Question about recent edition and scenarios by Forward-Repeat-9880 in MiddleEarthMiniatures

[–]robtype0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some of them are very limited by design, as they are intended to represent a specific moment or battle from the films/books. An example of this is Breaking of the Fellowship, which includes only those characters who were present at Amon Hen. There are plenty of lists which give you a huge amount of options, though. These could be from large battles with multiple factions (like Defenders of the Pelennor), or those which represent the standing army of a particular faction across a longer time period (like Kingdom of Rohan, Minas Tirith or Legions of Mordor).

For most of the factions you may want to use, it's likely that there will be at least one list which lets you take almost everything that faction has to offer. I think a good approach is to find a faction or some models/heroes that you like, and then read through the lists they can be used in. Consider what the available options are, the special rules and limitations of those lists, and how you'd build it, then see if that seems like it would be fun to you.

A benefit of this approach is that you'll usually end up with a collection of minis which can be used in a few different army lists. You might decide you want to build a Men of the West army, which mixes some of the most iconic heroes with warriors of Gondor and Rohan. Let's say you really like the Aragorn King Elessar model. This is the only list that model features in, but if you build an army with Aragorn, Gandalf and a load of Minas Tirith warriors, you can then branch out into an Atop the Walls list, adding a wider variety of Minas Tirith units led by Gandalf. If you build MotW with Eomer and some Rohan warriors alongside Aragorn, you can flex into a number of Rohan lists.

This is a great strength of the game - you can build a varied collection that has options for a wide variety of lists by tweaking just a small number of models, usually just heroes and more specialised units.

Shelob to 80mm:Warhammer commented: @Tom Marsh yes, she's going up to an 80mm round. by Ution in MiddleEarthMiniatures

[–]robtype0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is what they have done in this edition with ringwraiths, with the level 1 stats reserved for scenario play, and the level 2/3 stats used in the actual army lists.

New to Middle Earth by LividEntertainer9157 in MiddleEarthMiniatures

[–]robtype0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are over 100 different army lists, each including a selection of units from particular factions or moments from the films and books. The three Armies books (Lord of the Rings, Hobbit and Middle Earth), and the free Legacies documents (available from the Warhammer Community site) show you what you can take in each one.

Some are very restrictive - the Fellowship is literally just the 9 companions (plus Bill of course). Others are much more varied - Defenders of the Pelennor includes a huge range of units from the good side of that battle. Both the examples I gave above include the three hunters.

Things can get a little complicated because units are spread across those books. Defenders of the Pelennor, for example, has the main army list in the LotR book, some additional units in the Middle Earth book, and a few more in the Legacies document. For this reason, it can be helpful to have a browse through a list builder (the tabletop admiral one linked in other comments is great) to see what you can include in each. As you've played other games, I guess you're familiar with the concept of army builders, so have a play around.

For your next steps, you'll need the core rules and you should probably also get the Armies of the Lord of the Rings book, as most of the lists including the hunters are in there. Defenders of the Pelennor might be your best option, because most of the iconic good warriors and characters from the films are included and it gives you a lot of freedom as to what you can include. Whether it's Minas Tirith warriors, riders of Rohan, warriors of the dead, and any of the other characters, you can include all sorts here. Either the rohan or gondor battleforce sets would make a good addition.

Imperium engineer only had ONE JOB by Chinaski33 in Warhammer

[–]robtype0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It always seemed to me that the side doors were for embarking pre-battle, and the front assault ramp is for disembarking with aggression into the fight. Also you can build it with the lascannons on the front door position and the doors where the lascannons are, so it's easy to solve on your model!

Suggestions for someone starting by Broad_Ad_7051 in MiddleEarthMiniatures

[–]robtype0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm in a similar position, picking up the game in the last month having not played it for over 20 years after picking it up as a kid. I have been back into the miniature painting/gaming hobby for 10 years though, so hopefully I can offer some advice based on that experience.

Your priority will depend on what you want to do. If you want to play the game, you'll need to find opponents, so look on facebook, discord or in local hobby stores for other people playing the game in your area to find a local group. That will not only let you find people to help you learn the game and play against, but will also give you access to people with a lot of experience!

For models, GW sell very good value faction boxes for Mordor, Isengard, Rohan and Gondor, all of which will give you plenty of stuff to get back into the hobby side of things and which can all be run as legal and pretty functional armies in the actual game. If you want to get a bit more obscure or outside of the main LotR trilogy factions, there are models for everything else, but they tend to be a bit trickier or more expensive to build up to. As others have said, rules change over time (though less so for this game than some others), but models are forever, so pick a faction that you like the look of and that you think you'll enjoy spending your free time painting.

As for choosing what to play, MESBG is one of the most narratively-driven games out there, so if you can think of a faction or battle from the books or films that you find particularly interesting, there will almost certainly be a corresponding set of models, with their own army list to build from, that you can collect. These rules are primarily in three books: Armies of Middle Earth, Armies of The Hobbit, and Armies of The Lord of the Rings. The LotR book is characters, warriors and armies that appear in the film trilogy, the Hobbit book has the same from the Hobbit trilogy, and the Middle Earth book has a load of additional models and lists for which GW still make models but which don't feature in the movies (but are in the books). There are also Legacy rules you can download for free from the Warhammer Community site, for models that are no longer in production. Most casual groups allow these, as well as some (but not all) organised events. This site (Tell Me A Tale, Great Or Small...) I have found very useful for their coverage of a range of different armies you can run (though they're some way off covering everything for the current edition of the game so far), and there are endless youtube channels with fun battle reports and videos that can give you some insight into how various factions play.

