Snaggas and the future of 40k

[Xenith]

Ok, so a while ago when I first came back to the forums I asked if 40k was getting the AoS treatment but in less severe or drastic way.

A lot of people said no and gave their reasoning, I was not convinced.

The new orks, the beast snaggas to me look very much like the orrucks of AoS from the first model shown, and from the ork art. That one boss seems very reminiscent of the orruck megaboss to me.

 

 

Range refreshes, and drastic lore changes, it stills seems to me 40k is getting a more gradual AoS treatment to avoid the pitfalls they made with AoS.

 

Please can you elaborate exactly what you mean by "the AoS treatment" is, and then what a less drastic version of that is?

 

As you can see from the thread, there is divergence of opinion, as people interpret this differently, which you then disagree with. So if we can nail down that you think AoS ification means, we have a place to start.

 

New models? Blown up setting? IP friendly names?

[Closet Skeleton]

People have been using AoS Orks in 40k armies pretty much since they came out. The AoS shaman is really popular with 40k players, I haven't seen a official Weird Boy used for all of 8th ed.

 

Some AoS stuff is new and wacky but a lot of it is straight from older Warhammer fantasy art. Old art is a massive influence on the 'new' direction some 40k models are taking. The main stylistic chance seems more driven by CAD and plastic vs sculpting clay and white metal than by aesthetic intentions.

 

 

I wouldn't say that a range refresh ever occurred until 8th Ed.
Updating a few sculpts here and there, introducing new units here and there, but I'd say the closest thing to a range refresh that's occurred before 8th maybe the introduction of the 3rd ed marine sculpts, but again that seems like simply updating sculpts...and even that wasn't something that happened for every army until now...dark Eldar went what? 15+ years with the exact same models and units?

 

 

3rd ed Orks and Tyranids were complete Range refreshes apart from the Ork vehicles. 4th ed tyranids were pretty much a second refresh in spite of keeping the plastics from 3rd ed.

 

 

They aren’t interested in redoing old kits as they’ve said several times on Twitch.

 

They are redoing old kits though, just not in any rush. The latest bunch of Aos undead reveals are all old units, some previously not in plastic, zombies which have an ancient plastic kit and skeleton warriors which have had numerous plastic kits going back to the 80s.

 

 

Things like the Lord Discordant, void dragon, the triumph give me a very AoS vibe. Then there’s things like the sanctum which is a faction terrain piece like armies in AoS have.

The Triumph looks like something you'd see in classic black and white codex art and there's only a few similar concepts to in in AoS that came out at a similar time. The Lord Discordant is the exact same aesthetics as the other post Defiler plastic daemon engines with an admech cloak on the rider, he's a fantasy unit in that he's cavalry but that's always been part of 40k chaos and his mount is different in that its not a straight port of a fantasy daemon mount. The Void Dragon is AoS in that having giant god models on the table top is common in AoS but Necrons have been doing that for a while as well.

Edited March 22, 2021 by Closet Skeleton

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

Things like the Lord Discordant, void dragon, the triumph give me a very AoS vibe. Then there’s things like the sanctum which is a faction terrain piece like armies in AoS have.

The Triumph looks like something you'd see in classic black and white codex art and there's only a few similar concepts to in in AoS that came out at a similar time. The Lord Discordant is the exact same aesthetics as the other post Defiler plastic daemon engines with an admech cloak on the rider, he's a fantasy unit in that he's cavalry but that's always been part of 40k chaos and his mount is different in that its not a straight port of a fantasy daemon mount. The Void Dragon is AoS in that having giant god models on the table top is common in AoS but Necrons have been doing that for a while as well.

That’s my point though, the triumph is the first diorama type model released for 40k and it came after and very close in time to the bonereapers one. That adds to the feeling that one system is copying or getting similar to the other one. Necrons have definitely had the god models for a while but there’s a significant step change in the models available to represent the dragon compared to the nightbringer for example. The newer model is much closer to what you’d see in AoS.

