Galas wrote:
See? This is why I hate wargames. It appeals to the fanboy fantasy of people and corporations conspiring to destroy their toys just because they chose to make into plastic one style of power armour instead of other style of power armour.

Damn, no kidding. talk about hangups.

 RaptorusRex wrote:
People complaining about "anachronistic" armor marks is the logical end result of the same attitude that led to that WD guy's Son of Horus army getting excoriated. First of all, yes, there was Corvus armor in production by that time. Even Mk. VII was being produced by the Siege of Terra. Secondly, what are you trying to prove? That you're more of a pedant than anyone else?

I demand historical accuracy in my game about *checks notes* super soldiers 40k years in the future fighting alien races and literal demons...

 RaptorusRex wrote:
... that led to that WD guy's Son of Horus army getting excoriated.

Please elaborate.

A guy made a nice SoH army that got featured in WD, and it had Primaris marines in it.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Mk.II and Mk.V are the two I want the most, and, weirdly, are the only two they don't make in plastic. Even Mk.VIII exists in plastic thanks to the Deathwatch Vet kit (and the odd bit in the Tactical Squad box).

give it time, they'll likely put out MK V armor the next time they wanna do a HH box. including the upcoming one GW's put out 3 HH boxes. Betrayal at Calith (MK IV) Properio (MK 3) and the upcoiming box with MK VI.

seems a safe bet we'll get a battle box with MK V down the road.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JWBS wrote:
A guy made a nice SoH army that got featured in WD, and it had Primaris marines in it.

which GW proably deliberately selected to enforce that "your guys do what you want!" and push back against pendantry like the folks complaining typically did

Toofast wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
People complaining about "anachronistic" armor marks is the logical end result of the same attitude that led to that WD guy's Son of Horus army getting excoriated. First of all, yes, there was Corvus armor in production by that time. Even Mk. VII was being produced by the Siege of Terra. Secondly, what are you trying to prove? That you're more of a pedant than anyone else?

I demand historical accuracy in my game about *checks notes* super soldiers 40k years in the future fighting alien races and literal demons...

Kind of irrelevant since he wants to adhere to a fictional history. The rules are made up too, would you play with cheaters? Assuming you believe they exist.

I guess it really doesn't matter, I'll just use Stormtroopers as Clone troopers in my next legion match. The fake history isn't really important enough to bother being accurate. I mean they're both suits of laminate armor, how can it be such a big deal? Anyone who has an issue with it is just a toxic gatekeeper anyways and I wouldn't want to play with them in the first place. They probably spend way to much time being "lore accurate" painting correct legion/battalion markings on every squad or worrying about phase 1 and phase 2 armor or some stupid gak like that.

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
I guess it really doesn't matter, I'll just use Stormtroopers as Clone troopers in my next legion match. The fake history isn't really important enough to bother being accurate. I mean they're both suits of laminate armor, how can it be such a big deal? Anyone who has an issue with it is just a toxic gatekeeper anyways and I wouldn't want to play with them in the first place. They probably spend way to much time being "lore accurate" painting correct legion/battalion markings on every squad or worrying about phase 1 and phase 2 armor or some stupid gak like that.

You didnt fight in the "Number of Clones War" did you...

JWBS wrote:
A guy made a nice SoH army that got featured in WD, and it had Primaris marines in it.

I just looked, and I find it hilarious that the first result on google for "iron warriors primaris" are the minis I painted xD.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
I guess it really doesn't matter, I'll just use Stormtroopers as Clone troopers in my next legion match. The fake history isn't really important enough to bother being accurate. I mean they're both suits of laminate armor, how can it be such a big deal? Anyone who has an issue with it is just a toxic gatekeeper anyways and I wouldn't want to play with them in the first place. They probably spend way to much time being "lore accurate" painting correct legion/battalion markings on every squad or worrying about phase 1 and phase 2 armor or some stupid gak like that.

I mean... yes?

JWBS wrote:
A guy made a nice SoH army that got featured in WD, and it had Primaris marines in it.

Oh I'd love to see that, googling hasn't revealed that picture or what WD its in!

Isn't going back to MkVI a ret-ret-con anyway? The first Horus Heresy set game featuring marines, was Space Marine, which contained marines all wearing MKVI.

Seems a sensible choice as we already have MKIII and MKIV in plastic (even if the scale is slightly out) and I suspect MKV would be a bit of a nightmare to do well in plastic due to all the potential undercuts for the studs.

Also it ties in nicely with the 35th Anniversary of 40K and RTB01.

 Gir Spirit Bane wrote:

JWBS wrote:
A guy made a nice SoH army that got featured in WD, and it had Primaris marines in it.

Oh I'd love to see that, googling hasn't revealed that picture or what WD its in!

Google "White Dwarf Sons of Horus Army". It hasn't revealed which issue it was in, but I found a pic, and a video complaining about it from 2020. Apparently, the dude doesn't play Horus Heresy at all and uses it as a 40k Ultramarines army.

It was a SoH army that also had some Primaris because the owner, Simon Elsen, liked the models. It was primarily HH era models but again like the Ben Greaves incident, the fragile babies in the HH community sent harassment towards the guy because he dared to paint models in a scheme he liked.

If I remember rightly, they published that under the Horus Heresy banner which riled people up. Unfortunately, some took it upon themselves to go after Simon for some reason where his only sin was to paint an army of "Your Dudes". Not his fault for what the Warhammer Community and White Dwarf publishes.

Edit: For context:

Happen there’s a Horus Heresy Open Day at Warhammer World Saturday 7 May 2022.

Potential launch date?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Happen there’s a Horus Heresy Open Day at Warhammer World Saturday 7 May 2022.

Potential launch date?

could be. THE WAITING DRIVES ME CRAZY!

gonna be hard figuring out what legion to dive into though

 ohreally wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
And wasn't it just a justification as to WHY adeptis titanicus models where fighting eachother

More or less. It started as a fluff bit in the 1988 Rogue Trader book and then was built on when they did the AT (and later 1st edition Epic) to justify why both sides had the same robots but painted different colors.

This is an extremely common misconception but there is no mention of the Horus Heresy in Rogue Trader.

That's on me, I meant to write Rogue Trader Chapter Approved Book, at least I got the year right.

HH was not mentioned in the RT book but it was soon after.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Mk.II and Mk.V are the two I want the most, and, weirdly, are the only two they don't make in plastic. Even Mk.VIII exists in plastic thanks to the Deathwatch Vet kit (and the odd bit in the Tactical Squad box).

Thunder Warriors or GTFO.

Thunder Warriors vs techno barbarians in the ruins of Earth. That's the game I want now.

 ohreally wrote:


This is an extremely common misconception but there is no mention of the Horus Heresy in Rogue Trader.

Not really. But it's a common misconception that there are still some similarities remaining between the original Horus Heresy background and the ret-con train wreck it became after the Horus Rising novel going forward.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Happen there’s a Horus Heresy Open Day at Warhammer World Saturday 7 May 2022.
Potential launch date?

Only reason I would say no is that IIRC GWs fiscal year ends May 31st. Usually they launch this type of a product after the year end so that they can get a running start to the numbers for the next year and have something solid to report for their half-year statement.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Mk.II and Mk.V are the two I want the most, and, weirdly, are the only two they don't make in plastic. Even Mk.VIII exists in plastic thanks to the Deathwatch Vet kit (and the odd bit in the Tactical Squad box).

Thunder Warriors or GTFO.

Thunder Warriors vs techno barbarians in the ruins of Earth. That's the game I want now.

This.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Happen there’s a Horus Heresy Open Day at Warhammer World Saturday 7 May 2022.

Potential launch date?

Joe over on Bolter+Chainsword posted this:

This huge event is a must for every fan of Warhammer: The Horus Heresy. The massive new edition will be on display in all its glory, and you’ll be able to marvel at the fantastic new miniatures, glory in some of the sprawling studio armies on display, and paint one of the new plastic MkVI Space Marines – who you’ll even get to take home with you.

You’ll also meet some of the top content creators from around the community in person. And, of course, you’ll have the chance to try out the new game, with focused demos to explain some of the core mechanics of the rules.

The event will also feature a brand new open format painting competition that all attendees can enter so get your best Horus Heresy models ready to go to see if you can become a Legend of Paint! We'll be sending out more details on this so keep those paints and brushes primed and ready for action!

So, it's looking like a May release date!

Or at the very least it might be preorders going or gone live, with a 2 week window or something.

yeah doesn't sound like its releasing on May 7th based on that, sounds like it'll be a preview event.

 zedmeister wrote:
If I remember rightly, they published that under the Horus Heresy banner which riled people up. Unfortunately, some took it upon themselves to go after Simon for some reason where his only sin was to paint an army of "Your Dudes". Not his fault for what the Warhammer Community and White Dwarf publishes.

Edit: For context:

The reaction is stupid, but its clear from the article text that he is trying to build a heresy army, to the point of building his own versions of the HH novels' characters. The WD people put it under the Heresy banner for a reason.


------
The preview open day is interesting. Though... I hope they don't wait until May to show off decent pictures of the box set contents..

Obligatory link:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/03/28/caught-horus-heresy-fever-play-the-new-edition-before-its-released-at-a-special-warhammer-world-event/

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
I guess it really doesn't matter, I'll just use Stormtroopers as Clone troopers in my next legion match. The fake history isn't really important enough to bother being accurate. I mean they're both suits of laminate armor, how can it be such a big deal? Anyone who has an issue with it is just a toxic gatekeeper anyways and I wouldn't want to play with them in the first place. They probably spend way to much time being "lore accurate" painting correct legion/battalion markings on every squad or worrying about phase 1 and phase 2 armor or some stupid gak like that.

I'm genuinely puzzled by this post. I assume it is meant to be some sort of satire instead of presenting an eminently reasonable position in good faith...

 Crimson wrote:
I'm genuinely puzzled by this post. I assume it is meant to be some sort of satire instead of presenting an eminently reasonable position in good faith...

It's definitely satire but he's making a point that it doesn't matter what hobby you're in, if there's a certain pre-set cannon then there will always be a subset of people who expect that cannon to be adhered to. Now you can level accusations of gatekeeper all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that you're fighting against two strands, or maybe more, of wargamer and you'll never change this. The one strand who is in for total immersion who treats the game as part re-enactment and part wargame, right down to correct use of equipment and uniforms, will be the one who gets annoyed at this. The MkVI at Istvaan 3 armour issue or Sons of Horus primaris trouble can be seen in the same vein as what Midnightdeathblade was impying when talking about using Stormtroopers in the clone wars era or the hypothetical Historical gamer getting annoyed at his opponent using Peninsula War uniforms during the battle of Waterloo for Napoleonics. Most of the time, you'll almost never encounter this in person as most people attending events or clubs will already know of the environment they're stepping into.

 zedmeister wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I'm genuinely puzzled by this post. I assume it is meant to be some sort of satire instead of presenting an eminently reasonable position in good faith...

It's definitely satire but he's making a point that it doesn't matter what hobby you're in, if there's a certain pre-set cannon then there will always be a subset of people who expect that cannon to be adhered to. Now you can level accusations of gatekeeper all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that you're fighting against two strands, or maybe more, of wargamer and you'll never change this. The one strand who is in for total immersion who treats the game as part re-enactment and part wargame, right down to correct use of equipment and uniforms, will be the one who gets annoyed at this. The MkVI at Istvaan 3 armour issue or Sons of Horus primaris trouble can be seen in the same vein as what Midnightdeathblade was impying when talking about using Stormtroopers in the clone wars era or the hypothetical Historical gamer getting annoyed at his opponent using Peninsula War uniforms during the battle of Waterloo for Napoleonics. Most of the time, you'll almost never encounter this in person as most people attending events or clubs will already know of the environment they're stepping into.

I can appreciate attention to detail, but ultimately I play a fantasy wargame instead of a historical one so that I have freedom to use my imagination. I will convert, model and paint my army according to what I think looks cool, not according to some dusty manual of made-up history that has already been retconned countless times and is self-contradictory. In this regard the strength of Warhammer has always been that the fluff is vague, messy and up to interpretation, so it seems extremely counterproductive to get all OCD about it.

 Crimson wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I'm genuinely puzzled by this post. I assume it is meant to be some sort of satire instead of presenting an eminently reasonable position in good faith...

It's definitely satire but he's making a point that it doesn't matter what hobby you're in, if there's a certain pre-set cannon then there will always be a subset of people who expect that cannon to be adhered to. Now you can level accusations of gatekeeper all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that you're fighting against two strands, or maybe more, of wargamer and you'll never change this. The one strand who is in for total immersion who treats the game as part re-enactment and part wargame, right down to correct use of equipment and uniforms, will be the one who gets annoyed at this. The MkVI at Istvaan 3 armour issue or Sons of Horus primaris trouble can be seen in the same vein as what Midnightdeathblade was impying when talking about using Stormtroopers in the clone wars era or the hypothetical Historical gamer getting annoyed at his opponent using Peninsula War uniforms during the battle of Waterloo for Napoleonics. Most of the time, you'll almost never encounter this in person as most people attending events or clubs will already know of the environment they're stepping into.

I can appreciate attention to detail, but ultimately I play a fantasy wargame instead of a historical one so that I have freedom to use my imagination. I will convert, model and paint my army according to what I think looks cool, not according to some dusty manual of made-up history that has already been retconned countless times and is self-contradictory. In this regard the strength of Warhammer has always been that the fluff is vague, messy and up to interpretation, so it seems extremely counterproductive to get all OCD about it.

This.

GW make games set in a fictional setting, which is big enough to cover anyone's creative designs. Let people paint/convert their models how they see fit after all... the models belong to the owner.

 stonehorse wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I'm genuinely puzzled by this post. I assume it is meant to be some sort of satire instead of presenting an eminently reasonable position in good faith...

