Leagues of Votann Initial 1st April 2022 reveal, new lore & articles discussion

[TheVoidDragon]

1 hour ago, Valkyrion said:

If you don't like something then you should be able to voice that dislike on the appropriate platform, which this is, and whilst there may have been a bit of circular argument going on, VoidDragon (I don't know how to link names) has been nothing but polite and articulate, and shrugged off a few condescending or patronising replies that he/she/they could've been baited by. 

The poster only has 57 posts, but I hope they aren't chased off by the ones with 2000+ posts, because volume on the internet is apparently better than content....

 

That's nice to hear, thanks. To be honest I had considered not posting because I've not been here long and most of my posts have been about the Leagues, but after seeing so many posts that come across as either seemingly disingenuous, misconstruing what's said or just being condescending, it does get a little disheartening.

I very much like Space Dwarfs, I think the artwork for the Leagues has been great and full of atmosphere, I like their lore and the general idea, there are just some aspects of them I feel could be done better that I wanted to discuss. To then have it get framed as if it's wrong just to criticize that then comes across stiffing opinions and wanting a positive echo chamber.

Edit: See post below. Apparently I'm a "hater" for not liking everything about them.

I like the Leagues. That's why i'm not entirely positive about every aspect of them and want them to be the best they can be.

Anyway though, as for Palaquins....makes me wonder what sort of thing they could do for a big centerpiece character. I get the impression we might get some sort of Hero Ironkin based on one of the articles mentioning sometimes they lead.

Edited July 6, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

45 minutes ago, Valkyrion said:

It's an internet thing in general, not exclusive to this wonderful forum, that criticism must mean hate must mean toxic must mean negativity must mean boycotting must mean whatever....

If you don't like something then you should be able to voice that dislike on the appropriate platform, which this is, and whilst there may have been a bit of circular argument going on, VoidDragon (I don't know how to link names) has been nothing but polite and articulate, and shrugged off a few condescending or patronising replies that he/she/they could've been baited by. 

The poster only has 57 posts, but I hope they aren't chased off by the ones with 2000+ posts, because volume on the internet is apparently better than content....

 

Anyway, we've stopped talking about the main thing, so to get back on track, there's not enough palanquins in 40k. The squats were a perfect faction to reintroduce the palanquin with a God Level dwarf, but twas not to be.  Maybe Epidemius, one can hope. 
 

no one is saying people can't voice displeasure, but the haters have been arguing about how bad or undwarfy they are for at least 2 pages now. 
there's no votann section like the other factions have here, so this is essentially that section for now. 

i don't like what GW did with a lot of the dark eldar units in their refresh, but i'm not going into that section and complaining about it for pages and pages. why? because it's completely irrelevant and doesn't add anything to the discussion about the faction.
maybe there just needs to be a dedicated 'complain about GW' section or very least thread.

my own complaints about things, i at least try to make it so it adds something, rather than just a flat complaint which often adds nothing to any conversation.

[Ayatollah_of_Rock_n_Rolla]

3 hours ago, Spagunk said:

I think everyone should be comparing LoV to Van Saar as they're the closest "army" that aesthetically matches what we see so far. They have very similar looks/features which makes sense since Van Saar also prodigiously uses STC/DAoT era tech. 

In that context, these all look on track and in line with the aesthetic.

That's a very good observation but  does not help League's case for me - Van Saar are Infinity stuff, not WH40k.

[phandaal]

52 minutes ago, Leif Bearclaw said:

To be entirely fair, we've not seen any HQ type units for the Votann yet, which is clearly where a palanquin would belong. So you might still get your wish .

Maybe those not-psykers referenced in the leaked Strategem cards will get palanquins to ride on. Complete with a giant Dataslate of Grudges!

[Slave to Darkness]

4 minutes ago, Ayatollah_of_Rock_n_Rolla said:

That's a very good observation but  does not help League's case for me - Van Saar are Infinity stuff, not WH40k.

Agreed, but the G1 Van Saar looked pretty bad as well. 

 

Always bothered me how you can have gangs running around using top of the range tech yet the authorities dont do anything to find out why they have all this gear kicking about thats better than 'official' approved weapons. 

[TheVoidDragon]

1 hour ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

no one is saying people can't voice displeasure, but the haters have been arguing about how bad or undwarfy they are for at least 2 pages now. 
there's no votann section like the other factions have here, so this is essentially that section for now. 

i don't like what GW did with a lot of the dark eldar units in their refresh, but i'm not going into that section and complaining about it for pages and pages. why? because it's completely irrelevant and doesn't add anything to the discussion about the faction.
maybe there just needs to be a dedicated 'complain about GW' section or very least thread.

my own complaints about things, i at least try to make it so it adds something, rather than just a flat complaint which often adds nothing to any conversation.

