I…actually don’t know how much I like them now. A lot of the leg poses are not good. The walking ones are cool but they just can’t get away from the ‘stood still, legs splayed’ pose I guess.
I think they’re wonderful. I’m getting seriously fuzzy, warm, nostalgia feels from them. I never actually played Rogue Trader but I did buy a box of RTB01 to use as power armoured soldiers in Traveller games.
The black marine (Raven? Angel? Who knows ) is exactly identical to the Sons one with the pointing gun, right down to the helmet.
The DG marine has two differences with the SoH one, chain bayonet and helmet.
Sergeants have a different arm and helmet.
I'm not sure it bodes too well for customizability.
Sooo the same as 90% of every other Marine and GW kit in existence?
Not at all, no? More like the same as the Intercessors, with 5 bodies repeated over, and over and over and over.
As it is, and seeing that, I don't think I want any kind of bundle for a lot of these. I'll still probably get a single box of ten, but more than that would get very old, very fast.
Really nice design on the new power sword. Happy to see differentiations continue with this kit. I can understand the customization concerns, from the point of view of fun in assembly, but not in terms of final appearance, as basic troops always look samey. Having assembled dozens of first born space marines over the years, those kits just really didn’t give a result all that different from these newer kits.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: Whoever said doubled-up sprue of five Marines, seems to have been entirely correct.
There also seems to be just, like, three bolter arms poses. There's four there with the finger on the trigger guard (two with belt, two without, and seeing that's the only difference, no, that's NOT a different pose), two hip shooting, two shoulder aiming.
Albertorius wrote: Not at all, no? More like the same as the Intercessors, with 5 bodies repeated over, and over and over and over.
As it is, and seeing that, I don't think I want any kind of bundle for a lot of these. I'll still probably get a single box of ten, but more than that would get very old, very fast.
So, good for a KT I guess.
It's ok to be in denial that these are fundamentally the same as any Space Marine ever made where the squads all have very similar poses and it takes kitbashing to change that. The biggest difference is these ones don't look like they really need to go to the toilet as soon as the battle is over.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albertorius wrote: There also seems to be just, like, three bolter arms poses. There's four there with the finger on the trigger guard (two with belt, two without, and seeing that's the only difference, no, that's NOT a different pose), two hip shooting, two shoulder aiming.
VERY limited.
Anyways, about what was expected.
As opposed to the current Tactical or other Heresy armour kits where there is one or two Bolter poses.
Albertorius wrote: Not at all, no? More like the same as the Intercessors, with 5 bodies repeated over, and over and over and over.
As it is, and seeing that, I don't think I want any kind of bundle for a lot of these. I'll still probably get a single box of ten, but more than that would get very old, very fast.
So, good for a KT I guess.
It's ok to be in denial that these are fundamentally the same as any Space Marine ever made where the squads all have very similar poses and it takes kitbashing to change that. The biggest difference is these ones don't look like they really need to go to the toilet as soon as the battle is over.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albertorius wrote: There also seems to be just, like, three bolter arms poses. There's four there with the finger on the trigger guard (two with belt, two without, and seeing that's the only difference, no, that's NOT a different pose), two hip shooting, two shoulder aiming.
VERY limited.
Anyways, about what was expected.
As opposed to the current Tactical or other Heresy armour kits where there is one or two Bolter poses.
Right, sure. And we've always been at war with Eastasia. Bye.
You liking them and thinking there's nothing wrong at all with these, because for you the old way didn't make them different enough? It's cool.
You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
Shame that there doesn't seem to be any special or heavy weapons included like the Mk III or IV sets. And a lack of the basic bolt pistol and chainsword for the sergeant.
Someone suggested in a FB chat that we might get 5-man support/heavy support box set.
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: Whoever said doubled-up sprue of five Marines, seems to have been entirely correct.
Well have to see how the models are actually built but if they have flat joins for the arms, it looks like any arm could go with any body. But yeah, if you are gonna have fused torso and legs for better poses (something I like), it would be better to have 10 unique body-legs pieces and then freedom for arms and heads than just 5 bodies.
Toofast wrote: Once you get into the Warmaster, Warbringer and Dire Wolf offer new, but limited options to a would-be Princeps.
The Warmaster DOES have options, GW just refuses to let you use them without buying and painting 2 entire Warmaster models. This deviates from their previous strategy of selling upgrade sprues through GW and individual weapons through FW so that you could have 1 titan body and all the weapon options. The problem with the warmaster isn't the limited options, it's the fact that I have to buy a second huge, $150 model that I don't need or want to paint just for 2 weapon arms.
Sweet, monopose plastics for HH. So glad I spent the better part of a week drilling tiny holes into marines. Now I can has the same 5x models as everyone else on the planet. It's okay, I'm sure I'll be the only person to glue knife bits to my guns, oh wait, they have those too.
Beakies are my second (Heresy is the first) least favourite SM armor but I still like how that squad looks, and as others pointed the power sword looks great.
Ah, the nostalgia. I bought a box set of the RTB01 back when they were released, painted them up very poorly as White Scars, and over the decades since have lost them. Probably for the best.
What i think is interesting, is that the Sergant gets no other ranged options than the Plasma Pistol.
This is a Legion Tactical Squad, so it’s (old-style) bolters and bayonets for everyone, though the Sergeant gets a plasma pistol and a choice of power sword, power fist, or lightning claw.
Right, sure. And we've always been at war with Eastasia. Bye.
You liking them and thinking there's nothing wrong at all with these, because for you the old way didn't make them different enough? It's cool.
You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
But the truth is that kits with 10 entirely unique body poses are:
a) An aberration rather than the norm.
b) Typically entirely unnoticeable on the tabletop. There's only so much variety you can put into guys walking around guns before it gets weird.
Albertorius wrote: Not at all, no? More like the same as the Intercessors, with 5 bodies repeated over, and over and over and over.
As it is, and seeing that, I don't think I want any kind of bundle for a lot of these. I'll still probably get a single box of ten, but more than that would get very old, very fast.
So, good for a KT I guess.
It's ok to be in denial that these are fundamentally the same as any Space Marine ever made where the squads all have very similar poses and it takes kitbashing to change that. The biggest difference is these ones don't look like they really need to go to the toilet as soon as the battle is over.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albertorius wrote: There also seems to be just, like, three bolter arms poses. There's four there with the finger on the trigger guard (two with belt, two without, and seeing that's the only difference, no, that's NOT a different pose), two hip shooting, two shoulder aiming.
VERY limited.
Anyways, about what was expected.
As opposed to the current Tactical or other Heresy armour kits where there is one or two Bolter poses.
Well just because you suck at assembling doesn't mean everybody sucks at assembing.
Albertorius wrote: Right, sure. And we've always been at war with Eastasia. Bye.
?
You liking them and thinking there's nothing wrong at all with these, because for you the old way didn't make them different enough? It's cool.
You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
It's not gaslighting when it is objectively true. What you are describing is someone challenging your bias towards "New Thing Bad" and you don't like being wrong.
But this discussion has been done to death both here and in the other thread in the HH forum so I'm not searching for pictures of every single Tactical Squad ever to prove my point.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
tneva82 wrote: Well just because you suck at assembling doesn't mean everybody sucks at assembing.
For majority this is degrade in posability.
The arms can be up or down. There's no in-between and there's no need to insult me.
Shadow Walker wrote: Beakies are my second (Heresy is the first) least favourite SM armor but I still like how that squad looks, and as others pointed the power sword looks great.
I'll be modifying mine with alternate heads/shoulder pads, like the Forgeworld Sons of Horus heads or Kromlech Legionary heads. That should break up the profile somewhat.
I'm realizing, however, that I'm not a fan of the weird pseudo-toes on the feet. I wonder if they can be altered without too much hassle?
infinite_array wrote: I'm realizing, however, that I'm not a fan of the weird pseudo-toes on the feet. I wonder if they can be altered without too much hassle?
Right, sure. And we've always been at war with Eastasia. Bye.
You liking them and thinking there's nothing wrong at all with these, because for you the old way didn't make them different enough? It's cool.
You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
But the truth is that kits with 10 entirely unique body poses are:
a) An aberration rather than the norm.
b) Typically entirely unnoticeable on the tabletop. There's only so much variety you can put into guys walking around guns before it gets weird.
They are now. Not always have been and forever and ever will be.
And I don't much care that they are unnoticeable (they're not, really, particularly not when you can mix and match from every other marine out there... except the prims, of course, and these) as long as I can pose them however I want instead of having to align parts 01 to 07 five times in a row to get a single body.
As to the rest, I don't really think it merits an answer.
Shadow Walker wrote: Beakies are my second (Heresy is the first) least favourite SM armor but I still like how that squad looks, and as others pointed the power sword looks great.
I'll be modifying mine with alternate heads/shoulder pads, like the Forgeworld Sons of Horus heads or Kromlech Legionary heads. That should break up the profile somewhat.
I'm realizing, however, that I'm not a fan of the weird pseudo-toes on the feet. I wonder if they can be altered without too much hassle?
If they're just recessed, as they seem to be, you can probably fill in the holes with greenstuff and smooth it out without much trouble.
Albertorius wrote: You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
Crazy stuff, ain't it?
1. "You're crazy! Nothing had changed. They're not mono-pose!"
2. "So what if they are monopose? They weren't really posable before, so it's not that big a difference!" <--- Gert is here.
3. "We like it because they're dynamic and the old ones were bad anyway!"
4. "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!"
5. "It's just nostalgia/rose-tinted glasses that you think they were posable/easy to convert!"
6. "You should be thankful there are even options at all!"
1. "You're crazy! Nothing had changed. They're not mono-pose!"
2. "So what if they are monopose? They weren't really posable before, so it's not that big a difference!" <--- Gert is here.
3. "We like it because they're dynamic and the old ones were bad anyway!"
4. "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!"
5. "It's just nostalgia/rose-tinted glasses that you think they were posable/easy to convert!"
6. "You should be thankful there are even options at all!"
Actually, I'm at:
1 - "You all need to find a new hobby. Find something to enjoy instead of constantly being whiney children about literally anything GW does ever.
I like the MkIV and III kits, they're good. You also can't pose them very well and pretending otherwise is stupid. I've built a hell of a lot of Space Marines for my CSM, HH Legions, and 40k Marines and 9/10 times the pose is the same as the model beside it because there are only so many ways you can pose Man With Gun. The only real exception to this has been my Deathwatch because I've been using bitz services and kitbashed almost every single model in the army to make each one different from the next, and it's still a difficult process.
The rose-tinted glasses part I agree with because it's based entirely on the very prevalent "New Thing Bad" attitude displayed by many people, people who would rather make stuff up or intentionally incite anger from people than admit they were wrong. But hey, why let people enjoy things, they're obviously all idiots who need to be forced to agree with your anti-GW crusade, right HBMC?
1. "You're crazy! Nothing had changed. They're not mono-pose!"
2. "So what if they are monopose? They weren't really posable before, so it's not that big a difference!" <--- Gert is here.
3. "We like it because they're dynamic and the old ones were bad anyway!"
4. "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!"
5. "It's just nostalgia/rose-tinted glasses that you think they were posable/easy to convert!"
6. "You should be thankful there are even options at all!"
Actually, I'm at:
1 - "You all need to find a new hobby. Find something to enjoy instead of constantly being whiney children about literally anything GW does ever.
7. "No place in this hobby for opinions that aren't blind corporate worship" --- Gert is actually here
Albertorius wrote: You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
Crazy stuff, ain't it?
1. "You're crazy! Nothing had changed. They're not mono-pose!"
2. "So what if they are monopose? They weren't really posable before, so it's not that big a difference!" <--- Gert is here.
3. "We like it because they're dynamic and the old ones were bad anyway!"
4. "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!"
5. "It's just nostalgia/rose-tinted glasses that you think they were posable/easy to convert!"
6. "You should be thankful there are even options at all!"
Albertorius wrote: You gaslighting everyone to think that's how it's always been? Less cool.
Crazy stuff, ain't it?
1. "You're crazy! Nothing had changed. They're not mono-pose!"
2. "So what if they are monopose? They weren't really posable before, so it's not that big a difference!" <--- Gert is here.
3. "We like it because they're dynamic and the old ones were bad anyway!"
4. "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!"
5. "It's just nostalgia/rose-tinted glasses that you think they were posable/easy to convert!"
6. "You should be thankful there are even options at all!"
Just stop lying and misusing words! Lack of waistjoint doesn’t make a model monopose!
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: 7. "No place in this hobby for opinions that aren't blind corporate worship" --- Gert is actually here
I think characterising it as "blind corporate worship" is unfair, and borders on hyperbole.
1. "You're crazy! Nothing had changed. They're not mono-pose!" <--- xttz is here... 2. "So what if they are monopose? They weren't really posable before, so it's not that big a difference!" <--- Gert & Crimson are here. 3. "We like it because they're dynamic and the old ones were bad anyway!" 4. "No options and nonposable is actually better for everyone/the game/etc.!" 5. "It's just nostalgia/rose-tinted glasses that you think they were posable/easy to convert!" <--- ... and xttz is also here, somehow. 6. "You should be thankful there are even options at all!"
Crimson wrote: Just stop lying and misusing words! Lack of waistjoint doesn’t make a model monopose!
I'm not lying. There is a marked difference between old kits and the new kits, in just the same way as there is a marked difference between the plastic kits at the start of 2nd Edition and the ones we had in 6th and 7th, no matter what gaslighting Gert his attempting with his "objective truth" nonsense, trying to pretend as if there's no difference between then and now.
And you're the one who keeps bringing up the waist joint.
ImAGeek wrote: I…actually don’t know how much I like them now. A lot of the leg poses are not good. The walking ones are cool but they just can’t get away from the ‘stood still, legs splayed’ pose I guess.
I like how ugly thing that was standard for 30 years (and is still defended by people with bad taste) was completely demolished by natural primaris posing to the point even a fixed kit that looks vastly better than old squat garbage looks bad in comparison. Sanity starts to prevail, I see
Wha-Mu-077 wrote: What i think is interesting, is that the Sergant gets no other ranged options than the Plasma Pistol.
Seeing we know he can be assembled as tactical marine, that's at least bolter right there, if not combi-weapon all HH kits so far had.
Except you can see edges of RG transfer and besides, not only DC is not a thing in HH yet but even if it was, the armour would be marked by multiple red crosses...
I'm not sure it bodes too well for customizability.
Uh, what? There is at least 5 distinct bolter targeting poses (more if you count straps and trigger safety grips, something that already makes this superior to any squat kit in existence), that's already better than virtually any HH or 40K tactical squad kit. People already forgot these produced 9 almost identical 'clutching me bolter across chest' models + sergeant without cutting and resculpting?
Except you can see edges of RG transfer and besides, not only DC is not a thing in HH yet but even if it was, the armour would be marked by multiple red crosses...
They meant Dark Angels (and it's not Iron Hands, as the hands are black).
Except you can see edges of RG transfer and besides, not only DC is not a thing in HH yet but even if it was, the armour would be marked by multiple red crosses...
They meant Dark Angels (and it's not Iron Hands, as the hands are black).
Yup, I meant Dark Angels, of course. AFAIK, there's no red rage in HH.
My guess is the starter set Mk6's aka Legion Tactical will be monopose small sprues like the ETB Assault Intercessors - 5 bodies repeated, with a few options.
Then a full Mk6 kit will come out, like the full Assault Intercessors.
Especially as the 'rumor release list' lists Legion upgrade pack sprues.
judgedoug wrote: My guess is the starter set Mk6's aka Legion Tactical will be monopose small sprues like the ETB Assault Intercessors - 5 bodies repeated, with a few options.
Then a full Mk6 kit will come out, like the full Assault Intercessors.
Especially as the 'rumor release list' lists Legion upgrade pack sprues.
Even more reason to wait for the separate kit and buy just the one instead of getting the bundle, TBH. For me, that is.
But the intercessors kits are still five bodies duplicated, right? At least the regular ones is, I don't know about the assault ones.
judgedoug wrote: My guess is the starter set Mk6's aka Legion Tactical will be monopose small sprues like the ETB Assault Intercessors - 5 bodies repeated, with a few options.
Then a full Mk6 kit will come out, like the full Assault Intercessors.
Especially as the 'rumor release list' lists Legion upgrade pack sprues.
I agree with this post.
These models are akin to the last two large release sets that GW did for 40k. Both Indomitus and Dark Imperium has exclusive poses in their primaris releases. Indomitus had squads of 5 repeated poses.
