Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 SmurfInABlender wrote:
Why the mess is one in FA and the other in HS when they are the same basic ship? Blah, I need all my Fast Attack for my army of thunderwolves. Guess I'll have to go 2x3 rather than the more successful 3x2 I normally run inorder to fit the Stormwolf in.

Click the link and read.

My question: Can Cavalry embark transports? The 16 variant with a couple TWC in it would be hilarious.

This is a SW transport, of course they can

I think that the rulebook says they can't, but if there's an exception or loophole in there somewhere, I'm going to abuse the feth out of it.

No, looks like the Stormfang/wolf has to go into hover mode for disembarking, but can assault off the disembark so it's not all bad . . . just take out the AT weapons when you have the chance first.

Anyone else think TWC need a points drop by like 5 pts, maybe even 10?

Jefffar wrote:
No, looks like the Stormfang/wolf has to go into hover mode for disembarking, but can assault off the disembark so it's not all bad . . . just take out the AT weapons when you have the chance first.

Worth mentioning, the current leaks only have the Stormwolf as an assault vehicle. The Stormfang is a heavily armed flying razorback, awh yeah.

 Bull0 wrote:
Uglier's subjective, I rather like the transport variant at least - tone down the symbology a bit and they've got a deal!

I'm not sure how it being cheaper is a bad thing... If you prefer the Caestus and you can afford it, the existence of this kit isn't going to stop you buying one...

Will it be cheaper? Anyone know what it will cost? Maybe if it is cheap you can buy two and make a Caestus out of it

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Will it be cheaper? Anyone know what it will cost? Maybe if it is cheap you can buy two and make a Caestus out of it

Two Stormravens are the same price as a Caestus.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Remulus wrote:
I'm just happy they aren't calling it a "Skywolf" ore something.

Stormwolf is that much better?

*Stormclaw

 Remulus wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Remulus wrote:
I'm just happy they aren't calling it a "Skywolf" ore something.

Stormwolf is that much better?

*Stormclaw

Stormclaw is the campaign box. Stormwolf is the transport version of the new flier.

Escorted by a pair of Stormfangs, the three Stormwolfs carrying Strike Force Stormclaw and Njal Stormcaller descended upon the renegades' Storm Ravens and Storm Eagles.

I really like it.

Each to their own though.

 mattyrm wrote:
How much is this fether going to cost then, any word on that?

I think their prices have gone nuts lately me. I have loved some of the new orks, especially Badrukks Flash Gitz, but they work out at like, 9 dollars a model or something, its just a bit fething absurd now.

I reckon I could be tempted if it is sub 80 bucks, but more than that and they can wedge it, Ill just spray a brick grey and glue some wings on the sides.

I've already got the bricks and spray paint ready. Totally gonna field these...not gonna pay 80$ for the 2-3 that will inevitably hit the table.

is it bad that I want to add more bits to make it different?

If we could get the transport version as a dedicated transport/objective secure, that would be nice

Just funny how the WD claim these flyers are a rare thing, most likely most SW lists and perhaps some new allies will have it.

 Yonan wrote:
The more GW destroys the lore of 40k, the easier I find it to slip through their grasp tbh.

 Peregrine wrote:
The point is that it's a unit that shouldn't exist fluff-wise, but GW cares more about short-term sales than maintaining consistent fluff.

I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Yonan wrote:
The more GW destroys the lore of 40k, the easier I find it to slip through their grasp tbh.

 Peregrine wrote:
The point is that it's a unit that shouldn't exist fluff-wise, but GW cares more about short-term sales than maintaining consistent fluff.

I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

"feet on the ground" to put it simply. Old editions had this and everyone instantly thought it meant no flying machines ever

Kavik_Whitescar wrote:
"feet on the ground" to put it simply. Old editions had this and everyone instantly thought it meant no flying machines ever

Which is, of course, total nonsense. They have Thunderhawks, Land Speeders and Drop Pods. They fly around in space where there is no ground.

Feet on the ground only refers to literally fighting in the air (jump packs). Find me a fluff reference otherwise.

 pretre wrote:
Feet on the ground only refers to fighting in the air (jump packs). Find me a fluff reference otherwise.

100% correct.

Woohoo, mine arrived today and they've already base coated it for me as well!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

The fact that it exists at all. SW already have the Caestus assault ram, a flyer that does the exact same things the new one does. There would be absolutely no plausible reason fluff-wise to make an entirely new flyer for that same role, so it's blatantly a case of "we need a new plastic flyer kit, find a way to justify one". Except this time they didn't even bother coming up with a new design, they just cut the existing flyer in half and glued some wolf symbols on it.

 pretre wrote:
Feet on the ground only refers to literally fighting in the air (jump packs). Find me a fluff reference otherwise.

No actually I believe it only ever refers to teleportation. It's in the rules for Terminator armour, explaining why the SW will only drop pod in instead of using teleporters, it's the last paragraph on page 61 of the 5th ed codex, can't remember if it's mentioned anywhere in the 3rd edition one, I don't recall ever seeing it in the 2nd edition codex. But SW have always been quite happy to use jump packs. You can, after all, give Jump Packs to all of the Wolf Lords, Rune Priests, Wolf Priests and Wolf Guard in your army.

But either way, that's not what I read when I read Peregrine's comment anyway, it seemed to be that he was saying it shouldn't exist because the SW already have an Assault Ram vehicle.

 Peregrine wrote:
The fact that it exists at all. SW already have the Caestus assault ram, a flyer that does the exact same things the new one does. There would be absolutely no plausible reason fluff-wise to make an entirely new flyer for that same role

1. Cool, you've read the new fluff for the kit. Post it please

2. Oh, you haven't? So you're just tremendously unimaginative and forcing that on the rest of us? You think the future is a place where no two vehicles have the same purpose? The diverse, far future, based on thousands of years of lost and rediscovered technology, etc? Besides, they aren't even the same - this thing's half the size. You're upset that the US Marines have PT boats because they also have Destroyers, they're both boats with guns that carry people, there's absolutely no plausible reason to have both.

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

The fact that it exists at all. SW already have the Caestus assault ram, a flyer that does the exact same things the new one does. There would be absolutely no plausible reason fluff-wise to make an entirely new flyer for that same role, so it's blatantly a case of "we need a new plastic flyer kit, find a way to justify one". Except this time they didn't even bother coming up with a new design, they just cut the existing flyer in half and glued some wolf symbols on it.

Well in recent years GW doesn't really care about the fluff anymore, remember these things? Centurions

 pretre wrote:
Feet on the ground only refers to literally fighting in the air (jump packs). Find me a fluff reference otherwise.

That's dumb though, because jump-packs don't allow you to "fight in the air" anymore than a Thunderhawk or a drop-pod does. A jump-pack is a form of transportation that allows you to travel quickly from spot to spot via hopping. It's not a jet-pack.

Maybe at the end of the day Space Wolves fluff is just stupid and nonsensical.

 Peregrine wrote:
Which is why I don't like this new flyer. It's just an uglier version of the Caestus, with a cheaper plastic kit. The only reason for it to exist is to sell more stuff.

Erm, the reason for every GW product ever made is to sell stuff........

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Feet on the ground only refers to literally fighting in the air (jump packs). Find me a fluff reference otherwise.

That's dumb though, because jump-packs don't allow you to "fight in the air" anymore than a Thunderhawk or a drop-pod does. A jump-pack is a form of transportation that allows you to travel quickly from spot to spot via hopping. It's not a jet-pack.

Maybe at the end of the day Space Wolves fluff is just stupid and nonsensical.

It was 1 sentence in the codex that was used in a bad context and for some reasons players have grasped on to this 1 sentence as being some amazing revelation that Space Wolves don't like to be in the air when it actually doesn't refer to that at all.

It's as much the stupid players' fault as it is GW's stupid fluff writing fault.

 Peregrine wrote:
The fact that it exists at all.

Well this ought to be good...

 Peregrine wrote:
SW already have the Caestus assault ram, a flyer that does the exact same things the new one does.

Does it? The Cestus is a craft that acts as a battering ram - it has a massive melta cannon thingy on the front and its designed to punch into hard targets. The Stormwhatever (the gunship one) doesn't do that and the Stormwolf (the transport one), seems to be more of a ground-based assault craft. Separating the new miniature kit aspect of it, this doesn't go against the fluff of 40K or the Space Wolves at all. If anything it goes with it far more than the Chibi-Hawk or the Space Guppy because it at least looks like it came from the same family of STC's. I completely reject that these two craft and the Caestus have the same role, in the same way that the Chibi-Hawk doesn't invalidate the Thunderhawk, or the other way around.

 Peregrine wrote:
There would be absolutely no plausible reason fluff-wise to make an entirely new flyer for that same role...

I disagree that it has the same role, so I reject your entire premise of critique.

 Peregrine wrote:
...so it's blatantly a case of "we need a new plastic flyer kit, find a way to justify one". Except this time they didn't even bother coming up with a new design, they just cut the existing flyer in half and glued some wolf symbols on it.

I do agree with you that it's just another kit for the sake of having a big release for the Wolves. Much like with the Grey Knights and Blood Angels (and Dark Angels), GW have painted themselves into a corner when it comes to the Wolves. They released a catch-all Grey Hunter/Wolf Guard/Blood Claw kit and a Wolf Guard Terminator kit, plus all the specialist kits, meaning the Space Wolves don't have anything else they need in plastic outside of Wolf Scouts, and even the Space Wolf kit takes care of them somewhat with a few heads and guns. For that reason they need to invent new things to be worth re-releasing them (which makes me wonder what the Blood Angels are going to get, as they're pressed even further into the corner than the Wolves).

So the Wolves get a flyer, which we kinda knew would happen (plus they'll probably get a big wolf/robot thing, and we might even see a Dire Avengering of their 10-man Space Wolf box), but as cynical as it is they made something new that fits with 40K. They didn't make something out of left field (like Marines riding Wolves or Marines in Power Armour inside another type of armour). They made something that aesthetically exists with an existing Marine unit, meaning that it fits more with 40K than any other Marine flyer since the Caestus and the Thunderhawk.

I don't see the issue.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Feet on the ground only refers to literally fighting in the air (jump packs). Find me a fluff reference otherwise.

That's dumb though, because jump-packs don't allow you to "fight in the air" anymore than a Thunderhawk or a drop-pod does. A jump-pack is a form of transportation that allows you to travel quickly from spot to spot via hopping. It's not a jet-pack.

Maybe at the end of the day Space Wolves fluff is just stupid and nonsensical.

It was 1 sentence in the codex that was used in a bad context and for some reasons players have grasped on to this 1 sentence as being some amazing revelation that Space Wolves don't like to be in the air when it actually doesn't refer to that at all.

It's as much the stupid players' fault as it is GW's stupid fluff writing fault.

That's probably true.

I've never been under the impression that the Wolves have a issue with any specific kind of warfare or combat role. Seems silly to me.

EDIT- Regarding "new" things for the Wolves, I'd be pretty okay with them getting a new Monstrous Creature. Like, some Fenris native beastie that they capture and domesticate for warfare. That'd be pretty dope.

Just teleportation. That's been something they never liked.

Kavik_Whitescar wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Yonan wrote:
The more GW destroys the lore of 40k, the easier I find it to slip through their grasp tbh.

 Peregrine wrote:
The point is that it's a unit that shouldn't exist fluff-wise, but GW cares more about short-term sales than maintaining consistent fluff.

I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

"feet on the ground" to put it simply. Old editions had this and everyone instantly thought it meant no flying machines ever

Well, that says more about "everyone" and their assumptions that it does about the fluff.

I don't get this weird binary thinking that 40k gamers display from time to time. I don't particularly like carrots, but I do eat them sometimes without it being a 'violent rape of Bomster fluff'. Because they're good for me, you know.

If someone has access to the 2nd Ed Space Wolf Codex, feel free to add anything:

Codex Space Wolves, 3rd Edition, page 4 wrote:Will Not Teleport: Space Wolves have little trust or respect for the more arcane aspects of the technology used by the Imperium. In particular, they dislike the idea of teleporting into battle and remain stubbornly opposed to its use. To represent this, any Space Wolves models with Terminator armour may not Deep Strike unless the entire army enters play in drop pods.

Codex Space Wolves, 5th Edition, page 61, the rules for Terminator Armour wrote:NB: Though the Terminators of other Space Marine Chapters often teleport straight into battle, Space Wolves have a deep mistrust of such arcane tactics and prefer to fight on their feet on solid ground, just as Russ intended.

