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.

By the way, our new website is now launched. Same old address - www.chapterhousestudios.com

Oh wow, it looks much better. Congratulations!

I better scoot on over and check it out then! :-)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Yep, very nice indeed, like what you've done, looks very professional and easy to navigate! should attract buyers with the cleanliness of it all!

Thanks,

The old site has kept us going for the last 3 years or so. It was a budgeted site for a newly formed business.

Now that we are a bit more mainstream I felt it was time for a change. I am looking to the future and hope to increase our retail presence as well (look for retail packaging as well as retailer logins).

Nick

Planning on true-scale space marines? I see a tab but no products...

Chapterhouse wrote:By the way, our new website is now launched. Same old address - www.chapterhousestudios.com

Psst - commissions...

MagickalMemories wrote:As for the location of the weapons... a bike is an infantry model. It has a 180 degree firing arc, but can turn freely in the shooting phase. So, weapon location doesn't really matter.

It doesn't matter rules-wise, in the current incarnation of 40K. That's a completely separate issue from whether or not it's a good design aesthetically or practically, though.

If you look at the GW bike with the side car and try to associate the same logic, then there's no way they could shoot anyone on the right side of the model. Same thing.

Not quite. The attack bike does still have a reasonable arc to the side. Having to weapons slaved together on opposite sides of the vehicle restricts both of them to firing to the front... and mounting them so far back imposes a minimum range at which they can both lock on.

Assuming they actually have any sort of traverse. On closer inspection, it looks like they're just hooked in place and fire directly forwards. So you have two weapons firing straight ahead, with a gap between their stream of fire the width of the bike.

insaniak wrote:

MagickalMemories wrote:As for the location of the weapons... a bike is an infantry model. It has a 180 degree firing arc, but can turn freely in the shooting phase. So, weapon location doesn't really matter.

It doesn't matter rules-wise, in the current incarnation of 40K. That's a completely separate issue from whether or not it's a good design aesthetically or practically, though.

If you look at the GW bike with the side car and try to associate the same logic, then there's no way they could shoot anyone on the right side of the model. Same thing.

Not quite. The attack bike does still have a reasonable arc to the side. Having to weapons slaved together on opposite sides of the vehicle restricts both of them to firing to the front... and mounting them so far back imposes a minimum range at which they can both lock on.

Assuming they actually have any sort of traverse. On closer inspection, it looks like they're just hooked in place and fire directly forwards. So you have two weapons firing straight ahead, with a gap between their stream of fire the width of the bike.

Everything you're saying supports the "reality" of the design and not the aesthetics. Aesthetically, I find the symmetry of it more pleasing than the GW sidecar version (don't get me wrong... I likes me some side cars lol).
My comment was specifically in response to when you said:

Also not really sure about the heavy weapons being mounted so far back on either side. Assuming that they would be slaved together, that would seriously cut into their fire arc at close-in targets.

Arc of fire and the ability to rotate do not matter from a game standpoint (presuming 40K rules), since the bike is presumed to be able to turn freely as needed. Having a gap between them is supported by the twin link aspect you mentioned; if one doesn't get ya, the other will. If it misses entirely... Well, then you turned sideways between them or stepped to the side. : )


Eric

Not quite. The attack bike does still have a reasonable arc to the side. Having to weapons slaved together on opposite sides of the vehicle restricts both of them to firing to the front... and mounting them so far back imposes a minimum range at which they can both lock on.

Assuming they actually have any sort of traverse. On closer inspection, it looks like they're just hooked in place and fire directly forwards. So you have two weapons firing straight ahead, with a gap between their stream of fire the width of the bike.

But somehow ork bikes are ok?

MagickalMemories wrote:Everything you're saying supports the "reality" of the design and not the aesthetics.

Yes and no. To a certain extent, they're linked. Having a design that makes practical sense (to me) makes it more aesthetically pleasing. YMMV, obviously.

Pyriel- wrote:But somehow ork bikes are ok?