Shortly after came the more varied squads with more posing options.
I wonder how compatible these are with the other two existing kits? A quick arm swap between the Mark 4 and Mark 6 would make for some really neat posed.
I wonder how compatible these are with the other two existing kits? A quick arm swap between the Mark 4 and Mark 6 would make for some really neat posed.
Mark 4 came out before Mark 3, and I don't have much experience with the former. But Mark 3 aren't big models and although the arms aren't necessarily terrible different, they are kind of small when used on newer models Given the size of the new mark 6 marines, the Mk4 arms may be noticably smaller
If the big box has etb mkvi I'm ok with it, generally that means extra poses in addition to the full kit. I've done a bunch with the various etb tacticus kits and have a pretty decent variety of poses for Intercessors, so maybe it'll be the same deal???
But I would much rather have had 10 unique poses to begin with, ya know kinda like the MKIII/IV.
I wonder how compatible these are with the other two existing kits? A quick arm swap between the Mark 4 and Mark 6 would make for some really neat posed.
Mark 4 came out before Mark 3, and I don't have much experience with the former. But Mark 3 aren't big models and although the arms aren't necessarily terrible different, they are kind of small when used on newer models Given the size of the new mark 6 marines, the Mk4 arms may be noticably smaller
MKIII arms work fine in primaris so unless the beakies are bigger, shouldn't be an issue.
judgedoug wrote: My guess is the starter set Mk6's aka Legion Tactical will be monopose small sprues like the ETB Assault Intercessors - 5 bodies repeated, with a few options.
Then a full Mk6 kit will come out, like the full Assault Intercessors.
Especially as the 'rumor release list' lists Legion upgrade pack sprues.
I agree with this post.
These models are akin to the last two large release sets that GW did for 40k. Both Indomitus and Dark Imperium has exclusive poses in their primaris releases. Indomitus had squads of 5 repeated poses.
Shortly after came the more varied squads with more posing options.
Isn't that a huge problem if the supposed content of the box (40 marines) are true? Neither of the other starter sets had that many duplicate marines.
judgedoug wrote: My guess is the starter set Mk6's aka Legion Tactical will be monopose small sprues like the ETB Assault Intercessors - 5 bodies repeated, with a few options.
Then a full Mk6 kit will come out, like the full Assault Intercessors.
Especially as the 'rumor release list' lists Legion upgrade pack sprues.
I agree with this post.
These models are akin to the last two large release sets that GW did for 40k. Both Indomitus and Dark Imperium has exclusive poses in their primaris releases. Indomitus had squads of 5 repeated poses.
Shortly after came the more varied squads with more posing options.
I thought Indomitus had the necron warriors that were released separately, as were the outriders. Likewise, soul wars had chainrasps that were released separately, despite being monopose. Also the previous HH boxsets were the full multiple kits.
But the intercessors kits are still five bodies duplicated, right? At least the regular ones is, I don't know about the assault ones.
Yes, Primaris full kits have historically been a 5-model set of sprues, duplicated for 10 model sets (though they did release 'combat squads' early in the Primaris for Intercessors, Reivers, Hellblasters, etc).
The upside of the full kits is that the legs are separate pieces and are of significantly greater detail than the Firstborn style plastics where the lower legs are typically one piece, but the downside is the legs are paired to match so the out of the box poses goes down drastically. Thankfully arm and head posing is typically not specifically matched so a squad of ten dudes looks fine, especially as the separate leg bits allows the sculpt to create a much greater range of motion. So both bad and good depending on what you like.
(Personally, I recently assembled my first Mk4 models along with finally assembling my full kit Primaris fellas who have been sitting around for years, and I found I liked the Primaris more; that being said, I don't have like 50 Intercessors, so I can imagine having 50 of five leg poses repeated ten times each might annoy me)
judgedoug wrote: My guess is the starter set Mk6's aka Legion Tactical will be monopose small sprues like the ETB Assault Intercessors - 5 bodies repeated, with a few options.
Then a full Mk6 kit will come out, like the full Assault Intercessors.
Especially as the 'rumor release list' lists Legion upgrade pack sprues.
I agree with this post.
These models are akin to the last two large release sets that GW did for 40k. Both Indomitus and Dark Imperium has exclusive poses in their primaris releases. Indomitus had squads of 5 repeated poses.
Shortly after came the more varied squads with more posing options.
Isn't that a huge problem if the supposed content of the box (40 marines) are true? Neither of the other starter sets had that many duplicate marines.
5 bodies and 5 body options don't even get you 30 unique poses, even if you count wheather or not a dangling shoulder strap makes a different pose lul.
I still wouldn't consider picking up HH unless mk II got similar treatment to this and they came out with skirmish rules. I just can't do army games anymore, don't have the time and don't have the money. Love the early HH setting and books though.
I wonder how compatible these are with the other two existing kits? A quick arm swap between the Mark 4 and Mark 6 would make for some really neat posed.
Mark 4 came out before Mark 3, and I don't have much experience with the former. But Mark 3 aren't big models and although the arms aren't necessarily terrible different, they are kind of small when used on newer models Given the size of the new mark 6 marines, the Mk4 arms may be noticably smaller
I'm personally stoked for these, they'll make fine additions to my XXth, likely as seekers and veteran squads. I imagine there will be some cool looking Legion-specific upgrade boxes or FW additions worth working into them.
Might pick up a couple of extra boxes and start on my intended IXth as I'm feeling in the mood to add a loyalist faction. Fascinated to see the amount of vitriol here, I'm personally stoked to see HH moving into the big leagues with these plastic releases and fully happy to splash my cash on it, sorry others aren't, you'll be missed at the gaming tables I guess.
Now to resume sending letters to Forge World demanding the Dark Mechanicum for the Martian Civil War! My sneaky hydra bois need an ally!
Im hoping the difference in size/proportion between these and my hordes of Mk3 and Mk4 marines won't be too noticeable. Pretty sweet kit, Im sure some are going to be annoyed that they don't come with special or heavy weapons so that they can be fielded in 40k as tactical marines, but I'm fine with it. Bolters with straps and bayonets just look *chefs kiss*
Andykp wrote: Looked away from this 5read for a few days and it’s all name calling and more arguing about monopose. God this place is miserable as f@ck some times.
If old marines were “polypose” you can keep it, they were garbage.
The new mk 6 ones are not easy build according to warhammer community you have options of grenades, bayonets, sergeant weapons.
Careful with that opinion, Whamu might accuse you of blind corporate worship and Albertorious will put you on ignore.
What a bunch of entitled whiny millennials. RT-01 was monumental—ly bad! Technically multipose, yet everything looked the same unless you knew how to use an Xacto blade. They couldn’t even hold their guns. They weren’t very detailed and what there was was very soft. They were bad models when they came out—and they were the greatest thing to have ever come out at that point.
They models are best compared to the new Necromunda gangs since I’m sure that the model they’ll be trying to repeat: big box appeal with dollar store budget. And for that they are amazing because at least they can hold their guns.
Could remember that the on scale with the nearly at the same time released Deathwatch (late 2016) which means they fit more to the upcoming MkVI than to the one Year older MkIV (late 2015)?
No, the height differences between the GW plastics are the same. You might get some FW resin models that are different heights but it's not noticeable en mass.
I mean it's worth pointing out that scale has never been entirely precise. I've owned these models for bloody years and it was only after all this talk that I walked past my shelves a couple of nights ago and actually noticed this... It's never made a jot of difference to me or enjoying my figures or my army or my games.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: I mean it's worth pointing out that scale has never been entirely precise. I've owned these models for bloody years and it was only after all this talk that I walked past my shelves a couple of nights ago and actually noticed this... It's never made a jot of difference to me or enjoying my figures or my army or my games.
Once the little lads are running about on the table getting smushed by volkites and C beams, it doesn't matter to me one bit.
There is no way I don't come off as an donkey-cave here...but do you have a picture larger than 200 X 200? That pic is so small I can barely see any detail in the image.
What I like
• Plenty of different helmet designs, some completely new
• Plastic bayonets & chain bayonets FTW (the current FW resin ones are a PITA to assemble and break to dam easy)
• Everybody seems to get pistol holsters and grenades, no more looting for bits from other kits • Proportions are much improved, as suspected
• Sergeant model seems to have two options for the breastplate, one of them is a new design with a more angular plate
What I don't like
• Only five discreet torsos/poses! 10 would have been a vast inprovement, considering the HH launch box ships with 40 of these.. We'll be looking at 8 exact poses of every mini
• No running / crouched poses (KT Vet Guard Kit got this one right)
While I like what I see here, I'm not convinced anymore about splurging for the launch box. If the kit had 10 unique torsos I would have bought it for sure, now I might just ebay me 10-20 and wait until more kits are announced.
This kit does make me think about a possible Mk VI Assault squad kit - will one be coming at some point? I hope so..
I don't mind the HH style weapons on the sergeants, weapon swaps are pretty much a mandatory skill for any GW hobbyist.
Will be interesting to see just how well one can make the existing FW MK VI resins to match up with these scale-wise. I hope it'll be possible somehow, since I will not be content with having only 5 poses for my entire army. Will also bring more variety if I can mix the old resins with these, as the resin ones have different looking feet, umbra bolters & backpacks.
There is no way I don't come off as an donkey-cave here...but do you have a picture larger than 200 X 200? That pic is so small I can barely see any detail in the image.
Sorry, try this. This is a BaC MkIV and a FW apothecary side by side, same mark of armour. The good doctor is a head higher. I have owned these minis perhaps 3 or more years, just noticed it the other night after all this talk of scale creep.
There is no way I don't come off as an donkey-cave here...but do you have a picture larger than 200 X 200? That pic is so small I can barely see any detail in the image.
Sorry, try this. This is a BaC MkIV and a FW apothecary side by side, same mark of armour. The good doctor is a head higher. I have owned these minis perhaps 3 or more years, just noticed it the other night after all this talk of scale creep.
Thanks! I appreciate it. My eyes are horrendously broken right now and thanks to the state of healthcare in my country I can't afford to fix them at the current time! This helps me a lot!
They don't look terrible, but I am honestly thinking I might wait a year to jump back in and see what else gets updated beyond this box.
There are certain projects I had in the pipeline that these Mk6s are not going to work well for. For that purpose, I would have preferred the older parts breakdown with separate arms, shouldepads, torsos and legs.
I had been planning on picking up a few boxes, but with all of the limitations piled on by the "dynamic posing", I think I'll be okay with just getting a single sprue of 5. For the rest I might have to put out a bounty for the older resin versions and just deal with the scale difference on an as-it-comes sort of basis.
Agamemnon2 wrote: There are certain projects I had in the pipeline that these Mk6s are not going to work well for. For that purpose, I would have preferred the older parts breakdown with separate arms, shouldepads, torsos and legs.
I had been planning on picking up a few boxes, but with all of the limitations piled on by the "dynamic posing", I think I'll be okay with just getting a single sprue of 5. For the rest I might have to put out a bounty for the older resin versions and just deal with the scale difference on an as-it-comes sort of basis.
If you want the old style ball joint torsos etc, I strongly recommend this kit. I have four of these kits myself, they are great (althoughh in the old scale). You can even twist the legs slightly with warm water to make the poses a bit more varied.
They are "Last Chance To Buy" at FW so if you want to get them, you need to act fast.
FW also sells classic Umbra Bolters if you want the classic style bolters for em.
If you want a few more MkVI helmet variants, check the FW Raven Guard head upgrades kit
chaos0xomega wrote: Im hoping the difference in size/proportion between these and my hordes of Mk3 and Mk4 marines won't be too noticeable. Pretty sweet kit, Im sure some are going to be annoyed that they don't come with special or heavy weapons so that they can be fielded in 40k as tactical marines, but I'm fine with it. Bolters with straps and bayonets just look *chefs kiss*
Andykp wrote: Looked away from this 5read for a few days and it’s all name calling and more arguing about monopose. God this place is miserable as f@ck some times.
If old marines were “polypose” you can keep it, they were garbage.
The new mk 6 ones are not easy build according to warhammer community you have options of grenades, bayonets, sergeant weapons.
Careful with that opinion, Whamu might accuse you of blind corporate worship and Albertorious will put you on ignore.
And you're the one who keeps bringing up the waist joint.
Mate, that's the hill the haters have chosen to die on. Because that is literally the only poseability difference between the old kits and the new ones that they label monopose.
chaos0xomega wrote: Im hoping the difference in size/proportion between these and my hordes of Mk3 and Mk4 marines won't be too noticeable. Pretty sweet kit, Im sure some are going to be annoyed that they don't come with special or heavy weapons so that they can be fielded in 40k as tactical marines, but I'm fine with it. Bolters with straps and bayonets just look *chefs kiss*
Andykp wrote: Looked away from this 5read for a few days and it’s all name calling and more arguing about monopose. God this place is miserable as f@ck some times.
If old marines were “polypose” you can keep it, they were garbage.
The new mk 6 ones are not easy build according to warhammer community you have options of grenades, bayonets, sergeant weapons.
Careful with that opinion, Whamu might accuse you of blind corporate worship and Albertorious will put you on ignore.
This did make me chuckle
Loving the look of the new MKVIs, the proportions make them some of my favourite "Firstborn" marines so far. They will look amazing painted up in Raven Guard colours.
If I have to be picky (I have to make sure that I'm not accused of being a GW shill, after all) I'll mention that I'm not a big fan of the one wide pose set of legs, but that's a minor thing.
infinite_array wrote: Shame that there doesn't seem to be any special or heavy weapons included like the Mk III or IV sets. And a lack of the basic bolt pistol and chainsword for the sergeant.
Someone suggested in a FB chat that we might get 5-man support/heavy support box set.
My thoughts as well. Really hoping they just didn't show them for one reason or another....though I suspect the reason is that they probably aren't included in the kit.
Nice looking kit however, I wouldn't mind having a squad or two in an army. Don't think I would want to field a hundred or so of them due to the repeated posing. Fortunately converting them to have a heavy/special with Mk III or IV bits will be pretty easy.
I expect the sprues simply don't some with any of those options, since HH marine organization doesn't use them. Instead, they might make 5-man heavy or special weapon squad sprues.
The possible lack of chainswords and bolt pistols in that Set is strange.
There was a rumor for an "auxillary set" with weapon options for Sergeants in plastic. Maybe is this true?
Agamemnon2 wrote: I expect the sprues simply don't some with any of those options, since HH marine organization doesn't use them. Instead, they might make 5-man heavy or special weapon squad sprues.
One of the rumors said GW will sell smaller FW Sets in their own Stores as another test run and will offer special weapon packs for those Squads.
RazorEdge wrote: The possible lack of chainswords and bolt pistols in that Set is strange.
There was a rumor for an "auxillary set" with weapon options for Sergeants. Maybe is this true?
Agamemnon2 wrote: I expect the sprues simply don't some with any of those options, since HH marine organization doesn't use them. Instead, they might make 5-man heavy or special weapon squad sprues.
One of the rumors said GW is testing more FW sells in GW Stores and will offer special weapon packs for those Squads.
Honestly, if I end up having to use FW's gakky resin, I'd rather use my own.
It's a set with different weapon options (in the same fashion like for Necromunda and those close weapon sets from FW) which couldn't fit into the regulary Horus Heresy sprues.
Given this boxed set is supposed to come with a contemptor, a spartan and so on, the box is going to be filled to the brim, I can tell you from experience that with the plastic Mk IVs and IIIs, we ended up with a slew of special and heavy weapons we didn't use. Also given the rumors/leaks, standard 30k era tacticals with bolters are back with a vengeance and the days of the endless ennui of 'Pride of the Legion' for cheap armies is over (as is plasma spamming).
It makes absolute sense to cram useful items into the box and keep special/heavy weapons to their own boxes or separate sprues for later addition. The vast desire for those boxed set marines will be as bolter carrying tacticals. Veteran Squads and despoilers are dramatically more limited in their scope, appeal and number needed.
It's a set with different weapon options (in the same fashion like for Necromunda and those close weapon sets from FW) which couldn't fit into the regulary Horus Heresy sprues.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Given this boxed set is supposed to come with a contemptor, a spartan and so on, the box is going to be filled to the brim, I can tell you from experience that with the plastic Mk IVs and IIIs, we ended up with a slew of special and heavy weapons we didn't use. Also given the rumors/leaks, standard 30k era tacticals with bolters are back with a vengeance and the days of the endless ennui of 'Pride of the Legion' for cheap armies is over (as is plasma spamming).
