£120 seems pretty good to me. It’s significantly larger than the normal Knight chassis and much more posable, and only £15 more. The only downside is that there’s just one option in the kit. It’s also £10 cheaper than the AoS mega Gargant which although also comes with options is about the size of the normal Knight chassis IIRC.
I think I'll wait and get one of the other two since they look cooler, albeit the Lancer seems to have the most relevant weapons.
At least if anyone local picks up a non-Marine faction the Acheron can kill all of it in one go with the Hellstrom template.
Yeah the size difference is significant. That and the posability (which is a pretty big deal for me personally) make me feel it’s easily worth the extra £15, even if it’s just one build.
I think I'll wait and get one of the other two since they look cooler, albeit the Lancer seems to have the most relevant weapons.
At least if anyone local picks up a non-Marine faction the Acheron can kill all of it in one go with the Hellstrom template.
Yeah the size difference is significant. That and the possibility (which is a pretty big deal for me personally) make me feel it’s easily worth the extra £15, even if it’s just one build.
They’re also going to get the Forgeworld Skew.
From a £225 resin kit with no legit way to get a discount, to a £120 plastic kit where you can seek a discount to best suit? Folk mostly see “why I can get this for easily half the original asking price”, not worrying that even with a 15-20% discount it’s still a fair old chunk of cash.
No pictures or even hints yet - "It’s a little too early to say exactly what they’re cooking up".
I'd guess starting with the 2 Age of Darkness Praetors and Mk6 in SoH and IF colors. Say a Sarge, basic bolter guy with auspex, vexilla guy, omniscope guy, heavy bolter guy and guy with autocannon.
I reckon we'll see the MkVI sgt exactly as pictured as well a generic MkIII marine. 1 or both of the praetors is a safe bet. Maybe a contemptor too. Might even see Horus if they're feeling daring!
Compared to the Knight Dominus/Valiant, you get one more large sprue and one medium-size sprue (Dominus/Valiant has three large sprues, Cerastus has four and a medium-size one). Also, you get not one but two pretty nice transfer sheets. Still not cheap of course.
Compared to the Knight Dominus/Valiant, you get one more large sprue and one medium-size sprue (Dominus/Valiant has three large sprues, Cerastus has four and a medium-size one). Also, you get not one but two pretty nice transfer sheets. Still not cheap of course.
Great review! One small question: You mention the arms are swappable. Does that mean the shield hand can be built as either a left or right hand?
Compared to the Knight Dominus/Valiant, you get one more large sprue and one medium-size sprue (Dominus/Valiant has three large sprues, Cerastus has four and a medium-size one). Also, you get not one but two pretty nice transfer sheets. Still not cheap of course.
Great review! One small question: You mention the arms are swappable. Does that mean the shield hand can be built as either a left or right hand?
Olthannon wrote: I think maybe it's just the shield but that lancer knight looks ugly as sin.
You're not the only one. For me it's the back-bent double knee in the leg. Well, that and the fact that the shield is just a frame and really needed a clear acrylic force field component. But mostly the backward bending knees.
On the bright side, maybe it will sell well enough to justify them making the Porphyrion in plastic.
Olthannon wrote: I think maybe it's just the shield but that lancer knight looks ugly as sin.
You're not the only one. For me it's the back-bent double knee in the leg. Well, that and the fact that the shield is just a frame and really needed a clear acrylic force field component. But mostly the backward bending knees.
On the bright side, maybe it will sell well enough to justify them making the Porphyrion in plastic.
I'll have to say it looks much better than the normal Knight, which I always found pretty ugly and badly posed.
The FW Knights...well, they are no beauties as well, but still better than GWs, bar the Chaos Knight which might be the best looking one.
But I also feel they should have done something more interesting with the shield on that Lancer.
lord_blackfang wrote: Backward bending knees? Have you people ever seen a dog? Cat? Horse?
Have you? All mammal knees bend the normal way. The backwards part is the ankle. Also, the ankle and knee aren't right next to each like they are in the Cerastus.
Olthannon wrote: I think maybe it's just the shield but that lancer knight looks ugly as sin.
On the bright side, maybe it will sell well enough to justify them making the Porphyrion in plastic.
Obviously, we all have different tastes in models, but is the Porphyrion that much better of a model? It's so chunky and impractical looking. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if that was something planned for down the road.
lord_blackfang wrote: Backward bending knees? Have you people ever seen a dog? Cat? Horse?
Have you? All mammal knees bend the normal way. The backwards part is the ankle. Also, the ankle and knee aren't right next to each like they are in the Cerastus.
...so, your objection is that the tibia-fibula-equivalent is too short, essentially? Because that seems to fall somewhat short of 'backwards bending knee', tbh.
lord_blackfang wrote: Backward bending knees? Have you people ever seen a dog? Cat? Horse?
Have you? All mammal knees bend the normal way. The backwards part is the ankle. Also, the ankle and knee aren't right next to each like they are in the Cerastus.
...so, your objection is that the tibia-fibula-equivalent is too short, essentially? Because that seems to fall somewhat short of 'backwards bending knee', tbh.
My objection is to the way the legs look, not any anatomical inaccuracy. I also don't care if you disagree with the phrase "backward bending knees". I used it deliberately for the connotation and will continue to do so.
You are of course free to not like it, but it's obviously a joint layout analogous to digitigrade animal legs, which is a sensible reference for a knight known for speed.
lord_blackfang wrote: You are of course free to not like it, but it's obviously a joint layout analogous to digitigrade animal legs, which is a sensible reference for a knight known for speed.
which means it isn't a backwards bending knee, but rather an elevated ankle.
in fact given the simplified nature of the "foot", it's actually closer to an unguligrade leg form. close to some of the Perissodactyl leg bauplans.
Compared to the Knight Dominus/Valiant, you get one more large sprue and one medium-size sprue (Dominus/Valiant has three large sprues, Cerastus has four and a medium-size one). Also, you get not one but two pretty nice transfer sheets. Still not cheap of course.
Great review! One small question: You mention the arms are swappable. Does that mean the shield hand can be built as either a left or right hand?
Yes, the hands can be turned by 180 degrees as the "thumb" sits in the middle of the hand.
Olthannon wrote: I think maybe it's just the shield but that lancer knight looks ugly as sin.
On the bright side, maybe it will sell well enough to justify them making the Porphyrion in plastic.
Obviously, we all have different tastes in models, but is the Porphyrion that much better of a model? It's so chunky and impractical looking. That being said, it wouldn't surprise me if that was something planned for down the road.
The Porphyrion appeals to people who don't see chunky and impractical but massive and indestructible when they look at the model. That's my take anyway. Do you prefer the look of skinny Mk.VI Marines or would you rather have those big slabs of armor we call Terminators? Same thing when it comes down to it.
Disregarding height and just looking at proportions, the normal Knight is fairly balanced. The Lancer looks lanky. The Porphyrion looks chunky. There's one for every taste.
Also it’s not that large a step from Porphyrion to Warhound, which is something that people have been wanting since armourcast discontinued the original plastic warhound.
Mr_Rose wrote: Also it’s not that large a step from Porphyrion to Warhound, which is something that people have been wanting since armourcast discontinued the original plastic warhound.
The Armorcast Warhound was a resin model, not plastic.
And TBH I don't understand this fascination with plastic kits. Resin has better detail and is far easier to build, if anything GW needs to be going the other direction and moving plastic kits to resin.
And TBH I don't understand this fascination with plastic kits. Resin has better detail and is far easier to build, if anything GW needs to be going the other direction and moving plastic kits to resin.
Plastic kits are cheaper, lighter, more robust, and more accessible.
It’s a hard combo to beat, especially when “more detailed” is so subjective in value and “easier to build” is both debatable and extremely variable between resin kits.
And TBH I don't understand this fascination with plastic kits. Resin has better detail and is far easier to build, if anything GW needs to be going the other direction and moving plastic kits to resin.
Plastic kits are cheaper, lighter, more robust, and more accessible.
It’s a hard combo to beat, especially when “more detailed” is so subjective in value and “easier to build” is both debatable and extremely variable between resin kits.
I’d also argue about resin being easier to build.
Give me my plastic and poly cement and let me be. I don’t want to be mucking about with bathing, pinning and superglue, or finding out Far Too Late that one part is on wonky and now wonky it shall forever be.
And TBH I don't understand this fascination with plastic kits. Resin has better detail and is far easier to build, if anything GW needs to be going the other direction and moving plastic kits to resin.
Plastic kits are cheaper, lighter, more robust, and more accessible.
It’s a hard combo to beat, especially when “more detailed” is so subjective in value and “easier to build” is both debatable and extremely variable between resin kits.
I’d also argue about resin being easier to build.
Give me my plastic and poly cement and let me be. I don’t want to be mucking about with bathing, pinning and superglue, or finding out Far Too Late that one part is on wonky and now wonky it shall forever be.
The only point towards resin building being easier I can see is because you can break apart super glue again. So if you glued on something wrong it can still be saved which is not the case with plastic cement. But then again you can also just use super glue with plastic kits.
