Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
malfred wrote:That's where we differ. I'm more likely to use masses of infantry
than four heavy warjacks. I tend to stick to the same one or two
heavies. Heck, I've been using Longriders with Horthol, which
costs MORE than a battle engine and fills less points in an army.
I have a self imposed moratorium on £60+ unit. Bloodgorgers were the first unit I baulked at, I'd have snapped them up as a £30 plastic box, similarly I'd have bought two boxes of plastic Skinwalkers at £30 a box. Pretty much everything else I'll buy. I have three pretty large forces for Warmachine/Hordes and no complaints with what I have.
I really wish the Colossals were something more than simply big warjacks.
I know that's how they're roughly described in the fluff, but it just seems to need something more. I don't really like the aesthetic of the 40k Titans, but at least they did something different than "giant dreadnoughts." Hopefully the Hordes "Colossals" are better.
The concept for the battle engines was much better, IMO.
Plus, you know, Cygnaran dogs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/09 13:33:18
I have some sourcing to do regarding a few things (not everything is made by the same company) but pretty much. Currently I estimate the army will come to £100.
biccat wrote:I really wish the Colossals were something more than simply big warjacks.
I know that's how they're roughly described in the fluff, but it just seems to need something more. I don't really like the aesthetic of the 40k Titans, but at least they did something different than "giant dreadnoughts." Hopefully the Hordes "Colossals" are better.
The concept for the battle engines was much better, IMO.
This is where the saying "different strokes for different folks" comes from then!
I really, really, really disliked the battle engine concept exactly because warnouns were supposed to be the pinnacle of the Iron Kingdoms military technology and in that light a battle engine wouldn't make much sense in my mind, so I'm loving these new modernised Colossals...
PhantomViper wrote:I really, really, really disliked the battle engine concept exactly because warnouns were supposed to be the pinnacle of the Iron Kingdoms military technology and in that light a battle engine wouldn't make much sense in my mind, so I'm loving these new modernised Colossals...
I understand that sentiment. But from a purely model view, the Colossals aren't anything new. They're just scaled-up Warjacks. The Battle Engines (and I admit, many of them were silly models/concepts) at least had some variation from the Warjack concept.
In the game and fluff they're much different, but I think more could've been done on the model side of things.
PhantomViper wrote:
biccat wrote:
Plus, you know, Cygnaran dogs.
Cygnar victor!
You won't be saying that when the cleansing flames of Menoth are upon you. Instead you'll be saying "arrggghhh, it burns, it burns."
Any idea when this thing is going to be available? Ive been searching and cant find any word. Id like to know how much time I have to get the $$ set aside.
Whats my game?
Warmachine (Cygnar)
10/15mm mecha
Song of Blades & Heroes
Blackwater Gulch
X wing
Open to other games too
Mad4Minis wrote:Any idea when this thing is going to be available? Ive been searching and cant find any word. Id like to know how much time I have to get the $$ set aside.
If you watch the video preview on Privateer's website, you'll see that Colossals is supposed to be released around July 2012 (can't remember exactly if it's June, July, or August)... it may get pushed up to be announced or released at Lock and Load (or it might be a July release, with Lock and Load attendees being able to get their hands on these early), or it may be pushed back to a GenCon release...
Easiest answer: Summer 2012
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
CT GAMER wrote:Many of the models by both companies are unrealistic, but some make their design seem more plausible then others.
Agreed.
CT GAMER wrote:In fact PP had a series of Guts & Gears articles in NQ in which they had exploded diagram drawings of their warjacks, guns, armor, etc. So apparently they think it is an important thing to consider as well...
And your point is? Other companies do exactly the same thing in their publications featuring FICTIONAL equipment and/or machinery. I don't see how this practice suddenly holds them to some high standard in realism.
CT GAMER wrote:This isn't a GW vs PP thing
It never was. It is a given that in wargaming involving fictional constructs, a certain amount of unrealistic proportion and/or implausible mechanisms are par for the course. By in large, the most recent PP releases are generally optional add-ons as each faction pretty much has all the key units for each battlefield role. In addition, I miss the old "plainer" looking models from the first few waves. The new releases are typically so gear/bling festooned that they look like walking flea markets and/or ornamental knicknacks. I could go on as to the number of really duff models that PP has released as of late. I'm not going to speculate as to whether the Colossals are going to be Colossal WIN or Colossal FAIL. They seem like a niche product to me. Weaponmaster infantry will eat them alive.
You don't like the design asthetic. I get that. But seriously, I don't understand why one would hold them to a supposed bar of realism when they operate in a world where heavy infantry wear steam boilers against their bodies.
Gargantuan wrote:Very typical PP fan behaviour. If someone criticize PP just say that GW is worse.
Nah, not really, just that the Russ was an easy (and common) example. Just swap the Russ for any of these other models from other manufacturers.
Pilot goes where?
I'm not even going to begin to describe how this makes no sense.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/03/09 21:35:11
There is an attitude that not having an insanely optimized, one shot, six stage, omnidirectional, inevitable, mousetrap of an assassin list army somehow means that you have foolishly wasted your life building 500 points of pure, 24 karat, hand rolled, fine, cuban fail. That attitude has been shown, under laboratory conditions, to cause cancer of the fun gland.
IMHO, 50 points for $105 even with a 20% discount can't be done. Decent lists at 35 for that amount is very possible from most e-retailers however. Second list is possible for as little as buying another caster.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
infinite_array wrote:
keezus wrote:\
Pilot goes where?
Just like to point out that the Dragoes is a remote presence TAG, so the 'pilot' is actually sitting comfortably somewhere off the battlefield.