So now you're calling me (and the other posters who dislike something about them) a "hater" for not thinking everything about them is a positive and for having a discussion about that? This thread is for talking about the news relating to the Leagues, and good or bad that is what is happening. It's telling how you're only considering the people giving criticism as "adding nothing to the discussion" while the posts that are nothing but positive praise for them apparently don't have that issue and are considered meaningful discussion.

Your last point making out people disagreeing as being "just flat complaints" comes across as a little disingenuous, because it's been explained (at least, I have) multiple times over the past few pages in detail why I think these things are a problem and what could be done. It's fine to disagree with what's been said, that's part of what makes it a discussion, but it's just absurd if you think that that shouldn't be allowed to be discussed because you disagree and don't like how it isn't saying entirely good things about them.

I presented a reasonable argument giving my thoughts on something that I like but think could be done a little better, and rather than actually respond with your own fair reasonable argument to discuss that in a respectful way it seems it's been dismissive "You just want them to be Fantasy Dwarfs, too bad!" and saying criticism is "being a hater".

Edited July 6, 2022 by TheVoidDragon

[Lemondish]

1 hour ago, Slave to Darkness said:

Always bothered me how you can have gangs running around using top of the range tech yet the authorities dont do anything to find out why they have all this gear kicking about thats better than 'official' approved weapons. 

In the grim darkness of the far future, ignorance is a virtue.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

5 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

So now you're calling me (and the other posters who dislike something about them) a "hater" for not thinking everything about them is a positive and for having a discussion about that? This thread is for talking about the news relating to the Leagues, and good or bad that is what is happening. It's telling how you're only considering the people giving criticism as "adding nothing to the discussion" while the posts that are nothing but positive praise for them apparently don't have that issue and are considered meaningful discussion.

Your last point making out people disagreeing as being "just flat complaints" comes across as a little disingenuous, because it's been explained (at least, I have) multiple times over the past few pages in detail why I think these things are a problem and what could be done. It's fine to disagree with what's been said, that's part of what makes it a discussion, but it's just absurd if you think that that shouldn't be allowed to be discussed because you disagree and don't like how it isn't saying entirely good things about them.

I presented a reasonable argument giving my thoughts on something that I like but think could be done a little better, and rather than actually respond with your own fair reasonable argument to discuss that properly it's just been "You just want them to be Fantasy Dwarfs, you're a hater!".

i'm calling you a hater because you can't get over the fact that they aren't what you wanted.
you've made your points, you've voiced your opinion, yet here you are still adding nothing to the actual conversation. we get it, you don't like them, your voice is hear, point is made, move on.

you claim you like them even though i'm pretty sure you've explicitly said you don't like them....

[TheVoidDragon]

9 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

i'm calling you a hater because you can't get over the fact that they aren't what you wanted.
you've made your points, you've voiced your opinion, yet here you are still adding nothing to the actual conversation. we get it, you don't like them, your voice is hear, point is made, move on.

you claim you like them even though i'm pretty sure you've explicitly said you don't like them....

Once again more condescension, more calling people who don't think every aspect about them is positive as being haters, and more trying to stifle opinions you disagree with rather than discuss the points raised on a discussion forum.

Evidently you aren't even paying attention to what's being said as I even said right above your previous post:
 

Quote

 

"I very much like Space Dwarfs, I think the artwork for the Leagues has been great and full of atmosphere, I like their lore and the general idea, there are just some aspects of them I feel could be done better that I wanted to discuss."

"I like the Leagues. That's why i'm not entirely positive about every aspect of them and want them to be the best they can be."

 

 

[Shield-Captain]

18 minutes ago, TheVoidDragon said:

 

Your last point making out people disagreeing as being "just flat complaints" comes across as a little disingenuous, because it's been explained (at least, I have) multiple times over the past few pages in detail why I think these things are a problem and what could be done. It's fine to disagree with what's been said, that's part of what makes it a discussion, but it's just absurd if you think that that shouldn't be allowed to be discussed because you disagree and don't like how it isn't saying entirely good things about them.

 

What could be done about what? Didn’t another frater offer solutions that could dwarf-ify them and you kind of poo-pooed those options? 
 

These are very clearly the models GW decided on, spent the r&d on, and went with. These are the Votann we have. Some others think they look fine. Some other others do not like their design. If you wanted something else, that’s fine but the bottom line is that you aren’t going to get it. Is there anything you do like about them? At all? 
 

 

[Lemondish]

I think @TheVoidDragon has been clear about their position, and pretty level headed so I don't think it's fair to call them a 'hater'. They wanted more Dwarf designs in their Leagues, and I'm now convinced it's fair to be disappointed even if I don't think those expectations are sacred cows.