From a practical design point of view? God, no. But they're Orks. Their vehicles aren't really designed with 'practical' in mind.

Besides, when you're incapable of consistently hitting a barn door from 3 feet away, not being able to point both of your weapons at the same target isn't such a big deal. In fact, it probably improves your chances of actually hitting something.

Guess this one is new (haven't seen it before):




Website looks cleaner and better, but is a bit more awkward to navigate (e.g. takes longer to get to Tyranid compatible bitz).

Minor bug on the website:
If a category has subcategories, it claims to have 0 in that category (e.g. claims to have 0 shoulder pads). Can irritate some people.

Kroothawk wrote:Guess this one is new (haven't seen it before):




Website looks cleaner and better, but is a bit more awkward to navigate (e.g. takes longer to get to Tyranid compatible bitz).

Minor bug on the website:
If a category has subcategories, it claims to have 0 in that category (e.g. claims to have 0 shoulder pads). Can irritate some people.

Thanks, sent that to the web designers.

Yes, thats been sitting in my office for the last 8 months.. sadly I just now added to the store!

From a practical design point of view? God, no. But they're Orks. Their vehicles aren't really designed with 'practical' in mind.

Besides, when you're incapable of consistently hitting a barn door from 3 feet away, not being able to point both of your weapons at the same target isn't such a big deal. In fact, it probably improves your chances of actually hitting something.

Ah, you have a point there.
Although I dont find ork bikes to be that bad at shooting with all the rerolls and so, certainly not as bad as traditional orks ought to be.

Besides, what vehicles in the SM armoury are designed with practical in mind? I cant come up with one single piece.

Rhino chassi armour have shell traps all over each arc, landraiders cant even traverse a minor road bump due to zero ground clearance, thunderhawks create such drag that half the spped potential is lost straight away and lets not even talk about the non-balanced stormchicken or the 5-lascannon landraider version with 2 of the weapons shooting at the vehicles own sponsons.

SO...my own point is that would a jetbike weapon not being put in the absolutely best position possible really be THAT big of an issue with you?
It's like complaining about that one undercooked pea in a plate full of spoiled food.

Heck, every time I take a look at a space marine or rhino on the tabletop I smile to myself over the ridiculous design flaws but hey, for me that is part of the charm and level of "cool".

Pyriel- wrote:SO...my own point is that would a jetbike weapon not being put in the absolutely best position possible really be THAT big of an issue with you?

Actually, yes.

To hold up the Land Raider Terminus as exhibit A... the regular Landraider is not hugely practical, but looks at least vaguely functional to a casual glance. The Terminus however is just silly. But given how fast people came up with alternative designs that worked much better, I can't help bu t wonder how much better a reception it would have received if GW had taken an extra few minutes to think through the design to create something a little less impractical.

For this bike, dropping the second weapon and mounting the left hand one on a pivot so that it has the same field of fire as an attack bike heavy weapon would be an improvement, to my mind. Mounting the heavy weapon on an underslung pivot Landspeeder-style would also work. Still silly, but silly within the confines of the existing model range's design ethos.

Aerethan wrote:Well riders are always wearing power armor, so it's not like pant legs will get sucked into the intakes.

I agree that rear mounted weapons limits their firing capability.

I'd be more concerned that a leg might get blown off if the rider was knocked too much. The idea of a heavy weapon firing from behind me would not fill me with confidence.

Mmm, very posh new webpage! The layout is much better, some of the pics did not supersize well (like the salamander helmet) but apart from that it looks pretty cool!

I personally like the heavy jetbike guns, they are placed close enough to the crat that it retains a streamlined shape and is not too bulky. The addition of the fins is also very welcome, it has a much more imperial look to it.

insaniak wrote:Assuming they actually have any sort of traverse. On closer inspection, it looks like they're just hooked in place and fire directly forwards. So you have two weapons firing straight ahead, with a gap between their stream of fire the width of the bike.

