I fully share your opinion. After looking at the new range for the first time, I couldn’t really understand why I didn’t like the models. You’ve hit the nail on the head. 
2 Likes
I pretty much agree with all the points you’ve brought up…my feelings to these new chaos dwarfs designs vary from indifference to just thinking “wow, that sucks”.
And I’m fairly upset (almost angry?) that their faces look just like you’ve said, some sort of orc. My first thought was they had a flattened nose like a bat, reminiscent of a weird vampire orc.
It just doesn’t make sense.
The old saying “it’s better than nothing” doesn’t even work with these guys…very disappointed.
But I’m happy with the new hobgrots at least, good to see them with a hunchback and the old school Scythian style caps.
2 Likes
One thing that the new range does is make Chaos Dwarfs a much more accessible army. It’s visible and available in stores for the first time in decades. People can use them straight out of the box with only a small amount of imagination.
The weird AoS style of painting really doesn’t help the models though. There’s very few AoS models that I like based on the GW painting, any better-than-average guy does a better job of showing off the model well.
4 Likes
As one of the few who are truly happy (even relieved) with the new release I will say I feel genuinely bad for those of you that are disappointed.
I also waited almost 15 years for these, and I was tense with fear that I wouldn’t like them in the days before the showcase.
My army back in 8th ed was a disjointed mostly unpainted mess from the Titan Forge Kickstarter, Forge World and even some Mantic ones. I largely abandoned it as my gaming group graduated college and moved across the country.
So I completely understand that getting something so mismatched with your collections must suck, especially after 10 years of AoS hints and rumors.
Not going to glaze why I like them, or argue against criticisms.
I’m just sad that they weren’t for you.
3 Likes
I largely agree with your criticisms. The face and beard designs are probably the biggest misses for me.
From my perspective, the big wins are the fact that most of our unit types have been preserved: Taurus, Bull Centaurs, Rockets, Mortar, Blunderbuss, Hobgoblins.
I also like that they’ve evolved the Daemon-usage in the lore, though the daemon orbs, as painted, don’t seem to be infusing much daemonic energy into their weapons. I think paint can improve that.
I’m also not as down on the blunderbusses as some people. They seem very salvageable.
I’m not sure if you saw my recolour or not, but I’ll post it here to show what I think is possible with this range:
But you are right, just look at this. This is an orc:
Head-swaps are going to be crucial, that’s for sure.
6 Likes
Well. After grimgor perhaps they infiltrated 
With that one model Xander, I know they don’t really have army standard bearers in AoS but this is the prime candidate imo.
I saw the recolour and I definitely think it helps massively. The green and black was a weird choice, the traditional colours look much better. Taurus in black looks great (the original paint job with the angular design made it look like something from Disney’s Hercules), I’m not really bothered by the animated stone/metal design, and the Bull Centaurs and the golem are alright with a different paintjob. It also helps to pinpoint more what the issues are with them, which as you mentioned are the heads. The beardless ones in particular stand out as the worst offenders. I know these are supposed to be the females but other than the lack of beards there’s nothing to really distinguish them as female, they just look like increadibly ugly orcs.
I’ve been reading a lot of the comments to see what people like and dislike about them in general, and a lot of the positive comments are coming from a gameplay perspective, which admitedly is secondary to me. It really is impressive how large of a range we are getting at launch, making things like Bull Centaurs more accessible (as well as everything else really since without a 3D printer there arent many options), and with most of the unit types preserved, we can easily use old units with the new rules. What’s making me feel like I’m taking crazy pills are that the majority of comments I’ve read are saying things like “these are the most beautiful models I’ve ever seen” and “these are peak”. It’s personal preference of course, I can’t tell people not to like them, I’m just surprised that after 30 years of Chaos Dwarfs having such a particular style that the majority seem to be expressing that this new style/design is beyond their expectations. Still, at least the army and the book exists and all the old models can still be used.
I think the best way to think about it is that these are not Chaos Dwarfs, but as the Warhammer Community article states they are “spiritual successors to the Chaos Dwarfs”. They have the same units, they have Hashut, but they are not stylistic successors. As much as Forge of the Chaos Dwarfs nailed what they should have looked like, that’s Old World and not AoS. Still, I feel like they could have easily just tweaked those designs a bit to make them fit AoS instead of scrapping everything and starting again. AoS and Old World Slaves to Darkness use the same Chariot model, Chaos in general seems to have kept its style and iconography, but they couldn’t give us Forge of the Chaos Dwarfs style big hats/faces/beards? The Hobgoblins/Hobgrots also feel like a major downgrade. They feel more like Moria Goblins to me.
