Unlike many, I believe that comment at the end of that video was actually a joke that ended up getting way out of hand, for a couple of reasons that are not really important to this thread, since I'm going to ask a hypothetical rather than convince people of its veracity one way or the other. I am, of course, hopeful that he was telling the truth and plastic Sisters of Battle are on the way in another month or two, but... I mean, what if they're not? So many people are so hopeful and excited for them, and I can't help but wonder what the reaction will be if it turns out that it was just a joke that got taken way more seriously than they thought it would be. How livid and angry are the people who've been looking forward to this for years or even over a decade going to be should it turn out to not actually be happening? Or will it instead be more of a demoralizing depression that could shake people's faith that that update will ever come?
Admittedly, I haven't been paying attention to 40k tabletop news for the past month or so, so there may have been new developments that I'm unaware of. If so, please share.
As someone who plays Sisters I can't say I'd be all that bothered, to be honest. My Codex has been Crud-Warded, so playing the army in its current state is out of the question unless I want to get stomped repeatedly (I don't), which makes the issue of new models irrelevant. I'm not going to expand my army with new purchases until the deck is no longer stacked against me in almost every game I play, so unless they release a new Codex with the plastic kits, and said Codex is not Cruddace-grade dung, then the whole thing is a non-issue to me. This wouldn't be the first time the poor old Sisters have been the butt of a GW joke, and I doubt it'll be the last.
As someone who plays Sisters I can't say I'd be all that bothered, to be honest. My Codex has been Crud-Warded, so playing the army in its current state is out of the question unless I want to get stomped repeatedly (I don't), which makes the issue of new models irrelevant. I'm not going to expand my army with new purchases until the deck is no longer stacked against me in almost every game I play, so unless they release a new Codex with the plastic kits, and said Codex is not Cruddace-grade dung, then the whole thing is a non-issue to me. This wouldn't be the first time the poor old Sisters have been the butt of a GW joke, and I doubt it'll be the last.
Good to know.
Also, did Matt Ward really write our latest Codex?
The latest one is essentially a reprint of the one he and Cruddace collaborated on back in 5th, so yes, he did. Ward **and** Cruddace. I bet they let C.S. Goto have a go at writing some of it too.
Also, did Matt Ward really write our latest Codex?
Unknown, Ward left the company around the same time the most recent digital codex came out, by then GW stopped crediting its codex authors, both have been suggested to be due to actual threats made against him.
And, for the record, despite lacking baked-in flyer defense, and generally having to tap dance around the limitations of the model range, the existing 7th edition codex is leaps ahead of the 5th edition one, and is nowhere near bottom tier.
Also, did Matt Ward really write our latest Codex?
Unknown, Ward left the company around the same time the most recent digital codex came out, by then GW stopped crediting its codex authors, both have been suggested to be due to actual threats made against him.
And, for the record, despite lacking baked-in flyer defense, and generally having to tap dance around the limitations of the model range, the existing 7th edition codex is leaps ahead of the 5th edition one, and is nowhere near bottom tier.
I'm glad Ward is no longer writing for GW, but... threats? Seriously? People were so angry at his books that they legitimately threatened to kill him over it?
That's a level of malice I didn't think gamers were capable of, and I saw what happened with Eternal Crusade along with being a long-term member of one of the worst communities in online gaming (WoW).
And then I remembered that Bus Shock was a thing. I withdraw my incredulity regarding the concept of threatening a game developer with death.
Captain Joystick wrote: Unknown, Ward left the company around the same time the most recent digital codex came out
Right - but it's a reprint of the Codex he co-authored in 5th Edition. Aside from minor additions literally nothing has changed; not wargear costs, not abrogated unit rules (remember when Immolators could move 12" and still fire their turret flamers? When there were 2 grades of Canoness?). He therefore wrote the rules we're currently using.
, by then GW stopped crediting its codex authors, both have been suggested to be due to actual threats made against him.
Which was stupid. You can't be threatening people or calling them names for writing cack-handed rules for your toy soldiers. Pointing out that someone has consistently done that and should therefore stop writing rules for toy soldiers does not constitute a "threat".
And, for the record, despite lacking baked-in flyer defense, and generally having to tap dance around the limitations of the model range, the existing 7th edition codex is leaps ahead of the 5th edition one, and is nowhere near bottom tier.
You're right. Sisters can beat 120 footslogging Storm Guardians, so we should all just stop complaining and get over ourselves!
I don't know, if I don't see any SoB in two, three ... six months, will I be upset or something ? I'm waiting for the sisters, yes, but I don't have a target date.
I want them to be released, but I can't miss what is almost non existant.
, by then GW stopped crediting its codex authors, both have been suggested to be due to actual threats made against him.
Which was stupid. You can't be threatening people or calling them names for writing cack-handed rules for your toy soldiers. Pointing out that someone has consistently done that and should therefore stop writing rules for toy soldiers does not constitute a "threat".
My understanding is that he single-handedly destroyed the WHFB tabletop game by writing its main rulebook.
When you've invested thousands of dollars and years of your life in your toy soldiers, you can get a bit emotional when the game creator makes a new edition that is so terrible it made most people quit the game entirely.
Death threats are clearly out of line though. More realistic and appropriate threats are telling him you hope he steps on a piece of Lego. It causes intense pain, but no real harm of any sort.
As for the original question, if nothing happens, I'll be ever-so-slightly amused that I can say "I told you so" to people who got their hopes up. Then join in their misery that I got to say "I told you so".
Melissia wrote: As for the original question, if nothing happens, I'll be ever-so-slightly amused that I can say "I told you so" to people who got their hopes up. Then join in their misery that I got to say "I told you so".
I hope you're proven wrong, just like I want to be with my levels of scepticism, and anyone else who feels the same
However, with GW's record, you'll most likely have your wish granted
ERJAK wrote: I'd just do what the chaos players do and piss and moan until someone gives me a primarch.
I'd love to see a version of the Living Saint more akin to Dawn of War 1's version than the wussy tabletop version that gets instagibbed by a Renegade Guardsman's grenade launcher.
Me personally i'm not playing 40k (my sisters) as much lately so i'm a bit divided about it, sure it would be nice for new stuff but in saying that i've already got nearly everything i want out of the current army and i couldn't see GW adding too much to the army (maybe a non navy flyer, grav weapons maybe).
ERJAK wrote: I'd just do what the chaos players do and piss and moan until someone gives me a primarch.
I'd love to see a version of the Living Saint more akin to Dawn of War 1's version than the wussy tabletop version that gets instagibbed by a Renegade Guardsman's grenade launcher.
I've always thought it would be fun if all her stats except LD were 7.
WS7 BS7 S7 T7 W7 A7 I7 LD10 2+4++. Keep her the same points and call it good.
ERJAK wrote: I'd just do what the chaos players do and piss and moan until someone gives me a primarch.
I'd love to see a version of the Living Saint more akin to Dawn of War 1's version than the wussy tabletop version that gets instagibbed by a Renegade Guardsman's grenade launcher.
I've always thought it would be fun if all her stats except LD were 7.
WS7 BS7 S7 T7 W7 A7 I7 LD10 2+4++. Keep her the same points and call it good.
I'm not overly familiar with the intricacies of the Ecclesiarchy's ideology.
Does the number 7 hold some sort of special significance?
ERJAK wrote: I'd just do what the chaos players do and piss and moan until someone gives me a primarch.
I'd love to see a version of the Living Saint more akin to Dawn of War 1's version than the wussy tabletop version that gets instagibbed by a Renegade Guardsman's grenade launcher.
I've always thought it would be fun if all her stats except LD were 7.
WS7 BS7 S7 T7 W7 A7 I7 LD10 2+4++. Keep her the same points and call it good.
I'm not overly familiar with the intricacies of the Ecclesiarchy's ideology.
Does the number 7 hold some sort of special significance?
It's mostly that she has 3 stats that are 7 already and the symmety appeals to me.
Pouncey wrote: Does the number 7 hold some sort of special significance?
General Annoyance wrote: I'm sure we can forge a narrative for it, unless 7 is the number of Chaos
Actually that'd be 8...
Both 7 and 8 are Sacred Numbers of Chaos. 6 and 9, too:
6 = Slaanesh
7 = Nurgle
8 = Khorne
9 = Tzeentch
You used to get bonuses if your unit numbered a multiple of the Sacred Number (e.g. 8 Bloodletters, 6 Daemonettes).
If you go further, then 11 & 13 are also Sacred Numbers:
11 = Malal
13 = Horned Rat
BBAP wrote:7 is Nurgle, isn't it? Slaanesh is 6, Khorne is 8, Tzeentch is 9. She'd have to be 10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10 to avoid heresy.
Exalted
JohnHwangDD wrote:
Both 7 and 8 are Sacred Numbers of Chaos. 6 and 9, too: 6 = Slaanesh 7 = Nurgle 8 = Khorne 9 = Tzeentch You used to get bonuses if your unit numbered a multiple of the Sacred Number (e.g. 8 Bloodletters, 6 Daemonettes).
If you go further, then 11 & 13 are also Sacred Numbers: 11 = Malal 13 = Horned Rat
I only knew about 8 being associated with Khorne - good to know!
As someone who plays Sisters I can't say I'd be all that bothered, to be honest. My Codex has been Crud-Warded, so playing the army in its current state is out of the question unless I want to get stomped repeatedly (I don't), which makes the issue of new models irrelevant. I'm not going to expand my army with new purchases until the deck is no longer stacked against me in almost every game I play, so unless they release a new Codex with the plastic kits, and said Codex is not Cruddace-grade dung, then the whole thing is a non-issue to me. This wouldn't be the first time the poor old Sisters have been the butt of a GW joke, and I doubt it'll be the last.
If this guys is getting stomped repeatedly with sisters, I wouldn't listen to much of what he's saying here. Not to mention there would be pretty well 0 chance of plastic models without a book to come along with them.
That's a level of malice I didn't think gamers were capable of,
It amazes me that people still get shocked over internet threats to the point where even the media buys into it wholesale. I've been getting death/rape threats for 15+ years online, anyone who's ever been any good at competitive online games can probably say the same. It's never bothered me, it's anonymous internet bs. I used to collect them and make them into collages for gaks and giggles.
There's no reason to think gamers are a community that is universally free of bad people. Seeing the reaction of the `tolerant` `progressive` community in the aftermath of their candidates loss, especially after they cockily proclaimed Trump would incite riots just 24 hours earlier, should be enough proof that any community houses idiots.
As someone who plays Sisters I can't say I'd be all that bothered, to be honest. My Codex has been Crud-Warded, so playing the army in its current state is out of the question unless I want to get stomped repeatedly (I don't), which makes the issue of new models irrelevant. I'm not going to expand my army with new purchases until the deck is no longer stacked against me in almost every game I play, so unless they release a new Codex with the plastic kits, and said Codex is not Cruddace-grade dung, then the whole thing is a non-issue to me. This wouldn't be the first time the poor old Sisters have been the butt of a GW joke, and I doubt it'll be the last.
If this guys is getting stomped repeatedly with sisters, I wouldn't listen to much of what he's saying here. Not to mention there would be pretty well 0 chance of plastic models without a book to come along with them.
I'll admit I haven't really been interested in any new 40k releases for the past few years, but... Don't model revamps still come packaged with a brand-new Codex?
