Well, the Rough Riders are no where on the GW site, so the rumor of them getting dropped completely from a while ago may be true.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

jae4x4 wrote:
i will use them weather or not they are in the new codex, who is going to stop me?

My guess would be the person you are trying to play against or the store/club/tournament you are playing in.

my opponent will stop me from using a "bad" unit? ill just use the DKOK list feth GW

I really want good RR units with solid rules. I'm not asking for cheese just good models with solid rules. I want a rough rider army so I can field Theodore Roosevelt on a dirt bike shooting twin plasma pistols into the air with George Washington leading a unit of storm troopers while Abe Lincoln commands a tank squadron!

I need my fantasy to work, I need it.

I'd be happy with a boost in toughness or the ability to give them carapace armour.

 Cortez667 wrote:
Well, the Rough Riders are no where on the GW site, so the rumor of them getting dropped completely from a while ago may be true.

That's been discussed waaay back in the thread. It's not necessarily an indication that they are being dropped. GW often remove stuff from the website temporarily when they run out of existing stock and don't want to run a new batch because there is a new version coming.

BoLS came out with a rumor recently that Nork is featured in the kit as the one with the fancy stache on his face. Personally I feel as if this is an insult to everyone's favorite Ogryn.

There was another scarred head (no longer showing in the OP) with a commisar capped vox caster that looked much more likely for Nork.

I believe that one being Nork to be far more likely, as that model does show Nork's scars on his head with the staples too. Also that Commissar cap is going on Norks head.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
You'd have a point if I hadn't specifically brought up that I don't even see them get played in fluffy games. As it stands, them having ass rules is only half of it, the other half is that, as far as I can tell, they just aren't a very popular Guard unit in general.

Only because of the complete lack of inspiration, given the Attilans have never held most people's interests and the models look like garbage.

Unless they made distinctly Attilan only RR's, they'd gather a lot of attention I'd wager.

 BunkerBob wrote:
I really want good RR units with solid rules. I'm not asking for cheese just good models with solid rules. I want a rough rider army so I can field Theodore Roosevelt on a dirt bike shooting twin plasma pistols into the air with George Washington leading a unit of storm troopers while Abe Lincoln commands a tank squadron!

I need my fantasy to work, I need it.

I have no idea what rules are coming up but I do want to see Abe Lincoln Tank Commander.

I think they need to rethink RR, ruleswise. To me RR are another unit that just like Storm Troopers speak to the galactic spanning imperial nature of the Imperium and Imperial Guard. At the same time horseman throughout history have represented a more elite warrior. These are two aspects present in the fluff but lacking in their rules. Additionally one of the main advantages of horsemen are their ability to carry more than an unmounted soldier.

They should be less like fodder on horseback and more like veterans or storm troopers on horseback. They should have a carapace armor option, they should ranged weapons and lances, and they should have mounts that are more than just horses.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I think they need to reinvent RR. To me RR are another unit that just like Storm Troopers speak to the galactic spanning imperial nature of the Imperium and Imperial Guard. At the same time horseman throughout history have represented a more elite warrior. These are two aspects present in the fluff but lacking in their rules. Additionally one of the main advantages of horsemen are their ability to carry more than an unmounted soldier.

They should be less like fodder on horseback and more like veterans or storm troopers on horseback. They should have a carapace armor option, they should ranged weapons and lances, and they should have mounts that are more than just horses.

Agree on all counts

I agree, Rough Riders have always had amazing potential that has never been realised. Would love to see some non-horse mount options and a more flexible unit.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I think they need to rethink RR, ruleswise. To me RR are another unit that just like Storm Troopers speak to the galactic spanning imperial nature of the Imperium and Imperial Guard. At the same time horseman throughout history have represented a more elite warrior. These are two aspects present in the fluff but lacking in their rules. Additionally one of the main advantages of horsemen are their ability to carry more than an unmounted soldier.

They should be less like fodder on horseback and more like veterans or storm troopers on horseback. They should have a carapace armor option, they should ranged weapons and lances, and they should have mounts that are more than just horses.

Careful, say things like that and people will accuse you of "just wanting things removed".

If they were in the Elite slot I would actually use them. They are currently competing for the best air unit in the game and I just can't bring them unless they are apocalypse.

 plastictrees wrote:
I agree, Rough Riders have always had amazing potential that has never been realised. Would love to see some non-horse mount options and a more flexible unit.

I always wanted to put a unit of them on terror birds. All plumes and decoration and such.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
You'd have a point if I hadn't specifically brought up that I don't even see them get played in fluffy games. As it stands, them having ass rules is only half of it, the other half is that, as far as I can tell, they just aren't a very popular Guard unit in general.

There's a difference between people not liking the models and not liking the idea behind the unit. I love the idea of Rough Riders and I'd love to own some, but I'm not a fan at all of the Attilan Rough Riders, who're the only choices barring Forge World. And even if I were, they're expensive and hard to find. Both those things would obviously have an impact on the popularity of a unit. If they actually looked good, not to mention if they were readily available for purchase instead of forcing people to go to eBay to get them, then they'd likely be seen more often on the tabletop.

So yeah, I'd dispute the notion that Rough Riders aren't popular. It's Attilans who aren't popular.

I'm not sure about that.

They had Tallarn Rough Riders on sale for years and years too. And they were perfectly suitable cavalry sculpts for the time, yet you never really saw them being massively popular either.

RR need a boost rules wise, but I've always been in love with the "Idea" of them. And I have wanted them to be a solid unit since I had first seen in the 1st ed. compendium.

Like bikes they should have a +1 toughness
They should have upgrades for carapace
Something with some flava like a vet sarg (+20 points) gives hit and run, Or he could give 1 of 2 orders, 1 allows run and charge and 1 gives fleet + furious charge

Then make a supplement with RR in the troop slot, a few mounted ICs, warlord traits, and more themed orders.


Also they should take the master of that horrendous truck thing and put it in a fire. then blow up the dies with explosives.

Honestly, I feel the easiest way to save RRs is to make them more like the current Death Korps Death Riders, who are actually pretty strong right now. WS 4, 2 wounds, carapace armour, 6+ FNP and 2 attacks base at a slightly increased price is pretty formidable. Yes, I know the WS comes from them being Death Korps, but honestly an assaulty unit like RRs should really have a higher WS than your average rank and file.

I think if RR had +1 toughness, carapace armor and hit and run standard, they would be pretty damn deadly with those power lances. For, eh, 12-14 ppm, they'd be worth the points.

I for one would love to field some Rough Riders, but as with Ogryns and Ratlings, they don't exactly 'fit' my Regiment (Vostroyan Firstborn).

I dig the concept of them, and having a nice counter-charge unit I can keep back and use would be a nice element to add to my force. I typically only use one to two fast attack options in my army also, so there's typically room for them more often than not.

Sadly, the odds of even a third party making good miniatures that fit with the theme of the Vostroyans on horseback is slim at best.

That, and if I were to try and run Vostroyan Rough Riders, I'd want to have my Rough Riders riding bears, because bear Calvary is awesome.

C'est la vie.

Hoping for new rumors this week, I'm chomping at the bit to see what's coming down the pipe next.

Take ti easy,

-Red__Thirst-

I am in the camp of wanting better RR. I converted 10 from LotR Knights of Dol Amroth and loved how they fit in with my lightly feudal themed army. I hate how the lances only work on the first charge. It's the future, bring some extra charges and spring loaded extendable poles and there you go. I just want it to say only works on the first round of combat instead of just the first charge.

Anyway some anecdotal evidence:
1, Saved the game by routing and chasing down a unit of DE scourges who were haywiring my Leman Russ squads.
2, Again saved the game by charging and killing FateWeaver who was melta beaming again my tank squadrons. (This one was lucky I know)

I agree with BlaxicanX, Delboy and First0f0ne on how to help them.

I think that if they make it into the next codex, they'll just have regular power lances. That means slightly less power (only +1Str, AP3 rather +2str, AP3) but with more longevity (have that profile in every charge, rather than once-per-game).

 BunkerBob wrote:
BoLS came out with a rumor recently that Nork is featured in the kit as the one with the fancy stache on his face. Personally I feel as if this is an insult to everyone's favorite Ogryn.

Really?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
I think that if they make it into the next codex, they'll just have regular power lances. That means slightly less power (only +1Str, AP3 rather +2str, AP3) but with more longevity (have that profile in every charge, rather than once-per-game).

They'll never survive a round to stick around, thats the problem, like real lancers they are only good for the first charge, then they use their other weapons. Of all the things that the current hunting lances do its that Initiative 5 that makes all the difference in the world to making them effective at their job which is to totally eliminate a target unit that is hard to kill (i.e. counter charging assault squads, dev squads, etc.).

I love the Death Rider rules and would love to see them ported. Right now RRs suffer from Sisters of Battle syndrome. No one takes them because their aren't any good or cheap models. Therefore the company does not make more because no one buys them.

If they made nice models with even slightly better rules people would buy them. As for me, i am currently converting some RR (and poor timing is a specialty of mine) from cold ones and Victoria Miniatures rough riders. If they made decent models in a 5 box for riders I would have bought some years ago but i knew i was going to have to convert these guys so ive taken time with them (if only my painting skills were better). So really the current method is inefficient but it does force you to actually do what the hobby has always intended you to do, which is to be creative and convert and do things you would otherwise feel uncomfortable doing .

Heres what ive got so far!

Your link is broken, just letting you know.

Also I don't care for Shrek, he just doesn't make a good body guard because he has plot armor.

I always thought it was funny that they had horse-mounted cavalry in the age of bikes, tanks, and aircraft. Just never made any sense to me. But, I will admit that I'm more in the vein of common sense than in the idea that everything look cool and logic be damned. I guess part of the stems from my time in the Marines and the fact that I don't like science fiction at all.

If they keep them, I hope they do make them viable. That one use lance was BS. And better models would be nice. Maybe make it so you could change out the torso with other models so if I was inclined I could put Cadian torsos on them and have them match the rest of my army.

 BunkerBob wrote:
Your link is broken, just letting you know.

Also I don't care for Shrek, he just doesn't make a good body guard because he has plot armor.

fixed...i think!

Nice conversion work there! I hope it works out for you.

 BunkerBob wrote:
Nice conversion work there! I hope it works out for you.

The only mistake i've made so far is that i accidentally bought 5 of the fat old lizardmen Cold ones. They arent bad (hes the one in the middle) but they change the dynamic of it. I've only kept them because my wife thinks they are cute =P

Still it is not bad at all, I like them to be honest.

Has anyone else been making new lists within the limitations of the rumors that have been floating about? I know some sections will be off but I don't see many setbacks beyond Vets getting hit hard by the nerf bat.

 BunkerBob wrote:
Still it is not bad at all, I like them to be honest.

Has anyone else been making new lists within the limitations of the rumors that have been floating about? I know some sections will be off but I don't see many setbacks beyond Vets getting hit hard by the nerf bat.