It's definitely satire but he's making a point that it doesn't matter what hobby you're in, if there's a certain pre-set cannon then there will always be a subset of people who expect that cannon to be adhered to. Now you can level accusations of gatekeeper all you like, but that doesn't change the fact that you're fighting against two strands, or maybe more, of wargamer and you'll never change this. The one strand who is in for total immersion who treats the game as part re-enactment and part wargame, right down to correct use of equipment and uniforms, will be the one who gets annoyed at this. The MkVI at Istvaan 3 armour issue or Sons of Horus primaris trouble can be seen in the same vein as what Midnightdeathblade was impying when talking about using Stormtroopers in the clone wars era or the hypothetical Historical gamer getting annoyed at his opponent using Peninsula War uniforms during the battle of Waterloo for Napoleonics. Most of the time, you'll almost never encounter this in person as most people attending events or clubs will already know of the environment they're stepping into.

I can appreciate attention to detail, but ultimately I play a fantasy wargame instead of a historical one so that I have freedom to use my imagination. I will convert, model and paint my army according to what I think looks cool, not according to some dusty manual of made-up history that has already been retconned countless times and is self-contradictory. In this regard the strength of Warhammer has always been that the fluff is vague, messy and up to interpretation, so it seems extremely counterproductive to get all OCD about it.

This.

GW make games set in a fictional setting, which is big enough to cover anyone's creative designs. Let people paint/convert their models how they see fit after all... the models belong to the owner.

But don't allow 3D printed parts/models or conversions during GW tournaments . This is the reason some are worried as they have seen odd rules held at tournaments and conventions that could limit people "Having Fun".

From Reddit, Discord, 4Chan ect.:

here are some further informations for the Horus Heresy release in his Year.

Preorders for the first content are planned for May, releae then in June.

Releases for June:

>"Heta-Gladius" Launch Box: - £240

>Rulebook - £43

>Three Codex like compilation Books - £32.50 each
>>Loyalists
>>Traitors
>>Other Age of Darkness Armies - Loyalists and Traitors

Relaases for July:

> Three different Starter Sets - £180 /£100 / £40 each

>Space Marine Legionary + Paints Sets (A + B) - £23 each
>>3 Space Marines
>>7 paints

>Getting Started with Horus Heresy Magazine - £10
>>Includeds 2 Space Marine Legionaries

Releases for August:

>Space Marine Legion Tactical Squad - £36
>>10 Models multipart in the same fashion like the Chaos Space Marines
>>Common weapon options

>Daimos Pattern Rhino - £31

>Space Marine Legion Praetor - £22
>>Not the same Model than was already shown

Releases for September:

>Daimos Pattern Predator - £39
>Upgrade Spue Sons of Horus - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue Imperial Fists - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue Blood Angels - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue Emperors Children - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue White Scras - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue World Eaters - £9.50

Releases without date:

>Daimos Pattern Vindicator - £39
>Kratos Battle Tank - £52.50
>Land Raider - £52.50
>Land Raider Spartan - £60
>Contemptor Dreadnought - £35
>Space Marine Tactical Squad + Rhino - £57
>Daimos Pattern Rhino Suqadron - £87
>Daimos Pattern Predator Squadron - £107

>Space Marine Auxillary ->>I absolutly don't know what this is.

Mikhael

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer30k/comments/tq9xhs/horus_heresy_launch/

 zedmeister wrote:
Obligatory link:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/03/28/caught-horus-heresy-fever-play-the-new-edition-before-its-released-at-a-special-warhammer-world-event/

Oh. Alright. The July tournament announcement puzzled me, but digging into it, its the old system and old books (which fair, even if the game is releasing in July, that's a real quick turnaround to expect system mastery, especially at 3000 points.

So, May preview and ?? release still. Ninja'd by reddit rumors (but I'll take everything with extra salt for the next week or so)

Hmm. upgrade sprues. If they're in plastic, that might be worth waiting for. I wonder how they'll do them- beakies only need one shoulder pad (the proper one for the chapter symbol) and not much else.

 Crimson wrote:
I can appreciate attention to detail, but ultimately I play a fantasy wargame instead of a historical one so that I have freedom to use my imagination. I will convert, model and paint my army according to what I think looks cool, not according to some dusty manual of made-up history that has already been retconned countless times and is self-contradictory. In this regard the strength of Warhammer has always been that the fluff is vague, messy and up to interpretation, so it seems extremely counterproductive to get all OCD about it.

All well and good. I'm a big advocate of "Your Dudes" but we need to accept that the other strand exists and they will always be there and will always be ready to criticse the official releases from GW if they don't match the previously established lore. Probably the reason why GW has recently hired a lore overseer. If, however, some's criciticising your personal work, then shame on them.

Worst part of those rumors is that I literally just ordered myself 4 Deimos Rhinos, 2 Vindicator Laser Destroyers and a Land Raider MkIIb to convert for my 40k Thousand Sons. Would much prefer to work with plastic vs resin, but whatever I guess.

Wonder which version the plastic land raider kit will be.

Also theres no such thing as a "Land Raider Spartan".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just realized that rumor comes from Admiral_SKK, might as well be made up bs for how much bs hes posted which has yet to come to fruition. Worse than Faeit.

It gets called that sometimes since it was originally a conversion from the RT Land Raider. The Rhino pattern is also the Deimos not Daimos after the Martian moon but these leaks started off with a "Lunch Box" so yknow, spelling obviously isn't this rumour person's strong suit.

There was in Rogue Trader.

Or am I thinking of the Claymore?

I'll believe it when I see it. If true... Damn! That's pretty awesome.

With Necromunda and all this probably coming, 'tis will be an expensive year...

I would assume that the Land Raider will be either a Proteus or Achilles. Personally hoping for a Proteus, as I already have an Achilles.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
I would assume that the Land Raider will be either a Proteus or Achilles. Personally hoping for a Proteus, as I already have an Achilles.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it's just the same old Land Raider just repackaged with the Horus Heresy logo on the box. Maybe they'll add one of the HH variants into the box.

I saw the proce list and sort of went "meh not as horrid as I expected" then went and saw that cataphractii are now £42.50 rrp. No way is a posable contemptor dread £35 if they're flogging termies at that band.

I like that there are potentially multiple starter sets. As someone who only has interest in Zone Mortalis and small games, I definitely don't need a bunch of tanks. Also the legions I would choose MKVI doesn't really match my head aesthetic for them, so I could just get a couple squads from a smaller boxed set.

Wait so, I didn't get it: there is a tournament in July (23th and 24th), for which the tickets are on sale on April, 4th, but what's on May, 7th ?

Three different starter sets and a "getting started" magazine? A £240 launch box?

Is The Horus Heresy really as big as 40K and AoS? I'm certainly all for it, as it bodes well for The Old World next year, but finding it hard to believe.

SamusDrake wrote:
Three different starter sets and a "getting started" magazine? A £240 launch box?

Is The Horus Heresy really as big as 40K and AoS? I'm certainly all for it, as it bodes well for The Old World next year, but finding it hard to believe.

Might be a "dress for the job you want" kind of situation. Seeing as SMs still sell more than anything else, they might see a release of a full SM game (yes, yes, there's some other factions, but still) through GW regular instead of FW as a license to print money.

They might even be right.

SamusDrake wrote:
Three different starter sets and a "getting started" magazine? A £240 launch box?
Is The Horus Heresy really as big as 40K and AoS? I'm certainly all for it, as it bodes well for The Old World next year, but finding it hard to believe.

Considering that Space Marines alone make up something like 30% of GWs total sales volume, I would say yes, but also that it doesn't matter if Horus Heresy is "as big" as 40k (or AoS which is substantially smaller than 40k), because on the basis of it being a box full of space marines theres a clear market demand for it regardless. I wouldn't necessarily take it as an indicator of the Old World for that reason alone (as the old story goes, Space Marines alone outsold the entirety of the Warhammer Fantasy product range from ~2003 until the WHFBs demise about a decade later).

Its certainly believable though, I expect that 240 GBP box to come in over 300 American (if I were to guess, probably $320-360 range) - for sake of comparison the Adeptus Titanicus Grandmaster Edition box was like 290 USD (not sure on GBP) when it released in 2018/2019 and contained substantially less content vs what is being indicated in the leaked photos.

SamusDrake wrote:
Three different starter sets and a "getting started" magazine? A £240 launch box?

Is The Horus Heresy really as big as 40K and AoS? I'm certainly all for it, as it bodes well for The Old World next year, but finding it hard to believe.

It bodes nothing for Old World. Its a completely different sausage*

This is 'we heard you like Space Marines, so here's some Space Marines fighting Space Marines that you can just use together to fight Space Marines.'
Also its really low risk, since people will happily buy these models to use in 40k (and that isn't speculation, it happened with Calth and Prospero), for multiple factions- Chaos and Imperial (and the long long list of subfactions). From a GW sales perspective, this is probably the easiest 'best seller' candidate they've ever done. Even some folks who've already decided they hate the new HH ruleset may well buy the box just for the models.


*By comparison, Old World is going to maybe have a starter that's going to be...?
Old style Empire vs something? Maybe a civil war? Limited fanbase and no use to current AoS players.
Or a new style that will alienate the old players they want to lure back through pure nostalgia and vague promises?
Depending on how they handle it, they can easily lose people's interest, no matter which side of the fence they sit on. There's still room to do something impressive, but it doesn't have the branding, utility or general popularity of 'here's a big box of SPACE MARINES, go nuts'

Except it's firstborn marines. Not so much use for them in 40k anymore.

tneva82 wrote:
Except it's firstborn marines. Not so much use for them in 40k anymore.

Except for all the people that still use them. There's no point in trying to start that argument here.

tneva82 wrote:
Except it's firstborn marines. Not so much use for them in 40k anymore.

Unless you play a heretic legion.

tneva82 wrote:
Except it's firstborn marines. Not so much use for them in 40k anymore.

Upscaled firstborn, in super-awesome retro armor but updated to modern standards.

Sign me up.

tneva82 wrote:
Except it's firstborn marines. Not so much use for them in 40k anymore.

My 40k list is 100% FB and will remain so for the foreseeable future. So I'll be using them for 40k while pulling double duty with all the other 30k units I have.


I'm really looking forward to the box.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Thunder Warriors or GTFO.

Thunder Warriors vs techno barbarians in the ruins of Earth. That's the game I want now.

I was thinking about that myself. Feels ripe for a Necromunda style game.

RazorEdge wrote:
From Reddit, Discord, 4Chan ect.:

here are some further informations for the Horus Heresy release in his Year.

Preorders for the first content are planned for May, releae then in June.

Releases for June:

>"Heta-Gladius" Launch Box: - £240

>Rulebook - £43

>Three Codex like compilation Books - £32.50 each
>>Loyalists
>>Traitors
>>Other Age of Darkness Armies - Loyalists and Traitors

Relaases for July:

> Three different Starter Sets - £180 /£100 / £40 each

>Space Marine Legionary + Paints Sets (A + B) - £23 each
>>3 Space Marines
>>7 paints

>Getting Started with Horus Heresy Magazine - £10
>>Includeds 2 Space Marine Legionaries

Releases for August:

>Space Marine Legion Tactical Squad - £36
>>10 Models multipart in the same fashion like the Chaos Space Marines
>>Common weapon options

>Daimos Pattern Rhino - £31

>Space Marine Legion Praetor - £22
>>Not the same Model than was already shown

Releases for September:

>Daimos Pattern Predator - £39
>Upgrade Spue Sons of Horus - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue Imperial Fists - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue Blood Angels - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue Emperors Children - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue White Scras - £9.50
>Upgrade Spue World Eaters - £9.50

Releases without date:

>Daimos Pattern Vindicator - £39
>Kratos Battle Tank - £52.50
>Land Raider - £52.50
>Land Raider Spartan - £60
>Contemptor Dreadnought - £35
>Space Marine Tactical Squad + Rhino - £57
>Daimos Pattern Rhino Suqadron - £87
>Daimos Pattern Predator Squadron - £107

>Space Marine Auxillary ->>I absolutly don't know what this is.

Mikhael

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer30k/comments/tq9xhs/horus_heresy_launch/

I hope these rumours aren't true.. My poor wallet.. But if they happen to be true, it's a dream come true for Rogue Trader freaks! Imagine, in 2022 you'll be able to buy a classic Rhino, Predator & Land Raider to go with your Beakies - all as modern GW plastic kits.


Mind. Blown.

Plastic legion upgrade spruies would be amazing, but unfortunately that poster is just an attention seeker.

 Mr_Rose wrote:

 MonkeyBallistic wrote:
There are no retcons in 40K, just a succession of unreliable narrators

In my view, The Horus Heresy is a legend from the prehistory of the Imperium. The stories in the Black Library novels and the background in the Forge World books are just one version of what might have happened.

Yeah, the black books even say they are not first-person accounts but assemblies of secondary and tertiary sources made several centuries after the conclusion of the Scouring, and definitely incomplete and inaccurate because some details had been deliberately obscured/censored.

Remember, the building of the Great Pyramid of Giza is closer to now than the Heresy is to “now” in 40K. Ten thousand years is a looong time.

You want to feel old? The first release of the Tau codex is closer to Rogue Trader's publication date than we are...by seven years.

Plastic Legion upgrade sprues? Would be interesting if I didn't already have a host of WE upgrades. Would be nice to get WE Tartaros pads though, I guess.

Plastic dome-top Predators? Now that's a different story altogether.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Plastic dome-top Predators? Now that's a different story altogether.

Oh god, yes.

Also if they release a plastic version of the Land Raider Proteus, I can finally stop pretending I'm ever going to try to assemble that second resin one that's sitting downstairs...

 insaniak wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Plastic dome-top Predators? Now that's a different story altogether.

Oh god, yes.

Also if they release a plastic version of the Land Raider Proteus, I can finally stop pretending I'm ever going to try to assemble that second resin one that's sitting downstairs...

I too have an unassembled resin Land Raider (armoured Proteus) which I have been too nervous about to start building it. Might as well leave it unbuilt at this point in time and see if we get a Plastic version; I could then sell the resin one for profit (once the resin models goes OOP).