That's a level of malice I didn't think gamers were capable of,
It amazes me that people still get shocked over internet threats to the point where even the media buys into it wholesale. I've been getting death/rape threats for 15+ years online, anyone who's ever been any good at competitive online games can probably say the same. It's never bothered me, it's anonymous internet bs. I used to collect them and make them into collages for gaks and giggles.
A couple of years ago a Dakkite threatened to kill me because I posted clean artwork of my RP character and my partner's RP character both wearing 40k power armor in a thread about Dakkites' favorite 40k artwork.
First time I'd ever gotten a death threat online. Admittedly I don't game competitively so the crowds I run into in online games are more relaxed.
There's no reason to think gamers are a community that is universally free of bad people. Seeing the reaction of the `tolerant` `progressive` community in the aftermath of their candidates loss, especially after they cockily proclaimed Trump would incite riots just 24 hours earlier, should be enough proof that any community houses idiots.
I agree that every community has both its bad apples along with its paragons, but could you refrain from the political comments? If I wanted to discuss the US election I'd be down in the Politics forum, not the 40k forum.
Pouncey wrote: I'll admit I haven't really been interested in any new 40k releases for the past few years, but... Don't model revamps still come packaged with a brand-new Codex?
Not always - some Space Marine revamps (Assault and Devastator Marines) came quite some time after the release of their latest codex.
Most of the time though, model revamps do come straight before or after a codex release.
A couple of years ago a Dakkite threatened to kill me because I posted clean artwork of my RP character and my partner's RP character both wearing 40k power armor in a thread about Dakkites' favorite 40k artwork.
First time I'd ever gotten a death threat online. Admittedly I don't game competitively so the crowds I run into in online games are more relaxed.
I believe that I may have been there to witness that, if my memory serves me correctly. I did leave Dakka for about 3 years so my memory is a bit fuzzy on the details.
It's pretty regular, honestly - if people don't like something even remotely, they use it to justify threatening to rape or murder people online since they're protected by anonymity. This happened very recently when No Mans Sky developer Hello Games delayed the game for another 2 months; a reporter who was first on the scene to report the delay received an absolute tonne of death threats from "fans" saying that he was lying. Then when Hello Games made an official announcement saying the game was delayed, instead of apologising for their response, they shifted their attack to Sean Murray, the face of Hello Games, and he got death threats right up to the game's release.
This is how the internet rolls, unfortunately, especially in the videogaming community. It is one of the reasons why I reserve a special hatred for most "gamers" despite being one myself.
I agree that every community has both its bad apples along with its paragons, but could you refrain from the political comments? If I wanted to discuss the US election I'd be down in the Politics forum, not the 40k forum.
Don't worry Pouncey, I believe that was only a comparison to prove a point. Nobody wants to or is going to start a political scuffle here
Pouncey wrote: I'll admit I haven't really been interested in any new 40k releases for the past few years, but... Don't model revamps still come packaged with a brand-new Codex?
Not always - some Space Marine revamps (Assault and Devastator Marines) came quite some time after the release of their latest codex.
Most of the time though, model revamps do come straight before or after a codex release.
Right, they started doing that thing where they release kits almost randomly instead of in waves with 4-5 things for the monthly featured army.
Speaking of their monthly releases, is there a way I can send GW an e-mail informing them that I am not interested in any of their non-Sisters of Battle products, and tell them to only send me an e-mail when they finally release plastic Sisters of Battle?
I've tried a couple of e-mails pledging my support to a plastic Sisters of Battle line, got the usual, "Have faith, Sister, GW has not forgotten the Sororitas" line that feels meaningless when I remember that I read that reply 3-4 years ago and nothing ever came of it. I wonder if forcing them to stop advertising to me unless it's about Sisters of Battle might get the message cross more clearly.
Right, they started doing that thing where they release kits almost randomly instead of in waves with 4-5 things for the monthly featured army.
Speaking of their monthly releases, is there a way I can send GW an e-mail informing them that I am not interested in any of their non-Sisters of Battle products, and tell them to only send me an e-mail when they finally release plastic Sisters of Battle?
I've tried a couple of e-mails pledging my support to a plastic Sisters of Battle line, got the usual, "Have faith, Sister, GW has not forgotten the Sororitas" line that feels meaningless when I remember that I read that reply 3-4 years ago and nothing ever came of it. I wonder if forcing them to stop advertising to me unless it's about Sisters of Battle might get the message cross more clearly.
Well I mean you could try emailing customer service, but I think you know how much use that will be on the back of you sending emails to GW before that weren't about product returns.
I don't get email notifications from GW anyway - I just check into the site every Saturday morning to see what's new.
Right, they started doing that thing where they release kits almost randomly instead of in waves with 4-5 things for the monthly featured army.
Speaking of their monthly releases, is there a way I can send GW an e-mail informing them that I am not interested in any of their non-Sisters of Battle products, and tell them to only send me an e-mail when they finally release plastic Sisters of Battle?
I've tried a couple of e-mails pledging my support to a plastic Sisters of Battle line, got the usual, "Have faith, Sister, GW has not forgotten the Sororitas" line that feels meaningless when I remember that I read that reply 3-4 years ago and nothing ever came of it. I wonder if forcing them to stop advertising to me unless it's about Sisters of Battle might get the message cross more clearly.
Well I mean you could try emailing customer service, but I think you know how much use that will be on the back of you sending emails to GW before that weren't about product returns.
I don't get email notifications from GW anyway - I just check into the site every Saturday morning to see what's new.
I ended up pushing the Unsubscribe link at the bottom of one of the e-mails, there was an Other option for feedback, so I selected that and typed a short paragraph.
Ir probably doesn't mean much to people since I can't prove anything..but my local hobby shop that sells GW products has already told me that "major changes to the product line and plastic sisters are coming in around january or february." Apparently the distributors told him early so he could try and shift out product before he gets a TON of new things in.
Right now he's got a lot of the basic things every army needs so from the sounds of things it's going to be a lot of armies being effected. But he claims 100% that he was told plastic sisters were coming in around then too. And this is a guy that has no investment in 40k at all. He's more interested in AoS and really has no reason to lie.
mmzero252 wrote: Ir probably doesn't mean much to people since I can't prove anything..but my local hobby shop that sells GW products has already told me that "major changes to the product line and plastic sisters are coming in around january or february." Apparently the distributors told him early so he could try and shift out product before he gets a TON of new things in.
Right now he's got a lot of the basic things every army needs so from the sounds of things it's going to be a lot of armies being effected. But he claims 100% that he was told plastic sisters were coming in around then too. And this is a guy that has no investment in 40k at all. He's more interested in AoS and really has no reason to lie.
Plastic Sisters incoming would mean that GW announced a major release two or three months in advance.
The GW I know issues C&D orders to take down photographs from White Dwarfs that were posted a few days before the models in it are sold.
I cannot fathom a reality where Games Workshop, the company that does its absolute best to keep all upcoming releases secret until they go up for sale, would announce this three months before it actually happens.
Also... to me, he really sounded like he was telling a joke. By which I mean his tone, his inflections, the way he was speaking those words, was exactly like he was telling a joke and expecting a laugh to come afterward.
Nothing has been announced yet; typically, we have found out from a leaked White Dwarf the month prior, with a hint in the WD before that.
If they continue with that convention, then no SoB's in January because there was no hint in November's WD. Now, if December has a hint, and we should see the December WD any day now, followed by the announcement in the January WD... then Sisters of Battle in February!
mmzero252 wrote: Ir probably doesn't mean much to people since I can't prove anything..but my local hobby shop that sells GW products has already told me that "major changes to the product line and plastic sisters are coming in around january or february." Apparently the distributors told him early so he could try and shift out product before he gets a TON of new things in.
Right now he's got a lot of the basic things every army needs so from the sounds of things it's going to be a lot of armies being effected. But he claims 100% that he was told plastic sisters were coming in around then too. And this is a guy that has no investment in 40k at all. He's more interested in AoS and really has no reason to lie.
Plastic Sisters incoming would mean that GW announced a major release two or three months in advance.
The GW I know issues C&D orders to take down photographs from White Dwarfs that were posted a few days before the models in it are sold.
I cannot fathom a reality where Games Workshop, the company that does its absolute best to keep all upcoming releases secret until they go up for sale, would announce this three months before it actually happens.
Also... to me, he really sounded like he was telling a joke. By which I mean his tone, his inflections, the way he was speaking those words, was exactly like he was telling a joke and expecting a laugh to come afterward.
He in no way sounded like he was telling a joke. Nothing I said even made hint that he could have been..but if you want to say that to make yourself feel better or something then so be it. He actually sounded a bit stressed out from having to make so much room for new things coming to the 40k line-up in a few months.
mmzero252 wrote: Ir probably doesn't mean much to people since I can't prove anything..but my local hobby shop that sells GW products has already told me that "major changes to the product line and plastic sisters are coming in around january or february." Apparently the distributors told him early so he could try and shift out product before he gets a TON of new things in.
Right now he's got a lot of the basic things every army needs so from the sounds of things it's going to be a lot of armies being effected. But he claims 100% that he was told plastic sisters were coming in around then too. And this is a guy that has no investment in 40k at all. He's more interested in AoS and really has no reason to lie.
Plastic Sisters incoming would mean that GW announced a major release two or three months in advance.
The GW I know issues C&D orders to take down photographs from White Dwarfs that were posted a few days before the models in it are sold.
I cannot fathom a reality where Games Workshop, the company that does its absolute best to keep all upcoming releases secret until they go up for sale, would announce this three months before it actually happens.
Also... to me, he really sounded like he was telling a joke. By which I mean his tone, his inflections, the way he was speaking those words, was exactly like he was telling a joke and expecting a laugh to come afterward.
He in no way sounded like he was telling a joke. Nothing I said even made hint that he could have been..but if you want to say that to make yourself feel better or something then so be it. He actually sounded a bit stressed out from having to make so much room for new things coming to the 40k line-up in a few months.
...No, I mean the video on Warhammer TV. The guy at the very end of the video whose comment started this whole thing. He's the one who sounded like he was joking.
How on Earth could I possibly have an inkling of the tones and inflections of your local GW manager? I don't think we even live in the same country, though I haven't checked the flags yet.
Nothing has been announced yet;
You mean apart from the guy on the official GW Facebook page in an official Warhammer TV video who said in no uncertain terms that plastic Sisters of Battle were coming out in 2-3 months?
...No, I mean the video on Warhammer TV. The guy at the very end of the video whose comment started this whole thing. He's the one who sounded like he was joking.
Ah, it was a bit hard to tell since you quoted me on the whole thing. I believe my local game shop simply because from a retail standpoint it makes sense to tell them early if there's major stuff coming up. But there's nothing preventing the shop owners themselves from telling others that come there what the distributors have told them.
It's less of a major anouncement by GW...and more a "Hey we just wanted to let you shop owners know you should get rid of a lot of product soon because we'll be replacing a ton of the line-up with new things."
...No, I mean the video on Warhammer TV. The guy at the very end of the video whose comment started this whole thing. He's the one who sounded like he was joking.
Ah, it was a bit hard to tell since you quoted me on the whole thing. I believe my local game shop simply because from a retail standpoint it makes sense to tell them early if there's major stuff coming up. But there's nothing preventing the shop owners themselves from telling others that come there what the distributors have told them.