They are fine with aircraft. They are fine with space flight. They are fine with orbital deployment, gunships, rough landings, Land Speeders, jump packs and pogo-sticks. They don't like to teleport, and Logan Grimnar came out in 2000. Can we all move on now?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Separating the new miniature kit aspect of it, this doesn't go against the fluff of 40K or the Space Wolves at all.

It wouldn't break the fluff, if the Caestus didn't exist. But it does, the Space Wolves use it, and now you have to ask why they bother with these new flyers when they already have one that fills the same role. Yeah, out of universe we know it's because "main" GW likes to pretend that FW fluff doesn't exist and needed a new flyer kit, but in-universe it's just redundant.

I completely reject that these two craft and the Caestus have the same role, in the same way that the Chibi-Hawk doesn't invalidate the Thunderhawk, or the other way around.

But the difference there is that the mini-Thunderhawk is actually significantly smaller than the full-size Thunderhawk. The Thunderhawk is the superheavy gunship with a titan-scale weapon and massive transport capacity, the Stormraven is a lighter unit that can carry a single squad in situations where a Thunderhawk is overkill. This thing is pretty much the same size (16 models vs 10 models and ignore "bulky") as the Caestus, fills the same role of flying assault transport for a single squad, costs about the same points, and even looks like it has the same role. You could even proxy a Caestus as either of the new flyers with a minor gun swap at most.

They made something that aesthetically exists with an existing Marine unit, meaning that it fits more with 40K than any other Marine flyer since the Caestus and the Thunderhawk.

But the problem is that it doesn't just fit aesthetically, it looks like someone cut a Caestus in half and glued some wolf icons on it. GW took the lazy route of making a ripoff of an existing design instead of trying to make something new that fits the theme while still being a new design.

So, anyone got any info on when Logan Grimnar was released?

MaxT wrote:
So, anyone got any info on when Logan Grimnar was released?

The existing one? 3rd edition. Most definitely. He's in my 3rd edition Codex and was never in 2nd edition.

Fact of the matter is, we don't have the fluff behind this flier so nobody can really say whether or not it's justified. All of this is being based on the similarity between this and another ship. Until we have the concrete information, it's pretty much impossible to claim that something is unnecessary or a ripoff. It could be the difference between a heavy bolter and an assault cannon.

- Both are weapons that can be carried
- Both fire rounds
- Not the same thing

What I'm saying is that unless you know the origin and all of that, you can't really make any definitive statements.

 Peregrine wrote:
It wouldn't break the fluff, if the Caestus didn't exist.

Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If someone has access to the 2nd Ed Space Wolf Codex, feel free to add anything:

The not wanting to teleport thing is a 3rd edition addition. 2nd edition Space Wolf Terminators would teleport, I don't recall anything saying they disliked teleporting and it specifically said in the WG Terminator rules that they could teleport at an additional cost of +50% of their total points value.

I remember when 3rd edition came out thinking "wtf, why have my Space Wolves become barbarians who don't like technology?".

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If someone has access to the 2nd Ed Space Wolf Codex, feel free to add anything:

Codex Space Wolves, 3rd Edition, page 4 wrote:Will Not Teleport: Space Wolves have little trust or respect for the more arcane aspects of the technology used by the Imperium. In particular, they dislike the idea of teleporting into battle and remain stubbornly opposed to its use. To represent this, any Space Wolves models with Terminator armour may not Deep Strike unless the entire army enters play in drop pods.

Codex Space Wolves, 4th Edition, page 61, the rules for Terminator Armour wrote:NB: Though the Terminators of other Space Marine Chapters often teleport straight into battle, Space Wolves have a deep mistrust of such arcane tactics and prefer to fight on their feet on solid ground, just as Russ intended.

They are fine with aircraft. They are fine with space flight. They are fine with orbital deployment, gunships, rough landings, Land Speeders, jump packs and pogo-sticks. They don't like to teleport, and Logan Grimnar came out in 2000. Can we all move on now?

Adding to that, the 5th edition codex has this to say under the terminator description:

Though the Terminators of other Space Marine chapters often teleport straight into the battle, Space Wolves have a deep distrust of such arcane tactics and prefer to fight with their feet on solid ground, just as Russ intended.

Reading that, while I think the fandom may be jumping the gun, it is indeed a dumb line. How the hell is using a teleporter "not fighting on solid ground"? You spend more time "off the ground" in a drop-pod then you do using a teleporter.

The statement should have just ended at the Wolves having a deep distrust of teleportation technology.

When did GW give any consideration to the fluff?

Now, if you don't mind, I've got unbound demons to use with my SW army.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Adding to that, the 5th edition codex has this to say under the terminator description:

Sorry, I meant the 5th Ed Codex in my description. I'll edit my post.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Reading that, while I think the fandom may be jumping the gun, it is indeed an extremely stupid line. There is no relation between using a teleporter and "fighting on solid ground".

I'm not sure what you mean. The relationship is clear: Wolves don't teleport. Anyone saying that this attitude extends outwards to things like Jump Packs and aircraft lacks reading comprehension skills and/or an appreciation for what the word "context" means.

There is no relationship between not wanting to be off the ground and using a teleporter. You spend more time with your feet off solid ground in a drop-pod or a jump-pack then you do when using a teleporter.

Per my edit, the statement makes sense when ending at "Wolves distrust teleporter technology and don't use it." The part about desiring solid ground as a justification for their distrust is superfluous.

Again: Context.

The idea is they like firm, proven technologies. Trying to imply any further meaning is just wishful thinking.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Clang wrote:
I don't understand all the nerd-rage over its look. Of all the SM fliers, this looks the least stupid to me.

IMO it's not the design itself, it's the fact that they took an existing design and made it less appealing. If this had been the first one it wouldn't have been so bad, but when it's an obvious mediocre ripoff of one of GW's other kits it's pretty disappointing that this is the best they could do.

Hmm, true, but you could also argue(and I will) that it's a pleasant surprise that they seem to have at least tried to come up with something that's appropriately thematic in a less "on the nose" way than was previously the case; I'll take an improbable sci-fantasy Viking longship over a werewolf with wolf claws riding a giant wolf any day of the week. And honestly, if all the design team are capable of/are permitted to do by the suits is ripping off superior FW designs, well, better that than when they were operating under the same business-related strictures for each new release but putting out their own designs, lest we forget the Dreadknight, ChibiHawk, and the Chaos Dinobots.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

Ahh oops, the whole "won't teleport" spread into "won't use flyers" to me I guess. I blame the community (my lack of knowledge of wolves due to them vs 1ksons is irrelevant!) spreading fud! ; p

Damnit, I've already said I didn't mind the look of it (similarity to caestus and all that)... now I need to really dig for something to gripe about. Price I guess is always a good fall-back!

 Yonan wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I'm sorry, what about this vehicle breaks with the fluff?

Ahh oops, the whole "won't teleport" spread into "won't use flyers" to me I guess. I blame the community (my lack of knowledge of wolves due to them vs 1ksons is irrelevant!) spreading fud! ; p

Damnit, I've already said I didn't mind the look of it (similarity to caestus and all that)... now I need to really dig for something to gripe about. Price I guess is always a good fall-back!

Maybe about the crazy new weapon technology that never existed before but now does?

"Land Raiders! Get your deep frozen Helfrost blasted Land Raiders!"

I think we've ascertained then that the SW are not in fact B.A. Baracus.

At least with regards to flight.

I might be late with my opinions regarding the new flyer, but feth me it looks bad. It's not the fact that is looks like the Caestus Assault Ram that bothers me, it's that it looks like a lazy third party copy with some bits slapped on, and this is a miniature that GW intend to sell in their own name, likely for an absurd price.

I actually really liked the recent Ork releases, especially the Flash Gitz. Unfortunately they have passed my personal price threshold, so I cannot justify purchasing GW products anymore since I play other miniatures wargames that I also want to afford.

Well, this argument is getting out of control.

The reason the SW don't like teleporting is because when you do so you don't get your Star Trek-style dissassemble/reassemble, you get shunted through the gakking Warp. The Rout don't trust the warp one bit.
Thus: no gakking teleportation, it's not about the tech, it's what it does to the user.

 STC_LogisEngine wrote:
Well, this argument is getting out of control.

The reason the SW don't like teleporting is because when you do so you don't get your Star Trek-style dissassemble/reassemble, you get shunted through the gakking Warp. The Rout don't trust the warp one bit.
Thus: no gakking teleportation, it's not about the tech, it's what it does to the user.

Well then they should word it as such in the fluff instead of wording it like they have, lol.

IIRC, there was also some fluff about 'feet on the ground' to explain why in 3rd edition Blood Claws lost their jump packs.

They later came back as Sky Claws so I guess GW backtracked.

At least Dakka Dakka are a bunch of equal opportunity whiners.

That flyer looks cool.

I will say that I can't stop seeing it as a dog head now.

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

Caestus Assault Ram - "Assault Rams are void attack craft, intended to participate in close-range space boarding actions, that can also act as drop-assault vessels for direct orbital attack."<--forgeworld site.

They are specifically built for void conditions and combat.
The Stormfang, was probably (because we have no fluff yet) built specifically to get troops into the atmosphere of the planet and deal in planetary combat. For all we know it could have been the precursor to the Caestus.


Real world example. Two young boys are born on the same day, at the same time, in the same city, in the same hospital, whose mothers were both in the same room. They both fill the role of child and son to a mother. Why not, by your logic, make both mothers share the same child? Because, by your logic, why should the both exist?

Khine wrote:
Real world example. Two young boys are born on the same day, at the same time, in the same city, in the same hospital, whose mothers were both in the same room. They both fill the role of child and son to a mother. Why not, by your logic, make both mothers share the same child? Because, by your logic, why should the both exist?

Two young boys born on the same day, at the same time, in the same city, in the same hospital, whose mothers were both in the same room. Some years later, one makes an analogy that is not even remotely comparable to the discussion at hand.

Khine wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

Caestus Assault Ram - "Assault Rams are void attack craft, intended to participate in close-range space boarding actions, that can also act as drop-assault vessels for direct orbital attack."<--forgeworld site.

They are specifically built for void conditions and combat.
The Stormfang, was probably (because we have no fluff yet) built specifically to get troops into the atmosphere of the planet and deal in planetary combat. For all we know it could have been the precursor to the Caestus.

From IA2 2E page 142 (The Caestus unit entry):

As a result of the seminal discoveries made by the acclaimed machine-arcanist Arkhan Land in the lost vaults beneath the Martian wastes, the Caestus was fitted with an array of anti-grav projection nodes that allowed it to operate within the gravitational field of a planet or similar sized body. This adaption turned the Caestus from a craft limited to operations in the cold depths of the void to one also capable of assaulting the most formidable of fortifications on a planet's surface, making it a vital weapon in the arsenal of many Space Marine Chapters.

The Caestus already exists and does exactly what this was supposed to do it seems. Not to mention the simialr (and probably better) look. If GW wanted to modify the rules for their own publication that wouldn't have been a problem.

If the kit is available at a decent price, the iconography is optional and they're similar size I wouldn't be against getting it for use as a "counts as" caestus since I don't like working with resin, especially for larger kits.

I find it amusing that people are griping against a potential retcon to Wolves fluff by citing a previous retcon (3rdEd) as canon.


Also, again, The military has many ships that are virtually smaller variations of larger ships. Space Wolves tend to fight in smaller packs (on full expeditions, not like in battle) It would make sense to have smaller assault ships, therefore having a smaller variation of the Ceastus.

The US Navy has smaller versions of Aircraft Carriers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

I mean, if they serve roughly the same purpose why not just use the big ones? Because you don't always NEED the big ones thats why. The military is full of different model crafts that serve redundant purposes. It shows a lack of military knowledge when one complains that having redundant crafts is "unrealistic" when it's actually very realistic.

Triangle time!

Anyway - back on TOPIC.

With the new assault flier, does this make SW termies viable again?

Going off of the DA codex - could we see an upgraded Terminator squad or just plain new rules for WG?

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Triangle time!

Anyway - back on TOPIC.

With the new assault flier, does this make SW termies viable again?

Going off of the DA codex - could we see an upgraded Terminator squad or just plain new rules for WG?

I can't see how it would help them much. They are still overcosted, and the earliest you can get into assault from a flier is turn 3, that's best case. That also doesn't factor danger to passengers being on a destroyed flier(STR 10 AP1 hits to everyone).

It would be cool to see some positive changes to WG terminators though.

 SmurfInABlender wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Plus, the Space Wolf codex was woefully lacking in the "requisite giant model" category.

Well, it could have been a Wolfknight instead. A quadrupedal Dreadnought for a critically injured thunderwolf, ridden by a Space Wolf Dreadnought.

I already have a wolfknight. No need for them to make one when the conversion is simple.