I think it may mirror stuff like you see in the ABG or DKOK where you get 2 special weapons instead of 3, probably a point increase

 Red__Thirst wrote:

I dig the concept of them, and having a nice counter-charge unit I can keep back and use would be a nice element to add to my force. I typically only use one to two fast attack options in my army also, so there's typically room for them more often than not.

they do compete with vendettas/valks/hellhounds for space, which makes them less attractive by proxy. But, in answer to the 'nobody uses them even in fluff lists' comment up above, I used 'em loads in my napoleonic-ish Guard. And while they died a lot, they also scared the bejeezus out of my MEQ opponent

All his plan was based around not being charged by those suckas. he started bringing landspeeder typhoons (a nice easy First Blood target) in order to try and snipe them. He'd keep a lot of his firepower hidden in rhinos until they were dead. Definitely created an effective threat bubble

also yes, they die like guardsmen and cost more than twice the points. But they are just soooo fun to play with, I'd love to see them in the new codex, and if the new minis are badass enough, I'll buy them instead of saving up for Victoria Minis versions


Automatically Appended Next Post:
in small battles (>1k) they were such an unexpected thing for Guard to have they put the pressure on and kept me the initiative often

Not that they helped me win much, but that's my generalship instead of the fault of the RR's themselves.

It'd play into GWs mentality but maybe if they had a larger unit size and lower point cost they could be more effective. Then like all new kits they make a second elite version of the unit with all the bells and whistles.

I wouldn't mind being able to use RR if they had better rules even though I'm more of a mech guy. Does anyone wish they would make sentinels better? I love the idea of them but their so weak. I've taken the scout a few times and its missed every time expect when it one shot a ironclad dreadnought with a missile launcher which I found very funny.

I don't think Rough Riders of Psyker Battle Squads will make it into the new book.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't think Rough Riders of Psyker Battle Squads will make it into the new book.

Well, pysker battle squads do *technically* have models. They're just metal/finecast. We may not see the exact unit stay intact but I'm sure we'll get some sort of cheap pysker unit with similar abilities.

Also, I would love to see Sentinels get a buff (or more likely, a points decrease) Maybe make them an addition to platoons. Since the fast attack slot is fairly crowded, it would be nice to see the Sentinel have the option to be taken as an "infantry support platform" with platoons, at the small cost of making them troops and losing their fast attack ability for the scouring.

For example, if a base Scout sentinel with multilaser was 25pts and could be taken as an add on to a platoon, I'm sure you'd see a lot more of them. Even if you could only buy one per platoon, it would give people a lot more incentive to use them.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't think Rough Riders of Psyker Battle Squads will make it into the new book.

...or the Colossus... Penal legion is a maybe since GW seems okay with variations on generic regiment minis. Just adding to the endangered units list.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I don't think Rough Riders of Psyker Battle Squads will make it into the new book.

Well, pysker battle squads do *technically* have models. They're just metal/finecast. We may not see the exact unit stay intact but I'm sure we'll get some sort of cheap pysker unit with similar abilities.

Truthfully, I would not be surprised to see some plastic psyker models. Whether it's just a single plastic model or a box of 5 for a kidney? I don't know.

Also, I would love to see Sentinels get a buff (or more likely, a points decrease) Maybe make them an addition to platoons. Since the fast attack slot is fairly crowded, it would be nice to see the Sentinel have the option to be taken as an "infantry support platform" with platoons, at the small cost of making them troops and losing their fast attack ability for the scouring.

For example, if a base Scout sentinel with multilaser was 25pts and could be taken as an add on to a platoon, I'm sure you'd see a lot more of them. Even if you could only buy one per platoon, it would give people a lot more incentive to use them.

I have been saying for ages that Sentinels should be a support option for Infantry Platoons--or purchasable as a "Troops" choice at a 1:1 ratio to mounted veteran/infantry squads.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:


For example, if a base Scout sentinel with multilaser was 25pts and could be taken as an add on to a platoon, I'm sure you'd see a lot more of them. Even if you could only buy one per platoon, it would give people a lot more incentive to use them.

I have been saying for ages that Sentinels should be a support option for Infantry Platoons--or purchasable as a "Troops" choice at a 1:1 ratio to mounted veteran/infantry squads.

Seriously. The units only about as useful as a heavy weapon team. They're such neat little models it's a shame GW has just hasn't made them work.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Well, pysker battle squads do *technically* have models. They're just metal/finecast. We may not see the exact unit stay intact but I'm sure we'll get some sort of cheap pysker unit with similar abilities.

The "Psyker Battle Squad" co-opted the Sanctioned Psyker miniatures and turned them into a unit so everyone who owned any had to go out and buy more (and they were already a 0-5 group of models that came in packs of 3, meaning in order to get 5 you had to buy 6). Them reverting back to advisors makes sense given the material they're made of. Unless they release a 5-man plastic psyker box, I don't see them hanging about. Same goes for RR's.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Also, I would love to see Sentinels get a buff (or more likely, a points decrease) Maybe make them an addition to platoons. Since the fast attack slot is fairly crowded, it would be nice to see the Sentinel have the option to be taken as an "infantry support platform" with platoons, at the small cost of making them troops and losing their fast attack ability for the scouring.

For example, if a base Scout sentinel with multilaser was 25pts and could be taken as an add on to a platoon, I'm sure you'd see a lot more of them. Even if you could only buy one per platoon, it would give people a lot more incentive to use them.

Or make them T5 W2 Sv3+ very bulky infantry models and that would solve a lot of problems. Or even Sv4+, with Fleet/Outflank/Scout, and Extra Armour gives a 5+ FNP and Enclosed Cockpit gives them Sv3+ but takes away the Fleet/Outflank/Scout.

 aka_mythos wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:


For example, if a base Scout sentinel with multilaser was 25pts and could be taken as an add on to a platoon, I'm sure you'd see a lot more of them. Even if you could only buy one per platoon, it would give people a lot more incentive to use them.

I have been saying for ages that Sentinels should be a support option for Infantry Platoons--or purchasable as a "Troops" choice at a 1:1 ratio to mounted veteran/infantry squads.

Seriously. The units only about as useful as a heavy weapon team. They're such neat little models it's a shame GW has just hasn't made them work.

I think the problem is that there is no real focus on what they are.

Should they be scouty, quick moving units? But wait--what would be the point of that if they're not CC beasts?
Maybe they should be heavy, slow units with heavy firepower? But wait--what would be the point of the other FA slots if Sentinels were cheaper but packed a nifty punch as well?

Sentinels should get a "Stomp" attack when in CC, and should get something allowing for them to serve as either flank harassers or to give up the chance for the Sentinel to attack in CC in order to be able to fire their main armament.

One thing I would not be surprised about is Flakk Missiles for the Missile Launcher Sentinel loadout--and for the standard Guard heavy weapon teams to boot.

I always hoped they'd make that catachan chain blade arm standard and have it represent something more.

The chainsaw arm for the catachan sentinels didn't make much sense. A NORMAL catachan guardsman has a bicep that is bigger than the weapon of a sentinel, why produce CC sentinels when you can produce super-bicep catachan soldiers?

Only just noticed that the hydra is slightly different from the FW model.

I now have images of ork conversions of an ork in the middle of those guns, screaming "DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKA!"

I'd love to see Sentinels get some love. I'm currently about to start painting a pair of them for my Vostroyans (Armored crew compartment type, the old metal/plastic Steel Legion Armored Sentinel box). I got them for a steal from my FLGS, just 30 bucks for two of them. Hoping to see them get a little cheaper in the near future. We'll see I suppose.

Take it easy.

-RT-

 LazzurusMan wrote:
Only just noticed that the hydra is slightly different from the FW model.

'Slightly different'...?

 Kirasu wrote:
The chainsaw arm for the catachan sentinels didn't make much sense. A NORMAL catachan guardsman has a bicep that is bigger than the weapon of a sentinel, why produce CC sentinels when you can produce super-bicep catachan soldiers?

I forgot that unlike the rest of the Imperium Catachan is the planet where sentinels ride the guardsmen. Why?-Because their planet just isn't hard enough on them.

Psykers made into grek knights, battle conclave for as, and inquisition. I don't see pbs being dropped, but I can see their stats being changed to be the same as gk/as/inq psykers with an overseer.

I don't think psykers will go, not unless GW is willing to invalidate the Imperial Guard psychic choir datasheet for Apocalypse, I don't see them doing that just yet.

 BrookM wrote:
I don't think psykers will go, not unless GW is willing to invalidate the Imperial Guard psychic choir datasheet for Apocalypse, I don't see them doing that just yet.

It seems like a terrible idea. Therefor, I predict GW will do it.

I do hope the Psychic Battle Squad stays in the codex. I rather like mine and enjoy running it immensely. Very useful little elite choice. I don't expect the unit to be removed. Changed up? Sure. Removed Entirely? Doubtful.

Just my thoughts, take it easy.

-RT-

I made my own Catachan rough riders a long time back.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I do hope the Psychic Battle Squad stays in the codex. I rather like mine and enjoy running it immensely. Very useful little elite choice. I don't expect the unit to be removed. Changed up? Sure. Removed Entirely? Doubtful.

Aye, spent quite some time tracking down blisters of the metals to get the squad up to full strength. I think the biggest change will be the powers they have access to.

Those Catachan Rough Riders are great!

So... No rules rumours at all yet?

I'm using a mix of Empire Pistoleer horses and Victoria Miniatures bits myself:



And yeah, I'm surprised that pics of the rules haven't been leaked yet, we got those pretty swiftly when the Knights first got "unveiled".

Those rules were in WD, rather than a Codex.

[Not a rumour]
One way they could do the Rough Riders is to make it a dual kit for Rough Riders (lances and pistols, fight from horseback) and Dragoons (lasguns, heavy and special weapons, can dismount to fight as a Veteran squad).

Half the IG heavy weapons already have the little wheeled trolleys, so it's not hard to imagine GW making one that can be pulled by a beast of burden.
[/Not a rumour]

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Those rules were in WD, rather than a Codex.

What does HBMC stand for?

New Pics of Vendetta in WD

Looks like that one might have 3 TLLCs, two wing-mounted turrets and then a hull mount (assuming symmetry on the wings.)

Sorry but no... It's the old kit with the forgeworld upgrade pack...

Isn't that just the Forgeworld kit?

Ahhh Vendetta huh ? Nice !

I am really wanting Rough Riders to receive some love in the codex as I would love to field the ones I am working on, a stat boost would be nice for sure !


So far the models we've seen haven't really excited me as much as I had hoped it would when i first saw the IG were getting an update, however the vendetta model is a step in the right direction, I just hope the codex is good too !

*Edit*

Oh I just saw people saying its the Forgeworld upgrade kit. This excites me less...

Kolbalt266 wrote:New Pics of Vendetta in WD

konst80hummel wrote:Sorry but no... It's the old kit with the forgeworld upgrade pack...