It's less of a major anouncement by GW...and more a "Hey we just wanted to let you shop owners know you should get rid of a lot of product soon because we'll be replacing a ton of the line-up with new things."
I need to clarify something that will clear up some of the confusion.
My original response to you was less a counter-argument to the things you were saying, and more an enumeration of my reasons why I believe the statement at the very end of that Warhammer TV video was a joke. I quoted you not to reference the things you said, but instead to direct my comment to you since you were providing evidence for why it's real, and without quoting it it would seem as though I were just talking to no one in particular.
It's all good. My original post was a bit all over the place so it let me reword things a little and clarify the information I got too.
From the sounds of things though, they might be rereleasing a bunch of standard 40k kits with new options or perhaps condensing kits together to sell models better. I kinda hope this is the case.
mmzero252 wrote: It's all good. My original post was a bit all over the place so it let me reword things a little and clarify the information I got too.
From the sounds of things though, they might be rereleasing a bunch of standard 40k kits with new options or perhaps condensing kits together to sell models better. I kinda hope this is the case.
Don't get me wrong, I would be very, very happy to finally have plastic Sisters of Battle. The prospect of condensing the existing range of kits in a large-scale model revamp is also something that could be good, and I hope that the redesigned Astartes kits get rid of the massive amount of utterly pointless flavor details that make a standard Veteran look more blinged-out than a Chapter Master.
The way that teaser on Warhammer TV was done though... I am filled with doubt since it is not at all like Games Workshop to say something like that.
I don't blame you. The way they mentioned it in that video is either the world's most cruel joke..or the worst way to tease something people have been wanting for YEARS.
The BoLS rumour mill is pretty certain about it, I'd be startled at this point if they didn't.
(Also I'd be very annoyed. I've spent a lot of time getting my white-armoured fire-tank brigade and their new psychic-blank broadswordist allies ready for the update.)
AnomanderRake wrote: The BoLS rumour mill is pretty certain about it, I'd be startled at this point if they didn't.
(Also I'd be very annoyed. I've spent a lot of time getting my white-armoured fire-tank brigade and their new psychic-blank broadswordist allies ready for the update.)
I have had zero faith in the rumor mill starting from the day I held a copy of White Dwarf I received a few days early in my hand and was able to see for myself that the things the rumor mill was certain were coming that month were not, in fact, coming.
I have had much less faith in Dakka since I shared that information with you guys, including photos and every detail you wanted to know, and was eventually informed that, because what I was saying did not line up with what the rumor mill was saying, I was probably lying.
MarsNZ wrote: I've been getting death/rape threats for 15+ years online, anyone who's ever been any good at competitive online games can probably say the same. It's never bothered me, it's anonymous internet bs. I used to collect them and make them into collages for gaks and giggles.
A couple of years ago a Dakkite threatened to kill me because I posted clean artwork of my RP character and my partner's RP character both wearing 40k power armor in a thread about Dakkites' favorite 40k artwork.
First time I'd ever gotten a death threat online. Admittedly I don't game competitively so the crowds I run into in online games are more relaxed.
Holy feth. I'm sorry that either you had to deal with that.
@Pouncey - I certainly hope that you reported, and that the Mods did something about it. Pretty sure that's a major violation of Dakka rules...
MarsNZ wrote: I've been getting death/rape threats for 15+ years online, anyone who's ever been any good at competitive online games can probably say the same. It's never bothered me, it's anonymous internet bs. I used to collect them and make them into collages for gaks and giggles.
A couple of years ago a Dakkite threatened to kill me because I posted clean artwork of my RP character and my partner's RP character both wearing 40k power armor in a thread about Dakkites' favorite 40k artwork.
First time I'd ever gotten a death threat online. Admittedly I don't game competitively so the crowds I run into in online games are more relaxed.
Holy feth. I'm sorry that either you had to deal with that.
@Pouncey - I certainly hope that you reported, and that the Mods did something about it. Pretty sure that's a major violation of Dakka rules...
Moderator was on the scene in less than 20 minutes. Thread locked, posts deleted, never saw that guy ever again. One of the thing's Dakka's got going for it is a moderator team that steps in when needed very quickly.
The threat itself was not credible in the slightest though. He was an American and he claimed to be getting on a plane to come find me IRL. As in, going through the boarding procedure in the present tense. Given that he said that less than 15 minutes after becoming aware of my existence, and that going through security in a US international airport takes long enough you should probably bring a snack, it was obviously complete crap.
The other people in the thread, regardless of their opinion on furry-40k crossover artwork, fully agreed he was way beyond out of line. When a new version of the thread was made, they specifically invited me to post that artwork.
I really, really prefer the 40k tabletop crowd's reaction to furry 40k crossover stuff compared to the 40k video game crowd. You tabletop guys are usually of the opinion that while it's not your cup of tea, it is merely fan art, thus not canon, and my models are unlikely to ever grace a gaming table with any of you, thus it is of little concern.
The video game crowd is much less passive about their dislike of it. Maybe because they spend a lot of time on the Internet so their gaming medium is exposed to furry 40k crossovers much more often and much more blatantly. Maybe just because people who play tabletop games have long since realized the need for social niceties while gaming since they are always face-to-face with their opponent.
As for furry-40k, isn't that what the Spaz Woofs have become?
Video games for me were MMO, and I just hung out with the cool Swedes & Germans. Good crowds.
I have seen the Wulfen. They do not bear much resemblance to a wolf furry. There is a similar thing with World of Warcraft where many non-furry WoW players consider Draenei to be anthro goats, whereas furries place Draenei in the alien category.
I think the funniest thing about the people who hate furries and 40k mixing is that they love pictures where Space Marines brutally murder furries. It's god damned hilarious when you realize that those people are protesting fanart where furries and 40k mix, by creating and enjoying fanart where furries and 40k mix. Their protest art is literally the exact thing it is a protest against.
JohnHwangDD wrote: Do you recall the very old RT-era Imperial Guard Beastmen regiments? Where do they categorize?
I have heard of them but never seen their models or art.
I have however, seen some of the incredibly rare fanart of a Felinid, and my assessment is that Felinids are not furries, but instead the 40k version of anime catgirls/catboys.
Pouncey wrote: (Quote truncated for brevity) ...I really, really prefer the 40k tabletop crowd's reaction to furry 40k crossover stuff compared to the 40k video game crowd. You tabletop guys are usually of the opinion that while it's not your cup of tea, it is merely fan art, thus not canon, and my models are unlikely to ever grace a gaming table with any of you, thus it is of little concern...
Wait, furry 40k crossover stuff is unlikely ever to grace the table? You mean you guys don't routinely see MLP toys converted with Space Marine bits in your games?
(This comment is mostly comic, the closest to this I've actually seen in real life is a Menoth player with pastel-coloured ponies in Warmachine.)
(I did see someone use LEGO monkeys as Joakero once, though.)
(And I don't know why any of us has a leg to stand on, if someone wanted to grumble about furry models in the game. We've got Wulfen, Scourges, Possessed, Kroot, folks with weapons they ate earlier bubbling up out of their armour-flesh to blast away with, all the unusual biology that comes out of Slaanesh, and we seem to take the weird crypto-fascist theocracy that is the Imperium and their fondness for sticking paper to stuff with wax for protection for granted easily enough. Against that backdrop a planet of fuzzy abhumans seems pretty tame.)
Aiming back for the topic slightly anyone else had a chance to put together some Sisters of Silence? I've found them to be awesome and if they're a predictor of what the plastic Sisters would look like I'm optimistic.
AnomanderRake wrote: Aiming back for the topic slightly anyone else had a chance to put together some Sisters of Silence? I've found them to be awesome and if they're a predictor of what the plastic Sisters would look like I'm optimistic.
I like that the SoS have prominent boob armor, shaved heads and enormous phallic swords. This is a good direction for Sisters of Battle.
Only in your bizarre, twisted vision of them, Hwang.
AnomanderRake wrote: Aiming back for the topic slightly anyone else had a chance to put together some Sisters of Silence? I've found them to be awesome and if they're a predictor of what the plastic Sisters would look like I'm optimistic.
I found them to be kinda dull. They looked like basically Dark Eldar models with slightly different aesthetics, not like an original sculpt of their own.
AnomanderRake wrote: Aiming back for the topic slightly anyone else had a chance to put together some Sisters of Silence? I've found them to be awesome and if they're a predictor of what the plastic Sisters would look like I'm optimistic.
I like that the SoS have prominent boob armor, shaved heads and enormous phallic swords. This is a good direction for Sisters of Battle.
The cigar is just a cigar, John.
I thought that they were very well posed, that the designers did a good job of making their armour look cohesively armour-like throughout, and that the shoulders, cloaks, and topknots did a good job of giving them the presence/bulk of models in power armour without making them look chunky or unwieldy, but apparently this is yet another thing to add to the long list of things where I'm the only person who likes them.
... do they really have Canoness-style boob-corset armour? Please tell me they don't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AnomanderRake wrote: this is yet another thing to add to the long list of things where I'm the only person who likes them.
I've seen the rules and I like those. I just... I don't want to paint anymore Madonna boob-corsets. You have no idea how awkward it is to paint Canoness breast-pyramids. Or how sharp they are.
BBAP wrote: ... do they really have Canoness-style boob-corset armour? Please tell me they don't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AnomanderRake wrote: this is yet another thing to add to the long list of things where I'm the only person who likes them.
I've seen the rules and I like those. I just... I don't want to paint anymore Madonna boob-corsets. You have no idea how awkward it is to paint Canoness breast-pyramids. Or how sharp they are.
Oh yeah, they'll stab your thumb up a treat.
They don't have Canoness-style boob corsets. The torsos are closer to more subdued Howling Banshees than they are to the current Sisters range.
Aiming back for the topic slightly anyone else had a chance to put together some Sisters of Silence? I've found them to be awesome and if they're a predictor of what the plastic Sisters would look like I'm optimistic.
I adore them, the models are very nice in appearance and would be a perfect size for new plastic sisters.
Pouncey wrote: You mean apart from the guy on the official GW Facebook page in an official Warhammer TV video who said in no uncertain terms that plastic Sisters of Battle were coming out in 2-3 months?
No uncertain terms?
A video that shows artwork from the BoP box, hints at a sprue for thousand sons space marines that should be put in a box. Big reveal of Magnus the Red model obviously linked to the events from the Burning of Prospero storyline that box focuses on. Which we now know has plastic models of sisters that go into battle in it.
"Cool, this isnt released for months yet."
Long pause
"Plastic Sisters of Battle?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?"
If you take the theme of the video, the tone of his voice which is obviously questioning whether whatever the guy in the bin is looking at is or isn't Sisters of Battle. You cannot be definitively certain that they weren't teasing us about Plastic Sisters of Battle while actually leaking the Sisters of Silence models.
The Sisters of Silence are after all in the box with that leaked artwork, next to the leaked sprue used to model the 1K sons portrayed in the box which were from the Legion that followed the leaked Primarch in the video. Never mind that Sisters of Battle no longer exist in the GW universe.
It's not like he said "plastic adeptus sororitas?!?!?!?"