Other than that I see so reason why resin would be easier than plastic. Faster maybe since it will have way less parts but not easier
It will probably be resin upgrade parts to the existing kit. I want to know if they only intend to upgrade the Baneblade guns for Solar Auxilia or if all the variants in the kit will have weapon upgrades as well.
lord_blackfang wrote: From that pic I'm guessing more than half the sprues would need replacing... practically everything but the main track housing and underside.
So hopefully it would be a complete re-do of the kit. With tracks that assemble as easily as the Rogal Dorn’s.
Kanluwen wrote: Baneblade kit is a bit long in the tooth, they could potentially rejig it to add SA components.
Baneblade is still a solid kit, especially with the shadowsword upgrades. Stomps is only a year younger, but never got extra sprues like the baneblade did and could really use them. If they did redo the Baneblade, I would expect the massive belly plate to go away, and people would have issues like the Dorn.
lord_blackfang wrote: From that pic I'm guessing more than half the sprues would need replacing... practically everything but the main track housing and underside.
No different than the Felblade or Stormhammer which are both hybrid kits.
Don’t forget there were originally two kits sharing the same lower hull with different upper designs (turret and assault gun), so they could use the existing hull sprue with a different turret and upper hull sprue.
Whatever the edited image is, its not the 8mm version. If you look at the sensors on the turret the edited version has grooves around them while the epic model has a flat panel there. Also all the other signs like the perfectly drilled barrel, the fact the co-axial gun has a hole at all, the light thingies? on the hatch that have indents,...
Matrindur wrote: Other than that I see so reason why resin would be easier than plastic. Faster maybe since it will have way less parts but not easier
Fewer parts also makes it easier. Take a gun barrel, for example. A plastic kit can't do undercuts and either has to have a solid front to the barrel (looks like and only works on small guns) or split the barrel into halves. Those halves need to be glued together very carefully if you want to avoid alignment issues and you're almost always going to have to do sanding and/or gap filling on the joint to hide it. A resin gun barrel, on the other hand, can be cast as a single piece and requires none of that. Cut the part off the "sprue", attach it to the model, no other work required.
Matrindur wrote: Other than that I see so reason why resin would be easier than plastic. Faster maybe since it will have way less parts but not easier
Fewer parts also makes it easier. Take a gun barrel, for example. A plastic kit can't do undercuts and either has to have a solid front to the barrel (looks like and only works on small guns) or split the barrel into halves. Those halves need to be glued together very carefully if you want to avoid alignment issues and you're almost always going to have to do sanding and/or gap filling on the joint to hide it. A resin gun barrel, on the other hand, can be cast as a single piece and requires none of that. Cut the part off the "sprue", attach it to the model, no other work required.
Unless it’s wonky, or there’s mold slip, or air bubbles.
Actual building experience aside, the fact that resin stuff is like twice the price of plastic equivalents in a lot of places would go a long way to making up for increased difficulty in building (which I don’t find anyway, plastic is much better to build in my experience).
TBH the Malcador is probably the only FW tank I'd want to see in plastic. The track alignment problems on the resin kit are awful, it's almost impossible to build one correctly since if the resin pieces shrink even slightly more or less than intended as they cure the plastic track links won't fit. Love the design but building one of them was more than enough.
Obviously I have no way to judge the veracity of this and it’s about as unverified as rumours can get but a rumour’s a rumour; this is from B&C in the thread about this Baneblade there:
I believe it is, in fact, a new plastic kit. My reasoning is that I have been assured by someone I trust that I should not buy any more Malcadors because the plastic kit is coming late this year/early next year. It stands to reason there could be a whole swathe of Solar Auxilia plastic tanks, or maybe a drip feed...
Plastic Malcador I can believe, it's still comparable to the Spartan line in size and the existing resin kit is one of the notoriously badly designed FW plastic/resin hybrid kits. It's not as bad as the Storm Eagle and its near-100% scrap rate but it uses a plastic track sprue that GW doesn't use for anything else anymore, adding to the reasons to phase it out.
Plastic SA Baneblade I'm a bit more skeptical about. I just don't see it adding much over the existing Baneblade kit, and remaking a tank that size would be a pretty big leap of faith for GW given the lack of any sales numbers on a new SA line. I think it would be much more likely to be a center hull and sponson upgrade kit like the Stormhammer, letting GW give the option to the few purists who really want it without having to worry about all the people who just throw a new coat of paint on the existing guard version.
ThePaintingOwl wrote: Plastic Malcador I can believe, it's still comparable to the Spartan line in size and the existing resin kit is one of the notoriously badly designed FW plastic/resin hybrid kits. It's not as bad as the Storm Eagle and its near-100% scrap rate but it uses a plastic track sprue that GW doesn't use for anything else anymore, adding to the reasons to phase it out.
I've heard other people mention that they've had trouble building the Malcador, it's strange to me because I've built multiple Malcadors and haven't had a problem.
As much as I love the tank I can think of plenty of other kits that I'd rather have in plastic, but maybe that's just me.
Well besides Malcador (that will swarm the table) I really hope for Carnodon battle tanks as "light" tank option. And we may see as Carnodon is based on Aurox transport.
If you can go for full autocannon loadout then better.
Sabre squadron, two to a box, would go great, I think.
But yeah, assuming the mystery army from the roadmap is in fact plastic Solar Auxilia as widely speculated, Carnodons and Aurox would be the thing to have.
Mr_Rose wrote: Sabre squadron, two to a box, would go great, I think.
But yeah, assuming the mystery army from the roadmap is in fact plastic Solar Auxilia as widely speculated, Carnodons and Aurox would be the thing to have.
Infantry, rapiers, malcadors and aurox.
Malcador could also do double duty for the transport variant.
The Aurox and Carnodon have the Sabre and Arquitor problem of being pretty new kits, so are unlikely to get a plastic release ahead of other stuff like the Malcador.
Then again they made the AT Dire Wolf plastic after like a year.
Plastic Malcador and Dracosans would be ace, I have them in resin and while the Dracosan was something of an improvement over the stock Malcador, not the most pleasant of build experiences.
Is the vanilla Malcador with battle cannon and Demolisher cannon still a thing in 30k? Or has it been banished to the realms of epic 30k?
As it is, we still are waiting on plastic breachers and ASSAULT MARINES.
But hey, Solar Aux getting moved to plastic would be huge. Not only would it be a really cool way to have a new kind of astra militarum model to convert/use, some of those tanks that the solar aux have are super cool and would be great in plastic.
drbored wrote: As it is, we still are waiting on plastic breachers and ASSAULT MARINES.
But hey, Solar Aux getting moved to plastic would be huge. Not only would it be a really cool way to have a new kind of astra militarum model to convert/use, some of those tanks that the solar aux have are super cool and would be great in plastic.
Plus they’d probably get an assault oriented kit or two, so maybe marines could punch some chain swords.
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I've heard other people mention that they've had trouble building the Malcador, it's strange to me because I've built multiple Malcadors and haven't had a problem.
I think it's one of those random luck things. Like a lot of the other resin/plastic hybrid kits it's a design where it goes together fine if all of the parts are cast perfectly but if you get uneven shrinking during the curing process you no longer have the precise alignment required to make it fit. The plastic track segments no longer line up perfectly to curve around the wheels and meet up at the end of the resin track sections. And it really doesn't take much, if that plastic track segment lands 1mm too short instead of right on the tangent line along the wheel the next plastic track segment is pushed outward instead of being able to follow along the curve of the wheel. And so you end up having to hack apart the resin pieces, carefully put just enough gap between plastic segments to make it curve without showing too much of a visible gap, etc.
If you compare the Malcador to better-designed kits like the Stormhammer you see a lot more tolerance for fit issues. Joints are hidden better, you have overlapping parts fitting into slots instead of needing precise edge to edge alignment, etc.
Ya I have a malcador that I haven't finished building because the tracks just wont line up and i haven't found a good solution, so if we are getting a plastic kit that would be great.
the baneblade just doesn't seem different enough to justify a new kit so i'm pretty skeptical on that one.
the kit I really want but likely wont get is a plastic macharus
Speaking of Malchador. Have we heard any rumours of rules for the blackshields or malchador's lads, the pre-greyknights/inquisitional stuff. Fun to play for seige of terra style skirmishes.
cody.d. wrote: Speaking of Malchador. Have we heard any rumours of rules for the blackshields or malchador's lads, the pre-greyknights/inquisitional stuff. Fun to play for seige of terra style skirmishes.
We have not. I suspect GW will approach HH2.0 like 1.0 with annual campaign books, meaning that stuff is probably a few years down the line.
It's funny - so much is said about the supposed lack of support for HH, but speaking as someone with a job and other commitments, I welcome the less frenetic release schedule. I can't build and paint stuff at anything like the rate that GW pushes it out - I still haven't finished the SoH army I started when Age of Darkness was released. And with a rapid release schedule comes rapid changes to the rules and units, often resulting in stuff you've built (or are still building) becoming obsolete. While it would have course have made a lot more sense to have included some more basic HH units (like assault troops) in the first few months, I don't think it's terrible to have a game that gives you time to breathe.
I'm still hoping for Custodes being ported to plastic instead of Solar Auxila, but there would be a second chance when the 10th Ed Custodes Codex comes out next year I suppose.
I mean, absolutely, everything but something we already got in plastic that works just fine doesn't need to become plastic.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
lord_blackfang wrote: Looks like everyone is wishlisting only for tanks so I guess GW was right in not developing Marine infantry...