Agamemnon2 wrote:Isn't that just the Forgeworld kit?

Just wanted to show that the Vendetta in white dwarf

 Lansirill wrote:
Looks like that one might have 3 TLLCs, two wing-mounted turrets and then a hull mount (assuming symmetry on the wings.)

Exactly what the Vendetta already had.

Maybe, just maybe, we'll get lucky and GW will update the Valk box with parts to make a Ven. Granted, the conversion isn't difficult, but it would be nice to have all the parts in the kit.

Yeah, looks like the FW kit... so if the old FW one is pictured in the new WD, we probably won't be getting a new Valk/Vendetta kit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 spectreoneone wrote:
Maybe, just maybe, we'll get lucky and GW will update the Valk box with parts to make a Ven. Granted, the conversion isn't difficult, but it would be nice to have all the parts in the kit.

The conversion isn't difficult, but it's expensive if you go with FW and you need a bunch of spare lascannons around if you want to do it without the FW kit.

Did the vendetta always have a searchlight thing on the nose? I can't remember.

Looks like it:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Did the vendetta always have a searchlight thing on the nose? I can't remember.

Yup!

Not sure about the ogryn's yet, they look very plain compared to the current models.

Which could be a blessing when it comes to converting them for other IG forces other than cadia.

 Wolf wrote:
Ahhh Vendetta huh ? Nice !

I am really wanting Rough Riders to receive some love in the codex as I would love to field the ones I am working on, a stat boost would be nice for sure !

Spoiler:

So far the models we've seen haven't really excited me as much as I had hoped it would when i first saw the IG were getting an update, however the vendetta model is a step in the right direction, I just hope the codex is good too !

*Edit*

Oh I just saw people saying its the Forgeworld upgrade kit. This excites me less...

Also in the new codex. Rough Rider should gain access to carapace armor to make Cuirassier thing.

^ Absolutely it would help make them a little more durable if it gave +1 to armour saves.

 Red__Thirst wrote:
I for one would love to field some Rough Riders, but as with Ogryns and Ratlings, they don't exactly 'fit' my Regiment (Vostroyan Firstborn).

I dig the concept of them, and having a nice counter-charge unit I can keep back and use would be a nice element to add to my force. I typically only use one to two fast attack options in my army also, so there's typically room for them more often than not.

Sadly, the odds of even a third party making good miniatures that fit with the theme of the Vostroyans on horseback is slim at best.

That, and if I were to try and run Vostroyan Rough Riders, I'd want to have my Rough Riders riding bears, because bear Calvary is awesome.

Actually, I think the Attilan models are mostly there...they have the coats already. Just gotta cut down the hat and green stuff a big furry one. That's my plan for mine. I also might add wings from the Kislev lancers for a Hussar look, and then change the mount. Although I'm thinking Cold Ones for mine.

I hope RRs don't get the boot, because they're an IG classic.

I think a Hussar might be a little more 40k speed for a heavy elite infantry!

Don't have the IG codex, but do the rough riders have rules for something like a parthian shot? Or are they just meat holding melta's on a stick?

 Kirasu wrote:
The chainsaw arm for the catachan sentinels didn't make much sense. A NORMAL catachan guardsman has a bicep that is bigger than the weapon of a sentinel, why produce CC sentinels when you can produce super-bicep catachan soldiers?

They should just give Catachans a special rule called "We make Arnold Schwarzenegger look like a B#$%@" that gives them S7 and makes anyone shooting at them BS1 because bad guys can never aim. I'd buy those.

The valk/vendetta will be combined (I.e. valk that can be armed in many ways, including vendetta armament...) and still carry troops. In essense, the vendetta is gone, but a valk armed like a vendetta is what it will be in the new codex. Be on the lookout for new boxing, and additional sprue in gw valk kits...

 krazynadechukr wrote:
The valk/vendetta will be combined (I.e. valk that can be armed in many ways, including vendetta armament...) and still carry troops. In essense, the vendetta is gone, but a valk armed like a vendetta is what it will be in the new codex. Be on the lookout for new boxing, and additional sprue in gw valk kits...

Given the pics we've seen appear identical to the FW Vendetta, I'm not convinced we'll get a reboxing of the Valk with the Vendetta parts.

It never really made sense why the Valk and Vendetta were separate entries in the book anyway, so it wouldn't surprise me to see the codex entries consolidated.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Don't have the IG codex, but do the rough riders have rules for something like a parthian shot? Or are they just meat holding melta's on a stick?

You can pay for up to two models to drop their lances in favor of special weapons, and everyone's got laspistols. Allows for rapidly-redeploying firepower in exchange for less punch on the charge (y'know, the big draw of taking rough riders!) I do like taking a couple of flamers in large units, just so they've got something to do once they've exploded their main target.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
The valk/vendetta will be combined (I.e. valk that can be armed in many ways, including vendetta armament...) and still carry troops. In essense, the vendetta is gone, but a valk armed like a vendetta is what it will be in the new codex. Be on the lookout for new boxing, and additional sprue in gw valk kits...

Given the pics we've seen appear identical to the FW Vendetta, I'm not convinced we'll get a reboxing of the Valk with the Vendetta parts.

It never really made sense why the Valk and Vendetta were separate entries in the book anyway, so it wouldn't surprise me to see the codex entries consolidated.

I am having flashbacks here.

Way, way back, I posted when GW was making a plastic Valkyrie (even though FW had a resin one at that time) and heard same counter statements and shouts of heresy! "But FW already has a Valkyrie..."

Anyways, take it with a grain of salt if you want, but you'll see soon enough...... It jives with GW lowering points costs for guard across the board (so you have to buy more models) and also making the Valk/Vend a single fast entry, opens up a slot for folks to buy another fast model/s kit (more money for GW), it's all about the $$$$$$$$.

I know, I know, everyone says this, but I do have a very reliable source (same one from way back about plastic valk), and that source has never told me wrong (old military buddy of mine).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, the Vendetta from FW is just a conversion kit, why is it so hard to grasp that they would just add a (plastic) sprue to existing Valk kit (since they've completely replaced entire vehicles in the past)?

:Well it is at least still in, was fearing that it was removed.

 spectreoneone wrote:
Maybe, just maybe, we'll get lucky and GW will update the Valk box with parts to make a Ven. Granted, the conversion isn't difficult, but it would be nice to have all the parts in the kit.

I strongly doubt they would redo one of Valkyrie sprues to accommodate for the Vendetta configuration. The kit is 5 years old only, made with up-to-date 3D computer design. Even more striking with the Vakyrie kit, is its composition of no less than 4 full-size plastic sprues. It means it is already expensive to manufacture compared to more recent fliers / large monstrous creatures. To compare :

Valkyrie : 4 sprues, 52 €
Stormraven : 4 sprues, 65 €
Stormtalon : 2 sprues, 36 €
Heldrake : 2 sprues, 59 €
Trygon : 2 sprues, 46 €
Harpy : 2 sprues, 62 €
Riptide : 2 sprues, 65 €
Wraithknight : 3 sprues, 90 €
Paladin : 3 sprues, 110 €

So, above stupidity of GW's pricing, I'm struck on how how cheap the Valkyrie is, taking into account its size and the amount of stuff in the box !
I would not be surprised of a sudden price hike, however they seem to have stopped this hated practice, for now.

Of course the pics look like the FW one, the valk itself is GW plastic kit & "... the conversion kit for the plastic Valkyrie consists of just a nose- and wing-mounted lascannons and a replacement sensor pod." .... All they will do is recast it in plastic....

 krazynadechukr wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
The valk/vendetta will be combined (I.e. valk that can be armed in many ways, including vendetta armament...) and still carry troops. In essense, the vendetta is gone, but a valk armed like a vendetta is what it will be in the new codex. Be on the lookout for new boxing, and additional sprue in gw valk kits...

Given the pics we've seen appear identical to the FW Vendetta, I'm not convinced we'll get a reboxing of the Valk with the Vendetta parts.

It never really made sense why the Valk and Vendetta were separate entries in the book anyway, so it wouldn't surprise me to see the codex entries consolidated.

I am having flashbacks here.

Way, way back, I posted when GW was making a plastic Valkyrie (even though FW had a resin one at that time) and heard same counter statements and shouts of heresy! "But FW already has a Valkyrie..."

Anyways, take it with a grain of salt if you want, but you'll see soon enough...... It jives with GW lowering points costs for guard across the board (so you have to buy more models) and also making the Valk/Vend a single fast entry, opens up a slot for folks to buy another fast model/s kit (more money for GW), it's all about the $$$$$$$$.

I know, I know, everyone says this, but I do have a very reliable source (same one from way back about plastic valk), and that source has never told me wrong (old military buddy of mine).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, the Vendetta from FW is just a conversion kit, why is it so hard to grasp that they would just add a (plastic) sprue to existing Valk kit (since they've completely replaced entire vehicles in the past)?

I'm not saying it *because* FW have a model. Rather that the leaked pictures in the WD are of the FW model. If GW was releasing a plastic Vendetta sprue, I don't think they'd have several pictures of what appears to be the FW Vendetta.

Valk price is increasing too.

With all this talk of Valks and Vendettas, I am still hoping (praying, maybe) that Punisher Cannons make it into this codex on something other than the Russ. I know you can ally with IA to get the Vulture, but I would crap myself if IG could take a Valkyrie with TL Punisher cannons.

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Of course the pics look like the FW one, the valk itself is GW plastic kit & "... the conversion kit for the plastic Valkyrie consists of just a nose- and wing-mounted lascannons and a replacement sensor pod." .... All they will do is recast it in plastic....

Maybe. Though usually it's not trivial to recast resin to plastic, as resin can have undercuts, plastic cannot. Most FW -> GW kits aren't just simple recasts, they are genuinely new parts that look similar but not exactly the same.

I forsee the Vandetta being the "Tervigon" of the IG codex, I.E. it'll have a massive points cost to punish all the people who bought so many of them last edition, but it'll have the same configuration and so will be considered an almost auto-take by most competitive players.

Well, regardless of the "sprue" aspect of it all, with Vendetta becoming/merged into a Valkyrie, basically the Valk now with option to have TLLC option (be a "vendetta"), and still transport troops, and maybe being lowered in point cost, PLUS the fact GW will carry Forgeworld product starting April 7th, I am sure we will see lots of these on the battlefield soon!

 krazynadechukr wrote:
PLUS the fact GW will carry Forgeworld product starting April 7th

Umm, since when is this a FACT?

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Well, regardless of the "sprue" aspect of it all, with Vendetta becoming/merged into a Valkyrie, basically the Valk now with option to have TLLC option (be a "vendetta"), and still transport troops, and maybe being lowered in point cost, PLUS the fact GW will carry Forgeworld product starting April 7th, I am sure we will see lots of these on the battlefield soon!

Yeah, it's a reasonable bet to say the Valk and Vendetta will share a codex entry. Probably more like the Leman Russ variants, the Hellhound variants, the Ordnance variants.