But it's too early to take these rumours as very convincing yet. Sounds too good to be true tbh

chaos0xomega wrote:
Its certainly believable though, I expect that 240 GBP box to come in over 300 American (if I were to guess, probably $320-360 range) - for sake of comparison the Adeptus Titanicus Grandmaster Edition box was like 290 USD (not sure on GBP) when it released in 2018/2019 and contained substantially less content vs what is being indicated in the leaked photos.

The Adeptus Titanicus Grandmaster box was 180 GBP, so by that reckoning the HH launch box would be around 385-390 USD (not accounting for random regional price differences due to reasons).

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Thunder Warriors or GTFO.

Thunder Warriors vs techno barbarians in the ruins of Earth. That's the game I want now.

It could be a cool board game.

After HH will run its time in few years (i think 5) we will get Thunder Warriors. I also presume it will start from a skirmish or boardgame.

Says who?

Badab wars will get the plastic treatment first. We might already be seeing it happening as Huron has gone LCTB. With the rescaling of the MKVI and some of the other kits also clearing out of Forgeworld there could be an easy purposeful relaunch of all Marine armors (MK VII and MK VIII) with larger proportions. People like the new size and larger bases, so why not resell what you already have. Make them just as modular as the older kits, and release Badab chapter specific upgrades kits like they are doing for Hersey. It's more Marine on Marine action with no primarchs, simple work up as most everything is already fleshed out, just not widely available. All these current battle areas like Nachmund just seem disposable while something like the Badab war is more Iconic.

There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

Wouldn’t it be something if the plan all along was to redo first born in exactly this way? Get primaris out there with the paper thin fluff justification, let folks sort themselves out into camps, with the intention of once the hubbub settled, rescaling OG marines, as the most stubborn neck beards would now see their toy soldiers as inferior in the face of the new stuff, pass on primaris, but happy to embrace a rescaling of the classic mks.

RazorEdge wrote:
There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

What's the source for that? That seems unlikely.

Tavis75 wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Its certainly believable though, I expect that 240 GBP box to come in over 300 American (if I were to guess, probably $320-360 range) - for sake of comparison the Adeptus Titanicus Grandmaster Edition box was like 290 USD (not sure on GBP) when it released in 2018/2019 and contained substantially less content vs what is being indicated in the leaked photos.

The Adeptus Titanicus Grandmaster box was 180 GBP, so by that reckoning the HH launch box would be around 385-390 USD (not accounting for random regional price differences due to reasons).

When the grandmaster edition launched the pound was much stronger against the dollar than it is now. The price disparity between GWs UK pricing and US pricing is (generally) not as severe now as it was back then, so I would be surprised if the box was priced above $360.

 ekwatts wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

What's the source for that? That seems unlikely.

Its that time of the year. Everything should be considered unlikely.

Plan is always to find new ways to sell Space Marines and its a good plan because it keeps the cash flowing and results in new releases for other armies and games too. I expect Horus Heresy boxed set to sell like absolute hotcakes regardless of price tag because its contents can be used to build a single army and for anyone who can afford to play Horus Heresy with FW models already the only question is how many copies are they limited to in single purchase.

I don't care if large amounts of MK6 armour is canon or not. It becomes canon from the exact moment when pre-orders go live.

 ekwatts wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

What's the source for that? That seems unlikely.

I think this probably stems from the little snippet from the very old white dwarf that says MkVII made a first appearance at the SoT which was floating around twitter recently.

Vorian wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

What's the source for that? That seems unlikely.

I think this probably stems from the little snippet from the very old white dwarf that says MkVII made a first appearance at the SoT which was floating around twitter recently.

Alan Bligh's plan was to move into The Scouring after The Siege of Terra, but who knows what it is now...

 Shadow Walker wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

Thunder Warriors or GTFO.

Thunder Warriors vs techno barbarians in the ruins of Earth. That's the game I want now.

It could be a cool board game.

It was kind of a missed opportunity to introduce Custodes in a "last war for Terra" boxset, featuring Thunder Warriors vs Custodes. That could have been incredible. The issue would be that Thunder Warriors themselves wouldn't serve a huge purpose for people outside collectors, compared to the majority Burning of Prospero models which are usable in 40k.

Popped up on 4chan:

Spartan and Deimos Rhino based Vehicles will have options to build the Crew
with different armours (MkII and MkVI).

Those Compilation Books are a stop-gap for more Expansion releases with new
Unit options.

There exist plans for separate codex books for EVERY Space Marine Legion
which will released over the next years.

GW doesn't plan a 3 years Edition life time for Horus Heresy.

FW weapon packs for special and heavy weapons will sold regularly via the GW
main shop after the release of HH as a new main game.

This is another test run to sell FW stuff via GW.

They plan to release certain smaller model parts which can be produced fast
and with lesser risk of miscasts.

Seems like the rumor is original from faeit

beast_gts wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

What's the source for that? That seems unlikely.

I think this probably stems from the little snippet from the very old white dwarf that says MkVII made a first appearance at the SoT which was floating around twitter recently.

Alan Bligh's plan was to move into The Scouring after The Siege of Terra, but who knows what it is now...

He also talked about the Great Crusade and expanding the Game with few Xenos like Orcs and Eldar, that's why the named the ruleset "Age of Darkness" and not Horus Heresy perse.

RazorEdge wrote:
Popped up on 4chan:

Spartan and Deimos Rhino based Vehicles will have options to build the Crew
with different armours (MkII and MkVI).

Those Compilation Books are a stop-gap for more Expansion releases with new
Unit options.

There exist plans for separate codex books for EVERY Space Marine Legion
which will released over the next years.

GW doesn't plan a 3 years Edition life time for Horus Heresy.

FW weapon packs for special and heavy weapons will sold regularly via the GW
main shop after the release of HH as a new main game.

This is another test run to sell FW stuff via GW.

They plan to release certain smaller model parts which can be produced fast
and with lesser risk of miscasts.

Seems like the rumor is original from faeit

beast_gts wrote:

Vorian wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
There was a rumor about MKVII Marines in new Scale for late Horus Heresy.

What's the source for that? That seems unlikely.

I think this probably stems from the little snippet from the very old white dwarf that says MkVII made a first appearance at the SoT which was floating around twitter recently.

Alan Bligh's plan was to move into The Scouring after The Siege of Terra, but who knows what it is now...

He also talked about the Great Crusade and expanding the Game with few Xenos like Orcs and Eldar, that's why the named the ruleset "Age of Darkness" and not Horus Heresy perse.

Tbh I wouldn’t be surprised if they went back and filled out the Great Crusade once they’re done with the Siege.

Release plastic MkII that everyone wants plus Orks and other Xenos for that era.

He never really discussed doing Great Crusade and incorporating Xenos. He was very specifically ambivalent towards that very idea and said (roughly paraphrasing) that it was something that they might do maybe one day but there was so much other content to do in terms of the Horus Heresy and Age of Scouring that they would be busy for several decades producing other content before they got to the point that they would even need to think about going back to the Great Crusade.

RazorEdge wrote:
Popped up on 4chan:

Spartan and Deimos Rhino based Vehicles will have options to build the Crew
with different armours (MkII and MkVI).

Those Compilation Books are a stop-gap for more Expansion releases with new
Unit options.

There exist plans for separate codex books for EVERY Space Marine Legion
which will released over the next years.

GW doesn't plan a 3 years Edition life time for Horus Heresy.

FW weapon packs for special and heavy weapons will sold regularly via the GW
main shop after the release of HH as a new main game.

This is another test run to sell FW stuff via GW.

They plan to release certain smaller model parts which can be produced fast
and with lesser risk of miscasts.

If these rumours are true, MKII plastic troopers are pretty much guaranteed.

However there's so much rumours on new stuff right now that it's all sus right now

Just waiting for GW to say on Friday that the core set will be $500. Then if the blowback is too much they can always say April Fools, but if enough people say...well it's a bit more than I wanted, but I'm still going to get one or two, then they will just smile sheepishly with the sound of a cash register chinging in their heads.

On one of the leaked Box Set pictures from last year, you can see that the Spartan has a Crew member in Mk III armour.

It would be great if they could release plastic mk7. Maybe set during the Badab War era. Or even the 13th Black Crusade!

No idea what they could possibly call it though. Horus Heresy is obviously out. Games of Warhammer. In the 41st millenium. Hmmm.
Any ideas?

chaos0xomega wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
Three different starter sets and a "getting started" magazine? A £240 launch box?
Is The Horus Heresy really as big as 40K and AoS? I'm certainly all for it, as it bodes well for The Old World next year, but finding it hard to believe.

Its certainly believable though, I expect that 240 GBP box to come in over 300 American (if I were to guess, probably $320-360 range) - for sake of comparison the Adeptus Titanicus Grandmaster Edition box was like 290 USD (not sure on GBP) when it released in 2018/2019 and contained substantially less content vs what is being indicated in the leaked photos.

I think the range is closer to $350-400 USD. Generally GW converts 1.6 x the price in pounds (some a smidge higher, some a smidge lower, but always within a small percent).

Honestly if the leaked price is 240 pounds, then I'd be legitimately shocked if it's less than $380. More likely that it's $400.

Tac squads will be $55 each retail at minimum. The Spartan will likely be $110 minimum (more likely $140). Cataphractii are $70. That Contemptor has zero cance of coming in at less than $70. The Praetors if sold separately will be $35+.

That's over $500 in gw bucks right there, and that's before the rulebook. If you figure 30-33% discount for big starter boxes, then $380-400 puts you roughly there.

 tauist wrote:
I too have an unassembled resin Land Raider (armoured Proteus) which I have been too nervous about to start building it.

The armoured Proteus is the one I have. I built one, and it was awful - most of the panels were noticeably concave, and several pieces simply didn't fit. The exhaust block on the back needed about a quarter inch of gap filling on the sides. I sent FW an email about it and they sent me a new kit which I've not been motivated enough to do anything with... but would be reasonably confident that a plastic one would be better quality and easier to build.

over all, I think any price under 500 bucks is going to be a good eneugh bargin folks'll buy it, and if the 3 boc HH set rumor is true it's going to be a suprisingly accessable game.


there's a LOT of room for plastic stuff, heck I'd not be suprised if when GW finally releases another plastic primarch for 40k the mini comes with a "heresy build" and a "40k build" and I expect we're going to see a lot of that partiuclarly with regards to chaos marines.

Do we really want 18+ hardback AUD$85 books for HH?

Apparently they're gonna be Legion books, so if you want 18 books you can have them, but the plurality of people will buy one or two. Seems like a win/win.

JWBS wrote:
Apparently they're gonna be Legion books, so if you want 18 books you can have them, but the plurality of people will buy one or two. Seems like a win/win.

Honestly I just want them to be cheaper than the black books.

As long as the books don't get replaced in one year by a new "2.0-2" edition, or come alongside day one patches. I think it would be neat to have dedicated books with lore, army rules, special units/characters, and hobby guides all in one place.

So not likely.

If some of this is true and 30k will get a nice long lifespan (instead of the relatively short lifespan of a 40k or AoS edition) then I'm ok with separate legion books. Will be easier to carry around one of those rather than whatever massive tome the 'traitor' and 'loyalist' indexes will be.

The major issue I see with that is having to wait years to get them all out. Unlikely that they'll be out all at once, probably done in clusters around certain parts of the war, likely coinciding with the upgrade kits that were rumored, if that pans out. So if you're the unlucky person that loves, say, Salamanders, and they're the last book to come out, well, have fun waiting for those 5+ years for that to happen. So, let's hope those loyalist and traitor indexes are good enough to get everyone by for half a decade.

As to the rest, time will tell. It's looking pretty good if we're getting all that plastic, and if FW weapon packs can be bought through GW stores/site. As for the various marks of armor... if they're going with the upscaling of all the models, then I just hope we do indeed see the other marks done in due time. To me it's a risk, because 30k is already a niche thing, so making 4-5 of the same unit just to have different armor...

As for the Badab stuff, I honestly can't see FW touching that. I could absolutely see GW taking the few Badab war factions that were popular (namely Carcharodons and Red Scorpions) and giving those characters the Primaris treatment.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:
It would be great if they could release plastic mk7. Maybe set during the Badab War era. Or even the 13th Black Crusade!

No idea what they could possibly call it though. Horus Heresy is obviously out. Games of Warhammer. In the 41st millenium. Hmmm.
Any ideas?

I know you're joking, but I would love some Badab War stuff. There were some awesome characters and factions in there.

The best part about HH marine armour is that it's incredibly transferable to 40k. You don't even need to really justify why your guys wear old suits of armour either. So GW can tap two markets with those sets.

I've never played HH because of the overwhelming, crushing, and intimidating cost but if the box set is good I could be tempted. Not really sure what legion I would go for, which is also a bit of a road block.

Hairesy wrote:

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:
It would be great if they could release plastic mk7. Maybe set during the Badab War era. Or even the 13th Black Crusade!

No idea what they could possibly call it though. Horus Heresy is obviously out. Games of Warhammer. In the 41st millenium. Hmmm.
Any ideas?

I know you're joking, but I would love some Badab War stuff. There were some awesome characters and factions in there.

75% of my games are centered around either Badab or Armageddon, so I approve of this.

But for 30k I'd like Istvaan and others to not be forgotten with all this SOT stuff they've got coming out.

Remember Istvaan!

I like it.

I don’t think even GW would release upgrade sprues months after the main box comes out. They’d be a day one release to maximise launch Fomo.

Back in the comments , it’s mentioned the BL books are a version of events ? The heresy series is the actual version as of now of events. Not a 40K era doctored version. Hence things like Imperium Secundus, Dark angels being where they shouldn’t be etc

Racerguy180 wrote:
75% of my games are centered around either Badab or Armageddon, so I approve of this.

The fluff for my Primaris Chapter - the Iron Paladins - has its routes in the aftermath of the Badab Uprising.

It's a fun place to visit.