Here’s hoping head swaps are a viable option as that’s really where my main issue lies. The infantry shocked me too much, the paint job made it hard to appreciate anything else, and we desperately need a new War Despot model. I’ll for sure be using Zzharg Madeye instead. The Demonsmith will likely look better without the Warcraft paintjob, and the mechanical fist reminds me of Zargod, but it pales in comparison to the Forge World Demonsmiths, which again I’ll also stick with. The gems on the hats/beards must have some reason in the lore, but replacing the bearded skulls, lightning bolts, arrows etc iconography with them was a stylistic downgrade, not to mention replacing the various hat shapes with uniform blocks. I’m just worried that the heads will be part of the bodies when the sprues are revealead and it won’t be possible to replace them without cutting them off. The war machines and the bull centaur armour could do with some decals or a nice Green Stuff World brass sprue for the large blank surfaces. At least the large surfaces give plenty room to paint Hashut runes and lightning bolts.
Overall I’m looking forward to see what everyone does with the new range. It’s definitely got potential, and I’m looking forward to see what new releases we get in the future, hopefully with some of the feedback taken into consideration (although GW deleted my comment on Facebook). I still think a Zharr Vyxa oil rigger/steampunk pirate style could have been cool. If head swaps are a viable option then there’s a chance I’ll pick up some of the infantry, but I’ll always think that the heads we got here are abysmal, but then again it’s obvious they have tried to distance them from the original designs, I just can’t understand why. The one part that should have been the easiest to get right is the one they got the most wrong.
Compare them to some of the Forge World/Forge of the Chaos Dwarf artwork (and some of the character concept art), and I feel like we are missing out on our potential. Hopefully its not another 30 years before we get to see a physical army like this in plastic.
9 Likes
I find it hard to find any joy in this release. I wasn’t a big fan of the new BB team which were already reasonably fine models for the range, and I had huge issues believing that an AoS range would look fitting to our classic idea
It bothers me so much that you can see those models are a downgrade from current aos armies, skaven got s terrific job done on their army, same can apply on chaos generally all around
This CD army to me is current GW trying to force down on purpose some different stuff to protect their IP. The fact that their classic bighat were redone so many times in the last 30ish years is what made them going with this slop. Clearly a secondary 3d sculptor team,lead by what could appear like a not so experienced designers
The majority of the range to me seems unfinished, blunderbuss to me are the worst unit in the whole lot, followed by that plastic toy of a taurus
To see what they used to be 15years ago with FW models it’s incredible to see how not only they downgraded compared to the current state of the game, but also a downgrade compared to 2010.
Like tzeench said, change is inevitable, but jesus Christ man, don’t evolve backwards.
Hobbos and bullcentaurs are at least ok. They would require some work with conversions but I feel like they are the ok part of the range.
Unfortunately Ok isn’t s great standard at all
This goes all in the book of grudges
4 Likes
This is the key takeaway from this entire redesign imo. GW have been moving towards not having shared kits between systems for iirc brand recognition for the individual settings, which means changing designs. That S2D Chariot is probably not long for this world in AoS, as goes for any other kits that are still shared. It’s a different topic, but it’s going to be real interesting to see if GW goes all the way with this with the daemon range, as they have been slightly rolled back in 40k with the recent god-specific chaos marine codexes…
Anyway, the healthies way to look at this new deisgn if anyone is disappointed by it is, like you said, that these are Helsmiths of Hashut and not Chaos Dwarfs.
1 Like
Put this together for my own sanity and peace of mind so I can stop ponding the “what ifs”. I’ll likely be picking up the Helsmiths book so I can use the models I’ve already got in some AoS games with friends but there’s a few, mostly 3D printed, additions I’d like to make to my collection so I’ve been thinking of what alternative minis I’d like to use. To try and keep some semblance of conformity, I haven’t gone for any 3rd edition style models as the scale is likely too small, although it wouldnt be too difficult to put together a dodgy counts as list with what I’ve got.
War Despot:
Zzharg Madeye (see above). I know it’s a Blood Bowl model but I think it’s one of the best looking official models we’ve gotten recently. Ordered it after the Helsmiths reveal and should hopefully be picking it up Saturday. I’ll be converting the ball to a grenade.
Demonsmith/Ashen Elder:
Infernal King from White Angel Miniatures, based on Zhatan the Black from Forge of the Chaos Dwarfs. It’s not a perfect sculpt but I think the colour scheme is great.
I also have all the Forge World Demonsmiths to pick from. My old photos are trash, I’ll try take new ones next time I’m back home.
Infernal Cohorts:
Infernal Guard (with a new banner) from White Angel Miniatures, also based on Forge of the Chaos Dwarfs. Only problem is that they look a bit too tall. Does anyone have any photos of this unit printed?
Big Hats Elite Guard, or Immortal Guard, from Lost Kingdom. I already have the Big Hats Elite Guard but find the big hats too ornamental.
Also have ten Forge World Infernal Guard. Style doesnt match but they were never meant to be big hats anyway so could probably still get away with using them.
Also a unit of MOM Miniatures Infernal Guard if I need an extra unit, although the style fits more with 3rd Edition maybe.
Tormentor Bombard:
Hellcannon. Or Tormentor Bombard with much better paint job, decals, and something to cover the wheels (or 3D print some Iron Demon wheel replacements) and ideally different crew from a Lost Kingdom or Forge World warmachine.
