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.

When the rest of the thread can drop that, I will, I tried talking with out it, that got nowhere.

The two helmet types look similar enough, that unless someone is anal retentive it should not matter. The other major source that could cause some problems is the Power Pack, which come on, its a damned back pack. Or the torsos, which unless they don't have their weapons over their chest, you won't even notice.

 Peregrine wrote:
Regardless of what the subtle details of a particular image show this just proves the point about how absurd the "no 40k marines in 30k" policy is. You're sitting here arguing about tiny and ambiguous details in a picture and can't even agree what type of power armor it shows. If the differences between 40k and 30k power armor are that subtle then I don't see how anyone can reasonably have such a strong objection to using the 40k version. Only a handful of dedicated marine fans would be able to tell the difference, and even fewer would be able to do it at normal tabletop distances.

Well, If you enjoy doing it that way. Then why do you care if other people don't agree?

Like. IRL, I'm prety sure the conversation would go like this:

"Oh? Are you just trying out the list before doing up your 30k infantry?"
"I'm not going to be getting any of the 30k infantry, because I feel they don't look that different from normal 40k marines."
"really? That's to bad. I really like seeing 30k legions properly modelled up. It's just really cool."
"Yah, no. I just don't feel 30k infantry is worth my time/money for such small differences"

Like adults, we then play our game, roll some dice, and laugh talking about dumb nerd gak. I oviousely would not bring it up agien, because we just disagree.

If you truely do not feel that 30k infantry are worth it, because "the detail is obscured", and "you can't see it at table top standard anyway". Then that is your choice. As long as you are being intrinsically satisfied, then you don't really need me to validate your choices. Because at that point our what gives us internal satisfaction from the game is fundamentally different.

Well I enjoy playing more causal, I agree with you 100% the rules in 40k need to be much tighter to improve causal play. But I don't look down at competitive players. We play the same game, but for different reasons. Their is nothing wrong with that.


My point is that when I build a army for 30k, I would not accept clearly MK 7&8 armour pieces on my guys. The 30k armies I enjoy seeing are the ones that follow this also. But like I said, I'm not going to refuse to play you, just because we disagree about how the army should be modelled. At that point I would be no better then a annal historical gamer, who will not shut up about using the wrong grey on your Germans. That's just annoying, and a symptom of poor social skills.

 Lockark wrote:


My point is that when I build a army for 30k, I would not accept clearly MK 7&8 armour pieces on my guys. The 30k armies I enjoy seeing are the ones that follow this also. But like I said, I'm not going to refuse to play you, just because we disagree about how the army should be modelled. At that point I would be no better then a annal historical gamer, who will not shut up about using the wrong grey on your Germans. That's just annoying, and a symptom of poor social skills.

There is a degree of this to 30K players. But then, there is to 40K players as well. Which is bizarre when its all made up by a spod in Nottingham and subject to change at any point.

 Lockark wrote:
My point is that when I build a army for 30k, I would not accept clearly MK 7&8 armour pieces on my guys. The 30k armies I enjoy seeing are the ones that follow this also. But like I said, I'm not going to refuse to play you, just because we disagree about how the army should be modelled. At that point I would be no better then a annal historical gamer, who will not shut up about using the wrong grey on your Germans. That's just annoying, and a symptom of poor social skills.

And that's fine. I have no objection with you (or anyone else) holding your own armies to a stricter "historical" standard. What you were saying earlier about trying to persuade other people to get rid of their 40k marines and use the "correct" 30k models made it seem like you were agreeing with the people who said "40k marines = I won't allow it".

Exactly so. And, indeed, it has. I got some disapproving looks the last time I went to a Heresy event because, again, my marines weren't the 'proper' ones.

My first Horus Heresy army was made from 'normal' chaos marines. It's Word Bearers, for Calth, because my flatmate at the time was converting Ultramarines up. I didn't convert them much but largely used normal chaos marines, because according to the artwork I grew up on, that's exactly how they looked - This is an original Collected Visions artwork of some word bearers at Calth:



So my army was a massively infantry-heavy force of essentially, power armoured-with-chaos-armour-but-no-marks-or-mutations chaos marine. Now obviously, things have changed in the last few years and, the current state of the past of the future* is that event the word bearers actually didn't look like this at calth, and are instead in 'normal' heresy-era armour patterns (which only rarely included the Sarum-pattern - Aquilla-style - helm) and just have lots of colchisian script on their armour.






* Reminds me of Douglas Adam's descriptions of the problems of trying to describe tenses when time travel's involved!