It makes absolute sense to cram useful items into the box and keep special/heavy weapons to their own boxes or separate sprues for later addition. The vast desire for those boxed set marines will be as bolter carrying tacticals. Veteran Squads and despoilers are dramatically more limited in their scope, appeal and number needed.
Oh, I very much used them all, and eventually bough bits of more! Just not to make tactical squads with them.
Honestly these models look excellent and make me sad to realize we’re unlikely to see any properly proportioned mkiii any time soon.
The paint jobs on these look great, too. Tons of shading work done on these. I know a lot of people are sad that they no longer do the “sponge on chips everywhere” weathered look, but I kinda like the cleaner look. It adds nice contrast to the range for legions that are known for getting grimy like DG and WE.
I’m curious to see the new studio rendition of iron hands and if they’ll still do the “oil slick” look.
The only real difference I see with the SoH specifically is the green. The earlier stuff (SoH Command Squad, Loken) have more of a blue tinge whereas more recent models (SoH Praetor, MkVI Marines) are more green since they use the SoH Green paint.
Quasistellar wrote: Honestly these models look excellent and make me sad to realize we’re unlikely to see any properly proportioned mkiii any time soon.
True, I imagine the two existing plastics would be the last two to be upgraded. But I do think this means we are close to plastic MkII and plastic MkV, which I love. Also, can you imagine the raging from people who've paid for MkIIIs if they released a reproportioned MkIII this soon?
Maybe in 5 or 6 years I'll be ok with trading out my current tactical squads of MkIV, but I'd be a bit miffed if they were 'upgraded' now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote: The only real difference I see with the SoH specifically is the green. The earlier stuff (SoH Command Squad, Loken) have more of a blue tinge whereas more recent models (SoH Praetor, MkVI Marines) are more green since they use the SoH Green paint.
I like this green a lot better, the previous looked too much like nonmetallic Alpha Legion to me. This has more identity to it.
They don't look terrible, but I am honestly thinking I might wait a year to jump back in and see what else gets updated beyond this box.
I think that's a good idea, it's a big fiscal commitment. For me, I left 40k behind some years ago and went all in to Heresy so it's a continuation rather than an initial dive into a new game. As I understand it, almost everything currently in resin is going plastic, with the exceptions (currently) of the legion specific units and characters. I hope you'll make the jump when you feel ready, I've been amazed at the positive differences I've found in the 30k community and it really lifted my gaming experiences which had dwindled over time from my heyday of 5th.
Quasistellar wrote: Honestly these models look excellent and make me sad to realize we’re unlikely to see any properly proportioned mkiii any time soon.
True, I imagine the two existing plastics would be the last two to be upgraded. But I do think this means we are close to plastic MkII and plastic MkV, which I love. Also, can you imagine the raging from people who've paid for MkIIIs if they released a reproportioned MkIII this soon?
Maybe in 5 or 6 years I'll be ok with trading out my current tactical squads of MkIV, but I'd be a bit miffed if they were 'upgraded' now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote: The only real difference I see with the SoH specifically is the green. The earlier stuff (SoH Command Squad, Loken) have more of a blue tinge whereas more recent models (SoH Praetor, MkVI Marines) are more green since they use the SoH Green paint.
I like this green a lot better, the previous looked too much like nonmetallic Alpha Legion to me. This has more identity to it.
They don't look terrible, but I am honestly thinking I might wait a year to jump back in and see what else gets updated beyond this box.
I think that's a good idea, it's a big fiscal commitment. For me, I left 40k behind some years ago and went all in to Heresy so it's a continuation rather than an initial dive into a new game. As I understand it, almost everything currently in resin is going plastic, with the exceptions (currently) of the legion specific units and characters. I hope you'll make the jump when you feel ready, I've been amazed at the positive differences I've found in the 30k community and it really lifted my gaming experiences which had dwindled over time from my heyday of 5th.
I played HH for a couple of years back in 2016-2018. Personally I found the community to be no different than the communities for AoS and 40K. But I also don't think the GW communities are all that bad when compared to other stuff I've been in.
I have to say that seeing the models in a wider range of colors has warmed me up them a bit more. Death Guard was probably the oddest one, but unlike MkIII and MkIV where some legions can feel out of place in that armour (I think it's a combination of color combos and lore that does it to me at least) the beakies seem to do every color scheme they've put them in well.
I am a little surprised there aren't any special or heavy weapons mixed in but if I had to guess the intent isn't to try and piggyback the set into 40k for extra sales and instead treat it as a primarily HH product instead.
As for the complaints about limited posing, I've always been confused by the grievance. Mind I spent years with a single option for each heavy weapon and three poses with Bolters for Sisters (and adding in spending time doing the whole military thing which means dressing like everyone else and marching in step), but I mean when you dealing with an army, especially the more uniform legions having models that look similar just kind of makes sense. Plus do you really spend all your time in a game looking for duplicate poses, or do you play time just playing the game?
Again, I've got a bias, but I've just never seen not having a whole bunch of unique poses for every single model as an issue. I'm just happy that the models aren't doing the old "full diaper" squat anymore.
ClockworkZion wrote: I have to say that seeing the models in a wider range of colors has warmed me up them a bit more. Death Guard was probably the oddest one, but unlike MkIII and MkIV where some legions can feel out of place in that armour (I think it's a combination of color combos and lore that does it to me at least) the beakies seem to do every color scheme they've put them in well.
I am a little surprised there aren't any special or heavy weapons mixed in but if I had to guess the intent isn't to try and piggyback the set into 40k for extra sales and instead treat it as a primarily HH product instead.
As for the complaints about limited posing, I've always been confused by the grievance. Mind I spent years with a single option for each heavy weapon and three poses with Bolters for Sisters (and adding in spending time doing the whole military thing which means dressing like everyone else and marching in step), but I mean when you dealing with an army, especially the more uniform legions having models that look similar just kind of makes sense. Plus do you really spend all your time in a game looking for duplicate poses, or do you play time just playing the game?
Again, I've got a bias, but I've just never seen not having a whole bunch of unique poses for every single model as an issue. I'm just happy that the models aren't doing the old "full diaper" squat anymore.
I have my doubts regarding the Iron Hands, but then, I have Mk3/4 to scratch all my clunky armour itches, so may the new stuff bring joy to you all else!
Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
Can confirm...each set of arms are numbered 1-5 and they really only work in 1 position each.
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
Can confirm...each set of arms are numbered 1-5 and they really only work in 1 position each.
Hasn't really stopped anyone before. All it takes is a little creativity and a scalpel.
I heard a lot of talk about how the new Intercessor kits were fine because anyone "good enough" would still be able to customize them. Well I don't see a whole lot of Primaris conversions out there, whereas I just built a bunch of HH marines out of the same old tired Tac box that's been the start of so many projects. Or am I supposed to be happy with a few bitz swaps now because GW said so?
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Yeah, 'cause that's the comparison that was being made.
Comparisons to Intercessors are tired. The Intercessors kit is actually really solid. I've built it. Get better Marines out of it than I've EVER gotten out of the old Tactical Marines and Chaos Marines of the previous style. Arm sets can be freely swapped across torsos making for even more pose options than you'd get normally, and yes, that's with 'ONLY' 5 torso/leg sets.
The Mark VI marines are likely to be much the same.
The Mark III and Mark IV marines were not all that poseable either. Due to the Mark III having a longer front section, you could only turn it so far, and there were still only 5 pairs of legs, most in the same sorts of pose you'd find in the Tactical marine box. No crouched poses, no running poses, just all kinda standing there.
Again, the arguments are old and stale and fall apart under scrutiny. Seems people either want the moon, with every finger and toe able to be posed, or you vaguely refer to something that you think is superior but... is either the same net, or not superior at all.
But hey, go and become a 3d modeler so you can 3d print your perfect marines in exactly the way and mark of armor and pose and other things you want!
Just please, stop.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hairesy wrote: I heard a lot of talk about how the new Intercessor kits were fine because anyone "good enough" would still be able to customize them. Well I don't see a whole lot of Primaris conversions out there, whereas I just built a bunch of HH marines out of the same old tired Tac box that's been the start of so many projects. Or am I supposed to be happy with a few bitz swaps now because GW said so?
You may not see many conversions, but it hardly has anything to do with the kit itself. Please, instead, show me all of the amazingly stunning conversions using the old Tactical Marine kit that produce poses that are superior to today's kits. Would love to see those, unironically.
Also just check out golden daemon entries and the top tier painters, you'll see plenty of things you can do with all that sort of stuff.
The fact of the matter is that MOST hobbyists and gamers build the model out of the box, paint it as is, and go about their day.
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
Those leg poses are however much better than the new ones.
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
Can confirm...each set of arms are numbered 1-5 and they really only work in 1 position each.
That’s not gonna be any different with the new ones? Paired arms do only work in 1 position each.
drbored wrote: Again, the arguments are old and stale and fall apart under scrutiny.
Not really. No. They stick together like plastic multi-part multi-pose models held together with plastic cement. And I ain't even brought up Intercessors, so nice try there.
I've provided endless amounts of screenshots of sprues showing the CLEAR AS DAY divide when things began to change with GW miniatures. You and your ilk can continue to deny reality and pretend that things have always been likethis when that's clearly not the case. A guy a few posts above even says that the arms are numbered to the torso on these new Beakies, meaning they're even less posable. But I guess that's imaginary as well, right? Or doesn't really mean anything, as they were basically non-posable before (but still aren't mono-pose as well... 'cause that makes sense!).
But hey, you do you man. Keep denying reality. I don't a give a damn anymore...
Lord Damocles wrote: Even from the preview pictures GW have showed the repetition is egregious.
No, no. Haven't you been listening? The repetition is not real. It's completely in our heads. We're all utterly mental for even beginning to think that these minis are in any way different - at all - to the kits from even 6 years ago.
We have to stop pretending that multi-pose was ever a thing. It wasn't. There have never been multi-pose kits, and these minis also (paradoxially) aren't mono-pose... somehow! They're just... pose, I suppose. Ha! Suppose.
RazorEdge wrote:I'm sure we will see running poses with Assault Marines.
This. I wasn't happy with the variety of intercessor poses when the first came out. But looking at the variety they have out now across the 3 tacticus kits kits out there it's not inconceivable that the same would bode for 30k. The downside is 40k had to wait for year and an edition change new box set for it to happen. I hope this isn't the case for beakies.
You know what would be nice ..? If certain people could just accept that the line between posable and monopose is subjective, that whether or not it matters is subjective, that whether the new style is better or worse than the old style is subjective.
That way we could stop having the same argument literally every time GW preview a new kit and we wouldn’t have pages of people trying to prove that other people’s subjective opinions are wrong.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: You know what would be nice ..? If certain people could just accept that the line between posable and monopose is subjective, that whether or not it matters is subjective, that whether the new style is better or worse than the old style is subjective.
That way we could stop having the same argument literally every time GW preview a new kit and we wouldn’t have pages of people trying to prove that other people’s subjective opinions are wrong.
a- fething -men
on another note, I recently for a convo in a discord took a picture of a MK III marine beside one of the new CSMs. I expect the MK 6 kit to be basicly the same as the CSM kit in terms of general construction.
I think over all with that in mind the beakies are gonna fit in fine with the mk iii and mk iv kits on the field, so those wanting some visual flair can run mixes of armor marks without too many issues
I do really like the new proportions (kind of wish they were redoing the Mk III and IV marines in them - but they are relatively new and nice kits in their own right). I pretty happy with how they look in the different color schemes shown.
As an Iron Warrior fan, I am a bit skeptical how they will look in Iron Warriors colors......but I might just use them for a second legion and keep the Iron Warriors in mostly Mk III and a smattering of IV. Mark VI wasn't a mark the Iron Warriors were fond of anyways, though towards the end of the war, i'm sure the legions were using whatever they could get their hands on.
H.B.M.C. wrote: We have to stop pretending that multi-pose was ever a thing. It wasn't. There have never been multi-pose kits, and these minis also (paradoxially) aren't mono-pose... somehow! They're just... pose, I suppose. Ha! Suppose.
Strange things going on and GW marketing is doing its thing
you know, having 3 different legs, 3 different torsos (not fixed to the legs), 5 different heads (not fixed) and 3 different pairs of arms (not fixed) is now "too many duplicates to be useful in a mass battle game"
while 5 different models without the possibility to easy change them is superior and perfectly fine for mass battle games regarding duplicates
as long as GW makes it of course, 3rd party Marines that have 5 different bodies with free to pose arms and heads are considered a no-go because they produce too many duplicates which is unacceptable these days
don't know if people are not aware that they apply double standards here and just 1:1 copy GW marketing and add that models must be superior to justify the price, or are just White Knights that go around social media to advertise the superiority of new GW models
Sabotage! wrote: I do really like the new proportions (kind of wish they were redoing the Mk III and IV marines in them - but they are relatively new and nice kits in their own right). I pretty happy with how they look in the different color schemes shown.
As an Iron Warrior fan, I am a bit skeptical how they will look in Iron Warriors colors......but I might just use them for a second legion and keep the Iron Warriors in mostly Mk III and a smattering of IV. Mark VI wasn't a mark the Iron Warriors were fond of anyways, though towards the end of the war, i'm sure the legions were using whatever they could get their hands on.
If it helps, I've never seen any version of power armor that looks bad in metallic colors.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: You know what would be nice ..? If certain people could just accept that the line between posable and monopose is subjective, that whether or not it matters is subjective, that whether the new style is better or worse than the old style is subjective.
That way we could stop having the same argument literally every time GW preview a new kit and we wouldn’t have pages of people trying to prove that other people’s subjective opinions are wrong.
If you don't want to see any subjective views, just look at the announcements on the WarCom pages.
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
Isn't that resin version? Compare monopose models to multipose if you dom't want to show yourself dishonest.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: You know what would be nice ..? If certain people could just accept that the line between posable and monopose is subjective, that whether or not it matters is subjective, that whether the new style is better or worse than the old style is subjective.
That way we could stop having the same argument literally every time GW preview a new kit and we wouldn’t have pages of people trying to prove that other people’s subjective opinions are wrong.
If you don't want to see any subjective views, just look at the announcements on the WarCom pages.
I think it's less about the subjective takes at this point and more about the fact that ever since Primaris launched and GW started exploring poses with less leg and torso combos for more natural poses to pair with a variety of arm options this horse has been beaten to death, and then continued to be beaten until it can't even be used for glue.
There is a definite spectrum of posing capability with snap fit monopose on one end, and master grade Gundams (yes, the ones were you can pose all the fingers) on the other. Everything else falls along a line and whether you feel a waist swivel is important or not for expressing your ideas is entirely subjective. Same for how many unique poses you get. Honestly limited poses don't bother me because we're not playing a skirmish game where you only have maybe 10 distinct models who all do need to be highly individualized. Instead we have dozens of models on the table and any individuality in a unit is going to be lost once you start pushing them around the table en masse.
As someone who paints far more than I can play I can appreciate options for sure, but it's never ruined my fun to not have every model in a unit be a perfectly unique mini, even when paint and decals are used. Now your mileage may vary and I'm sure someone can tell me it's soul crushing to paint the same mini twice, thrice, or more. Basically all I'm saying is this debate has been done to death and no one it ever going to talk other people out of their opinions on what the "correct" amount of posing is for that person.
Now, having said all that, and moving back to the main topic, being HH and the model preview, I'm sincerely hoping heavy and special weapons will be plastic, not a FW resin upgrade. I prefer the more durable bond of plastic glue over the brittleness of superglue whenever possible so not having to mix the two materials would be super.
MonkeyBallistic wrote: You know what would be nice ..? If certain people could just accept that the line between posable and monopose is subjective, that whether or not it matters is subjective, that whether the new style is better or worse than the old style is subjective.
That way we could stop having the same argument literally every time GW preview a new kit and we wouldn’t have pages of people trying to prove that other people’s subjective opinions are wrong.
If you don't want to see any subjective views, just look at the announcements on the WarCom pages.
On the contrary, I do want to see people’s subjective views about what they like and dislike. I just wish it could come without all the arguing about who’s subjective view is the correct one.
Sabotage! wrote: I do really like the new proportions (kind of wish they were redoing the Mk III and IV marines in them - but they are relatively new and nice kits in their own right). I pretty happy with how they look in the different color schemes shown.
As an Iron Warrior fan, I am a bit skeptical how they will look in Iron Warriors colors......but I might just use them for a second legion and keep the Iron Warriors in mostly Mk III and a smattering of IV. Mark VI wasn't a mark the Iron Warriors were fond of anyways, though towards the end of the war, i'm sure the legions were using whatever they could get their hands on.
