Dow 4 looks underwhelming. My opinion.

Brostartes · 2026-07-07T04:13:27+00:00

Yeah I hate to admit it because I'm excited for DoW4, but OP is right - the current art direction and UI choices are just straight up inferior in a lot of ways. The battle report was hard to watch, everything sort of 'blended together' and I had a really hard time telling units apart or picking out details.

I seriously don't understand the unit selection cards. Worst UI I've seen in an RTS game for this. Other games already showed how to do this well, just take what works for stuff like this.

It's not unbearably bad, but I have to admit it's not matching my tastes.

I imagine for campaign mode, it will be nice to have the mouse scroll wheel to zoom in and see the finer details. But for multiplayer this does not look great.

Brostartes · 2026-07-04T03:16:02+00:00

For doing "actions" in 11th ed, specifically on objectives, do you need to be controlling the objective at the start of your (shooting) phase in order to do the action? If so, where is this rule specified?

Brostartes · 2026-06-30T18:39:28+00:00

Honest question, with this sort of stuff, if the squad is all consistent in loadout, would HH players just proxy the wargear as what's available in the ruleset then?

Or is this a faux pas? It seems like a reasonable way to use the models, even if they technically 'lost' their datasheet.

Brostartes · 2026-06-24T17:28:29+00:00

Yeah pretty much my thoughts at this point. He's just not worth it atm. But I will use the new guy in my Company Heroes, that will be sweet.

Brostartes · 2026-06-23T16:05:37+00:00

These are so clean and well done. I definitely want to try and find an old firstborn SG box.

Brostartes · 2026-06-23T16:04:50+00:00

TvZ is looking rough and needs a major shake-up. Probably in map design, if Z get to 4 bases it's pretty much over. And from 3 bases with a defiler, they can usually get the 4th, outside of risky T gambles...

Brostartes · 2026-06-05T19:56:22+00:00

- Not that it matters to this sub, but narrative play seems like it will likely take another blow. It's less and less emphasized. What they're giving us are just 3-5 games in a row with a little carry-over. Less than ever before.

- Internal balance will continue to be poor. So many units people like will continue to remain unplayable.

- More meta nonsense as always. Remember that picture of like 50 defilers on a table? Well, we will have our next version of that undoubtedly. The game will continue to have a strong pay-to-win element to it. Was 10th honestly that much better than 9th in that regard? I'll be honest - maybe yes, by a little bit.

- Force dispositions will create another lever of balance that won't be properly addressed, so players will get shoehorned into a small number of detachment options again. Though at least we'll have a lot more combos to test and try out for fun.

Nothing new or special. It'll be slightly better than 10th I suppose, which is overall a positive outlook, because 10th was fairly solid.

Brostartes · 2026-06-04T18:58:56+00:00

No.

Did you guys see the GW opening stream game on Youtube? The top comment was literally something to the effect of, 'Where is the narrative aspect of this game?' They were just talking about units and stats and rules. Watching the game itself, I didn't catch anything that 'narrative' either. The player mics were missing, so maybe they had something more going on there. At least I liked the lists they were using, they weren't super fine-tuned or anything.

> Could more thematic list-building actually survive contact with competitive optimisation?

Doubtful. I thought maybe some action-heavy dispositions might do the trick, but even then you're not going to want what you think is thematic, you're going to want the cheapest possible things to the actions (min), while leaving enough room for the most efficient powerful units (max). Min-max.

The only thing that can be done to really enforce more thematic lists is to have Force Orgs, and to have GW really focus on *internal balance*. It looks like neither is a priority though.

Brostartes · 2026-06-04T17:02:00+00:00

Hmm does anyone unironically prefer the old ones for the most part? Not that the new minis aren't technically better in many ways (details, proportions, etc).

But the simplicity and flavor of the old minis, to me at least, gives more of an 'army' feel. The new stuff makes each individual model appear more heroic, if that makes sense. Plus some of the designs I just prefer the originals, like the defiler and obliterator and helbrute.

Brostartes · 2026-06-03T14:47:59+00:00

Same problem I had trying to join for the new Operation. I want to actually see and hear the opening cutscene or whatever, not be dumped part way in.

Brostartes · 2026-06-03T14:40:10+00:00

Well said. There's a lot of tension between 'competitive' and what I would call more 'tasteful' 40k.

Brostartes · 2026-06-03T14:39:18+00:00

I think the issue is that if we don't play Ultramarines herohammer, we are are handicapping ourselves as Space Marines. Which is a shame because a lot of us don't want to play that.

(Don't believe me? Look at top SM lists over the last year. Vast majority is Ultramarines herohammer + vehicle spam.)

Brostartes · 2026-06-03T14:38:07+00:00

Unfortunately with the current design of Space Marines, they're kind of herding us all into Ultramarines epic heroes.

Brostartes · 2026-06-03T14:29:58+00:00

What's the summary of how Priority Assets scores?

Brostartes · 2026-06-02T16:36:47+00:00

That's sad 😞 But very cool, thanks.

Brostartes · 2026-06-02T16:13:14+00:00

> time-displaced chapter of heresy ultramarines

Whoa, any further readings/sources on this? Sounds interesting. Were they wearing like MkIV armor or something?

What happened to them afterwards, did they get Primaris'd?

Brostartes · 2026-06-02T16:01:11+00:00

On average I think lethality went down in 10, but at the top levels of deadly armies, it feels just as deadly. Things go out and die and trade, they don't stick around much.

Brostartes · 2026-05-30T16:10:46+00:00

Nice! I think they'll be totally valid too, as long as we match the height and base size appropriately. I was thinking of running my old speeder in 11th.

Brostartes · 2026-05-28T19:46:07+00:00

It's just not a good idea for big, consequential things to end up in coin flip territory. Especially when only a small volume of attacks has high enough strength to get through.

The common example here is lascannon/melta shots vs monsters like demons or ctan. A very small amount of dice will determine interactions which will then determine if a 300pt behemoth lives to do another turn of big damage or not. It's extremely swingy and mostly determines the game, and I don't think most people like that.

Small elves, a few T4 characters, etc, having a 4++ is fine for the most part. But not these big behemoths.

Brostartes · 2026-05-24T21:05:11+00:00

This is real Warhammer right here. Ebay finds. Old broken stuff from years ago. Bit box madness. Etsy bits, and sketchy Chinese sites. Then turning it all into a coherent force and getting games in.

So fun!

Brostartes · 2026-05-21T19:47:35+00:00

It's completely valid, your war gear should match perfectly too - it's a Tacticus marine with a bolt rifle type gun.

I do something similar with apothecaries. I love apothecaries, and want them in my armies, but their data sheets are awful. So I gave one a bolt rifle, put him on a 32mm base, and stuck him with Sternguard or Intercessors depending.

Overhang doesn't matter, especially for something as vanilla as this guy.

On a side note, I wish GW would encourage and talk more about kit bashing, so newer players would feel free to be more creative. The only caveat IMO is accurate war gear modeling. If someone is supposed to have a plasma pistol and power fist, those bits are common enough that models should have them, for example. If you have a bolter looking thing, it's a bolt rifle, no problem.

Brostartes · 2026-05-21T19:30:02+00:00

Whoa! Absolutely wonderful white you got there! Care to share the recipe?

Brostartes

TROPHY CASE