 

Now all of this could be purely coincidence or the inevitable result of sculpting technology improving but my main point is that because the stuff that is similar in 40k tends to follow AFTER the stuff in AoS is released it leads to this feeling that the two systems are getting similar and because the AoS stuff tends to be first it leads to this idea that 40k is being AoS-Ified, if it was 40k first some AoS forum would be saying their game was becoming 40k-ified.

[Halandaar]

Necrons have definitely had the god models for a while but there’s a significant step change in the models available to represent the dragon compared to the nightbringer for example. The newer model is much closer to what you’d see in AoS.

Now all of this could be purely coincidence or the inevitable result of sculpting technology improving 

 

It very obviously is. The design concept of hovering around in swirly energy is by no means new and certainly not pioneered by AoS models. It's there on the Deceiver, a model that is over 10 years old at this point, although very obviously limited by the production capabilities of the time. The Void Dragon is a logical evolution of the design of the Transcendent C'tan from the Tesseract Vault, which pre-dates Age of Sigmar's entire existence by 2 years. 

 

my main point is that because the stuff that is similar in 40k tends to follow AFTER the stuff in AoS is released it leads to this feeling that the two systems are getting similar and because the AoS stuff tends to be first it leads to this idea that 40k is being AoS-Ified, if it was 40k first some AoS forum would be saying their game was becoming 40k-ified.

 

This is the kind of thing I find a bit baffling really, given that AoS exists purely as an effort to reboot fantasy in the image (and profitability) of 40k. They scrapped the massed-rank square blocks of infantry from WFB and replaced it with 40k's round bases and unit coherency. Stormcast Eternals were conceived as a means of translating the popularity of Space Marines in to fantasy. These are just two examples, but "it's becoming 40k-ified" is exactly what was being said about Fantasy becoming Age of Sigmar.

 

The irony of the "Sigmarines" bit is that Space Marines themselves were conceived as a way of translating the popularity of Chaos Warriors in to Sci-Fi, because 40k started it's life as a space-faring spin-off of Warhammer Fantasy, replete with Beastmen, Dwarves, Slann and Ratmen. Remember when psychic disciplines, cards and casting rolls were re-introduced in 40k 6th Edition? That was a straight rip of Fantasy Battle's Winds of Magic system. 8th Edition's AP system might look to some people like a clone of AoS' rend system, but that in turn is derived from the way armour save modifiers worked in 40k 2nd. 

 

Aside from the rules, there's links in the lore; the Eldar of 40k and Elves of the Old World (and to some extent the Mortal Realms) share the same gods. The Orcs of Warhammer Fantasy worship Gork and Mork. The Orks of 40k worship Gork and Mork. The Orruks of the Mortal Realms worship Gorkamorka. What else is Gorkamorka? A planet in 40k, populated by... Orks. There's even the blatant case of the Chaos Daemons where the models and even named characters appeared in all three systems! With that already being the norm it seems not only plausible but actually inevitable that there are other visual cues shared between systems.

 

There has always been a cyclical design relationship between Warhammer's Sci-Fi and Fantasy cousins going right back to the beginning, i can't understand why or how people see them in absolute vacuums from each other. 

Edited March 22, 2021 by Halandaar

[Marshal Loss]

If 40k getting the AoS treatment gets me my Emperor's Children then I'm all for it

 

[Urauloth]

You don't see a lot of Middle-earth these days, but back when it was a popular system GW would include it in the cycle of death and rebirth of rules and concepts. It inherited a rework of Mordheim's specific weapon rules, for example, and gave rise to Heroic Intervention. War of the Ring was a testbed for several of WHFB 8E's mechanics. Silver Tower's fate dice ended up as a core mechanic for Tzeentch armies in AoS. GW game design is very fluid. "X is getting Y-ified?!" is a good clickbait line for youtube videos, but not really a realistic assessment of the state of GW tabletop games at any given time.

[Matteus]

As someone who had 40k orks as a kid where I spent forever saving up for a squiggoth (instead of just more trukks), I would love to go back to my less techy ork army with a bunch of these new cavalry.

[Rik Lightstar]

I think this is the upshot of both the miniatures, background and rules studios becoming more structured and coordinated.

 

If something works well from one project they'll refine it and build upon it. Things that hit a less successful note will be dropped.

