Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

nkelsch,

How would you best address my issue with Carapace Armor then? I've been ebaying up the Valk gunners as suitable "count-as", but by the rules, I have nothing to represent that upgrade. Indeed, I can't technically even figure out how to legally field Veterans then, because GW doesn't sell anything called a "Veteran Squad".

nkelsch wrote:

whitedragon wrote:

Respectfully disagree.

Then my scouts can be terminators or space marines because weapons and armor no longer matter, even if GW makes models for them.

Or is the line, "Everything should be WYSIWYG, unless I personally don't feel like it for my models..."

'ard boyz exist. 4+ ork armor exists. AoBR do not have 4+ armor and cannot in any capacity be used as 4+ armor without PROXYING. And if Proxies are not allowed, neither are AoBR being 'ard boyz.

Actually, a quick check of the GWUS site shows no 'Ard Boy models in the 40k Ork section.

daedalus wrote:nkelsch,

How would you best address my issue with Carapace Armor then? I've been ebaying up the Valk gunners as suitable "count-as", but by the rules, I have nothing to represent that upgrade. Indeed, I can't technically even figure out how to legally field Veterans then, because GW doesn't sell anything called a "Veteran Squad".

This is actually one of my pet peeves when playing against Guard. It MATTERS whether that squad is Vets or just standard Guardsmen, after all.

For non-carapace Vets, either paint them different, or consider tapping a different IG range. If you're using plastic Cadians, see if you can find some of the old metal Cadians (they've been around longer, so have achieved Veteran status on their own).

My Steel Legion uses Death Korp models for Vets, but I don't expect everyone to be quite that insane.

Janthkin wrote:
For non-carapace Vets, either paint them different, or consider tapping a different IG range. If you're using plastic Cadians, see if you can find some of the old metal Cadians (they've been around longer, so have achieved Veteran status on their own).

Yeah, the way I usually get around that is just to not field both at the same time, which generally works out for player comprehension as well as tactically. I then have one squad painted differently in case I ever do decide to run them together. Unfortunately, I really don't have a strong like for catachans, and everything else is just so expensive in comparison.

While I can using variant (older) models for carapace/noncarapace figures I use Praetorians. What would you suggest I use to show that some have carapace while others do not? I can tell my different units by markings on their bases but it wouldn't be obvious to a casual observer. Likewise my Vets have a different load out of special weapons than my normal troopers but that may not last long after casualties occur.

WYSIWYG actually says you have to represent upgrades, not basic equipment.

CSM modelled with bp/ccw still have bolters, because they come with all three. CSM with bolters have bp/ccw because they come with all three.

A chaos rhino with a combi-weapon modelled onto it still has its basic twin-linked bolter - it comes with it for free. Even if I model them with no weapons, they come with a twin-linked bolter. I've seen GW DA rhinos with no weapons - they still have a storm bolter on top.

This allows you to model a space marine ripping a gaunt's head off, and still say he has a bolter even if there isn't one on the model.

daedalus wrote:nkelsch,

How would you best address my issue with Carapace Armor then? I've been ebaying up the Valk gunners as suitable "count-as", but by the rules, I have nothing to represent that upgrade. Indeed, I can't technically even figure out how to legally field Veterans then, because GW doesn't sell anything called a "Veteran Squad".

that's why it's called a hobby. i don't know your modelling experience but you can add knee, arm, and crotch armor via little bits of plasticard or green stuff to regular cadians and they'll look like kasrkin without the hellguns. as for veterans, they're regular guardsmen with more skill and optional equipment. i've modelled them as IG with backpacks to differentiate them from the regular guys (easy to tell them from a simple glance). although i didn't get the idea from here, i've seen it repeated by various other IG players.

I just painted carapace a different color representing a different material. say.. your average cadian is green, make the carapaced guys' plates metal colored for instance

Leo_the_Rat wrote:While I can using variant (older) models for carapace/noncarapace figures I use Praetorians. What would you suggest I use to show that some have carapace while others do not? I can tell my different units by markings on their bases but it wouldn't be obvious to a casual observer. Likewise my Vets have a different load out of special weapons than my normal troopers but that may not last long after casualties occur.