They already are identical other than the weapons load out. They both have searchlights, they both transport 12 models, they can both be taken in squadrons, they are both fast attack and they both have grab chute insertion, so it makes sense they'd be a single unit entry.

I disagree with you on the "lowered points cost". GW aren't very intelligent when it comes to balance, since Valks/Vendettas are currently very popular, I assume they'll get much more expensive.

Honestly, the vendetta was way too cheap, even on 5th edition standards. There is no way it would have costed 130 points, when the Valkyrie, its weaker anti-infantry counterpart costed the same. Do the full-laser predator tank costs the same as the dakka predator ? Sure no, so why Robin Cruddace let is so for the Vendetta ? Certainly lack of though and playtesting, already.
Flyers are good in 6th, nonetheless expensive. Based simply on 5th edition costing mechanics, take your current Valkyrie : 130 points, and upgrade it with laser cannons.
Replace front multilaser with lascannon : +15 pts, replace wings rockets with lascannons : +2*15 pts.
twin-link all of them : +15 pts (or free if you want to be kind with guard).
TOTAL : 175 points to 190 points price range.

I'm expecting this kind of pricing. It would not even stop me from using mine (I'm not spamming them anyway).
Maybe they will push forward a smaller more point-efficient new flier to replace it. Go figure.

I assume Vendettas will be made TOO expensive.

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Honestly, the vendetta was way too cheap, even on 5th edition standards. There is no way it would have costed 130 points, when the Valkyrie, its weaker anti-infantry counterpart costed the same. Do the full-laser predator tank costs the same as the dakka predator ? Sure no, so why Robin Cruddace let is so for the Vendetta ? Certainly lack of though and playtesting, already.
Flyers are good in 6th, nonetheless expensive. Based simply on 5th edition costing mechanics, take your current Valkyrie : 130 points, and upgrade it with laser cannons.
Replace front multilaser with lascannon : +15 pts, replace wings rockets with lascannons : +2*15 pts.
twin-link all of them : +15 pts (or free if you want to be kind with guard).
TOTAL : 175 points to 190 points price range.

I'm expecting this kind of pricing. It would not even stop me from using mine (I'm not spamming them anyway).
Maybe they will push forward a smaller more point-efficient new flier to replace it. Go figure.

The Valk costs 130 WITH Rocket Pods, or IIRC 105 without.

I'd like to see the Valk stay the same price, lose extra armor. Replace Multilaser with Las cannon, 10 points or TLLC for 15. May choose either Hellstrike or Hellfury Missiles for free, take 2X rocket pods for +25, or 2X TLLC for +45.

 Lone Cat wrote:

 Wolf wrote:
Ahhh Vendetta huh ? Nice !

I am really wanting Rough Riders to receive some love in the codex as I would love to field the ones I am working on, a stat boost would be nice for sure !

Spoiler:

So far the models we've seen haven't really excited me as much as I had hoped it would when i first saw the IG were getting an update, however the vendetta model is a step in the right direction, I just hope the codex is good too !

*Edit*

Oh I just saw people saying its the Forgeworld upgrade kit. This excites me less...

Also in the new codex. Rough Rider should gain access to carapace armor to make Cuirassier thing.

The DKoK Death Riders are kitted that way, with French style breastplate and now considered a 4+ armor save.

That said, there's a reason such Cuirassier's ceased existing or wearing such uniforms/outfits a hundred years ago also

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Honestly, the vendetta was way too cheap, even on 5th edition standards. There is no way it would have costed 130 points, when the Valkyrie, its weaker anti-infantry counterpart costed the same. Do the full-laser predator tank costs the same as the dakka predator ? Sure no, so why Robin Cruddace let is so for the Vendetta ? Certainly lack of though and playtesting, already.
Flyers are good in 6th, nonetheless expensive. Based simply on 5th edition costing mechanics, take your current Valkyrie : 130 points, and upgrade it with laser cannons.
Replace front multilaser with lascannon : +15 pts, replace wings rockets with lascannons : +2*15 pts.
twin-link all of them : +15 pts (or free if you want to be kind with guard).
TOTAL : 175 points to 190 points price range.

I'm expecting this kind of pricing. It would not even stop me from using mine (I'm not spamming them anyway).
Maybe they will push forward a smaller more point-efficient new flier to replace it. Go figure.

The Valk costs 130 WITH Rocket Pods, or IIRC 105 without.

I'd like to see the Valk stay the same price, lose extra armor. Replace Multilaser with Las cannon, 10 points or TLLC for 15. May choose either Hellstrike or Hellfury Missiles for free, take 2X rocket pods for +25, or 2X TLLC for +45.

Of course with rocket pods ! If I'm comparing the full-laser predator to the dakka pred', it was for a reason. I'm not comparing it with the bare bone predator configuration.

The bare bone Valkyrie is irrelevant, it's 100 points with a multilaser and two single-use flimsy anti-tank Hellstrike missiles. It's trash, a bad joke.
Comparing a somewhat weak, but still usable anti-infantry variant (frag' rockets pods) versus a powerful anti-tank version is relevant.
And based on this type of comparison, Vendetta should have been pricier in V5, and should take a price hike in V6 codex.

I think that Polish Hussar thing needs to happen. I'd get an IG army just for them. Increase their armor a bit, give them fear or something and you're good to go!

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
Honestly, the vendetta was way too cheap, even on 5th edition standards. There is no way it would have costed 130 points, when the Valkyrie, its weaker anti-infantry counterpart costed the same. Do the full-laser predator tank costs the same as the dakka predator ? Sure no, so why Robin Cruddace let is so for the Vendetta ? Certainly lack of though and playtesting, already.
Flyers are good in 6th, nonetheless expensive. Based simply on 5th edition costing mechanics, take your current Valkyrie : 130 points, and upgrade it with laser cannons.
Replace front multilaser with lascannon : +15 pts, replace wings rockets with lascannons : +2*15 pts.
twin-link all of them : +15 pts (or free if you want to be kind with guard).
TOTAL : 175 points to 190 points price range.

I'm expecting this kind of pricing. It would not even stop me from using mine (I'm not spamming them anyway).
Maybe they will push forward a smaller more point-efficient new flier to replace it. Go figure.

The Valk costs 130 WITH Rocket Pods, or IIRC 105 without.

I'd like to see the Valk stay the same price, lose extra armor. Replace Multilaser with Las cannon, 10 points or TLLC for 15. May choose either Hellstrike or Hellfury Missiles for free, take 2X rocket pods for +25, or 2X TLLC for +45.

Of course with rocket pods ! If I'm comparing the full-laser predator to the dakka pred', it was for a reason. I'm not comparing it with the bare bone predator configuration.

The bare bone Valkyrie is irrelevant, it's 100 points with a multilaser and two single-use flimsy anti-tank Hellstrike missiles. It's trash, a bad joke.
Comparing a somewhat weak, but still usable anti-infantry variant (frag' rockets pods) versus a powerful anti-tank version is relevant.
And based on this type of comparison, Vendetta should have been pricier in V5, and should take a price hike in V6 codex.

Another change besides points adjustments would be to remove the squadron option from them, or possibly remove them from FA completely, and make them dedicated transports for company command, stormtroopers, and platoons/veterans with an "Airborne" doctrine

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Lone Cat wrote:

 Wolf wrote:
Ahhh Vendetta huh ? Nice !

I am really wanting Rough Riders to receive some love in the codex as I would love to field the ones I am working on, a stat boost would be nice for sure !

Spoiler:

So far the models we've seen haven't really excited me as much as I had hoped it would when i first saw the IG were getting an update, however the vendetta model is a step in the right direction, I just hope the codex is good too !

*Edit*

Oh I just saw people saying its the Forgeworld upgrade kit. This excites me less...

Also in the new codex. Rough Rider should gain access to carapace armor to make Cuirassier thing.

The DKoK Death Riders are kitted that way, with French style breastplate and now considered a 4+ armor save.

That said, there's a reason such Cuirassier's ceased existing or wearing such uniforms/outfits a hundred years ago also

Many Kriegsche collectors/players prefer them to be 'french' rather than 'germans'. maybe because the designer created them that way, giving them a sallet helmet with central comb rather than plasteel pickehaube or adrians.
WW1 eliminated Cuirassiers as cavalry unit, machineguns made horsemen obsolette. (and so same ol' Baroque era warfare). BUT i guess the Poles invented the 'explosive-tipped hunting lance' and used them in WW2 against German panzerkampfwagens.

This FOC adjustment would be fluffy and nice. Losing a bit of resilience (extra-armor is not needed thanks to V6 rules on stunned fliers, and rarity of stunned occurrence anyway) would not be a big harm.
I too, would like the rocket Valkyrie to keep its current price. Making a viable and scoring airborne force with stromtroopers (like in many action / sci-fi movies) would be awesome. Especially if it is not an overpowered nonsense. We will soon see, but no solid info for now...

 Lone Cat wrote:
BUT i guess the Poles invented the 'explosive-tipped hunting lance' and used them in WW2 against German panzerkampfwagens.

This is a myth. There is no recorded example of Polish cavalry charging armour.

It was German propaganda meant to degrade the Poles as a whole.

 BrookM wrote:
It was German propaganda meant to degrade the Poles as a whole.

In order to keep this thread from locking, how about we talk about the actual rumors/WD stuff, etc rather than wishlisting and history lessons.

 pretre wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
It was German propaganda meant to degrade the Poles as a whole.

In order to keep this thread from locking, how about we talk about the actual rumors/WD stuff, etc rather than wishlisting and history lessons.

Well, the Vendettas that were shown in WD were part of a spread about Apocalypse--so they definitely were from this week's WD. The models were part of the WD staff member's Guard armies, not the Studio armies--so it's definitely Forge World Vendetta kits not plastic Vendetta bits.

 Lone Cat wrote:

Many Kriegsche collectors/players prefer them to be 'french' rather than 'germans'. maybe because the designer created them that way, giving them a sallet helmet with central comb rather than plasteel pickehaube or adrians.
WW1 eliminated Cuirassiers as cavalry unit, machineguns made horsemen obsolette. (and so same ol' Baroque era warfare). BUT i guess the Poles invented the 'explosive-tipped hunting lance' and used them in WW2 against German panzerkampfwagens.

Well, no Sir, I disagree. Polish cavalry never stupidly charged panzers in 1939. This was a nazi propaganda hoax, made-up to show the "inferiority" of Slavic people. However, there was at least one occurrence of a panzer force counter-attacking a polish cavalry company which had defeated german infantry. Polish cavalry was considered tactically as fast moving infantry detachment, for scooting / harassing uses. True, WW1 had already dismissed any conventional role to cavalry in an era dominated by long-range rifles, machine guns and artillery. And yes, even the proud traditional cuirassiers with their armoured plates (and flashy red pants...) were completely obsolete from WW1 start. Horses are far from fearless in this environment anyway.

edit : ninja'ed

 Kanluwen wrote:

Well, the Vendettas that were shown in WD were part of a spread about Apocalypse--so they definitely were from this week's WD. The models were part of the WD staff member's Guard armies, not the Studio armies--so it's definitely Forge World Vendetta kits not plastic Vendetta bits.