And if my suspicions are true and the Sisters "of Battle " aren't getting a plastic reboot for x-mas. I will be completely unaffected, my models are purchased, and despite many on the forums who apparently can't even come close to winning with them. I find them pleasantly competitive, even more so when I run double CAD 6 Dom in Repressor builds against your more "meta" minded opponents.
I feel it's a bit of a really long stretch to say he was leaking Sister of Silence when he said "Sisters of Battle". Sisters of Silence are the ones that actually no longer exist in 40k. Sisters of Battle still exist. They are just locked in an infinite lack of fluff because 'they never choose a new leader until the old one is found'...and there's got lost in space.
Sisters of Battle is the name everyone uses for Adepta Sororitas.
Sisters of Silence are simply the Sisters of Silence.
There's very little chance that two people working for GW would confuse the two, by accident or on purpose.
Edit: It's also extremely unlikely that GW will do any reboots for Christmas like that...
I find it hard to believe anyone would get themselves hyped over Sisters rumors again after decades of disappointment, but apparently some peoples' candles burn longer than mine.
dracpanzer wrote: Never mind that Sisters of Battle no longer exist in the GW universe.
Alright, I was considering a response to your entire post as a whole until I came across this particular statement and absolutely need to know.
What the feth did I miss in the last month that is making you say Sisters of Battle do not exist anymore? Did I miss Sororitas being squatted?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: I find it hard to believe anyone would get themselves hyped over Sisters rumors again after decades of disappointment, but apparently some peoples' candles burn longer than mine.
Normally rumors of plastic Sisters of Battle are not spawned by an official GW video where a GW employee digging through the trash bin where they dispose of production byproducts so secretive they grind up everything into pellets that are not recognizable as any sort of actual thing, and says to the camera, "Plastic Sisters of Battle? Thought those weren't due out for another two or three months."
And we don't have miniatures or leaks or anything else. Just the one rumor. Just like always. And pardon the cliche, but I'm not a betting woman, but if I were, I'd bet this is going to be more of the same. Once we do have something of substance, maybe I'll start feeling some hype. But we don't have that yet.
AnomanderRake wrote: They don't have Canoness-style boob corsets. The torsos are closer to more subdued Howling Banshees than they are to the current Sisters range.
It's hardly Madonna boob-cones but it's still a bit... much. I don't get the need for boob armour on sculpts at all.
Melissia wrote: And we don't have miniatures or leaks or anything else. Just the one rumor. Just like always. And pardon the cliche, but I'm not a betting woman, but if I were, I'd bet this is going to be more of the same. Once we do have something of substance, maybe I'll start feeling some hype. But we don't have that yet.
To be honest, after all these long years of tease and neglect, it'd be perfectly understandable to remain sceptical until we had the new models physically in our hands...
AnomanderRake wrote: They don't have Canoness-style boob corsets. The torsos are closer to more subdued Howling Banshees than they are to the current Sisters range.
It's hardly Madonna boob-cones but it's still a bit... much. I don't get the need for boob armour on sculpts at all.
The Fantasy and Sci-fi genres in general prove very solidly that humans need to see boobs on a character to view them as female.
Why? Because boobs in real life are a very, very human thing that is a result of runaway sexual selection. Larger breasts don't yield more milk, as breasts are simply sacks of fat dangling off a woman's chest. There is no biological benefit to large breasts instead of a mammary gland that is flat against the torso, like pretty much all mammals other than humans have.
Despite how incredibly unique boobs are to humans and only humans, virtually every humanoid alien and fantasy species we have ever created have women with breasts. Even the ones that are not mammals and do not nurture their young with milk have breasts.
To me, this indicates quite solidly that for a human to recognize someone as a woman, that person needs to have breasts.
And I know many of you differ, but I would not like playing Sisters of Battle if they were not female. I strongly prefer playing female characters whenever I possibly can, to a degree that affects what games I am willing to even try playing. And yes, I do actually need my miniatures of female characters to look like women, simply pretending that they are does not work for me, I need to be able to look at my army and have my brain instantly identify them as female, not have to rationalize an explanation to come to that conclusion.
To make Sisters of Battle look like women, they need to have some sort of recognizable breasts. Sisters of Battle wear WH40k power armor, which is a type of plate armor. Plate armor is very, very rigid, so to give the appearance of breasts to someone wearing plate armor, you have to shape the plate armor in a way that makes it look like breasts. Thus, boobplate.
However, all I really require is that my models appear to have breasts when I look at them. This can be done in a variety of ways, not all of which require the approach that the original Sisters of Battle models used, but all of them involve shaping their breastplate in a way that pushes the armor out. The size of the miniatures may also require exaggerating parts of the model to be recognizable from playing distance.
In Final Fantasy 14, some of the newer armor I've come across for my character gives her a completely flat chest. Giving my female character a flat chest does actually damage my enjoyment of the game, so I have instead opted for different armor.
Essentially,what I am trying to tell you is that I need some sort of boobplate to enjoy the Sisters of Battle army. I am malleable on the precise form it takes, bit I need it to be present. Completely flat chest armor would destroy my enjoyment of the army.
I'm less holding out hope due to a single clip from a video...and more holding out hope because someone who has an exceptional track record of rumors being correct and my local games shop being told by a GW distributor both say they are coming in the next few months. They specifically mention 2017 though so I'm not holding out for anything a month after that silly video clip.
Pouncey wrote: The Fantasy and Sci-fi genres in general prove very solidly that humans need to see boobs on a character to view them as female.
Not really. They've only really proven that people will often assume male until something is proven female. Which is not a biological thing, but a societal one.
Pouncey wrote: To me, this indicates quite solidly that for a human to recognize someone as a woman, that person needs to have breasts.
There's a lot more to a human female that defines them as female purely from a visual standpoint - you look at things such as hips and thighs as well as their breasts. Boobs are just simply the most obvious trait. There is potential to scope a character out as female before they reveal their face without looking at their chest, something that GW models do address while also drowning out those features with "boobplate".
Of course there is the discussion about scale and noticing such features at a distance on that scale; we've done this debate many times before in multiple threads, so I won't elaborate this point here.
In Final Fantasy 14, some of the newer armor I've come across for my character gives her a completely flat chest. Giving my female character a flat chest does actually damage my enjoyment of the game, so I have instead opted for different armor.
Essentially,what I am trying to tell you is that I need some sort of boobplate to enjoy the Sisters of Battle army. I am malleable on the precise form it takes, bit I need it to be present. Completely flat chest armor would destroy my enjoyment of the army.
How exactly does this destroy your enjoyment? Just curious.
The thing about previous sisters rumors vs. now is that before you got 'oh the sculpts are done' and then 6 months later someone say 'oh yeah they'll come out in 6-8 months then 6 months later someone says 'oh yeah plastic sisters could come out whenever' now we have the EXACT SAME rumor cycle that deathwatch and genestealer cults and etc got. Vague stuff months away. Vague maybe significant, maybe nothing hints from gw which all leads into rumors of dates and times that all agree that something is being released for the faction but not exactly what or when. Then comes the anonymous sources claiming much tighter releases windows and specific kits. After that is sad panda, after that is atia, then finally official prerelease teasers out of GW. The train's never late, feel free to hop on!
dracpanzer wrote: Never mind that Sisters of Battle no longer exist in the GW universe.
What the feth did I miss in the last month that is making you say Sisters of Battle do not exist anymore? Did I miss Sororitas being squatted?
"Plastic Sisters of Battle? Thought those weren't due out for another two or three months."
I said that the Sisters exist as the Adepta Sororitas. The only Imperium unit in the game currently are the Sisters of Silence.
As for the quote, you have the order entirely wrong.
"Cool, these aren't going to be released for months yet!"
Long Pause......
"Plastic Sisters of Battle?!?!?!?!?!?"
The End....
If you turn the sentence around and add words to it, well I guess you can have it say whatever you want it to say. I for one don't buy it. Perhaps I am just too skeptical after a decade plus of "sisters are coming, I herdz it"
In Final Fantasy 14, some of the newer armor I've come across for my character gives her a completely flat chest. Giving my female character a flat chest does actually damage my enjoyment of the game, so I have instead opted for different armor.
Essentially,what I am trying to tell you is that I need some sort of boobplate to enjoy the Sisters of Battle army. I am malleable on the precise form it takes, bit I need it to be present. Completely flat chest armor would destroy my enjoyment of the army.
How exactly does this destroy your enjoyment? Just curious.
Because I look at my female character, see her flat plate armor, and feel worse than I did before seeing that and my urge to play the game is reduced. Then I use Glamour to give my armor the appearance of a piece of armor where my character's boobs are noticeable, and the amount of fun I have with the game goes up and I want to play it more.
Do you really need me to describe the exact process of a thing in a game making the game less enjoyable?
dracpanzer wrote: Never mind that Sisters of Battle no longer exist in the GW universe.
What the feth did I miss in the last month that is making you say Sisters of Battle do not exist anymore? Did I miss Sororitas being squatted?
"Plastic Sisters of Battle? Thought those weren't due out for another two or three months."
I said that the Sisters exist as the Adepta Sororitas. The only Imperium unit in the game currently are the Sisters of Silence.
Sisters of Battle and Adepta Sororitas are effectively synonymous.
And what game do you think we're talking about exactly? Half the playable armies are part of the Imperium.
As for the quote, you have the order entirely wrong.
"Cool, these aren't going to be released for months yet!"
Long Pause......
"Plastic Sisters of Battle?!?!?!?!?!?"
The End....
If you turn the sentence around and add words to it, well I guess you can have it say whatever you want it to say. I for one don't buy it. Perhaps I am just too skeptical after a decade plus of "sisters are coming, I herdz it"
I am quoting it as I remember it because I dislike Facebook too much to go dig up a month and a half old video on GW's Facebook page to prove it one way or the other. If you want to go find it and give me a link, I will rewatch it and concede the point if it turns out you are correct.
Pouncey wrote: Do you really need me to describe the exact process of a thing in a game making the game less enjoyable?
Well, kinda. I'm trying to understand how seeing your character flat chested turns off your enjoyment for the game for anything other than the immersion factor (as in she had boobs before and now she doesn't)
If immersion is the problem, that can't really apply to SoB models since you technically have no influence over the characters in your army, at least in appearance - if a Sister was flat chested where she was flat chested before, how would that make you enjoy the model less?
mmzero252 wrote: Sisters of Battle still exist. They are just locked in an infinite lack of fluff because 'they never choose a new leader until the old one is found'...and there's got lost in space.
I know they exist, they just aren't called that anymore. Since we haven't had anything but the one mention in the video, which is also about a box set that has a unit of actual "sisters" in it. It is just as likely a troll as it is the truth. Don't have any proof of it, but it's exactly what I thought the moment I heard it. Certainly isn't a confirmation like so many wan't to believe.
I would say that the guy in the video was being cheeky with just about everything he said and every gesture he used. So I wouldn't be surprised if they upped the troll level just a bit. If it is, it was extremely effective.
Not sure what you mean by "infinite lack of fluff because they never choose a new leader until the old one is found". The Adepta Sororitas dex had quite a bit of new fluff when it came out. They had a lot of fluff in the Nid/BA campaign, just sadly no rules.