If it helps, I've never seen any version of power armor that looks bad in metallic colors.
Chaos Space Marines also have all Mk5, Mk6 and Mk7 Legs in their Sets.
Andykp wrote: What this kit really makes me want to do is build a lovely 1st/2nd edition army with all the modern (retro) kits.
Welcome to the club! I've been doing exactly the same thing for a few years now. There has never been a better time for redoing a 1st ed/2nd ed 40K army with modern GW minis. I even got the Ambull and the Zoat now.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
drbored wrote: Oh no, 5 poses, that sure is so much worse than we had befo-
Spoiler:
There's 3 leg options. No crouching, no kneeling, no standing normally, just a sort of waddling gaited jog. Maybe 3 positions for the bolter/weapon to be in?
God I'm tired of the monopose argument in this community. Just... just please go play another game. Any other game. I'm sure the grass is real green over there.
Call me whatever you want, dismiss me, whatever, your opinion is old, stale, and barely holds up when scrutinized and you know it.
You are deliberately misunderstanding things.
First off, that kit actually has 5 discreet leg poses, and you can make more by heating up the resin pieces and bending them gently. Check LeakyCheese's MkVI youtube video for proof.
Secondly, this is not the only source for MkVI bits, not by a long shot. You can also combine this kit with all the plastic MKVI bits from regular 40K kits, which offer a lot more MkVI legs and poses. Here's 2 picts to prove this:
Would you say there are only 5 leg poses in those pictures?
The new kit will have 5 leg poses, will not be bendable into new poses cuz its plastic, and due to scale creep will be incompatible with the existing 40K MkVI kits. This is the problem. If we ever get MkVI assault marines in the new scale, things will improve a lot.
"You can kitbash more poses with other kits" isn't exactly proving the original point of "the original base kit was very limited". Neither is "you can slightly changes poses with heat" as that is the same as saying people can just cut and repose their plastics.
Yes, you can do those things, but it doesn't mean the original kit is more diverse right out of the box on it'a own.
The same people who will complain about how the "monopose" kits distinctive poses stick out to much in a crowd and thus are worse than the multipose kits where every model looked the same will also unironically explain to you how much extra effort they can put into their old minis in order to get them into distinctive poses that will stick out in a crowd more.
chaos0xomega wrote: The same people who will complain about how the "monopose" kits distinctive poses stick out to much in a crowd and thus are worse than the multipose kits where every model looked the same will also unironically explain to you how much extra effort they can put into their old minis in order to get them into distinctive poses that will stick out in a crowd more.
I am sure that converting minis so they are more distinctive and therefore "stick outside in a crowd more" and having the same, distinctive, pose repeated eight times through four squads is the same, yes.
Or would be, if the one that did the conversion repeated it ad nauseam.
Anyways, this case is a bit different, I think, as the five actual poses are not that distinctive, and there's hope that at least arms and heads are fully interchangeable.
Honestly I'm okay with the troops kind of blending together visually with similar poses as the only models I really need to stand out are the characters (and special/heavy weapons but that's wargear not poses, unless you want back flipping missile launcher Astartes or something).
ClockworkZion wrote: Honestly I'm okay with the troops kind of blending together visually with similar poses as the only models I really need to stand out are the characters (and special/heavy weapons but that's wargear not poses, unless you want back flipping missile launcher Astartes or something).
I can't think of a single sane person who wouldn't want that, tbh
ClockworkZion wrote: Honestly I'm okay with the troops kind of blending together visually with similar poses as the only models I really need to stand out are the characters (and special/heavy weapons but that's wargear not poses, unless you want back flipping missile launcher Astartes or something).
I can't think of a single sane person who wouldn't want that, tbh
To be honest, i could live with 5 repeated poses and 5 repeated bolter poses, except 3 of the bodies are pretty much identical, and 2 of the bolter poses are nearly entirely copied from a diffrent two, so it's more like 3 body poses (standing, running with one leg forward, running with the other leg forward) and 3 bolter poses (at ease, aiming and hip-firing).
The monopose/polypose arguments are very dull and silly. It’s all subjective. I am happy to exchange a waist that can be rotated in one plain for a more natural looking torso and legs. Overall the models but better to me that way. But that’s my tastes, anyone else’s tastes will be different but no more or less valid. Whether you like the new direction GW has taken or not is not changing the fact that they have taken it. And for every complainer on here there is another that likes it. Re-running these old arguments isn’t helpful or interesting, and neither side will convince the other by now.
Andykp wrote: The monopose/polypose arguments are very dull and silly. It’s all subjective. I am happy to exchange a waist that can be rotated in one plain for a more natural looking torso and legs. Overall the models but better to me that way. But that’s my tastes, anyone else’s tastes will be different but no more or less valid. Whether you like the new direction GW has taken or not is not changing the fact that they have taken it. And for every complainer on here there is another that likes it. Re-running these old arguments isn’t helpful or interesting, and neither side will convince the other by now.
People can like what they want, I'm just annoyed by the misuse of terminology. Calling both a fixed-pose starter-kit jigsaw models that can be constructed basically in one way, and a kit that allows you to combine various arm positions with different bodies thus allowing creating variety of differently posed models as 'monopose' is just misleading and confusing.
It's a set with different weapon options (in the same fashion like for Necromunda and those close weapon sets from FW) which couldn't fit into the regulary Horus Heresy sprues.
What do you think, credible with view on what we know about the MkVI Tactical Squad?
I'm a bit unsure whether to believe it, simply because in order to make a heavy or special weapons squad using the legion list, don't you always need 4x or 5x of the same weapon? (I forget whether even squad leaders have to take one, I don't play 30k) A plastic sprue with, for example, 5 meltas, 5 plasmas, 5 volkites, 5 grav guns? Seems too good to be true.
It's a set with different weapon options (in the same fashion like for Necromunda and those close weapon sets from FW) which couldn't fit into the regulary Horus Heresy sprues.
What do you think, credible with view on what we know about the MkVI Tactical Squad?
I'm a bit unsure whether to believe it, simply because in order to make a heavy or special weapons squad using the legion list, don't you always need 4x or 5x of the same weapon? (I forget whether even squad leaders have to take one, I don't play 30k) A plastic sprue with, for example, 5 meltas, 5 plasmas, 5 volkites, 5 grav guns? Seems too good to be true.
I would more expect missing Sergeant options. Special Weapons do we already have from FW.
It's a set with different weapon options (in the same fashion like for Necromunda and those close weapon sets from FW) which couldn't fit into the regulary Horus Heresy sprues.
What do you think, credible with view on what we know about the MkVI Tactical Squad?
I'm a bit unsure whether to believe it, simply because in order to make a heavy or special weapons squad using the legion list, don't you always need 4x or 5x of the same weapon? (I forget whether even squad leaders have to take one, I don't play 30k) A plastic sprue with, for example, 5 meltas, 5 plasmas, 5 volkites, 5 grav guns? Seems too good to be true.
Maybe a little sprue of just 10 of the same special or heavy weapon...for $15+.
ClockworkZion wrote: "You can kitbash more poses with other kits" isn't exactly proving the original point of "the original base kit was very limited". Neither is "you can slightly changes poses with heat" as that is the same as saying people can just cut and repose their plastics.
Yes, you can do those things, but it doesn't mean the original kit is more diverse right out of the box on it'a own.
Reposing resin legs is a heckuva lot easier than reposing plastic legs.
Again, my gripe is not that we only get 5 poses, but that we only get 5 poses and have ZERO other kits to kitbash with for more variety, as the new resculpts (which admittedly look superior) are incompatible with the leg pieces of older kits. This is exactly the same situation we were when Primaris Interecessors were released. Fast forward to today, we have Hellblasters, Interecessors and Assault Interecessors to kitbash with, tripling our torso/pose kitbashing potential - much, much better!
The heavy weapons/special weapons thing will be interesting to see. If the old FW resin upgrades are to remain compatible, the hands of these NuBeakies will have to be separate from the arms like on the older models.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
chaos0xomega wrote: The same people who will complain about how the "monopose" kits distinctive poses stick out to much in a crowd and thus are worse than the multipose kits where every model looked the same will also unironically explain to you how much extra effort they can put into their old minis in order to get them into distinctive poses that will stick out in a crowd more.
I don't know if this was a critique towards me? If it was, I'll let you know that I do not intend to build an army with much more than 30-40 marines altogether. My idea of Space Marines is based on their scarcity and high value as assets to the Imperium, the army will have much more vehicles and mechanized units than actual infantry, and when I'm done, every single infantry model will be unique one way or the other. Sure enough, if I was planning on building a legion with 60-100 marines, I wouldn't be so concerned about having model repetition in my army. But this is my army, and I have my own prerogatives with it. Feel free to build your army exactly as you see it, I will not judge you. It's your hobby.
It's funny, it almost sounds like you are upset about someone doing things differently from you.
Sabotage! wrote: I do really like the new proportions (kind of wish they were redoing the Mk III and IV marines in them - but they are relatively new and nice kits in their own right). I pretty happy with how they look in the different color schemes shown.
As an Iron Warrior fan, I am a bit skeptical how they will look in Iron Warriors colors......but I might just use them for a second legion and keep the Iron Warriors in mostly Mk III and a smattering of IV. Mark VI wasn't a mark the Iron Warriors were fond of anyways, though towards the end of the war, i'm sure the legions were using whatever they could get their hands on.
If it helps, I've never seen any version of power armor that looks bad in metallic colors.
Sabotage! wrote: I do really like the new proportions (kind of wish they were redoing the Mk III and IV marines in them - but they are relatively new and nice kits in their own right). I pretty happy with how they look in the different color schemes shown.
As an Iron Warrior fan, I am a bit skeptical how they will look in Iron Warriors colors......but I might just use them for a second legion and keep the Iron Warriors in mostly Mk III and a smattering of IV. Mark VI wasn't a mark the Iron Warriors were fond of anyways, though towards the end of the war, i'm sure the legions were using whatever they could get their hands on.
If it helps, I've never seen any version of power armor that looks bad in metallic colors.
Chaos Space Marines also have all Mk5, Mk6 and Mk7 Legs in their Sets.
chaos0xomega wrote: The same people who will complain about how the "monopose" kits distinctive poses stick out to much in a crowd and thus are worse than the multipose kits where every model looked the same will also unironically explain to you how much extra effort they can put into their old minis in order to get them into distinctive poses that will stick out in a crowd more.
Umm, this is either missing the point or disingenuous. The problem of dramatic mono-poses is that they look like they're doing a synchronized dance or something. They stand out as the same. Effort to make your models look unique means they stand out because they're different. Variation arguably would look more realistic, or immersive, or what have you; similarity would look more artificial. One guy running and chucking a grenade adds interest. Four guys across two squads throwing a grenade in the same way looks copy-pasted.
Reposing resin legs is a heckuva lot easier than reposing plastic legs.
then thats a materials complaint not a kit complaint
GW could totally make 30pc individual marines, where they were completely poseable. As much of a modeler I am, that sounds like a nightmare when done 50 times. Now my guess is that each marine will be 10-15 from tip to toe(that's farkle, head, pauldrons etc). Whether the kit will have decent choice when it comes to compatability amongst poses will be determined by the amount of kits they choose to make.
ClockworkZion wrote: "You can kitbash more poses with other kits" isn't exactly proving the original point of "the original base kit was very limited". Neither is "you can slightly changes poses with heat" as that is the same as saying people can just cut and repose their plastics.
Yes, you can do those things, but it doesn't mean the original kit is more diverse right out of the box on it'a own.
Reposing resin legs is a heckuva lot easier than reposing plastic legs.
Again, my gripe is not that we only get 5 poses, but that we only get 5 poses and have ZERO other kits to kitbash with for more variety, as the new resculpts (which admittedly look superior) are incompatible with the leg pieces of older kits. This is exactly the same situation we were when Primaris Interecessors were released. Fast forward to today, we have Hellblasters, Interecessors and Assault Interecessors to kitbash with, tripling our torso/pose kitbashing potential - much, much better!
The heavy weapons/special weapons thing will be interesting to see. If the old FW resin upgrades are to remain compatible, the hands of these NuBeakies will have to be separate from the arms like on the older models.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
chaos0xomega wrote: The same people who will complain about how the "monopose" kits distinctive poses stick out to much in a crowd and thus are worse than the multipose kits where every model looked the same will also unironically explain to you how much extra effort they can put into their old minis in order to get them into distinctive poses that will stick out in a crowd more.
I don't know if this was a critique towards me? If it was, I'll let you know that I do not intend to build an army with much more than 30-40 marines altogether. My idea of Space Marines is based on their scarcity and high value as assets to the Imperium, the army will have much more vehicles and mechanized units than actual infantry, and when I'm done, every single infantry model will be unique one way or the other. Sure enough, if I was planning on building a legion with 60-100 marines, I wouldn't be so concerned about having model repetition in my army. But this is my army, and I have my own prerogatives with it. Feel free to build your army exactly as you see it, I will not judge you. It's your hobby.
It's funny, it almost sounds like you are upset about someone doing things differently from you.
It was really a general critique about one side of the argument and the hypocritical mental gymnastics they use to try to justify the supposed superiority of their multipose waifus. In this case it has nothing to do with you doing anything differently (by all means, they are cool minis), but rather that you've sided with the "multipose miniature master race" crowd while aptly demonstrating that the indistinct sameness of those same minis has driven you to make an added effort to attempt to differentiate them with more distinct posing, not long after another poster suggested that the more distinct and differentiated poses offered by monopose minis are a problem, rather than a feature, because they make the models stand out more amongst the unit rather than blending in with one another.
drbored wrote: Again, the arguments are old and stale and fall apart under scrutiny.
Not really. No. They stick together like plastic multi-part multi-pose models held together with plastic cement. And I ain't even brought up Intercessors, so nice try there.
I've provided endless amounts of screenshots of sprues showing the CLEAR AS DAY divide when things began to change with GW miniatures. You and your ilk can continue to deny reality and pretend that things have always been likethis when that's clearly not the case. A guy a few posts above even says that the arms are numbered to the torso on these new Beakies, meaning they're even less posable. But I guess that's imaginary as well, right? Or doesn't really mean anything, as they were basically non-posable before (but still aren't mono-pose as well... 'cause that makes sense!).
But hey, you do you man. Keep denying reality. I don't a give a damn anymore...
Lord Damocles wrote: Even from the preview pictures GW have showed the repetition is egregious.
No, no. Haven't you been listening? The repetition is not real. It's completely in our heads. We're all utterly mental for even beginning to think that these minis are in any way different - at all - to the kits from even 6 years ago.
We have to stop pretending that multi-pose was ever a thing. It wasn't. There have never been multi-pose kits, and these minis also (paradoxially) aren't mono-pose... somehow! They're just... pose, I suppose. Ha! Suppose.
You love pointing at the Thousand Sons kits as the pinnacle of multi-pose, but the rubric marines had the same issue. 2 sets of 5 legs and torsos and other things, with an extra bit to make the aspiring sorcerer stand on a heroic rock. It's easy to miss because unlike the very simple look of regular tactical marines, the thousand sons have a ton of detail obscuring the flat surfaces of the models. So go ahead and lump the thousand sons in with all the other 'multipose' kits like the resin Mark VI (which, to the other poster that clearly didn't do his research, DOES come in the classic legs + torso + arms + backpack + head configuration, but still doesn't invalidate my point) which is that there's still more limit than you might think, and the number of poses you can get out of the rubric marines is even further limited by the tabards that prevent you from rotating the torso a long way around.
The Exalted Sorcerer kit is there with only a SMALL HANDFUL of other kits that are like this. The Daemon Prince, the old Space Marine Command Squad, and maybe a few others here and there. You like to flaunt it as the standard of what GW "can and should" be achieving for every single kit, but it's actually not at all standard. It's excellent because it's for an HQ unit, and we've seen a few other HQ units that have multiple ways to build the model, though the same base pose. The Sisters of Battle Canoness has options. The new Gravis Space Marine Captain has options. The only thing that those kits are missing are multiple bodies, but it just wouldn't make sense for GW to sell a kit of 3 Canonesses or 3 Space Marine Captains. With those other ranges, there's also nothing stopping you from converting a canoness or captain out of other kits, because many of the bits are compatible across the range. Same with Orks. Same with Chaos Marines. You'll find a limit here or there, but no other faction gives you 3 leaders in a box with as many options. It was a one-off. If you enjoy those kits so much, then it seems like your needs should be satisfied! Make a wonderfully varied Thousand Sons army with all of the multi-pose models you can get your hands on!