Which is sad, since a simple upgrade sprue for the Valk with repack would have been nice.

Seemed to have taken something of a diversion into history for a while there but we're back on track now, be easier for all if we were to maintain this corrected course.

Thanks

What would you guys like to see happen to the Hydra? Interceptor and the ability to not snapfire at ground units would be pre tight. PaK 88 anyone?

Hell, make it TL. I don't want to buy a valk or rely on fortifications for AA. I use tank heavy guard for a reason.

 Las wrote:
What would you guys like to see happen to the Hydra? Interceptor and the ability to not snapfire at ground units would be pre tight. PaK 88 anyone?

How about we keep the wishlisting to a minimum? I think the big question is whether the Hydra pics show a chance of a dual-kit, but no one has been able to get a definitive answer yet. :(

Looks like yes, it is a dual kit, the rear platform more or less confirms that if you ask me.

Just got my monthly pay bonus come through, think ill keep hold of it for now though
Want to know if vehicle squadrons are still a choice 1st.

Always seen people run a unit of 3 bassys but never tried it, so might splash out and get a unit.
However, i want to make sure GW isnt doing anything stupid 1st, like making them a unit of 1 max.

 BrookM wrote:
Looks like yes, it is a dual kit, the rear platform more or less confirms that if you ask me.

I could definitely see it doubling as some of the Ordnance tanks. The only doubt in my mind is the sheer size of the Hydra Guns. They will single handedly take up most of a sprue. I doubt you could fit something like a Colossus mortar and the Hydra Guns on a single sprue. That means GW would be throwing away a sprue with each kit.

Most of the dual kits I know all the options fit on a single sprue. Look at the Leman Russ variants, all the turret options along with the turret itself and part of the hull all fit on a single sprue. The imperial knight, both weapon options + part of the body fit on a single sprue. The Manticore, all the missile options fit on the one sprue that expands it from being a simple Chimera. Several others as well.

So that's the one thing that makes me think the Hydra won't be a dual kit, simply that the Hydra's guns are so big they'll take up most a sprue on their lonesome. Just a Hydra by itself I think would be a 2 sprue kit, any sort of dual kit I reckon would have to be a 3 sprue kit.

Maybe a Griffon could fit on there?

Or maybe the Hydra is going to be a 3 sprue kit which is horribly expensive, lol.

Again:
The Hydra is almost certainly going to be a dual kit with the Basilisk. The Basilisk is currently a Direct Only item, and has been since 2013. We know that they plan things far, far in advance so this is not unheard of.

Many Kriegsche collectors/players prefer them to be 'french' rather than 'germans'.

NEIN! My DKOK is wearing 1943 SS autumn camo while my vehicles sport spring 1943!!!!

 pretre wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Well, the Vendettas that were shown in WD were part of a spread about Apocalypse--so they definitely were from this week's WD. The models were part of the WD staff member's Guard armies, not the Studio armies--so it's definitely Forge World Vendetta kits not plastic Vendetta bits.

Which is sad, since a simple upgrade sprue for the Valk with repack would have been nice.

It doesn't mean there won't be one--it just means that these photos aren't it.

With that said, I kind of hope we can say good riddance to the Vendetta. It's an abomination that never should have been approved. It would have been far simpler for them to put the Vulture in or an actual, dedicated anti-tank flyer. Not this hideous multirole blargher.

I think the Vendetta was fine before the flyer rules came about, maybe a little bit cheap, but not terribly so.

 Kanluwen wrote:
With that said, I kind of hope we can say good riddance to the Vendetta. It's an abomination that never should have been approved. It would have been far simpler for them to put the Vulture in or an actual, dedicated anti-tank flyer. Not this hideous multirole blargher.

There you go again, telling us how we shouldn't have things.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
With that said, I kind of hope we can say good riddance to the Vendetta. It's an abomination that never should have been approved. It would have been far simpler for them to put the Vulture in or an actual, dedicated anti-tank flyer. Not this hideous multirole blargher.

There you go again, telling us how we shouldn't have things.

Saying "It should never have existed" is not the same as "We shouldn't have something".

Plus it's not like there wasn't already, y'know, the Vulture Gunship.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
With that said, I kind of hope we can say good riddance to the Vendetta. It's an abomination that never should have been approved. It would have been far simpler for them to put the Vulture in or an actual, dedicated anti-tank flyer. Not this hideous multirole blargher.

There you go again, telling us how we shouldn't have things.

Saying "It should never have existed" is not the same as "We shouldn't have something".

Plus it's not like there wasn't already, y'know, the Vulture Gunship.

Gotta agree with Kan here, it's no more saying that people shouldn't have something than the outcry over the aesthetics of the Taurox is.

Speaking of RR being removed from the GW sight has anyone noticed the techpriests are now under elites and not HQ so that rumor must have been true

410mcollins wrote:
Speaking of RR being removed from the GW sight has anyone noticed the techpriests are now under elites and not HQ so that rumor must have been true

Guessing based off of the webstore is not a terribly accurate method.

I wonder if they will get grav guns?

I also Vendetta isnt good...

 pretre wrote:

410mcollins wrote:
Speaking of RR being removed from the GW sight has anyone noticed the techpriests are now under elites and not HQ so that rumor must have been true

Guessing based off of the webstore is not a terribly accurate method.

Unfortunately in this case it's not a bad method. Enginseers were under the HQ slot until roughly three weeks back.

Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 pretre wrote:

410mcollins wrote:
Speaking of RR being removed from the GW sight has anyone noticed the techpriests are now under elites and not HQ so that rumor must have been true

Guessing based off of the webstore is not a terribly accurate method.

Unfortunately in this case it's not a bad method. Enginseers were under the HQ slot until roughly three weeks back.

We saw Steel Legion go away from GW webstore, and then a leak of the new packaging for them sprouted up. That could be the case for RR too...

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

Nope, Blanche himself stated Cossacks and Russian infantry.

Unless he's getting mixed up with Death Korp?

I might go down to GW for like the fourth time in my life to buy this see what the annoying sales guy there will try on me. But when will this be available to just walk in and buy? Anyone know?

The codex I mean.

Three or so weeks from now.

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

They seem like a mix of French napoleonic grenadiers and cossacks to me. I hope they will keep them in the future line. They look great, have a distinct 40k millenium feel, and a nice fluff.
We now GW is retreating from metal production, but this recent and rich range owes to be kept !

 BrookM wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

Nope, Blanche himself stated Cossacks and Russian infantry.

But was John Blanche really honest saying so ? Could he openly admit inspiring from French napoleonic, an army enemy of Great Britain ? Cossacks had much straightforward coats, more and few ornate weapons. As should be for a steppe army. Napoleonic grenadiers on the other hand share an ornate look with vostroyans. They borrowed their fur cap tradition from cossacks, which make these units linked of course.

cheers. it says pre orders from 22nd? So its a 2 week ish wait from then? I have never pre ordered before sorry.

 Swastakowey wrote:
cheers. it says pre orders from 22nd? So its a 2 week ish wait from then? I have never pre ordered before sorry.

Just check the GW site daily.

 krazynadechukr wrote:
We saw Steel Legion go away from GW webstore, and then a leak of the new packaging for them sprouted up. That could be the case for RR too...

That steel legion box shot was fake.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
But was John Blanche really honest saying so ? Could he openly admit inspiring from French napoleonic, an army enemy of Great Britain ?

Mmm, you're totally right. We have laws against mentioning the Napoleonic war. Because it's so relevant to us, and all. Why, just last week I saw three coal-streaked urchins hanged outside the pie and mash shop in Whitechapel for possessing a caricature of Bonaparte scrawled on a fish and chip wrapper

 Bull0 wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
But was John Blanche really honest saying so ? Could he openly admit inspiring from French napoleonic, an army enemy of Great Britain ?

Mmm, you're totally right. We have laws against mentioning the Napoleonic war. Because it's so relevant to us, and all. Why, just last week I saw three coal-streaked urchins hanged outside the pie and mash shop in Whitechapel for possessing a caricature of Bonaparte scrawled on a fish and chip wrapper

King George will not look kindly on this 'John's' continental sympathies.To the stocks with him, and then we retire to the gentleman's club for scotch and racism!

 Kanluwen wrote:
Again:
The Hydra is almost certainly going to be a dual kit with the Basilisk. The Basilisk is currently a Direct Only item, and has been since 2013. We know that they plan things far, far in advance so this is not unheard of.

I concur. Two other arguments back this idea.
First. The elevating circular gears seen on the Hydra guns picture, are very similar in shape and size to the old one of Basilisk. Look above the crewman :



Second. While basilisk kit was updated consecutively to V5 Chimera kit being redone, it kept many outdated sprues components : the accessory sprue for the gunner and some bits, and two 1990's small sprues.
Redesigning these elements to fit on one big current GW's sprues leads to manufacturing economies, and some space to include hydra guns. I'm curious to see if they will circumvent gamer's techniques who magnetize components to swap from a codex entry to another. I suspect them to be slightly vicious, and similarly to the manticore / deathstrike kit, key components would then need to be glued in not swappable configuration.

If it is a dual kit with some kind of artillery, I bet that you need the elevating gears in a different position for the alternate build.

 BrookM wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

Nope, Blanche himself stated Cossacks and Russian infantry.

F E E L of French Napoleonic Grenadiers.... Not citing scripture here fella.....

 BrookM wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
cheers. it says pre orders from 22nd? So its a 2 week ish wait from then? I have never pre ordered before sorry.

Just check the GW site daily.

if your signed up for marketing material from GW, its a safe bet you'll get an email when it goes up for preorder

Big fan of the Rough Riders personally, having long ago learned to use them as a counter-punch against CC armies, rather than running forward and trying to get the charge off aggressively.

Going with the modern "Two kits in one" approach, I'd say that the best bet would be to do them up as lancers and dragoons, with one option getting the power lance and probably carapace armor while the other was more rapid redeploy, with las carbines or even sniper rifles.

Probably a base unit of Guardsmen stats, +1 Toughness for being on horseback, and treated as fleet, rather than beasts (Since horses and woods go together poorly) ... from there, you get a laspistol and lascarbine (that can be switched out for a CCW for free), optional special weapons (say one per five models), and the entire crew can have one-shot power lances for X pts and/or carapace armor for Y pts. If you were feeling frisky, you could add on the Scout rule as well. The base points would be low, in the 8-10 pt range, since you're just a Fleet guardsman with T4, but weapon mods would push it up.

In a perfect world, there'd even be options included for mounted command squads and cavalry platoons, but that's just dreaming, sadly.

Still the option should always be there for your somewhat primative Imperial worlds giving up their best and brightest, even if the rest of the universe and goes, "Nice horse. I have a tank."