Well marines have marine infantry as their core, as their identity.
That is less the case with Solar Auxilia, which is a combined army. Also you require like 3 infantry kits to fill the whole roster: Infantry, command and elites. There done. The tanks otoh Aurox 35 pts transport resin chunks for the price absurd, etc.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arbitrator wrote: The Aurox and Carnodon have the Sabre and Arquitor problem of being pretty new kits, so are unlikely to get a plastic release ahead of other stuff like the Malcador.
Then again they made the AT Dire Wolf plastic after like a year.
i honestly think the aurox will enter plastic quite early , because it doesn't sell in resin. Which is understandable, it's a 35 pts model with a 100 $ pricetag that is in essence a worse rhino.
Otoh, maybee they skipp it and just throw out the malcador and the dracosan, the bigger transport.
Andykp wrote: You ain’t wrong, I hope they don’t replace the old baneblade with this one, I dislike the overly decorative look.
That look is 90% paint. If you paint the SA kits in subdued 40k guard style schemes instead of bright colors and gold trim everywhere they don't look decorative at all. The actual sculpted trim is no more than the average 40k tank. For example:
Why is bringing something back into production a "swing and a miss"?
In. Resin.
You can pretend that it simply doesn't exist if you like, that way you have lost nothing.
You're welcome
You can be happy that it's just back, but don't expect me to be pleased just because they decided to start producing it in resin again. This would have been a perfect plastic kit to bring in for GSC, Necromunda, or even just as a scenery piece for KT.
Since LI is delayed I'm sure they also had to delay some LI reveals and now they have to fill them with something else. The question was just if they move up some HH reveals or if they just spin some out of nothing/leave some weeks without a reveal. This seems to be the second case to me.
Matrindur wrote: Since LI is delayed I'm sure they also had to delay some LI reveals and now they have to fill them with something else. The question was just if they move up some HH reveals or if they just spin some out of nothing/leave some weeks without a reveal. This seems to be the second case to me.
Doubtful. Heresy Thursday existed long before LI was even leaked.
Frankly, LI getting less noise is a good thing. It's been sucking the oxygen out of the room.
I'd guess that this being 'retooled' means it's been done with an updated Epic-scale version in mind... possibly in plastic. Currently it's the only confirmed Solar Auxillia transport in that scale.
Yes Kan. It was resin before, and it still is now. It's a very simple concept.
*** You're being negative about a model that has been bought back into production. There is literally no downside.
I'm being negative about the fact that they're doing a hype article about them simply reissuing a resin kit.
This isn't new to me. This isn't exciting to me. I get that maybe some people are super-stoked to be able to throw money at FW for it, but this isn't even a HH piece! It was a piece intro'd way back when, intended to be a thematic piece for officers/Inquisitors to ride around in.
It was the perfect opportunity to do some gap-filling for Newcromunda, GSC, or Guard for a "small, flying transport". And that opportunity was instead squandered on simply redoing the resin kit.
Matrindur wrote: Since LI is delayed I'm sure they also had to delay some LI reveals and now they have to fill them with something else. The question was just if they move up some HH reveals or if they just spin some out of nothing/leave some weeks without a reveal. This seems to be the second case to me.
Doubtful. Heresy Thursday existed long before LI was even leaked.
Frankly, LI getting less noise is a good thing. It's been sucking the oxygen out of the room.
I might be misunderstanding you but that has nothing to do with what I said?
They have a plan what they want to reveal each week and now that some LI reveals can't happen anymore as its delayed they either have to fill those holes with something else or leave them blank.
Lets say of the five next reveals three would have been HH and two LI, now they have to fill the two with something else and the Arvus today seems like such a filler article to me. Of course they didn't just start production up again for this but if they didn't need to fill those slots it might not have gotten a dedicated article but only a mention in a Friday Forgeworld preorder article that its available again
I'm with Kan here. Maybe the Lighter eventually shows up in plastic, but GW trumpeting the return in resin means that will be a while yet.
It's basically the exact same as when FW re-tooled some of the remaining resin tanks to take the plastic sponson sprue. Sure, it's not bad news... but it means plastic Arquitors (which many of us were hoping wouldn't be that far away due to the extra tracks on the Sicaran sprue) are probably years away yet.
It’s an appealing model - nice to see something that’s not bristling with weapons. But I don’t do FW vehicles. How has it been refreshed (apart from a new paint job)?
One would hope for a more assembly friendly retool of the model, the FW designers know that most of their flyers are utter pieces of garbage when it comes to assembly.
Snord wrote: It’s an appealing model - nice to see something that’s not bristling with weapons. But I don’t do FW vehicles. How has it been refreshed (apart from a new paint job)?
before it used 40K logos and markings on the box/bags. now it's Horus Heresy.
only half joking, because that's probably it. it was originally marketed as a 40K vehicle to go with the imperial armor books, they're now going to be marketing it primarily as a HH unit.
I'm not seeing this announcement as anything else than further evidence pointing to the possibility that Solax Auxilia will be the mystery army mentioned in the roadmap. Kinda obvious, first we get the new Baneblade pict and now this new colourscheme, which just happens to match the SA colourscheme from Legions Imperialis
But I'm still going to buy an Arvus when it re-releases, its a classic model. I'd prefer it to be plastic but whatever. If you dont want to buy one, that's cool
Kanluwen wrote: And that opportunity was instead squandered on simply redoing the resin kit.
You mean not squandered on a plastic kit. After discontinuing a bunch of kits in favor of lower-quality plastic copies it's good to see GW finally just repairing the molds and putting the original back into production.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrookM wrote: One would hope for a more assembly friendly retool of the model, the FW designers know that most of their flyers are utter pieces of garbage when it comes to assembly.
Really? It's been a while since I've built one but all of mine, Arvus included, were incredibly easy to build. The resin/plastic hybrids like the Storm Eagle were notoriously bad but the all-resin stuff is easy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Snord wrote: It’s an appealing model - nice to see something that’s not bristling with weapons. But I don’t do FW vehicles. How has it been refreshed (apart from a new paint job)?
My guess is the "refresh" is a mold repair. It went OOP for a while without any last chance to buy notice so there was probably an issue with the molds and/or master model. Repair the master, rebuild the molds, maybe do some tweaks to how the parts are split up or arranged on the sprue so it casts better, etc.
Kanluwen wrote: And that opportunity was instead squandered on simply redoing the resin kit.
You mean not squandered on a plastic kit. After discontinuing a bunch of kits in favor of lower-quality plastic copies it's good to see GW finally just repairing the molds and putting the original back into production.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrookM wrote: One would hope for a more assembly friendly retool of the model, the FW designers know that most of their flyers are utter pieces of garbage when it comes to assembly.
Really? It's been a while since I've built one but all of mine, Arvus included, were incredibly easy to build. The resin/plastic hybrids like the Storm Eagle were notoriously bad but the all-resin stuff is easy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Snord wrote: It’s an appealing model - nice to see something that’s not bristling with weapons. But I don’t do FW vehicles. How has it been refreshed (apart from a new paint job)?
My guess is the "refresh" is a mold repair. It went OOP for a while without any last chance to buy notice so there was probably an issue with the molds and/or master model. Repair the master, rebuild the molds, maybe do some tweaks to how the parts are split up or arranged on the sprue so it casts better, etc.
Agreed with both your points RE good to see resin molds being refreshed rather than downgraded( ) to plastic, and FW resin flyers not being difficult to build.
I think that the Arvus has been upgraded rather than a simple refresh, the spoilered image posted by xttz shows some significant differences
Undead_Love-Machine wrote: I think that the Arvus has been upgraded rather than a simple refresh, the spoilered image posted by xttz shows some significant differences
That's just photo quality and painting. The rivet holes are on the old model as well, they're just less prominently shaded on the old image and the poor photo quality blurs them out. The only difference I can see between the two is that the cylinder with the lens bit on it is a bit thicker and less prone to breaking than the one on the old kit.
Edit: and looking back at the article image the wing lights may be slightly larger.
I'd guess that this being 'retooled' means it's been done with an updated Epic-scale version in mind... possibly in plastic. Currently it's the only confirmed Solar Auxillia transport in that scale.
My understanding is they start with the 28mm design before doing the 8mm version, so... This.
How old was the Arvus kit? Vraks? Anphelion? Could be that it was redone in CAD to match the more recent models.
Staying in resin is fine, there are a lot of other kits that need the upgrade to plastic and commisurate reduction in weight and price first. The Xiphon and Lightning would be good starts for fliers.
Anphelion IIRC. It was in the book, don't know if it was out before that.
Could be that it was redone in CAD to match the more recent models.
Highly doubt it. The images look virtually identical to the original kit so there would be no real point to redoing it via CAD model, just remake the molds from the physical master. And TBH the whole "do it at 28mm first" thing is highly overstated. You really can't translate between scales like that. An Epic-scale model is not just a 28mm model scaled down, almost the entire model has to be rebuilt. At best you're reusing a couple hours worth of work for a very rough sketch of the basic shapes. The only real benefit would be the ability to see how the 28mm version looks so you don't end up repeating the classic Epic models and making stuff that looks ok at Epic scale but awful at 28mm.
HudsonD wrote: The images are not the same, you can see the difference in detail placement.