 

Big centrepiece models have ALWAYS been a thing in 40K & WFB the only changes are how big they can be and how many of them there can be.

 

Likewise there have been Special Characters that represent the "Supreme Leaders" of factions for an incredibly long time. They just now have the ability to do justice to the ones they wouldn't touch before.

 

Greater Daemons are a good way to track what the studio are capable of, look back at the original metal ones that weren't much bigger than a Centurion and compare them to the plastic ones today.

 

For rules, the Detachments of 7th Ed 40k were a good idea that didn't work quite right, they tweaked it for AoS with Warscroll Battalions which had a points cost associated with the bonuses, and now the 40k Armies of Renown are the subsequent progression.

 

It's not one system becoming more like the other, it's both systems coming more in line with a clear design "ethos" both from a rules and model perspective. They justifiably want all of their output to be "recognisably GW".

 

Rik

[firestorm40k]

Aren't Beast Snaggas just a new* name for Feral Orks? Or have I missed something?

 

* new, and more easily copyrighted :lol:

[Xenith]

 

Big centrepiece models have ALWAYS been a thing in 40K & WFB the only changes are how big they can be and how many of them there can be.

 

Yea, people seem to so easily forget about Land Raiders. And titans. I guess as everything else got bigger, these once centrepiece models lost their lustre. I think what we're really seeing, in both systems, is model making technology allowing bigger and more detailed models than before, so while a 4" high greater daemon used to be one of the largest models available for fantasy/40k, and would be an imposing centrepiece all the way up to 5th ed, things like knights and the normal plastic giant/gargant exist. What we're seeing is a gradual upscaling. 

[Lexington]

Likewise there have been Special Characters that represent the "Supreme Leaders" of factions for an incredibly long time. They just now have the ability to do justice to the ones they wouldn't touch before.

 

I think it's a bit more than that. The background's really had some changes to give individual factions singular leaders (with accompanying models, of course). Some of these are existing "exemplar" characters - Ghazghkull, fr'ex, has gone from being a very powerful and dangerous Warlord, and the face of Orks since forever, to being an inheritor of "The Beast" in title and stature, with a WAAAGH! that's become truly galactic in scope, making him more or less the Orks' racial commander. Then you have the returning Traitor Primarchs, each breaking off into their own Legion Codexes where they are the undeniable Big Cheese, Guilliman giving the Imperium as a whole a "face character" it's never had before, and most recently, the Silent King has come back to reclaim Necron-dom.

 

I don't think there's anything particularly sinister, here - it's just good marketing, and the background for 40K and Fantasy is now much more firmly bound to marketing than it was in the past. It's very similar to how Privateer Press ended up structuring the Iron Kingdoms, and GW's been using the same playbook as Privateer for a while now for quite a few things.

 

Aren't Beast Snaggas just a new* name for Feral Orks? Or have I missed something?

 

Far as I can tell, you're right on the money. Really glad I wrote some feral equivalents into my Ork army's background years ago as an excuse to use WHFB Stonehorns as Squiggoths. Thanks for validating my past choices, GW! 

Edited March 22, 2021 by Lexington

[Halandaar]

Yea, people seem to so easily forget about Land Raiders. And titans. I guess as everything else got bigger, these once centrepiece models lost their lustre. I think what we're really seeing, in both systems, is model making technology allowing bigger and more detailed models than before, so while a 4" high greater daemon used to be one of the largest models available for fantasy/40k, and would be an imposing centrepiece all the way up to 5th ed, things like knights and the normal plastic giant/gargant exist. What we're seeing is a gradual upscaling. 

 

Absolutely this. And the more I think on it, the more absolutely bonkers it seems to me that people are claiming big centrepiece kits is an AoS thing that's bleeding in to 40k, as if Warhammer Fantasy didn't have Dragons and Giants, and 40k didn't have Dreadknights, Riptides, Wraithknights, Stompas, Baneblades (not to mention Forgeworld Greater Daemons and Superheavies) long before AoS was so much as a twinkle in GW's eye.