On a TAG like the Lizard, however, you can see the smaller arms, indicating where the pilot is.
'
And ninja'd of course!
Conceeded.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/09 18:30:14
Going from the exploded view, I think it would be perfectly possible to add a gun mount onto the shoulders instead of the silly barrel. I wonder if the Behemoth's bombards would be a good fit as a gun base. The Stormwall's cannons could then be fit to the bombard base as a barrel extension.
I guess I've never had a huge problem with things in my Steampunk or sci fi universes being THAT functional, but I can understand how it'd be a problem for some.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/09 21:32:56
There is an attitude that not having an insanely optimized, one shot, six stage, omnidirectional, inevitable, mousetrap of an assassin list army somehow means that you have foolishly wasted your life building 500 points of pure, 24 karat, hand rolled, fine, cuban fail. That attitude has been shown, under laboratory conditions, to cause cancer of the fun gland.
12thRonin wrote:Why? There's no requirement for a SR event that you HAVE to have multiple lists. That's generally only a requirement for Masters events.
This. To quote Steamroller:
Steamroller 2012 wrote:Players must bring two legible copies of all their army lists complete with point costs. Army list point totals cannot exceed the point size chosen for the game and cannot fall more than 2 points under the point size chosen for the event. Players must incorporate all bonus warjack or warbeast points in their army list(s) point total. A 50-point Kaelyssa army, for example, must include 55 to 57 points of models.
Players can bring a second list if they choose. All lists must be led by warcasters/warlocks from the same faction. Mercenary players can use different contracts or Theme Forces for their lists. Minion players can use different pacts or Theme Forces for their lists. Players cannot include the same version of a model or unit with FA:C in more than one list. The original and epic incarnation(s) of a character do not count as the same version of a model. Any player-determined model relationships (attached, client, marshaled, etc.) must be specified in the list and cannot change between rounds.
There's a variant that requires more than 1 list (Divide and Conquer), but it's by no means the standard format.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/09 19:18:20
keezus wrote:
It is a given that in wargaming involving fictional constructs, a certain amount of unrealistic proportion and/or implausible mechanisms are par for the course.
Agreed, but this model just stretches it too far for me. Unless you want to pretend that an extra-dimensional space exists under those shoulder pads that is...
Its like they insisted on adding every iece of iconic Cygnar the (steam, electro, chaingun, etc.) ontot he same jack at all costs...
By in large, the most recent PP releases are generally optional add-ons as each faction pretty much has all the key units for each battlefield role. In addition, I miss the old "plainer" looking models from the first few waves. The new releases are typically so gear/bling festooned that they look like walking flea markets and/or ornamental knicknacks. I could go on as to the number of really duff models that PP has released as of late. I'm not going to speculate as to whether the Colossals are going to be Colossal WIN or Colossal FAIL.
Aagreed. I also much prefer the older waves and designs. The original Ironclad and Destroyer are models/designs that I love.
In particular I hate the redesign of the khador warjack lines from the older "ugly is beautiful" design; sort of like how ugly WWII Russian tanks have a sort of charm all their own, to the plastic Khador kits which now have more of a "spikey heavy metal" look.
You don't like the design asthetic. I get that. But seriously, I don't understand why one would hold them to a supposed bar of realism
We all hold our models to cetain bars. I find this model too busy and too implausible in design even by Warmachine/Immoren standards. Your mileage may vary...
My main objection was what seemd to be you implying that one could not dislike something because other things other people have mae may or may not also be bad design.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/09 19:39:40
I'm torn on the Plastic Warjack chassis. (A bit OT)
Menoth:
The heavy is a huge improvement being wider stanced at the legs and sports a much more menacing profile thanks to its somewhat less cramped shoulders. Heads are a bit small, though it is passable in this case. Tellingly, the original Menite heavies were sculpted by McVey.
The light - in general, all the plastic light jacks are too big. They dwarf the metal light jacks. IMHO, the shoulders look awkward on the Menite light chassis, otherwise, they are passable.
Cygnar:
Where to begin. The torso itself is alright. Heads again are very small. Feet and hands are TINY compared to the metals. This is my biggest beef. The hands are so tiny they don't even wrap fully around the haft of the quake hammer. I could live with the plastic heavy being Ironclad MKII - sleeker and newer revision, but the tiny hands and feet ruin it for me. The chassis looks fine with Rowdy's arms though. I only own one and he's been converted to Gallant. Plastic chainguns can be put onto the metal ironclad without much issue.
Cygnar light warjacks are ENORMOUS. They are almost the size of the metal Khador heavies. Epic fail IMHO.
Khador:
The Khador heavy traded the apperance of width for additional height. IMHO this is a poor tradeoff. The entire thing is a sore spot for me, as the legs lack detail (the thigh and crotch plates in particular are conspicuously devoid of detail). I like the new Khador forearms/hands and the posability of the new shoulders. With a bit of sawing, the new hands and armored forearm cowls fit nicely on the old metals. Putting around 3 pennies on each side between the body and the shoulder joint increases width and fixes some of the problem, but doesn't correct the overly tall stack system in the middle. Only own one of these as well, used the decimator parts on a metal Juggernaut chassis and repurposed the leftover parts into Black Ivan.
Cryx:
New plastic heavy is almost identical to the metal. Good show.
New plastic light is again, too big, but follows the same aesthetic, if not the same profile. Don't know what posessed them to make the new chickens taller at the arcnode/stacks. A niggling point for those of us who have a lot of the old metals, but not really an issue for newer players.