And you guys think GW takes it too far. I like to go "How can I wolf this up even more than they do?"

Thats awsome looks really good

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

Such duplication is commonplace in real world armies, and also within 40k universe - for example, Razorback vs Immolator.

I always wanted a Caestus but my experiences assembling a Storm Eagle have scared me off, so this looks like a safe compromise. With all the Storm Raven bits (wings etc) I have lying around from the aforementioned Eagle it should be a fun customization project.

Space Wolves allied detachment is go!

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Triangle time!

Anyway - back on TOPIC.

With the new assault flier, does this make SW termies viable again?

Going off of the DA codex - could we see an upgraded Terminator squad or just plain new rules for WG?

I can't see how it would help them much. They are still overcosted, and the earliest you can get into assault from a flier is turn 3, that's best case. That also doesn't factor danger to passengers being on a destroyed flier(STR 10 AP1 hits to everyone).

It would be cool to see some positive changes to WG terminators though.

Does it not make a difference that the Stormwolf version has an assault ramp? I know that you can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves but doesn't this supersede that a little bit because the assault ramp is meant to allow a disembark to go into assault like on a Land Raider. Right?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
If someone has access to the 2nd Ed Space Wolf Codex, feel free to add anything:

Codex Space Wolves, 3rd Edition, page 4 wrote:Will Not Teleport: Space Wolves have little trust or respect for the more arcane aspects of the technology used by the Imperium. In particular, they dislike the idea of teleporting into battle and remain stubbornly opposed to its use. To represent this, any Space Wolves models with Terminator armour may not Deep Strike unless the entire army enters play in drop pods.

Codex Space Wolves, 5th Edition, page 61, the rules for Terminator Armour wrote:NB: Though the Terminators of other Space Marine Chapters often teleport straight into battle, Space Wolves have a deep mistrust of such arcane tactics and prefer to fight on their feet on solid ground, just as Russ intended.

They are fine with aircraft. They are fine with space flight. They are fine with orbital deployment, gunships, rough landings, Land Speeders, jump packs and pogo-sticks. They don't like to teleport, and Logan Grimnar came out in 2000. Can we all move on now?

The flight thing is on the right next to the Stormclaw entry in the third ed codex and just refers to jump packs.

edit "The Space Wolves have a perverse disdain for jump packs, preferring ot fight with both feet firmly planted on the ground "as Russ intended"." 3rd ed codex.

I totally must have sold my 2nd ed SW Codex :(

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Triangle time!

Anyway - back on TOPIC.

With the new assault flier, does this make SW termies viable again?

Going off of the DA codex - could we see an upgraded Terminator squad or just plain new rules for WG?

I can't see how it would help them much. They are still overcosted, and the earliest you can get into assault from a flier is turn 3, that's best case. That also doesn't factor danger to passengers being on a destroyed flier(STR 10 AP1 hits to everyone).

It would be cool to see some positive changes to WG terminators though.

Does it not make a difference that the Stormwolf version has an assault ramp? I know that you can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves but doesn't this supersede that a little bit because the assault ramp is meant to allow a disembark to go into assault like on a Land Raider. Right?

Unfortunately no, Stormraven has the same problem.

So, while they can assault when they disembark thanks to the ramp...it has to be on a turn after they arrive from Reserves.

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Triangle time!

Anyway - back on TOPIC.

With the new assault flier, does this make SW termies viable again?

Going off of the DA codex - could we see an upgraded Terminator squad or just plain new rules for WG?

I can't see how it would help them much. They are still overcosted, and the earliest you can get into assault from a flier is turn 3, that's best case. That also doesn't factor danger to passengers being on a destroyed flier(STR 10 AP1 hits to everyone).

It would be cool to see some positive changes to WG terminators though.

Does it not make a difference that the Stormwolf version has an assault ramp? I know that you can't assault on the turn you come on from reserves but doesn't this supersede that a little bit because the assault ramp is meant to allow a disembark to go into assault like on a Land Raider. Right?

Unfortunately no, Stormraven has the same problem.

So, while they can assault when they disembark thanks to the ramp...it has to be on a turn after they arrive from Reserves.

That sucks, maybe they'll come out with a special rule "Hunger of the Wolf" or something that lets them assault because they're so eager to get into combat

 pretre wrote:
edit "The Space Wolves have a perverse disdain for jump packs, preferring ot fight with both feet firmly planted on the ground "as Russ intended"." 3rd ed codex.

And yet they still use them, unlike teleporation, which they categorically do not.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 pretre wrote:
edit "The Space Wolves have a perverse disdain for jump packs, preferring ot fight with both feet firmly planted on the ground "as Russ intended"." 3rd ed codex.

Slightly different to a deep distrust of arcane technology.

Yeah, it's separate issues, imo. One is 'avoid the warp'; the other is 'It may be funny to hit each other while flying through the air like some sort of chinese wire-work movie, but that's not how Russ used to roll'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
And yet they still use them, unlike teleporation, which they categorically do not.

Ninja edit! Yeah, I think one is a deep prohibition. Might even say that they think of Teleportation as a kind of sorcery/maleficarum since it involves the warp. Whereas the other one, they just think is silly and only for pups.

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:

That sucks, maybe they'll come out with a special rule "Hunger of the Wolf" or something that lets them assault because they're so eager to get into combat

When that happens, Ork players, Dark Eldar players and Tyranid players will all break down in tears.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:

That sucks, maybe they'll come out with a special rule "Hunger of the Wolf" or something that lets them assault because they're so eager to get into combat

When that happens, Ork players, Dark Eldar players and Tyranid players will all break down in tears.

So will Eldar. Tau and Necron players, for different reasons

There really should be several units across different armies that should be able to assault the turn they arrive. Lictors most definitely. It should represent a unit's ability to get in to combat before the enemy even has a chance to fire. So yeah, Lictors should, Space Wolves, eh, not so much.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:

That sucks, maybe they'll come out with a special rule "Hunger of the Wolf" or something that lets them assault because they're so eager to get into combat

When that happens, Ork players, Dark Eldar players and Tyranid players will all break down in tears.

You mean I could have a cheesy assault rule AND make people cry?! It literally would be Christmas in July!

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
There really should be several units across different armies that should be able to assault the turn they arrive. Lictors most definitely. It should represent a unit's ability to get in to combat before the enemy even has a chance to fire. So yeah, Lictors should, Space Wolves, eh, not so much.

I agree.

I don't know what the difference is between coming down the speed of sound in a drop pod, being able to "move out" and shoot at full effectiveness or throw a bomb etc...., and then not be able to assault because? Jet lag?

Or teleporting on the field and have to forgo shooting so you're not clumped up for 5" template goodness.

Seems silly and historically they've made this change as we have moved through the editions as those in 3rd will remember BA/Zerker Rhino rush

Good times.

So yeah, Lictors should, Space Wolves, eh, not so much.

Your opinion.

I don't think it breaks the fluff, i just think it looks wonky.

Justyn wrote:

So yeah, Lictors should, Space Wolves, eh, not so much.

Your opinion.

I figured that was kind of implied. The "eh, not so much" was because I wouldn't be offended if Space Wolves got to assault out of reserves, but to think they deserve it more than a unit like Lictors is kind of crazy... in my opinion.

Yeah,
Who wants to play in a game with assaulting the turn you turn up?

Panic...

 Panic wrote:
Yeah,
Who wants to play in a game with assaulting the turn you turn up?

Panic...

Who wants to play a game with only ONE army that can assault on turn one"

It makes no sense to me that Genestealers and the such like can't assault when they Outflank...

They've deliberately gone round the side of an enemy just to arrive and suddenly decide they're FAR too tired to assault and decide to sit and wait for the enemy to realise they are there?

Can we get over the assault tangent since none of the rumors indicated anything of the sort?

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Panic wrote:
Yeah,
Who wants to play in a game with assaulting the turn you turn up?

Panic...

Who wants to play a game with only ONE army that can assault on turn one"

Well...I'm sure there will be a number of "Wolf" armies of a rainbow of colors and spikiness once again if that should come to pass. I know if Blood Angels get some kind of "Assault out of Their fast Rhinos" or "deep strike AMs can assault" I'm going to have a Chaos Raptor Blood Angel army painted like Knights of Blood faster than you can say "Hey those aren't Loyalist models..."

 Peregrine wrote:
(...)now you have to ask why they bother with these new flyers when they already have one that fills the same role.

By that logic, the Rhino chassis has no place on the battlefield because the Land Rider exists.

 pretre wrote:
Can we get over the assault tangent since none of the rumors indicated anything of the sort?

I'm not sure this thread is ready for that or when Logan came out or if the wolf flier is pretty or if SW should fly/teleport/be fluffy....

I'm pretty sure that if Logan had come out in 2000, he'd've been able to assault out of a Caestus ram, on the grounds that (a) it's pretty and (b) I painted it so there is soil and grass on the inside of the ramp, enabling him to 'fight with his feet on the ground', whereas if he was more recent than that there's no way he could assault out of a Stormwolf, because that's clearly ugly AND unfluffy.

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if Logan had come out in 2000, he'd've been able to assault out of a Caestus ram, on the grounds that (a) it's pretty and (b) I painted it so there is soil and grass on the inside of the ramp, enabling him to 'fight with his feet on the ground', whereas if he was more recent than that there's no way he could assault out of a Stormwolf, because that's clearly ugly AND unfluffy.

Khine wrote:Real world example. Two young boys are born on the same day, at the same time, in the same city, in the same hospital, whose mothers were both in the same room. They both fill the role of child and son to a mother. Why not, by your logic, make both mothers share the same child? Because, by your logic, why should the both exist?

SmurfInABlender wrote:Also, again, The military has many ships that are virtually smaller variations of larger ships. Space Wolves tend to fight in smaller packs (on full expeditions, not like in battle) It would make sense to have smaller assault ships, therefore having a smaller variation of the Ceastus.

The US Navy has smaller versions of Aircraft Carriers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

I mean, if they serve roughly the same purpose why not just use the big ones? Because you don't always NEED the big ones thats why. The military is full of different model crafts that serve redundant purposes. It shows a lack of military knowledge when one complains that having redundant crafts is "unrealistic" when it's actually very realistic.

His Master's Voice wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
(...)now you have to ask why they bother with these new flyers when they already have one that fills the same role.

By that logic, the Rhino chassis has no place on the battlefield because the Land Rider exists.

I don't necessarily disagree that the Stormwhatever and the Caestus should not coexist in a given army, but you guys really suck at analogies.

1) Comparing kids to military vehicles, really?

2) Large ships are very different, they are big complex devices that take many man hours and dollars to build, so you're more likely to see core design variation than smaller vehicles which tend to get locked in to a single core design with variations coming in the form of additions to it (kind of like how there's several vehicles based off the Chimera chassis).

3) The LR and Rhino are 2 completely different roles, one is a large, expensive, heavily armed assault transport vehicle, the other is a small, cheaper, lightly armed non-assault transport.

Now sure, I could see the Caestus and the giant dog's head coexisting in an army, but you guys really need to start coming up with better analogies, lol.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The LR and Rhino are 2 completely different roles, one is a large, expensive, heavily armed assault transport vehicle, the other is a small, cheaper, lightly armed non-assault transport.

The Predator is almost as heavily armoured as the Land Rider on the front. Nothing prevents SM from slapping a Vindicator shield on a Rhino and driving it up the enemy's face.

The point is, having multiple vehicles serving similar roles with a different chassis is not some universe shattering breach of reason.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:


Now sure, I could see the Caestus and the giant dog's head coexisting in an army, but you guys really need to start coming up with better analogies, lol.

There's a reason analogies are usually crappy forms of debate.

People tend to only fashion an analogy that advances their own agenda. The actual strength of the analogy is secondary to whether or not it advances the arguer's position.

I'll check back now and then to see when the complaining stops.

 pretre wrote:
Can we get over the assault tangent since none of the rumors indicated anything of the sort?

Yep, the White Dwarf leaks indicate that the Stomwolf will have go into hover mode and wait until the following turn in order to disembark it's troops. So, two turns minimum for it's embarked troops to assault.

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

what, you mean like a razor back?

or one of the upteen variations on the lemen russ chassis?

or chimera chassis?

or the eldar wave serpant chassis?

Looking at everything I have seen I like most of wht I an seeing.

The Stormwolf: Th looks don't me, I use a Terminator 2 Hunter Killer Flyer as a proxy for 90% of my flyers anyways [th other 10% is a Toothless for my Helrake]. It is nice to et a Space Wolf Specific Flyer not just a copy/paste Marined Flyer.