[WrathOfTheLion]

I like the big centerpiece kits. I think it's great that there's something like Teclis for Elves, and now as well Guilliman or Mortarion for Ultramarines and Death Guard in Warhammer 40,000.

 

As far as a visual aesthetic for a force, having that scale from more plain infantry, to more blinged up veterans, to characters, up to a final centerpiece is visually pleasing.

Edited March 22, 2021 by WrathOfTheLion

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

People have been using AoS Orks in 40k armies pretty much since they came out. The AoS shaman is really popular with 40k players, I haven't seen a official Weird Boy used for all of 8th ed.

 

Some AoS stuff is new and wacky but a lot of it is straight from older Warhammer fantasy art. Old art is a massive influence on the 'new' direction some 40k models are taking. The main stylistic chance seems more driven by CAD and plastic vs sculpting clay and white metal than by aesthetic intentions.

 

 

I wouldn't say that a range refresh ever occurred until 8th Ed.

Updating a few sculpts here and there, introducing new units here and there, but I'd say the closest thing to a range refresh that's occurred before 8th maybe the introduction of the 3rd ed marine sculpts, but again that seems like simply updating sculpts...and even that wasn't something that happened for every army until now...dark Eldar went what? 15+ years with the exact same models and units?

 

 

3rd ed Orks and Tyranids were complete Range refreshes apart from the Ork vehicles. 4th ed tyranids were pretty much a second refresh in spite of keeping the plastics from 3rd ed.

 

They aren’t interested in redoing old kits as they’ve said several times on Twitch.

They are redoing old kits though, just not in any rush. The latest bunch of Aos undead reveals are all old units, some previously not in plastic, zombies which have an ancient plastic kit and skeleton warriors which have had numerous plastic kits going back to the 80s.

 

Things like the Lord Discordant, void dragon, the triumph give me a very AoS vibe. Then there’s things like the sanctum which is a faction terrain piece like armies in AoS have.

The Triumph looks like something you'd see in classic black and white codex art and there's only a few similar concepts to in in AoS that came out at a similar time. The Lord Discordant is the exact same aesthetics as the other post Defiler plastic daemon engines with an admech cloak on the rider, he's a fantasy unit in that he's cavalry but that's always been part of 40k chaos and his mount is different in that its not a straight port of a fantasy daemon mount. The Void Dragon is AoS in that having giant god models on the table top is common in AoS but Necrons have been doing that for a while as well.

AoS treatment

Massive changes to the lore setting and the game rules, combined with widespread range refreshes/reworks.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I like the big centerpiece kits. I think it's great that there's something like Teclis for Elves, and now as well Guilliman or Mortarion for Ultramarines and Death Guard in Warhammer 40,000.

 

As far as a visual aesthetic for a force, having that scale from more plain infantry, to more blinged up veterans, to characters, up to a final centerpiece is visually pleasing.

bringing primarchs back imho opinion was a double edged sword. Sure it's cool but now some (chaos)marine armies have the potential to be much more powerful than others with no good counter to them....

 

Ultramarine scan counter mortarion with girlyman and vice versa.

How does a blood Angels player or imperial fist player come up with an easy counter? Bring back Rogal Dorn? Ok works for IF, but what about BA? Rewrite 30 year old lore so sanguinius can come back as well?

 

Primarchs in 40k was a trap imho.

Powerful center piece units could have been done in a way that all factions and sub factions could benefit from equally, while still being consistent with lore

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

Yea, people seem to so easily forget about Land Raiders. And titans. I guess as everything else got bigger, these once centrepiece models lost their lustre. I think what we're really seeing, in both systems, is model making technology allowing bigger and more detailed models than before, so while a 4" high greater daemon used to be one of the largest models available for fantasy/40k, and would be an imposing centrepiece all the way up to 5th ed, things like knights and the normal plastic giant/gargant exist. What we're seeing is a gradual upscaling.

Absolutely this. And the more I think on it, the more absolutely bonkers it seems to me that people are claiming big centrepiece kits is an AoS thing that's bleeding in to 40k, as if Warhammer Fantasy didn't have Dragons and Giants, and 40k didn't have Dreadknights, Riptides, Wraithknights, Stompas, Baneblades (not to mention Forgeworld Greater Daemons and Superheavies) long before AoS was so much as a twinkle in GW's eye.