I know they exist, they just aren't called that anymore. Since we haven't had anything but the one mention in the video, which is also about a box set that has a unit of actual "sisters" in it. It is just as likely a troll as it is the truth. Don't have any proof of it, but it's exactly what I thought the moment I heard it. Certainly isn't a confirmation like so many wan't to believe.
I would say that the guy in the video was being cheeky with just about everything he said and every gesture he used. So I wouldn't be surprised if they upped the troll level just a bit. If it is, it was extremely effective.
Not sure what you mean by "infinite lack of fluff because they never choose a new leader until the old one is found". The Adepta Sororitas dex had quite a bit of new fluff when it came out. They had a lot of fluff in the Nid/BA campaign, just sadly no rules.
They are called Sisters of Battle though...they are called both Sisters of Battle AND Adepta Sororitas. That's like saying nobody calls the Astra Millitarium the Imperial Guard any more.
The part about the fluff is that GW essentially wrote them into a dead end fluff wise with how they get new leadership then suddenly their only candidate gets lost forever.
On the topic of the video though, that was more about Magnus than anything. And no.."sisters of battle" would never be in relation to sisters of silence. Again..GW would not purposefully go and mix up two different armies like that.
Pouncey wrote: Do you really need me to describe the exact process of a thing in a game making the game less enjoyable?
Well, kinda. I'm trying to understand how seeing your character flat chested turns off your enjoyment for the game for anything other than the immersion factor (as in she had boobs before and now she doesn't)
If immersion is the problem, that can't really apply to SoB models since you technically have no influence over the characters in your army, at least in appearance - if a Sister was flat chested where she was flat chested before, how would that make you enjoy the model less?
The problem is that I like my female characters to have a solid appearance that they have breasts. When I have a female character with flat chest armor, I don't like that. I don't want to play it.
And as for your final statement, presently every Sister in my collection has breasts. I.E. the boobplate you hate so much. Thus, the replacement models having flat torso plates would change my army of Sisters of Battle with boobplate, into an army of Sisters of Battle with flat chest armor.
Buying plastic Sisters of Batttle kits, for me, is not a matter of merely adding extra models to my collection. It is a matter of replacing the old models with new ones.
What exactly do you want me to explain? Do you want me to explain why I like my female characters having noticeable chests and don't like them having much more realistic flat chest armor? If an explanation of why I like what I like, and why I don't like what I don't like, is what you're after, you will be leaving this thread empty-handed, as you have rejected every explanation I have ever been able to offer and the ultimate reason may simply be, "Because I do."
As for why it's a huge issue for me, it's because unlike many other Sisters of Battle players, I have no backup army to turn to. If plastic Sisters of Battle end up having an aesthetic I strongly dislike, there is no other army I can simply start playing. Sisters of Battle are the only army in the game I like, the only thing keeping me interested in WH40k. And my dislike of flat chest armor on female characters is strong enough that if the plastics, whenever they come out, have flat chest armor, that is the end of WH40k tabletop for me.
Could I play with my existing models? Maybe, maybe not. The update might open up wargear options and new units. Continued support for the army would expand tthe range, add new units, and as time goes on, the collection I have becomes insufficient to make an army that is capable of playing even casual games and have a hope of winning, as the army's balance takes into account the new units and tools I will not have access to.
You want flat chest armor because you don't see the point in boobplate.
I want boobplate because without it, I can no longer play WH40k tabletop.
mmzero252 wrote: The part about the fluff is that GW essentially wrote them into a dead end fluff wise with how they get new leadership then suddenly their only candidate gets lost forever.
On the topic of the video though, that was more about Magnus than anything. And no.."sisters of battle" would never be in relation to sisters of silence. Again..GW would not purposefully go and mix up two different armies like that.
I must confess to having no clue what you are talking about, suddenly their only leadership candidate gets lost forever? The Adepta Sororitas leadership are simply made up of Veteran Sororitas elevated to the Rank of Canoness. There are a lot of different ones for the different Orders within the fluff.
Magnus was the big hit in the video, but they did leak artwork from the BoP event as well as talking about a sprue of Thousand Sons space marines in the video. Somehow you didn't see GW being cheeky in the video, I certainly did. In the spirit of that, its just as likely that they were trolling everyone about plastic sisters of battle as they weren't.
Back on topic though, if they were trolling us, it has no effect on me or my SoB army. Though I would be happier I think if they were just trolling us. Please GW, give me SoB tactical cards and stay away from my Dex.
I am quoting it as I remember it because I dislike Facebook too much to go dig up a month and a half old video on GW's Facebook page to prove it one way or the other. If you want to go find it and give me a link, I will rewatch it and concede the point if it turns out you are correct.
Pouncey wrote: The problem is that I like my female characters to have a solid appearance that they have breasts. When I have a female character with flat chest armor, I don't like that. I don't want to play it.
Okay, but why? Is there a more nuanced reason why this is the case for you?
And as for your final statement, presently every Sister in my collection has breasts. I.E. the boobplate you hate so much.
I don't hate boobplate, FYI. The statement was a theoretical point to help me understand why you wouldn't like flat chested models.
What exactly do you want me to explain? Do you want me to explain why I like my female characters having noticeable chests and don't like them having much more realistic flat chest armor? If an explanation of why I like what I like, and why I don't like what I don't like, is what you're after, you will be leaving this thread empty-handed, as you have rejected every explanation I have ever been able to offer and the ultimate reason may simply be, "Because I do."
An explanation of why you don't like flat chested armour is exactly what I wanted. If your answer is "because I do" then that's fine. I just thought there may have been some depth to your earlier point.
As for why it's a huge issue for me, it's because unlike many other Sisters of Battle players, I have no backup army to turn to. If plastic Sisters of Battle end up having an aesthetic I strongly dislike, there is no other army I can simply start playing. Sisters of Battle are the only army in the game I like, the only thing keeping me interested in WH40k. And my dislike of flat chest armor on female characters is strong enough that if the plastics, whenever they come out, have flat chest armor, that is the end of WH40k tabletop for me.
So your hatred of flat chested armour is that severe that you would ditch 40k if it were ever to happen?
I get people buying into armies because of their aesthetic, like I have with my 4 armies. Pinpointing the whole aesthetic of the Sisters on their chest dimensions just seems a little... extreme?
You want flat chest armor because you don't see the point in boobplate.
I don't want flat chest armour. Frankly I don't give a how the new Sisters may look, just as long as they keep their knightly and angelic aesthetic designs so I have an opportunity to buy them myself. What cup size the Sisters want to be drafting their recruits in as is not important enough to me to merit not buying models.
I want boobplate because without it, I can no longer play WH40k tabletop.
You could if you could see past that very small nuance in the current Sisters range. In the same way that I don't understand people who (ironically) blow up the topic of Sister's boobplate being ridiculous, I don't understand how the Sisters losing their boobplate will be such a big deal.
I may as well add a disclaimer saying that I'm not trying to be antagonistic to your opinion like you may think I'm doing. We can tone down the passive aggressiveness and have a reasonable discussion about this.
mmzero252 wrote: The part about the fluff is that GW essentially wrote them into a dead end fluff wise with how they get new leadership then suddenly their only candidate gets lost forever.
On the topic of the video though, that was more about Magnus than anything. And no.."sisters of battle" would never be in relation to sisters of silence. Again..GW would not purposefully go and mix up two different armies like that.
I must confess to having no clue what you are talking about, suddenly their only leadership candidate gets lost forever? The Adepta Sororitas leadership are simply made up of Veteran Sororitas elevated to the Rank of Canoness. There are a lot of different ones for the different Orders within the fluff.
Magnus was the big hit in the video, but they did leak artwork from the BoP event as well as talking about a sprue of Thousand Sons space marines in the video. Somehow you didn't see GW being cheeky in the video, I certainly did. In the spirit of that, its just as likely that they were trolling everyone about plastic sisters of battle as they weren't.
Back on topic though, if they were trolling us, it has no effect on me or my SoB army. Though I would be happier I think if they were just trolling us. Please GW, give me SoB tactical cards and stay away from my Dex.
Nothing in that video was to do with the Burning of Prospero release. Magnus, the artwork and the 1k Sons are all for the upcoming Curse of the Wulfen Part 2 release.
And given 2 of the most reputable rumormongers (Atia and Sad Panda, both of which haven't been wrong at all so far) are saying that yes, SoB are indeed coming some time next year, I for one am willing to believe that GW weren't just trolling.
It would also be incredibly incompetent, more so than GW usual has been in the past, to troll their fans like that given the effort they've been trying to put in to build more trust with the community with their new Facebook pages among other things.
Pouncey wrote: The problem is that I like my female characters to have a solid appearance that they have breasts. When I have a female character with flat chest armor, I don't like that. I don't want to play it.
Okay, but why? Is there a more nuanced reason why this is the case for you?
And as for your final statement, presently every Sister in my collection has breasts. I.E. the boobplate you hate so much.
I don't hate boobplate, FYI. The statement was a theoretical point to help me understand why you wouldn't like flat chested models.
What exactly do you want me to explain? Do you want me to explain why I like my female characters having noticeable chests and don't like them having much more realistic flat chest armor? If an explanation of why I like what I like, and why I don't like what I don't like, is what you're after, you will be leaving this thread empty-handed, as you have rejected every explanation I have ever been able to offer and the ultimate reason may simply be, "Because I do."
An explanation of why you don't like flat chested armour is exactly what I wanted. If your answer is "because I do" then that's fine. I just thought there may have been some depth to your earlier point.
As for why it's a huge issue for me, it's because unlike many other Sisters of Battle players, I have no backup army to turn to. If plastic Sisters of Battle end up having an aesthetic I strongly dislike, there is no other army I can simply start playing. Sisters of Battle are the only army in the game I like, the only thing keeping me interested in WH40k. And my dislike of flat chest armor on female characters is strong enough that if the plastics, whenever they come out, have flat chest armor, that is the end of WH40k tabletop for me.
So your hatred of flat chested armour is that severe that you would ditch 40k if it were ever to happen?
I get people buying into armies because of their aesthetic, like I have with my 4 armies. Pinpointing the whole aesthetic of the Sisters on their chest dimensions just seems a little... extreme?
You want flat chest armor because you don't see the point in boobplate.
I don't want flat chest armour. Frankly I don't give a how the new Sisters may look, just as long as they keep their knightly and angelic aesthetic designs so I have an opportunity to buy them myself. What cup size the Sisters want to be drafting their recruits in as is not important enough to me to merit not buying models.
I want boobplate because without it, I can no longer play WH40k tabletop.
You could if you could see past that very small nuance in the current Sisters range. In the same way that I don't understand people who (ironically) blow up the topic of Sister's boobplate being ridiculous, I don't understand how the Sisters losing their boobplate will be such a big deal.
I may as well add a disclaimer saying that I'm not trying to be antagonistic to your opinion like you may think I'm doing. We can tone down the passive aggressiveness and have a reasonable discussion about this.
G.A
I'm sorry for being aggressive in my response. I assumed you were one of the people I have spent months arguing about Sisters of Battle boobplate and whether it should exist or not. Those arguments have never been pleasant to participate in as I generally get the impression the people I argued with were insinuating I just wanted to perv out on the models, which is not the case but is definitely an insinuation difficult to defend oneself against when I'm arguing for boobs. I have become increasingly defensive in these discussions as a matter of course, as the people I argue against demand I explain myself and then deny the validity of any reasonable argument I bring up in a fairly dismissive manner.