Grey Hunters: Mixed Feelings. The more options for for more Plasma sound great along with the optinal Wolf Guard looks to be a good way to handle it. The buy/tade for your Chainsword...buy a Chainsword, YAY it will stop some of the complaning...sorry whinning about the extra CCW. Trading for the Chainsword I don't like, but thas s a WYSIWYG issue.

Blood Claws: Like what I have seen so far, though the 5-20 size means nw models.

Bjorn: I like the Idea of him become a Lord of War, I just hope he can now take a Drop Pod.

Logan: Lord of War??? Well I can work with that.

The rest I am going to take with a gain of salt.

 His Master's Voice wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The LR and Rhino are 2 completely different roles, one is a large, expensive, heavily armed assault transport vehicle, the other is a small, cheaper, lightly armed non-assault transport.

The Predator is almost as heavily armoured as the Land Rider on the front. Nothing prevents SM from slapping a Vindicator shield on a Rhino and driving it up the enemy's face.

Land Raider is still a hugely different vehicle. A Predator is almost as heavily armoured as a Land Raider... but sacrifices transport capacity. You could slap a Vindicator shield on a Rhino, but it still doesn't have 14 AV all round and a front assault ramp. The Land Raider is unique compared to the Rhino and Rhino chassis variants.

A better 40k analogy would be the Chimera and Taurox. 2 vehicles that fill pretty much the same role but aren't based off the same core design. Of course people also bitch that the Taurox is unnecessary, lol. A better real world example would be the Hurricane and Spitfire, two unique vehicles that fill basically the same battlefield role.

With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

 easysauce wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

what, you mean like a razor back?

or one of the upteen variations on the lemen russ chassis?

or chimera chassis?

or the eldar wave serpant chassis?

Again with the bad comparisons. All of those are variants of the same chassis, not a unique vehicles that fills the same role as another vehicle.

You mean like raiders and venoms?

I don't think it's fair to compare a fairly large cumbersome resin thing to a plastic model that's lighter and smaller. I wouldn't want to carry that ceastus thing anywhere.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Again: Context.

The idea is they like firm, proven technologies.

Thus, they decide to create their own special snowflake dropship/gunship and their own special snowflake super-cannon. Meanwhile teleportation technology, which has been used by almost every Astartes for 11 millenia, is "unproven" technology.

Razorbacks are explicitly noted within their descriptions as being a new and relatively unproven technology, yet they eagerly use those as well. I don't think the reliability of the technology has anything to do with it. What I think is that they simply don't like teleportation technology, and the line about solid ground is just flowery nonsense.

I like it because it looks like the Cassius ram but isn't made from sketchy FW resin. Heck... I've got half a mind to get two and glue them together to make my own ram.

And there are still places that frown on FW. This bridges the gap.

I wonder if people would be complaining about battlefield roless if it has the DA flier rules but still looked like it does?

 Eldarain wrote:
With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

this is actually a good thing,


you now get 2 hq choices, AND your 3rd "LOW HQ"

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

 easysauce wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

In what way?

 Eldarain wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

In what way?

because if you take this LoW your slot is already occupied and cannot take another unless you take another CAD.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Again: Context.

The idea is they like firm, proven technologies.

Thus, they decide to create their own special snowflake dropship/gunship and their own special snowflake super-cannon. Meanwhile teleportation technology, which has been used by almost every Astartes for 11 millenia, is "unproven" technology.

Razorbacks are explicitly noted within their descriptions as being a new and relatively unproven technology, yet they eagerly use those as well. I don't think the reliability of the technology has anything to do with it. What I think is that they simply don't like teleportation technology, and the line about solid ground is just flowery nonsense.

Yeah yeah, we all know it's a badly written section of fluff that has randomly and unnecessarily been retconned in and out depending on what the fluff writers were eating the night before, lets try and get past it.

GW never should have introduced that silly bit of fluff and if they did, they should have explained it better and elaborated on it better.

 easysauce wrote:

this is actually a good thing,


you now get 2 hq choices, AND your 3rd "LOW HQ"

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

What if you don't want two HQ's+a pseudo-HQ and/or your list doesn't support two HQ's+a pseudo-HQ?

What if... you just want to use fething Ghazghkull as your HQ like you've been doing for ten years and not simultaneously open the floodgates to Apocalypse units troll-facing in your games?

The obvious answer is "times change, move on". But I think it's fair to say that moving iconic HQ's to the LoW slot is very obviously just a form of coercion. If you want more than three HQ's, you can take multiple detachments/allied detachments.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Yeah yeah, we all know it's a badly written section of fluff that has randomly and unnecessarily been retconned in and out depending on what the fluff writers were eating the night before, lets try and get past it.

Well, if we all knew it then I wouldn't be having this conversation.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

this is actually a good thing,


you now get 2 hq choices, AND your 3rd "LOW HQ"

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

What if you don't want two HQ's+a pseudo-HQ and/or your list doesn't support two HQ's+a pseudo-HQ?

What if... you just want to use fething Ghazghkull as your HQ like you've been doing for ten years and not open the floodgates to Apocalypse units troll-facing in your games?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Yeah yeah, we all know it's a badly written section of fluff that has randomly and unnecessarily been retconned in and out depending on what the fluff writers were eating the night before, lets try and get past it.

Well, if we all knew it then I wouldn't be having this conversation.

unbound?

 easysauce wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

this is actually a good thing,


you now get 2 hq choices, AND your 3rd "LOW HQ"

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

"You want to use Ghaz? Cool, I'll just field my Phantom Titan then since it's also a LOW!"

Totally awesome, right? No. It was a dumb move. He doesn't have the stats of a LOW, even another infantry LOW like the Primarchs. He's barely better than a normal Warboss, statwise.

How does Unbound allow you to use use fething Ghazghkull as your HQ like you've been doing for ten years and not open the floodgates to Apocalypse units troll-facing in your games? lol

You can use any unit in the game in an Unbound list.

you seriously WANT an ork list with one, and ONLY one hq?


WTF are you building your list to do?

there are rules that allow you to not need to take an HQ for that already... so you can stop QQ'ing about your "ten year list" suddenly being invalid as you can still take it, and no one worth playing will not let you take ghazz.

for tourneys,
any competitive list you will take an HQ as well as ghazzy if you think ghazz is really a competitive choice...

getting 4 HQ's + ghazzy is better for orks then being able to feild ghaz as an HQ solo with no other hq's..

 streamdragon wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

this is actually a good thing,


you now get 2 hq choices, AND your 3rd "LOW HQ"

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

"You want to use Ghaz? Cool, I'll just field my Phantom Titan then since it's also a LOW!"

Totally awesome, right? No. It was a dumb move. He doesn't have the stats of a LOW, even another infantry LOW like the Primarchs. He's barely better than a normal Warboss, statwise.

so... don't play that douche who wants to use a Phantom Titan against you. Or Phantom Titan's suddenly burst into existence because you bring a LOW? Does everybody who owns a titan bring it everyday to the store just in case someone brings Ghaz?

ah but it's forum overreaction... never mind me then.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
How does Unbound allow you to use use fething Ghazghkull as your HQ like you've been doing for ten years and not open the floodgates to Apocalypse units troll-facing in your games? lol

You can use any unit in the game in an Unbound list.

Because you can play an Unbound list with Ghazkul without your opponent having one, just as they can play unbound and bring 'apocalypse units' while you play a Battle Forged list. What how you and your opponent build your lists are exclusive and independent events.

The issue is that SC LOW is stupid as a concept

 streamdragon wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
With the way they treated Ghaz it's looking like each army will just arbitrarily have their most Iconic characters moved to the LoW slot without much of a boost.

That's really disappointing as it would have been a great opportunity to mirror what their FW peers (betters?) did with the Primarchs in 30K

It comes off feeling like an artificial way to break down player resistance to LoWs to me.

this is actually a good thing,


you now get 2 hq choices, AND your 3rd "LOW HQ"

also helps keep in check the # of "uber OMG ROFLSTOMP" units people can take

"You want to use Ghaz? Cool, I'll just field my Phantom Titan then since it's also a LOW!"

Totally awesome, right? No. It was a dumb move. He doesn't have the stats of a LOW, even another infantry LOW like the Primarchs. He's barely better than a normal Warboss, statwise.

so unecessary attitude and being unrealistic? yup sounds like streamdragon...

tournaments allow ghazzy, they dont allow revenaunts, welcome to players packs, this shouldnt be news as these kinds of things have been needed for tournaments for every edition.

orks can get 5+ hq's with the way GW did it, its awesome, your PUG games you can still use ghazzy as your leader if you are so upset over having to take one of the other awesome HQ' choices that make your list better as well...

ghazzy is also available as a AWESOME formation that kicks so much butt it makes me glad to be an ork... so he can be your warlord still, and wont take up a low slot...

so we can get 3 + 5 "hqs" that way...


have fun complaining about that huge buff though,

Where did all the SW rumors go?

Take all the gak talk to this thread

The LOW debate happened around page 7 or so when we heard Bjorn and Logan may be in the LOW slot.

Not debating the merits of the rule, but I for one don't mind so much.

Whats slowed is that Gazzy the iconic image of a warboss can't have a stompa in his detachment. Makes no sense. If they go this route with all books it means Abby can never have a LOW in his detachment....Excuse me what!? Those are the types that would have titans in their vanguard. Yet hillariously enough, in one detachment, exiled folks like Fabulous Bill can have their own LOW...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
Where did all the SW rumors go?

Take all the gak talk to this thread

The LOW debate happened around page 7 or so when we heard Bjorn and Logan may be in the LOW slot.

Not debating the merits of the rule, but I for one don't mind so much.

Welcome to a rumors thread. In the absence of steady new rumors we have nothing but speculation. My guess is its a week until anything new is released from the next WDW.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Whats slowed is that Gazzy the iconic image of a warboss can't have a stompa in his detachment. Makes no sense. If they go this route with all books it means Abby can never have a LOW in his detachment....Excuse me what!? Those are the types that would have titans in their vanguard. Yet hillariously enough, in one detachment, exiled folks like Fabulous Bill can have their own LOW...

You can take the stompa in the second detachment if my reading of the new force org rules is correct. You can take as many detachments as you want as long as the points fit and the minimum requirements are met. If you don't have 4 troops and 2 hq's in your ork force, I'd say that you're not the typical player. This is frankly mostly a non-issue. Also, you of course have the completely bat-poop crazy unbound rules if you don't meet those minimum requirements as well.

 pretre wrote:
Can we get over the assault tangent since none of the rumors indicated anything of the sort?

Good job, now they are argueing over how many HQs Orks should run.

For those wanting to Assault as early as possible with the new flier, you can run a Skyshield Landing Pad with the upgrade that allows a flyer to start on it.

Could do a turn 2 assault pretty easily, depending on some variables.

I really think these 2 new fliers are winners, due to the firepower and armor.

 pretre wrote:

I feel this short clip sums up my initial impression of it pretty accurately



Although I'm hardly an impartial party, as I've always felt space wolf stuff looked kind of stupid in general, and I play Orks for goodness sake.

Thanks for the contribution anyways! :eyeroll:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

I feel this short clip sums up my initial impression of it pretty accurately

That would also have been my initial impression if it weren't for the fact I collect Space Wolves

Well obviously looks are subjective, but it's a cockpit and big engines with big guns strapped to either an even bigger gun or a compliment of Russ' finest.

What's not to like?

That is the stupidest model I have ever seen, and that includes the Dreadknight. It's literally a Storm Talon with a huge box slapped on the front. The missile pods that flank the cockpit are flush with the huge box, and are never going to hit anything other than the craft itself.

It looks like the results of accidentally going too far with the Extrude tool in Sketchup.

I think you might be confusing missiles with rockets. Missiles have guidance. You can fire them out and then they use their propulsion and limited machine spirit to hit their target.

 pretre wrote:
I think you might be confusing missiles with rockets. Missiles have guidance. You can fire them out and then they use their propulsion and limited machine spirit to hit their target.

Gravity/wind turbulence coming over the hull would pull them into the hull before the guidance had a chance to adjust the trajectory.

Also, the exhaust from the rocket would blind the pilot/obscure the windscreen.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 pretre wrote:
I think you might be confusing missiles with rockets. Missiles have guidance. You can fire them out and then they use their propulsion and limited machine spirit to hit their target.

Gravity/wind turbulence coming over the hull would pull them into the hull before the guidance had a chance to adjust the trajectory.

Okay, I may not have been clear that I was referring to sci-fi when I put machine spirit in there, so I'll take my lumps and back out of the 'that space soldier's sci-fi ship is unrealistic' debate.

40K becoming too unrealistic is a worry that keeps me awake at night.