 Peregrine wrote:

 Lockark wrote:
My point is that when I build a army for 30k, I would not accept clearly MK 7&8 armour pieces on my guys. The 30k armies I enjoy seeing are the ones that follow this also. But like I said, I'm not going to refuse to play you, just because we disagree about how the army should be modelled. At that point I would be no better then a annal historical gamer, who will not shut up about using the wrong grey on your Germans. That's just annoying, and a symptom of poor social skills.

And that's fine. I have no objection with you (or anyone else) holding your own armies to a stricter "historical" standard. What you were saying earlier about trying to persuade other people to get rid of their 40k marines and use the "correct" 30k models made it seem like you were agreeing with the people who said "40k marines = I won't allow it".

I said multiple times I would not turn my nose up at someone who used 40k marines looking for a game.
=/

At most I would just ask how you plan on modeling your guys, since I would probley assume you were using the 40k guys to proxy the army until you finished your 30k infantry. If you told me that was how you were modeling your army I would just be quietly disappointed that I wouldn't be seeing what I consider a "proper" 30k army. They are just really impressive and cool to see every time.

I'm not going to be a jerk over it....

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

The other major source that could cause some problems is the Power Pack, which come on, its a damned back pack.

To be fair the differences between the backpacks can be pretty big. FW initially replaced the original armour variant packs with updated sculpts but were forced to backpedal and put the old ones back into production, relabeling the newer sculpts 'legion' packs due to enough people spitting blood over the changes, the biggest of which was their changing the MkIV sets backpack from a copy of the RT MkVI to a copy of the RT MkVII.

Funny thing is, a lot of rivet counters get their knickers in a twist about the BaC MkIV backpack looking too much like the modern backpack, yet the modern backpack (which was introduced in 3rd edition, supplanting the standard 2nd edition pack which was the 1st edition MkVII pack) was actually identified in the 3rd edition rulebook *as* MkIV! (which had not previously been defined).

For me, I expect a bit of effort from the 30k player. By effort I mean that their force looks good and fit the themes and colours of the time. Saying that, armour marks don't bother me. As has been seen, there are so many patterns and variants from the Mk VII style Sarum helmets and then there's this:



Yep, a chaos style powerpack or, more accurately, an Anvilus Pattern Powerpack. It isn't much of a stretch to imagine a Legion Armourer slapping on a bunch of Sarum helmets on a locally manufactured pattern of Mk IV armour that happens to be styled similar to Mk VII. As long as you've gone to the effort of painting them and they look good, then all's dandy. Though, if you're using Mk VII's, get rid of the bling and skulls if you are able! 30k is definitely more minimalist in style.

30k is an expensive choice and I won't begrudge people saving a bit of cash. But painting, attitude and effort doesn't cost (unless you commission) and that's more important than the depth of your wallet in 30k

 Brennonjw wrote:
thanks!

and just a brief summary of the thread so far, correct me if I'm wrong: Use whatever, though if you can try and go actual HH models (or have good fluff for your MK VII ). some people dislike Calth, but no one should actually judge to harshly for using Calth models. There are outliers/trolls Who say 30k only/resin only. Yes?

Yeah, that's pretty much it! Some people like to rivet count, and prefer only to play entirely resin FW armies with the exact period-correct armour mark, or get annoyed over BaC, etc.
Most people would just prefer that your army looks like a Heresy army and not exactly the same as a 40k Marine army. How you choose to do that and how much people like it is entirely down to Rule of Cool.

30k is an expensive choice and I won't begrudge people saving a bit of cash. But painting, attitude and effort doesn't cost (unless you commission) and that's more important than the depth of your wallet in 30k

That I'd agree with. I've seen a 'militia' army which is essentially just plastic cadians - but with the time invested to remove all the Imperialis (winged skulls) and pad the helmet to make them look like old style epic guardmen.

 TheManWithNoPlan wrote:
Bought this up because I heard some grumbling about lack of dedication to the game and how it wasn't right because everyone else had spent on FW models. Thoughts?

There's a special level of hell reserved for people like that. They share it with overzealous traffic wardens and grammar nazis.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

 TheManWithNoPlan wrote:
Bought this up because I heard some grumbling about lack of dedication to the game and how it wasn't right because everyone else had spent on FW models. Thoughts?

There's a special level of hell reserved for people like that. They share it with overzealous traffic wardens and grammar nazis.

There's probably a bit of buyer's remorse in this kind of attitude, as well. I admit I'd be a bit miffed if I spent a fortune on Forgeworld marines, only for GW to release much cheaper plastics.

I'd expect a bit of the same if they ever released plastic SoB.

