[WFB] Glade riders & dryads

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakk­a/Default.aspx?tabid=27&g=post­s&t=6843

>
>
>Both the new horses and the dryads are huge improvments over the
>current ones.

Goody, more Welves to review:

While I'm waiting for the others to load up (interminably slowly), how
about the Waywatcher? Hmm, quite a change of style, and IMO not for the
better - why the One Million Years BC outfit? The bronze blade isn't
elegantly Elvish enough and she's got the same weird pose as the Scout
leader. Rating out of 5: 2.

Glade Riders: Damn. I was really looking forward to these, not least
because of the fanboys' praise lavished on them while waiting for them
to load. The rider's not great (why does his bow have a handle?) - no
wonder everyone was praising the horse instead. I love its pose and it
does look more horselike, but it seems too sinewy, without enough of a
chest or enough muscle for a real horse. A different paintscheme would
definitely help, but even with that I'm not sure it's so much better
than the current steeds that I'll be giving my Ellyrian Reavers new
horses. After the Bret horses, this is a shame. 3 for the whole.

Dryads: Those are ... really strange. They're great models in
themselves (I say this as a fan of the current Dryads), but they really
don't look as though they fit the rest of the army. Going the Daemonic
route is one thing, but these look more downright evil than any of the
Chaos Daemons. Chop off the treetop bits at the back and they'd make
*GREAT* Banshees, though. No idea where Dakka got the idea they're
plastic - they certainly don't look it to me. 4.

Eternal Guard: Pretty good from what I can see. 3.5.

Wardancers: Very hard to make out. Certainly the look and poses seem to
want to hearken back to 3rd Ed., which IMO is no bad thing. Provisional
4.

I was going to run down my ratings of WE so far, but I can't seem to
find the links to my past posts on Google. Oh, well, there don't seem
to be any true stinkers yet, which is nice, and there's some great
stuff (a couple of the characters and the archers). As I recall my
ratings are something like this (again out of 5):

Glade Guardian (2 handed hunting spear): 5
Glade Guardian (1 handed hunting spear): 2 (provisional)
Glade Guardian (bow): 4
Mage (seen in WD): 2.5 (don't like the pose much, but otherwise
well-done)

Glade Guard: 5
Glade Riders: 3
Dryads: 4
Wardancers: 4 (provisional)
Scouts: 3 (2 for the Champion)
Treekin: 3
Waywatcher: 2
Eternal Guard: 3.5

That's most of the basics covered, and covered well - let's see the
cavalry characters, the eagles, the Warhawk Riders and the Treemen and
we'll be in business. All told, I'd say only the Waywatcher is inferior
to the current models, the Scouts pretty much equal and the others an
improvement (on sometimes good figures).

Philip Bowles
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>Wardancers:
>http://uk.games-workshop.com/s­neakpeeks/warhammer/image1.jpg

Bloody hell. Well, I did say my 4 rating was provisional - 5 it is (I
knew I should have taken my rating system to 6...). I love the
character to these models; GW really seems to be going back to 3rd Ed.
imagery with the range in general (the Glade Rider's horse is posed
very much like one of those pulling the Elven Attack Chariot) with 6th
Ed. sculpting quality, and for the WE I can hardly think of a better
combination. Great variety too - spear-staff, two-handed swords, two
hand weapons (and after all these years a new Wardancer musician
model). Only thing is - while I like the leader's pose, the fact that
he's attacking from a tree makes him look a little out of place with
the rest of the unit; at a guess he's the Bladelord, since fighting
from trees seems to be a theme among WE characters in the new range.

Dryads:
http://uk.games-workshop.com/s­neakpeeks/warhammer/image2.jpg

Still look really weird, but painted up like that they look less evil
and more other-wordly, in keeping with the range (well, the beckoning
one looks pretty evil). Great models, though there doesn't seem that
much variety in posing - you can see that they look vaguely female. Why
are they skirmishing, though? I thought that was out in the new book.
Still 4.

I have been toying with the idea of (re)starting various armies out
here - High Elves, Lizardmen, or starting an all-new army with the
Empire or Dark Elves. But now I'm decided - I'm waiting for the Wood
Elves. These are so much better than the current ones (which I like
anyway) that I might just ignore what I've already got and go straight
for a full 3-4,000pt army. Can't wait to see what the army as a whole
looks like.

Philip Bowles
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>Even more welvsie pics:
>http://img181.echo.cx/img181/3­485/grandebannireditionspciale­5rz9.jpg


He's not the best standard bearer I've seen, but he'll do - I have
every intention of getting the army deal anyway to get the models and
book quickly, so I'm happy that he's useable if not as good as I might
have hoped from what I've seen of the range so far. 3. And are those
Waywatchers visible on the army deal box cover? I was expecting Eternal
Guard for the Rare choice, mostly to give GW an excuse to put an
undersize and hence unusable unit in.

>http://img36.echo.cx/my.php?im­age=enchanteresse5sf.jpg

Someone should tell this girl she really needs a haircut. The face,
pose and detail are all great, but sadly that hair means that she *has*
to have some conversion work done on her. 2.5.

>http://img36.echo.cx/my.php?im­age=hroavecarc8ph.jpg

Hrovacarc? Translate, please? Presumably a Waywatcher - I don't much
care for it. The drawn-back hand seems a little clumsily-done and, for
a wonder, I'll actually complain that there's too much detail here -
all the twigs and things make it look cluttered (and what's the junk
all over the bow?). Shame this is a low point of the range - I'll have
to have my current 10-strong unit shipped from the UK, as so far the
Waywatchers are the only models in the old range that are clearly
superior to new ones. 2.

>http://img36.echo.cx/my.php?im­age=lmure6jn.jpg

Moving upwards - good pose, great woody detail, just what we need now
the shrub-Dryads are gone. Moving up further still, and...gagh! What is
*that*? *That's* supposed to be a head? It looks as though someone
decided Ghazghkull Thraka would be a good model for the Treeman's face
- what's with the lumpy angular jaw? And what's that red lizard thing
on his head? More to the point, *why* is it on his head? It's a huge
improvement over the current Treemen - it would have to try hard not to
be - but as in this edition to date (and the last, and the one before
that...) I find myself hoping I never need to use a Treeman in my army.
1.5 (only because I can't bring myself to give it a 1 on the basis that
that would put it on a par with the current model).

Well, that's a disappointing step downhill. Hope the Eagle and
characters have more in common quality-wise with what we've seen before
than most of this lot. To review my ratings (again):

Glade Guardian (2 handed hunting spear): 5
Glade Guardian (1 handed hunting spear): 2 (provisional)
Glade Guardian (bow): 4
Bladesinger: 5
Mage (seen in WD): 2.5 (don't like the pose much, but otherwise
well-done)
Enchantress with staff: 2.5

Glade Guard: 5
Glade Riders: 3
Dryads: 4
Wardancers: 5
Scouts: 3 (2 for the Champion)
Treekin: 3
Waywatchers: 2
Eternal Guard: 4 (I've decided I really like them now).
Treeman: 1.5

Overall, still a good range, and I'm mostly happy to very happy with
the units I'm likely to use.

Philip Bowles
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom