8th Ed. Army book is horrible

[LeanderAT]

I just received my army book, 8th edition. I don't like its quality at all. While the 7th edition had awesome photos in good quality, some of the 8th edition's photos look blurred...have a painted watercolor look.
What do you think? Are the book of other races like that too?

 

[n810]

Like a lot of army books there are a lot of recycling of old art, IRC 8th had some colored versions of old black and white art.
also, the 7 edition book was probably the best looking one we ever got, so it's a pretty high bar.

Ps. Not a fan of the weird salamander looking lizards in the art, as I prefer the more dinosaur inspired ones.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

I just received my army book, 8th edition. I don't like its quality at all. While the 7th edition had awesome photos in good quality, some of the 8th edition's photos look blurred...have a painted watercolor look.
What do you think? Are the book of other races like that too?

The main qualm I have with the images in the 8th Ed Lizardmen book is that they repeat the green image in the front and back index pages in the middle of the book - being a perfectionist, I don't like to see images repeated. They do the same with the 8th Ed High Elf book too - the dark blue index image is repeated on the summary page. The Dwarf and Greenskin books, on the other hand, don't repeat any images - if you have a look, each image only appears once in the book. Perfect!

I like the way they have coloured in some of the previously black and white 7th Ed art so that you haven't got some B&W and some colour, and of course having a full-colour book shows that GW have really gone to town for once by spending more on coloured ink.

Now, the books I really don't like are the 40K 8th Edition Codices, because instead of bringing in some beautiful new cover art, GW go the cheap way out and reuse the same cover art from 6th and 7th Ed books, apart from those for Spess Mehreens (of course) and the horrid Death Guard who were (yet another) new Space Marine chapter faction.

Also, you've got your army book late - they're now OOP! Was it second-hand or did you manage to find one of the very last brand-new ones ever to exist?

 

[Lawot]

The 8th edition book had a recycled feel, in general, to me. The art was ok - I guess I took the blurry watercolor as a stylistic choice - but both rules and fluff felt like they were copied and pasted, given a quick once-over, and called done. Some thing just felt un-updated (like the Master of Skies' rules for 'his unit'), and the fluff seemed like a summary of 7th edition, like it didn't even do justice to a copy-and-paste, much less a new book.

It was one of the later 8th edition books to come out, I think, and they new the End Times were coming...no reason to spend a lot of time on a book that's just a placeholder while they blow up the world and destroy Warhammer.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

It was one of the later 8th edition books to come out, I think.

You are correct, the Lizardmen army book was one of the later releases:




I may be the odd man out here, but I liked our 8th Edition book. It may not have been perfect, but it is still a beautiful tome. The only thing I resent is that GW never released an Errata/FAQ for it. There certainly was enough time between its release and the End Times for a quick FAQ to be written and published on the website.

 

[Lawot]

Yeah, but customer satisfaction was just not their priority at the time. They knew they'd lose a bunch of us soon anyways, so there was only so much point (dollar-wise) in making the best product they could.

 

[n810]

You might find this interesting, if you are looking for a patched version of 8th edition.
http://www.lustria-online.com/threads/whfb-8-5.17593/
Lizardmen stuff and FAQ's on page 3.
http://www.lustria-online.com/threads/whfb-8-5.17593/page-3

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Yeah, but customer satisfaction was just not their priority at the time. They knew they'd lose a bunch of us soon anyways, so there was only so much point (dollar-wise) in making the best product they could.

I thought the release was overall quite good. We got some lovely new models and a good looking book. Sure there were disappointments (like the rules/points for the Troglodon or the silly errors that are present in every edition), but I still enjoyed it. I don't think that the impending doom of WFB resulted in a lower effort on GW's part. The 7th edition book had many gripes associated with it as well.

Obviously they are putting forth a much stronger effort towards AoS, but I wouldn't trade our 8th edition Lizardmen book for anything that AoS has released.

 

[Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl]

You are correct, the Lizardmen army book was one of the later releases:

View attachment 38704


I may be the odd man out here, but I liked our 8th Edition book. It may not have been perfect, but it is still a beautiful tome. The only thing I resent is that GW never released an Errata/FAQ for it. There certainly was enough time between its release and the End Times for a quick FAQ to be written and published on the website.

We actually agree here - I also like the 8th Ed book - the artwork may be samey in places but it's in full colour - GW actually splashed out a bit here! Everyone else, just be grateful that you actually got a full-colour hardback 8th Ed book - Bretonnia, Beastmen and Skaven didn't because GW decided to mess things up with the End Times, although Skaven did get their equivalent to an 8th Ed book because they got the Stormfiends and new Verminlords and Thanquol.

I thought the release was overall quite good. We got some lovely new models and a good looking book. Sure there were disappointments (like the rules/points for the Troglodon or the silly errors that are present in every edition), but I still enjoyed it. I don't think that the impending doom of WFB resulted in a lower effort on GW's part. The 7th edition book had many gripes associated with it as well.

Obviously they are putting forth a much stronger effort towards AoS, but I wouldn't trade our 8th edition Lizardmen book for anything that AoS has released.