Instead, what we end up with is a toxic mix of entitlement and rose-tinted nostalgia that creates these arguments that never, ever, EVER change anyone's mind. At the end of the day, they serve one purpose:
So angry grognards can try to throw a dagger at a picture of GW and continue their grumbling about how awful things are in this forum of other people complaining about how awful things are.
Oh, and of course, if anyone's sick of the grognard stinking up the place, they get called a GW fanboy and all of their own complaints and stink is ignored and dismissed. Wonderful thing about opinions: they don't matter to those that have the opposing opinion.
ClockworkZion wrote: "You can kitbash more poses with other kits" isn't exactly proving the original point of "the original base kit was very limited". Neither is "you can slightly changes poses with heat" as that is the same as saying people can just cut and repose their plastics.
Yes, you can do those things, but it doesn't mean the original kit is more diverse right out of the box on it'a own.
Reposing resin legs is a heckuva lot easier than reposing plastic legs.
Again, my gripe is not that we only get 5 poses, but that we only get 5 poses and have ZERO other kits to kitbash with for more variety, as the new resculpts (which admittedly look superior) are incompatible with the leg pieces of older kits. This is exactly the same situation we were when Primaris Interecessors were released. Fast forward to today, we have Hellblasters, Interecessors and Assault Interecessors to kitbash with, tripling our torso/pose kitbashing potential - much, much better!
The heavy weapons/special weapons thing will be interesting to see. If the old FW resin upgrades are to remain compatible, the hands of these NuBeakies will have to be separate from the arms like on the older models.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
chaos0xomega wrote: The same people who will complain about how the "monopose" kits distinctive poses stick out to much in a crowd and thus are worse than the multipose kits where every model looked the same will also unironically explain to you how much extra effort they can put into their old minis in order to get them into distinctive poses that will stick out in a crowd more.
I don't know if this was a critique towards me? If it was, I'll let you know that I do not intend to build an army with much more than 30-40 marines altogether. My idea of Space Marines is based on their scarcity and high value as assets to the Imperium, the army will have much more vehicles and mechanized units than actual infantry, and when I'm done, every single infantry model will be unique one way or the other. Sure enough, if I was planning on building a legion with 60-100 marines, I wouldn't be so concerned about having model repetition in my army. But this is my army, and I have my own prerogatives with it. Feel free to build your army exactly as you see it, I will not judge you. It's your hobby.
It's funny, it almost sounds like you are upset about someone doing things differently from you.
It was really a general critique about one side of the argument and the hypocritical mental gymnastics they use to try to justify the supposed superiority of their multipose waifus. In this case it has nothing to do with you doing anything differently (by all means, they are cool minis), but rather that you've sided with the "multipose miniature master race" crowd while aptly demonstrating that the indistinct sameness of those same minis has driven you to make an added effort to attempt to differentiate them with more distinct posing, not long after another poster suggested that the more distinct and differentiated poses offered by monopose minis are a problem, rather than a feature, because they make the models stand out more amongst the unit rather than blending in with one another.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
drbored wrote: Again, the arguments are old and stale and fall apart under scrutiny.
Not really. No. They stick together like plastic multi-part multi-pose models held together with plastic cement. And I ain't even brought up Intercessors, so nice try there.
I've provided endless amounts of screenshots of sprues showing the CLEAR AS DAY divide when things began to change with GW miniatures. You and your ilk can continue to deny reality and pretend that things have always been likethis when that's clearly not the case. A guy a few posts above even says that the arms are numbered to the torso on these new Beakies, meaning they're even less posable. But I guess that's imaginary as well, right? Or doesn't really mean anything, as they were basically non-posable before (but still aren't mono-pose as well... 'cause that makes sense!).
But hey, you do you man. Keep denying reality. I don't a give a damn anymore...
Lord Damocles wrote: Even from the preview pictures GW have showed the repetition is egregious.
No, no. Haven't you been listening? The repetition is not real. It's completely in our heads. We're all utterly mental for even beginning to think that these minis are in any way different - at all - to the kits from even 6 years ago.
We have to stop pretending that multi-pose was ever a thing. It wasn't. There have never been multi-pose kits, and these minis also (paradoxially) aren't mono-pose... somehow! They're just... pose, I suppose. Ha! Suppose.
You love pointing at the Thousand Sons kits as the pinnacle of multi-pose, but the rubric marines had the same issue. 2 sets of 5 legs and torsos and other things, with an extra bit to make the aspiring sorcerer stand on a heroic rock. It's easy to miss because unlike the very simple look of regular tactical marines, the thousand sons have a ton of detail obscuring the flat surfaces of the models. So go ahead and lump the thousand sons in with all the other 'multipose' kits like the resin Mark VI (which, to the other poster that clearly didn't do his research, DOES come in the classic legs + torso + arms + backpack + head configuration, but still doesn't invalidate my point) which is that there's still more limit than you might think, and the number of poses you can get out of the rubric marines is even further limited by the tabards that prevent you from rotating the torso a long way around.
The Exalted Sorcerer kit is there with only a SMALL HANDFUL of other kits that are like this. The Daemon Prince, the old Space Marine Command Squad, and maybe a few others here and there. You like to flaunt it as the standard of what GW "can and should" be achieving for every single kit, but it's actually not at all standard. It's excellent because it's for an HQ unit, and we've seen a few other HQ units that have multiple ways to build the model, though the same base pose. The Sisters of Battle Canoness has options. The new Gravis Space Marine Captain has options. The only thing that those kits are missing are multiple bodies, but it just wouldn't make sense for GW to sell a kit of 3 Canonesses or 3 Space Marine Captains. With those other ranges, there's also nothing stopping you from converting a canoness or captain out of other kits, because many of the bits are compatible across the range. Same with Orks. Same with Chaos Marines. You'll find a limit here or there, but no other faction gives you 3 leaders in a box with as many options. It was a one-off. If you enjoy those kits so much, then it seems like your needs should be satisfied! Make a wonderfully varied Thousand Sons army with all of the multi-pose models you can get your hands on!
Instead, what we end up with is a toxic mix of entitlement and rose-tinted nostalgia that creates these arguments that never, ever, EVER change anyone's mind. At the end of the day, they serve one purpose:
So angry grognards can try to throw a dagger at a picture of GW and continue their grumbling about how awful things are in this forum of other people complaining about how awful things are.
Oh, and of course, if anyone's sick of the grognard stinking up the place, they get called a GW fanboy and all of their own complaints and stink is ignored and dismissed. Wonderful thing about opinions: they don't matter to those that have the opposing opinion.
PLUS stuff like the daemon prince and exalted sorc aren't even that poseable -- they just come with more weapon/gear options in the box.
Some folks are thinking that the Termiantors could be too small in relation of the upcoming Beakies, I can calm you cause I found a nice detail.
I was reading an older WD and it featured an Fallen Angels Army with MkIII and Cataphractii Models. The good; all of them are 100% in scale with the actual models (32mm and 40mm wide are the bases on the pages).
I measured them from Foot to Head and the Terminators are much taller than the MkIII. The issues also featured the new CSMs in 100% printed and they are same tall than the Terminators.
Out of all of the Warhammer 40k kits under the "HQ" tag, there are 234 kits. Many of them are of course named characters.
12 of them could be considered 'Multipose' and here they are:
Big Mek in Meganob Armor (a pack of 3 Meganobz)
The 4 Custodes kits that can be used to make one of their leaders.
The Tau Empire Commander
The Daemon Prince
Cadian Command Squad
Catachan Command Squad
Tyranid Hive Tyrant
Exalted Sorcerers (which aren't even in HQ but I've included them here)
Of those, the Daemon Prince and Hive Tyrant have a base 'core' of the common thing that people complain about: a fused torso and legs.
MANY more of the HQ units across the range have multiple options, but 'suffer' from the same thing that monopose complainers complain about: fused torso and legs.
I haven't built any of the Custodes or Ork kits so I'm not sure how they go together, but I'm guessing... fused torso and legs. Maybe the Meganobz have a ball joint for their waist?
So that leaves the 2 aging Command Squads and the Tau Commander and of course the Exalted Sorcerer kit. So...
3 out of 234? A little over 1% of GW's HQ sets are the prime example of kit-building across the industry? And of these, only a handful actually replaced an older kit. There were many, many, MANY kits that were brand new, like the Contorted Epitome, the Lord Discordant, and the Beastboss on Squigosaur.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RazorEdge wrote: Some folks are thinking that the Termiantors could be too small in relation of the upcoming Beakies, I can calm you cause I found a nice detail.
I was reading an older WD and it featured an Fallen Angels Army with MkIII and Cataphractii Models. The good; all of them are 100% in scale with the actual models (32mm and 40mm wide are the bases on the pages).
I measured them from Foot to Head and the Terminator Marines are much taller than the MkIII Power Armour Miniatures. The issues also featured the new CSMs in 100% printed and they are same tall than the Terminators.
This is good. I guess I'll have to see how they measure up when they are side by side.
I do wonder if the new Cataphracti are going to be the old kit, or if they're going to be an updated kit.
drbored wrote: I actually went to the GW site and counted.
Out of all of the Warhammer 40k kits under the "HQ" tag, there are 234 kits. Many of them are of course named characters.
12 of them could be considered 'Multipose' and here they are:
3 out of 234? A little over 1% of GW's HQ sets are the prime example of kit-building across the industry? And of these, only a handful actually replaced an older kit. There were many, many, MANY kits that were brand new, like the Contorted Epitome, the Lord Discordant, and the Beastboss on Squigosaur.
...why would one want to check HQ kits to "prove" anything about monopose or multipose kits? One would think that HQ kits, by their very nature of needing few in an army, would be much less of a "problem" in regards to posability than troop kits.
I mean, if you go check the oldmarines line, how many of the regular kits can be considererd "multipose"?
That said, yes, most of the HQs (except the squads, for obvious reasons) tend to be either fully monopose, particularly special characters (duh) or they have a single pose and multiple options. I don't think anyone was disputing that.
I will be honest I remember these guys so have a pretty low bar, so by comparison all of the new poses look great!
Spoiler:
Although I remember at the time people complaining that the 2nd edition box set marine was deliberately poor to push people into buying the metal (and much more expensive) mk7 marines, which had a lot more poses. It did definitely feel like a step back from the posing possibilities of the RTB-01 kit, that was for sure.
Although I remember at the time people complaining that the 2nd edition box set marine was deliberately poor to push people into buying the metal (and much more expensive) mk7 marines, which had a lot more poses. It did definitely feel like a step back from the posing possibilities of the RTB-01 kit, that was for sure.
Most 2nd edition plastics were a big step back from the Rogue Trader ones in terms of posability. The "Warriors of the Imperium" plastics were probably the best ones across all of the armies, and they look pretty naff by today's standards.
Torso+head in one piece, three different leg poses (two of which look pretty much identical) and the standard plastic arms and bolters of that era, also used for metal miniatures. There's very little you can do to set them apart from each other in meaningful ways, there isn't that much you can even twist the torsos side to side before it looks weird.
The 3rd edition kit, with the two-piece torsos allowing for a head to be socketed in, was a massive evolution in terms of converting freedom. Headswaps had never been easier, and using a dremel to carve out chunks of pewter became a thing of the past.
Pacific wrote: I will be honest I remember these guys so have a pretty low bar, so by comparison all of the new poses look great!
Spoiler:
Although I remember at the time people complaining that the 2nd edition box set marine was deliberately poor to push people into buying the metal (and much more expensive) mk7 marines, which had a lot more poses. It did definitely feel like a step back from the posing possibilities of the RTB-01 kit, that was for sure.
Interestingly enough, IMHO those older sets are a much better starting point than the current ones to actually get on and start playing a game:
They really had everything you needed to start with, for a very competitive price (or it felt that way, more than they do nowadays), all the rules, scenery, counters and area markers galore, measuring sticks, dice, two starting "armies"... even though a lot of it was cardboard and the miniatures included were mostly the same sprue over and over... that kept the price at a good enough level for a kid to be able to buy it. And that's this one starter... the Epic 40k one was incredibly good.
So yeah, I don't really begrudge them that much TBH xD.
Although I remember at the time people complaining that the 2nd edition box set marine was deliberately poor to push people into buying the metal (and much more expensive) mk7 marines, which had a lot more poses. It did definitely feel like a step back from the posing possibilities of the RTB-01 kit, that was for sure.
Most 2nd edition plastics were a big step back from the Rogue Trader ones in terms of posability. The "Warriors of the Imperium" plastics were probably the best ones across all of the armies, and they look pretty naff by today's standards.
Spoiler:
Torso+head in one piece, three different leg poses (two of which look pretty much identical) and the standard plastic arms and bolters of that era, also used for metal miniatures. There's very little you can do to set them apart from each other in meaningful ways, there isn't that much you can even twist the torsos side to side before it looks weird.
The 3rd edition kit, with the two-piece torsos allowing for a head to be socketed in, was a massive evolution in terms of converting freedom. Headswaps had never been easier, and using a dremel to carve out chunks of pewter became a thing of the past.
Those were plastic? Why don't I remember those? I remember going from the terrible single pose statue marines shown on the previous page straight to the multipart ones that are very similar to the ones they still sell today... I never knew there was a plastic iteration between these...
Crimson wrote: Those were plastic? Why I don't I remember those? I remember going from the terrible single pose statue marines shown on the previous page straight to the multipart ones that are very similar to the ones they still sell today... I never knew there was a plastic iteration between these...
I think those were a rebox of the starter marines? I don't really remember them, I was all in Necromunda, Epic and orks at that time.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I just noticed that MK IV Marines and Tartaros/Catapractii Terminators are gone from the webstore.
Does anyone know how long that has been the case?
Also anyone know why they are gone since if its just a reboxing that normally only means they go no longer available instead of completely deleting the webstore-page.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
Because it is a strawman. More accurate comparison would be to say we compose picture so that there are five different base face shapes, but we then mix and match hairstyles, beards, hats, glasses etc to accessorise them differently.
And for the actual topic, I think the new beakies look absolutely marvellous. I'm not sure what I will do with them, but I will definitely be getting them. I'm not getting the crazy expensive starter box though. I wonder how long it will be until they're sold separately?
And for the actual topic, I think the new beakies look absolutely marvellous. I'm not sure what I will do with them, but I will definitely be getting them. I'm not getting the crazy expensive starter box though. I wonder how long it will be until they're sold separately?
It took around 12-18 weeks for the base troops to be available outside of Indomitus/Dominion so it will probably take around that long to get the beakies by themselves but if that rumour about 3 tiers of smaller starter sets is true those happened only 3-4 weeks after Indomitus/Dominions so I would expect the same here
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
I measured them from Foot to Head and the Terminators are much taller than the MkIII. The issues also featured the new CSMs in 100% printed and they are same tall than the Terminators.
I have both the new csm and the current plastic heresy terminators. And if the new beakies are the size of the new csm, then they will be about the same size as the plastic heresy terminators. With the new csm terminators being much larger and bulkier than the plastic heresy terminators.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
Identical suits of armor in slightly different poses look like 2 dudes wearing the same suit of armor. Identical suits of armor in exactly the same dynamic walking pose with exactly the same leg and body orientation look like copies. If the kit doesn't have enough variability to break up the poses, then it's preferable to have all poses be as neutral and indistinct as possible so they all blend together and the repeats are less noticable.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
It doesn't even work for that because it's a false analogy. It's very easy (and probably unsettling) to spot duplicate faces in a lifesize crowd. That's going to happen subconsciously.
But spotting two identically posed 1cm tall power armoured legs in a 10+ strong unit, partly obscured by other parts of the model, obscured by other models or by terrain, on a table with scores of other models on it? That's something you actively have go to looking to find. You need a conscious effort to find them, especially if you're not standing right next to the unit in question.
However false analogies are to be expected when the argument revolves around changing the actual meanings of words. So far in this thread we've learned that:
monopose = a model that can be assembled in multiple poses, but not as many as I'd like,
and
gaslighting = presenting facts that challenge my opinion
Very curious to see what the next entry in the Dakka Dakka Dictionary will be.
xttz wrote: But spotting two identically posed 1cm tall power armoured legs in a 10+ strong unit, partly obscured by other parts of the model, obscured by other models or by terrain, on a table with scores of other models on it? That's something you actively have go to looking to find. You need a conscious effort to find them, especially if you're not standing right next to the unit in question.