That's way too expensive I'm afraid. Any hope I had of getting mates to invest in this have just gone up in smoke with that £240 price tag - even doing a split box that's going to be a lot of money.

chaos0xomega wrote:
He never really discussed doing Great Crusade and incorporating Xenos. He was very specifically ambivalent towards that very idea and said (roughly paraphrasing) that it was something that they might do maybe one day but there was so much other content to do in terms of the Horus Heresy and Age of Scouring that they would be busy for several decades producing other content before they got to the point that they would even need to think about going back to the Great Crusade.

Thanks for the clarification on that

There is a distinction between launch box and starter boxes so don't jump the gun per say.

Assuming that price and box content rumour is accurate, why are you ignoring the lower priced options? Like just the rulebook, or one of the smaller starters? The big box looks like it’s positioned for veterans who want all the things now, much like Indomitus or the AT Grand Master edition.

 TwilightSparkles wrote:
I don’t think even GW would release upgrade sprues months after the main box comes out. They’d be a day one release to maximise launch Fomo.

The same happen with the expansion sprues for the Primaris at the beginning of the 8th Edition.

Shoulder Pads for Ultramarines came in August when the other main Chapters got theirs much later...

 Pacific wrote:
That's way too expensive I'm afraid. Any hope I had of getting mates to invest in this have just gone up in smoke with that £240 price tag - even doing a split box that's going to be a lot of money.

chaos0xomega wrote:
He never really discussed doing Great Crusade and incorporating Xenos. He was very specifically ambivalent towards that very idea and said (roughly paraphrasing) that it was something that they might do maybe one day but there was so much other content to do in terms of the Horus Heresy and Age of Scouring that they would be busy for several decades producing other content before they got to the point that they would even need to think about going back to the Great Crusade.

Thanks for the clarification on that

frankly the idea of going back to the great crusade doesn't make a lot of sense for the HH line anyway. as it removes options rather then adds them (in that anything introduced during the heresy such as traitor corrupted units would be unuseable). assuming they felt a ned to move beyond the heresy (which us a open question, WW2 games for the most part don't see a need to do say.. the korean war) the scouring makes the most sense

Apologies if this has already been answered but do we know if the kits in the Heta-Gladius box will be monopose or the full multi-part kits that will go on general release later in the year?

 PurpleEcho wrote:
Apologies if this has already been answered but do we know if the kits in the Heta-Gladius box will be monopose or the full multi-part kits that will go on general release later in the year?

Given we don't actually know if the Heta-Gladius box is a thing that actually exists... no idea.

 Mr_Rose wrote:
Assuming that price and box content rumour is accurate, why are you ignoring the lower priced options? Like just the rulebook, or one of the smaller starters? The big box looks like it’s positioned for veterans who want all the things now, much like Indomitus or the AT Grand Master edition.

I think a lot of people aren't factoring it in just because that hasn't been confirmed yet (unlike the box) and I believe the rumour for them came from Faeit of all places.

 PurpleEcho wrote:
Apologies if this has already been answered but do we know if the kits in the Heta-Gladius box will be monopose or the full multi-part kits that will go on general release later in the year?

Assuming that you're not using primaris-hater-definition of monopose,* I'm pretty sure that they won't be monopose. Looking at the previewed model, the arms and shoulderpads seem to be made of fully separate bits, indicating similar construction to full primaris and CSM kits. There probably won't be waist articulation, as GW tends not to do that anymore as it messes up the details of the abdomen.

(*Anything without ball-socket waist joint is 'monopose'.)

 Crimson wrote:

 PurpleEcho wrote:
Apologies if this has already been answered but do we know if the kits in the Heta-Gladius box will be monopose or the full multi-part kits that will go on general release later in the year?

Assuming that you're not using primaris-hater-definition of monopose,* I'm pretty sure that they won't be monopose. Looking at the previewed model, the arms and shoulderpads seem to be made of fully separate bits, indicating similar construction to full primaris and CSM kits. There probably won't be waist articulation, as GW tends not to do that anymore as it messes up the details of the abdomen.

(*Anything without ball-socket waist joint is 'monopose'.)

That's a very poor caracterization of the issue. A figure that the only poseable parts are the arms and the head is hardly "fully poseable" too. It just has assembly options.

 Albertorius wrote:

That's a very poor caracterization of the issue. A figure that the only poseable parts are the arms and the head is hardly "fully poseable" too. It just has assembly options.

Yet no-one called skitarii or genstealer cult models monopose, until labelling that type of model as such became an useful way to complain about the primaris.

But whatever. GW makes only monopose models now. And we don't anymore have useful terminology for distinguishing between different types of models GW makes, as they all have been defined 'monopose'. Happy?

 Crimson wrote:
Assuming that you're not using primaris-hater-definition of monopose,* I'm pretty sure that they won't be monopose. Looking at the previewed model, the arms and shoulderpads seem to be made of fully separate bits, indicating similar construction to full primaris and CSM kits. There probably won't be waist articulation, as GW tends not to do that anymore as it messes up the details of the abdomen.

(*Anything without ball-socket waist joint is 'monopose'.)

I reckon they'll be split in a similar way to how the Necromunda models are. In that you'll get a series of posed bodies with a few different arm poses.

For example, this fella here has a remarkably similar pose to the Sergeant:

^Yep.

So, to take it further and make a speculation on the Mk VI sprue layout, you could get:

- 5 Bodies
- 10 different bolter poses
- Equipment to outfit a sergeant to one pose
- Equipment to outfit a nuncio vox (I don't like the look of the new one) to one pose
- equipment to outfit a Vexilla to one pose

Take that 1 sprue and stuff two of them into your tactical squad box and hey presto - 10 man squad with just about enough variation to make them look different with loads of extra parts.

Does the aquila totem on the SoH marine's bolter make sense? (The one from the leaked pic, not the official preview)

Besides the fact that he's fighting against the Emperor, I didn't think it was used as a symbol by anyone outside of the EC. It looks like the IF praetor has it on his forehead as well, so maybe it's just me not being as familiar with 30k/HH traditions

 GaroRobe wrote:
Does the aquila totem on the SoH marine's bolter make sense? (The one from the leaked pic, not the official preview)

Besides the fact that he's fighting against the Emperor, I didn't think it was used as a symbol by anyone outside of the EC. It looks like the IF praetor has it on his forehead as well, so maybe it's just me not being as familiar with 30k/HH traditions

I think that might be the Imperialis - but odd that Sons of Horus are using it.

 GaroRobe wrote:
Does the aquila totem on the SoH marine's bolter make sense? (The one from the leaked pic, not the official preview)

Besides the fact that he's fighting against the Emperor, I didn't think it was used as a symbol by anyone outside of the EC. It looks like the IF praetor has it on his forehead as well, so maybe it's just me not being as familiar with 30k/HH traditions

Easily written off as a spoil of war. He picked up an bolter from a fallen EC marine. Also if they are at the battle on Earth then maybe it was a badge to help show who is loyalist/traitor with all the Alpha Legion Shenanigans happening.

I'd personally prefer no bling or neutral bling like studs so that I can paint however without need to make up story or remove items such as that.

The Emperor's Children had special permission to wear the aquila on their chest plates, but I believe it was still used as a decoration elsewhere.

 zedmeister wrote:

The picture has two other marines with the same body in the background, one looks like from the GW preview (skull on base) and the other like a 100% identical model.

The praetor models are legion neutral. I wouldn't look into the aquila thing too much.

 zedmeister wrote:

 GaroRobe wrote:
Does the aquila totem on the SoH marine's bolter make sense? (The one from the leaked pic, not the official preview)

Besides the fact that he's fighting against the Emperor, I didn't think it was used as a symbol by anyone outside of the EC. It looks like the IF praetor has it on his forehead as well, so maybe it's just me not being as familiar with 30k/HH traditions

I think that might be the Imperialis - but odd that Sons of Horus are using it.

I think it might actually be a winged skull rather than an Aquila. That makes more sense as a martial honour, for a start.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Pacific wrote:
That's way too expensive I'm afraid. Any hope I had of getting mates to invest in this have just gone up in smoke with that £240 price tag - even doing a split box that's going to be a lot of money.

chaos0xomega wrote:
He never really discussed doing Great Crusade and incorporating Xenos. He was very specifically ambivalent towards that very idea and said (roughly paraphrasing) that it was something that they might do maybe one day but there was so much other content to do in terms of the Horus Heresy and Age of Scouring that they would be busy for several decades producing other content before they got to the point that they would even need to think about going back to the Great Crusade.

Thanks for the clarification on that

frankly the idea of going back to the great crusade doesn't make a lot of sense for the HH line anyway. as it removes options rather then adds them (in that anything introduced during the heresy such as traitor corrupted units would be unuseable). assuming they felt a ned to move beyond the heresy (which us a open question, WW2 games for the most part don't see a need to do say.. the korean war) the scouring makes the most sense

Remove some, add others.

 Albertorius wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 PurpleEcho wrote:
Apologies if this has already been answered but do we know if the kits in the Heta-Gladius box will be monopose or the full multi-part kits that will go on general release later in the year?

Assuming that you're not using primaris-hater-definition of monopose,* I'm pretty sure that they won't be monopose. Looking at the previewed model, the arms and shoulderpads seem to be made of fully separate bits, indicating similar construction to full primaris and CSM kits. There probably won't be waist articulation, as GW tends not to do that anymore as it messes up the details of the abdomen.

(*Anything without ball-socket waist joint is 'monopose'.)

That's a very poor caracterization of the issue. A figure that the only poseable parts are the arms and the head is hardly "fully poseable" too. It just has assembly options.

There comes a point where we are just quibbling about definitions though. The old GW models weren't "fully posable" were they? Well, depending on your definition anyway. Were the classic tactical marines fully posable? If you answer yes then I think you're looking at them through rose-tinted glasses tbh. I found the myriad different parts to be tedious to use, and there wasn't much payoff to having all those bits that apparently added poseability. The twist of the torso? Great (I'm being sarcastic, it was okay and that's all). The cupped hand holding the bolter? Bad. The six different bolters, each with a different icon? meh. This was no golden age of miniatures. Here's a reminder of what we have 'lost' in terms of poseability, in case anyone has forgotten

I think a 10-marine squad will be on two sprues, like the existing MkIV kit. Not enough room on a single sprue for 5 bodies and all the weapon options, backpacks, shoulderpads and heads. Remember, this will be a kit for both 30K & 40K, it will have special weapon & Heavy weapon loadouts as well as sergeant loadouts, plus HH specific comms guy and whatnot. I don't see how all that's ever going to fit on a single sprue. That would also result in a bunch of redundant bits, as everything would be doubled.

I hope we also get 10 unique poses but it's possible that we'll have to settle for 5 with duplicates.

 Crimson wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

That's a very poor caracterization of the issue. A figure that the only poseable parts are the arms and the head is hardly "fully poseable" too. It just has assembly options.

Yet no-one called skitarii or genstealer cult models monopose, until labelling that type of model as such became an useful way to complain about the primaris.

But whatever. GW makes only monopose models now. And we don't anymore have useful terminology for distinguishing between different types of models GW makes, as they all have been defined 'monopose'. Happy?

Sure man, you seem to be pretty flustered about it, so whatever you say. Happy?

Froim 4chan:

There will be also a set with different weapon options (in the same fashion like for Necromunda) which couldn't fit into the regulary Horus Heresy sprues.

Also a little correction about the rumor yesterday:

The Vehicle Sprues include options for MkIII and MkVI armours, not MkII...

I think calling them limited pose models is probably more accurate. You'll get a set of pre-defined poses with hopefully enough variety for you to not notice.

As to the special and heavy weapons, I suspect we'll probably see them either released as resin or plastic upgrades. Magnetisation will probably harder as each set will be keyed to one of the set poses.

I assume the MkVI kit will have 10 bodies, not 5, due largely to how HH squads work.

tneva82 wrote:
Remove some, add others.

But nothing gets added. The Crusade allowed each Legion to find its rhythm and modus operandi, learning from their experiences and their fellow Legions. By going back the Legions gain nothing and in some cases (Word Bearers) lose everything.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I assume the MkVI kit will have 10 bodies, not 5, due largely to how HH squads work.

But it also isn't the case for some newer Marine kits. So who knows.

 Crimson wrote:
But whatever. GW makes only monopose models now. And we don't anymore have useful terminology for distinguishing between different types of models GW makes, as they all have been defined 'monopose'. Happy?

Now you're just being melodramatic.

RazorEdge wrote:
Popped up on 4chan:

There exist plans for separate codex books for EVERY Space Marine Legion which will released over the next years.

I don't buy this. That's a ridiculous amount of books for factions that aren't THAT different from one another. I just can't see each Legion getting its own big release. And it seems like it would be extremely messy for these books to be released over...years and years...while new core units and such are (inevitably) happening.

IF however this is true...Heresy players liking their streamlined faction rules better hold onto their hats, because things probably would go more the way of 40K in that instance.

The problem with the monopose stuff is its not as fun creatively when building, it requires attention and dare I say it a bit a of anxiety on the part of the builder. The most annoying part with marines or guard back in the day was 3 point connections, basically the arms were often the only pieces that needed that extra level of attention to pair up properly but everything else was usually pretty modular outside of key wargear pieces. I would hope the new marines don't follow the trend of monopose/keyed builds like necromunda stuff. The weapons pack at least at least added some breathing room but still, the old way of building a marine would be preferable if we're to suffer the new scale. First thing I want to see is how they'll look with anything other than a beakie helmet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 zedmeister wrote:
I think calling them limited pose models is probably more accurate. You'll get a set of pre-defined poses with hopefully enough variety for you to not notice.

As to the special and heavy weapons, I suspect we'll probably see them either released as resin or plastic upgrades. Magnetisation will probably harder as each set will be keyed to one of the set poses.

The heavy weapons is where I don't mind monpose/limited pose as much because there's only so many ways to meaningfully hold an autocannon or lascannon, especially if its shoulder mounted.

Ah, the ol' monopose argument, where everyone's definition of monopose is different and nobody can agree on anything and at the end of the day nothing was gained.