Where do you see a difference? Looking at the side by side images xttz posted the only difference, after accounting for differences in camera angle and photo quality, is that the extended rod bit with a lens on it is a bit thicker on the new kit (probably to keep it from breaking). And the only difference I can find in the full-size picture, other than the rear landing gear being attached in the wrong spot, is that maybe the wing lights are slightly larger.
HudsonD wrote: The images are not the same, you can see the difference in detail placement.
Where do you see a difference? Looking at the side by side images xttz posted the only difference, after accounting for differences in camera angle and photo quality, is that the extended rod bit with a lens on it is a bit thicker on the new kit (probably to keep it from breaking). And the only difference I can find in the full-size picture, other than the rear landing gear being attached in the wrong spot, is that maybe the wing lights are slightly larger.
Snord wrote: How has it been refreshed (apart from a new paint job)?
No clue
I found this. Looks like they upgraded it to HD
Spoiler:
That's pretty clearly a different sculpt. For starters, the old one didn't have indented rivets... but everything else is different too (the casing of the gun is heftier and now has some sort of cabling, the sensors suite is different, thicker and more detailed... the list goes on, just on that snippet). Same main design, different sculpt.
Albertorius wrote: For starters, the old one didn't have indented rivets...
Yes it did. They just aren't shaded in the comparison image and the poor photo quality isn't showing them. You can see a better image of the old model here with the rivets more clearly visible:
but everything else is different too. Same main design, different sculpt.
It really isn't. I've been looking at them side by side and there is hardly any difference. What exactly do you think has changed?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albertorius wrote: (the casing of the gun is heftier and now has some sort of cabling
What "gun" is that? The Arvus has no weapons of any kind, on either version.
the sensors suite is different, thicker and more detailed...
Look closer. The painting style is different but if you look closely at the details there's no difference except that one minor bit.
There are lots of difference if you bother to look at it.
Here are a few :
You can see the angles and lengths of the panel lines are completely different. The detailing is different, I could go on and on. It's pretty obvious.
Albertorius wrote: For starters, the old one didn't have indented rivets...
Yes it did. They just aren't shaded in the comparison image and the poor photo quality isn't showing them. You can see a better image of the old model here with the rivets more clearly visible:
Hm... yeah, you seem to be right on that one. The side panels do have indented rivets.
but everything else is different too. Same main design, different sculpt.
It really isn't. I've been looking at them side by side and there is hardly any difference. What exactly do you think has changed?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albertorius wrote: (the casing of the gun is heftier and now has some sort of cabling
What "gun" is that? The Arvus has no weapons of any kind, on either version.
You got me there. The "whatever thingie" that's under the nose. It has some sort of cabling that seems to not exist in the old sculpt.
the sensors suite is different, thicker and more detailed...
Look closer. The painting style is different but if you look closely at the details there's no difference except that one minor bit.
The main sensor boom still looks thicker to me.
And yeah, there's also some dimensional rejiggering. But you're right on the indented rivets.
Albertorius wrote: You got me there. The "whatever thingie" that's under the nose. It has some sort of cabling that seems to not exist in the old sculpt.
That half-circle cable hanging down from it? That's on the original version, it's just not visible in that specific image. Here's one that shows it (second from the top):
The main sensor boom still looks thicker to me.
That's the bit I think is different. It was a break-prone part on the original and it wouldn't have taken much work to clip it and replace it with a thicker rod. And TBH if the master model being damaged was the reason it went OOP for a while I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the broken pieces GW had to repair. But that's a pretty tiny change best explained by reworking the existing master and/or molds, not a whole new resculpt of the kit.
It does actually state in the article that this is a retooled model, so there will be some small changes but I suspect the way it goes together, gate positions etc, will also be different.
Yes, all of this is just the angle and the picture of the new model being squished horizontally a bit to fit the page dimensions. All of the rivet holes are there on the old model, all of the panel lines follow the same path.
Albertorius wrote: For starters, the old one didn't have indented rivets...
Yes it did. They just aren't shaded in the comparison image and the poor photo quality isn't showing them. You can see a better image of the old model here with the rivets more clearly visible:
The old one had indented rivets, but it looks like they've redone them. Some of the rivets are in slightly different places, and by my eye the rivets on the new one look deeper and more pronounced (maybe they're just painted darker, but I reckon they are actually deeper).
For example, the 3 rivets on the panel above the "TAXI FARE" writing in the pic you posted, they don't exist on the new sculpt.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: For example, the 3 rivets on the panel above the "TAXI FARE" writing in the pic you posted, they don't exist on the new sculpt.
You got me on that one, they're faint as hell on the old model but they do exist and not all of them ended up on the new one. I wonder if it's just a case of the old ones being so shallow that after a couple generations of remaking molds they weren't casting properly and GW re-cutting the holes on the master. Given how exactly everything else lines up I'm still not believing it's a whole new CAD rebuild of everything but there is at least that change.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I imagine they needed to remake the masters so decided to tweak the CAD a bit at the same time.
Let’s hope the new ones don’t come covered in 3D printing lines like their AI equivalents, lol.
Doubt it. The Arvus is from long before the era of CAD and 3d printing. Unless they completely remade the model from zero (unlikely given how close the details match) it won't be touching digital at all.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I imagine they needed to remake the masters so decided to tweak the CAD a bit at the same time.
Let’s hope the new ones don’t come covered in 3D printing lines like their AI equivalents, lol.
Doubt it. The Arvus is from long before the era of CAD and 3d printing. Unless they completely remade the model from zero (unlikely given how close the details match) it won't be touching digital at all.
They already made a digital version for Aeronautica Imperialis. This new version will be a digital design based on that. There's really no point updating or repairing older physical masters at his point; the work of producing a refreshed digital design is not that great, especially when some of the assets already exist for the smaller scale version. Creating a digital version means that new masters and moulds can be produced in perpetuity, so the quality of the production version will be easier to maintain, and it also opens up the possibility of plastic in future, as has just happened with the Knight Lancer, so it's a worthwhile investment, even if the model is deliberately almost identical to the previous version.
Greenfield wrote: They already made a digital version for Aeronautica Imperialis.
Like I said earlier, there whole "we already have a model" thing is highly overstated. There's virtually zero overlap between models for 28mm and models for Epic scale. Moving between scales requires rebuilding 99% of the model, features that look good at Epic scale will be comically oversized at 28mm and features that look good at 28mm will be too small to manufacture at Epic scale.
and it also opens up the possibility of plastic in future
It doesn't. Making a good plastic kit takes way more than taking a 3d printing file and saying "make some molds". You have to completely rework the model to split it into sections that work for injection molds, having that source file saves very little time. And if you're going to put in all the work of preparing for plastic why bother with the resin kit at all? Replacing the resin kit only makes sense if you can do it with some quick repairs to the original master model and want to get it back on the market as cheaply as possible.
Yeah, designing a model for resin is very different from plastic. A lot of geometry and detail needs to be altered in order to port a model designed for one medium to the other. People have a perception that having a model sculpted for one means you have like 80% of what you need for the other, but its really more like 30-40%. The hard part isnt sculpting the model, its turning it into a product and optimizing it for production and assembly.
Greenfield wrote: They already made a digital version for Aeronautica Imperialis.
Like I said earlier, there whole "we already have a model" thing is highly overstated. There's virtually zero overlap between models for 28mm and models for Epic scale. Moving between scales requires rebuilding 99% of the model, features that look good at Epic scale will be comically oversized at 28mm and features that look good at 28mm will be too small to manufacture at Epic scale.
I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I do quite a bit of CAD related to my work, and I'd MUCH rather start with an existing 3D model than have to build a new one from scratch. So long as the original model wasn't made by a complete fool, tweaking dimensions and adding extra details on existing parts is way quicker than doing it from nothing. Hell, even if the original CAD was made by a complete fool, I'd still import it as a static object to draw over and it takes out a lot of the brain work of "what processes do I need to do to make this geometry..." which means the whole process goes a lot faster.
Also, we're talking about an Arvus here, even if CAD didn't exist before, it's got to be one of the easiest models I could imagine to CAD up. No CAD model is trivial... but if I were to describe any CAD model as trivial, it'd probably be CAD of an Arvus
Greenfield wrote: They already made a digital version for Aeronautica Imperialis.
Like I said earlier, there whole "we already have a model" thing is highly overstated. There's virtually zero overlap between models for 28mm and models for Epic scale. Moving between scales requires rebuilding 99% of the model, features that look good at Epic scale will be comically oversized at 28mm and features that look good at 28mm will be too small to manufacture at Epic scale.
and it also opens up the possibility of plastic in future
It doesn't. Making a good plastic kit takes way more than taking a 3d printing file and saying "make some molds". You have to completely rework the model to split it into sections that work for injection molds, having that source file saves very little time. And if you're going to put in all the work of preparing for plastic why bother with the resin kit at all? Replacing the resin kit only makes sense if you can do it with some quick repairs to the original master model and want to get it back on the market as cheaply as possible.
It is pretty likely that GW wouldn't expect to sell enough full size Arvus flyers to justify injection mold tooling for it. At the end of the day it's still a niche unit in a relatively niche army.