Also a special mention to the Anzu Cannon, a model I’d love to get printed one day but the size would be a bit much.
Deathshrieker Rocket Battery:
I wonder if this could somehow be combined with the deathshrieker rocket launcher. As I already have a Hellcannon though I’ll only be using the Bombard, although the Maghmorin Dalianzhu would be a cool model to use as an alternative.
Dominator Engine:
Not really many alternative options for this that I’d be happy with. Can only find the Maghmorin Magma Thrower, Devastator and Golems (probably need to be scaled up) from Lost Kingdom. Otherwise the Helsmith one with a decent paintjob would be fine.
I’d really like to get a good sculpt of the K’daai Destroyer from Forge of the Chaos Dwarfs commissioned as I really liked the concept behind the original sculpt before they scrapped it. White Angel have a very cheap approximation.
Bull Centaurs:
Taurukh Anointed from Lost Kingdom. Excellent looking models. They have a big hat option but I prefer them without hats.
I have the Russian Alternative bull centaurs that would likely be a match for scale but the style wouldn’t fit and they are a bit static.
Infernal Razers:
Death Guard from Lost Kingdom. Unfortunately I already have the version with Crossbows instead of arquebuses and can’t be bothered painting another unit of them so they will have to do. Alternatively the original big hat blunderbuss are perfectly useable.
White Angel also do a Forge of the Chaos Dwarfs style Blunderbuss unit called Infernal Thunder, but it looks like every model has the exact same hat so that’s disappointing. Maybe some head swaps with the Infernal Guard would be possible.
The Helsmith Razers would only be an option with full head swaps.
Hobgrot Vandalz:
I was contemplating the Lost Kingdom Mongobbos but they are too tall looking and the riders especially look massive.
I’ve only got a small unit of the original Hobgoblins but not enough to field. Fabezel’s hobgoblins are the only ones I’ve found that I like to bulk them up.
Infernal Taurus:
I have a Drazhoath the Ashen but the model honestly feels more like a display piece than a usable model. The new Helsmith taurus isn’t terrible with a decent paint job, but the rider would have to be replaced. Maybe I could just transplant Drazhoath to the more stable mount, but I’d need to replace some damaged parts of his throne with some new 3D printed parts.
5 Likes
Great insight and analysis. Looking forward to your assembled troops!
What are your thoughts on AoS vs. ToW?
2 Likes
I share many of these thoughts as expressed in your post above.
Many elements just feel like a simplification of earlier designs where key aspects got lost along the way. There’s a kind of needless motif-obsession across the range. This is seen in the angular, pressed sheet metal aspects of the armour, the funny looking gems (including the big gemstone baby bib on one of the characters) and the power-source daemon batteries. I suspect the same designer(s) who worked on the Cities of Sigmar range designed the range because that range likewise has a motif-obsession of putting diamond shapes everywhere and funny looking angular armour designs that stray away from historical armour norms.
The forgeworld war machines looked like very real, very functional pieces of machinery. Whereas now, basic elements of the designs such as cannon barrels look like these weird looking faceted tubes.
Earlier chaos dwarf armour look like properly forged (albeit fantastical) armour. Some aspects of the new models armour (especially shoulder armour and hats) looks crudely punched and bent out of sheet metal rather than carefully crafted. However, the scale mail and torsos are broadly quite nice. The curled beards and beard detail is also well done IMO, but I would have much preferred the vast majority to have beards.
The blunderbusses on the new models - well, they look more like ventilation pipes on a modern day shopping centres than functional guns. Guns have round barrels for a reason - so the pressure is distributed evenly and the barrel doesn’t crack. I get it, it’s fantasy not reality, but I do like my fantasy to look like it works on a basic level, so I feel an effort is made to sell the illusion.
Decoratively, we are also distinctly missing any clear hallmarks of chaos - there are no chaos arrows in sight and the spikiness is kept to a minimum. There’s an odd futuristic look to some of the carved inlay on some models that almost gives them a necron vibe - this is most apparent on the new bull dreadnought thing and the stone taurus. I am not a bit fan of this and will probably fill it in if I end up using those models.
I also quite dislike the stone bull. The shapes are abstract and modern feeling. It feels more at home as an Art Deco piece in the lobby of a building on Wall Street than in a fantasy world. I’m not entirely opposed to a mount being a construct, but I’d rather than it be some horrifying (and proper sculpture-looking) brass bull construct akin to a juggernaut detail-wise (in terms of having that flesh-metal mishmash) and perhaps fueled by some hapless victim(s) shoved inside, so that there’s some neat historical inspiration to it.
Personally, I will be using (but modifying significantly) the basic infantry and some of the characters, focussing on removing the shoulder armour and replacing the helmets, which are the big detracting elements. I will also be giving them back distinctly dwarfy weapons like hammers and axes because that feels right to me.
I will also probably use the bull centaurs as I feel they are one of the much better parts of the new range.
2 Likes