Only case where it bothers me is when a sgt is a little too dramatically posed, like the Sisters of Battle. Makes it tough to distinguish other squad leaders.

In every other case, I've been pleased by the variety I can get out of GW's kits thus far. Yes, even kits as horridly 'monoposed' as primaris intercessors.

drbored wrote:
Ah, the ol' monopose argument, where everyone's definition of monopose is different and nobody can agree on anything and at the end of the day nothing was gained.

It's more that there are still people here who insist that this kit is no different to this kit, or that there isn't a marked difference between when sprues looked like this, and when they started looking like this.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

drbored wrote:
Ah, the ol' monopose argument, where everyone's definition of monopose is different and nobody can agree on anything and at the end of the day nothing was gained.

It's more that there are still people here who insist that this kit is no different to this kit, or that there isn't a marked difference between when sprues looked like this, and when they started looking like this.

Deathguard are definitely the most limited sprues I've seen in the game outside of pushfit minis. Honestly I usually see most of the "monopose" claims being aimed at Primaris but most of those models have decent posing options, just no built in waist swivel.

As long as these new Minis are just fixed torso +legs but otherwize have swappable arms, heads and backpacks it's okay. I admit I prefer being able to pose the torso, too as it allows for more interesting poses, but GW seems to have moved away from that.

I hate the "complete right arm and the left hand on the weapons" in the CSM sprue...

Honestly a bit disappointed we're not getting another Betrayal at Calth/Burning of Prospero boxed game as part of this and instead a more traditional starter set. In the back of my mind I had hoped we might get a reworking of the original Horus Heresy board game (that FFG redid in the 00s) depicting the Siege of Terra to tie in with the book series.

The fixed waists on Intercessors and other modern kits doesn't bother me at all. This isn't the first time we've been through this. I loved my RTB01 plastic kit back in the day, with it's individually poseable torsos, legs, arms, etc. And then the Imperial Space Marines box set came out, with complete metal abdomen, torso and heads fixed, with plastic arms to be added on. As I remember, that template was retained for the mid-90s Chaos Marines, until they went back to the modular approach with the late 90s plastics.

The thing is, as great as that modularity was, the newer kits, with their fixed waists (but separate heads) look amazing in comparison to their immediate predecessors. So I can't really complain. Some individual weapon options may have been lost here and there over time, but in terms of ending up with a great looking model at the end of the process, I don't see anything aesthetically or functionally being lost in the modern kits.

 gorgon wrote:
I don't buy this. That's a ridiculous amount of books for factions that aren't THAT different from one another. I just can't see each Legion getting its own big release. And it seems like it would be extremely messy for these books to be released over...years and years...while new core units and such are (inevitably) happening.

I buy this for a few reasons:
1) It gives GW a stream to sell more book and card bloat
2) It allows them to slowly expand out the legions with new units / characters in a contained package, thereby avoiding the no model no rules scenario that they appear to be applying now to the heresy (RIP Bligh and creativity in geneal)

Now, to be truly cynical, you have to wonder if the expression above will occur alongside campaign books which will also contain new, likely generic, units.

 ekwatts wrote:
I don't see anything aesthetically or functionally being lost in the modern kits.

With so many ways to build these and all.

Here's to Iron Hands being the first Legion to get a book. That way with power creep in each following book they don't have to worry about updating Ferrus Manus . By the time they get to the 6th book they will need to revisit the first book again to correct wording and how new Legion rules interact with the older books.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
I don't see anything aesthetically or functionally being lost in the modern kits.

With so many ways to build these and all.

Spoiler:

As opposed to all of the old multiparts where you could build whatever you wanted, provided you were okay with it looking like trash!

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Death-Guard-Blightlord-Terminators-2020

Can you imagine rotating the torsos on most of the terminators and still making them look appropriate?

I'm pretty sure it'd be very difficult to modularize lots of features in the DG range and still make them look cohesive.

To me the models look fantastic and I'd take that over some half-assed posing options. I'd quite enjoy Thousand Sons who were modeled with dust spilling out or holes in them even if it meant I couldn't pose them.

Maybe my purchases are ruining that side of the hobby for some people and I am sorry about that, but I have a difficult time "getting it" when people talk about what I think are very minor things.

These new models aren't ugly or anything, but you'd only buy every kit once and then look for 3rd party alternatives if you don't want a Clone army while with the old style you'd have several boxes and every Marine/ Ork what have you looking different. At least that's how I'm doing it (and GW seems to have guessed that as well that's why they made 30 different new Plague Marines ).

I'm pretty sure it'd be very difficult to modularize lots of features in the DG range and still make them look cohesive.

It really isn't. Just leave out the dumb tentacles crawling out from between gaps and focus on the detail of the _armor plates_. Face on a shin guard, teeth on a belly plate, spike on a pauldron? General cracks, bullet holes and corrosion? All real easy to make modular.

Torso fronts, arms and pauldrons for power armor are generally separate pieces anyway. Adding a couple left or right leg outer armor options isn't that much.

They went far too overboard with details (especially compared to old plague marines) and given the history and nature of the legion (stoic and straightforward), all this... cruft... is wildly out of character.

No, there's no fething way you could twist those torsos, even if the torso front plate was a separate piece. I'll take better looking models over models where you can rotate the torso tyvm.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
These new models aren't ugly or anything, but you'd only buy every kit once and then look for 3rd party alternatives if you don't want a Clone army while with the old style you'd have several boxes and every Marine/ Ork what have you looking different.

Well, that's just not true at all. Why do people keep parroting this narrative that all the pre-8th kits are super customisable when at best the differences between one unit of Tacticals and another will be the Sergeant and special/heavy weapons i.e exactly the same things that are in the newer kits.

JWBS wrote:
No, there's no fething way you could twist those torsos, even if the torso front plate was a separate piece. I'll take better looking models over models where you can rotate the torso tyvm.

The older style Nurgle Forgeworld models were much better. The torsos fit on standard chaos marine legs allowing them to be repositioned. Seemed like a loss at that point though as you had wonderfully sculpted torso (I think the heads were part of the torso, but it's been a while since I owned them), and the arms were also plain chaos marine arms. I wish they had expanded on that line over the new plastics. The plastics are "Fine", but the spike protrusions and huge mouths with gigantic teeth look like playskool toys compared to the resin models.

 Gert wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
These new models aren't ugly or anything, but you'd only buy every kit once and then look for 3rd party alternatives if you don't want a Clone army while with the old style you'd have several boxes and every Marine/ Ork what have you looking different.

Well, that's just not true at all. Why do people keep parroting this narrative that all the pre-8th kits are super customisable when at best the differences between one unit of Tacticals and another will be the Sergeant and special/heavy weapons i.e exactly the same things that are in the newer kits.

Umm, I'm actually generally fine and even happy in many cases with the single-piece bodies + torsoes, but there really is a difference, especially with Marines. The Badab War was what got me back into 40k in part because of the emphasis in many cases on mixes of armor, and it's rare that any given Marine or CSM model in my collection is made from fewer than three different kits unless it's a monopose or equivalent (which I do sometimes use for cheap filler). I don't esp. care about the poses, but Marine part cross-compatability is a huge part of what I find rewarding about modeling anything in the game. I imagine that for many gamers it isn't a big thing, but my collections actively mixes everything from RT through 8th and fits my vision of both imperial and chaos forces stretched thin (and in the latter case less mutated and spiky than GW's vision), and the loss of those combinations does actually affect my choices. No, it isn't immense, but it's also not nothing.

Just because something isn't relevant to your experience doesn't mean it isn't relevant to others'. People who disagree with you might actually have an informed reason for their disagreement, and aren't just uncritically repeating something they heard.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
These new models aren't ugly or anything, but you'd only buy every kit once and then look for 3rd party alternatives if you don't want a Clone army while with the old style you'd have several boxes and every Marine/ Ork what have you looking different.

Well, that's just not true at all. Why do people keep parroting this narrative that all the pre-8th kits are super customisable when at best the differences between one unit of Tacticals and another will be the Sergeant and special/heavy weapons i.e exactly the same things that are in the newer kits.

Umm, I'm actually generally fine and even happy in many cases with the single-piece bodies + torsoes, but there really is a difference, especially with Marines. The Badab War was what got me back into 40k in part because of the emphasis in many cases on mixes of armor, and it's rare that any given Marine or CSM model in my collection is made from fewer than three different kits unless it's a monopose or equivalent (which I do sometimes use for cheap filler). I don't esp. care about the poses, but Marine part cross-compatability is a huge part of what I find rewarding about modeling anything in the game. I imagine that for many gamers it isn't a big thing, but my collections actively mixes everything from RT through 8th and fits my vision of both imperial and chaos forces stretched thin (and in the latter case less mutated and spiky than GW's vision), and the loss of those combinations does actually affect my choices. No, it isn't immense, but it's also not nothing.

Just because something isn't relevant to your experience doesn't mean it isn't relevant to others'. People who disagree with you might actually have an informed reason for their disagreement, and aren't just uncritically repeating something they heard.

The cross compatibility is a good point, the plastic 30k marines worked really well with weapon and shoulder swaps, lots conversion potential. That's a lot more difficult with something that has to have details hacked off or cut and sanded.

At least they kept the mk6 relatively free of frilly bits and it's pretty clean overall,

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
I don't see anything aesthetically or functionally being lost in the modern kits.

With so many ways to build these and all.

This is the very definition of cherry picking.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Umm, I'm actually generally fine and even happy in many cases with the single-piece bodies + torsoes, but there really is a difference, especially with Marines. The Badab War was what got me back into 40k in part because of the emphasis in many cases on mixes of armor, and it's rare that any given Marine or CSM model in my collection is made from fewer than three different kits unless it's a monopose or equivalent (which I do sometimes use for cheap filler). I don't esp. care about the poses, but Marine part cross-compatability is a huge part of what I find rewarding about modeling anything in the game. I imagine that for many gamers it isn't a big thing, but my collections actively mixes everything from RT through 8th and fits my vision of both imperial and chaos forces stretched thin (and in the latter case less mutated and spiky than GW's vision), and the loss of those combinations does actually affect my choices. No, it isn't immense, but it's also not nothing.

Just because something isn't relevant to your experience doesn't mean it isn't relevant to others'. People who disagree with you might actually have an informed reason for their disagreement, and aren't just uncritically repeating something they heard.

Cool but that's not the point of this criticism. The specific thing people keep saying is that two boxes of the same kit will be entirely different when that isn't the case at all. What you have is 3 different boxes (say one Tactical, one MkIV and one MkIII) and you've mixed and matched the parts from those 3 different boxes to make 3 units with models with visual distinction.
Next time take your own advice and read what was written.

 Gert wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Umm, I'm actually generally fine and even happy in many cases with the single-piece bodies + torsoes, but there really is a difference, especially with Marines. The Badab War was what got me back into 40k in part because of the emphasis in many cases on mixes of armor, and it's rare that any given Marine or CSM model in my collection is made from fewer than three different kits unless it's a monopose or equivalent (which I do sometimes use for cheap filler). I don't esp. care about the poses, but Marine part cross-compatability is a huge part of what I find rewarding about modeling anything in the game. I imagine that for many gamers it isn't a big thing, but my collections actively mixes everything from RT through 8th and fits my vision of both imperial and chaos forces stretched thin (and in the latter case less mutated and spiky than GW's vision), and the loss of those combinations does actually affect my choices. No, it isn't immense, but it's also not nothing.

Just because something isn't relevant to your experience doesn't mean it isn't relevant to others'. People who disagree with you might actually have an informed reason for their disagreement, and aren't just uncritically repeating something they heard.

Cool but that's not the point of this criticism. The specific thing people keep saying is that two boxes of the same kit will be entirely different when that isn't the case at all. What you have is 3 different boxes (say one Tactical, one MkIV and one MkIII) and you've mixed and matched the parts from those 3 different boxes to make 3 units with models with visual distinction.
Next time take your own advice and read what was written.

If the 'specific thing people keep saying is two boxes of the same kit,' why are you bringing up three different boxes?

Voss wrote:
If the 'specific thing people keep saying is two boxes of the same kit,' why are you bringing up three different boxes?

Because that's what that individual I was replying to was talking about, whereas Sgt. Cortez was talking about repeats of the same box.
It would have taken you no time at all to read the context. But I guess cheap shots are easier right?

spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
These new models aren't ugly or anything, but you'd only buy every kit once and then look for 3rd party alternatives if you don't want a Clone army while with the old style you'd have several boxes and every Marine/ Ork what have you looking different.

Well, that's just not true at all. Why do people keep parroting this narrative that all the pre-8th kits are super customisable when at best the differences between one unit of Tacticals and another will be the Sergeant and special/heavy weapons i.e exactly the same things that are in the newer kits.

Umm, I'm actually generally fine and even happy in many cases with the single-piece bodies + torsoes, but there really is a difference, especially with Marines. The Badab War was what got me back into 40k in part because of the emphasis in many cases on mixes of armor, and it's rare that any given Marine or CSM model in my collection is made from fewer than three different kits unless it's a monopose or equivalent (which I do sometimes use for cheap filler). I don't esp. care about the poses, but Marine part cross-compatability is a huge part of what I find rewarding about modeling anything in the game. I imagine that for many gamers it isn't a big thing, but my collections actively mixes everything from RT through 8th and fits my vision of both imperial and chaos forces stretched thin (and in the latter case less mutated and spiky than GW's vision), and the loss of those combinations does actually affect my choices. No, it isn't immense, but it's also not nothing.

Just because something isn't relevant to your experience doesn't mean it isn't relevant to others'. People who disagree with you might actually have an informed reason for their disagreement, and aren't just uncritically repeating something they heard.

With the total # of individual MKX Tacticus armoured poses(spread thru ETB, Starter boxes, intercessor, assault & hellblaster) "monopose" is not really a bad thing. I think i have at least a squad of each tacticus pattern sculpt in each role and think the variety looks good. But contrast that to PM & reg CSM kits and the "monopose" butts up into homogeneity when you get into 30+ models.