However given that we know the Arvus is going to be a staple transport unit in Legions Imperialis, it's likely that the existing resin Aeronautica model wouldn't be able to keep up with the production volumes customers would require. GW recently stated that their first step to creating an Epic scale model is to design it in CAD for 28mm scale.
Redesigning the model in CAD is worthwhile because:
a) They can produce a new digital design that addresses any previous QA issues with the first FW model
b) That also makes it easier to maintain molds in future; just print out a new master model
c) They can now use that same design to mass produce a consistent plastic Arvus sprue for Epic scale
d) It's now a digital asset that can be used for artwork
lord_blackfang wrote: Does Warcry terrain that they put into one FOMO box with a tiny print run make 500k back?
I think the terrain sprues come out of China?
But generally, yeah, it clearly doesn't cost GW a huge amount to cut moulds these days, it wouldn't surprise me if the limitation is on the free time for the injection moulding machines rather than cutting sprues.
lord_blackfang wrote: Does Warcry terrain that they put into one FOMO box with a tiny print run make 500k back?
I think the terrain sprues come out of China?
But generally, yeah, it clearly doesn't cost GW a huge amount to cut moulds these days, it wouldn't surprise me if the limitation is on the free time for the injection moulding machines rather than cutting sprues.
Injection molds are still relatively expensive to produce. What confuses matters is that in recent years GW started using aluminium injection molds for limited time products like store anniversary characters. These are much cheaper than steel but also give a fraction of the lifetime use (e.g. 10,000 casts rather than 100,000).
You're right in that time required by both injection molding and the toolmakers will be a factor though. Not only are GW products expected to give a minimum level of profit (£100k was mentioned as an example on the Painting Phase), but they'll be weighed against other items competing for the same resources. If GW forecast an full size Arvus flyer to make £100k profit but other Solar Auxillia vehicle kits would make £150k+, then that's an easy decision for them.
Greenfield wrote: They already made a digital version for Aeronautica Imperialis.
Like I said earlier, there whole "we already have a model" thing is highly overstated. There's virtually zero overlap between models for 28mm and models for Epic scale. Moving between scales requires rebuilding 99% of the model, features that look good at Epic scale will be comically oversized at 28mm and features that look good at 28mm will be too small to manufacture at Epic scale.
I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I do quite a bit of CAD related to my work, and I'd MUCH rather start with an existing 3D model than have to build a new one from scratch. So long as the original model wasn't made by a complete fool, tweaking dimensions and adding extra details on existing parts is way quicker than doing it from nothing. Hell, even if the original CAD was made by a complete fool, I'd still import it as a static object to draw over and it takes out a lot of the brain work of "what processes do I need to do to make this geometry..." which means the whole process goes a lot faster.
Also, we're talking about an Arvus here, even if CAD didn't exist before, it's got to be one of the easiest models I could imagine to CAD up. No CAD model is trivial... but if I were to describe any CAD model as trivial, it'd probably be CAD of an Arvus
Do you do anything relating to plastic injection molding? Because it's a good bit more complicated than tweaking dimensions and adding details. There's wall thicknesses, draft angles, filled joints, etc etc etc that need to be taken into account.
lord_blackfang wrote: Does Warcry terrain that they put into one FOMO box with a tiny print run make 500k back?
I think the terrain sprues come out of China?
But generally, yeah, it clearly doesn't cost GW a huge amount to cut moulds these days, it wouldn't surprise me if the limitation is on the free time for the injection moulding machines rather than cutting sprues.
Injection molds are still relatively expensive to produce. What confuses matters is that in recent years GW started using aluminium injection molds for limited time products like store anniversary characters. These are much cheaper than steel but also give a fraction of the lifetime use (e.g. 10,000 casts rather than 100,000).
I guess when I said "huge amount... these days" I was comparing to the old estimates we used to have when they were outsourcing.
It'd be interesting to know what GW effectively pays for creating a plastic mould versus a resin one, while I'm sure it's not cheap I believe most of the estimates we have are from back when CNC machining was far less common than it is today and machining time was far more expensive. Also I imagine swapping from pantographing to digital models has made the machining process faster.
Greenfield wrote: They already made a digital version for Aeronautica Imperialis.
Like I said earlier, there whole "we already have a model" thing is highly overstated. There's virtually zero overlap between models for 28mm and models for Epic scale. Moving between scales requires rebuilding 99% of the model, features that look good at Epic scale will be comically oversized at 28mm and features that look good at 28mm will be too small to manufacture at Epic scale.
I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I do quite a bit of CAD related to my work, and I'd MUCH rather start with an existing 3D model than have to build a new one from scratch. So long as the original model wasn't made by a complete fool, tweaking dimensions and adding extra details on existing parts is way quicker than doing it from nothing. Hell, even if the original CAD was made by a complete fool, I'd still import it as a static object to draw over and it takes out a lot of the brain work of "what processes do I need to do to make this geometry..." which means the whole process goes a lot faster.
Also, we're talking about an Arvus here, even if CAD didn't exist before, it's got to be one of the easiest models I could imagine to CAD up. No CAD model is trivial... but if I were to describe any CAD model as trivial, it'd probably be CAD of an Arvus
Do you do anything relating to plastic injection molding? Because it's a good bit more complicated than tweaking dimensions and adding details. There's wall thicknesses, draft angles, filled joints, etc etc etc that need to be taken into account.
I wasn't talking about plastic injection moulding, I was talking about CAD for resin moulds, we already know it's coming out in resin not plastic.
Do you think GW are physically refreshing their ancient masters of the Arvus? Or converting it to CAD, 3D printing it, prepping it, etc like they do with all other modern FW models? I'd be somewhat surprised if it was the former.
I'd be moderately surprised if the Arvus comes out in plastic in the future though, I guess it's possible, but it doesn't seem like the sort of item that would push the volume required to justify it and if they were going to convert it, surely now would be the time.
Literally getting a praetor they already have in a different pose before Iron Warriors, World Eaters, Salamanders, Raven Guard and probably more I’m forgetting have any legion specific praetors.
On the plus side though, the last sentence of the article: "There’ll also be plenty more to see from the Age of Darkness, as the threat of corrupted Daemon Engines looms over a new entry in the Exemplary Battles series." Does not sound like a full Ruinstorm list to me, but it is something.
ImAGeek wrote: Literally getting a praetor they already have in a different pose before Iron Warriors, World Eaters, Salamanders, Raven Guard and probably more I’m forgetting have any legion specific praetors.
Yeah this is really disappointing. It adds literally nothing but a new pose, and not even an interesting one:
Spoiler:
Old:
New:
A completely necessary release, deserving of all our attention! /s
The new pose does seem like it would be easier to switch in alternate weapons in case you don't want a shield?
Still very disappointing. Seems like they could've changed the iconography and slapped two lightning claws on it for Raven Guard, or two axes for World Eaters.
Darnok wrote: On the plus side though, the last sentence of the article: "There’ll also be plenty more to see from the Age of Darkness, as the threat of corrupted Daemon Engines looms over a new entry in the Exemplary Battles series." Does not sound like a full Ruinstorm list to me, but it is something.
Probably the ones in the "Heresy Legends" for 40K being put in 30K.
Darnok wrote: On the plus side though, the last sentence of the article: "There’ll also be plenty more to see from the Age of Darkness, as the threat of corrupted Daemon Engines looms over a new entry in the Exemplary Battles series." Does not sound like a full Ruinstorm list to me, but it is something.
We always have to be careful when we complain to GW about the mistakes they make, as they're likely to learn the wrong lessons.
When they turned a bunch of 40k things that had been part of 40k even before the Horus Heresy was ever a separate FW-produced game and made them into "Horus Heresy Legends", we complained and told them that turning things that did not exist during the Heresy (like Daemon Engines) into "Horus Heresy Legends" units was not only stupid, but took away so many units that, as mentioned, were simply part of 40k since their introduction to the rules (they were never Horus Heresy units).
And so, GW has taken that feedback on board and, I'm guessing, will now retcon these units into the Horus Heresy, making their previous change to their rules totally legitimate (after the fact).
Some new dark mechanicus gribbleys would be pretty fun to see. Representing the wild experimenting the tech nerds are doing when given full reign for the first time.
Darnok wrote: On the plus side though, the last sentence of the article: "There’ll also be plenty more to see from the Age of Darkness, as the threat of corrupted Daemon Engines looms over a new entry in the Exemplary Battles series." Does not sound like a full Ruinstorm list to me, but it is something.
We always have to be careful when we complain to GW about the mistakes they make, as they're likely to learn the wrong lessons.
When they turned a bunch of 40k things that had been part of 40k even before the Horus Heresy was ever a separate FW-produced game and made them into "Horus Heresy Legends", we complained and told them that turning things that did not exist during the Heresy (like Daemon Engines) into "Horus Heresy Legends" units was not only stupid, but took away so many units that, as mentioned, were simply part of 40k since their introduction to the rules (they were never Horus Heresy units).
And so, GW has taken that feedback on board and, I'm guessing, will now retcon these units into the Horus Heresy, making their previous change to their rules totally legitimate (after the fact).
Cool...
Ehhhh....though I fully share your anger at gw taking units that have always been 40k units and branding them as "HH units", I have to point out that we were told that we'd be getting Daemon engines for 30k long before even the announcement for 10th edition 40k. I think it was in the article that gave us the rules for Daemons of the Ruinstorm allies? Could be mistaken, though. So, this feels like less of a reaction to community feedback, and more like something already planned.