Perfect Organism wrote:If it is a dual kit with some kind of artillery, I bet that you need the elevating gears in a different position for the alternate build.

Absolutely. Elevating gears on peripheral position for hydra, but much more centered for basilisk.
We will see if there is a way to get around on the matter.

krazynadechukr wrote:

 BrookM wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

Nope, Blanche himself stated Cossacks and Russian infantry.

F E E L of French Napoleonic Grenadiers.... Not citing scripture here fella.....

Nice catch !

Wakshaani wrote:


Probably a base unit of Guardsmen stats, +1 Toughness for being on horseback, and treated as fleet, rather than beasts (Since horses and woods go together poorly)

There is an "cavalry" sub-type in the 6E rulebook. 12'' move, not slowed by difficult terrain but counts all difficult terrain as dangerous terrain; have fleet and hammer of wrath.

 krazynadechukr wrote:

 BrookM wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

Nope, Blanche himself stated Cossacks and Russian infantry.

F E E L of French Napoleonic Grenadiers.... Not citing scripture here fella.....

I mean, I don't have a dog in this race, but while you did say "Feel" you also said "T H E Y W E R E B A S E D O F F"

 Bull0 wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:

 BrookM wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Vostroyans would be more suited for a "French" feel since they were based off french grenadiers...

Nope, Blanche himself stated Cossacks and Russian infantry.

F E E L of French Napoleonic Grenadiers.... Not citing scripture here fella.....

I mean, I don't have a dog in this race, but while you did say "Feel" you also said "T H E Y W E R E B A S E D O F F"

 reds8n wrote:
Seemed to have taken something of a diversion into history for a while there but we're back on track now, be easier for all if we were to maintain this corrected course.

Thanks

Just saying...

This isn't what he was talking about with that and we aren't discussing history. Just saying...

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
With that said, I kind of hope we can say good riddance to the Vendetta. It's an abomination that never should have been approved. It would have been far simpler for them to put the Vulture in or an actual, dedicated anti-tank flyer. Not this hideous multirole blargher.

There you go again, telling us how we shouldn't have things.

Saying "It should never have existed" is not the same as "We shouldn't have something".

Plus it's not like there wasn't already, y'know, the Vulture Gunship.

Gotta agree with Kan here, it's no more saying that people shouldn't have something than the outcry over the aesthetics of the Taurox is.

It's not like many people are going to be running a 6 to 9 vendetta list. Its just too expensive for an average joe. I hope the vendetta stays exactly the same. I think it would be fair if they put a max on how many you can take though. Spamming anything detracts from the gaming experience for many gamers.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Wakshaani wrote:


Probably a base unit of Guardsmen stats, +1 Toughness for being on horseback, and treated as fleet, rather than beasts (Since horses and woods go together poorly)

There is an "cavalry" sub-type in the 6E rulebook. 12'' move, not slowed by difficult terrain but counts all difficult terrain as dangerous terrain; have fleet and hammer of wrath.

Sure, but which were remarkable cavalry units throughout V5 & V6 editions ? Thunderwolves cavalry for sure, some mounted daemons, OK. What else ? Not IG outdated outclassed cavalry.
I've seen them played once, and they were converted cadians anyway.

IG cavalry is a bit let down, from many years. I remember clearly, at the end of V4 edition, almost all IG's good old metals were discontinued. There was doubts about cavalry availability.
They have been kindly reintroduced in the vastly varied miniature range available when V5 codex hit the stores. Like Valhallans, Mordians, Tallarns, Steel Legionaires were breathed new life with an extended availability period.

Now, I don't like to be doom and gloom, but I fear they are gone definitely. Simply look at how huge the IG range was, and how rationalized other armies are now (into a few plastic / finecast boxes).
So far,we have been given this information :
1 refreshed ogryn box
1 new stormtrooper 5-man squad box
0-1 supposed commissar unit / splittable individuals in plastic box
1 unexpected light transport
1 ( maybe 2) renewed artillery kit


I don't see any room for a cavalry unit, sorry for the guys who like them.
Hope for Forgeworld to take care of them (Mukaali riders of Tallarn, there were old Tallarn metal horse riders also, some time ago).

Can we just agree that Krieg and Vostroya are obviously French names

 Kroothawk wrote:
Can we just agree that Krieg and Vostroya are obviously French names

They are not, mein herr Kroot. Just a cunning cover for two partly French inspired miniatures (and parlty German / Cossack respectively).

Vostroya sounds distinctly Russian/Cossack to me. I'm not exactly a student of history though, so I'm sure my frame of reference isn't as informed/vast as others here.

That said, I hope to be able to get more models for the Vostroyan Firstborn line in the future. I've got what I need for now, but would like to expand the force a little more, so that I can run a couple of infantry platoons and have enough models left to field a veteran squad or two with supporting heavy weapons teams. Truth be told, that's what I'd like are some more Vostroyan heavy weapon teams, specifically the Lascannon teams, a few special weapons (Plasmaguns, and maybe one or two more grenade launchers) as well as some Sergeants/Officers. That's whats holding me back currently to be honest. C'est-la-vie.

I wonder if GW is going to do what they've done with the codex supplements for some of the larger/more well known Regiments after the new codex drops?

I'd love to see some unique doctrines for Regiments like Steel Legion, Tallarn, Vostroyan, and Valhallan given some attention this way.

Hell, I'll be honest, I'd enjoy seeing some attention given to the Vostroyans (persona bias speaking here, sorry) and maybe a named character you could field with them to give them some flavor.

C'est la vie, guess we'll see when the time comes.

Thanks guys, take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

I fear for my Elysians.

 BrookM wrote:
I fear for my Elysians.

I wouldn't. Just like the DKoK, they're Forgeworld and operate off of a slightly different paradigm than the rest of the I.G. regiments out there. As for special characters/rules outside of what Forgeworld has for them, who knows.

Time to troll Ebay for Vostroyan auctions that won't cost an arm, leg, or firstborn child.

Take it easy.

-RT-

 Kroothawk wrote:
Can we just agree that Krieg and Vostroya are obviously French names

Vostro is Italian... Krieg is a German Word. Kislev (the Warhammer Fantasy "Rus" army) is a Jewish/Hebrew word. Elysian is Greek.... Steel Legion is based off WW2 German Paratroopers....

I doubt we can put any stock in GWs naming method.

They are what you make them to be...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BrookM wrote:
I fear for my Elysians.

I have a DKOK army, but run them as regular guard! So don't panic! There will always be a way to play with the minis you have, even if the list changes....

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Can we just agree that Krieg and Vostroya are obviously French names

They are not, mein herr Kroot. Just a cunning cover for two partly French inspired miniatures (and parlty German / Cossack respectively).

I know it's hard to read tone on the internet, but can y'all REALLY not tell sarcasm at all?

Delirious pedantry is one of the symptoms of Nonewsitis. This usually sets in in N&R threads that have gone more than three days without any valid rumors.

Kind of surprised no thread has mentioned the LE void shield generators for sale this weekend.

Evidence of generators?

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Again:
The Hydra is almost certainly going to be a dual kit with the Basilisk. The Basilisk is currently a Direct Only item, and has been since 2013. We know that they plan things far, far in advance so this is not unheard of.

I concur. Two other arguments back this idea.
First. The elevating circular gears seen on the Hydra guns picture, are very similar in shape and size to the old one of Basilisk. Look above the crewman :



Second. While basilisk kit was updated consecutively to V5 Chimera kit being redone, it kept many outdated sprues components : the accessory sprue for the gunner and some bits, and two 1990's small sprues.
Redesigning these elements to fit on one big current GW's sprues leads to manufacturing economies, and some space to include hydra guns. I'm curious to see if they will circumvent gamer's techniques who magnetize components to swap from a codex entry to another. I suspect them to be slightly vicious, and similarly to the manticore / deathstrike kit, key components would then need to be glued in not swappable configuration.

If this is a dual kit with the Basilisk then why is the Basilisk using the old hull and Bassie parts just looking at the hulls you can see the difference between them If it was a dual Hydra / Basilisk kit it should be using the same hull shouldn't it? it might be a dual kit with something else but I don't think it is the Basilisk.

 sonofruss wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Again:
The Hydra is almost certainly going to be a dual kit with the Basilisk. The Basilisk is currently a Direct Only item, and has been since 2013. We know that they plan things far, far in advance so this is not unheard of.

I concur. Two other arguments back this idea.
First. The elevating circular gears seen on the Hydra guns picture, are very similar in shape and size to the old one of Basilisk. Look above the crewman :



Second. While basilisk kit was updated consecutively to V5 Chimera kit being redone, it kept many outdated sprues components : the accessory sprue for the gunner and some bits, and two 1990's small sprues.
Redesigning these elements to fit on one big current GW's sprues leads to manufacturing economies, and some space to include hydra guns. I'm curious to see if they will circumvent gamer's techniques who magnetize components to swap from a codex entry to another. I suspect them to be slightly vicious, and similarly to the manticore / deathstrike kit, key components would then need to be glued in not swappable configuration.

If this is a dual kit with the Basilisk then why is the Basilisk using the old hull and Bassie parts just looking at the hulls you can see the difference between them If it was a dual Hydra / Basilisk kit it should be using the same hull shouldn't it? it might be a dual kit with something else but I don't think it is the Basilisk.

I thought we had all agreed on a Griffon/Hydra since the amount of parts and set up seems right

 sonofruss wrote:

If this is a dual kit with the Basilisk then why is the Basilisk using the old hull and Bassie parts just looking at the hulls you can see the difference between them If it was a dual Hydra / Basilisk kit it should be using the same hull shouldn't it? it might be a dual kit with something else but I don't think it is the Basilisk.

Because the studio armies do not always use the newest models?

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Wakshaani wrote:


Probably a base unit of Guardsmen stats, +1 Toughness for being on horseback, and treated as fleet, rather than beasts (Since horses and woods go together poorly)

There is an "cavalry" sub-type in the 6E rulebook. 12'' move, not slowed by difficult terrain but counts all difficult terrain as dangerous terrain; have fleet and hammer of wrath.

Sure, but which were remarkable cavalry units throughout V5 & V6 editions ? Thunderwolves cavalry for sure, some mounted daemons, OK. What else ? Not IG outdated outclassed cavalry.
I've seen them played once, and they were converted cadians anyway.

IG cavalry is a bit let down, from many years. I remember clearly, at the end of V4 edition, almost all IG's good old metals were discontinued. There was doubts about cavalry availability.
They have been kindly reintroduced in the vastly varied miniature range available when V5 codex hit the stores. Like Valhallans, Mordians, Tallarns, Steel Legionaires were breathed new life with an extended availability period.