I wouldn't mind a little of both. Where all(or most) weapons will work with all(or most) bodies but not "rotating waist". If they really wanted to, they could make each individual leg, hip, foot components on sprue. Which would lead to a great deal of pose-ability & coincidentally consternation from everyone.
The new plastic Contemptor/Leviathan will prob lose some of the excellent posing available in the resin kit.

 Gert wrote:
Next time take your own advice and read what was written.

Oh thank you Great One, how foolish of me, when I responded to your claim rejecting false customizability and minor differences made possible through it, to have interpreted it in anything other than the exact context that you intended and favorably, and shamefully responding with a counterpoint which is directly relevant to the discussion but not identical in scope.

I did read what was written.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
responding with a counterpoint which is directly relevant to the discussion but not identical in scope.

It's an entirely different point that has no bearing on that specific argument.

If you have 2 boxes of Tactical Marines, there are not enough parts in those boxes to make 2 entirely distinct units of Tactical Marines. You get 1 special weapon, 1 heavy weapon, Sergeant options, 1 alternate body front, 6 heads, and 1 alternate shoulder pad set. The poses will be similar if not identical with the only "posing" being in head movement and which way the torso is facing, the latter being a false choice as many of the "options" are not suitable for the sturdy construction of the model. At best Marines from squad 1 will be facing left and Marines from squad 2 will be facing right. There will be differences but not to the point where every single Marine in both squads is different in a significant way from another.
So the argument that older kits had superior posing to newer kits when duplicated isn't true.

Your point was about how you mix up to 3 kits per unit, meaning any argument regarding identical models is removed because you have introduced 2 more sets of parts and options not present in the original kit. I am not arguing that the return to single (in essence) body pieces allows for the same level of kit interchangeability because they don't. Hence why your entire argument was entirely irrelevant to the specific criticism of the point Sgt. Cortez made.

 Gert wrote:

Voss wrote:
If the 'specific thing people keep saying is two boxes of the same kit,' why are you bringing up three different boxes?

Because that's what that individual I was replying to was talking about, whereas Sgt. Cortez was talking about repeats of the same box.
It would have taken you no time at all to read the context. But I guess cheap shots are easier right?

But the argument does apply, because cross-compatibility of parts would allow for substantial variation even with just two of the same box. Use this torso with those legs, that set of arms with that torso, this head with that, swap those shoulderpads around, make the special weapon MK6 in one, MK4+7 mix in the next etc etc. Some of the new style boxes allow some degree of parts swapping, but a lot of them are pretty fixed in what you can do especially for "unique" models - sure you can give Special Weapon Man one of three guns, but they're all the same dude in the same pose.

Further, combining that cross-compatibility with two points of rotation at both the neck and waist did allow for a surprising amount of variation. Of course it was more limited in practice than in theory, not *every* pose you could technically make looked good, and not every combination of bits would work with the poses that did look good, but there absolutely, categorically, demonstrably was more variety in what you could do straight out of the box than with almost any modern GW kit without having to cut or file or sculpt a thing.

If all of GW's modern kits were up to the standard of their better "monopose" efforts, where parts are still reasonably distinct, types of joints are fairly universal, and there's variety in the parts available that would be one thing, but a lot of them aren't even close to it. Instead the pieces on the sprue are often cut for efficiency of casting above all else and can only be put together one way - sometimes only in a particular order - with a very slightly different "alt build" if you're lucky. Given that, people's nostalgia for a time when you could just chop stuff off the sprues and kitbash away is understandable and perfectly justifiable, and it's mystifying to me why some folk are so invested in "proving them wrong" - you're allowed to prefer the new way of doing things without having to deny that there is in fact a new way things are being done.

ERJAK wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:

 ekwatts wrote:
I don't see anything aesthetically or functionally being lost in the modern kits.

With so many ways to build these and all.

This is the very definition of cherry picking.

What's incorrect though?

 Yodhrin wrote:
But the argument does apply, because cross-compatibility of parts would allow for substantial variation even with just two of the same box. Use this torso with those legs, that set of arms with that torso, this head with that, swap those shoulderpads around, make the special weapon MK6 in one, MK4+7 mix in the next etc etc. Some of the new style boxes allow some degree of parts swapping, but a lot of them are pretty fixed in what you can do especially for "unique" models - sure you can give Special Weapon Man one of three guns, but they're all the same dude in the same pose.

Let's take a look into this "substantial variation" shall we?

Wow, look at all those shoulder pads where 90% are exactly the same. And those legs! Wow, almost entirely the exact same pose with minimal differences.

Holy smokes, just look at those Bolters and arms! They are once again almost entirely identical.

Hot damn! Look at all of those parts that are almost entirely identical to the point where there is basically no difference between them!

Amazing! Look at the sheer variety of poses. I can't decide if my Marines should have their guns up or down!

Further, combining that cross-compatibility with two points of rotation at both the neck and waist did allow for a surprising amount of variation. Of course it was more limited in practice than in theory, not *every* pose you could technically make looked good, and not every combination of bits would work with the poses that did look good, but there absolutely, categorically, demonstrably was more variety in what you could do straight out of the box than with almost any modern GW kit without having to cut or file or sculpt a thing.

The variation is not as much as you make out though. The model will face left, right, or straight ahead for the balljoint design models, and that design is a pain in the rear to build since every single one needs to be balanced perfectly or the top half doesn't stick properly and falls off.

If all of GW's modern kits were up to the standard of their better "monopose" efforts, where parts are still reasonably distinct, types of joints are fairly universal, and there's variety in the parts available that would be one thing, but a lot of them aren't even close to it. Instead the pieces on the sprue are often cut for efficiency of casting above all else and can only be put together one way - sometimes only in a particular order - with a very slightly different "alt build" if you're lucky. Given that, people's nostalgia for a time when you could just chop stuff off the sprues and kitbash away is understandable and perfectly justifiable, and it's mystifying to me why some folk are so invested in "proving them wrong" - you're allowed to prefer the new way of doing things without having to deny that there is in fact a new way things are being done.

It is objectively wrong to suggest that the Tactical Marine kit is better for posing that the Intercessor kit. The former has set poses because physics and the other has set poses by design and those 5 set poses are far more natural looking that "squatting with gun".

It's amazing how many people try to pretend that the minis today and the minis from them are no different.

Sad, really.

"tHeY aLl LoOk ThE sAmE."

Lack of imagination. Or skill. Or both.

The newer models simply look a lot better. I have not touched a squat marine after seeing the primaris. The fixed waist doesn't make them monopose, like it didn't make skitarii or GSC monopose. And of course the kits are cross-compatible, I have kitbased them a lot.


GW makes actual monopose models, often found in starter sets. So having terminology to be able to distinguish such models from more posable ones often found in full kits is useful, so I don't appreciate the Newspeak mudding up the communication.

 Crimson wrote:
The newer models simply look a lot better. I have not touched a squat marine after seeing the primaris. The fixed waist doesn't make them monopose, like it didn't make skitarii or GSC monopose. And of course the kits are cross-compatible, I have kitbased them a lot.


GW makes actual monopose models, often found in starter sets. So having terminology to be able to distinguish such models from more posable ones often found in full kits is useful, so I don't appreciate the Newspeak mudding up the communication.

I agree that Primaris ruined Firstborn for me. Plus they have a delightful amount of physical mass that just makes them feel nice to paint.

HH plastics are a good second in that department actually.

Dynamic repetition is always worse than neutral repetition as far as posing goes. Newer GW bits are full of extremely dynamic poses that are monopose or difficult to change . Older style tactical marines and the like are all similarly posed, but since the parts are very neutrally positioned you get minor variation in every model if you want, and they're all doing the same action of firing/advancing.

The 2012 Dark Vengeance Chosen are a perfect example. You get two of the exact same marines carrying bolters in the kit. With the same snarling leg daemon and the same chain dangling from boltgun, and the same relatively dynamic pose compared to most other bolter equipped marines at the time. Its very noticeable when looking at the squad as a whole.

Like the new Deathguard Plague marine kit, every single model is doing something different with a different weapon. Its way too busy imo.

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Dynamic repetition is always worse than neutral repetition as far as posing goes. Newer GW bits are full of extremely dynamic poses that are monopose or difficult to change . Older style tactical marines and the like are all similarly posed, but since the parts are very neutrally positioned you get minor variation in every model if you want, and they're all doing the same action of firing/advancing.

Bang that drum buddy, for all the good it'll do. I've been saying that for ages, and still people try to pretend that this isn't an issue.

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Dynamic repetition is always worse than neutral repetition as far as posing goes. Newer GW bits are full of extremely dynamic poses that are monopose or difficult to change . Older style tactical marines and the like are all similarly posed, but since the parts are very neutrally positioned you get minor variation in every model if you want, and they're all doing the same action of firing/advancing.

The 2012 Dark Vengeance Chosen are a perfect example. You get two of the exact same marines carrying bolters in the kit. With the same snarling leg daemon and the same chain dangling from boltgun, and the same relatively dynamic pose compared to most other bolter equipped marines at the time. Its very noticeable when looking at the squad as a whole.

Like the new Deathguard Plague marine kit, every single model is doing something different with a different weapon. Its way too busy imo.

Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

Of proper kits Deathguard are definitely the worst of it, but most kits are honestly fine.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

That doesn't really counter what he said.

He's talking about dynamic repetition vs neutral repetition. A lot of GW's current minis are dynamic - far more than they used to be - but option poor in the realms of poseabilty (push fit or otherwise).

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

That doesn't really counter what he said.

He's talking about dynamic repetition vs neutral repetition. A lot of GW's current minis are dynamic - far more than they used to be - but option poor in the realms of poseabilty (push fit or otherwise).

When the only missing pose ability option is a waist swivel that results in a more natural body line and no one standing around like they got a full diaper I'd argue that for Primaris at least the trade off was worth it. Most of the dynamic poses are walking or standing poses so it doesn't exactly cause the same issues like we see in Deathguard who are some of the most mono build option models in the game.

There is a spectrum here and it feels like everyone wants to lump everything down on the Deathguard end of the spectrum when most of it sits around the middle just a smidge to the opposite direction of the middle than the older plastic kits were.

I agree that the old chosen aren't a great example, as they were doomed to be dramatic monopose models, as they were released as a starter set with no options.

However, over dynamic standard kit models do stand out like a sore thumb. Especially if one or more model is posed on a piece of very unique scenery that can easily be identified if you have more than one of that model's body.

Primaris don't have the issue, because they tend to be standardized, so the whole unit will have the same weapon. Plague marines, like he mentioned, all have random weapons and don't have a cohesive feel to them. It tends to be a more common issue with elite units, or basically any set that has five or few models in it.

Look at the new eldar rangers. They have options for guns, or pistols and swords. But at least one is doing the weird splay leg pose on scenery, so it's obvious that it's a repeat model, despite the head and arm swap

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

That doesn't really counter what he said.

He's talking about dynamic repetition vs neutral repetition. A lot of GW's current minis are dynamic - far more than they used to be - but option poor in the realms of poseabilty (push fit or otherwise).

What H.B.M.C. said is where I lie.

New models are better visually and much more dynamic.
BUT reposability/conversion options are severely limited.

I prefer a balance of the 2 where the bodies are set but the arms or weapons can be change between models such as in necromunda for the vast majority of the range.

 Waaagh_Gonads wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

That doesn't really counter what he said.

He's talking about dynamic repetition vs neutral repetition. A lot of GW's current minis are dynamic - far more than they used to be - but option poor in the realms of poseabilty (push fit or otherwise).

What H.B.M.C. said is where I lie.

New models are better visually and much more dynamic.
BUT reposability/conversion options are severely limited.

I prefer a balance of the 2 where the bodies are set but the arms or weapons can be change between models such as in necromunda for the vast majority of the range.

That's where I tend to favor it as well and it seems GW sticks with that more than they do monobuild dynamic kits, but that isn't to claim said monobuild kits don't exist (Aggressors for example don't have a lot of freedom in posing but the walking poses hide the issue since they don't have anything else going on there).

Honestly the worst of it has to be units with sculpted terrain on their bases because without cutting them off their special ruins or rocks and putting them on something else it's hard to hide the repeated bit of ground over and over again if it's too unique.

 Crimson wrote:
The newer models simply look a lot better. I have not touched a squat marine after seeing the primaris. The fixed waist doesn't make them monopose, like it didn't make skitarii or GSC monopose. And of course the kits are cross-compatible, I have kitbased them a lot.

Just for a tangent here (or back to HH as the case may be), this doesn't strike me as primaris vs oldmarine issue. The new beakies also look a lot better, and I think any new oldmarines that GW would have done rather than primaris would also have been better in much the same ways.

Now, the leaked pictures show a lot of repeated poses, so I don't expect a lot of customization options with the new HH starter (certainly not at the waist), but there's a lot of opportunity for GW to redo the oldmarine range better than before. And keep a lot of the functionality that the primaris range abandoned (in terms of gear options)

I agree that we need to better distinguish between true monopose, and the somewhat limited pose figures.

When Primaries first came out I made an entire Ultramarines army almost entirely made from starter set marines I got on the cheap. The army looks good too, but that's because it's easy to hide repetition in Marines with limited bling on them.

True monopose I like for filler guys, if they are cheap. GW has had a few true monopose filler guys in the past that were almost as expensive as the stardard kit with options, and that's just silly.

When it comes to Primaris vs Tactical, the Primaris look a bit better, but are less poseable.That is just a fact. It's not much, but that little twist in the torso can be just enough to justify a new position for the head,and little variations add up. They also have just a bit less part interchangeability, which is what really matters to me.

My perfect kit would have back halves of torsos locked to the legs for a dynamic pose, with interchangeable chests, heads, arms, weapons, and shoulder pads. And not just within a squad, but across the entire army, or in the case of SM/CSM across both armies for parts swapping.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Dynamic repetition is always worse than neutral repetition as far as posing goes. Newer GW bits are full of extremely dynamic poses that are monopose or difficult to change . Older style tactical marines and the like are all similarly posed, but since the parts are very neutrally positioned you get minor variation in every model if you want, and they're all doing the same action of firing/advancing.