The problem is we have precisce dates on a lot of those Daemonengines.
Decimator M35.
Bloodslaughterer M40ish.
Neither are 30k material.
And whilest i can kinda see a distcint relativness with the decimator and some of the FW bots for admech and therefore could live with a prototype being around in the 30k era or better scouring era.. the bloodslaughterer and other things that got put in that document are basically just a cheap copout for GW.
Ehhhh....though I fully share your anger at gw taking units that have always been 40k units and branding them as "HH units", I have to point out that we were told that we'd be getting Daemon engines for 30k long before even the announcement for 10th edition 40k. I think it was in the article that gave us the rules for Daemons of the Ruinstorm allies? Could be mistaken, though. So, this feels like less of a reaction to community feedback, and more like something already planned.
or they wanted to push daemonengines into 30k without using development time and test the waters not realising that in a "quasi historical" the timeframe would matter to people.
Essentially, a vehicle possessed by or which has had a Daemon bound unto it. Usually (but I don’t think always?) in place of the Machine Spirit.
Yes there are specific patterns which appear to have no mortal antecedent designs. But a Predator having a Daemon piped in and sealed up is as much a Daemon Engine as one with a purpose designed hull.
ImAGeek wrote: Literally getting a praetor they already have in a different pose before Iron Warriors, World Eaters, Salamanders, Raven Guard and probably more I’m forgetting have any legion specific praetors.
Yeah this is really disappointing. It adds literally nothing but a new pose, and not even an interesting one:
Spoiler:
Old:
New:
A completely necessary release, deserving of all our attention! /s
Well, but this way you can just rejigger the file you have, pose it a bit and boom, done!
I guess what GWcould do, is to provide rules for a variety of Daemon Engines with somewhat generic lore attached to each, then have a list of "you could use use a Blood Slaughterer for X, or convert Y from a Defiler". Plus an article showing some conversions from studio members and all that jazz.
I have serious doubts it will go like this - it is way too sensible approach for current day GW.
Essentially, a vehicle possessed by or which has had a Daemon bound unto it. Usually (but I don’t think always?) in place of the Machine Spirit.
Yes there are specific patterns which appear to have no mortal antecedent designs. But a Predator having a Daemon piped in and sealed up is as much a Daemon Engine as one with a purpose designed hull.
Yes, but not really? Usually a daemon engine is either a superheavy or a vehicle made specifically to host a daemon. Otherwise it would usually just be defined as a possessed vehicle.
Essentially, a vehicle possessed by or which has had a Daemon bound unto it. Usually (but I don’t think always?) in place of the Machine Spirit.
Yes there are specific patterns which appear to have no mortal antecedent designs. But a Predator having a Daemon piped in and sealed up is as much a Daemon Engine as one with a purpose designed hull.
Yes, but not really? Usually a daemon engine is either a superheavy or a vehicle made specifically to host a daemon. Otherwise it would usually just be defined as a possessed vehicle.
You just said the same thing two ways, the difference is one happens naturally the other is by intent. Whichever HH book it is that covers the fighting in the webway definitely mentions daemon engines and I seem to think they were described as scuttling?
ImAGeek wrote: Literally getting a praetor they already have in a different pose before Iron Warriors, World Eaters, Salamanders, Raven Guard and probably more I’m forgetting have any legion specific praetors.
Yeah this is really disappointing. It adds literally nothing but a new pose, and not even an interesting one:
Spoiler:
Old:
New:
A completely necessary release, deserving of all our attention! /s
I like the new pose much better.
Of course we are talking about the same people that figured plastic close combat Marines were unnecessary, so why would we expect GW to release something for everyone instead of doubling up on some things and leaving others to wait? We know they don't have their priorities straight.
Not Online!!! wrote: The problem is we have precisce dates on a lot of those Daemonengines.
Decimator M35.
Bloodslaughterer M40ish.
Neither are 30k material.
I said something similar in the LI thread - the Marauder Destroyer is specifically a post-HH variant (Second War for Armageddon) but is getting LI rules (and has 30k Legacies rules).
Essentially, a vehicle possessed by or which has had a Daemon bound unto it. Usually (but I don’t think always?) in place of the Machine Spirit.
Yes there are specific patterns which appear to have no mortal antecedent designs. But a Predator having a Daemon piped in and sealed up is as much a Daemon Engine as one with a purpose designed hull.
We are not talking about the possessed tanks.
We are talking about the bloody m35 earliest sighting daemonengine which got legended and then shoved over here, not even going into scorpion, slaughterers etc.
I said something similar in the LI thread - the Marauder Destroyer is specifically a post-HH variant (Second War for Armageddon) but is getting LI rules (and has 30k Legacies rules).
it's annoying and sets a bad precedent. It also shows a severe lack of respect for the lore, out of which the coherency of the universe follows which is the main selling point of 40k.
Not Online!!! wrote: It also shows a severe lack of lore which is the main selling point of 40k.
That got thrown out when primaris marines became a thing. Lore, just like anything else, will be changed at will to suit the needs of the marketing department.
I guess they could do like they did with the Marauder Destroyer and similar 40k-era units where it isn't technically that exact unit, it's representing some obscure pattern of local vehicle thrown into the fight out of desperation. Lore-wise they aren't the same 40k-era demon engines, those models are just convenient representations of the 30k thing.
(It's still stupid that they were removed from 40k.)
Not Online!!! wrote: There is a lot wrong with forcing clearly not time accurate daemonengines into 30k.
It's not clear when a lot of these came into being. Checking through IA13, there are scant dates and only refereneces to "largely encountered". Blight Drone is obviously a corrupted Vultarax, Defiler a corrupted Onager, Decimator a corrupted Leviathan, etc. Hellblades and the like are from Xana II and Blood Slaughterers and Brass Scorpions are from Sarum. Those Forgeworlds were present in the Heresy and reading through some of the novels, there's plenty of references to scuttling biomechanical horrors. They may not be called Defiler, Blood Slaughter, but it could be that the Dark Mechanicum lists in future could make references to a corrupted dreadnought, corrupted Vultarax, etc instead of the 40k names, similar to how the Ruinstorm lists refer to Dæmon Brutes, etc instead of their pantheon names.
Personally looking forward to Dark Mechanicum, not necessarily to collect, but to see an older style biomechanical horror Chaos army.
It's not clear when a lot of these came into being. Checking through IA13, there are scant dates and only refereneces to "largely encountered".
Yeah the fluff explicitly leaves the door open for these dates to be somewhat fuzzy. Taken from the last CSM codex:
Still other Daemon Engines are the possessed husks of former tanks, the growl of their engines now that of a living beast. These and innumerable other creations have been reported first-hand to the Imperium, while many more have left no survivors to scream of their hideous nature...
Just because a given engine was first idenfitied or given a name at a specific place, it doesn't mean that was the first time it was used. It was just the first time usable details of the encounter made it off-world to be recorded somewhere others can access.
ImAGeek wrote: I personally don’t think slightly changing a nebulous date when something was first encountered is particularly lore breaking.
So you're ok with primaris marines (actual primaris marines, not primaris kits being used to represent 30k-era marines) in 30k?
No, that’s probably a fair point. But Primaris marines have much much more concrete lore about their inception and introduction than the daemon engines do, and the heresy saw a big boom in experimentation with daemon stuff for obvious reasons, so it’s logical for a lot of daemon engines to date from there.
Fixed dates and Warp Daemons are only vaguely related. Remember the Ork Waaagh that went back in time thanks to the warp so the Warboss killed himself for a second copy of his shoota?
zedmeister wrote: Definitely looks like a re-size. Here's my very rough approximation. I suspect that the current IF Praetor will be going away once this is released
The current IF Praetor may be huge, but the pose is many times better than the new one.
It looks like the sculptor was told to re-size it and re-pose it, then put in the minimum required effort.
I wonder why now though? It's been out for a while hasn't it?
I feel like it was a case of someone making a couple variants, having one approved, then later it was decided the other variant was good as well, so release it.
Not Online!!! wrote: There is a lot wrong with forcing clearly not time accurate daemonengines into 30k.
It's not clear when a lot of these came into being. Checking through IA13, there are scant dates and only refereneces to "largely encountered". Blight Drone is obviously a corrupted Vultarax, Defiler a corrupted Onager, Decimator a corrupted Leviathan, etc. Hellblades and the like are from Xana II and Blood Slaughterers and Brass Scorpions are from Sarum. Those Forgeworlds were present in the Heresy and reading through some of the novels, there's plenty of references to scuttling biomechanical horrors. They may not be called Defiler, Blood Slaughter, but it could be that the Dark Mechanicum lists in future could make references to a corrupted dreadnought, corrupted Vultarax, etc instead of the 40k names, similar to how the Ruinstorm lists refer to Dæmon Brutes, etc instead of their pantheon names.
Personally looking forward to Dark Mechanicum, not necessarily to collect, but to see an older style biomechanical horror Chaos army.
Again NOTHING WRONG with Dark mech, or the decimator style daemon engines.
everything wrong with mistaking m35 and m40 majority sightings with:" Jup that's fine in 30k"
Because the later is lazy.