Mordians, of course.

Alternatively, different colored epaulettes, braidwork, or even just different colored bands around their helmets. I've got a bunch of Praetorians, too - there's lots you can do to make units distinctive, while still looking coherent as an army.

I thought of Mordians (especially since rumor says that their molds were the basis for Praetorians) but they still don't show carapace armor. They may look different from the normal troops but they still look like they're wearing normal cloth uniforms.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:I thought of Mordians (especially since rumor says that their molds were the basis for Praetorians) but they still don't show carapace armor. They may look different from the normal troops but they still look like they're wearing normal cloth uniforms.

No rumor required - I can tell you that the models are EXACTLY the same, but for the helmet shapes.

Obviously, the Mordians have better anti-ballistic cloth.

I also believe that you have to represent upgrades that you take in your army list, but the reverse isn't necessarily true - that veteran sergeant with a powerfist can actually be wielding a close combat weapon - in that case, though, you should be:

A) Consistent - don't have one model with a powerfist that's ACTUALLY a powerfist and another powerfist that's a ccw.

B) Let your opponent know beforehand and be very clear - and remind them throughout the game. I have CSM aspiring champions with powerfists that I often use, but rarely find I can afford the ridiculous amount of points they have to pay for a powerfist in this codex. I let my opponents know ahead of time, and also whenever they're near assaulting range as a reminder, in case they're avoiding close combat for fear of the upgrade.

warboss wrote:
that's why it's called a hobby. i don't know your modelling experience but you can add knee, arm, and crotch armor via little bits of plasticard or green stuff to regular cadians and they'll look like kasrkin without the hellguns. as for veterans, they're regular guardsmen with more skill and optional equipment. i've modelled them as IG with backpacks to differentiate them from the regular guys (easy to tell them from a simple glance). although i didn't get the idea from here, i've seen it repeated by various other IG players.

Unfortunately sketchy at best. There's a dakka modeling post where I tried to make a greenstuff commissar jacket with abysmal results, however, I've gotten a bit better since then. I don't think I could make them look nearly as sharp as kasrkin, but I think I could get the point across. That would at least give me bonus points for "he tried", if nothing else. I agree that the backpacks are a suitable way to make vets. I may try that in the future.

DarthDiggler wrote:Let me understand. Is it alright to not have certain, everyday wargear not modeled on the unit? Such as every IG vehicle has smoke launchers and a searchlight. Can I have some modeled without and that be ok? Every Marine comes with frag grenades. Do I need to model all of them with grenades now? or is it alright to not have the grenades on them?

I understand the importance of having a lascannon razorback have the lascannons and not heavy bolters that are called lascannons, but what about the common wargear that is not bought, but allowed by the codex for every unit or model for free? Is the rule that if you pay for it it must be modeled?

From the rules I quoted earlier, I believe the key word is 'upgrades'. Stuff that automatically comes with the unit is assumed to be there. Upgrades above those basics must be clearly modeled.

How do you model veteran experience though? Or Psyker powers? Or the Machine Spirit? some upgrades can be overlooked.

Redbeard wrote:From the rules I quoted earlier, I believe the key word is 'upgrades'. Stuff that automatically comes with the unit is assumed to be there. Upgrades above those basics must be clearly modeled.

But, once again, WYSIWYG isn't just about the rules. Its about making sure your army isn't confusing to either player.

whitedragon wrote:

Actually, a quick check of the GWUS site shows no 'Ard Boy models in the 40k Ork section.

Next time... look harder...

Orks have had official 'ardboy models since 3rd edition. While you can make them by gathering up parts from the plastic box, you can also get the 3rd edition parts and make them.

And as it relates to 'carapace armor' and other units without official models... Not having one official model doesn't give the right to other models not to be WYSIWYG. if you want a unit which there are no models for, then you need to be creative and do your best to model them. The idea of using Valk gunners is a good 'counts as'. The idea of using AoBR as 'eavy armor is a bad 'Proxy'.

nkelsch wrote:

whitedragon wrote:

Actually, a quick check of the GWUS site shows no 'Ard Boy models in the 40k Ork section.