Certainly the Lizardmen did get some beautiful new models - I was a lot more disappointed with the Dwarf release initially, I imagine @Killer Angel will agree - we Dwarf players got hardly any new miniatures, just the Gyrobomber and Irondrakes. The truly nice surprise we got was what they did with the characters - not only did they reintroduce the badass that is Ungrim Ironfist, but they also gave King Belegar a miniature (Finally! For ages he was the only one of the 3 Karak Eight Peaks characters that didn't have his own miniature) and Grim Burloksson, who is the son of Guildmaster Burlok Damminson, who first appeared in the 4th Edition book and was then lost to Warhammer history. Furthermore we Dwarf players also had the cobwebs shaken out of our rules - so many of the Army Special Rules in the 6th Ed book that were pretty useless now became really competent - Resolute and Shieldwall were certainly brought out of the Dark Ages.

Lizardmen on the other hand got loads of new models and only a few new rules - probably the only Army Special Rule they got that was new was Predatory Fighter.

The one thing I do love about AoS as you probably know by now is the Fyreslayers - I see them as the new models the Dwarfs never got in Fantasy, especially the amazing Magmadroth miniature - the first monster for the Dwarfs! Also with AoS Gw have a clean sheet - there's no recycling of artwork. That's the one thing I truly hate about 40K 8th Edition, as GW proved themselves to be tightwads by giving the majority of the codices the same cover art as the previous editions' books, which I think looks cheap and awful. They only existing faction that has been given new cover art is - surprise surprise! - Space Marines.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

specially the amazing Magmadroth miniature - the first monster for the Dwarfs!

Personally I liked the fact that not every army had access to a monster, or a war machine, or monstrous cavalry, etc, etc, etc. It made the armies feel more unique rather than everyone receiving the same token units and creating a sense of uniformity among the forces. I'm not saying this is good or the way it should be, but rather that it suited my personal tastes.

Bretonnia, Beastmen and Skaven didn't because GW decided to mess things up with the End Times

Those poor bastards. At least Skaven is extremely powerful and competitive. Bretonnia and Beastmen are pretty limited in terms of competitiveness. Which I guess isn't totally bad from a Tomb Kings point of view, because we need a couple of armies at our level too!

 

[Lawot]

Personally I liked the fact that not every army had access to a monster, or a war machine, or monstrous cavalry, etc, etc, etc. It made the armies feel more unique rather than everyone receiving the same token units and creating a sense of uniformity among the forces. I'm not saying this is the good or the way it should be, but rather that it suited my personal tastes.

Agreed! Those differences are key to me in having unique armies, with very different playstyles. All part of the fun.

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

Agreed! Those differences are key to me in having unique armies, with very different playstyles. All part of the fun.

I find games are typically more fun between armies that have different play styles. For instance WoC vs. WoC is not as fun as say Lizardmen vs. Wood Elves or Dark Elves vs. Vampire Counts or Tomb Kings vs. Bretonnia. Having unit variation between armies makes things interesting. It creates situations where a player has to figure out how to neutralize opposing opposing elements that they might not have access to (i.e. war machines or monsters or monstrous cavalry or flyers, etc.).

 

[Scalenex]

I don't like its quality at all. While the 7th edition had awesome photos in good quality, some of the 8th edition's photos look blurred...have a painted watercolor look.

The art was pretty recycled and so was the fluff, but I do give the 8th army book credit for making the best Lustrian map ever.

I was a lot more disappointed with the Dwarf release initially

My main gaming opponent played/plays Dwarfs as a primary army. I was jealous of the new Dwarf book. They didn't get much in the way of new models but if you read the Dwarf handbook, there are very few stinkers. Apart from the Anvil of Doom, the new Dwarf book really doesn't have anything subpar. That means Dwarf players can assemble a wide variety of competitive armies and isn't stuck with mono-builds.

Ark of Sotek Bastiladons, Troglodons, and Swarms are basically never takes for us. Saurus Warriors are pretty iffy for a unit that is supposed to be the background of our Core.

Lizardmen on the other hand got loads of new models and only a few new rules - probably the only Army Special Rule they got that was new was Predatory Fighter.

And fortunately there was no ambiguity with how Predatory Fighter applied to supporting attacks and there were no arguments forcing moderators to intervene in...

I find games are typically more fun between armies that have different play styles.

In general yes, but I am rather fond of mirror matchups. I especially like Lizardmen versus Lizardmen. I guess it's because as a moderator I need to know all the tricks to keep the errant members of my group in line.

 

[hardyworld]

And fortunately there was no ambiguity with how Predatory Fighter applied to supporting attacks and there were no arguments forcing moderators to intervene in...

To be fair, the moderators only had to intervene because the arguments from a couple people became personal and VERY off-topic, NOT about the topic at hand. The back-and-forth discussion carried on between almost everyone very civilly for 16 months in that thread before a couple people ruined the topic altogether by marking it as a toxic subject (Unjustly in my opinion, since the topic didn't cause the escalation, the people did, the topic merely acted as the battlefield where the individuals chose to act poorly. The thread had to be shut down to allow those people a chance to calm down, but I think should have been reopened after a month.).

 

[NIGHTBRINGER]

but I think should have been reopened after a month

In a way it was (though not within a month) as I did create the poll equivalent of it...

http://www.lustria-online.com/threa...tacks-from-supporting-ranks-yea-or-nay.15916/