I agree, duplicates are difficult to spot when you hide them behind terrain. Also, if you don't look at them they disappear entirely!
xttz wrote: But spotting two identically posed 1cm tall power armoured legs in a 10+ strong unit, partly obscured by other parts of the model, obscured by other models or by terrain, on a table with scores of other models on it? That's something you actively have go to looking to find. You need a conscious effort to find them, especially if you're not standing right next to the unit in question.
I agree, duplicates are difficult to spot when you hide them behind terrain. Also, if you don't look at them they disappear entirely!
I agree as well. You only notice it when you hyper focus on it in glamor shot pictures where each model is separated and individually highlighted. On the table top, no one notices or cares. Which is the exact same sentiment for the kitbashed models people spent a bucket of money on and several extra hours on. It still looked the same as the guy next to it from across the table.
Honestly they all end up looking the exact same regardless of effort for the guy who made them because on the table you spend all your time looking at the exact same power plant on the model's back.
xttz wrote: But spotting two identically posed 1cm tall power armoured legs in a 10+ strong unit, partly obscured by other parts of the model, obscured by other models or by terrain, on a table with scores of other models on it? That's something you actively have go to looking to find. You need a conscious effort to find them, especially if you're not standing right next to the unit in question.
I agree, duplicates are difficult to spot when you hide them behind terrain. Also, if you don't look at them they disappear entirely!
I agree as well. You only notice it when you hyper focus on it in glamor shot pictures where each model is separated and individually highlighted. On the table top, no one notices or cares. Which is the exact same sentiment for the kitbashed models people spent a bucket of money on and several extra hours on. It still looked the same as the guy next to it from across the table.
Honestly they all end up looking the exact same regardless of effort for the guy who made them because on the table you spend all your time looking at the exact same power plant on the model's back.
I know, right? Why do we even care what the models look like anyway as long as they're the official GW models that we paid lots of money for and spent days assembling and painting and basing? You can't even tell from far away!
I guess the takeaway is that nothing matters if you don't care. Glad we can all agree.
I care how the models look lie a lot. Thus I'm extremely pleased that these days we have marine models that do not look like misshapen squats that struggle to stand.
...
It was really a general critique about one side of the argument and the hypocritical mental gymnastics they use to try to justify the supposed superiority of their multipose waifus. In this case it has nothing to do with you doing anything differently (by all means, they are cool minis), but rather that you've sided with the "multipose miniature master race" crowd while aptly demonstrating that the indistinct sameness of those same minis has driven you to make an added effort to attempt to differentiate them with more distinct posing, not long after another poster suggested that the more distinct and differentiated poses offered by monopose minis are a problem, rather than a feature, because they make the models stand out more amongst the unit rather than blending in with one another.
I refuse to take any such sides. Both types of kits are cool. I don't have a problem with the current GW modelling way per se (style where the torso is one piece instead of two), as a matter of fact I'd say the singular torso piece miniatures look more natural most of the time. But I also enjoy the modularity of the old multipiece kits when there are enough compatible kits to mix and match with. It's like legos man, addictive trying to come up with new combos, buying all the kits with cross compatible pieces, hunting for bits etc. Monopose gets you better looking models out of a single box, but multipart kits make you a friggin collector man! You start buying hideously expensive kits just to use a few bits out of them, its not for sane people and I love it.
If we are talking about poses in general, I can understand why someone would want as neutral poses as possible for a large unit of models, where repeated poses, if overly distinctive, stick out quite a bit. Let's take the current Harlequins kit as an example - imagine having 30 of those models in a unit - I bet that'd look hella derpy.
But numbers do matter. If a unit is on the small side, even more dynamic poses can look aight as long as they are not repeated many times.
Then there is context to consider - I think the combat role of a unit should also factor in to its pose to a degree. Every model running or leaping? Far more appropriate for an Assault squad than a shooty one. Everybody kinda still and slowly advancing? Far more appropriate for a shooty unit. But even this guideline should ideally be broken up a bit IMO, in order to add visual interest.
My point with the HH 2.0 MkVI tac kit was this: With only 5 poses across 40 models, the 8 copies of the " /\ " stance is going to stick out. I hope there will be at least one more set of 5 poses getting added to the pool eventually via a new kit, this could cut the amount of repetition to just 4 models out of a potential pool of 40 instead of 8. Assuming you buy 2 10-model kits of both variety, of course..
But then again, this will mostly be an issue with large squads.
I still stand by my opinion that the KT21 Veteran Guardsman kit is among the best ones, because it features 10 discreet poses, in all theee main flavours: Running, Static, Kneeling. This is what I personally hoped from the new MkVI kit, but didn't get. I am still going to buy the kit anyway because of the vastly improved proportions, but I do not consider the kit ideal in this regard, and this is why I'm leaning towards not buying the launch box after all.
I care how the models look lie a lot. Thus I'm extremely pleased that these days we have marine models that do not look like misshapen squats that struggle to stand.
Which is completely irrelevant to the fact that GW could easily have made the new kit two different sprues, giving ten different poses, rather than a repeated sprue.
But oh noes! They wouldn't have made such fat stacks doing that!
I care how the models look lie a lot. Thus I'm extremely pleased that these days we have marine models that do not look like misshapen squats that struggle to stand.
Which is completely irrelevant to the fact that GW could easily have made the new kit two different sprues, giving ten different poses, rather than a repeated sprue.
I know this isn’t representative of most games you’ll play, but when you’re up against TFG, they’re just another thing for them to bore to you to tears over.
I know this isn’t representative of most games you’ll play, but when you’re up against TFG, they’re just another thing for them to bore to you to tears over.
That defeats the point of 30k though,being more simulationist like 40k in the past was.
RazorEdge wrote: When the Mk6 Power Armor Marines have only 5 Models per spure, it fits to the Rumor of a Smaller Starter Set with just 10 Tacital Marines.
Except 10 Marines isn't a starter for anything so either the people designing the HH starter set decided to make it worthless as a starter set (unlikely) or the rumour is wrong.
There's nothing at all to indicate that the 240 quid (Faeit) source is anything more than somebody taking guesses based on existing leaks, so I wouldn't take that price as gospel. At least some of the accompanying information already looks suspect.
Is it because it keeps getting listed as a "lunch" box? That tipped me off that it might not be real but who am I to judge those who spend £240 on lunch boxes....
RazorEdge wrote: When the Mk6 Power Armor Marines have only 5 Models per spure, it fits to the Rumor of a Smaller Starter Set with just 10 Tacital Marines.
Except 10 Marines isn't a starter for anything so either the people designing the HH starter set decided to make it worthless as a starter set (unlikely) or the rumour is wrong.
depends, the rumor has it this inital box will be a launch box and we'll see a starter set similer to the 40k and AOS ones, in which case you could be looking at 10 marines, a paperback rules book, 2 HQs a piece of cardboard terrain and a play mat for 50 bucks. that'd honestly be STUPIDLY good. no it wouldn't be a "2000 point army in a box" or something, but it'd be a fantastic first purchase.
BrianDavion wrote: depends, the rumor has it this inital box will be a launch box and we'll see a starter set similer to the 40k and AOS ones, in which case you could be looking at 10 marines, a paperback rules book, 2 HQs a piece of cardboard terrain and a play mat for 50 bucks. that'd honestly be STUPIDLY good. no it wouldn't be a "2000 point army in a box" or something, but it'd be a fantastic first purchase.
value is everything.
The rumour said 10 Marines only, which is why I said months ago that specific bit couldn't be true because along with the price for the starter set being higher than the AoS and 40k ones, it didn't contain enough models to satisfy one player's basic army needs let alone two.
To be very specific the rumour explicity stated HH would follow the 40k and AoS starter set model with the increasing number of units per box. The prices for these however, were way out of wack and the contents were drastically less than even the Warrior and Recruit editions which have a unit of Troops and an HQ (Recruit also comes with some Scarabs) to form the most basic army requirements for AoS and 40k. If HH goes the same route with a 1 HQ and 1 Troop minimum for the smallest game sizes, then the smallest starter set doesn't even fill that.
BrianDavion wrote: depends, the rumor has it this inital box will be a launch box and we'll see a starter set similer to the 40k and AOS ones, in which case you could be looking at 10 marines, a paperback rules book, 2 HQs a piece of cardboard terrain and a play mat for 50 bucks. that'd honestly be STUPIDLY good. no it wouldn't be a "2000 point army in a box" or something, but it'd be a fantastic first purchase.
value is everything.
The rumour said 10 Marines only, which is why I said months ago that specific bit couldn't be true because along with the price for the starter set being higher than the AoS and 40k ones, it didn't contain enough models to satisfy one player's basic army needs let alone two.
yup, still, 10 marines as the basis seems possiable. but yeah my guess is it'll be 10 marines, some ":quick play" rules a cheap game board and cardboard box that they insist is terrain.
BrianDavion wrote: yup, still, 10 marines as the basis seems possiable. but yeah my guess is it'll be 10 marines, some ":quick play" rules a cheap game board and cardboard box that they insist is terrain.
How does it seem possible when it doesn't function as a starter set? It doesn't fit the price range and it doesn't fit the basic requirement of actually teaching the new player how to play the smallest scale of the game. The rumours surrounding the starter sets can't be true because it doesn't fit with the business model.
Good god I'm getting flashbacks to the last time I did this.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
Identical suits of armor in slightly different poses look like 2 dudes wearing the same suit of armor. Identical suits of armor in exactly the same dynamic walking pose with exactly the same leg and body orientation look like copies. If the kit doesn't have enough variability to break up the poses, then it's preferable to have all poses be as neutral and indistinct as possible so they all blend together and the repeats are less noticable.
But you know, that's just like my opinion, man.
As someone who did the whole military thing, when I see people dressed identically walking in unison I assume that they're in step with each other rather than clones, but you do you.
I care how the models look lie a lot. Thus I'm extremely pleased that these days we have marine models that do not look like misshapen squats that struggle to stand.
Which is completely irrelevant to the fact that GW could easily have made the new kit two different sprues, giving ten different poses, rather than a repeated sprue.
But oh noes! They wouldn't have made such fat stacks doing that!
Repeated sprues are cheaper than multiple unique sprues, so it keeps mold costs down to keep the sprues identical.
BrianDavion wrote: depends, the rumor has it this inital box will be a launch box and we'll see a starter set similer to the 40k and AOS ones, in which case you could be looking at 10 marines, a paperback rules book, 2 HQs a piece of cardboard terrain and a play mat for 50 bucks. that'd honestly be STUPIDLY good. no it wouldn't be a "2000 point army in a box" or something, but it'd be a fantastic first purchase.
value is everything.
The rumour said 10 Marines only, which is why I said months ago that specific bit couldn't be true because along with the price for the starter set being higher than the AoS and 40k ones, it didn't contain enough models to satisfy one player's basic army needs let alone two.
yup, still, 10 marines as the basis seems possiable. but yeah my guess is it'll be 10 marines, some ":quick play" rules a cheap game board and cardboard box that they insist is terrain.
More likely if it only has 10 marines, it would only have the 10 marines but also some other unit to face against them (even if they are not troops) and a pair of characters.
Selling a box of 10 marines is not a starter set. Especially as this one is rumored for to cost more than the AoS and 40k ones, which both contain two units and two characters.
BrianDavion wrote: yup, still, 10 marines as the basis seems possiable. but yeah my guess is it'll be 10 marines, some ":quick play" rules a cheap game board and cardboard box that they insist is terrain.
How does it seem possible when it doesn't function as a starter set? It doesn't fit the price range and it doesn't fit the basic requirement of actually teaching the new player how to play the smallest scale of the game. The rumours surrounding the starter sets can't be true because it doesn't fit with the business model.
Good god I'm getting flashbacks to the last time I did this.
Something different about this starter is that all the contents could be used by one person for the same army, (Maybe one HQ couldn't) along with GW seeing HH as another opportunity to bilk older whale buyers used to paying more for these kits from FW (Even if recent years has seen the plastics) and an uncertain economic environment from all the fallout of the war in Ukraine and it seems likely that the basic starter for HH has just a squad and no HQs.
GW are probably also concerned about sales cannibalisation from a source of cheap upscaled 'first born' if the Starter deals are too good. (Though I'm not sure how much they're selling of the 98' style Marines, they still sell them and for all we know they could be planning to release an upscaled tac squad)
One thing I noticed recently is that GW got very stingy with the number of models in their 3rd ed AoS paint sets. They now have 2 models in the Stormcast version and 3 in the Orruk whereas the 40k versions (Both 8th and 9th) have 3 in both and the 2ed AoS ones had 3 in the Stormcast and 4 in the Nighthaunt.
We now have a situation where the fantasy equivalent of something comes with fewer models than the 40k version!
It is a possibility that they could be shifting the smaller starter sets to single player starter sets. That said, if the rumored price is correct (40 pounds, which generally means 60 USD in the States), they definitely are going to have a hard time selling it if it's just some get started pamphlets and a squad of Marines. Maybe if they included on of the mini-rulebooks also. This is going to be extra true as many of the launch boxes will be broken down, and if there are 40 Mark VI marines in them, I can't imagine squads selling for more than 40 USD on Ebay.
If they really are trying to get people to play Horus Heresy and run it as a big line game, they will have to put out starter sets that are at least relatively comparable to the 40k and AoS ones in price and contents - especially as it's not like GW is selling starter sets at a loss.
People like two player starter sets because it lets them test out the game. Putting out a niche game system with starter sets that are objectively worse in terms of contents and price, and then setting them on the same shelf as the starters for your other two big games (one of which is directly competing for Sci-fi fans and is the most popular miniature game ever) is like asking that niche system to fail.
About the Intercessor Sqaud and Intercessor Assault Sqaud from the Starter Sets; is there any difference in the modularity in relation to the seperate Squad Box sets?
RazorEdge wrote: About the Intercessor Sqaud and Intercessor Assault Sqaud from the Starter Sets; is there any difference in the modularity in relation to the seperate Squad Box sets?
The ones from the starters are push fits, whereas the regular release boxes have fixed bodies but options in arms and heads, at least in the case if the regular ones. I remember I cut the arms of all the repeated ones I got and used a variety of others.
Sabotage! wrote: It is a possibility that they could be shifting the smaller starter sets to single player starter sets. That said, if the rumored price is correct (40 pounds, which generally means 60 USD in the States), they definitely are going to have a hard time selling it if it's just some get started pamphlets and a squad of Marines. Maybe if they included on of the mini-rulebooks also. This is going to be extra true as many of the launch boxes will be broken down, and if there are 40 Mark VI marines in them, I can't imagine squads selling for more than 40 USD on Ebay.
If they really are trying to get people to play Horus Heresy and run it as a big line game, they will have to put out starter sets that are at least relatively comparable to the 40k and AoS ones in price and contents - especially as it's not like GW is selling starter sets at a loss.
People like two player starter sets because it lets them test out the game. Putting out a niche game system with starter sets that are objectively worse in terms of contents and price, and then setting them on the same shelf as the starters for your other two big games (one of which is directly competing for Sci-fi fans and is the most popular miniature game ever) is like asking that niche system to fail.
keep in mind 10 marines would allow 2 5 man squads. the hersy is just a bit odd in that technicly any combination save something like "and 4 HQs" is going to be a decent 1 person army too
NightReconnaissance wrote: Something different about this starter is that all the contents could be used by one person for the same army, (Maybe one HQ couldn't) along with GW seeing HH as another opportunity to bilk older whale buyers used to paying more for these kits from FW (Even if recent years has seen the plastics) and an uncertain economic environment from all the fallout of the war in Ukraine and it seems likely that the basic starter for HH has just a squad and no HQs.
Ok, there are many dumb points here.
Firstly, a starter set that doesn't get someone started in the game system is not something that sells. GW isn't making big bucks on the starter sets but that doesn't matter because they are the hook that gets people into buying more models. If the starter set doesn't work as a hook then it doesn't sell which means people don't buy more models.
Secondly, the UK economy has been taking hit after hit due to Brexit, not the situation in Ukraine. In fact, Ukraine has literally nothing to do with why GW increases its prices or why the cost of living in the UK has increased stupidly this year.
Thirdly, GW doesn't care what you do with the models, in fact when Calth was released it was specifically billed as its own thing but also a good way to start one or two armies for HH, to the point where FW did Legion army bundles with upgrade packs and the Calth box. If the HH starter set is a good deal for making one army as well as two, that means more people will be likely to buy it which means more money in the coffers and more models bought in the future. It is a win-win situation for GW.