I don't actually hate the idea of smooth chest armor for female characters. It would be the way any sane armor designer would create it and it would be way more effective as protection.
However, while I recognize that flat armor would be more effective, it's not an appearance I enjoy at all. I place a large amount of value on the way things look, and without being dramatic, I would no longer enjoy the appearance of Sisters of Battle if they had flat chest armor. It's not that the boob armor is the only thing I like about them, it's that I dislike flat chests on female characters enough that it would overwhelm everything else I like about them, and my sculpting skills will never be sufficient to simply Green Stuff my models into something I like better.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Matt.Kingsley wrote: Nothing in that video was to do with the Burning of Prospero release. Magnus, the artwork and the 1k Sons are all for the upcoming Curse of the Wulfen Part 2 release.
And given 2 of the most reputable rumormongers (Atia and Sad Panda, both of which haven't been wrong at all so far) are saying that yes, SoB are indeed coming some time next year, I for one am willing to believe that GW weren't just trolling.
It would also be incredibly incompetent, more so than GW usual has been in the past, to troll their fans like that given the effort they've been trying to put in to build more trust with the community with their new Facebook pages among other things.
Plastic Sisters of Battle are not the kind of thing GW should ever be joking about. Not simply that they shouldn't troll people in general if they want to rebuild trust, but plastic Sisters of Battle are a topic that has to be dealt with extremely carefully. Making a casual, off-hand joke is not the kind of thing that should be done. Because a lot of people are taking it as a serious promise.
When you neglect one of your playable factions so severely that World of Warcraft was being called "Blizzard's upcoming Runescape-killer" the time they last received new models, you absolutely should not be treating that neglect as fodder for a joke. It's not god damned funny. There are teenagers on this planet who were born after the Sisters of Battle got their last batch of new models.
mmzero252 wrote: The part about the fluff is that GW essentially wrote them into a dead end fluff wise with how they get new leadership then suddenly their only candidate gets lost forever.
The Abbess of the Adepta Sororitas, in the lore, vanished and is unable to be found. It's a lazy cop-out to try to make Sisters more Marine-like because it gives the Abbess similarities to the Primarchs... but it doesn't work because nobody cares who the Abbess is to begin with because she never had any character and was never given any depth before her disappearance, unlike the Primarchs.
She was never even given a name. Just a title and then stuffed right in to the fridge.
Pouncey wrote: The Fantasy and Sci-fi genres in general prove very solidly that humans need to see boobs on a character to view them as female.
Why? Because boobs in real life are a very, very human thing that is a result of runaway sexual selection. Larger breasts don't yield more milk, as breasts are simply sacks of fat dangling off a woman's chest. There is no biological benefit to large breasts instead of a mammary gland that is flat against the torso, like pretty much all mammals other than humans have.
Despite how incredibly unique boobs are to humans and only humans, virtually every humanoid alien and fantasy species we have ever created have women with breasts. Even the ones that are not mammals and do not nurture their young with milk have breasts.
If you look at other mammals, the females aren't necessarily flat against the body.
Spoiler:
Actively milk-producing breasts/udders are dramatically larger than dry teats. This is true across pretty much all of the animals that I've seen.
Sows teats are much larger when nursing. It's more than just some fatty tissue. It's very much like what GW sculpts on a Slanneshi model.
Yes, female space aliens will have boobs.
Spoiler:
The Navi of Avatar have the full breasts of a evolution-selected placental mammal. Also, long flowing hair, and very favorable bust-waist-hip ratios.
Pouncey wrote: However, while I recognize that flat armor would be more effective, it's not an appearance I enjoy at all
Define "flat". Because most actual plate armor chest pieces weren't "flat", they were curved. They didn't have boob-cups, but barring certain kinds of Mirror Armor plates that were literally flat, they contained a curve in the chest or belly region that helped deflect arrows, thrusts, and blows. Armor such as this, with a thinner waist and flared chest and hips, would be entirely in keeping with traditional knightly platemail while appearing feminine in modern eyes, and without having boob-cups.
I'm not making advocacy, I just find the vehemence of your objections to be bizarre.
Oh good, boob plate arguments. Let's cover the whole discussion so we can all move on.
Pro: Boob plates look cool/make female characters more attractive or more obviously female and if done in a reasonable way don't detract from the badassness.
Against: Boob plates are unrealistic, not super necessary, and vaguely(sometime extremely, though not with sisters as MODELED) sexist and armor can look cool without doing that vaguely sexist thing we talked about.
There, the basis of both arguments. Please go back to talking about furries.
mmzero252 wrote: The part about the fluff is that GW essentially wrote them into a dead end fluff wise with how they get new leadership then suddenly their only candidate gets lost forever.
The Abbess of the Adepta Sororitas, in the lore, vanished and is unable to be found. It's a lazy cop-out to try to make Sisters more Marine-like because it gives the Abbess similarities to the Primarchs... but it doesn't work because nobody cares who the Abbess is to begin with because she never had any character and was never given any depth before her disappearance, unlike the Primarchs.
She was never even given a name. Just a title and then stuffed right in to the fridge.
Pouncey wrote: Plastic Sisters of Battle are not the kind of thing GW should ever be joking about. Not simply that they shouldn't troll people in general if they want to rebuild trust, but plastic Sisters of Battle are a topic that has to be dealt with extremely carefully. Making a casual, off-hand joke is not the kind of thing that should be done. Because a lot of people are taking it as a serious promise.
When you neglect one of your playable factions so severely that World of Warcraft was being called "Blizzard's upcoming Runescape-killer" the time they last received new models, you absolutely should not be treating that neglect as fodder for a joke. It's not god damned funny. There are teenagers on this planet who were born after the Sisters of Battle got their last batch of new models.
You're taking this way too seriously. These are toys you're talking about, not Serious Life Events that people build their lives on. If some people get hyped up about SoB rumors and end up disappointed life will still go on. If GW never releases another SoB model and eventually removes them from the fluff entirely life will still go on for the former SoB players. They might get a bit annoyed and move on from 40k, but this is hardly the kind of abuse that you seem to be presenting it as.
Pouncey wrote: I'm sorry for being aggressive in my response. I assumed you were one of the people I have spent months arguing about Sisters of Battle boobplate and whether it should exist or not.
Ah, don't worry about it. Considering how these conversations usually go, like you described, I don't entirely blame you for drawing at the duel too early
I don't actually hate the idea of smooth chest armor for female characters. It would be the way any sane armor designer would create it and it would be way more effective as protection.
However, while I recognize that flat armor would be more effective, it's not an appearance I enjoy at all. I place a large amount of value on the way things look, and without being dramatic, I would no longer enjoy the appearance of Sisters of Battle if they had flat chest armor. It's not that the boob armor is the only thing I like about them, it's that I dislike flat chests on female characters enough that it would overwhelm everything else I like about them, and my sculpting skills will never be sufficient to simply Green Stuff my models into something I like better.
So it's more of a style choice that you like on their chest plate, but it's nothing to do with the boobs themselves and the possible sex appeal?
Well there is the argument that the boobplate is simply a style choice since they'd hardly fulfil a practical use for most females; I can therefore see why one would see it as a potentially important design aesthetic of the Sisters. However, I would say that perhaps you are putting a little too much significance on such a detail in the bigger picture, which if it were lost (not saying it should or shouldn't be) will ultimately have no effect on the general style of the Sisters.
AnomanderRake wrote: They don't have Canoness-style boob corsets. The torsos are closer to more subdued Howling Banshees than they are to the current Sisters range.
It's hardly Madonna boob-cones but it's still a bit... much. I don't get the need for boob armour on sculpts at all.
I'm happy they look like they're wearing armour in the first place. The torsos on the old sculpts didn't make a lot of visual sense as armour, these ones do.
Elemental wrote: As any thread about Sisters of Battle goes on, the probability that boob armour will hijack the thread approaches 1.
If you'd ever jagged your finger on a Canoness, you'd understand.
I had to Google this, because my understanding of Sisters is very old school, from when they first came out, and the Canoness looked like this:
Same boob armor as a regular sister.
I see that there's a much fancier kit out now.
No idea how long it's been out, but I'm guessing it's been a while. At only $15, and still metal, I might just get one. Hm.
Pouncey wrote: Unlike many, I believe that comment at the end of that video was actually a joke that ended up getting way out of hand, for a couple of reasons that are not really important to this thread, since I'm going to ask a hypothetical rather than convince people of its veracity one way or the other. I am, of course, hopeful that he was telling the truth and plastic Sisters of Battle are on the way in another month or two, but... I mean, what if they're not? So many people are so hopeful and excited for them, and I can't help but wonder what the reaction will be if it turns out that it was just a joke that got taken way more seriously than they thought it would be. How livid and angry are the people who've been looking forward to this for years or even over a decade going to be should it turn out to not actually be happening? Or will it instead be more of a demoralizing depression that could shake people's faith that that update will ever come?
Frankly, the way it has been announced, since there is no real date to wait for, my enthusiasm will just die slowly until I become even more bitter than before, but there won't be any outburst.
JohnHwangDD wrote: I had to Google this, because my understanding of Sisters is very old school, from when they first came out, and the Canoness looked like this:
Same boob armor as a regular sister.
I see that there's a much fancier kit out now.
No idea how long it's been out, but I'm guessing it's been a while. At only $15, and still metal, I might just get one. Hm.
Old one is way better imo. I ordered one body along with Kyrinov's Mace of Valaan. Made for a very cool model.
Pouncey wrote: Despite how incredibly unique boobs are to humans and only humans, virtually every humanoid alien and fantasy species we have ever created have women with breasts. Even the ones that are not mammals and do not nurture their young with milk have breasts.
Well, except Aliens. They have Queens that don't have any breasts. Unless you count the extra set of arms as breasts ofc!
Pouncey wrote: Essentially,what I am trying to tell you is that I need some sort of boobplate to enjoy the Sisters of Battle army. I am malleable on the precise form it takes, bit I need it to be present. Completely flat chest armor would destroy my enjoyment of the army.
What about the uniboob? I think it can make a quite good compromise. While completely unrealistic, it avoids making the armor look like skintight, while also conveying the idea the wearer is female? I mean, boobsocks don't look good, and it's something we barely ever see in real life safe for when people only wear bra...
JohnHwangDD wrote: No idea how long it's been out, but I'm guessing it's been a while. At only $15, and still metal, I might just get one. Hm.
I bought mine when 3rd Edition was current, so 9 years ago or something like that. She's been jabbing me with her boob-cones ever since. Woe betide if you drop her and have to catch her.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Old one is way better imo. I ordered one body along with Kyrinov's Mace of Valaan. Made for a very cool model.
They're both really nice models - the detail on the "new" one is fantastic, it's just the unfortunate boob-cones that are a nightmare.
BBAP wrote: They're both really nice models - the detail on the "new" one is fantastic, it's just the unfortunate boob-cones that are a nightmare.
I feel like the “new” canoness is way to thick and large, feels completely different from basic Sisters. The old one is just slightly more imposing than a normal Sister.
Yeah, but most of her bulk is in the massive triple-cloak-robe-stole-tabard-thing she's wearing. She's a lot heavier, but she doesn't look too different from the rest of the Sisters models.