I think maybe the last thing that can be said about this is that we should all accept that there's nothing wrong with the direction they're taking this army even if it isn't your preferred approach. It's just one of many ways they could have taken this. I have been convinced that it isn't wrong to have wanted something else, but it certainly shouldn't be wrong to like what we're getting. 

[Grotsmasha]

This is a clear warning to knock it off. Focus on the Leagues of Votann, and not each other.

There are some Permission Issues preventing the Thread being locked, otherwise we'd be cooling off already.

Keep it civil.

[Scribe]

8 hours ago, Spagunk said:

I think everyone should be comparing LoV to Van Saar as they're the closest "army" that aesthetically matches what we see so far. They have very similar looks/features which makes sense since Van Saar also prodigiously uses STC/DAoT era tech. 

In that context, these all look on track and in line with the aesthetic.

This is a good observation. I didn't like the Tau line of thought, because I still don't like Tau, like the first Primaris, they don't fit.

[jaxom]

23 minutes ago, Scribe said:

This is a good observation. I didn't like the Tau line of thought, because I still don't like Tau, like the first Primaris, they don't fit.

The Kastallen robots and the robot from Blackstone Fortress are another place to look to for in-universe aesthetics that an STC-heavy faction could be in line with. I think the similarity between the Mk10 power armors and the Kin are due to common STCs. They should look similar, but different. A sedan is recognizable as a sedan regardless of if it is a Volvo or a Ford.

[Malakithe]

Opinion: all the old squat stuff you old people keep referring too isnt very dwarf at all and never was. All the old stuff screams to me World of Warcraft gnomes. All the new stuff by comparison is very dwarf like. Superior craft and tech vs the gnomes quirky inventions and overall weirdness.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

34 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

Opinion: all the old squat stuff you old people keep referring too isnt very dwarf at all and never was. All the old stuff screams to me World of Warcraft gnomes. All the new stuff by comparison is very dwarf like. Superior craft and tech vs the gnomes quirky inventions and overall weirdness.

Oh snap, shots fired!

[MithrilForge]

I'm Quite looking forward to a Character being Shown.... One with a Big Power Axe that has a Shield to stand on...Most likely a Hover shield though  No standard bearers except Hover tech! That would be Dwarfy wouldn't it 

@ TheVoidDragon - sorry you were called a hater, I think you're not, but you do kinda Grumble about things like a Dwarf does ....... Maybe that's why your so animated about the archetype, I do hope you stay and make a Votann army and post it up for us to see.

Mithril 

 

[appiah4]

18 hours ago, TheVoidDragon said:

There being "potential" isn't an excuse for them to be devoid of a distinct faction identity and to not have their lore realized via the miniatures, though. I like that there's potential too, I can see all sorts of different bits and styles fitting on them, but that doesn't mean it's then alright that they're generic sci-fi styled and without much of the Dwarf theming that is actually part of them.

 

I'm sorry but I will have to express my rather unpopular opinion in response to this: They are no less devoid of distinct faction identity than Primaris space marines.  Both are brainchilds of the same creatively bankrupt design ideology and for the most part hideously bland.

Edited July 7, 2022 by appiah5

[Marshal Reinhard]

39 minutes ago, appiah5 said:

I'm sorry but I will have to express this potentially unpopular view in response to this: They are no less devoid of distinct faction identity than Primaris space marines.  Both are brainchilds of the same creatively bankrupt design ideology and for the most part hideously bland.

Its not only unpopular, its also wildly incorrect and most likely quite disingenious to boot.

What do you even mean to try and convey when you say primaris are devoid of faction identity? The faction is space marine. They have that identity in abundance.  Tell me with a straight face that the basic tactical marine squad is on a completely different level of creativity and design, brimming with faction identity over intercessors. They're both bland or not at all. Or did you mean subfaction, aka chapters? Nearly all primaris releases so far have been general purpose kits available to all marine chapters. Of course those aren't brimming with (sub)specific faction identity. 

With the Votann we don't have enough information to compare anything yet. We haven't seen subfaction specific models, just some models painted a in a couple of different schemes.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Reinhard

[Lemondish]

Not at all the thread to be discussing Primaris design for the 527th time, buds. That way lies madness (and thread lock).

As for the Leagues, I am so interested in seeing what big vehicle mounted weapons these guys will wield. I really like the design of the infantry pieces - both new and familiar, so what does the heavy ordnance look like? Have we seen any yet? 

[Halandaar]

3 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Oh snap, shots fired!

This a pretty rich post given you've spent so much effort in this thread calling other people's comments pointless non-contributions.