This isn't as big of a practical problem as you might initially think looking at a static model. This is a vehicle with some form of "anti-grav" technology (which is generally impossible under general relativity and improbable under quantum physics) and is therefore assumed capable of fairly sleek maneuvering and the ability to turn on a dime like Land Speeders. A gap between weapons wouldn't really matter at that point. Historically, I can think of several examples of similar designs on real life aircraft. The North American P-51 Mustang comes to mind, which had 2 sets of wing mounted machine guns slaved in inner and outer pairs (the P-51D had 3 sets). Yet somehow, despite the gap between the weapons, the P-51 accounted for 4,950 enemy aircraft shot down in WWII!

the regular Landraider is not hugely practical, but looks at least vaguely functional to a casual glance.

It does? Well we have to agree to disagree on this one.

As for the weapon positioning, how would having it mounted on a pivot behind and to the side of the rider sound?
Like a miniature turret to say, the right and behind the helmet of the rider?

Pyriel- wrote:As for the weapon positioning, how would having it mounted on a pivot behind and to the side of the rider sound?
Like a miniature turret to say, the right and behind the helmet of the rider?

That's what I do with my quad attack bikes. So yeah, works for me

@chapterhouse
will there be a future chariot back for the bike as well as heavy flamers?

The new homepage looks great !looks much more professional

Too bad the jetbike is horrible , the new maximini jetbike is like a miljon times better , sorry guys but you got ownd
http://www.beastsofwar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Gothic-Jetbike-3D-Model-1.jpg

I don't mean to be rude, but I don't like it

I still miss the pre-heresy termi pads whear are they??

Claimh_Solais wrote:

Too bad the jetbike is horrible , the new maximini jetbike is like a miljon times better , sorry guys but you got ownd
http://www.beastsofwar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Gothic-Jetbike-3D-Model-1.jpg

Seems a bit harsh!... I found that the maxmini one looked too steampunkish, particularly the cogs under the seat.

Tend to agree that was a bit harsh, but it was said from his own point of view.

As with everything, some will love it, some will hate it. I personally don't mind it, but I am not in love either. Apart from the Master of the Ravenwing, I haven't really seen jetbikes I like, and I am not massively in love with that one either!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I do find the maxmini one oddly steampunky though -

Claimh_Solais wrote:Too bad the jetbike is horrible , the new maximini jetbike is like a miljon times better , sorry guys but you got ownd
http://www.beastsofwar.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Gothic-Jetbike-3D-Model-1.jpg

I don't mean to be rude, but I don't like it

The trick to not being rude is to, you know, not be rude.

Adding a disclaimer saying that you don't mean to be rude doesn't make your comment any less out of line... it just suggests that you're fully aware that you're being rude, but couldn't be bothered taking the time to actually explain your viewpoint.

Explaining what you don't like about it is constructive. Just pointing out that it is horrible is not.

I like the site update, consider getting the webmaster to migrate the old user reviews.

Yeah Ill work on that once the festivities are over..

To the poster who posted the other companies web link for a competing product.

Not cool, I hope noone ever goes into a business you own and starts telling your potential customers about the guy selling similiar items down the street..

Chapterhouse wrote:Yeah Ill work on that once the festivities are over..

To the poster who posted the other companies web link for a competing product.

Not cool, I hope noone ever goes into a business you own and starts telling your potential customers about the guy selling similiar items down the street..

At the risk of sounding trollish...


Pretty sure I've seen you do the same.

Kudos on the new site, really loving the new design!

I know this is a sneak peak Nick but any word on when the Pilum bike is going to be released? Also is the image you posted the final design or are any planned revisions?

Chapterhouse wrote:Yeah Ill work on that once the festivities are over..

To the poster who posted the other companies web link for a competing product.

Not cool, I hope noone ever goes into a business you own and starts telling your potential customers about the guy selling similiar items down the street..

I wouldn't worry about it. That other bike, while nice also, is way too clockword steamtech looking for 40k. Its a better fit for warmachine.