a solo char is never outnumbering a unit by 2 to 1 so FBIGO would kick in a lot of the time. Then the following turn the infantry unit get full ranks and the BSB is in trouble - and the BSB will not be able to FBIGO itself.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well I did it. Bought 4 Tomb guard boxes, 4 sepulchral stalkers boxes, and 6 necrosphinx/warsphinx boxes.

Oh no.

Now, if I could find a nice alternative set of skeleton horses, I have plans to kitbash myself 6 or so chariots from the sphinx and necropolis knight leftovers. Other things on my to buy list- 2 units of bow ushabti, necrolith bone dragon.

How big is your pile of shame? Or are you just a machine that paints armies for breakfast?

I was mildly tempted to get the Bret box to finish off my old Bret force.... but then I remembered I still have unpainted Brets that I bought 20 years ago

MaxT wrote:

In the past that sort of worked when there was just 1 or 2 attacks coming back. Now with the entire front rank fighting it could be 4, 5 or more attacks back easily. Plus a solo char is never outnumbering a unit by 2 to 1 so FBIGO would kick in a lot of the time. Then the following turn the infantry unit get full ranks and the BSB is in trouble - and the BSB will not be able to FBIGO itself.

That... is a terrible, overly long acronym that conveys nothing. 'Fall back' actually provides coherent information, as does 'Break'

For give ground, I'd just suggest 'push'

Sorry but I played WAB back in the day, so FBIGO it is!

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well I did it. Bought 4 Tomb guard boxes, 4 sepulchral stalkers boxes, and 6 necrosphinx/warsphinx boxes.

Oh no.

Now, if I could find a nice alternative set of skeleton horses, I have plans to kitbash myself 6 or so chariots from the sphinx and necropolis knight leftovers. Other things on my to buy list- 2 units of bow ushabti, necrolith bone dragon.

How big is your pile of shame? Or are you just a machine that paints armies for breakfast?

I was mildly tempted to get the Bret box to finish off my old Bret force.... but then I remembered I still have unpainted Brets that I bought 20 years ago

My pile of shame is truly shameful. I have more unopened boxes in my apartment than most flgs in the area. For the most part, I only buy bundle sets though (starter boxes, combat patrol boxes, 2-player battleboxes, launch boxes, battleforces, etc.), which I acquire through various sources and means at anywhere from ~25% to 40% off (I know people and have kind of a side hustle that gets me employee discounts or considerable store credit, etc. at various places)., so I basically compound the discount offered by GW in the bundle by buying it at well below retail to collect massive volumes of stuff at a relatively low price, and then often sell the extras to recoup some of the cost. As such I have a lot of very large armies/collections, the downside is that despite that there are many units I simply don't own because they weren't included in the various boxes and bundles I've purchased lol. The Tomb Kings purchase is probably the first time in several years that I bought individual kits.

I've been thinking about starting a blog to do in depth reviews, scale comparisons, sprue photos, dimensional measurements and stuff like that of everything I own as an informational resource for other hobbyists, as well as to document my efforts to do a burn-down of what is probably one of the largest piles of shame in the community lol.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I have more unopened boxes in my apartment than most flgs in the area.

Fun, innit?

I could open a small store with what's under my bed.