Next time... look harder...

Are you f'ing kidding me? That bitz pack has Iron Gobs and Shoulder Pads, all of which come as extras on the boyz sprues, and are sprinkled liberally throughout the plastic orks. So now I'm even less convinced that 'Ard Boyz are a huge WYSIWYG step up from AOBR boyz, and I would have even less trouble accepting someone's AOBR boyz as 'Ard Boyz.

So how 'bout you look harder next time at the models you are complaining about before you go spouting off about WYSIWYG and "official" models. (By the way, there used to be 'Ard Boyz with armored up metal torso's that fit onto the ork plastics, but that bitz pack is not it.)

insaniak wrote:
But, once again, WYSIWYG isn't just about the rules. Its about making sure your army isn't confusing to either player.

I agree with you. But, I think that you'll find that the stuff that is default to a unit or model isn't confusing to begin with. No one is going to stare at your marines for 5 minutes trying to figure out if they've got their frag grenades - they're assumed to have them because they all do and there's no option to not have them.

nkelsch wrote: if you want a unit which there are no models for, then you need to be creative and do your best to model them.

This comes very close to being insulting. I (almost) have the artistic ability of a dead termagant. I wouldn't even know where or how to start modeling carapace armor that would fit in with my praetorians. I even thought about using the old SAS looking storm troopers but they don't look like they have carapace armor either. If you have suggestions on an easy way to make my troops look like they are wearing carapace armor then I'm open to your help. The most creative thing I can think of at this point is to paint the helmets on some of my figures a different color. Then I have to dread the coming of a new codex that says I have to rearrange my troops once again (and therefore repaint). BTW did I mention that I don't paint well and I guess I'm one of those horrible people who actually wants to play the game as my first priority and making perfect looking figures is somewhere around 5th.

@Leo_the_Rat... I think it's comendable that you recognize your shortcomings regarding creativity. However I believe you are being too hard on yourself. Anyone has the potential to get creative with something, it's in our human tool-using nature. You just might not think you're good at it because you don't let yourself try.

Second part of your post about painting the helmets a different color I think is just a fine idea, as it clearly defines the figure on a visual level. See! You got creative!

whitedragon wrote:
Are you f'ing kidding me? That bitz pack has Iron Gobs and Shoulder Pads, all of which come as extras on the boyz sprues, and are sprinkled liberally throughout the plastic orks. So now I'm even less convinced that 'Ard Boyz are a huge WYSIWYG step up from AOBR boyz, and I would have even less trouble accepting someone's AOBR boyz as 'Ard Boyz.

So how 'bout you look harder next time at the models you are complaining about before you go spouting off about WYSIWYG and "official" models. (By the way, there used to be 'Ard Boyz with armored up metal torso's that fit onto the ork plastics, but that bitz pack is not it.)

We have had official 'ard boy models from GW since around 1999. GW expects an official 'ard boy to have two shoulderpads, a helmet, a chest and back armor and an iron gob.

Just like our BIG GUNZ and MANZ who do not have current plastic and our buggies who do not have current models. The 3rd edition models are official and available.

If you do not want to model the official upgrades the way they are supposed to be, you can do a conversion, but you have to do 'something' as a 6+ AoBR model is no more a 4+ than a Marine Scout 4+ is a 2+ terminator model.

You have no valid excuse to call AoBR 'ard boyz. It is a PROXY' and proxies are not allowed at events as it breaks WYSIWYG. Your models would either get a 6+ save or be removed from play for breaking the rules if you called AoBR 'ard boyz.

The Bitz pack is official... It even says 'ard boyz on it. Just because you were not around during 3rd edition and forget doesn't mean that somehow now orks are allowed to be 4+ with no modeling. They have just provided the tools to do it with the plastics.

I have some 'ard boyz who are currently proxied as regular shootas - as I need the shootas, and have nowhere near enough for a 'ardboyz mob This is only temporary however...