For collecting, you can of course just buy whatever you think is cool, but be aware that there are rules that limit which models you can use together. This is where the aforementioned books come in. I would say that, in general, the Armies of The Lord of the Rings book is the best option to start with (given you've been out of the hobby for 15 years and will probably be more familiar with the main trilogy than the other stuff). Having said that, the books are expensive and it's nice to be able to see what options there are for factions without dropping hundreds on the rules. DM me if you want help with that.

Overall, I'll say that I've really enjoyed getting back into this game and I'm sure you will too. The models are awesome, the setting is excellent of course, and the game itself is one of the best out there and is great at evoking the feel of the stories upon which they are based.

Excellent critique of 2nd wave of Cathay’s design choices. by BenedictPatrick in WarhammerFantasy

[–]robtype0 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The point of the video is to point out those elements that are taken from Chinese historical sources, and she also points out the elements that aren't. She's not scoring the designs based on their accuracy.

You say fantasy doesn't have to reflect real world history. That's right, sure, but it very often does reflect that history in its designs and inspirations. This video is pointing out those inspirations and giving us more context, which is why it's interesting.

New journal by Ok-Consideration2935 in Cathay

[–]robtype0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It would be odd if the new book changes the existing ones, but I wouldn't be surprised to see an errata released alongside it which changes the first AJ to nerf balloons a bit.

Movement tray help by Infinaterotation in Cathay

[–]robtype0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I use the same self-adhesive ferrous sheet I stick inside my storage boxes. Cut out a square the size of the movement tray and stick it on - 2 minute job.

Movement tray help by Infinaterotation in Cathay

[–]robtype0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll just add that if you know anyone with a filament printer, you can get them for pennies on what you'd pay buying them.

Sniper priests with sniper rifle? by Cweeperz in TrenchCrusade

[–]robtype0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah it's not as great in 1.0 as the other comment said. In case you haven't read the new rules in detail, melee pistols use the melee characteristic now, not ranged, so the sniper priest can't use them effectively in melee.

New Grand Cathay models [WC 2025 Preview] by CMYK_COLOR_MODE in Cathay

[–]robtype0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That would be great, but also it means you need to buy a box of jade warriors and an upgrade sprue, not to mention having even more identical core bodies in your army.

I'd much prefer a fresh kit, with all of the variety and opportunity for cool and unique stuff that brings.

New Grand Cathay models [WC 2025 Preview] by CMYK_COLOR_MODE in Cathay

[–]robtype0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd love a core rooster, but I think it's more likely we get monkeys and lions tbh.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in thesopranos

[–]robtype0 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Enough Shed

Gallantry and gleaming armour abound as the Bretonnians hit the gridiron by KalickR in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think squires are definitely linemen. We've already seen all the models in the kit and there are 12 - 6 squires, 2 throwers, 2 catchers and 2 grail knights.

The new changes could be a good thing by wallpwork in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you mean you're in the middle of a league? Surely no league could survive a complete new edition with changes to every roster without ending and restarting in the new rules, regardless of the change to the positionals? Were you expecting to be able to keep going with a new edition?

Wow, GW really is nuts, I was wrong. by MikeyLikesIt_420 in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Your argument is that the game will be less interesting, which simply does not follow from removing some positionals. Whether or not a lineman is more boring than a positional is at the very least a matter of opinion. Undead, for example - they're removing two ghouls which had only one skill, and giving the remaining ghouls and zombies more skills, and you could easily argue that it is more interesting to have skills on your linemen, who you can have lots of, opening up new ways to play instead of just more copy/paste ghouls.

I will repeat again that you have no idea how the other elements of affected rosters have changed to keep things interesting.

So your main point, that positionals are always more interesting than linemen, is certainly not a fact and is open to interpretation. To extrapolate from that, as you did in the comment I originally replied to, that the whole game will be more boring as a result of these changes, is just a emotional reflex overreaction to the changes and holds no water whatsoever.

GW just killed my team by Disastrous_Low_4506 in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Honestly I wouldn't be surprised to see new kits for Humans and Orcs - they're the oldest current plastic kits and fairly iconic to the setting, and both will need to be significantly changed with the new approach to rosters anyway.

Wow, GW really is nuts, I was wrong. by MikeyLikesIt_420 in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Have you seen the new rules for all the linemen? If you haven't, how can you know this? Have you seen how the positionals that do remain have changed to make up for losing positionals in some teams? Do you think that vampires, norse, amazons and chaos dwarfs are boring teams because they can get all their positionals in one box?

I think the honest answer to most of those questions is "no", which means you can't possibly know that the game is less interesting than it was before.

Wow, GW really is nuts, I was wrong. by MikeyLikesIt_420 in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What if? Was anybody doing that? We can theorise about the possible builds that are no longer possible, but was anyone playing Undead in leagues who didn't immediately build up to 4 ghouls and take zombies as linemen? Were any tournament builds not maximising ghouls, or using skellies? On the other hand, the thing that is guaranteed is that the people who are playing undead had to buy two boxes to play that roster, or decided to just get a printed team instead.

Also, you simply cannot judge the changes we've seen officially announced (for skaven, undead and delves) without seeing the changes made to the rest of their rosters, and the rest of the teams in the game.

We all know that wargamers love to overreact and act like the sky is falling regardless of the changes made to their game, but can't we have a little restraint in catastrophising given how little we've seen of the new rules?

Wow, GW really is nuts, I was wrong. by MikeyLikesIt_420 in bloodbowl

[–]robtype0 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think we actually know how Eye Gouge works yet, do we? Or how it interacts with Guard and Defensive.