Now if' they bring out decimator type protypes, show a cohesive and understandable design progression. An mechanical evolution of design and innovation and give us the corresponding kits, that is awesome. Shoving the decimator and the slaughterer just back into 30k is not. But then again what a better way to obsolete vast swaaths of armies in 40k to resell units to.
Not Online!!! wrote: There is a lot wrong with forcing clearly not time accurate daemonengines into 30k.
It's not clear when a lot of these came into being. Checking through IA13, there are scant dates and only refereneces to "largely encountered". Blight Drone is obviously a corrupted Vultarax, Defiler a corrupted Onager, Decimator a corrupted Leviathan, etc. Hellblades and the like are from Xana II and Blood Slaughterers and Brass Scorpions are from Sarum. Those Forgeworlds were present in the Heresy and reading through some of the novels, there's plenty of references to scuttling biomechanical horrors. They may not be called Defiler, Blood Slaughter, but it could be that the Dark Mechanicum lists in future could make references to a corrupted dreadnought, corrupted Vultarax, etc instead of the 40k names, similar to how the Ruinstorm lists refer to Dæmon Brutes, etc instead of their pantheon names.
Personally looking forward to Dark Mechanicum, not necessarily to collect, but to see an older style biomechanical horror Chaos army.
See, I could believe this if it wasn't for the fact that some of these came first. The Defiler is nearly 2 decades older than the Onager, the the Decimator is from 2012 while the leviathan is from 2015. Not to mention neither of those look like each other and we have a specific date for the defiler, the beginning of the first black crusade, which began roughly in 781.m31, meaning *after* the heresy.
Yes they can shoehorn these things into heresy, but not only would that be a direct retcon (and before anyone gets onto me about "the whole heresy is a retcon!" yes, but there's a difference between retconning something loosely established with little concrete info, especially if they retain the basics, and directly retconning something we have relatively precise info on), it would also be a shame to see the work of old FW specifically thrown away for this weird all-encompassing entity the Heresy has become.
It would be better for basically everyone, even GW (after all, it's a whole lot easier to generate hype with a new thing) for them to create whole-new daemon-engines for the Dark mechanicum than to retro-actively retcon old ones into it.,
The Defiler was ordered by Abaddon to fill the ranks of the Black Legion because a big crab is a better siege engine than a tank.
Abaddon of course understands that crabs are the ultimate lifeform.
With regards to what will actually be added for Daemon Engines, folks need to chillax. Chances are its going to be like Militia and Daemon units where its given a name but not an explicit model.
While things like Decimators and Bloodslaughterers may have dates when they first entered common parlance, is this really an issue? By the time the Siege rolled around the traitors were basically CSM in terms of visuals; I don't think there's any issues with having a dreadnaughts but-a-bit-more-chaos, or crawling murder machines with harpoons.
morganfreeman wrote: While things like Decimators and Bloodslaughterers may have dates when they first entered common parlance, is this really an issue? By the time the Siege rolled around the traitors were basically CSM in terms of visuals; I don't think there's any issues with having a dreadnaughts but-a-bit-more-chaos, or crawling murder machines with harpoons.
Apparently? Heresy communities have a reputation for being sometimes passive, sometimes less so, aggressive over historical accuracy of forces etc.
morganfreeman wrote: While things like Decimators and Bloodslaughterers may have dates when they first entered common parlance, is this really an issue? By the time the Siege rolled around the traitors were basically CSM in terms of visuals; I don't think there's any issues with having a dreadnaughts but-a-bit-more-chaos, or crawling murder machines with harpoons.
Apparently? Heresy communities have a reputation for being sometimes passive, sometimes less so, aggressive over historical accuracy of forces etc.
quasi-historical.
40k would also be better off if the community were more like this, would've spared us atleast 20 Primaris leutnants.
morganfreeman wrote: While things like Decimators and Bloodslaughterers may have dates when they first entered common parlance, is this really an issue? By the time the Siege rolled around the traitors were basically CSM in terms of visuals; I don't think there's any issues with having a dreadnaughts but-a-bit-more-chaos, or crawling murder machines with harpoons.
Apparently? Heresy communities have a reputation for being sometimes passive, sometimes less so, aggressive over historical accuracy of forces etc.
I hope none of those folks bought one of those shiny Vindicators that just got transitioned to plastic. Their heads might implode if they ever find out that once upon a time the Vindicator STC was only rediscovered a couple of decades after the Heresy.
I hope none of those folks bought one of those shiny Vindicators that just got transitioned to plastic. Their heads might implode if they ever find out that once upon a time the Vindicator STC was only rediscovered a couple of decades after the Heresy.
Which can still hold true for the 40k pattern as the 30k one is different.
Dudeface wrote: Apparently? Heresy communities have a reputation for being sometimes passive, sometimes less so, aggressive over historical accuracy of forces etc.
But it's not just the HH community. It's had a direct rules-impact on 40k as well.
Dudeface wrote: Apparently? Heresy communities have a reputation for being sometimes passive, sometimes less so, aggressive over historical accuracy of forces etc.
But it's not just the HH community. It's had a direct rules-impact on 40k as well.
Yeah but the complaint isn't just as simple as they were turned into 40k legends, correctly given this is the 30k thread. The argument is people are saying they shouldn't exist in Heresy irrespective, which I'm not sure is objectively true.
I hope none of those folks bought one of those shiny Vindicators that just got transitioned to plastic. Their heads might implode if they ever find out that once upon a time the Vindicator STC was only rediscovered a couple of decades after the Heresy.
Which can still hold true for the 40k pattern as the 30k one is different.
The modern 40k one, sure. The one at the time, nope. The 30k one is just the high definition version of that.
Lowest effort possible.
The decimator is now naught but a 30k unit. So is the bloodslaughterer.
FFS.
Also decimator, you know the daemonengine known for just standing back up, can't stand back up. But it has T7 and 7 wounds at WS 5 and 4/5 attacks... nooo that isn't just a more dangerous contemptor, NoPe. Not at all.
Not Online!!! wrote: Lowest effort possible.
The decimator is now naught but a 30k unit. So is the bloodslaughterer.
FFS.
Also decimator, you know the daemonengine known for just standing back up, can't stand back up. But it has T7 and 7 wounds at WS 5 and 4/5 attacks... nooo that isn't just a more dangerous contemptor, NoPe. Not at all.
It's also 265 points, so if one considers contemptors fair at 175, this thing should by all rights be much more dangerous than a contemptor. This thing is probably net overall less dangerous than a contemptor because more things can cause d3 wounds to it due to Corrupted Engine and less point efficiency.
I'm not seeing anything preventing you having a Greater Brass Scorpion in a Loyalist Death Guard army with a Praevian. (when they're part of a *mechanicum* force it has to be Traitor, no such restriction when taken with a Praevian)
Charax wrote: I'm not seeing anything preventing you having a Greater Brass Scorpion in a Loyalist Death Guard army with a Praevian. (when they're part of a *mechanicum* force it has to be Traitor, no such restriction when taken with a Praevian)
Charax wrote: I'm not seeing anything preventing you having a Greater Brass Scorpion in a Loyalist Death Guard army with a Praevian. (when they're part of a *mechanicum* force it has to be Traitor, no such restriction when taken with a Praevian)
Yeah it's because every army besides Custodes/Sisters can be taken as either Loyalist or Traitor.
Units that are associated with a given side such as unique units or characters all have the special rule to stop things like Sigismund being taken in a Traitor list or Kharn in Loyalist one.
Regarding the whole debate on potential retconning, wasnt the Blood Slaughterer already present during the Heresy? I vaguely remember something like that mentioned in one of the old Imperial Armour books.
In the Garro Weapon of Fate novel, the story Oath of Moment has Garro fighting a Defiler.
It is described as such, and I think it was actually named a defiler.
Gert wrote: The Defiler was ordered by Abaddon to fill the ranks of the Black Legion because a big crab is a better siege engine than a tank.
Abaddon of course understands that crabs are the ultimate lifeform.
With regards to what will actually be added for Daemon Engines, folks need to chillax. Chances are its going to be like Militia and Daemon units where its given a name but not an explicit model.
My biggest issue with this is that the Imperial Fists are yet again having a starring role in a HH campaign. IMO, they should never be mentioned again in any new Heresy material or get another model, besides the update Dorn model, since every Legion is getting an updated Primarch model.
ArcaneHorror wrote: My biggest issue with this is that the Imperial Fists are yet again having a starring role in a HH campaign. IMO, they should never be mentioned again in any new Heresy material or get another model, besides the update Dorn model, since every Legion is getting an updated Primarch model.
You know like anybody else here that this won´t happen. IF will get all the toys and the rest will receive hardly anything.
ArcaneHorror wrote: My biggest issue with this is that the Imperial Fists are yet again having a starring role in a HH campaign. IMO, they should never be mentioned again in any new Heresy material or get another model, besides the update Dorn model, since every Legion is getting an updated Primarch model.
With how much attention Ultramarines get generally, I think fans can spare a few moments to give the Fists their due.
Good god the whinging about Fists is sad. Its barely passed year one of the games new edition for crying out loud.
The Praetor was dumb yes but Jesus you people have no damn patience.
Not Online!!! wrote: Lowest effort possible.