The 2012 Dark Vengeance Chosen are a perfect example. You get two of the exact same marines carrying bolters in the kit. With the same snarling leg daemon and the same chain dangling from boltgun, and the same relatively dynamic pose compared to most other bolter equipped marines at the time. Its very noticeable when looking at the squad as a whole.

Like the new Deathguard Plague marine kit, every single model is doing something different with a different weapon. Its way too busy imo.

Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

I knew someone would focus on the fact that they're push-fit lol. It's an example showing two dynamic models that are exactly the same pose and how much they stick out. You could achieve the same example with the modern CSM kit with the models that force a certain set of arms on a body, buying two kits, and having the exact same terminator pose twice in the same squad.

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Dynamic repetition is always worse than neutral repetition as far as posing goes. Newer GW bits are full of extremely dynamic poses that are monopose or difficult to change . Older style tactical marines and the like are all similarly posed, but since the parts are very neutrally positioned you get minor variation in every model if you want, and they're all doing the same action of firing/advancing.

The 2012 Dark Vengeance Chosen are a perfect example. You get two of the exact same marines carrying bolters in the kit. With the same snarling leg daemon and the same chain dangling from boltgun, and the same relatively dynamic pose compared to most other bolter equipped marines at the time. Its very noticeable when looking at the squad as a whole.

Like the new Deathguard Plague marine kit, every single model is doing something different with a different weapon. Its way too busy imo.

Your example are pushfit models. Primaris have dynamic bodies, but using different arms and posing the head in different direction can get a lot of work out of the kit without a problem.

I knew someone would focus on the fact that they're push-fit lol. It's an example showing two dynamic models that are exactly the same pose and how much they stick out. You could achieve the same example with the modern CSM kit with the models that force a certain set of arms on a body, buying two kits, and having the exact same terminator pose twice in the same squad.

You undermine your own argument when you use push fit models when complaining about pose ability. They're that way by design to make it easier to build, even without glue. That's like complaining that a bicycle doesn't come with a two stroke motor.

Death Guard are already a perfect example of repetitive poses with next to no options on a multipart kit that make the models look a lot like clones of each other. You don't even need a second example because that one is so damned good it outlines the extreme of dynamic versus pose ability perfectly. That's the only reason I focused in on it, because you weakened your own argument when you have better options to work from.

Do we need to kick this particular ball around again? Slow news day maybe but this dead horse is so dead and has been beaten so much it’s practically mince.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Do we need to kick this particular ball around again? Slow news day maybe but this dead horse is so dead and has been beaten so much it’s practically mince.

It does feel like old ground at this point and honestly I think we're not looking at Death Guard levels of posing, but rather Primaris levels where you can swap all the arms around and repose the heads. Then again, GW does love their cross compatibility between kits and it could be made intentionally compatible with MkIII and MkIV kits which would give seperate torso and legs (though despite the ballsocket waists MkIII is kind of swiveless due to the plate tabards).

Now getting back to the rumors, I have mixed feelings about the rules staying with a variant 7th edition. Age of Darkness did do a lot to help fix jank, I don't know enough to comment about things like how it handled psychic powers or the way 7th ed handled "barrage" weapons (looking at you Hydra Flak Cannon), and honestly I don't know if I want to deal with template arguments again.

That said I've been looking at a reason to buy some Primarchs (I want to do a diorama with Dorn and Pert as well as maybe pick up Lorgar as well) and honestly if I ever did a Word Bearers army in 40k I'd pick up Erebus just because he's got one hell of a sculpt and would look great on the table as a Dark Apostle, but triggering my desire to throw money at GW for models I like isn't a high bar to clear. I'm hoping we hear a bit more about the game over the next four weeks and get confirmation on how things will be playing out. Like maybe a free "how to play" video on their streaming platform they love so much.

 Crimson wrote:
The newer models simply look a lot better. I have not touched a squat marine after seeing the primaris. The fixed waist doesn't make them monopose, like it didn't make skitarii or GSC monopose. And of course the kits are cross-compatible, I have kitbased them a lot.

I agree that the Primaris look better. I disagree that the reason is due to fixed waist instead of to proportions.

I do agree that in general "fixed pose" bodies look better in a void, and if you then make sure that any body can get any arms/heads, it's usually great (and most historicals do this, as well as Stargrave, etc.). Problem for me starts when you get pose locked to a specific body to one or two specific sets of parts.

Also, as has already been said, fixed poses are perfectly great when there's no repetition, and it gets worse the more you see of them.

The Psychic phase and the way powers work with the 7th style is only really an issue if Tsons or Ruinstorm Daemons with loads of wizards are on the table. For the former it can be irritating while you wait for them to do their turn but IMO it's the same as any other phase where an army has specialised into using said phase. As long as power generation is still rolled for I wouldn't mind a switch to the 2d6 to get X result for casting but it's not a massive concern for me.

FW are putting up some new Horus Heresy Bundles:

Prepare for the coming battles of the Horus Heresy with a selection of bundles – from an Imperial Fists Legion Command to Leman Russ and his Wolf-Kin.

I've not checked to see if any of them have a discount yet, but it doesn't look like it...

The latest rumour on B&C seems to indicate that a huge amount of Legion units and Characters are getting dumped as well as some generic Legion units, including additions that were made very recently.
I mean it's also April 1st so I'm hoping it's some stupid joke but if not then it looks like I'll be sticking to the current edition.
Link for those interested:
http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/369602-state-of-the-union-heresy/page-115

beast_gts wrote:
FW are putting up some new Horus Heresy Bundles:

Prepare for the coming battles of the Horus Heresy with a selection of bundles – from an Imperial Fists Legion Command to Leman Russ and his Wolf-Kin.

I've not checked to see if any of them have a discount yet, but it doesn't look like it...

No discounts at all...

 zedmeister wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
FW are putting up some new Horus Heresy Bundles:

Prepare for the coming battles of the Horus Heresy with a selection of bundles – from an Imperial Fists Legion Command to Leman Russ and his Wolf-Kin.

I've not checked to see if any of them have a discount yet, but it doesn't look like it...

No discounts at all...

Which is standard fare for GW/FW by now, to be entirely honest.

 Gert wrote:
The Psychic phase and the way powers work with the 7th style is only really an issue if Tsons or Ruinstorm Daemons with loads of wizards are on the table. For the former it can be irritating while you wait for them to do their turn but IMO it's the same as any other phase where an army has specialised into using said phase. As long as power generation is still rolled for I wouldn't mind a switch to the 2d6 to get X result for casting but it's not a massive concern for me.

I played Sisters during 7th so maybe I have a bias, but honestly Invisible death stars was the worst part of the psychic powers.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I played Sisters during 7th so maybe I have a bias, but honestly Invisible death stars was the worst part of the psychic powers.

And I played against Lorgar Transfigured with a horde of Terminators all with Invisibility. That power is gone my guy, it was removed in the AoD ruleset.

 Gert wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I played Sisters during 7th so maybe I have a bias, but honestly Invisible death stars was the worst part of the psychic powers.

And I played against Lorgar Transfigured with a horde of Terminators all with Invisibility. That power is gone my guy, it was removed in the AoD ruleset.

Honestly cures one of my biggest concerns about sticking with 7th ed.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Honestly cures one of my biggest concerns about sticking with 7th ed.

The problem comes from how people describe the AoD ruleset. It is based on 7th Ed but the worst issues don't exist.
The Psychic tables were reworked and changed, with Invisibility being flat out removed and summoning abuse is much harder due to the lack of Psykers and the fact that Malefic powers are locked to the Word Bearers and the Esoterist unit for Astartes.
Formations aren't a thing and Rites of War are nowhere near as problematic as they almost always cause negative as well as positive effects. For example, Primarch's Chosen allows you to take a Primarch as your HQ and Warlord, alongside Veterans and all Terminators as Troops. However, in addition to Price of Failure (extra VP for LoW kills) if the Primarch is slain then all units in the detachment lose scoring and you have to take more units with the Legion Astartes rule than without (the latter isn't a serious issue but means that you can't take the minimum Troops then load up on tanks or aircraft).
Deathstars can still be an issue but the similarity between the Legion lists and the variety in Legion special units means that your Deathstar might go up against something just as big and bad as itself, if not more so.
Morale is much more of a player as although Legion Astartes units can always attempt to regroup, they are not immune to rules such as Fear, with Fearless being one of the most premium special rules in the system.
There are obviously broken lists and units but the wider HH event circuit (at least where I live) is centered around narrative-driven games and a more casual environment. So lists like the Court of the Crimson King (Magnus and a butt load of Sehkmet) supported by 3 Sicaran Arcus tanks (very very good) are not looked on favorably.

I have no issue either way as long as things are sculped in a way which makes cutting up the models easy

The glory of old monopose kits were that once you got all the kits of a single faction, there was a lot of cool kitbash combos you could do without having to cut and paste anything. But the poses were quite static at times.

I think I prefer the modern style where it's a singular torso piece, and you just mix & match the arms, head and accessories. But in order for that to work optimally, you need a healthy selection of torsos, with enough variety in poses. You gotta have both static and more dynamic ones, or it's not looking any better than the old ones.

You'll still need the hacksaw either way if you are serious about your minis

For those who have not seen it yet, here is a link to an imgur gallery with a lot of leaked rules pages.
https://imgur.com/a/sRSeyzH

Some things I like, some I don't (mostly in regards to missing units). Regardless, set your Doom-O-Meters to 11.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
For those who have not seen it yet, here is a link to an imgur gallery with a lot of leaked rules pages.
https://imgur.com/a/sRSeyzH

Some things I like, some I don't (mostly in regards to missing units). Regardless, set your Doom-O-Meters to 11.

A lot of units got the axe. Feeling like, great new plastic, take those and play original 30k. Avoid new of the sake of new and the campaign book churn.

Did the axed generic units?

RazorEdge wrote:
Did the axed generic units?

Yes - Indomitus Terminators (the GW plastic ones), Dreadnoughts, Legion Basilisk/Medusa...

They may tie some axed units in to other entries. Like the cortus and Mortis contemptors could be rolled up into the contemptor entry

Certain Centurion options have been removed as well as the Achilles, Phobos LR and probably some other stuff. Legion specifics have also seemingly been gutted so overall this is looking like a pretty grim picture for HH.

This is the removed list from B&C:

Yeah, pretty peeved that the full squadron of Legion Medusas I have for my Imperial Fists are now a nice expensive set of paperweights....

Really sad the Legion dedicated artillery is gone. That stuff rocks.

Bummer, list is larger than you’d think. I can see a few things I have are no longer on the list :(

It also doesn't make sense considering the model that was specifically made for the Legion arty is still in production and hasn't gone LCTB alongside the Spartan, Deimos Rhino, and Sicaran.

WTF, why did they removed Rylanor?

There was a leaked Page with a LR Proteus with the profile of the Phobos (???).

Some people said those leaks are not final, some removed options make no sense (to me) and could maybe only missing in this leaked book which isn't complete.

The thing is, at "Phase 3 Testing" (if that's what this really is) I'd expect things to be pretty nailed down. Unless this is all lies in which case we're at square 0.

Some of the removed units are just strange choices. GW clearly has some plan in regards to what they want to produce in plastic and what they want to produce in resin, but dropping the boxnoughts is just baffling. I can kind of understand the Lightning (I have one, so it sucks to not get to use it), as the Xiphon can be pushed as the marine-specific fighter and maybe the Lightning will be in the Imperial Army and militias list? Same with the artillery (I have a legion Basilisk), I suppose they'll get shunted to the Imperial Army and militias? Even if they discontinued the FW Basilisk, there's still the full plastic model they could just sell.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Some of the removed units are just strange choices. GW clearly has some plan in regards to what they want to produce in plastic and what they want to produce in resin, but dropping the boxnoughts is just baffling. I can kind of understand the Lightning (I have one, so it sucks to not get to use it), as the Xiphon can be pushed as the marine-specific fighter and maybe the Lightning will be in the Imperial Army and militias list? Same with the artillery (I have a legion Basilisk), I suppose they'll get shunted to the Imperial Army and militias? Even if they discontinued the FW Basilisk, there's still the full plastic model they could just sell.

The current plastic basilisk is one of the few guard kits that still needs a redone model- it has the new chimaera hull, but the old 3rd ed basilisk gun sprue.

my guess is if boxnaughts are removed it's due the GW wanting to create a clearer line between The HH and 40k.

BrianDavion wrote:
my guess is if boxnaughts are removed it's due the GW wanting to create a clearer line between The HH and 40k.

Which is strange because most of the SM stuff for 40k was around during the heresy, apparently even extending to primaris marines. HH is basically just 40k without xenos in terms of what units were being used.

BrianDavion wrote:
my guess is if boxnaughts are removed it's due the GW wanting to create a clearer line between The HH and 40k.

But that still baffles me. 30K is the perfect place for them to continue to sell all of the old marine vehicles, letting them push the Primaris stuff even more in 40K.

Part of me wants to think it's not something stupid like they don't want a kit to be usable in both game systems because they don't want to have to label the box with both the 40K and 30K logos.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


Part of me wants to think it's not something stupid like they don't want a kit to be usable in both game systems because they don't want to have to label the box with both the 40K and 30K logos.

It's not about labeling the box, they don't want anyone to be able to use 1 army for both 40k and HH. You wanna play HH? Better buy all the HH specific stuff because your 40k space marines won't work (even though the novels are full of space marines with loadouts that you can build from the 40k kits).

Toofast wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


Part of me wants to think it's not something stupid like they don't want a kit to be usable in both game systems because they don't want to have to label the box with both the 40K and 30K logos.

It's not about labeling the box, they don't want anyone to be able to use 1 army for both 40k and HH. You wanna play HH? Better buy all the HH specific stuff because your 40k space marines won't work (even though the novels are full of space marines with loadouts that you can build from the 40k kits).