Now, I don't like to be doom and gloom, but I fear they are gone definitely. Simply look at how huge the IG range was, and how rationalized other armies are now (into a few plastic / finecast boxes).
So far,we have been given this information :
1 refreshed ogryn box
1 new stormtrooper 5-man squad box
0-1 supposed commissar unit / splittable individuals in plastic box
1 unexpected light transport
1 ( maybe 2) renewed artillery kit


I don't see any room for a cavalry unit, sorry for the guys who like them.
Hope for Forgeworld to take care of them (Mukaali riders of Tallarn, there were old Tallarn metal horse riders also, some time ago).

wut

The hydra kit could be a Hydra/Salamander kit too.

All you would need is one hydra autocannon to make it work.

It would make sense to me at least.

It's either that, or the basilisk. I really wish they would cover the colossus and Griffon with a plastic kit too, but it is what it is.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 sonofruss wrote:

If this is a dual kit with the Basilisk then why is the Basilisk using the old hull and Bassie parts just looking at the hulls you can see the difference between them If it was a dual Hydra / Basilisk kit it should be using the same hull shouldn't it? it might be a dual kit with something else but I don't think it is the Basilisk.

Because the studio armies do not always use the newest models?

The problem with that is why not use the new shiny to promote the duality of the kit in that pic you have both the new Hydra and OOP Basilisk. I can see it being a dual kit with a different kit like a different artillery tank.

I don't see any room for a cavalry unit

Huh, with 3 fast choices in the org chart, the fact that valk/vendetta are being "combined" into 1 fast choice (1-3), sentinels are another option for fast (1-3), and hellhounds too, PLUS possible points being lowered for guard across the board, I'd imagine salamanders (rumor) and/or rough riders would make an easy "entry" into guard for optional fast choices. Most armies avg about 4 fast choices for their 3 slots...

Or, your statement might have meant, you do not feel GW can "release" so many kits (?) over 4 or 5 weeks (since they are doing weekly releases now), but rough riders already exist...

IMHO, RR will stay...

I'm still not convinced the Hydra will be a dual kit with a Basi, just because I don't think you could fit all the parts on a single sprue and if it is a dual kit, it would waste more plastic than any dual kit we've seen in the past (at least the ones of which I'm aware). The Hydra guns are as long as the tank's hull, all 4 of them will take up most of a sprue. A salamander dual kit makes a bit more sense because it will use one of the Hydra's guns.

Though I would like to see it being a dual kit with a colossus or a griffon. If we don't get a colossus model, it may be dropped from the codex, as I don't see a colossus on the FW site either.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'm still not convinced the Hydra will be a dual kit with a Basi, just because I don't think you could fit all the parts on a single sprue and if it is a dual kit, it would waste more plastic than any dual kit we've seen in the past (at least the ones of which I'm aware). The Hydra guns are as long as the tank's hull, all 4 of them will take up most of a sprue. A salamander dual kit makes a bit more sense because it will use one of the Hydra's guns.

Though I would like to see it being a dual kit with a colossus or a griffon. If we don't get a colossus model, it may be dropped from the codex, as I don't see a colossus on the FW site either.

The biggest part of the sprue is the gunshield. If they redid the gunshield slightly, they could make it pull double duty for the Basilisk and the Hydra.

This would explain why the Hydra is open topped. With a little redesign you could easily make that gun shield work for the basilisk and the Hydra. Have we see a full on pic of a basilisk in the leaked photos to see if the old gunshield is intact?

Maybe the new Basilisk will be a Vanaheim pattern:

Will GW allows roughriders to use lasguns once again?

 pretre wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Well, the Vendettas that were shown in WD were part of a spread about Apocalypse--so they definitely were from this week's WD. The models were part of the WD staff member's Guard armies, not the Studio armies--so it's definitely Forge World Vendetta kits not plastic Vendetta bits.

Which is sad, since a simple upgrade sprue for the Valk with repack would have been nice.

which it's not about the time to repack .. YET. actually GW prefers players to buy extra boxsets.
but to balance an entire removing Vendetta gunship completely is NOT COOL. add more army points to it made more sense

Will fighter thing included in codex and will there be plastic boxset too? if so, which slots will it occupy? Fast Attack or Heavy support ??

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'm still not convinced the Hydra will be a dual kit with a Basi, just because I don't think you could fit all the parts on a single sprue and if it is a dual kit, it would waste more plastic than any dual kit we've seen in the past (at least the ones of which I'm aware). The Hydra guns are as long as the tank's hull, all 4 of them will take up most of a sprue. A salamander dual kit makes a bit more sense because it will use one of the Hydra's guns.

Though I would like to see it being a dual kit with a colossus or a griffon. If we don't get a colossus model, it may be dropped from the codex, as I don't see a colossus on the FW site either.

The biggest part of the sprue is the gunshield. If they redid the gunshield slightly, they could make it pull double duty for the Basilisk and the Hydra.

This would explain why the Hydra is open topped. With a little redesign you could easily make that gun shield work for the basilisk and the Hydra. Have we see a full on pic of a basilisk in the leaked photos to see if the old gunshield is intact?

Spoiler:

As I've mentioned earlier in this thread, I do believe you could make a Basi without a lot of extra parts. It's just the sheer size of the parts that make me think it won't happen. The Earthshaker cannon is big and so are the Hydra Guns, so even if you can reuse all the other parts, there will still be a lot of wasted plastic going for a dual kit because the guns themselves are so large and will take up a large portion of the available sprues.

Have we see a full on pic of a basilisk in the leaked photos to see if the old gunshield is intact?

Behind the Hydra there is a Basi that clearly still has the old gunshield. So there's a lot of reasons why the Hydra wouldn't be a dual kit with the Basi.

1. Leaked Hydra picture has old Basi in the background.

2. The fact there'd be a lot of wasted plastic/sprue space.

3. Because there already is a Basi. It would make more sense to go with a Griffon, Medusa or Colossus which currently don't have kits from GW, the latter of which doesn't have ANY kit from either GW or FW.

BlaxicanX wrote:

 Ravajaxe wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Wakshaani wrote:


Probably a base unit of Guardsmen stats, +1 Toughness for being on horseback, and treated as fleet, rather than beasts (Since horses and woods go together poorly)

There is an "cavalry" sub-type in the 6E rulebook. 12'' move, not slowed by difficult terrain but counts all difficult terrain as dangerous terrain; have fleet and hammer of wrath.

Sure, but which were remarkable cavalry units throughout V5 & V6 editions ? Thunderwolves cavalry for sure, some mounted daemons, OK. What else ? Not IG outdated outclassed cavalry.
I've seen them played once, and they were converted cadians anyway.

IG cavalry is a bit let down, from many years. I remember clearly, at the end of V4 edition, almost all IG's good old metals were discontinued. There was doubts about cavalry availability.
They have been kindly reintroduced in the vastly varied miniature range available when V5 codex hit the stores. Like Valhallans, Mordians, Tallarns, Steel Legionaires were breathed new life with an extended availability period.

Now, I don't like to be doom and gloom, but I fear they are gone definitely. Simply look at how huge the IG range was, and how rationalized other armies are now (into a few plastic / finecast boxes).
So far,we have been given this information :
1 refreshed ogryn box
1 new stormtrooper 5-man squad box
0-1 supposed commissar unit / splittable individuals in plastic box
1 unexpected light transport
1 ( maybe 2) renewed artillery kit


I don't see any room for a cavalry unit, sorry for the guys who like them.
Hope for Forgeworld to take care of them (Mukaali riders of Tallarn, there were old Tallarn metal horse riders also, some time ago).

wut

Why this seems crazy to you ?

krazynadechukr wrote:

I don't see any room for a cavalry unit

Huh, with 3 fast choices in the org chart, the fact that valk/vendetta are being "combined" into 1 fast choice (1-3), sentinels are another option for fast (1-3), and hellhounds too, PLUS possible points being lowered for guard across the board, I'd imagine salamanders (rumor) and/or rough riders would make an easy "entry" into guard for optional fast choices. Most armies avg about 4 fast choices for their 3 slots...

Or, your statement might have meant, you do not feel GW can "release" so many kits (?) over 4 or 5 weeks (since they are doing weekly releases now), but rough riders already exist...

IMHO, RR will stay...

It is not about cavalry itself not having its place (or a niche at least) in IG army. It is just about production capabilities. GW streamline everything possible, got rid of hybrid material boxes (metal+plastic), made every new box as dual-kit since years. We have been rumoured many new boxes already, and we don't have any positive hint regarding IG's cavalry future. Plus V2 IG cavalry got OOP recently...



Oh and why keeping an unarmoured cavalry unit, as IG already have access to armoured knights anyway :

Why not a kit with a Griffon and a Colossus? They could have the same chassis I think.

 sonofruss wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 sonofruss wrote:

If this is a dual kit with the Basilisk then why is the Basilisk using the old hull and Bassie parts just looking at the hulls you can see the difference between them If it was a dual Hydra / Basilisk kit it should be using the same hull shouldn't it? it might be a dual kit with something else but I don't think it is the Basilisk.

Because the studio armies do not always use the newest models?

The problem with that is why not use the new shiny to promote the duality of the kit in that pic you have both the new Hydra and OOP Basilisk. I can see it being a dual kit with a different kit like a different artillery tank.

Because unless it's drastically different, there's no real reason to do so. There's also the question of painting deadlines, getting everything all in a unified color scheme and other logistical bits.

I really doubt they'd picture a new Hydra that can also be made in to a new shiny Basilisk next to an old crusty Basilisk unless it was just a slip up.

GW are happy enough to paint show models to a low quality, a lot of the Imperial Knight show models were pretty averagely painted, just a basecoat, single shade, and 1 or 2 edge highlights. I doubt they'd fail to paint a model ready for it's own advertising.

 Bull0 wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
We saw Steel Legion go away from GW webstore, and then a leak of the new packaging for them sprouted up. That could be the case for RR too...

That steel legion box shot was fake.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ravajaxe wrote:
But was John Blanche really honest saying so ? Could he openly admit inspiring from French napoleonic, an army enemy of Great Britain ?

Mmm, you're totally right. We have laws against mentioning the Napoleonic war. Because it's so relevant to us, and all. Why, just last week I saw three coal-streaked urchins hanged outside the pie and mash shop in Whitechapel for possessing a caricature of Bonaparte scrawled on a fish and chip wrapper

Best post 2014.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I really doubt they'd picture a new Hydra that can also be made in to a new shiny Basilisk next to an old crusty Basilisk unless it was just a slip up.

GW are happy enough to paint show models to a low quality, a lot of the Imperial Knight show models were pretty averagely painted, just a basecoat, single shade, and 1 or 2 edge highlights. I doubt they'd fail to paint a model ready for it's own advertising.

You're assuming that we aren't seeing the new Basilisk, which potentially has very little in the way of "newness".

It's most likely the old Basilisk but it does have the new siding from the currently selling Chimera kit.

 Kanluwen wrote:
You're assuming that we aren't seeing the new Basilisk, which potentially has very little in the way of "newness".