54 minutes ago, appiah5 said:

I'm sorry but I will have to express my rather unpopular opinion in response to this: They are no less devoid of distinct faction identity than Primaris space marines.  Both are brainchilds of the same creatively bankrupt design ideology and for the most part hideously bland.

Ha, how are Primaris devoid of faction identity?! Their faction is Space Marines, and they look exactly like Space Marines. Intercessors for example aren't any different from the Tactical Marines or Assault Marines or whatever from previous generations. How is one better than the other? 

4 hours ago, Malakithe said:

Opinion: all the old squat stuff you old people keep referring too isnt very dwarf at all and never was.

Yeah I'm inclined to agree with this, to an extent. Sticking knotwork and runes on stuff doesn't automatically make it Dwarfy. Biker gangs aren't exactly brimming with Dwarf identity when hardly any setting has them use cavalry of any kind.

[Gamiel]

 

  

On 7/5/2022 at 2:53 PM, Karhedron said:

To be fair, Eldar designs actually draw as much (if not more) from oriental inspiration such as the styalised face masks, plumes and ribbons. I guess this shows there is room for more than one interpretation of "space elf" and similarly this is just a slightly different interpretation of space dwarf than the one we were expecting.

I still wish there was just a bit more of this going on. 

https://youtu.be/34CZjsEI1yU

 

I'm hoping more for nods toward this:

https://youtu.be/nSgngZ9CpTM

https://youtu.be/Pyy_FIYE7EE

And yes, I'm being serious here

 

21 hours ago, Valkyrion said:

They look like Tau in aesthetics

Will have to disagree, I find that they have different design languages

 

20 hours ago, TheMawr said:

From the previous leaked cards (stratagems I think ?) its clear there will be a berzerker/slayer unit (named berzerker but spelled differently) that will likely make the total picture more dwarfish

Honest question here: are berzerker/slayer units really something dwarfish, outside of WHFB can't I really think of many setting that have those kinde of dwarfs as a standard (somewhat ignoring some D&D settings here I admit but Berserker is a standard class there so all races have them). 

 

20 hours ago, TheMawr said:

I think some things could also be said from a presentation point of view, for example these new elites main weapon isnt that wristblade.. but something fisty from the sound of it, yet they only show the blades. and the leader of the troops also has a hammer, yet they focused on the sword. Those little details can be important in presentation for the general vibe.

I have never understod why peole don't think swords are dwarfish. In many ways they fit better with shieald wall and tunell fighting than axes or hammer (you don't need to swing, just stab forward). And the whole "mostly made of metal" and "harder to make" part of swords compared to hammers and axes fits the idea as metal loving and craftsmen.

 

15 hours ago, Slave to Darkness said:

Always bothered me how you can have gangs running around using top of the range tech yet the authorities dont do anything to find out why they have all this gear kicking about thats better than 'official' approved weapons. 

They have explained it. Bribes, really big bribes. Combined with that if the AdMech took them away their use for Helmawr would be at an end and all the high-tech gadgets that they sell to the high nobility would no longer be available. So nobody in power is interested in having the AdMech look into them.  

Edited July 7, 2022 by Brother Tyler
videos converted to links

[Malakithe]

Slightly on topic but does the Leagues have their own sub forum area yet?

[Brother Tyler]

5 hours ago, Malakithe said:

Slightly on topic but does the Leagues have their own sub forum area yet?

No. We're waiting to figure out how GW is going to fit them in the meta factions.

I've gone through and edited some posts, converting videos to links. Embedding videos in this way imposes a burden on the server. Also, the videos don't contribute much that can't be articulated in text.

I've also removed some posts that were completely gratuitous and didn't contribute anything to the discussion.

I'm not sure why we feel the need for this "debate." Different people have different expectations and hopes for the faction. We're not going to agree on things. That's okay. Whether you like or dislike the Leagues of Votann is up to you. What constructive outcome are we hoping to accomplish with the bickering?

Perhaps a more constructive direction would be for those that dislike the faction to consider how they might convert or substitute models to fit within the rules that GW provides while more accurately matching the aesthetic that they want. That's probably better saved for later when we bring the Leagues of Votann forum to the public (it will remain hidden until GW gives us a solid lead on where their loyalties lie).

[SpaceDwalin]

1 hour ago, Brother Tyler said:

Perhaps a more constructive direction would be for those that dislike the faction to consider how they might convert or substitute models to fit within the rules that GW provides while more accurately matching the aesthetic that they want.

I do actually like most of the models so far. But I am also already thinking about augmenting them with Necrosquats and kitbashed Kharadrons with sci-fi guns.

edit: Hoping there will be spare heads from the Kin troops sprues to put on the Kharadrons.

Edited July 7, 2022 by SpaceDwalin