I don’t think it’s so much the fact that big centre piece models are bleeding into 40k as they have been for a while. But look at the models you listed yourself. Dragons and giants versus baneblades, stompas and knights. Those are really really different in their design aesthetic. They each clearly belong in their respective universes. The comments about bleeding in are more to do with the similar aesthetic of a lot of the bigger models. A lot of the characters in both games are floating in the air, held aloft by curling parchment, smoke, banners or magical energy. Or the diorama aspect of them renders them similar. The bigger centrepiece models share a lot more design similarities now than they used to.

 

I’m not saying either universe is bleeding into the other or any influence is one way or good or bad. But I genuinely think the newer technology has led to some design similarities in both ranges that weren’t there before and is part of the reason people might think the games are becoming “-ified” one way or the other.

[Rik Lightstar]

 

 

Likewise there have been Special Characters that represent the "Supreme Leaders" of factions for an incredibly long time. They just now have the ability to do justice to the ones they wouldn't touch before.

I think it's a bit more than that. The background's really had some changes to give individual factions singular leaders (with accompanying models, of course). Some of these are existing "exemplar" characters - Ghazghkull, fr'ex, has gone from being a very powerful and dangerous Warlord, and the face of Orks since forever, to being an inheritor of "The Beast" in title and stature, with a WAAAGH! that's become truly galactic in scope, making him more or less the Orks' racial commander. Then you have the returning Traitor Primarchs, each breaking off into their own Legion Codexes where they are the undeniable Big Cheese, Guilliman giving the Imperium as a whole a "face character" it's never had before, and most recently, the Silent King has come back to reclaim Necron-dom.

 

I don't think there's anything particularly sinister, here - it's just good marketing, and the background for 40K and Fantasy is now much more firmly bound to marketing than it was in the past. It's very similar to how Privateer Press ended up structuring the Iron Kingdoms, and GW's been using the same playbook as Privateer for a while now for quite a few things.

Guilliman and The Silent King are the ones here that represent bigger changes, but they were hinted at for a looooooong time in the background.

 

The Daemon Primarchs have always been an active presence in 40k background, but it's only recently that the game as a whole has been in a place where they wouldn't be insanely game breaking, Greater Daemons have gradually been dialled up to stay in step with other large kits.

 

Ghazkull was flagged as the biggest Ork threat for a long time and I rather like him being a character that has grown with the scale of the game from his first appearance as just a name for a regular 1st Ed Warboss through to today.

 

Rik

[Joe]

I mean, the easy solution to Primarch's in 40k was to restrict them above a certain points threshold (say, 3000 - so Apocalypse) and call it a day. There's absolutely no need for every miniature with rules to be usable in Matched Play.

[Warhead01]

 

I like the big centerpiece kits. I think it's great that there's something like Teclis for Elves, and now as well Guilliman or Mortarion for Ultramarines and Death Guard in Warhammer 40,000.

 

As far as a visual aesthetic for a force, having that scale from more plain infantry, to more blinged up veterans, to characters, up to a final centerpiece is visually pleasing.

bringing primarchs back imho opinion was a double edged sword. Sure it's cool but now some (chaos)marine armies have the potential to be much more powerful than others with no good counter to them....

 

Ultramarine scan counter mortarion with girlyman and vice versa.

How does a blood Angels player or imperial fist player come up with an easy counter? Bring back Rogal Dorn? Ok works for IF, but what about BA? Rewrite 30 year old lore so sanguinius can come back as well?

 

Primarchs in 40k was a trap imho.

Powerful center piece units could have been done in a way that all factions and sub factions could benefit from equally, while still being consistent with lore

 

It sounds like your assuming each army needs it's big model, like a Primarch or equivalent, to counter another.  I don't think that's really the case and as such doesn't automatically mean GW will bring any dead Primarch back to life erasing lore. I do think GW wishes they has a way around that so they could put them on the market to sell more large expensive models. 

at one time having the big centerpiece models was a goal more than a must have. I am not convinced they are even a must have outside of some circles of matched play.  On a side not if I remember every chapter can field Guilliman, not just the Ultramarines. 