The decimator is now naught but a 30k unit. So is the bloodslaughterer.
FFS.
Also decimator, you know the daemonengine known for just standing back up, can't stand back up. But it has T7 and 7 wounds at WS 5 and 4/5 attacks... nooo that isn't just a more dangerous contemptor, NoPe. Not at all.
Tbf doesn't it have IWND for the regen side of it?
The bolter 2nd row, 2nd from the left defs looks like a terminator hand, as does the 2nd axe from the left.
Axes look great though. Interesting design. Really not liking the high tech elbow joints they've started giving power armour. Does not fit with the established look of any of the Mks.
It’s not like GW wasn’t releasing upgrade kits for 40k marines for years, while neglecting other chapters. Weird hill to make a stand on, even if it’s annoying that other legions may not get cool bits
How dare GW make a Sons of Horus upgrade kit like Emperor's Children, Death Guard and Night Lords have for HH or like the Space Wolves, Ultramarines, Raven Guard, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, Iron Hands, Dark Angels and Blood Angels plastic upgrades for 40k all of which can be used for Heresy kits.
Utterly disgraceful.
Ultimately, I think the bolters and axes are fine. The coins are somewhat SoH, but I don't think there's too much on this upgrade accessory that couldn't be used on another legion if someone really wanted to.
Banestrike bolters are kinda misnomer, as it the Banestrike round that delivers the punch of them. If my lore is correct. So clipping/trimming the Eye of Horus (or not, for those real Horus fans) could be done quite easily if someone wanted some variation. Me, I've pretty much have my fill of bolters. I just stuck chain bayonets on my Justaerin and Veterans (who also have chainswords) to indicate Banestrike bolters.
As for the Carsoran power axes, I like the updated look to the ball mace with an axe coming out it of the old ones. But I think they could pass for regular power axes if someone wanted to use them. I don't know why, since power axes are horrible.
I do want to nitpick on the axes, though. I think they'd fit SoH a little better if they had a spike at the end of the handle (pommel). When I think SoH aesthetics, I think spikes, coins, eyes and the occasional skull. Leaving an area that could have a spike (and would be no trouble at all to remove if unwanted) empty seems like a shame. I also wonder if the axe would look a little more brutal if the cable was lowered a tad to fit another spike or smaller blade on the butt (poll).
I think the bigger issue for me, is the price isn't going to be there. I really only want the axes. Even then, they are too much of a mixed bag. I'm leaning on just converting CSM/Legionary power axes instead now.
Gert wrote:Good god the whinging about Fists is sad. Its barely passed year one of the games new edition for crying out loud.
The Praetor was dumb yes but Jesus you people have no damn patience.
It isn't just the models. Given how much time the Fists have been given as of late in the Heresy lore, they should not have been put into this campaign. Given how its focus is on daemon engines, the Imperial factors should have been the Mechanicum alongside the Iron Hands instead.
tauist wrote: I take it this means the upcoming MKIII resculpts will be compatible with the existing plastic weapon upgrades
I mean you'd hope so, right? I can't imagine that those kits fly off shelves, and then to go and introduce a whole new range of weapon boxes with slightly different details on the arms?
Makes far more sense to have the new Marine models be compatible with the existing weapon packs.
The frustration is that with how slow they're coming out with these things, by the time X or Y legion gets their particular upgrade, who knows how long it'll be. There will be someone complaining until every legion gets equal attention.
tbh, GW should just leave the legion-specific stuff to 3d printers and focus instead on getting the rest of the necessary range out.
Why can't we go back to the good old days, when GW just kept releasing new plastic tank after new plastic tank, and all we had to complain about was a complete lack of plastic assault troops...
For real though, really keen on those assault troops. Both for the units but also different possibilities with posing. Assuming the torsos actually pull off the running without looking like the old beserkers.
drbored wrote: The frustration is that with how slow they're coming out with these things, by the time X or Y legion gets their particular upgrade, who knows how long it'll be. There will be someone complaining until every legion gets equal attention.
tbh, GW should just leave the legion-specific stuff to 3d printers and focus instead on getting the rest of the necessary range out.
But what do I know.
I doubt a few legion specific things in resin are what’s holding up things like plastic Assault Marines. And I like the legion specific stuff. I just wish it didn’t take them 10 years to roll it out for every legion.
I really like this upgrade kit and there could be some really cool stuff for the other legions, I just hope they all get them in a reasonable timescale.
ArcaneHorror wrote: It isn't just the models. Given how much time the Fists have been given as of late in the Heresy lore, they should not have been put into this campaign. Given how its focus is on daemon engines, the Imperial factors should have been the Mechanicum alongside the Iron Hands instead.
Two Exemplary Battles and a campaign book is too much for you?
Also, do you know why the Imperial Fists are everywhere in recent background? Because they were everywhere in the older background as well. They fortified and garrisoned as many routes to Terra as possible to stop Horus's advance because the other Legions were massacred at Isstvan or trapped behind the the Ruinstorm.
Other Legions will get their spotlight when the next Campaign book comes out so once again, I reiterate have some patience.
This set includes five Phoenix Powers Spears for Emperor’s Children Legion Characters. There are three spears wielded in two hands and one wielded one handed for Space Marines in power armour, and single power spear in a one handed grip for a Space Marine in Terminator armour. Also included are the arms needed for the two handed spears, a left power armoured arm with open hand, and on open left hand for Terminator armour.
Gert wrote: Also, do you know why the Imperial Fists are everywhere in recent background? Because they were everywhere in the older background as well. They fortified and garrisoned as many routes to Terra as possible to stop Horus's advance because the other Legions were massacred at Isstvan or trapped behind the the Ruinstorm.
Other Legions will get their spotlight when the next Campaign book comes out so once again, I reiterate have some patience.
It's also clearly part of GW's marketing strategy to focus on one loyalist and one traitor legion. It means the models have more unified look. Given that most of the chapter-specific stuff is FW, it really doesn't affect the plastic model range, which is what most players will buy. There is also this wonderful concept known as customisation, which involves taking stock models and converting them (a lot or a little, depending on your skill level) to make the models that you want. It's actually part of the fun of the hobby.
This set includes five Phoenix Powers Spears for Emperor’s Children Legion Characters. There are three spears wielded in two hands and one wielded one handed for Space Marines in power armour, and single power spear in a one handed grip for a Space Marine in Terminator armour. Also included are the arms needed for the two handed spears, a left power armoured arm with open hand, and on open left hand for Terminator armour.
That isn't an argument for doing it? But rather an argument to finally get a grip on nonsensery and step in to fix it.
Eh, looks like the usual placating of the masses to me.
Can't see anything in there that doesn't either confirm something we already know (new Mk3 and Deredeo), something blindingly obvious (other plastic Sicarans), or something to get nerd rage going (a campaign book with SoH and Fists).
Right but if that rumour is correct then peeps would have two extra months to leak all kinds of stuff. GW doesn’t mind photos of minis getting out early; it actually enhances their IP. Full pdf copies of rule books months before the official release though? Madness!
Over in the LI thread Kodos recently commented about it(see below), someone else 1st commented about the book reprint on page 87, but was vague on info, from where they got the info from!
"the details we have is from people breaking the NDA (or not taking it more relaxed)"
"Bolter and Chainsword, one of the people who got a copy talked about it when the WC announcement came up
being that GW asked them send the book back and keep the rest for later"
So i was going by that, sorry i dont have a link for the B&C thread, you will to ask Kodos for that.
Holy crap! Not sure how long ago the Cerastus got released, but I just saw the price of it a minute ago. The poxy bastards want $335AUD for it! They're fething insane. It doesn't even make all the alternatives. It's just the bloody Lancer.
I get that it's a bit taller then the Questoris, but that doesn't equate to an extra $135 and no build options. Christ they're beyond taking the piss.
Snrub wrote: Holy crap! Not sure how long ago the Cerastus got released, but I just saw the price of it a minute ago. The poxy bastards want $335AUD for it! They're fething insane. It doesn't even make all the alternatives. It's just the bloody Lancer.
I get that it's a bit taller then the Questoris, but that doesn't equate to an extra $135 and no build options. Christ they're beyond taking the piss.
Thats more a case of the Questoris Knights being cheaper than the current GW conversion rate. In £ the Questoris is £105, the Dominus is £110 and the Cerastus is £120. Meanwhile for $AUD the Questoris is $195, the Dominus $304 and the Cerastus $335.
For other examples in the order of newest to oldest release the Necron Monolith is £110 and $294, the Tau Stormsurge is £110 and $262 and the Khorne Lord of Skulls is £105 and $179
As you can see they increased the exchange rate through the years and the Questoris just uses an older exchange rate. (Though no idea why the Dominus is that much worse)
Not saying that its cheap or that the price is fine as it is, just saying the price isn't surprising
Thats also why when comparing exchange rates for new releases, you should always compare to other new releases as they do change them with time, of course its way more noticeable when it is higher in the first place
and only works on small guns) or split the barrel into halves. Those halves need to be glued together very carefully if you want to avoid alignment issues and you're almost always going to have to do sanding and/or gap filling on the joint to hide it. A resin gun barrel, on the other hand, can be cast as a single piece and requires none of that. Cut the part off the "sprue", attach it to the model, no other work required.