GW are probably also concerned about sales cannibalisation from a source of cheap upscaled 'first born' if the Starter deals are too good. (Though I'm not sure how much they're selling of the 98' style Marines, they still sell them and for all we know they could be planning to release an upscaled tac squad)
This logic doesn't make sense. GW is scared people are going to buy into HH so the starter set is changed to make it a useless starter set.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: keep in mind 10 marines would allow 2 5 man squads. the hersy is just a bit odd in that technicly any combination save something like "and 4 HQs" is going to be a decent 1 person army too
And yet 10 Marines doesn't make a usable army for either player unless they aren't actually playing HH, which then defeats the point of a starter set.
Why are people coming up with these convoluted nonsense theories instead of just taking the obvious one, which is that the starter set section of the rumour dump is clearly wrong.
RazorEdge wrote: About the Intercessor Sqaud and Intercessor Assault Sqaud from the Starter Sets; is there any difference in the modularity in relation to the seperate Squad Box sets?
The ones from the starters are push fits, whereas the regular release boxes have fixed bodies but options in arms and heads, at least in the case if the regular ones. I remember I cut the arms of all the repeated ones I got and used a variety of others.
The intercessor squads that came in the DV box had arms cut up in odd spots, not easy to kit bash, although it could be done. And sometimes that’s all it took; the sarges were easy to arm/head swap. Basic troopers, a lot less easy. Big difference between the starter set and the full box.
The assault intercessors from the indominus box had all the arms on simple pegs to the torsos. Once you clipped those off, we are left with flat torso mounts just like the full kit. Now, all the kit, pistols, grenades, etc. are still molded on, so not full customization. I turned 5 of them into autobolt rifle intercessors with minimal effort.
So we have different examples of starter marines vs. full kits. Who knows how the Mk. VI will be.
That's exactly the point why I was asking this question.
Some rumours said there will be "full Set" Models in the Lunch Box (tm) and the Starters Sets but I guess we will see "simpler starter" Models like in the Starter Sets from 40k and AoS.
That's exactly the point why I was asking this question.
Some rumours said there will be "full Set" Models in the Lunch Box (tm) and the Starters Sets but I'm sure we will see "simpler starter" Models like in the Starter Sets from 40k and AoS.
I don’t think we’ll have an answer for that until we see the sprue pictures. The precedent is all over the place with no consistency, and covers a wide spectrum of options.
That's exactly the point why I was asking this question.
Some rumours said there will be "full Set" Models in the Lunch Box (tm) and the Starters Sets but I'm sure we will see "simpler starter" Models like in the Starter Sets from 40k and AoS.
I don’t think we’ll have an answer for that until we see the sprue pictures. The precedent is all over the place with no consistency, and covers a wide spectrum of options.
Yeah. Chances are, if the sprues are the size of the ones from the regular boxes and without mixed bits from other stuff, that they will probably be the ones that will go in the standard boxes. Otherwise, they will clearly be special ones for the release.
That's exactly the point why I was asking this question.
Some rumours said there will be "full Set" Models in the Lunch Box (tm) and the Starters Sets but I guess we will see "simpler starter" Models like in the Starter Sets from 40k and AoS.
I am effectively certain that the new beakies they've shown pictures of are a full kit. You can see it in the arm, shouldderpad and accessory details, and of course we've seen the same bodies with different arms and accessories. It's a full kit.
That's exactly the point why I was asking this question.
Some rumours said there will be "full Set" Models in the Lunch Box (tm) and the Starters Sets but I guess we will see "simpler starter" Models like in the Starter Sets from 40k and AoS.
I am effectively certain that the new beakies they've shown pictures of are a full kit. You can see it in the arm, shouldderpad and accessory details, and of course we've seen the same bodies with different arms and accessories. It's a full kit.
The whc article talked about choices of accessories and bayonets on the mk6 models. So clearly not ETB. So have to agree with crimson here.
Wow 500$ Canadian dollars for the starter set....wow.... its usually close to double the UK price here in Canada, I cant imagine what the aussies and NZ'ers are paying.
Also we will see (first) a Launch Box (as WarCom noted).
When one or three Starter Sets come later, it/ they will have a lower Price (with fewer content).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Matrindur wrote: I just noticed that MK IV Marines and Tartaros/Catapractii Terminators are gone from the webstore.
Does anyone know how long that has been the case?
Also anyone know why they are gone since if its just a reboxing that normally only means they go no longer available instead of completely deleting the webstore-page.
In the german Webshop, the Characters from Calth and the Mark III are the only HH Sets they still sell. This seems happen some time ago, they had already disappeared when I looked into the last time the webshop at the End of last Year - November or December.
I like new MK6 marines but the more I think of it, the less I want to add another big box to my pile of unfinished projects. I am still tempted to hop onto Heresy 2.0 bandwagon in some way, perhaps by painting one model for each Legion using models from Betrayal of Calth, Burning of Prospero and couple of MK6's from current tactical squad.
People like two player starter sets because it lets them test out the game. Putting out a niche game system with starter sets that are objectively worse in terms of contents and price, and then setting them on the same shelf as the starters for your other two big games (one of which is directly competing for Sci-fi fans and is the most popular miniature game ever) is like asking that niche system to fail.
But it is a two player starter set.5 marines aside. In the base 40k starter there are only 5 marines versus 10 necrons and the 2 HQs.
I think it's a combination of sales issues from there being stuff that could be used by one person in one army and just general aversion to having anything that is a deal for HH. Remember HH isn't supposed to be for new players, it's intended for existing players or people already into the HH novels. So in their minds 'starter set' having a squad + the rules/other gaming materials for roughly the price of a squad is the deal. You're saving on the rule book.
5 Marines aside isn't a two player game when both sides also need an HQ each and possibly another Troop if HH sticks with the current force org.
And the whole point of this HH revamp is to get all types of players into HH.
So wrong on both counts.
Not claiming “therefore it is cheap”. Just providing context for folk to draw their own conclusion.
so 500 canadian for 40 mk VI marines (60 dollars per box of 10)
10 Cataphracti Terminators (60 or 70 per box of 5)
2 character (45 bucks)
1 Dreadnought (the original cataphracti was 65? or 70 bucks or so. I expect the new one to be the same or more. we'll assume 70 bucks)
1 Spartan Tank (we'll assume the cost of a land raider, 100 bucks)
that comes out to kit contents worth about 620 dollars before the rulebook. assuming the rule book is the hard cover rule book we've gotten in the 40k and AOS launch boxes, that's about 700 bucks worth of stuff.
Two month build up to a massive edition launch would be on par for GW. Spend April showing off models, May showing off rules and mechanics and then pre-order in June.
ClockworkZion wrote: Two month build up to a massive edition launch would be on par for GW. Spend April showing off models, May showing off rules and mechanics and then pre-order in June.
Those were plastic? Why don't I remember those? I remember going from the terrible single pose statue marines shown on the previous page straight to the multipart ones that are very similar to the ones they still sell today... I never knew there was a plastic iteration between these...
They're a weird inbetweener release, since both the 2nd edition starter box marines and the metal (plastic-armed) marines were available as 10-man boxes but the "Warriors" sprues only came out in this 6-man configuration.
I'm not actually 100% sure when it came out, but here's a catalog pic. As you can see, the sprue itself was tiny, like most RT era sprues (cutting steel moulds was expensive as heck, so the smaller the better was a general rule). The other sprues on the page were much more common in the period, featuring in the various squad boxes and character blister packs of the era.
Those were plastic? Why don't I remember those? I remember going from the terrible single pose statue marines shown on the previous page straight to the multipart ones that are very similar to the ones they still sell today... I never knew there was a plastic iteration between these...
They're a weird inbetweener release, since both the 2nd edition starter box marines and the metal (plastic-armed) marines were available as 10-man boxes but the "Warriors" sprues only came out in this 6-man configuration.
I'm not actually 100% sure when it came out, but here's a catalog pic. As you can see, the sprue itself was tiny, like most RT era sprues (cutting steel moulds was expensive as heck, so the smaller the better was a general rule). The other sprues on the page were much more common in the period, featuring in the various squad boxes and character blister packs of the era.
All sprues are from 1992, except that plastic Body sprue, which is post-1993.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
Identical suits of armor in slightly different poses look like 2 dudes wearing the same suit of armor. Identical suits of armor in exactly the same dynamic walking pose with exactly the same leg and body orientation look like copies. If the kit doesn't have enough variability to break up the poses, then it's preferable to have all poses be as neutral and indistinct as possible so they all blend together and the repeats are less noticable.
But you know, that's just like my opinion, man.
Kinda like a uniform? You know, the thing that professional real world military forces wear? That are all... uniform.... and therefore identical?
I think this argument has just about run its course. Face it, neither of your sides is going to convince the other, so the only thing that's left is to see which accuses the other's mothers of unnatural acts with garden furniture first.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
Identical suits of armor in slightly different poses look like 2 dudes wearing the same suit of armor. Identical suits of armor in exactly the same dynamic walking pose with exactly the same leg and body orientation look like copies. If the kit doesn't have enough variability to break up the poses, then it's preferable to have all poses be as neutral and indistinct as possible so they all blend together and the repeats are less noticable.
But you know, that's just like my opinion, man.
Kinda like a uniform? You know, the thing that professional real world military forces wear? That are all... uniform.... and therefore identical?
If the professional military force is a clone army that also does synchronized dance routines in battle? Then yes, exactly like that.
Agamemnon2 wrote: I think this argument has just about run its course. Face it, neither of your sides is going to convince the other, so the only thing that's left is to see which accuses the other's mothers of unnatural acts with garden furniture first.
One of the problems of these threads is that there's practically nothing to discuss for like, weeks - so people can tumble into these huge arguments for pages simply because there is nothing else to talk about.
Agamemnon2 wrote: I think this argument has just about run its course. Face it, neither of your sides is going to convince the other, so the only thing that's left is to see which accuses the other's mothers of unnatural acts with garden furniture first.
I reckon we can still squeeze a few more pages between now and Thursday by quoting a full page of nested comments just to add a one-line zinger.
What else would anyone click on a HH news thread to read?
Fresh problem, 6th had rule for ruins, 7th didn't, they based it on 7th. Therefore, land raiders on ruin tops.
I made a thread back when 7th edition dropped comparing it to 6th ed's rules. It's relevant again given HH 2.0 seems to have taken the same path as 7th.
But ya, the problem in a nut shell is ruins in this edition are basically difficult terrain, meaning they're not much inconvenience to vehicles or most units really, being they can just melt through walls. But the added problem that vehicles generally aren't slowed by difficult but risk immobilization. So the problem is you're a dozer blade away from having any rhino or land raider pull some rather silly moves.
My local store owner thinks the first weekend of the UK summer fiscal quarter. Which would track with most core game releases. So probably July with a two week preorder.
GW starts all new main System Editions with their Launch Boxes in June. July the Starter Sets and from August regulary releases for starter Set Armies.
Here are the big summer release preorder dates for the last few years:
AOS 3rd
June 19th 2021
40k 9th
July 11th 2020
40K Apocalypse
June 29th 2019
AOS 2nd
June 16th 2018
40k 8th
June 3rd 2017
40k 9th edition was the first to be affected by covid and the July date seems be an outlier. As far as I know, GW's fiscal year ends on June 30th so they generally try to get the sales preorders before the end of that month.
Faces generally have 2 eyes, a nose, and a mouth. There are subtle differences between individual's faces that make them distinguishable if you look closely. A sea of slightly different faces looks like a crowd. A sea of faces where there are only 5 types and where every face of a given type is identical looks like a clone army. If on top of that, every third face also has an eye patch and pirate hat then it just looks silly.
This is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Flawless and concise, now watch as it's ignored, sidestepped, or gaslit away just like every other argument that's inconvenient.
I mean it works as an arguement for more variety in face options, but when talking about near identical suits of armour?
Identical suits of armor in slightly different poses look like 2 dudes wearing the same suit of armor. Identical suits of armor in exactly the same dynamic walking pose with exactly the same leg and body orientation look like copies. If the kit doesn't have enough variability to break up the poses, then it's preferable to have all poses be as neutral and indistinct as possible so they all blend together and the repeats are less noticable.
But you know, that's just like my opinion, man.
Kinda like a uniform? You know, the thing that professional real world military forces wear? That are all... uniform.... and therefore identical?
If the professional military force is a clone army that also does synchronized dance routines in battle? Then yes, exactly like that.
Have you ever heard of marching and drill?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
xttz wrote: Here are the big summer release preorder dates for the last few years:
AOS 3rd
June 19th 2021
40k 9th
July 11th 2020
40K Apocalypse
June 29th 2019
AOS 2nd
June 16th 2018
40k 8th
June 3rd 2017
40k 9th edition was the first to be affected by covid and the July date seems be an outlier. As far as I know, GW's fiscal year ends on June 30th so they generally try to get the sales preorders before the end of that month.
IIRC their fiscal year ends in late May, or at least has for the last few years, but going back farther it was at some point in June. Its not on the same date every year, if you go through the last few financial reports you'll see that they give a different date for each year, it seems to be one of those "4th thursday in May" type affairs or based off of something less fixed than a specific day on the calendar.
tneva82 wrote:9th ed 40k was 25 july for indomitus. Dangerous making assumption for trend from just 1(AOS) release.
xttz wrote:Here are the big summer release preorder dates for the last few years:
AOS 3rd
June 19th 2021
40k 9th
July 11th 2020
40K Apocalypse
June 29th 2019
AOS 2nd
June 16th 2018
40k 8th
June 3rd 2017
40k 9th edition was the first to be affected by covid and the July date seems be an outlier. As far as I know, GW's fiscal year ends on June 30th so they generally try to get the sales preorders before the end of that month.
Looks more like dangerous making assumption for a trend from just one 40k release
IIRC their fiscal year ends in late May, or at least has for the last few years, but going back farther it was at some point in June. Its not on the same date every year, if you go through the last few financial reports you'll see that they give a different date for each year, it seems to be one of those "4th thursday in May" type affairs or based off of something less fixed than a specific day on the calendar.
Yeah you're right, it seems to be the last Sunday in May or first Sunday in June. That's probably to give a clean cut-off point for things like currency exchange rates which may change more on weekdays.
That means they're putting these big releases at the start of the fiscal year, and we might not see HH preorders until June 4th at the earliest.
Is it your contention that GW makes models that are intended to depict a squad where 2 members are marching in synchronicity and the other 8 are standing and shooting? I don't know - is this something that typically happens in combat? If so, then I guess they're perfect - you win.
Is it your contention that GW makes models that are intended to depict a squad where 2 members are marching in synchronicity and the other 8 are standing and shooting? I don't know - is this something that typically happens in combat? If so, then I guess they're perfect - you win.
I meean, it depends on what period of time you're discussing. Modern era, not so much. Napoleonic - yes.
Now we’ve announced the upcoming edition of the Horus Heresy game, players will be pleased to note that all of the Exemplary Battles units we’ve published in this series will have their profiles updated to work with the new rules – stay tuned for more, but rest assured they will remain usable. In fact, they were all written for the new edition and then reverse-engineered to fit the current one – it’s almost like we had a plan all along…
Now we’ve announced the upcoming edition of the Horus Heresy game, players will be pleased to note that all of the Exemplary Battles units we’ve published in this series will have their profiles updated to work with the new rules – stay tuned for more, but rest assured they will remain usable. In fact, they were all written for the new edition and then reverse-engineered to fit the current one – it’s almost like we had a plan all along…
Yuck. This is some borderline gaslighting, like GW respects the conversions it encouraged and the collections defined by them and always intends continuity? (Looks at the cranky CSM codex thread... Looks at what's getting discontinued in this thread... Looks at...)
So we now have: UM Nemesis Destroyer Squad - Themed Destroyers DG Mortus Poisoner Squad - Themed Destroyers WE Red Hand Destroyer Assault Squad - Themed Destroyers WS Dark Sons of Death Squad - Themed Destroyers IW Dominator Cohort - Themed Terminators (Cataphractii) IF Huscarl Squad - Themed Terminators (Cataphractii) NL Atramentar Squad - Themed Terminators (Tartaros / Contekar?) DA Inner Circle Knights Cenobium (Order of the Broken Claws) - New variant EC Sun Killer Squad - Heavy Weapon / Support Squad RG Deliverer Squad - Themed Terminators (Cataphractii)
And are waiting for: Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Iron Hands, Thousand Sons, Sons of Horus, Word Bearers, Salamanders & Alpha Legion.
Looking at all the Destroyer units - plastic Destroyers incoming?