I demand strict historical and ballistic accuracy in my games of millennia-old demonic space soldier wizards who live in another dimension, fighting against Lovecraftian-Egyptian teleporting undead space robots.

Any hint that the designer has not conducted extensive research into the accurate weather patterns on extra-planar sorcerous battlegrounds before creating the Ordnance rules just ruins my suspension of disbelief.

I am off to play Infinity instead, where at least the manga-esque hyper-parkour stunts of reincarnated Achilles are grounded in a realistic extrapolation of nanotechnological progress.

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
40K becoming too unrealistic is a worry that keeps me awake at night.

I demand strict historical and ballistic accuracy in my games of millennia-old demonic space soldier wizards who live in another dimension, fighting against Lovecraftian-Egyptian teleporting undead space robots.

Any hint that the designer has not conducted extensive research into the accurate weather patterns on extra-planar sorcerous battlegrounds before creating the Ordnance rules just ruins my suspension of disbelief.

I am off to play Infinity instead, where at least the manga-esque hyper-parkour stunts of reincarnated Achilles are grounded in a realistic extrapolation of nanotechnological progress.

Have an exalt! I spit coffee all over my work computer when i read this.

 Frankenberry wrote:

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
40K becoming too unrealistic is a worry that keeps me awake at night.

I demand strict historical and ballistic accuracy in my games of millennia-old demonic space soldier wizards who live in another dimension, fighting against Lovecraftian-Egyptian teleporting undead space robots.

Any hint that the designer has not conducted extensive research into the accurate weather patterns on extra-planar sorcerous battlegrounds before creating the Ordnance rules just ruins my suspension of disbelief.

I am off to play Infinity instead, where at least the manga-esque hyper-parkour stunts of reincarnated Achilles are grounded in a realistic extrapolation of nanotechnological progress.

Have an exalt! I spit coffee all over my work computer when i read this.

lol, I was preparing to go grab a cup of coffee after reading the thread, saved my monitor this time.

 pretre wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 pretre wrote:
I think you might be confusing missiles with rockets. Missiles have guidance. You can fire them out and then they use their propulsion and limited machine spirit to hit their target.

Gravity/wind turbulence coming over the hull would pull them into the hull before the guidance had a chance to adjust the trajectory.

Okay, I may not have been clear that I was referring to sci-fi when I put machine spirit in there, so I'll take my lumps and back out of the 'that space soldier's sci-fi ship is unrealistic' debate.

Note how I did not mention that the Stormwolf would be completely unable to fly. It's not about that. If the Vindicator's siege shield covered the barrel of the demolisher cannon, would it be unfair to point out that there's no way the demolisher cannon could fire without hitting the siege shield? Having fantastical elements in the setting does not mean that all logic goes out the window. By your logic, a Chaos Space Marine could throw a grenade while standing atop a ship in space and hit The Emperor on Terra on the head with it, with absolutely no Warp assistance, because any attempts at realism are dumb due to the setting having anti-gravity technology and space elves. That's not how suspension of disbelief works.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 pretre wrote:
I think you might be confusing missiles with rockets. Missiles have guidance. You can fire them out and then they use their propulsion and limited machine spirit to hit their target.

Gravity/wind turbulence coming over the hull would pull them into the hull before the guidance had a chance to adjust the trajectory.

Okay, I may not have been clear that I was referring to sci-fi when I put machine spirit in there, so I'll take my lumps and back out of the 'that space soldier's sci-fi ship is unrealistic' debate.

Note how I did not mention that the Stormwolf would be completely unable to fly. It's not about that. If the Vindicator's siege shield covered the barrel of the demolisher cannon, would it be unfair to point out that there's no way the demolisher cannon could fire without hitting the siege shield? Having fantastical elements in the setting does not mean that all logic goes out the window. By your logic, a Chaos Space Marine could throw a grenade while standing atop a ship in space and hit The Emperor on Terra on the head with it, with absolutely no Warp assistance, because any attempts at realism are dumb due to the setting having anti-gravity technology and space elves. That's not how suspension of disbelief works.

Can we write this into the fluff officially?

The positioning of the weapons is pretty awful, but not because of the looks - because it limits them significantly via the game mechanics (LOS). They are NEVER going to be able to hit anything that's not at the same height that they are, and they can't even shoot much higher because they're limited to a 22.5 degree angle.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 pretre wrote:
I think you might be confusing missiles with rockets. Missiles have guidance. You can fire them out and then they use their propulsion and limited machine spirit to hit their target.

Gravity/wind turbulence coming over the hull would pull them into the hull before the guidance had a chance to adjust the trajectory.

Okay, I may not have been clear that I was referring to sci-fi when I put machine spirit in there, so I'll take my lumps and back out of the 'that space soldier's sci-fi ship is unrealistic' debate.

Note how I did not mention that the Stormwolf would be completely unable to fly. It's not about that. If the Vindicator's siege shield covered the barrel of the demolisher cannon, would it be unfair to point out that there's no way the demolisher cannon could fire without hitting the siege shield? Having fantastical elements in the setting does not mean that all logic goes out the window. By your logic, a Chaos Space Marine could throw a grenade while standing atop a ship in space and hit The Emperor on Terra on the head with it, with absolutely no Warp assistance, because any attempts at realism are dumb due to the setting having anti-gravity technology and space elves. That's not how suspension of disbelief works.

I dunno, was he ever in sports as a kid?

Maybe he could, but never did and now we are stuck where we are... should have thrown that grenade dude

I'm really hoping "Warriors of Fenris" refers to the rumored dual generic/special character kits I posted about in the OP.

I cannot imagine GW making a second SW kit seeings as how the first one covers the big three units (BC, GH, WG) already...

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm really hoping "Warriors of Fenris" refers to the rumored dual generic/special character kits I posted about in the OP.

I cannot imagine GW making a second SW kit seeings as how the first one covers the big three units (BC, GH, WG) already...

It's actually "Ancient Warriors of Fenris"

Expect Dreadnoughts or something?..IMO

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm really hoping "Warriors of Fenris" refers to the rumored dual generic/special character kits I posted about in the OP.

I cannot imagine GW making a second SW kit seeings as how the first one covers the big three units (BC, GH, WG) already...

It's actually "Ancient Warriors of Fenris"

Expect Dreadnoughts or something?..IMO

I would be ecstatic if there is a SW dreadnought kit that you can also make Bjorn with.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm really hoping "Warriors of Fenris" refers to the rumored dual generic/special character kits I posted about in the OP.

I cannot imagine GW making a second SW kit seeings as how the first one covers the big three units (BC, GH, WG) already...

It's actually "Ancient Warriors of Fenris"

Expect Dreadnoughts or something?..IMO

I would be ecstatic if there is a SW dreadnought kit that you can also make Bjorn with.

Same, the Finecast Bjorn does not do him justice. I want one that gives me the same presence as the cover of Battle of The Fang.

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm really hoping "Warriors of Fenris" refers to the rumored dual generic/special character kits I posted about in the OP.

I cannot imagine GW making a second SW kit seeings as how the first one covers the big three units (BC, GH, WG) already...

It's actually "Ancient Warriors of Fenris"

Expect Dreadnoughts or something?..IMO

I would be ecstatic if there is a SW dreadnought kit that you can also make Bjorn with.

Same, the Finecast Bjorn does not do him justice. I want one that gives me the same presence as the cover of Battle of The Fang.

Or taking out your opponent by chucking the pewter one and bouncing it off his head.

It'll probably just be Elite Wolf Guard, in the same way Blood Angels got Elite Veteran Assault Marines (Sang Guard) and Dark Angels got Elite Deathwing (Deathwing Knights). And then when everyone has their Elite elite unit, they'll do an Elite elite elite unit.

I love all this talk of aerodynamics. I mean it really is ridiculous that they make flyers that can't fly, it's not like they have anti-gravity technology......oh wait.....but still the missiles would totally hit the hull unless the space marines had some kind of suspensor tech that could be fitted to small things like skulls that could push off the hull after the missile was launched....oh thats right....so anyway really nice flyer i guess?

... or they could put the missile launchers in places that *don't* require such workarounds for no obvious gain?

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Bulldogging wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
I'm really hoping "Warriors of Fenris" refers to the rumored dual generic/special character kits I posted about in the OP.

I cannot imagine GW making a second SW kit seeings as how the first one covers the big three units (BC, GH, WG) already...

It's actually "Ancient Warriors of Fenris"

Expect Dreadnoughts or something?..IMO

I would be ecstatic if there is a SW dreadnought kit that you can also make Bjorn with.

Same, the Finecast Bjorn does not do him justice. I want one that gives me the same presence as the cover of Battle of The Fang.

Or taking out your opponent by chucking the pewter one and bouncing it off his head.

Nearly happened to me once. No word of a lie.

If you read the WD article snippet we've seen the transport version doesn't start firing it's weapons until it's A: Stationary and B: Has already unloaded it's troops.
So really we should be talking about how stupid that is rather than perceived design flaws in the ship.

 plastictrees wrote:
If you read the WD article snippet we've seen the transport version doesn't start firing it's weapons until it's A: Stationary and B: Has already unloaded it's troops.
So really we should be talking about how stupid that is rather than perceived design flaws in the ship.

It also mentions that it's "safer than teleporting" for Wolf Guard terminators and that it should get them in to close combat just as well.

Well, that's technically true. You might be blown up but you've reduced the chance of harrowing warp entities pulling your soul out through your nose to zero.

The lack of aerodynamics doesn't bother me... it's a futuristic plane, who the hell knows how it flies.

It's more the fact that it just doesn't look like a particularly agile craft (which is what I would expect from a gunship) that doesn't work for me.


Well, that and the missile sponsons directly in front of those massive jet intakes. I can't see that ending well.

 plastictrees wrote:
Well, that's technically true. You might be blown up but you've reduced the chance of harrowing warp entities pulling your soul out through your nose to zero.

It's interesting that they would even mention teleporting in what otherwise looks like a tactical briefing on the transport, given that Space Wolf terminators currently can't teleport.

Because they don't like to, and the author is most likely making reference to that, but still. I would much prefer an assault transport to getting my soul yanked Egyptian-style.

The termies in the Stormclaw box had Deep Strike, so we might see it on the full codex versions too.

 insaniak wrote:
The lack of aerodynamics doesn't bother me... it's a futuristic plane, who the hell knows how it flies.

It's more the fact that it just doesn't look like a particularly agile craft (which is what I would expect from a gunship) that doesn't work for me.

Blocky works well enough for a troop carrier, but yeah not so much for a gunship. Gunships are sleek, low profile attack craft that evade or outpace fire. Transports are blocky for capacity and armoured to protect the contents.

Landing craft can very much look like:

 warboss wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Whats slowed is that Gazzy the iconic image of a warboss can't have a stompa in his detachment. Makes no sense. If they go this route with all books it means Abby can never have a LOW in his detachment....Excuse me what!? Those are the types that would have titans in their vanguard. Yet hillariously enough, in one detachment, exiled folks like Fabulous Bill can have their own LOW...

You can take the stompa in the second detachment if my reading of the new force org rules is correct. You can take as many detachments as you want as long as the points fit and the minimum requirements are met. If you don't have 4 troops and 2 hq's in your ork force, I'd say that you're not the typical player. This is frankly mostly a non-issue. Also, you of course have the completely bat-poop crazy unbound rules if you don't meet those minimum requirements as well.

Yea except in lower point games where you can't afford to have to CAD.

Oh then there is the fact that Gaz can never be your warlord

Seriously, it would have been better to put these guys in a new slot like Titans of Lore of some such cinematic crap then to have them compete with the type of units they should be leading in droves.

It looks like a piece of a ship that broke off during atmospheric entry.

That said, it'll probably be av14, immune to melta, can change the missile launchers to twin linked battle cannons for five points and has an optional bomb-bay that drops Lone Wolves with dual hammers and stormshields.

 Alpharius wrote:
I like it!

But I'm not starting Space Wolves!

Alpha Legion has infiltrated everyone!

This picture is spot on:

Slap some jet engines on that, and you've essentially got the Stormthingoe.

Which, given the general WWII-ish aesthetic in 40K vehicles, is perfect for a landing craft.

I just kind-of wish that they had left the Stormthingoe as a transport and added the Talon for gunship support.

 Frankenberry wrote:
It looks like a piece of a ship that broke off during atmospheric entry.

That said, it'll probably be av14, immune to melta, can change the missile launchers to twin linked battle cannons for five points and has an optional bomb-bay that drops Lone Wolves with dual hammers and stormshields.

They've already posted the rules dude. Next time read the thread before you make a fool of yourself.

Firstly, in the current codex it makes a point that Blood Claws like to borrow thunderhawks and go zipping through the fjords, so even in the most recent fluff with "no teleporting" the wolves have no problem flying.