1: Sisters are coming. 2: They are coming in January 2017. 3: They will go up on pre-order in December 2016 4: Images of the new kits will be shown after we see the whole Thousand Sons release. 5: Thousand Sons kits will be shown within 2 weeks. 6: Sisters of Battle models will be show within 6 weeks.
If you don't like boob armour feel free to use any male models you want and say they are female as long as you stop complaining because you don't like it. No one is forcing you to use boob plate armoured models, there are hundreds of alternative male models out there with "realistic armour" you can use instead and all you have to do is say the models are females wearing "realistic" (in your eyes) armour.
Boob plate does make sense in 40K, it doesn't make sense in our world because our personal protection is garbage. Our best body armor can be defeated with very few shots and restricts movement by allot the heavier armour you wear. 40K armour on the other hand is many hundreds of times better than the best ones we have. The armour in 40k is so good in fact that many are crafted like works of art and almost all power armour is painted in bright colours so you can see the wearer from afar. No personal armour we have could take a bolt round but 40k armour can to some degrees. In fact the same metric can be used for 40k armour as with our own.
No body armour we have can take a .50 Cal AP around, a few rounds of 7.62 can be defeated before the armour fails. Name a ballistic round that can defeat Terminator or even Power Armour in 40k. You need to start looking for highly specialized ammunition that is so rare that very few have access to it. I'm taking about weapons that out right defeat 2+ and 3+ armour, not special rules like Rending weapons and such.
Lets switch our technology around. Lets say that .22 cal was the largest and most efficient weapons round we as a species could come up with. With todays technology could we create a boob plate armour strong enough to be "bullet proof" against it?
Saying boob plate armour doesn't make sense or would never work is a pretty shallow point of view. If a space faring alien race came to Earth and declared war on us is there any chance that they could wear what we'd call boob plate and none of our standard issue infantry weapons could defeat it?
What I'm getting at is material, we don't know what kind of material power armour is made out of but what we can 100% say is that the shape of the armour has no bearing if the protection is good enough.
Lets take one of the best armour technologies under development, graphene based armour. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/195089-graphene-body-armor-twice-the-stopping-power-of-kevlar-at-a-fraction-of-the-weight The researchers tested between 10 and 100 layers of graphene — between 10 nanometers and 100 nanometers thick, respectively. They focused a laser on a gold filament, vaporizing it into a projectile bullet that traveled at 3,000 meters per second — or more than twice the muzzle velocity of a high-powered rifle. As the tiny (micrometer-sized) bullets slammed into the graphene armor, it showed around twice the stopping power of Kevlar, or about 10 times the stopping power of steel plate.
What this basically translates to is that if you wore a T-Shirt and was hit by 9mm you'd be perfectly fine.
If we used the strongest material we know of in the form of nano tubes it gets even more ridiculous.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2007/oct/31/bullets-bounce-off-nanotubes Mylvaganam and Zhang found that the nanotubes were resistant to bullet speeds of over 2000 m/s, even after multiple impacts. (For comparison, the speed of rifle bullets can reach 1500 m/s and most gun bullets have speeds of less than 1000 m/s). The centre of a nanotube appeared to be the most resilient. The duo says that bullet-proof vests could be made by using "nanotube yarn". Here, the carbon nanotubes would be spun into fibres, probably using a technique called electrospinning. The researchers have calculated that body armour just 600 microns thick made from six layers of 100 micron yarns could bounce off a bullet with a muzzle energy of 320 Joules – which is typical of a light firearm.
This translates to you (if my math is right)being able to wear a 0.6mm silk T-shirt and it could stop 9mm bullets. 3mm would be able to stop some 7.62 rounds. 3cm could stop a 15 000 Joule BMG .50Cal.
Then comes force dissipation: Such vests would be better than existing anti-ballistic clothing, which is usually made of multiple layers of Kevlar, Twaron and Dyneema fibres. Although they stop bullets from penetrating, they do this by dissipating force over an area larger than the bullet, which can still cause injuries known as blunt force trauma. These range from severe bruising to critical organ damage. The high level of elastic storage energy of carbon nanotubes means that such trauma could be avoided.
So if we could mass produce nano tube thread we could create a very light and incredibly strong cloth like material. If we then used it to create a corset it would in theory be bullet proof all the way up the caliber ladder regardless of shape. Hit boob and is redirected towards chest? Doesn't matter if the force dissipation is reduced to almost 0.
Of course you want to whine about it some more but who's to say that Sororitas armour doesn't have a small force field generator built into it giving them their 6++? Then again this doesn't make much sense since Repentia also has 6++. What if the armour is actually flat on the inside and the boobs are just extra thick layers of protection? They all have the exact same boob size after all?
Boob plate is plausible in our world and makes sense in 40k where intimidation is a greater weapon than your weapon. I'm willing to bet my life that if you were in the trenches somewhere and a drop pod came down 200m/yards from you and 10 Khorne Berserkers started charging towards your line that you'd poo your pants because your weapons hardly even scratched the paint.
Facing SM with our weapons is like WW1 when the Germans faced tanks for the first time. There is a reason a new mental condition called Tank Shock was coined. So if the Russians invaded the US and they were all wearing boob plate power armour made of Super Secret Stalinium that no US infantry weapon could defeat you wouldn't complain about it being unrealistic but instead ask what kind of material it was made out of.
So in conclusion if you just skipped to the end of my long rant. Shape of armour has no bearing on protection if the material is strong enough. You wont destroy a tank with a 9mm, nor would you defeat kevlar boob plate with a .22 cal if the armour was thick enough.
MadCowCrazy wrote: Lets switch our technology around. Lets say that .22 cal was the largest and most efficient weapons round we as a species could come up with. With todays technology could we create a boob plate armour strong enough to be "bullet proof" against it?
.22 cal is 0.223" diameter - same size as what a M16 fires. I'll assume the current M855A1 round fired by a M16 with a 20" barrel, which does penetrate typical body armor.
We can't make body armour strong enough to be 'bullet proof' against anything scarier than a pistol, or at least not to the degree power armour is presented as.
The functional issue with boobplate is that armour needs to be shaped to deflect impacts away from the armoured body at least as much as it needs to absorb the impact straight-on. Boobplate deflects impacts to a portion of the torso into this nice convenient channel in the middle, which is going to result in dramatically more stress on a subsection of the armour that isn't well-shaped to handle it, and happens to be in a fairly vital area besides.
To summarize: the issue isn't that boobplate is impractical with our current technology, it's that given our current understanding of physics a boobplate design is always going to be worse at being armour than a more intelligently-shaped design from the same material against the same weapons.
However: The shape of a given suit of armour may be more or less relevant depending on the stage of materials tech/weapons tech around it. If the stuff power armour is made of is strong enough the shape isn't that relevant.
I'm prepared to accept the handwavey explanation that boobplate exists because armour materials are far enough ahead of the guns that people can go make odd ceremonial armour that performs similarly to more practical armour. It doesn't seem very far-fetched in a universe of cathedral-sized spaceships crossing a galaxy-spanning empire by travelling through the Lovecraft dimension while fighting enemies including giant space bugs that treat the laws of thermodynamics as a casual suggestion and artificially-designed aliens that happen to look exactly like skinny humans with pointy ears. Some people are less happy with that explanation and would prefer to point out that the Imperium is deliberately equipping the Sisters with worse armour than it could.
MadCowCrazy wrote: If you don't like boob armour feel free to use any male models you want and say they are female as long as you stop complaining because you don't like it.
That's your point in a nutshell. The other half a page is just drivel.
I understand you believe very strongly that toy soldiers should have boobs on them if they represent female characters. I won't ask why you're so passionate about it, because frankly I'm not sure I want to know. I would prefer they not have them, because it looks stupid, and if they must have them then I'd like them not to be pointed cones that jag me whenever I pick the model up. It's an aesthetic/ practical thing.
EDIT: Please don't use in-universe justifications to explain away a sculptor's stylistic choices. There could be any number of reasons a "real life" set of 41st Millenium power armour might have boobs on it. What we're discussing is the fact that a sculptor somewhere in Citadel HQ has decided to carve little boobs onto the models we use to play 40k, and why that's either a silly thing to do, a sad thing to do, or, apparently, a fantastic idea that must be defended from all possible criticism.
MadCowCrazy wrote: If you don't like boob armour feel free to use any male models you want and say they are female as long as you stop complaining because you don't like it.
That's your point in a nutshell. The other half a page is just drivel.
I understand you believe very strongly that toy soldiers should have boobs on them if they represent female characters. I won't ask why you're so passionate about it, because frankly I'm not sure I want to know. I would prefer they not have them, because it looks stupid, and if they must have them then I'd like them not to be pointed cones that jag me whenever I pick the model up. It's an aesthetic/ practical thing.
EDIT: Please don't use in-universe justifications to explain away a sculptor's stylistic choices. There could be any number of reasons a "real life" set of 41st Millenium power armour might have boobs on it. What we're discussing is the fact that a sculptor somewhere in Citadel HQ has decided to carve little boobs onto the models we use to play 40k, and why that's either a silly thing to do, a sad thing to do, or, apparently, a fantastic idea that must be defended from all possible criticism.
I'm trying to describe the in-universe logic because there are reasonable grounds for both sides (unfortunately, if one side was completely indefensible we'd be done by now).
Out-of-universe logic cuts both ways as well. You could argue that the boob armour happens to be a component of the distinct visual signature of the army, they look silly up close because they're designed to get "this is the female army" across from a distance and are thus exaggerated. You could argue that intentionally scultping sexualized armour on toy soldiers is sad and creepy.
But at the end of the day we're still here because both arguments make sense and people like to get angry about it.
AnomanderRake wrote: Out-of-universe logic cuts both ways as well. You could argue that the boob armour happens to be a component of the distinct visual signature of the army, they look silly up close because they're designed to get "this is the female army" across from a distance and are thus exaggerated.
The way I have mine painted (grey/black zenith-lit with coloured robes) the boob armour is barely visible from any distance, and on some of the sculpts it's not even visible at all because of how they're holding their weapons. The pauldrons, greaves, backpacks and helmets are pretty distinctive, as are the fleurs all over everything and the fact the bare-headed Sisters are obviously female. Not to mention the army is called "Sisters of Battle". In light of all that the boob armour seems redundant and silly.
We're arguing about booby plate in an army that mostly doesn't wear helmets?
Anyway. If plastic sisters don't arrive in January I will finish painting my Dark Eldar and Nids in the hope that by the time the plastic nuns are a reality.
If even by then there is no sign I will drag out all the old SM I have from Bloodstorm, Dark, Vengeance, BaC, and Bop to do a Consecrators/Unforgiven army as my third and final 40k force.
I am very hopeful for plastic sisters now, however.
Eldar and Assassins have been wearing spandex regardless of gender since the beginning. And Witch Elves out of WHFB are about as exaggerated an example of chainmail underwear as you can find anywhere (and yet, optimistically, they still have an armour save).
MadCowCrazy wrote: 1: Sisters are coming.
2: They are coming in January 2017.
3: They will go up on pre-order in December 2016
4: Images of the new kits will be shown after we see the whole Thousand Sons release.
5: Thousand Sons kits will be shown within 2 weeks.
6: Sisters of Battle models will be show within 6 weeks.
