AoS How would you feel if you had to re-base your Lizardmen army for 9th edition?

That's true. Chaos Dwarfs have also survived in such a state for quite some time. It's just sad if that is to be our fate. Slowly through power creep and the continued evolution of the game Lizardmen will become less and less relevant.

 

Unit fillers are a part of the Unholy Trinity of Evil in Warhammer.
That said, if Trayhammer comes, it will be like Kings of War, at which point unit fillers get demoted to Lesser Demon of Hobby Torture.

Chaos Dwarf receieved a new list (and even some new models) not that long ago, and when they did, they shot up the power scale. I think we are talking about a different fate for Lizardmen.

 

lol, you now really made me curious what the other two are.

Btw, never really liked fillers myself that much, but pricing and the "need" to field 40-60 strong units with models that are impossible to rank up kinda forced it upon everyone.

 

Makes two of us curious. What are the other two?

My guesses are:

Spoiler: Hidden under here...

2) Hideous paint jobs, worse than the unpainted mini... and 3) weird, improbable proxied substitutes.

 

I really think that depends on how the unit filler is executed. I've seen unit fillers that actually add to the aesthetics of the unit on the board. Others... not so much.

I can see how most people would agree with that sentiment. I think I belong to the very tiny minority who would rather see the army squatted completely than have it shuffle forward without any hope of support.

 

With Bretonnia and Chaos Dwarfs it has reached a point where they get bonus points in tournament play? Such as if the standard army size is: 2400 they give 2700-2900 points to the weaker armies. That may be where LM end up.

Does anybody have a link to this newer Chaos Dwarf list? or a trail to where / how it was published?

I saw a Monty Python themed Bretonnian Army that was just hilarious. (I think the three-headed giant and a stack of rocks was the trebuchet...)

There was a unit of men-at-arms that had the dancing guards of Camelot modeled up as a big stand that was about 5x2 -- took the place of ten models.

 

my biggest filler is 3x3....it consists of one full night goblin and 2 half ones who get sucked into the purple sun vortex. Only have a wip shot available of it right now



And i do small stuff like this (all wip), usually 2x2




Whole unit would then look something like this.



Rebasing would be a pain.

 

I don't want to do too much to derail the thread further, so I'll say what they are buy won't defend or expand on my view here or engage in further exploration. That said, happy to do so on another thread for those interested.

The Unholy Trinity of Evil in Warhammer
1) Counts As. This includes both unit filler and proxies.
2) Non-metallic metallic paint jobs.
3) Comp/get permission/house rules/"I know how they meant the rule to be"

 

Also it will depend on the level of changes we see in 9th and then further on. What will 10th look like? Will there be bigger changes on the horizon than we have seen in the last 10years, or smaller ones? Our compatibility will be directly related to the amount and degree of these changes. Personally I don't like the prospect of our army becoming a pathetic bottom feeder. I'd rather at that point they "put us out of our misery" and we can go on with 8th edition. Unless of course these rumours are completely false, then I would be happy to progress into 9th!

The most recent (or so I believe) Chaos Dwarf list is the one from Warhammer Forge's "Tamurkhan - The Throne of Chaos" book.

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Images/FW/tamurkhanev.jpg

Although with the collapse of Warhammer Forge, I do not believe it is still on sale on the Forge World site.

These are all awesome borkbork. This is exactly what I was talking about when I said that a well made unit filler actually adds to the aesthetic value of a unit on the battlefield.

 

I completely disagree with all 3 of those!!! Proxies are the only thing I am hesitant about. Although, if used within reason and on the short term (to test out the feel of a unit), then I personally am completely okay with it.

To each their own I guess

 

I think unit fillers are fine as long as they're done well - which is why I haven't made any myself! Proxies are a bit of a sore point for me. I've had a lot of unpleasantness related to proxy-ing in 40k and wouldn't be overjoyed if someone said to me "Is it cool if these halberdiers are skinks? Also my saurus are temple guard because I don't use saurus warriors and I don't have any temple guard models."

Non metallic metal looks great if pulled off by a skilled painter, but I'm lazy and pretty happy with normal metallic metals.

I LOVE house rules in non competitive thematic gaming, but I HATE when people try to take advantage ("I put an assault cannon on my bike captain but I added like 20pts so it's fair right?"), so I tend to play a lot of by-the-book games (in 40k anyway). I don't have much experience with playing in a comped environment but I can see ups and downs to it. Personally I don't like people punishing me for my choice of list, but then again I field things that look cool rather than what's the new filth. My possessed marines are yet to make a kill but I believe in their awesomeness!

Back on topic: I think maybe the round bases are for skirmish hammer and square bases could be for normalhammer and end times. Just an unfounded theory, but hey they're giving you two bases for a reason right? Right guys? Right ...... ?

 

I believe that is as good of a theory as any of us has at the current moment in time.

 

Hahaha

 

Hexagon shmexagon (srsly, WFB9E could be based on non-Euclidean polyhedrons for anyone knows right now), but I am utterly mesmerized by the Farscape background (mousepad? tablecloth? poster? bedsheet?). I love it.

 

My guess is it is a playing mat for MTG. Those card playing guys put down place mats for their precious decks.

@NIGHTBRINGER :: If you didn't photoshop that where did you find it?

 

I didn't photoshop it myself. I found it on Warseer....

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?409361-Warhammer-9th-Rumor-Discussion-Mk-III/page2

 

@NIGHTBRINGER .....lol lol lol , i actually know who photoshopped that (not me).

I shared the pictures of blisters with the round & square bases which were posted above here on GWhobby.net (a dutch wargame site), and someone called fake....and that same guy came up with the hexagon pic to proof his point. Then another thought it would be funny to toss it on Warseer.

http://www.gwhobby.net/forum/index.php?topic=20014.15 (its in Dutch though)

correction....it is no photoshop......the guy carefully cut open the blister and simply added the hex base

 

hahaha... that's too funny!