Second, I like the transport option. It reminds me a little of a 50s muscle car, with a hood scoop and a power charger. Perhaps the last of the V8 interceptors? My wolves have a new cruiser now and the DA can just sit back with their Mazda equivalents and wish the Sisters liked them instead.

Not to change the subject from hating the ship or discussion of Orks in this Space Wolves thread but had a look over of my models about this whole GH are bolter/bolt pistol and BC are bolt pistol/CCW but GH have the option of trading their bolter for a CCW.

And it got me wondering, say that rumour does become true, anybody got any plans on whether a Bolter/BP GH is preferred more than a BP/CCW GH? Because I'm looking at the Stormwolf and thinking about what Bulldogging said about the skyshield landing pad idea and it's giving me expensive ideas.

 insaniak wrote:
This picture is spot on:

Spoiler:

Slap some jet engines on that, and you've essentially got the Stormthingoe.

Which, given the general WWII-ish aesthetic in 40K vehicles, is perfect for a landing craft.

I just kind-of wish that they had left the Stormthingoe as a transport and added the Talon for gunship support.

Yeah as a transport it looks fine and especially fits the general ww2 theme of the imperium stuff which I don't mind tbh and why I'm somewhat partial to the model. Double role as a guncraft... it would need a lot more guns requiring a *lot* more ammo to make that blocky appearance semi realistic. more like a floating artillery base than a gunship.

 Hulksmash wrote:
I think I can manage the skull molded on since I play Iron Warriors and I could just paint it gold. I'm less sure about the work involved in removing stuff from the ramps and the sides of the flyer. I can't wait to see the sprues!!!!!!

Ditto im looking forward to seeing the sprues. I really hope all that wolf insignia crap is optional.

 insaniak wrote:
The lack of aerodynamics doesn't bother me... it's a futuristic plane, who the hell knows how it flies.

It's more the fact that it just doesn't look like a particularly agile craft (which is what I would expect from a gunship) that doesn't work for me.
Well, that and the missile sponsons directly in front of those massive jet intakes. I can't see that ending well.

I think it's fine as a troop-carrying dropship, and that there's a variant where someone figured out to improvise a BFG on it. I'm actually more annoyed that there's yet another chapter specific machine, and that GW needs to constantly invent a new Wolfy McWolferson tech item to slap on every new piece of gear, especially when half of the Imperium's fluff is that they're against any unsanctioned tech. Also, it's YET ANOTHER piece of wargear with it's own little special rule, as if there weren't enough of those. They're basically pissing on fluff AND game design at the same time.

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:
Not to change the subject from hating the ship or discussion of Orks in this Space Wolves thread but had a look over of my models about this whole GH are bolter/bolt pistol and BC are bolt pistol/CCW but GH have the option of trading their bolter for a CCW.

And it got me wondering, say that rumour does become true, anybody got any plans on whether a Bolter/BP GH is preferred more than a BP/CCW GH? Because I'm looking at the Stormwolf and thinking about what Bulldogging said about the skyshield landing pad idea and it's giving me expensive ideas.

It depends on their roll.
Plasma-Gun Armed: Keep The Bolt Guns, they are me mid ranged Gunline Unit.
Melta-Gun Armed: Not Sure, will pull out my Models and see and how much remodeling I will have to do.
Flamer Armed: I think they will end up with Bolt Pistols and Chain Swords.

Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:Not to change the subject from hating the ship or discussion of Orks in this Space Wolves thread but had a look over of my models about this whole GH are bolter/bolt pistol and BC are bolt pistol/CCW but GH have the option of trading their bolter for a CCW.

And it got me wondering, say that rumour does become true, anybody got any plans on whether a Bolter/BP GH is preferred more than a BP/CCW GH? Because I'm looking at the Stormwolf and thinking about what Bulldogging said about the skyshield landing pad idea and it's giving me expensive ideas.

Bolter/BP will most likely still be the best loadout. Shooting is king in 7th, and with Counter Attack your Grey Hunters are still getting an extra attack. Better to have all the rounds of shooting I think.

Plus if Blood Claws are coming down in price far enough to be valid, you don't really need your Grey Hunters trying to fill the assault role.

prowla wrote:I'm actually more annoyed that GW needs to constantly invent a new Wolfy McWolferson tech item to slap on every new piece of gear, especially when half of the Imperium's fluff is that they're against any unsanctioned tech. Also, it's YET ANOTHER piece of wargear with it's own little special rule, as if there weren't enough of those.

Don't they do this for all of the space marine chapters though? Back when Blood Angels came out, they got dreadnought rocket chain punches. When 'vanilla' SM came out, we got Grav weapons. Dark Angels get their... whatever they get, I admittedly don't know Dark Angels. Don't they get a -1T grenade or something?

 streamdragon wrote:
Dark Angels get their... whatever they get, I admittedly don't know Dark Angels. Don't they get a -1T grenade or something?

The re-introduction of Power Fields and Displacer Fields, and their own flyers.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:
It looks like a piece of a ship that broke off during atmospheric entry.

That said, it'll probably be av14, immune to melta, can change the missile launchers to twin linked battle cannons for five points and has an optional bomb-bay that drops Lone Wolves with dual hammers and stormshields.

They've already posted the rules dude. Next time read the thread before you make a fool of yourself.

Thanks, dad.

 streamdragon wrote:

Don't they do this for all of the space marine chapters though? Back when Blood Angels came out, they got dreadnought rocket chain punches. When 'vanilla' SM came out, we got Grav weapons. Dark Angels get their... whatever they get, I admittedly don't know Dark Angels. Don't they get a -1T grenade or something?

Yeah, they do, that's why I'm annoyed by it. If it would make the game a better experience, I wouldn't mind, but it feels like they just slap stuff on haphazardly to sell the kit.

Anpu42 wrote:
It depends on their roll.
Plasma-Gun Armed: Keep The Bolt Guns, they are me mid ranged Gunline Unit.
Melta-Gun Armed: Not Sure, will pull out my Models and see and how much remodeling I will have to do.
Flamer Armed: I think they will end up with Bolt Pistols and Chain Swords.

This is actually a really good point, I'm gonna write this down and keep it in mind because I'm gonna have to do some remodelling myself. Turns out I have quite a number of troops with bolter/CCW that will mean nothing if this rumour pans out.

streamdragon wrote:
Bolter/BP will most likely still be the best loadout. Shooting is king in 7th, and with Counter Attack your Grey Hunters are still getting an extra attack. Better to have all the rounds of shooting I think.

Plus if Blood Claws are coming down in price far enough to be valid, you don't really need your Grey Hunters trying to fill the assault role.

I think I'll cry if SW lose counter attack, not that any rumours have said that but you never know for sure.

I'm kind of hoping the Blood Claw one is true, I've always had a bit of a soft spot for wanting to try them but just never had a reason to.

Does anyone know if that "1 Plasma pistol per 5 models" was strictly GH? Because that'd be a lot of plasma, especially if you upgraded one to a WG and gave him dual combi-plasmas.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 easysauce wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Nonsense. The idea that these two things can't co-exist is stupid.

But why should they exist? This is like GW inventing a new "Rhino" kit that works just like a Rhino, except it has a bunch of wolf icons glued everywhere, some of the detail bits are rearranged, and the storm bolter is twin-linked.

what, you mean like a razor back?

or one of the upteen variations on the lemen russ chassis?

or chimera chassis?

or the eldar wave serpant chassis?

Again with the bad comparisons. All of those are variants of the same chassis, not a unique vehicles that fills the same role as another vehicle.

Do you people complaining about similar roles actually read the fluff? Most stuff dates back to the Great Crusade and lots of vehicles that are in service are rediscoveries of old STC's from that era. There were (and still are) many different Forgeworlds pumping out competing patterns of literally the same vehicles, in most cases with just minor design changes but in some cases they are more pronounced. For example Macharius tanks are second generation Baneblades they are smaller and not as good for the role but they are easier to manufacture because most of the 40k era Forgeworlds have gone to gak.

Now in game terms it may not be interesting to see similar vehicles but it is totally inline with the fluff.

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:
This is actually a really good point, I'm gonna write this down and keep it in mind because I'm gonna have to do some remodelling myself. Turns out I have quite a number of troops with bolter/CCW that will mean nothing if this rumour pans out.

Keep in mind magnetising can be a good idea to make this sort of thing not a problem.

 Yonan wrote:

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:
This is actually a really good point, I'm gonna write this down and keep it in mind because I'm gonna have to do some remodelling myself. Turns out I have quite a number of troops with bolter/CCW that will mean nothing if this rumour pans out.

Keep in mind magnetising can be a good idea to make this sort of thing not a problem.

To be fair, I never thought equipping a troop choice with their basic equipment would ever bite me in the ass.

Yeah basic troop weapons I'd only have thought to magnetise if I wanted to swap between say tacticals and assaults if I was being *really* stingy on transport space.

Jefffar wrote:The termies in the Stormclaw box had Deep Strike, so we might see it on the full codex versions too.

No they don't.

emptyedens wrote:I love all this talk of aerodynamics. I mean it really is ridiculous that they make flyers that can't fly, it's not like they have anti-gravity technology......oh wait.....but still the missiles would totally hit the hull unless the space marines had some kind of suspensor tech that could be fitted to small things like skulls that could push off the hull after the missile was launched....oh thats right....so anyway really nice flyer i guess?

I'd like to point out that Imperial anti-gravity technology does not work that way, or else Land Speeders would be fliers. In regards to aerodynamics, the other Imperial fliers, particularly the Space Marine ones (Thunderhawk and Stormraven especially) look like they could potentially fly through sheer force of thrust - inefficient, but possible. The Stormwolf is a Storm Talon with a box twice the size of the actual craft bolted on to the front, and the only difference in thrust is that it has an extra intake on each wing (if those tiny fins can be called "wings"). The thing is just so out of proportion that it doesn't even look like it could go in a straight line, never mind actually fly. Then you suggest that they attach Servo-Skull-esque equipment to each missile, pushing it upward after it comes out of the tube? Seriously? I won't even get in to how silly that is, so I'll just ask about the multimeltas. How do you suppose they, in their infinite wisdom, stopped the craft's fuselage from being melted by the multimelta beams that fire precariously close? Even with ceramite plating, that can't be good for it. Maybe they use fairy dust sparkle technology to teleport the beam directly to their enemies instead!

insaniak wrote:This picture is spot on:

Slap some jet engines on that, and you've essentially got the Stormthingoe.

Which, given the general WWII-ish aesthetic in 40K vehicles, is perfect for a landing craft.

I just kind-of wish that they had left the Stormthingoe as a transport and added the Talon for gunship support.

It would look better if the design was more balanced, and the part that isn't the box wasn't just the Storm Talon (which is already criticised for being too stubby). Making that boat into an aircraft is what they should have done. Instead, they took half of a large craft and attached it to a very small craft. It looks dumb. The single-pronged Caestus Assault Ram concept art, on the other hand, looks just fine. There's also the gunship variant having all this extra mass for no reason, because there's no way the shiny new gun needs all that bulk. If it does, they should have put it on a Predator instead of an aircraft (or at the very least a Stormraven, which is big enough to handle it). If they were going to make a Storm Talon variant, they should have followed the trend set by the Nephilim Jetfighter and Dark Talon; more details, a theme (Wolves, in this case), and a big gun. The transport plane could have an underslung box with an assault ramp on it.

Or, you know, they could have actually just designed a new thing.

We all have preconceived notions of what things can and can't do which is based on physics as we know. So while we might be able to suspend disbelief because magic, occasionally we hit a wall where something just looks stupid. The Stormtalon looks stupid because, to me, it looks like an underwater vehicle. It looks like a fat little fish more than it looks like an aircraft. Canis Wolfborn's TW looks like a friggen pomeranian. No matter how much you tell me it's a giant vicious wolf, it looks like a pomeranian. The Thunderbolt and Marauder could not fly, or if they could they could only fly at very low speeds and extremely uncomfortably for the pilots, but they have the proportions of a WW2 plane so to me, they look kinda cool. The Thunderhawk and Stormeagle push the limits of wacky proportions (to me) but they still manage to pull it off and look cool. The Stormraven pushes those limits too far and looks stupid (for some reason Forge World typically manages to get better proportioned vehicles to my eye than GW proper).

We all have different limits and no amount of "space magic" can take something we perceive as stupid as suddenly looking awesome. To me, the Storm-wolfy-mc-wolf looks like a front heavy brick crossed with an irish terrier with tiny little wings that serve no purpose. It looks like something that might have a place being fired from one ship at another ship as a form of boarding and it looks maybe like something you'd fire at a giant futuristic fortification to do as much damage as possible (like a brick would do...) and then unleash some troops.