.
I feel like I am going to look at the News and rumor section again right now!
MadCowCrazy wrote: Boob plate does make sense in 40K, it doesn't make sense in our world because our personal protection is garbage.
Meh don't care, what I care about is why boobplate was chosen and how it looks and what it conveys. Not realism for realism sake.
MadCowCrazy wrote: 40K armour on the other hand is many hundreds of times better than the best ones we have. The armour in 40k is so good in fact that many are crafted like works of art and almost all power armour is painted in bright colours so you can see the wearer from afar.
No personal armour we have could take a bolt round but 40k armour can to some degrees. In fact the same metric can be used for 40k armour as with our own.
That arqument makes zero sense. That assumes armour is invulnerable. That is NOTHING in 40k can penetrate it. THEN it doesn't matter because you are just as protected with or without.
BUT obviously that's not correct. Space marines die. Armour gets penetrated. Therefore you still need to make armour as protective as possible. This means deflecting impact OUT of your critical area.
Ergo boop plates are still bad idea. Just because you need bigger gun doesn't mean you can wave that away. It works fine as long as you don't face bigger gun but what happens when you do? Answer: Your chances of getting killed increases. You have just made armour that's less efficient than it could be.
Power armour without boop plate=more protective than one without. Simple as that. Only reasons when you don't have to worry about is when your armour is 100% impenetrable or when you don't care whether your armour is good or not.
MadCowCrazy wrote: 40K armour on the other hand is many hundreds of times better than the best ones we have. The armour in 40k is so good in fact that many are crafted like works of art and almost all power armour is painted in bright colours so you can see the wearer from afar.
No personal armour we have could take a bolt round but 40k armour can to some degrees. In fact the same metric can be used for 40k armour as with our own.
That arqument makes zero sense. That assumes armour is invulnerable. That is NOTHING in 40k can penetrate it. THEN it doesn't matter because you are just as protected with or without.
BUT obviously that's not correct. Space marines die. Armour gets penetrated. Therefore you still need to make armour as protective as possible. This means deflecting impact OUT of your critical area.
Ergo boop plates are still bad idea. Just because you need bigger gun doesn't mean you can wave that away. It works fine as long as you don't face bigger gun but what happens when you do? Answer: Your chances of getting killed increases. You have just made armour that's less efficient than it could be.
Power armour without boop plate=more protective than one without. Simple as that. Only reasons when you don't have to worry about is when your armour is 100% impenetrable or when you don't care whether your armour is good or not.
But the EMPRAH PROTECTS! Maybe the reasoning their armor isn't designed as well as it can be is because they feel the Emperor will literally protect them against any threat because of their unwavering faith. So that allows them to have a bit more artistic freedom in their armor shape because the Big E won't let them die anyway.
MadCowCrazy wrote: 40K armour on the other hand is many hundreds of times better than the best ones we have. The armour in 40k is so good in fact that many are crafted like works of art and almost all power armour is painted in bright colours so you can see the wearer from afar.
No personal armour we have could take a bolt round but 40k armour can to some degrees. In fact the same metric can be used for 40k armour as with our own.
That arqument makes zero sense. That assumes armour is invulnerable. That is NOTHING in 40k can penetrate it. THEN it doesn't matter because you are just as protected with or without.
BUT obviously that's not correct. Space marines die. Armour gets penetrated. Therefore you still need to make armour as protective as possible. This means deflecting impact OUT of your critical area.
Ergo boop plates are still bad idea. Just because you need bigger gun doesn't mean you can wave that away. It works fine as long as you don't face bigger gun but what happens when you do? Answer: Your chances of getting killed increases. You have just made armour that's less efficient than it could be.
Power armour without boop plate=more protective than one without. Simple as that. Only reasons when you don't have to worry about is when your armour is 100% impenetrable or when you don't care whether your armour is good or not.
No, his argument actually makes quite a lot of sense and you just don't seem to grasp it or how weapons interact with armor.
MadCow's point is that armor in 40k is designed to invalidate everything up to a certain abstract "ballistic" strength of weapons which it will encounter. Why did I put "ballistic" in scare quotes? Because by the 41st Millennium we know that a vast majority of fielded weapons are non-kinetic where ballistics largely stops being relevant and instead you now have to worry about entirely different principles such as heat dispersion.
Weapons like lasguns, vortex grenades, vibrocannons, zzap guns, grav guns, plasma cannons, tesla guns, etc. don't care at all what shape your armor is so much as what it is made of. You either have a material that is proof against the type of energy being thrown at it, or you watch you armor either suffer a material failure or turn into a deathtrap.
Even looking at specifically ballistic weapons against armor it still doesn't matter. Shaped hard armor has only ever applied to body armor utilized in deflecting close combat weapons relying on piecing or cleaving or low force bearing projectiles. That's it.
If a ballistic weapon has enough directed force to penetrate power armor then it will penetrate it regardless of where on the armor it hits. If a specific ammunition type can't penetrate the armor outright then you are left with only two options:
1) put enough rounds into the armor to induce a structural flaw which will allow for material failure (this is entirely dependent on the material and the armor's design)
2) aim for a spot not protected by said material (aka a video game-esq weakpoint) [#2 by the way is the reason why Space Marine MKVIII Errant Armor exists, because the most effective way to kill a Space Marine in lore is to target the soft-armor at the joints and neck.]
Thus the real failure of Sororitas boob armor is the minimal (assuming they wear their freakin helmet) chance that a projectile without the force capable to penetrate their armor will ricochet of their off the top, outer sides, or bottom of their breast-bastions into either the soft armor under their helmet (or just your face if you decided to feel the gore in your hair today), the elbow joints, or the top of the thigh.
The chance of any of which involving a ridiculous amount of luck or probably pool-god levels of mental geometry. (or if your a psyker and cheat. The real reason why SoB hunt witches)
For anything with the actual force to penetrate SoB power armor it really doesn't matter if it glances off the boob into the center or hits directly between them from start, as the effect will be the same. Which is to say that there is a very good chance of that bullet punching through her armor.
"So why do people always say that boob armor is dangerous and ineffective?"
Because the context that tied to that statement has been lost over the course of it being used as an argumentum ad infinitum.
That statement about boob armor being dangerous specifically argued against in the context of fantasy settings where parallels can easily be drawn to historical medieval weapons. In that case, yes, boob armor is bad because a spear or sword being directed towards center mass allows the wielder to direct all the force from the strike into their target. What also matters here is that even during the heyday of medieval armor there were still plenty of ways that you could beat it. What was significant was that armor increased your chances of survival by saving your from attacks which would normally kill a lesser armored soldier, and when you are a noble who doesn't want to die in a field of piss and gak you are willing take every possible advantage you can. So yeah, fantasy boob armor is absolutely impractical.
And even with 40ks obsession of having melee specific troops, boob armor still really isn't that much of a negative when you consider that the large majority of those melee specialists are armed with weapons strong enough to penetrate either vehicles or power armored infantry. Which leads us back to the idea that yeah, its not doing you any favors, but if the enemy is attacking you with can-openers then your armor probably won't stand up to the blow no matter where it gets hit. Best defense? Buy a rosarius.
It's more accurate to say it's crafted from inert plotonium-- a metal that protects the most when it's most convenient to the plot for it to do so, and offers little protection when the plot considers it a hinderance.
Jack Flask wrote: Thus the real failure of Sororitas boob armor is the minimal (assuming they wear their freakin helmet) chance that a projectile without the force capable to penetrate their armor will ricochet of their off the top, outer sides, or bottom of their breast-bastions into either the soft armor under their helmet (or just your face if you decided to feel the gore in your hair today), the elbow joints, or the top of the thigh.
So it's not the chance that such a blow or projectile that hits the boob plate but doesn't penetrate will force the centre of the boob plate into the breastbone? Because that's the physics reason I've heard for why boob plate is bad.
Jack Flask wrote: Thus the real failure of Sororitas boob armor is the minimal (assuming they wear their freakin helmet) chance that a projectile without the force capable to penetrate their armor will ricochet of their off the top, outer sides, or bottom of their breast-bastions into either the soft armor under their helmet (or just your face if you decided to feel the gore in your hair today), the elbow joints, or the top of the thigh.
So it's not the chance that such a blow or projectile that hits the boob plate but doesn't penetrate will force the centre of the boob plate into the breastbone? Because that's the physics reason I've heard for why boob plate is bad.
I mean thats guessing a lot about a non-existant material and armor design/composition which we can only speculate as to the properties of. We have no way of knowing whether ceramite deforms or shatters as a result of a heavy impact.
Plus, even if we assume that the material (ceramite I believe) has a tendancy to deform at higher forces, to argue that the central "wedge" would cave in assumes a lot about the armor's structure. For all we know the boobs on the plate could be wholly decorative additions over a smoth plate. Not to mention even if the armor boobs are affixed to holes in the front of the plate we'd have to know how they are joined as well as the structural tolerances of the overall plate against front facing trauma compared to that of just the boob housing. Otherwise theres no way to know if the join between the two parts would shear, the entire plate would cave, or if just the boob would cave.
Also the only time we'd expect to get this sort of result is with a ballistic weapon that delivers high amounts of blunt force trauma without it being focused enough to just punch through the plate in the first place which is a pretty uncommon train for most modern weapons (thinking off the top of my head this sort of applies to cannons and shotguns with slugs). Otherwise this is more of an effect associated with blunt weapons such as hammers or maces, which again are going to be fatal simply due to being sheathed by a power field, swung by an ork, etc before you even start arguing about armor deformation.
My point was more that smaller caliber rounds (relative to other guns in 40k) such as those from an autogun have a chance of going from 0% effective to .001% chance effective on the off chance that they ricochet the wrong way.
Edit: Also as far as the actual topic of the thread goes, this thread really has no where to go. Atia said explicitly that we are getting Sisters sometime in the beginning of 2017. Someone (cant remember if it was Atia as well) said Canoness preorder end of December. At this point everyone just has to play the waiting game until either SoB show up for preorder or we reach Q2 2017 with nothing but disappointment.
MadCowCrazy wrote: 1: Sisters are coming.
2: They are coming in January 2017.
3: They will go up on pre-order in December 2016
4: Images of the new kits will be shown after we see the whole Thousand Sons release.
5: Thousand Sons kits will be shown within 2 weeks.
6: Sisters of Battle models will be show within 6 weeks.
.
I feel like I am going to look at the News and rumor section again right now!
MadCowCrazy wrote: Boob plate does make sense in 40K, it doesn't make sense in our world because our personal protection is garbage.
Meh don't care, what I care about is why boobplate was chosen and how it looks and what it conveys. Not realism for realism sake.
As for the blob plate argument, there is a quick and simple reason why they have it. It is theatrical and dramatic and they have the
resources to do it. This is the same civilization that puts cathedrals bigger than Notre Dame on their spaceships
, use tank chases that were outdated by ww2, and use gun designs that by 40k are 38,000+ years old.
And even if it gets more people killed, its not like the Imperium has a shortage of people.
But back on topic. Ooooh boy sic weeks. I can't wait.
how the new Sisters may look, just as long as they keep their knightly and angelic aesthetic designs so I have an opportunity to buy them myself. What cup size the Sisters want to be drafting their recruits in as is not important enough to me to merit not buying models.
.