 

 

Back on the snaggas and all thing orkish...can we get the stompa fixed and maybe even playable this edition GW?  Asking for a friend. 

[Doghouse]

 

 

Yes, I just said that they are doing that to the entire company. It doesn't mean Snaggas are proof 40k is turning into AoS.

 

I'm sorry but everyone had this conversation four years ago and moved on, the sky is still not falling even after another edition has been added.

...no one said the sky was falling...

 

 

I was referring to the conversations based on this very topic four years ago when people were acting like it was and were genuinely concerned what was coming with 8th after AoS had been released. So yeah...people were acting like the sky was falling...

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

 

 

I like the big centerpiece kits. I think it's great that there's something like Teclis for Elves, and now as well Guilliman or Mortarion for Ultramarines and Death Guard in Warhammer 40,000.

 

As far as a visual aesthetic for a force, having that scale from more plain infantry, to more blinged up veterans, to characters, up to a final centerpiece is visually pleasing.

bringing primarchs back imho opinion was a double edged sword. Sure it's cool but now some (chaos)marine armies have the potential to be much more powerful than others with no good counter to them....

 

Ultramarine scan counter mortarion with girlyman and vice versa.

How does a blood Angels player or imperial fist player come up with an easy counter? Bring back Rogal Dorn? Ok works for IF, but what about BA? Rewrite 30 year old lore so sanguinius can come back as well?

 

Primarchs in 40k was a trap imho.

Powerful center piece units could have been done in a way that all factions and sub factions could benefit from equally, while still being consistent with lore

 

It sounds like your assuming each army needs it's big model, like a Primarch or equivalent, to counter another.  I don't think that's really the case and as such doesn't automatically mean GW will bring any dead Primarch back to life erasing lore. I do think GW wishes they has a way around that so they could put them on the market to sell more large expensive models. 

at one time having the big centerpiece models was a goal more than a must have. I am not convinced they are even a must have outside of some circles of matched play.  On a side not if I remember every chapter can field Guilliman, not just the Ultramarines. 

 

 

Back on the snaggas and all thing orkish...can we get the stompa fixed and maybe even playable this edition GW?  Asking for a friend. 

 

a primarch ins't a necessity to counter a primarch, but it's a helluva lot easier, but regardless it creates armies that are 'haves' and 'have nots' in that regard, and imo will alienate players at some level who don't get a primarch for their army.

sure even if every chapter can field him(not sure about that since he's not in the main codex, and even then supplemental codexes with named characters can only be used by their chapter, and not any other successor chapter), but his special rules only effect ultramarines last i heard even if he can be fielded, so now a BA player is paying a premium in points/power to field a primarch that doesn't syngergize with their army at all in any way.

I mean, the easy solution to Primarch's in 40k was to restrict them above a certain points threshold (say, 3000 - so Apocalypse) and call it a day. There's absolutely no need for every miniature with rules to be usable in Matched Play.

how is that solution easy for factions or subfactions who have dead primarchs?

[WrathOfTheLion]

Primarchs aren't the point there, there are other examples like the Silent King and the Triumph of Saint Katherine, I just didn't want to enumerate all of them.

 

Having those centerpiece models is visually appealing, they make for an excellent composition.

[N1SB]

Thanks to Brother Lensoven for starting this thread and everyone who replied.  I've been, like, getting all ontological on the nature of Warhammer recently, too.  This conversation really refined my thinking, especially around this point:

 

 

This is the kind of thing I find a bit baffling really, given that AoS exists purely as an effort to reboot fantasy in the image (and profitability) of 40k. They scrapped the massed-rank square blocks of infantry from WFB and replaced it with 40k's round bases and unit coherency. Stormcast Eternals were conceived as a means of translating the popularity of Space Marines in to fantasy. These are just two examples, but "it's becoming 40k-ified" is exactly what was being said about Fantasy becoming Age of Sigmar.