As an aircraft that's actually supposed to "fly" above a battlefield, making strafing runs and what not, it just looks too ill suited to the task which makes it look ugly as hell to me.

Yeah, sure, as a seaborne or spaceborne landing craft it looks fine (even if it still does look like a fething irish terrier), it just doesn't work for me as an aerial combat vehicle.

TL;DR: Just because we are talking about 40k where nothing could fly if it weren't for space magic it doesn't mean aerodynamic discussion is irrelevant.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:


Or, you know, they could have actually just designed a new thing.

Or, just let the Wolves use the existing StormRaven, which is basically exactly the same thing in different package

Presumably the people proclaiming the flyer looks like it could not fly have never seen an Antonov An225 taking off. Forget all this aerodynamics stuff and it comes down to a simple fact - give it powerful enough engines and a strong enough airframe and it will fly and perform how you wish it to.

We are after all talking about a universe where a gigantic flying castle exists and titans are airlifted, I think they got this covered.....

As far as tech goes, yeah the Imperium loves to tell everyone about using unsanctioned tech but also it has little oversight or actual control over the chapters - with the Wolves this is the chapter that came close to fighting the Grey Knights so kit bashing a plane is a bit minor IMO.

 TwilightSparkles wrote:
Presumably the people proclaiming the flyer looks like it could not fly have never seen an Antonov An225 taking off.

Wha? The An225 totally looks like it could fly, it looks like any other conventional aircraft ever built, just bigger.

With the giant dog muzzle, it's not so much the idea that it couldn't fly, it's the idea that it shouldn't fly... because it look like a brick.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 TwilightSparkles wrote:
Presumably the people proclaiming the flyer looks like it could not fly have never seen an Antonov An225 taking off.

Wha? The An225 totally looks like it could fly, it looks like any other conventional aircraft ever built, just bigger.

With the giant dog muzzle, it's not so much the idea that it couldn't fly, it's the idea that it shouldn't fly... because it look like a brick.

And Land Speeder looks like a big shoe, how does it fly?!

You're applying aerodynamics to technology capable of generating anti-gravity fields that can hover pretty much anything. You know that, right? Just because your imagination cannot possibly fathom this, it doesn't mean anyone else's can't. 40k has very little realism all around, it really boils down to personal taste in aesthetic, not any notion of "realism". "Realism" does not apply to 40k.

Of course it looks good. And licking your brush while using lead based paints is a great idea. GW certainly know their market, only an OCD completionist would buy that thing.

Anyone got a price point yet? Because the handsome 98 quid FW Caestus has sold out...

It could just be a conspiracy to force people to buy the fugly pug instead.

A strictly realistic far future science fiction setting would be Earth, only a lot warmer.

No science fiction setting that involves space travel (beyond a very expensive, mostly politically motivated, one-off space programme designed to get a handful of people to the Moon and back) is strictly realistic.

Haljin wrote:
And Land Speeder looks like a big shoe, how does it fly?!

It doesn't fly, it skims. And FWIW, yes, I preferred the 2nd edition Land Speeder to the current one.

You're applying aerodynamics to technology capable of generating anti-gravity fields that can hover pretty much anything. You know that, right? Just because your imagination cannot possibly fathom this, it doesn't mean anyone else's can't. 40k has very little realism all around, it really boils down to personal taste in aesthetic, not any notion of "realism". "Realism" does not apply to 40k.

For the millionth time, I have no problem with the fact it couldn't fly according to modern aerodynamics. I have a problem with the fact it doesn't look like it should fly and that it looks disproportionate and ugly (to me). None of the 40k aircraft could fly, but many of them look significantly more like they should fly.

It looks like it should be a space based ramming aircraft, just like the Stormtalon looks like it should be an underwater vehicle instead of an aerial vehicle. The fact almost no 40k aircraft could realistically fly doesn't change that this thing, IMO, doesn't look like it should be flying.

I'm aware other people may find it fine, obviously this is just my opinion, just like everything other than the actual rumours in this thread are also opinion.

Alabaster.clown wrote:
Of course it looks good. And licking your brush while using lead based paints is a great idea. GW certainly know their market, only an OCD completionist would buy that thing.

Anyone got a price point yet? Because the handsome 98 quid FW Caestus has sold out...

It could just be a conspiracy to force people to buy the fugly pug instead.

Always nice to be condescending to people who do not share your opinion!

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Haljin wrote:
And Land Speeder looks like a big shoe, how does it fly?!

It doesn't fly, it skims. And FWIW, yes, I preferred the 2nd edition Land Speeder to the current one.

You're applying aerodynamics to technology capable of generating anti-gravity fields that can hover pretty much anything. You know that, right? Just because your imagination cannot possibly fathom this, it doesn't mean anyone else's can't. 40k has very little realism all around, it really boils down to personal taste in aesthetic, not any notion of "realism". "Realism" does not apply to 40k.

For the millionth time, I have no problem with the fact it couldn't fly according to modern aerodynamics. I have a problem with the fact it doesn't look like it should fly and that it looks disproportionate and ugly (to me). None of the 40k aircraft could fly, but many of them look significantly more like they should fly.

It looks like it should be a space based ramming aircraft, just like the Stormtalon looks like it should be an underwater vehicle instead of an aerial vehicle. The fact almost no 40k aircraft could realistically fly doesn't change that this thing, IMO, doesn't look like it should be flying.

I'm aware other people may find it fine, obviously this is just my opinion, just like everything other than the actual rumours in this thread are also opinion.

*shrug* Okay, that is obviously fine. I like most of the 40k vehicles and I don't think 40k is unique in the regard of strange flying vehicles. Many sci-fi settings are guilty of this.

I will admit the wolf flyer would fit as a space craft a bit better.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
We all have different limits and no amount of "space magic" can take something we perceive as stupid as suddenly looking awesome. To me, the Storm-wolfy-mc-wolf looks like a front heavy brick crossed with an irish terrier with tiny little wings that serve no purpose. It looks like something that might have a place being fired from one ship at another ship as a form of boarding and it looks maybe like something you'd fire at a giant futuristic fortification to do as much damage as possible (like a brick would do...) and then unleash some troops.

Exalted, because I agree with it all.

I realise it's fantasy, but every time I try to imagine it flying I end up imagining what is effectively a brick being thrown through the air. And that's just too much of a strain on my suspension of disbelief. At least the airborne vehicles I like (Valkyrie, Dakkajet, Land Speeder etc) have some nods in their design towards our notions of what a flying vehicle should look like. If you took the wings, cockpit and tail off a Valkyrie you'd also end up with a large box. But those parts you took off at least make it conform to our ideas of how an aircraft should appear. So fair play to GW for trying a new kind of design with this, but I think it's a miss.

If Battlefleet Gothic was still going, the general shape of this model would have been excellent for a large, ponderous ship in that. So I'm not totally against the idea, just not in this context.

It's pretty clear that different people have different levels at which their suspension of disbelief starts to break down. That is to be expected, really. There are loads of 40K minis I really don't like the look of (most of the CSM daemon engines look dreadful to me, for example, though I like the Defiler). I just don't buy them.

I do like the look of the Stompa, but I've never figured out how it walks. It doesn't bother me. I won't tell someone else that they are having the wrong kind of fun if they don't buy it 'cos it looks wrong to them.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:
Not to change the subject from hating the ship or discussion of Orks in this Space Wolves thread but had a look over of my models about this whole GH are bolter/bolt pistol and BC are bolt pistol/CCW but GH have the option of trading their bolter for a CCW.

And it got me wondering, say that rumour does become true, anybody got any plans on whether a Bolter/BP GH is preferred more than a BP/CCW GH? Because I'm looking at the Stormwolf and thinking about what Bulldogging said about the skyshield landing pad idea and it's giving me expensive ideas.

It depends on their roll.
Plasma-Gun Armed: Keep The Bolt Guns, they are me mid ranged Gunline Unit.
Melta-Gun Armed: Not Sure, will pull out my Models and see and how much remodeling I will have to do.
Flamer Armed: I think they will end up with Bolt Pistols and Chain Swords.

You know what's really depressing? My first instinct on noticing your wee spelling mistake there was not to fight down my inner word-nazi, but to think "Oh christ, don't tell me GW have squads rolling on a random table for their equipment now"

 Yodhrin wrote:

You know what's really depressing? My first instinct on noticing your wee spelling mistake there was not to fight down my inner word-nazi, but to think "Oh christ, don't tell me GW have squads rolling on a random table for their equipment now"

There is precedent you know. You could buy rolls on gear tables back in RT. Not sure if that made it into 2nd.

TAKE ALL THE AERODYNAMIC CONVERSATION HERE!!!!

Good lord reading all this NON-SW discussion is killing me. Hijack your own thread.

 Uriels_Flame wrote:
TAKE ALL THE AERODYNAMIC CONVERSATION HERE!!!!

Good lord reading all this NON-SW discussion is killing me. Hijack your own thread.

....we're talking about the rumoured SW flier. That's how rumour threads around these parts work, people post rumours and then people discuss those rumours.

I have no time to read through the thread, but does anyone know or reckon the SW will get Centurion Warsuits? And grav weapons?

Also, fething loving that flying. The Assault Ram variant looks awesome.

 Deadshot wrote:
I have no time to read through the thread, but does anyone know or reckon the SW will get Centurion Warsuits? And grav weapons?

I haven't heard anything about either of those things.

I had a thought. I think instead of grav guns, space wolves will have access to frost guns.

canadainbeaver wrote:
I had a thought. I think instead of grav guns, space wolves will have access to frost guns.

After seeing the Helfrost cannon, I think that's a real possibility.

Yeah, no rumors on Centurions. Frost weapons would be excellent though.

I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

 Grimwulfe wrote:
I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

Oh, hell yes!

 pretre wrote:

 Grimwulfe wrote:
I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

Oh, hell yes!

Hell no without a points increase. Adding instant death to a weapon's profile shouldn't be free compared with the current price. There is a huge difference between +1 str and instant death in terms of power.

 warboss wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Grimwulfe wrote:
I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

Oh, hell yes!

Hell no without a points increase. Adding instant death to a weapon's profile shouldn't be free. There is a huge difference between +1 str and instant death in terms of power.

It's not true instant death. They are already spendy and outclassed by Wolf Claws in almost ever situation for their points, this would give a reason to take them.

 pretre wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Grimwulfe wrote:
I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

Oh, hell yes!

Hell no without a points increase. Adding instant death to a weapon's profile shouldn't be free. There is a huge difference between +1 str and instant death in terms of power.

It's not true instant death. They are already spendy and outclassed by Wolf Claws in almost ever situation for their points, this would give a reason to take them.

It's similar to a force weapon in mechanics (test to activate). And Helfrost ignores Eternal Warrior, as we've heard it.

So in that latter sense it's better than true Instant Death.

I would imagine they would be relics and limited to 1 per army?

But given how GW likes to forge those narratives - I can also definately see it happening.

How does Hellfrost ignore Eternal warrior?

 Grimwulfe wrote:
How does Hellfrost ignore Eternal warrior?

It removes from play upon a failed strength test. Eternal Warrior only protects against wounds with the Instant Death special rule, which Helfrost hasn't mentioned at all.

UltraPrime wrote:

Jefffar wrote:The termies in the Stormclaw box had Deep Strike, so we might see it on the full codex versions too.

No they don't.

Nut sure what you are saying UltraPrime, both page 22 and page 32 of the storm claw book say Terminator armour have the deep strike special rule.
Care to expand on your interpretation?

Helfrost is a way to get around Eternal Warriors being immune to instant death... but then it's also significantly less effective than instant death so I'm fine with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Does anyone think the Stormthingo looks a bit too small to carry 16 models and also be armour 12?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Helfrost is a way to get around Eternal Warriors being immune to instant death... but then it's also significantly less effective than instant death so I'm fine with it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Does anyone think the Stormthingo looks a bit too small to carry 16 models and also be armour 12?

The Caestus Assault Ram looks too small to carry 10 Terminators. It gets around it by the "Misercorde" rule. It essentially means that models in PA, AA (Runic) or TDA are held in place by special harnesses so they take up little space as possible. Probably somthing similar here.

That and the Space Wolves are going to be hanging out the windows anyway, so take up less room

 pretre wrote:

 Grimwulfe wrote:
I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

Oh, hell yes!