We aren't seeing it. The Basilisk in the picture is very clearly NOT a dual kit with the Hydra. In fact it isn't even the current Basilisk kit, since it has the side hull pieces of the old one. There's absolutely no way you could make a kit that duplicates what you see in the picture and still uses enough of the Hydra parts for it to be a meaningful "dual kit".

 Kanluwen wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I really doubt they'd picture a new Hydra that can also be made in to a new shiny Basilisk next to an old crusty Basilisk unless it was just a slip up.

GW are happy enough to paint show models to a low quality, a lot of the Imperial Knight show models were pretty averagely painted, just a basecoat, single shade, and 1 or 2 edge highlights. I doubt they'd fail to paint a model ready for it's own advertising.

You're assuming that we aren't seeing the new Basilisk, which potentially has very little in the way of "newness".

It's most likely the old Basilisk but it does have the new siding from the currently selling Chimera kit.

If the Basi is a new Basi, I'll be even more surprised if it's a dual kit with the Hydra because it's using the same old gun shield and a different upper hull. It's basically a full sprue worth of differences, so I'd imagine they'd still be separate vehicles.

As far as I can see, dual kits exist because they can fit one variant on 1.5 or 2.5 sprues and the other variant on the other 0.5 of a sprue. That way it doesn't cost them much extra to do the dual kit and they actually reduce the amount of manufacturing to produce the same number of units.

If the parts required to make the 2nd variant take up a whole sprue, it kind of defies the point of doing a dual kit. That's a large part of the reason I don't think the Hydra is a dual kit with a Basi. I could be wrong though!

I'm definitely interested in seeing how the Ordnance tanks turn out, I'm hoping they make a Colossus instead of just dropping it and also introduce some non-FW options for the other Ordnance tanks.

If this was the new Basilisk, I'd expect it to be painted with the same tone of green as the new Hydra.

For the Ogryns, the fact that apparently there's what appears to be manufactured armor with mounting brackets for tread-links seems a bit silly. Using spare links as 'improvised armor' on tanks is kind of neat, maybe as a shoulder-guard on an Ogryn, but having it as a part of what appears to be manufactured armor seems a bit silly.

 Balance wrote:
For the Ogryns, the fact that apparently there's what appears to be manufactured armor with mounting brackets for tread-links seems a bit silly. Using spare links as 'improvised armor' on tanks is kind of neat, maybe as a shoulder-guard on an Ogryn, but having it as a part of what appears to be manufactured armor seems a bit silly.

It is quite possible that the tank treads fitting onto the breast plate is a happy coincidence. We really have no way of knowing if that is (in universe) intentional or not.

I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed by this release. There's so many things that could be done, rough riders, new ordnance vehicles, including the lascannons in the valkyrie box, a new flyer, a new large tank, a different regiment plasticised instead of just cadians and catachans... but we've already seen 4 of the plastic kits we're getting (which haven't really blown me away) and somehow I doubt there's much more to come.

Same latent disappointment feeling for me.
Hydra kit is an edition late, on top of that. It was the ultimate hotness of optimized IG builds in fifth edition. Hydra could have sold like little pancakes.
I can't number how much kit-bashed hydras I have seen back then, to avoid the FW price. I've not seen it played much recently. Vanilla SM received a better tank on top of that...
Even if I think of a Hydra / Basilisk kit, there is still hope that they will grant us a Hydra / Griffon kit, or a second yet unveiled Griffon / *something else*.


Then, there is this awful disproportionate pig-face Taurox vehicle. Bwah !

Yeah this release doesn't seem to be living up to recent releases in my eyes :/ I just hope there is a second wave that makes everything better !

Disappointed by a release that hasn't even happened yet. Good times.

Well so far none of the new kits are exciting me except the Hydra, if the codex turns out to be great then I'll perk up a little

I just want more news on what is to come really, rules and more pictures pleaaase

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed by this release. There's so many things that could be done, rough riders, new ordnance vehicles, including the lascannons in the valkyrie box, a new flyer, a new large tank, a different regiment plasticised instead of just cadians and catachans... but we've already seen 4 of the plastic kits we're getting (which haven't really blown me away) and somehow I doubt there's much more to come.

Eh I like the release overall, the more techy Ogryn are nice, I might actually buy and field some, plastic storm troopers are great even if I hate the rigid armour/soft hat combo, it seems like kitbashing them into looking like Kasrkin only requires some cadian heads (IIRC the command squad box comes with respirators too) and a cadian torso instead of the knight like torso, the Taurox is ugly, but I imagine with some wheels to make it look like an armoured car and lower its profile it will be nice, I just want a single gun on the turret instead of multi-barrel guns, maybe a lascannon or something. Honestly I don't care for any new Ordnance, although I am a bit bummed out that we didn't get some rough riders, I can see Empire knights matching aesthetically with the new storm troopers, making it a good over all army theme.

The Stormtrooper kit actually includes helmeted heads, so you're not just stuck with the berets.

 pretre wrote:
Disappointed by a release that hasn't even happened yet. Good times.

Well we've already seen 4 brand new kits. Most the recent releases have only been, what, 3 new kits + some repackaging?

So if the IG release is following the recent trend in Codex releases, we've already seen all there is to see in the way of new kits.

An overpriced Stormtroopers kit

An ugly Taurox

Some Ogryns

A Hydra, which doesn't really excite my pants all that much given we already had a FW Hydra, this just makes it cheaper to obtain.

The Hydra may or may not be a dual kit, so we'll see how that pans out. But I was excited by the rumours of a new flyer and a new large tank model, so at this point I'm still pretty "meh".

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Disappointed by a release that hasn't even happened yet. Good times.

Well we've already seen 4 brand new kits. Most the recent releases have only been, what, 3 new kits + some repackaging?

And by 'seen' you mean we've gotten a couple bad pics from WD. Just saying it is a bit early to be disappointed when we don't even know the details of what is in the kits, etc.

 pretre wrote:
Disappointed by a release that hasn't even happened yet. Good times.

You sound almost surprised!

 pretre wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Disappointed by a release that hasn't even happened yet. Good times.

Well we've already seen 4 brand new kits. Most the recent releases have only been, what, 3 new kits + some repackaging?

And by 'seen' you mean we've gotten a couple bad pics from WD. Just saying it is a bit early to be disappointed when we don't even know the details of what is in the kits, etc.

Regardless of what's in the kits, the Stormtroopers are still 21GBP for only 5 models, the Taurox is still ugly, and the Hydra is still just a cheaper version of what we could already get from FW.

I remain optimistic that the Hydra MIGHT be a cool dual kit.

And hey, maybe they're going to release more than has been leaked... I didn't say I was disappointed, I said "I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed..."

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I didn't say I was disappointed, I said "I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed..."

And I didn't say I was talking about you...

Unless they decide to give the Hydra interceptor, I don't see what possible appeal it will have. Even to a complete fluff-bunny beer n pretzels pleeb, the unit is literally useless on the tabletop if your opponent isn't bringing air.

I just don't understand the thought process...

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Regardless of what's in the kits, the Stormtroopers are still 21GBP for only 5 models, the Taurox is still ugly, and the Hydra is still just a cheaper version of what we could already get from FW.

Except we have had multiple examples in the past where people have proclaimed the failure of a new model from the leaked pics only to turn around on it when the actual models hit the table. So, again, might want to wait for the actual release before giving up on it.

 pretre wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I didn't say I was disappointed, I said "I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed..."

And I didn't say I was talking about you...

I know, just clarifying seeing as your 2nd post was to me

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Even to a complete fluff-bunny beer n pretzels pleeb, the unit is literally useless on the tabletop if your opponent isn't bringing air.

That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

 pretre wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Regardless of what's in the kits, the Stormtroopers are still 21GBP for only 5 models, the Taurox is still ugly, and the Hydra is still just a cheaper version of what we could already get from FW.

Except we have had multiple examples in the past where people have proclaimed the failure of a new model from the leaked pics only to turn around on it when the actual models hit the table. So, again, might want to wait for the actual release before giving up on it.

I don't think I've ever done that, so I feel confident in my feeling that Stormtroopers are too expensive, Taurox is ugly and the Hydra is just a (hopefully!) cheaper version of what we already had.

Buttons wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I have a feeling I'm going to be disappointed by this release. There's so many things that could be done, rough riders, new ordnance vehicles, including the lascannons in the valkyrie box, a new flyer, a new large tank, a different regiment plasticised instead of just cadians and catachans... but we've already seen 4 of the plastic kits we're getting (which haven't really blown me away) and somehow I doubt there's much more to come.

Eh I like the release overall, the more techy Ogryn are nice, I might actually buy and field some, plastic storm troopers are great even if I hate the rigid armour/soft hat combo, it seems like kitbashing them into looking like Kasrkin only requires some cadian heads (IIRC the command squad box comes with respirators too) and a cadian torso instead of the knight like torso, the Taurox is ugly, but I imagine with some wheels to make it look like an armoured car and lower its profile it will be nice, I just want a single gun on the turret instead of multi-barrel guns, maybe a lascannon or something. Honestly I don't care for any new Ordnance, although I am a bit bummed out that we didn't get some rough riders, I can see Empire knights matching aesthetically with the new storm troopers, making it a good over all army theme.

I suspect Ogryns can use alot from the Centurion kits with minimal work.

One assumes that they'll be limited somewhat with regards to any changes they make by the fairly recently reprinted and revised Imperial Armour 1

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Imperial_Armour_Books/IMPERIAL_ARMOUR_VOLUME_ONE_SECOND_EDITION_IMPERIAL_GUARD.html


As this includes rules for the Russ tanks, Chimera, Hydra etc etc they'd have to stay the same ?

Unless they wish to invalidate a £55 reprint of a £50 book, which would piss off a lot of ..

,,..oh.


Oh dear.

On the plus side perhaps this is why we get the new vehicle, as it doesn't invalidate anything else ?

Does anyone have the revised IA : 1 at all ?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 pretre wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Regardless of what's in the kits, the Stormtroopers are still 21GBP for only 5 models, the Taurox is still ugly, and the Hydra is still just a cheaper version of what we could already get from FW.

Except we have had multiple examples in the past where people have proclaimed the failure of a new model from the leaked pics only to turn around on it when the actual models hit the table. So, again, might want to wait for the actual release before giving up on it.

I don't think I've ever done that, so I feel confident in my feeling that Stormtroopers are too expensive, Taurox is ugly and the Hydra is just a (hopefully!) cheaper version of what we already had.

You're basing your judgement of the Stormtroopers kit on two pictures, which is silly. For all you know the kit comes with masses of spares, a la most of the new plastic GW kits, to allow you to bling out a load of plastic cadians, etc.

Your opinion of the Taurox is subjective (although I agree, it's not an attractive kit) and why is getting a FW tank variant in plastic something to be disappointed about? At the very least that's also pretty personal to you.

You've also left out the fact that there are 2 books coming (Codex and Stormtroopers supp) and there are some other bits and pieces rumoured. Use all the winky faces you want, you're moaning about something you don't have the full story on.