 

I now see.  40k isn't getting AoS'd.  Warhammer Fantasy got 40k'd, and the result of that was AoS.  I'm going to ask Fantasy players about this, thanks for the pointer.

 

 

+++ But here's what I've been thinking +++

 

 

Honestly, even before this thread, I've been noticing a different trend.

 

40k is actually getting 30k'd...but maybe not doing it as well.

 

I love what the Black Library then Forge World did with 30k/HH/AoD.  The episodic novels ("I was there the day Horus slew the Emperor") and the Black Books tying together to form an ongoing narrative.  They start offed with a few stories then BANG, the Imperium split in half with Istvaan V, you want more Marines so they gave you all sorts of different new Marines.  Primarch on Primarch action!  You're motivated to keep up with the content.

 

I kinda like what GW is doing with 40k ever since late 7th ed.  The episodic novels ("I was there the day the Imperium died") and then Warzone books tying together to form an ongoing narrative.  They started off with The Gathering Storm (and that really was a continuation of the old Eye of Terror campaign) then BANG, the Imperium split in half with the Great Rift, you want more Marines so they gave you all sorts of different new Primaris.  Primarch on Primarch action!  I'm kinda motivated to keep up with the content.

 

GW, as an entity, is the type of player who finds a unit that works, then will SPAM that unit until it stops working or it's bored of painting the same models all the time.  I'd say GW should be more innovative, but y'know what, I do the same thing.  Oh, and all companies kinda do the same thing, success begets sequelitis...I really should try something crazy like a Harlequin army or something.

[jaxom]

 

Please can you elaborate exactly what you mean by "the AoS treatment" is, and then what a less drastic version of that is?

 

To me this means moving forward with an eye towards stressing what is weird and unique compared to other lores/systems that have very similar concepts (orks, elves, super soldiers, undead, etc). AoS had more carte blanche to do that. 

 

Aren't Beast Snaggas just a new* name for Feral Orks? Or have I missed something?

 

* new, and more easily copyrighted 

 

More than that, they're stressing the unique aspect: squigs. Orcs (of various levels of feralness) ride wolves, worgs, wargs, and boars in a variety of places. Only GW has squigs and squigs are part of the weirdness. A race of mushroom people riding a race of mushroom mounts according to a tradition that is effectively the anti-Mechanicus (oh, I can guess how these were meant to be released); flesh is stronger than metal. Less holdover undertones of real-world cultures, just (relatively) pure sci-fi oddness. 

 

 

3rd ed Orks and Tyranids were complete Range refreshes apart from the Ork vehicles. 4th ed tyranids were pretty much a second refresh in spite of keeping the plastics from 3rd ed.

 

 

They aren’t interested in redoing old kits as they’ve said several times on Twitch.

 

They are redoing old kits though, just not in any rush. The latest bunch of Aos undead reveals are all old units, some previously not in plastic, zombies which have an ancient plastic kit and skeleton warriors which have had numerous plastic kits going back to the 80s.

 

Word. The tyranids are a great example of range refreshes as GW refocuses army aesthetics and new model making technology becomes available.

 

Plastic 2e and 3e warriors:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-T8GFiJqa6pk/Tzu86kiJ1sI/AAAAAAAABdQ/Vdm_TNTBUZY/s1600/warrior_Plastic_2.jpeg

 

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-CtAX0ZX8TME/Tzu9BuofZRI/AAAAAAAABeY/AcrtXLdK4io/s320/Plastic_Warriors.gif

 

Pewter 2e, 3e, and 4e Hive Tyrants

 

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lfMLtiPjy-I/Tzu83b0jKWI/AAAAAAAABcc/lhhwJjmt3Ks/s320/Tyrant.jpeg

 

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-VV_PyFTrfRw/Tzu88DgylrI/AAAAAAAABdo/xoUWM6vz7SU/s320/Hive_Tyrant.gif

 

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-6hOUO7UXVXE/Tzu9OetXICI/AAAAAAAABgs/2Vd6-t2y6_0/s320/tyrant.jpeg

 

3e pewter Old One Eye and 4e plastic Old One Eye

 

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-7Bk3G3TcomI/Tzu89WkivsI/AAAAAAAABd4/rcd0wBng_vo/s320/Old+One+Eye+-+OOE.jpeg

 

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-AdK4KN3n4kM/Tzu9NOJSLII/AAAAAAAABgE/saKn9fSFKY0/s400/carnifex_variant_3.jpeg

 

And I could do this sort of comparison for almost every tyranid unit that's existed from 2e! They've all had multiple iterations/refreshes as the tyranid visuals got tighter and the tech got better.

