The main topic this time around is much more interesting for me as a Dwarf player/collector. We get 59 pages of nice Dwarf miniatures, both lone models as well as pictures of whole armies and battles. The pictures is nice and all, but if you have all the WD Weekly with the Dwarf releases, the Army Book and maybe even the digital Dwarfs Painting Guide, I think you have already seen most of them. I think it was better pictures here than in the last issue, but I think this segment could be much more interesting because as I said, you have probably seen most of the pictures already.
If they mixed in some more colour schemes in here, banner designs, rune designs etc. It would have been much more interesting.
Typhon and the his Terminators the Grave Wardens, some Iron Hands and some Vehicles. They all look nice but we have seen it before, eight pages.
Army of the Month
It features Damien Pedley's really large Imperial Guard army with some Grey Knights. Really nicely painted and some awesome conversions in there as well, the Death Cult Assassins and Inquisitor retinue is one of the coolest things in this Visions issue. Twenty pages, but it's all good. I just wished they had more text in there, but visions is all about the visual I guess.
We get a lot of nice pictures from Golden Demon in Memphis, good mix of 40k and Fantasy on 52 Pages. One of the coolest is the Eldar Harlquins which won Gold in the 40k Squad Category.
Horned Rat Rising is this one called, and oh so cool it would have been if they continued and written a nice narrative about this battle. We don't get that though, just as the last one we get very little text. The little text we do get is about some things happening on the battlefield. No overview of the table and with the little text snippets we get we don't have any idea of what is really happening in the game. Suddenly we know which army won and that's it. Really disappointing, make me actual battle REPORT, this is just a lot of pictures taken from the same game.
Edit: When I took pictures for this review I also realised that the Battle Report is the same as in WD Weekly #3! Really strange, we get to few pictures in one of them (Wd Weekly) and no text in the other (Visions). So if you put those two together you actually get a real battle report instead, crazy. Why not just do a decent Battle Report and have it in the same magazine!
|The same Battle Report in both Wd Weekly #3 and Visions #2 but in different styles. One lot of text and no pictures and one with almost no text but a lot of pictures, crazy.|
It's about Tau Battlesuits, I don't know that much about them but it seems there's isn't much conversion going on on the actual models, but rather on the bases which I find a little odd. Nice models though, 20 pages.
It's like is usually is, we get to see another Inquisitorial Warband, this time by Mikael Silvanto. It looks nice but I think they could do something more with this articles. 6 pages.
Dark Eldar Kabals
Here they show us four different looking Dark Eldar armies, they look nice and they don't overdo it. 14 Pages
The Dwarf Throng
Here they show us the old miniatures in the Dwarfs range, in the same Eavy Metal colours we all have seen so many times before, don't understand the need for this segment/article at all.
Some easy and nice tips on how to paint the Dwarfs of course. The Dragon Slayer, Belegar, Dwarf Ironbreakers and Irondrakes, Longbeards and the Gyrobomber. They tips isn't bad but if you have the first three WD Weekly or the Dwarf Digital Painting Guide you already have these mini tutorials. A big let down for me who have all that already.
|Upper picture; White Dwarf Weekly #3, Lower picture; Wh Visions: #2|
So did this issue of Visions change my mind since the first one. In short, No. I did find this issue more interesting than the last, and I'm more accepting towards what they try to achieve with Visions. However I'm not accepting the fact that a lot of the stuff in this magazine is pictures and tutorials already found in other places (Edit: They even use the same Battle report!), be that in a Digital Painting Guide or WD Weekly. I still think there's to little text, especially for articles like the Battle Reports.