I also magnetised an Ork Trukk so that I can WYSIWYG any combination of options as necessary. This was a lot of effort. It was more so that I wouldn't have to buy/build/paint more Trukks than I have to as I change my options.... Still, I wouldn't expect this extreme from others, especially in friendly games. It does solve the issue of overmodelling though! (Yes, I can remove that boarding plank if I'm not using it)

WYSIWYG has only really been brought up once to me at a local game store, I Have a platoon commander with a hand flamer dont know i always loved a hand held flame thrower i usually just say it's a bolt pistol but he insisted it's a hand flamer well i cant purchase them luckily he was a good enough sport instead of making me go with las pistol or continue arguing with me we just used the hand flamer rules from the new blood angels codex. Lots of fun toastin all those fire warriors !

We used to make Death Skulls 'Kustom Kombi Weapons' out of all sorts of leftover bits from wherever... little bits of bolters, lasguns, chopped up sprues, whatever. Once painted up they look cool, and so random that the 'Kustom' part is kind of evident and hard to doubt what that monstrosity might be. Ork models seem to me a lot more customizable than more rigid armies like SM types. I would think just adding some shoulder pads to boyz is reasonable enough to make an arguement that it's an armored ork... "look! It has armor!". A lot of their vehicles are very abstract too so go wild with bits n pieces IMO.

I'm not so fond of Looted Wagons though, on principle. Most vehicles have a distinct precise shape and size, their 'signiature' for TLOS. A Looted Wagon can be the size of a rhino, a Leman, a predator, a land raider... That adds ambiguity and encourages people to no longer think WYSIWYG since all the models are different sizes with the same stats.

There are also several different variations of 'trukks'. The old ones from 3rd ed. speed freaks are about half the size as the newer ones, so small in fact that you could probably fit 3 boyz in there... but it is a legitimate GW model just older one. Deffrolla length, Battlewagons... all suffer from this ambiguity.

What is an 'official' Battlewagon? Long ago they didn't make them at all so every one you saw was a kit-bash of all sorts of random stuff, and all shapes and sizes. I think game pieces in a game that highly emphasizes ranges and LOS should at least have defined dimensions for the game pieces.

Redbeard wrote:I think that you'll find that the stuff that is default to a unit or model isn't confusing to begin with. No one is going to stare at your marines for 5 minutes trying to figure out if they've got their frag grenades - they're assumed to have them because they all do and there's no option to not have them.

Which is fine... if everyone can remember what every single unit in every single army is carrying by default.

To return to the situation in question just before, do you remember which vehicles from which codexes come with smoke launchers or storm bolters by default? I have absolutely no idea, in no small part because it keeps changing every edition and so after a while keeping it straight in your head is practically impossible. So if I see a vehicle that doesn't have these things, I'm going to assume that it's not equipped with them.

Basic weaponry on squads has a certain amount of leeway... and yeah, most people ignore grenades... but it's just common courtesy (or it should be) to try to make your models as clear as possible for your opponent.

insaniak wrote:

Redbeard wrote:
Which is fine... if everyone can remember what every single unit in every single army is carrying by default.

No need. Your opponent should have brought their codex with them, and a quick scan through it will tell you what their basic equipment is. Doesn't take long if you know what you're looking for - if you're concerned if they have smoke launchers as standard on their vehicles, just look at the vehicles.

What's your guys thought on old school classic harlequins? A lot of those guys are modelled with weapons that don't exist any more or are not possible buys for their list. It's still a harlequin. I like to just tell my opponent they all have kisses as standard, even if the model has a power axe and a plasma pistol, or a laspistol, etc. Stuff you can't even take any more... I prefer that kind of leeway on something old and made of lead and that has been loved for so long and so obviously a harlequin by its paintjob... that the alternative of choping old classic models up just because a codex got outdated. Thoughts?

No one would care about that.

Spellbound wrote:No need. Your opponent should have brought their codex with them, and a quick scan through it will tell you what their basic equipment is. Doesn't take long if you know what you're looking for - if you're concerned if they have smoke launchers as standard on their vehicles, just look at the vehicles.

There's also no need if your opponent's army is WYSIWYG... which also removes the need to read his codex before the game to find out what everything is supposed to be equipped with.