This is a great idea, something that would set them apart from being too-expensive power weapons that aren't as good as fists or hammers, and also make them less of a 'not quite as good' relic blade.

peopel keep talking about the rules for this being available, but I can only see the pictures where the rules are sprayed out.


can we get the OP updated with the actual rules for hull and the non censored pictures please or a linky?

 easysauce wrote:
peopel keep talking about the rules for this being available, but I can only see the pictures where the rules are sprayed out.


can we get the OP updated with the actual rules for hull and the non censored pictures please or a linky?

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/360/605383.page#7042216

 Paradigm wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Grimwulfe wrote:
I would really like to see Frost Weapons have the Hellfrost rule. I think it would make then worth the points and give them a cool dynamic as well instead of just +1 str.

Oh, hell yes!

This is a great idea, something that would set them apart from being too-expensive power weapons that aren't as good as fists or hammers, and also make them less of a 'not quite as good' relic blade.

This would be awesome but unfortunately it was not mentioned in the Sanctus Reach frost axe entry so it's not happening outside of the relics section.

thanks for the link.


RE frost weapons: I think they are great as is, +1 str on swords, _2 on axes is very nice to have, they should be costed a bit less I think if the boxed set is anything to go on.

I am really liking the amount of plastic stuff that is rumoured to be coming out...

Yeah, it would be great if the OP actually put all the info in the first post.

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, it would be great if the OP actually put all the info in the first post.

I do wish people who don't intend to maintain the original post would just not bother being the thread starter.

Given that the way the rumours forum works is that rumours are posted and then people, for many pages, discuss the rumours, it does mean the OP needs to be switched on and updating the first post to keep the thread somewhat manageable.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, it would be great if the OP actually put all the info in the first post.

I do wish people who don't intend to maintain the original post would just not bother being the thread starter.

Given that the way the rumours forum works is that rumours are posted and then people, for many pages, discuss the rumours, it does mean the OP needs to be switched on and updating the first post to keep the thread somewhat manageable.

Exactly!

I'm very interested in what they plan to do with Frost Weapons.

The points were so close between them, power weapons and power fists I don't think it's as easy as changing points. They will have to add more rules to them IMO.

The frost axe is the big oddity, completely pointless currently, Krom says thanks also.

Fayric wrote:

UltraPrime wrote:

Jefffar wrote:The termies in the Stormclaw box had Deep Strike, so we might see it on the full codex versions too.

No they don't.

Nut sure what you are saying UltraPrime, both page 22 and page 32 of the storm claw book say Terminator armour have the deep strike special rule.
Care to expand on your interpretation?

My mistake. I was looking at unit special rules thinking it would be mentioned there. You are, of course, correct.

frost axe is only 20pts IIRC (correct me if wrong pls)

and not specialist, so cheaper 2nd attack, I can def see it getting cheaper.

Id love to see a frost mace with +3 str more then anything,

high str at initiative attacks are the bees knees.

 pretre wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, it would be great if the OP actually put all the info in the first post.

I do wish people who don't intend to maintain the original post would just not bother being the thread starter.

Given that the way the rumours forum works is that rumours are posted and then people, for many pages, discuss the rumours, it does mean the OP needs to be switched on and updating the first post to keep the thread somewhat manageable.

Exactly!

Jesus some people. First post updated.

A simple PM to me would suffice next time dudes. GW isn't my life,

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 pretre wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Yeah, it would be great if the OP actually put all the info in the first post.

I do wish people who don't intend to maintain the original post would just not bother being the thread starter.

Given that the way the rumours forum works is that rumours are posted and then people, for many pages, discuss the rumours, it does mean the OP needs to be switched on and updating the first post to keep the thread somewhat manageable.

Exactly!

Jesus some people. First post updated.

A simple PM to me would suffice next time dudes. GW isn't my life,

Chill. You're reading a lot more into this than there is. And thank you.

Alabaster.clown wrote:
fugly pug

Haha good name. We have the Chibi Hawk, now we have the Fugly Pug.

 easysauce wrote:
frost axe is only 20pts IIRC (correct me if wrong pls)

and not specialist, so cheaper 2nd attack, I can def see it getting cheaper.

Id love to see a frost mace with +3 str more then anything,

high str at initiative attacks are the bees knees.

They are priced the same as Power Fists, which is the problem. Granted it's a bigger deal on low attack models to get an extra attack with bolt pistol, but generally STR 8 is just hands down better. Instant death to T4, threatens higher armor vehicles, wounds most MC on a 2+. It's just better.

Hell yeah to frost mace though lol.

Man I'm glad you guys didn't ruin Starwars for me as a kid (eyes on you George Lucas). You guys must have of had strokes when the Millennium falcon flies through the atmosphere of Tatooine. The transport is away" ... no... no it isn't. I can't really think of any good sci-fi that has ships that could remotely fly in the atmosphere of an Earth like planet? Star Trek perhaps? Nah Oh wait the Hunter Killers from Terminator... Nah.

I understand the Taurox hate but this thing would fit right in in Star Wars it almost looks like an X-wing... I guess thats because GW ripped of BSG which ripped of SW. But thats what 40k is its all derivative.

The weapons could be better placed but meh im just going to move them.

"She don't fly pretty.... cos she aiint pretty"

Hydrapup wrote:
Man I'm glad you guys didn't ruin Starwars for me as a kid (eyes on you George Lucas). You guys must have of had strokes when the Millennium falcon flies through the atmosphere of Tatooine. The transport is away" ... no... no it isn't. I can't really think of any good sci-fi that has ships that could remotely fly in the atmosphere of an Earth like planet? Star Trek perhaps? Nah Oh wait the Hunter Killers from Terminator... Nah.

I understand the Taurox hate but this thing would fit right in in Star Wars it almost looks like an X-wing... I guess thats because GW ripped of BSG which ripped of SW. But thats what 40k is its all derivative.

The weapons could be better placed but meh im just going to move them.

"She don't fly pretty.... cos she aiint pretty"

As I said before, it's not a matter of "could it fly" so much as "it doesn't look like it should fly". I don't know a lot about the Star Wars background outside the movies and some of the video games, but the Millennium Falcon does look a lot more like something that should fly than the fugly pug. Just like the flying croissants of the Necrons look more like something that should fly. Though all do look more suited to space travel than atmospheric flight, none look as jarring as the giant irish terrier's head.

Neither the Monolith nor the flying croissants look capable of flight, but the flying croissants look vastly more like a manoeuvrable aircraft while the Monolith looks like a lumbering behemoth. It's all about designing things that look like they should fill a role rather than designing something that can actually fly according to real world physics.

I would love to see a Frost Lance/Spear.

Yes, exactly.

Rule #1 applies across the board.

The only 'correct' response if you perceive a Forum Rule issue is to use the "Moderator Alert" button - not to 'respond in kind'.

So, general in thread warning issued.

Consequences of varying severity to follow from here on in.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Hydrapup wrote:
Man I'm glad you guys didn't ruin Starwars for me as a kid (eyes on you George Lucas). You guys must have of had strokes when the Millennium falcon flies through the atmosphere of Tatooine. The transport is away" ... no... no it isn't. I can't really think of any good sci-fi that has ships that could remotely fly in the atmosphere of an Earth like planet? Star Trek perhaps? Nah Oh wait the Hunter Killers from Terminator... Nah.

I understand the Taurox hate but this thing would fit right in in Star Wars it almost looks like an X-wing... I guess thats because GW ripped of BSG which ripped of SW. But thats what 40k is its all derivative.

The weapons could be better placed but meh im just going to move them.

"She don't fly pretty.... cos she aiint pretty"

As I said before, it's not a matter of "could it fly" so much as "it doesn't look like it should fly". I don't know a lot about the Star Wars background outside the movies and some of the video games, but the Millennium Falcon does look a lot more like something that should fly than the fugly pug. Just like the flying croissants of the Necrons look more like something that should fly. Though all do look more suited to space travel than atmospheric flight, none look as jarring as the giant irish terrier's head.

Neither the Monolith nor the flying croissants look capable of flight, but the flying croissants look vastly more like a manoeuvrable aircraft while the Monolith looks like a lumbering behemoth. It's all about designing things that look like they should fill a role rather than designing something that can actually fly according to real world physics.

I really don't think you have an argument here... You say the falcon look like it could fly... my answer would be in what universe? Plus out all the sci fi you chose that as a flying machine, Its clearly a spaceship that only works in the atmosphere because of antigrav like our friend here. If you don't like it thats fine but please don't pretend you are being impartial as far as "aerodynamics" go.

Edit sorry didn't see the mod warning I'll quit now

Aerodynamics be damned. My problem is that it manages to be both ugly and boring looking. Might as well spray a shoe box blue and call it a flyer.

Just an opinion of course, and I liked the Taurox from the off.

Hydrapup wrote:
You say the falcon look like it could fly...

Actually I didn't say that. I said it looks more like it should fly. Yeah I know I'm on the losing side of a semantic argument and I apologise for that so I'll just elaborate.

I am very familiar with aerodynamics, that's not really what I'm talking about. I'm talking about designing the model so it looks like it actually fulfills the purpose you have set for it. This thing looks like a brick, an object to be hurled at another object, it looks like that (to me) because it of its aspect ratio, its bulk, it's tiny wings which are better suited to a dart or missile than a manoeuvrable flying craft. So no matter how much space magic you tell me about, it's still going to look like a brick that is hurled rather than a flier.

The same way the Stormtalon looks like an underwater vehicle, so even though you tell me it's a manoevrable aircraft, it will still always look to me like a guppy.

The Millennium Falcon is a much flatter, longer, higher aspect ratio vehicle. So even though, yes, aerodynamically it looks awful, within it's sci-fi space magic role it (to me at least) looks much more appealing and viable.

Good artists (of which I am not) have a better grasp of this, I said earlier in the thread neither the Thunderhawk nor the Stormeagle nor the Thunderbolt nor the Marauder could fly in reality, but they still look cool to me, the first 2 definitely push the limits of proportions. But the Stormraven, Stormtalon and now this thing push the limits to far and fail to capture the essence of what they are supposed to be.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Hydrapup wrote:
You say the falcon look like it could fly...

Actually I didn't say that. I said it looks more like it should fly. Yeah I know I'm on the losing side of a semantic argument and I apologise for that so I'll just elaborate.

I am very familiar with aerodynamics, that's not really what I'm talking about. I'm talking about designing the model so it looks like it actually fulfills the purpose you have set for it. This thing looks like a brick, an object to be hurled at another object, it looks like that (to me) because it of its aspect ratio, its bulk, it's tiny wings which are better suited to a dart or missile than a manoeuvrable flying craft. So no matter how much space magic you tell me about, it's still going to look like a brick that is hurled rather than a flier.

The same way the Stormtalon looks like an underwater vehicle, so even though you tell me it's a manoevrable aircraft, it will still always look to me like a guppy.

The Millennium Falcon is a much flatter, longer, higher aspect ratio vehicle. So even though, yes, aerodynamically it looks awful, within it's sci-fi space magic role it (to me at least) looks much more appealing and viable.

But again my friend that is not an argument you are just being subjective... If I answered in kind it would be the falcon looks like a trash can lid... which can fly for a time but so can a brick if you hurl it hard enough

Mate that Stormfang gunship looks MINT! GW is really stepping it up with the quality of these new releases!

Hydrapup wrote:
But again my friend that not an argument you are just being subjective... If I answered in kind it would be the falcon looks like a trash can lid... which can fly for a time but so can a brick if you hurl it hard enough

I never meant to imply it was anything other than subjective, I simply discuss it as a means to explain why I personally don't like it.

I said earlier in the thread:
We all have different limits and no amount of "space magic" can take something we perceive as stupid as suddenly looking awesome.

Just because we have space magic doesn't preclude discussion about how this thing does not look like a flier to some people.

And if the rules stated it flew like a brick, I'd probably be fine with that. If the rules had it more like a drop pod, where it gets 1 turn of shooting at the enemy before driving itself in to the ground in a giant explosion which the safely housed Space marines then emerge from, I'd be "feth yeah, that looks awesome".

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Hydrapup wrote:
Man I'm glad you guys didn't ruin Starwars for me as a kid (eyes on you George Lucas). You guys must have of had strokes when the Millennium falcon flies through the atmosphere of Tatooine. The transport is away" ... no... no it isn't. I can't really think of any good sci-fi that has ships that could remotely fly in the atmosphere of an Earth like planet? Star Trek perhaps? Nah Oh wait the Hunter Killers from Terminator... Nah.

I understand the Taurox hate but this thing would fit right in in Star Wars it almost looks like an X-wing... I guess thats because GW ripped of BSG which ripped of SW. But thats what 40k is its all derivative.

The weapons could be better placed but meh im just going to move them.

"She don't fly pretty.... cos she aiint pretty"

And all im saying is is your limits are not impartial... thats all I was ever saying