The door guns, seemingly, are for the gunship and bomber builds--so the 'legs' might not be as much of an issue as a transport would have.

Can we just admit the flyer looks aren't for everyone and move on ? As well please stop attacking the Taurox, they look pretty good with a different paint job and in person. I have a good number of them and they are excellent kits I've found.

Can we live in the holiday spirit and maybe not bash each other over what GW call it or what it's inspired by or should move like ?

Here I'll be positive I kind of like how it seems to have a similar role to a soviet Hind being gunship and transport but it feels like it's supposed to do those things at different times. Would have liked more a helicopter feel and maybe a bit stockier but over all it feels alright.

Will be interested to see the rules when they leak.

 insaniak wrote:
It;s also nowhere near over-the-top enough to fit in with current AoS designs.

You're right. Not nearly enough swirly bull gak to be an AoS mini.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Argive wrote:
It feels more like they made it for AOS but then decided to stick some 40k guns on it because IOM needed more releases in a schedule?

Really? We know that's not how they do things. And design Jes' sketches are even in this thread.

The wings feel like they belong in one of the new whatever dwarfs are called army.. They could have kept the body and juts slapped some normal wings/jet propellers on it. Bit like the orca chopper from C&C. You know like some over the top 15 vents and what not...

I'm glad people like it. Good for them getting new models to buy and paint. Still think

The wings make me think they stole Dark Eldar tech.
Legitimately it looks like the sails on DE vehicles.

I like its design and barring some Squigbuggy level of gak rules/points i'll get 1 for sure. I like how abstract admech look compared to other armies, yet still feel like they belong.
But i cant shake that it looks like a DE/Admech hybrid

I do like the monster pepperoni pizza...

T

 Vineheart01 wrote:
The wings make me think they stole Dark Eldar tech.
Legitimately it looks like the sails on DE vehicles.

Maybe the AdMech are like the Thomas Edison of 40k?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
The wings make me think they stole Dark Eldar tech.
Legitimately it looks like the sails on DE vehicles.

Maybe the AdMech are like the Thomas Edison of 40k?

naahhhh they wouldnt steal from filthy xenos...wink...wink?

 insaniak wrote:

JWBS wrote:
Fck are you talking about? I'm not dying on a hill. I've accepted it's an ornithopter. Have you not bothered reading the rest of the thread?

If you have accepted that it's an ornithopter, maybe saying that, instead of arguing over what it was called might have been more productive.

SO, if we're all on the same page now, let's leave the pedantry there, folks, and get back to talking about the actual models.

Shall go back and delete everything I said before this "We use the Greek "-pter" (wing, feather) to differentiate systems where a moving wing provides lift"? Because I was speaking under the misapprehension that since Helicopter means "Helix(spiral)Wing" and Ornithopter means "BirdWing", then Archaeothopter probably means"OldWing", and I didn't know that the Pter suffix is only used when were talking about moving wings. But yes, "φτερό" does indeed also mean "Feather" as well as "Wing". Trouble is, I said what I said before I had this information. Hence I was arguing over what the name meant. Now that I'm better informed I'll add "I now agree! This is definitely an Ornithopter!", and I'll discontinue the argument on this point (as I already did). But that stuff I said prior to this, it's out there, I can't take it back. I do now explicitly disavow it, if that's what's expected.

I for one like the look of the flyer.
It would be nice to have something in that style for chaos
with that cool bomb rack, the only (granted non FW) flyer
we have being that bird thing of a daemon engine...

 insaniak wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
It really does look like it’s kinda designed not to have wings,.

Not sure where you're getting that idea. They're just not shown on the side view so that the design can focus on the fuselage details, but the barrel mount for the wings is right there in the pic.

I think it's actually a cool idea to think that, in-universe, originally the design wasn't intended to have (cloth) wings. Like the fuselage is actually part of an incomplete STC design the AdMech have access to, and they added wings of their own design to make it into a functional vehicle. Seems very fitting!

Anyway, I quite like the design. Like with the dunerider, it's the hilariously schizo-tech look that to me seems fitting for the current Mechanicus. I mean, the skitarii troops use guns that look just like old-fashioned long rifles and sub-machine guns, but they are in fact far more advanced.

That said, I can also see why it's not for everyone!

 Insane Ivan wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
It really does look like it’s kinda designed not to have wings,.

Not sure where you're getting that idea. They're just not shown on the side view so that the design can focus on the fuselage details, but the barrel mount for the wings is right there in the pic.

I think it's actually a cool idea to think that, in-universe, originally the design wasn't intended to have (cloth) wings. Like the fuselage is actually part of an incomplete STC design the AdMech have access to, and they added wings of their own design to make it into a functional vehicle. Seems very fitting!

Anyway, I quite like the design. Like with the dunerider, it's the hilariously schizo-tech look that to me seems fitting for the current Mechanicus. I mean, the skitarii troops use guns that look just like old-fashioned long rifles and sub-machine guns, but they are in fact far more advanced.

That said, I can also see why it's not for everyone!

The wings really do just look bad, Not the idea of them, Its just kinda GW meh design. The rest i think could be really cool. And i did kinda go into why i thought it looks like it should not have wings. As well as other design issues i thought, that could be cleaned up and look very similar and more like someone designed something that functions.

With so much great designs and no shortage of access to them, Its the same way i think the taurox sucks. The tracks over just making it a truck, its like someone went Tracks are cool and they just stuck them on, rather than even looked at other designs to draw from.

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Ok, so the wings don't flap. Thats at both times good and bad. I want a flappy flyer...

Why do so many people think the wings flap? The thought never entered my mind. It’s like thinking the Star Wars Imperial Shuttle flaps just because it has a means of adjusting the wings.

Because 40k is massively inspired by Dune and Dune had ornithopters, dammit.

Not sure if all of these shots made it into the thread:

So there's rear lascannons as an option, hoorah?

AngryAngel80 wrote:
Can we just admit the flyer looks aren't for everyone and move on ? As well please stop attacking the Taurox, they look pretty good with a different paint job and in person. I have a good number of them and they are excellent kits I've found.

Can we live in the holiday spirit and maybe not bash each other over what GW call it or what it's inspired by or should move like ?

Here I'll be positive I kind of like how it seems to have a similar role to a soviet Hind being gunship and transport but it feels like it's supposed to do those things at different times. Would have liked more a helicopter feel and maybe a bit stockier but over all it feels alright.

Will be interested to see the rules when they leak.

Supposedly the rules have already been leaked. A friend told me it's a pretty mediocre data sheet, stubbers and some bombs and two special rules that are pretty average, all for 180 points.

It's three datasheets, so that might be specifically the bomber.

Shame nobody thought to grab photos, what with the instructions manual where the rules are sitting right on the dang table!

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's three datasheets, so that might be specifically the bomber.

Shame nobody thought to grab photos, what with the instructions manual where the rules are sitting right on the dang table!

Some people did, that's how I'd heard about it. He said there aren't any other weapon configurations for the models other data sheets, you get the butt bombs and 6 phosphor blasters. That's it. No missiles, no lasers.

 Togusa wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's three datasheets, so that might be specifically the bomber.

Shame nobody thought to grab photos, what with the instructions manual where the rules are sitting right on the dang table!

Some people did, that's how I'd heard about it. He said there aren't any other weapon configurations for the models other data sheets, you get the butt bombs and 6 phosphor blasters. That's it. No missiles, no lasers.

Then he's wrong.

We've seen the lasers, we've seen the aerials, the chaff launchers, and we've seen that the door guns are optional.