 

 

Now all of this could be purely coincidence or the inevitable result of sculpting technology improving but my main point is that because the stuff that is similar in 40k tends to follow AFTER the stuff in AoS is released it leads to this feeling that the two systems are getting similar and because the AoS stuff tends to be first it leads to this idea that 40k is being AoS-Ified, if it was 40k first some AoS forum would be saying their game was becoming 40k-ified.

 

Once AoS does something, the modelers are probably doing what every design/implementation group does when something new is shown off, and asking themselves, "Can you imagine X if we did Y to it? Look how happy the Khorne 40k daemon players are with the new End Times (soon to be AoS) plastic Greater Daemons; its a good thing the Wraithknight and Imperial Knight showed the viability of a model that size in plastic. Look at those Stormcast; they're big and dynamic in a way we could never have done for an entire range with pewter or 3-up design, imagine if we re-did Space Marines to that scale. Look at that new Archaon model; can you imagine a C'tan or a Primarch like that? "

 

I'm projecting here, but this is based off my own experiences in similar situations. The calls among players for "range refreshes" is the consumer side of the conversation: "Wow, look at that plastic Bloodthirster, I sure would buy a plastic Great Unclean One! Look at that new Fulgrim model... I mean the top half of Sigvald converted with the bottom half of snake-Morathi. Look at the proportions of the new Lumineth; too bad the Astra Militarum look like they all have encephalitus."

 

But why does it seem AoS is always one step ahead? 

 

AoS has the blank slate so can go bonkers experimenting with new models while 40k has to justify any changes because most of the factions are highly conservative. "Completely new tyranid look? They evolved. New Land Raider type for Black Templars? They're a bit weird as a chapter, no else uses it. Okay that was a super popular unit... it just got out of beta testing in the 41st millenia (4,000 years to get approval from the AdMech, etc) so now everyone can take it. New unit for Dark Angels? They were always there, but we never mentioned them because sssssssecrets. New units for Blood Angels and Space Wolves? They were also always there, but we never mentioned them because... just shut up, you know you like them and won't care what we say."

 

However, sometimes justification isn't needed as certain kits go over old ground. To reiterate what Closet Skeleton wrote earlier:

 

They are redoing old kits though, just not in any rush. The latest bunch of Aos undead reveals are all old units, some previously not in plastic, zombies which have an ancient plastic kit and skeleton warriors which have had numerous plastic kits going back to the 80s.

 

I think this bears some examination. A redo could mean different things. For example, the plastic Space Marine Tactical Squad 2e to 3e was a drastic change. Different scale, aesthetic details (while the overall aesthetic remained the same), customization (ditto for when Cadians went from pewter to plastic). The Tactical Squad redo in 2014 took advantage of new technology, but didn't change much; the largest being the amount of additional gubbins added to the sprue (more in line with post-4e releases). Specifically, it still wasn't a 1:1 recreation in plastic with new bits. Howling Banshees and Incubi are the closest I've seen to that and even they are noticeably different from their pewter/resin counterparts. The new zombie and skeleton kits? That's the sort of drastic change seen with 3e to 4e tyranids. I would say GW hasn't redone old kits in these cases, but make new kits clearly inspired by old kits and designs. It may be semantics, but it's important semantics for interpreting when an artist says they don't want to redo something they already did.

 

The big question (for me) is how the design studio differentiates between units important enough to warrant a re-tread compared to spending time on new, interesting, 40k-specific weirdness.

Edited March 22, 2021 by jaxom

[Marshal Rohr]

Ok sure, but then they need to be doing that for Guardians, Imperial Guard, Ork Boyz, Hormaguants/Termaguants, and Aspects and they need to have been done yesterday.