Now we’ve announced the upcoming edition of the Horus Heresy game, players will be pleased to note that all of the Exemplary Battles units we’ve published in this series will have their profiles updated to work with the new rules – stay tuned for more, but rest assured they will remain usable. In fact, they were all written for the new edition and then reverse-engineered to fit the current one – it’s almost like we had a plan all along…
2W, teleporting terminators with the option to equip the entire squad with master crafted lightning claws. Very nice.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: 2W, teleporting terminators with the option to equip the entire squad with master crafted lightning claws. Very nice.
And they can take Multi-meltas!
Zone Mortalisssss...
I haven't read the fluffy bits, is there a reason given why they're red?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote: I'm just happy that at least some Legion specifics aren't getting removed and that there may be hope that the rest stay as well.
The game's about to expand massively, not contract. I suspect we'd see things not immediately ported over in one of the principal books getting covered either later on or in an online article. I am staying optimistic in light of what's been, so far, very good news.
spiralingcadaver wrote: Yuck. This is some borderline gaslighting, like GW respects the conversions it encouraged and the collections defined by them and always intends continuity? (Looks at the cranky CSM codex thread... Looks at what's getting discontinued in this thread... Looks at...)
The stuff that is being "discontinued" is a rumour. You can choose to believe it or not but considering the "hold the HH lot over until the new edition" units are all staying, have you considered the rumours are wrong?
Now we’ve announced the upcoming edition of the Horus Heresy game, players will be pleased to note that all of the Exemplary Battles units we’ve published in this series will have their profiles updated to work with the new rules – stay tuned for more, but rest assured they will remain usable. In fact, they were all written for the new edition and then reverse-engineered to fit the current one – it’s almost like we had a plan all along…
I've never seen Raven Guard painted red before, I'm not up to speed on Heresy-era fluff. Is the paint scheme just for a special Cataphractii squad?
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I've never seen Raven Guard painted red before, I'm not up to speed on Heresy-era fluff. Is the paint scheme just for a special Cataphractii squad?
Yes - They're Terrans who were Raven Guard before Corax was discovered, and "had walked in the vanguard of Horus himself".
Having now read through the background, yes, they served right alongside the Justaerin and Horus praised them up so it would seem they adopted this scheme during that time and when they were united with Corax, he instantly disliked them and treated them like dirt, which is why a large number of them deserted to the Warmaster and the rest were bundled off to remote campaigns far away from their primarch (and likely found their way into the Carcaradons like the rest of the terrans he showed so much disdain towards, the feathery dringus).
I dunno about that. Considering how late Corax was found and how the Terran Astartes were indoctrinated too heavily into their savagery and terror tactics, traits that defined the soldiers and rulers Corax had fought his whole life on Deliverance, can you blame Corax for looking at his inherited sons and being disgusted? Horus then used the Raven Guard as he had before Corax's discovery and it further poisoned him to the old ways of his Legion.
Elite yes, but elite in a way that wasn't beneficial to the Legion. They were basically the Night Lords but with less skin wearing and that didn't fit with Corax's philosophies or tactics.
It is important to note that while he disliked the Terran Astartes, he was still disgusted at Horus's callous sacrifice of them at Gate 42. He also didn't immediately send them off to die in the depths of space, they had time together as father and sons which obviously didn't work out. We don't really know much about Corax or his feelings towards the Imperium and it currently sits as a contradiction between his philosophy of being a liberator and peace bringer, yet the Imperium is a bastion of slavery in almost every facet of its existence even during the Crusade-era.
If you really think about it, what is easier? Telling thousands of Astartes their methods of war are wrong and they need to adapt to the new order, or just telling them to go do whatever they do just over there away from you and the Astartes that are a part of the new order? Terrans never melded well with those of their Primarchs homeworlds and there was almost always resentment between the two groups, the Terrans feeling usurped and discarded, and the new breed feeling judged and unworthy. Very few Legions overcame this problem and Corax could have seen this and decided exile was easier than conflict within his forces.
Terminator armour isn't useful for infiltration purposes and Corax had a whole world dedicated to production for just his Legion, Khiavar, and its moon Deliverance.
So he could send off the Terrans to continue the Crusade and keep his Legion fully equipped at the same time.
keepo in mind that the Legions didn't travel in a single huge fleet but seperated into various task forces I imagine corax basicly just didn't hang out with his terrans and didn't reinforce them.
beast_gts wrote: Looking at all the Destroyer units - plastic Destroyers incoming?
If they did that, it'd make a lot of sense (to me) for them to combine it with the bp+chainsword Tactical squad option (Despoilers?) since it'd only require some extra close combat hands/arms to be thrown in. Although, Destroyers can take jump packs, can't they?
beast_gts wrote: Looking at all the Destroyer units - plastic Destroyers incoming?
If they did that, it'd make a lot of sense (to me) for them to combine it with the bp+chainsword Tactical squad option (Despoilers?) since it'd only require some extra close combat hands/arms to be thrown in. Although, Destroyers can take jump packs, can't they?
Yes there's a jump pack option, and if you believe the leaks there's separate unit entries for them now - Mortalis Destroyers on foot, and Destroyer Assault Squad with jump packs. I can see Despoilers becoming an upgrade pack.
I am intrigued to see just how many plastic kits GW thinks the HH range can support. I'm also happy from a selfish POV, since almost all basic HH infantry types are usable for Firstborn units in 40k
beast_gts wrote: So we now have:
UM Nemesis Destroyer Squad - Themed Destroyers
DG Mortus Poisoner Squad - Themed Destroyers
WE Red Hand Destroyer Assault Squad - Themed Destroyers
WS Dark Sons of Death Squad - Themed Destroyers
IW Dominator Cohort - Themed Terminators (Cataphractii)
IF Huscarl Squad - Themed Terminators (Cataphractii)
NL Atramentar Squad - Themed Terminators (Tartaros / Contekar?)
DA Inner Circle Knights Cenobium (Order of the Broken Claws) - New variant
EC Sun Killer Squad - Heavy Weapon / Support Squad
RG Deliverer Squad - Themed Terminators (Cataphractii)
And are waiting for: Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Iron Hands, Thousand Sons, Sons of Horus, Word Bearers, Salamanders & Alpha Legion.
Looking at all the Destroyer units - plastic Destroyers incoming?
I doubt it, they are just really proud, or really desperate, of/to push the FW destroyer kit that they re-tooled a few months ago. FW made like 5 posts about it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Deliverers are cool, but I feel a wee undercosted. Not that this sheet of rules really matters.
Gert wrote: Elite yes, but elite in a way that wasn't beneficial to the Legion. They were basically the Night Lords but with less skin wearing and that didn't fit with Corax's philosophies or tactics.
It is important to note that while he disliked the Terran Astartes, he was still disgusted at Horus's callous sacrifice of them at Gate 42. He also didn't immediately send them off to die in the depths of space, they had time together as father and sons which obviously didn't work out. We don't really know much about Corax or his feelings towards the Imperium and it currently sits as a contradiction between his philosophy of being a liberator and peace bringer, yet the Imperium is a bastion of slavery in almost every facet of its existence even during the Crusade-era.
If you really think about it, what is easier? Telling thousands of Astartes their methods of war are wrong and they need to adapt to the new order, or just telling them to go do whatever they do just over there away from you and the Astartes that are a part of the new order? Terrans never melded well with those of their Primarchs homeworlds and there was almost always resentment between the two groups, the Terrans feeling usurped and discarded, and the new breed feeling judged and unworthy. Very few Legions overcame this problem and Corax could have seen this and decided exile was easier than conflict within his forces.
Wasn't slavery a big issue in the exile of the Terran RG? Corax lead a slave uprising on his homeworld, and the Terran RG had actually taken slaves from a world(s) they brought into compliance?
Corax’s coldness to the Terran contingent of the legion who had grown close with Horus/the Luna Wolves is a factor in why the legion remained loyal during the heresy, culminating in them basically getting wiped out during the Battle of Gate 42 where they fought alongside the Luna Wolves, Iron Warriors and Space Wolves. This basically removed any influence Horus had over the legion. It might be ‘bad parenting’ on a personal level, but in the long run might have been a good thing.
Soundtheory wrote: Wasn't slavery a big issue in the exile of the Terran RG? Corax lead a slave uprising on his homeworld, and the Terran RG had actually taken slaves from a world(s) they brought into compliance?
It was more the tactics the Terrans favoured. They were very similar to that of the Night Lords and echoed the same tactics of the forces that Corax had fought to overthrow on Deliverance. It wasn't so much the slavery but rather the brutal oppression, terror warfare and extreme violence towards pretty much everyone. Corax was very much pro-not killing innocent civilians and the Terrans were the opposite.
MeanGreenStompa wrote: Scattering the Terrans to the four winds did give us the Carcharodons though, which are a definite silver lining.
Boringstuff wrote: I still don't understand why IW didn't get (haven't yet got) a legion specific breacher or destroyer squad - as that would suit them perfectly.
Infantry heavy weapons just doesn't fit with the whole siege-warfare thing they have going IMO.
Because IW are the red-headed stepchild of the Horus Heresy line - they don't even have an unique Praetor.
Boringstuff wrote: I still don't understand why IW didn't get (haven't yet got) a legion specific breacher or destroyer squad - as that would suit them perfectly.
Infantry heavy weapons just doesn't fit with the whole siege-warfare thing they have going IMO.
Because IW are the red-headed stepchild of the Horus Heresy line - they don't even have an unique Praetor.
Even their Primarch is just Dorn crossed with Ferrus but bitter.
Seriously though, maybe with plastics we'll see things get a bit more love.
Boringstuff wrote: I still don't understand why IW didn't get (haven't yet got) a legion specific breacher or destroyer squad - as that would suit them perfectly.
Infantry heavy weapons just doesn't fit with the whole siege-warfare thing they have going IMO.
Because IW are the red-headed stepchild of the Horus Heresy line - they don't even have an unique Praetor.
Honestly I don't much mind. Most special units feel like tiny snowflakes.
Boringstuff wrote: I still don't understand why IW didn't get (haven't yet got) a legion specific breacher or destroyer squad - as that would suit them perfectly.
Infantry heavy weapons just doesn't fit with the whole siege-warfare thing they have going IMO.
Are you talking about Iron Havocs, the Heavy weapons unit trained to pinpoint weaknesses in enemy fortifications and vehicles?
Or the Tyrant Siege, the heavily armoured Terminator breacher unit with missile launchers for that added bit of killing power?
Destroyers don't breach walls, they're much more a last resort weapon and if the IW got a breacher unit they'd just be too similar to both the Imperial Fists and Iron Hands. A siege isn't only about breaching units, you need to have the long-range firepower as well which is where the Iron Havocs and Ironfire Rite of War come in.
Boringstuff wrote: I still don't understand why IW didn't get (haven't yet got) a legion specific breacher or destroyer squad - as that would suit them perfectly.
Infantry heavy weapons just doesn't fit with the whole siege-warfare thing they have going IMO.
Because IW are the red-headed stepchild of the Horus Heresy line - they don't even have an unique Praetor.
\
GW proably figures Iron Warrior fans like being bitter about everyone else getting more attention
Boringstuff wrote: I still don't understand why IW didn't get (haven't yet got) a legion specific breacher or destroyer squad - as that would suit them perfectly.
Infantry heavy weapons just doesn't fit with the whole siege-warfare thing they have going IMO.
Are you talking about Iron Havocs, the Heavy weapons unit trained to pinpoint weaknesses in enemy fortifications and vehicles?
Or the Tyrant Siege, the heavily armoured Terminator breacher unit with missile launchers for that added bit of killing power?
Destroyers don't breach walls, they're much more a last resort weapon and if the IW got a breacher unit they'd just be too similar to both the Imperial Fists and Iron Hands. A siege isn't only about breaching units, you need to have the long-range firepower as well which is where the Iron Havocs and Ironfire Rite of War come in.
Yes, but infantry mounted weapons will always be weaker/shorter ranged than non-infantry weapons. Infantry is also easier to destory in seige scenarios due to the shorter range.
Sure I think the rapier weapons are fitting for seige stuff as they are small enough to be manueaverable, but able to mount heavier weapons.
As for the Tyrants, I just wish they made them carrying some kind of two-handed heavy weapon (i.e. near rapier grade) rather than back-mounted missile launchers (which is hardly unique in 30k/40k).
Sometimes I wonder if using DG rules for the chem flamers would be a better fluff choice then running IW rules.
GaroRobe wrote: Whose idea was it to give the helmetless version a mohawk????
It just looks bizarre. I’m not a fan of the new guy. The first praetor, in the Sons of Horus colours looks awesome to me, but this is a bit of let down.
This is by far, the absolute shittiest pose i've ever seen on a Marine. He's squatting like he's taking a dump, his gun awkwardly at his side, but also pointing his sword straight at the sky, and looking at nothing in particular.
I don’t like either of the head options or the “hands up if you’ve got a sword!” pose. However, if you swap out the head and give him a different right arm, the ready of the mini looks pretty good.
Just like the other guy was clearly designed as a Son of Horus, this fella definitely leans perhaps too heavily into being an Imperial Fist. The mohawk belongs on a White Scar though, the gold detail even looks like a flipped horse head.
I do quite like it, actually, but I can see a headswap being almost mandatory for other people
I'm planning on doing a headswap and possibly a different right arm, because my god that "holding the sword aloft" pose he has right now is awkward looking.
Tim the Biovore wrote: Just like the other guy was clearly designed as a Son of Horus, this fella definitely leans perhaps too heavily into being an Imperial Fist. The mohawk belongs on a White Scar though, the gold detail even looks like a flipped horse head.
I do quite like it, actually, but I can see a headswap being almost mandatory for other people
I see what you’re saying. It makes me wonder if the brief was to design a generic loyalist praetor and a generic traitor praetor.
Not quite sure about the 'First Prime' of Rogal Dorn, but the helmet option is... fine. The beaky helmet seems a little small on this much larger armor, and quite overwhelmed by the crest.
Not seeing a lot of options beyond headswap, and side by side the two are just ok.
Tim the Biovore wrote: Just like the other guy was clearly designed as a Son of Horus, this fella definitely leans perhaps too heavily into being an Imperial Fist. The mohawk belongs on a White Scar though, the gold detail even looks like a flipped horse head.
I do quite like it, actually, but I can see a headswap being almost mandatory for other people
I see what you’re saying. It makes me wonder if the brief was to design a generic loyalist praetor and a generic traitor praetor.
I'd imagine so. This guy has two head options, and both of them have an aquila. Unless you're EC, traitor praetors probably shouldn't have that
Tim the Biovore wrote: Just like the other guy was clearly designed as a Son of Horus, this fella definitely leans perhaps too heavily into being an Imperial Fist. The mohawk belongs on a White Scar though, the gold detail even looks like a flipped horse head.
I do quite like it, actually, but I can see a headswap being almost mandatory for other people
I see what you’re saying. It makes me wonder if the brief was to design a generic loyalist praetor and a generic traitor praetor.
I'd imagine so. This guy has two head options, and both of them have an aquila. Unless you're EC, traitor praetors probably shouldn't have that
Article mentions multiple head options, so we’ve likely not seen the full choice yet.
I find the "I have a sword" pose is a bit more tolerable when his head is positioned to make it look like he's signalling troops rather than waving it at the enemy
Tim the Biovore wrote: Just like the other guy was clearly designed as a Son of Horus, this fella definitely leans perhaps too heavily into being an Imperial Fist. The mohawk belongs on a White Scar though, the gold detail even looks like a flipped horse head.
I do quite like it, actually, but I can see a headswap being almost mandatory for other people
I see what you’re saying. It makes me wonder if the brief was to design a generic loyalist praetor and a generic traitor praetor.
Looking at them side by side, it certainly does feel that way.
Tim the Biovore wrote: I find the "I have a sword" pose is a bit more tolerable when his head is positioned to make it look like he's signalling troops rather than waving it at the enemy
Hm... on this picture his pose seems looking better, when the stone would be under the other leg... A plasma pistol would also look better.
Both would look better, with their head turned to the other side.
GaroRobe wrote: Whose idea was it to give the helmetless version a mohawk????
It just looks bizarre. I’m not a fan of the new guy. The first praetor, in the Sons of Horus colours looks awesome to me, but this is a bit of let down.
I knew the Imperial Fists were famous for their fortifications but, until seeing Fafnir Rann and this new chap, I didn’t know they were also renowned for their magnificent beards.
) is exactly identical to the Sons one with the pointing gun, right down to the helmet.