I mean cross game kits are a thing *points to chaos deamons* for all we know GW just didn't include a complete list of units (in fact if they where trying to catch play test leakers omitting a handful of beloved units from differant documents and waiting to see what the internet blows up about would be an easy way to do it)

Toofast wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


Part of me wants to think it's not something stupid like they don't want a kit to be usable in both game systems because they don't want to have to label the box with both the 40K and 30K logos.

It's not about labeling the box, they don't want anyone to be able to use 1 army for both 40k and HH. You wanna play HH? Better buy all the HH specific stuff because your 40k space marines won't work (even though the novels are full of space marines with loadouts that you can build from the 40k kits).

Otherweise, the added the "half-marines" Scout Squad to HH, when we already have the Legion Recon Squad.

Toofast wrote:


(even though the novels are full of space marines with loadouts that you can build from the 40k kits).

Their kneepads are the wrong shape though.

BrianDavion wrote:
my guess is if boxnaughts are removed it's due the GW wanting to create a clearer line between The HH and 40k.

The Castaferrum Mk.IV (exposed pilot head, secondary weapons mounted on body) was pre-HH while the Mk.V (fully enclosed sarcophagus, secondary weapons mounted on arm(s)) was introduced during the HH.

Toofast wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


Part of me wants to think it's not something stupid like they don't want a kit to be usable in both game systems because they don't want to have to label the box with both the 40K and 30K logos.

It's not about labeling the box, they don't want anyone to be able to use 1 army for both 40k and HH. You wanna play HH? Better buy all the HH specific stuff because your 40k space marines won't work (even though the novels are full of space marines with loadouts that you can build from the 40k kits).

Considering you could just use HH models as 40k ones (been thinking about jumping into Word Bearwrs in both systems via HH for example) I think it has to do more with sales tracking and GW wanting a clear revenue stream for FW's specialist games division.

That dude that leaked the loyal Legions rules is now leaking the main rulebook on 4chan...

Seems like the new Horus Heresy borrows stuff from a lot of the older editions, not only 7th Edition.

I hope that list of removed units is bs. Iron Warriors losing their whole contingent of non-primarch special characters, including the one that actually has a (limited edition event exclusive) model? That blows.

They removed one of my fav things about 40k: Angry Washing Machine Dreadnoughts.

Not that I have any in my WE army - it's just Contemptors - but still. I have so many Boxnaughts that I might've done one or two up in WE colours.

WTF - Tarantulas are out? They're hard enough to include in a 40K list already. Disappointed.

Soon, I will not only have an army incompatible with 40K, but 30K as well. Great

 tauist wrote:
WTF - Tarantulas are out? They're hard enough to include in a 40K list already. Disappointed.

Soon, I will not only have an army incompatible with 40K, but 30K as well. Great

Tarantulas are some of my favorite things...

 tauist wrote:
WTF - Tarantulas are out? They're hard enough to include in a 40K list already. Disappointed.

Soon, I will not only have an army incompatible with 40K, but 30K as well. Great

My guess is there's enough 3rd party sci-fi gun turrets out there that GW decided it was ok to toss them.

Ahh man, Ebon Keshig are the only keshig that exist, Qinxa cant have his special bodyguard aynmore.
I guess im kinda glad I never got around to converting those scarob occult termies to them.

Aren't the Ebon Keshig the only one that have miniatures?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Aren't the Ebon Keshig the only one that have miniatures?

They aren’t in the list of things going that I can see. The Golden Keshig have models as well.

Hm, Iron Havocs gone? >_>

Well, hopefully I'll at least will be able to use them as regular HWs.

There is no mention of custodes in those HH leaks or am i missing something?

 nordsturmking wrote:
There is no mention of custodes in those HH leaks or am i missing something?

I'm sure they'll be in the non legion book.

Regarding any missing units- isn't the initial release of books just supposed to be a get you by set until individual legions get their own books?

The Black Adder wrote:
I'm sure they'll be in the non legion book.

Regarding any missing units- isn't the initial release of books just supposed to be a get you by set until individual legions get their own books?

Considering this set of leaks seemingly has unique Legion units in it, and not only a few but what looks to be almost the full compliment of Dark Angels units, this doesn't seem to be a "get you by" book like the 8th Ed Indexes or even the 9th Ed Marine Codex pre-Supplement release. This seems to be the full package that has just wiped units from the board at random, even ones that were added in Book 9.

I think some of this may be the result of no models, no rules…

Yup, all the missing units are no models no rules.
Perhaps we can count our lucky stars that they haven't taken it to the same extremes that 40k has?

Allegedly (someone said someone said on twitter) there's some office politics as well. Games/studios are judged on how well their miniatures sell, and since Boxnaughts are 40k branded sales of those boost the 40k team's numbers, not the 30k team's.
So they've been removed because, although they're still available, sales hurt the 30k team more than they help.
Seems plausible enough but who knows.

 Gert wrote:

The Black Adder wrote:
I'm sure they'll be in the non legion book.

Regarding any missing units- isn't the initial release of books just supposed to be a get you by set until individual legions get their own books?

Considering this set of leaks seemingly has unique Legion units in it, and not only a few but what looks to be almost the full compliment of Dark Angels units, this doesn't seem to be a "get you by" book like the 8th Ed Indexes or even the 9th Ed Marine Codex pre-Supplement release. This seems to be the full package that has just wiped units from the board at random, even ones that were added in Book 9.

I think that's incredibly unlikely that GW won't release any more books for an entire addition of a game.

It is very annoying that they have removed Castraferrum Dreadnoughts and Indomitus Terminators.

My Imperial Fists force has both to match with their lore as a specialist force for void combat, including an Indomitus Praetor conversion (Imperial Fists had the most suits of Indomitus during the Heresy and Castraferrum Dreadnoughts are noted as having the lowest height and being better suited to boarding actions as a result).

No Medusa? Iron Warriors are gonna be mighty upset, there's literally a kit for it still around.

The Black Adder wrote:

 Gert wrote:

The Black Adder wrote:
I'm sure they'll be in the non legion book.

Regarding any missing units- isn't the initial release of books just supposed to be a get you by set until individual legions get their own books?

Considering this set of leaks seemingly has unique Legion units in it, and not only a few but what looks to be almost the full compliment of Dark Angels units, this doesn't seem to be a "get you by" book like the 8th Ed Indexes or even the 9th Ed Marine Codex pre-Supplement release. This seems to be the full package that has just wiped units from the board at random, even ones that were added in Book 9.

I think that's incredibly unlikely that GW won't release any more books for an entire addition of a game.

No doubt books come. Another thing does that mean rules for non-existant models or 40k models come with them...

The Black Adder wrote:
I think that's incredibly unlikely that GW won't release any more books for an entire addition of a game.

So? The Legion list has been gutted and the Legions themselves have also been gutted. My Iron Warriors just lost 2/3 of the named characters I had for them and my 3 units of Iron Havocs just got turned into Heavy Weapons squads. My Blackshields have been shelved because the rumours suggest they've been axed and the Shattered Legions army I had just started might now be unviable. As far as my current HH armies go they've been dropped into a lake with concrete tied to their legs if I move to the new edition.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Allegedly (someone said someone said on twitter) there's some office politics as well. Games/studios are judged on how well their miniatures sell, and since Boxnaughts are 40k branded sales of those boost the 40k team's numbers, not the 30k team's.
So they've been removed because, although they're still available, sales hurt the 30k team more than they help.
Seems plausible enough but who knows.

That puts Daemons in an interesting place...

 Gert wrote:

The Black Adder wrote:
I think that's incredibly unlikely that GW won't release any more books for an entire addition of a game.

So? The Legion list has been gutted and the Legions themselves have also been gutted. My Iron Warriors just lost 2/3 of the named characters I had for them and my 3 units of Iron Havocs just got turned into Heavy Weapons squads. My Blackshields have been shelved because the rumours suggest they've been axed and the Shattered Legions army I had just started might now be unviable. As far as my current HH armies go they've been dropped into a lake with concrete tied to their legs if I move to the new edition.

But no model no rules makes the game more welcoming to newbies, don't'chu forget.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
But no model no rules makes the game more welcoming to newbies, don't'chu forget.

Which would make sense if the units being removed fell into that category, which they don't.

 Gert wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
But no model no rules makes the game more welcoming to newbies, don't'chu forget.

Which would make sense if the units being removed fell into that category, which they don't.

Do the units you mentioned currently have explictly dedicated models for them, though? Or do you have to use something else as a count-as.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Do the units you mentioned currently have explictly dedicated models for them, though? Or do you have to use something else as a count-as.

There are unit entries in the book that don't have dedicated models so while in this instance you may be correct with "GW bad" it's not for the correct reason.

How many of the removed units are marginally different legion specific variations of generic units? Meaning that you could just continue to use them as the generic versions.

That don't have dedicated models yet, we don't know what releases they have planned.

Also GW being inconsistent with how rules are applied is nothing new.

 Gert wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Do the units you mentioned currently have explictly dedicated models for them, though? Or do you have to use something else as a count-as.

There are unit entries in the book that don't have dedicated models.

Sorry my guy, i'm pretty sure that falls under "No Model, No Rules", and thus, removing them as an unit makes them game more welcoming to new players, as they don't have to convert them, or whatever people that defend the whole thing say nowadays.

Oh ok then, if its nothing new then I just won't be annoyed about it. That's cool Kiro thanks for enlightening me


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
Sorry my guy, i'm pretty sure that falls under "No Model, No Rules", and thus, removing them as an unit makes them game more welcoming to new players, as they don't have to convert them, or whatever people that defend the whole thing say nowadays.

You didn't read what I said, or if you did ignored it because it doesn't suit your narrative. There are unit options still present in that leaked document that don't have official models. Therefore the argument of NMNR doesn't apply.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Yup, all the missing units are no models no rules.

Are they? Iron Havocs never needed any model that did not exist, and they're on the "no rules" list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
But no model no rules makes the game more welcoming to newbies, don't'chu forget.

Which would make sense if the units being removed fell into that category, which they don't.

Do the units you mentioned currently have explictly dedicated models for them, though? Or do you have to use something else as a count-as.

Why would all special units need dedicated ultra special minis, though, when they're just weapon swaps?

 Albertorius wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
Yup, all the missing units are no models no rules.

Are they? Iron Havocs never needed any model that did not exist, and they're on the "no rules" list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 Gert wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:
But no model no rules makes the game more welcoming to newbies, don't'chu forget.

Which would make sense if the units being removed fell into that category, which they don't.

Do the units you mentioned currently have explictly dedicated models for them, though? Or do you have to use something else as a count-as.

Why would all special units need dedicated ultra special minis, though, when they're just weapon swaps?

Ask the guy who designs Primaris models

So for a list of things that have been included in these leaks so far but don't have official models for HH:
Consuls - Librarian, Esoterist, Delegatus, Pathfinder, Armistos, Herald, Siege Breaker, Mortificator.
Praetor - Bike upgrade, Jetbike upgrade.
Legion Scout Squad
LR Proteus Explorator (there is no such model)
SW Grey Stalkers
DA Marduk Sedras
DA Corswain

Then we have the plethora of units that do have models for HH or 40k that have been removed. NMNR does not apply here, shoddy work on the behalf of the rules team does.

As said earlier - those axed Army list entries make particulary no sense;

We have options axed - they have Miniatures
We have options remaining - they don't have any Miniatures

Why? Whats the logic behind this?

I guess GW is playing "bs bingo"...

[edit]
Didn't saw that Gert answered

Another interesting thing I noticed, Phalanx Warders now all have both bolter and power axe, which makes for a difficult time for anyone who had previously built so many with axe and so many with bolter, as per the old rules for them

warl0rdb0b wrote:
Another interesting thing I noticed, Phalanx Warders now all have both bolter and power axe, which makes for a difficult time for anyone who had previously built so many with axe and so many with bolter, as per the old rules for them

And the IF rite of war seems to have changed so that you need more Phalanx Warders, whereas you used to have to use Breachers for compulsory troops.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

Ask the guy who designs Primaris models

You mean Jes Goodwin? Or do you mean the rules team who decided that because he designed multiple types of bolter they should all have bespoke profiles?

As for the cut minis: I'll.be saddened for those affected if they are really gone but I would advise waiting until we see thefinal copy start circulating before we claim it's all gone. Just maybe if you're thinking on adding any of that stuff wait a bit just in case otherwiseet's wait for the actual rulebooks to go off of.

 Albertorius wrote:
Are they? Iron Havocs never needed any model that did not exist, and they're on the "no rules" list.

But they don't make any "Iron Havoc" models.

What difference does that really make, I hear you say.

All the difference.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

Ask the guy who designs Primaris models

You mean Jes Goodwin? Or do you mean the rules team who decided that because he designed multiple types of bolter they should all have bespoke profiles?

I mean whoever decided that they needed a dedicated all-Bolter squad, a dedicated all Chainsword+Pistol squad, a dedicated all-Plasma squad, a dedicated all-Melta squad...

 ClockworkZion wrote:
As for the cut minis: I'll.be saddened for those affected if they are really gone but I would advise waiting until we see thefinal copy start circulating before we claim it's all gone. Just maybe if you're thinking on adding any of that stuff wait a bit just in case otherwiseet's wait for the actual rulebooks to go off of.

It is why I'm being very specific in what I'm saying because there is still a part of me that doesn't believe this is real or the final copy. The biggest issue is the two projects I was working on in anticipation of this new edition have currently been shelved or postponed until the rules come out. I haven't got anything to build towards now which kills my excitement massively.

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Wha-Mu-077 wrote:

Ask the guy who designs Primaris models

You mean Jes Goodwin? Or do you mean the rules team who decided that because he designed multiple types of bolter they should all have bespoke profiles?

I mean whoever decided that they needed a dedicated all-Bolter squad, a dedicated all Chainsword+Pistol squad, a dedicated all-Plasma squad, a dedicated all-Melta squad...

Ironically, isn’t that a port of rules that originally started in HH though? With Legion tactical squads, special weapon squads, etc.