Why? You would have made the choice at that time and then decided it was worth the cost. Cheaper product arriving a number of years later suddenly makes it not worth the cost any more?

For my part, if I had started out investing alot in Forgeworld marines, part of me would have regretted it when BaC came out, because it's a much better value, and I would think about the money I could have saved. But I'm kind of a cheapskate...

I have an MKIII army, and don't care for the MKIV style. From my perspective, BaC isn't a bargain because I don't want those models.

However, if another set BaCII: Electric Boogaloo comes out tomorrow with MKIII armor, I'll buy it for more marines. And I won't have buyers remorse as I have gotten to play in 6 different AdeptiCon 30k events with my army, met great people, and had fun. I have gotten my money's worth so far with my army.

 kronk wrote:
I have an MKIII army, and don't care for the MKIV style. From my perspective, BaC isn't a bargain because I don't want those models.

However, if another set BaCII: Electric Boogaloo comes out tomorrow with MKIII armor, I'll buy it for more marines. And I won't have buyers remorse as I have gotten to play in 6 different AdeptiCon 30k events with my army, met great people, and had fun. I have gotten my money's worth so far with my army.

Awesome. But if I recall correctly, you're not one of the people in this thread that's been putting down others for using BaC or 40K stuff in a 30K army.

Yeah, I don't have a problem or even understand the issue with the BaC models. They're fine.

I mean, they're MKIV, and if you're into ugly models, that's fine! You be you!

MKIII is best MK!

The MkIV models are in some ways nicer than the old FW variants, because they have more bulk to them. They are definitely held back by using standard backpacks (I am unsure if it is feasible or cost-effective for me to try and source 40 Chaos backpacks to use instead), and the usual cowboy poop squat pose of all of GW's plastic marines.

MkIII is indeed the best-looking of them all, but you got to have the right Legion for it.

 kronk wrote:
Yeah, I don't have a problem or even understand the issue with the BaC models. They're fine.

I mean, they're MKIV, and if you're into ugly models, that's fine! You be you!

MKIII is best MK!

I actually like MKIV helmets the best, and I like the studs on the shoulderpads and legs. I also think MKIII is cool. Hopefully one day they'll come out with a MKIII plastic kit, as there certainly seems to be a market for one.

Then again, they could decide to keep all the other marks in FW resin, because by GW releasing plastics, they are directly competing against the equivalent FW products, so they are competing against themselves. I doubt FW is going to sell to many MK IV PA marines now, and if a plastic MKIII kit came out, FW wouldn't be selling many of those, either.

Honestly FW has so much product to move as it is, they probably wouldn't mind the space. The detail on the resin is also nicer and has more variety of poses than anything GW ever does. So even if they make MkIII, I can still see them selling a lot of those for Breacher squads or even just for different posed characters.

HandofMars wrote:
The MkIV models are in some ways nicer than the old FW variants, because they have more bulk to them. They are definitely held back by using standard backpacks

The Betrayal at Calth backpacks are based off the same design as the Forge World ones, if anything they are closer to it. They merely resemble the 'standard' backpacks because they were an update of that same backpack.

Certainly, but from the front it looks the same, which bugs me a little.

I guess it would only be $48 for me to equip all 40 of my dudes with these, although it will be funny at that point to have spent as much or more on custom shoulder pads and backpacks than I did for the Calth boxes (bought them at $100 even).

 jasper76 wrote:
There's probably a bit of buyer's remorse in this kind of attitude, as well. I admit I'd be a bit miffed if I spent a fortune on Forgeworld marines, only for GW to release much cheaper plastics.

I'd expect a bit of the same if they ever released plastic SoB.

Yes, it's an understandable sentiment. I've gone out of my way to buy a few squads of OOP Kasrkin myself. I'd be angry for sure if plastics were released soon...but angry at myself for bad timing... would never begrudge GW for updating a kit. Or other players for using them.

locarno24 wrote:
Exactly so. And, indeed, it has. I got some disapproving looks the last time I went to a Heresy event because, again, my marines weren't the 'proper' ones.

My first Horus Heresy army was made from 'normal' chaos marines. It's Word Bearers, for Calth, because my flatmate at the time was converting Ultramarines up. I didn't convert them much but largely used normal chaos marines, because according to the artwork I grew up on, that's exactly how they looked - This is an original Collected Visions artwork of some word bearers at Calth:



So my army was a massively infantry-heavy force of essentially, power armoured-with-chaos-armour-but-no-marks-or-mutations chaos marine. Now obviously, things have changed in the last few years and, the current state of the past of the future* is that event the word bearers actually didn't look like this at calth, and are instead in 'normal' heresy-era armour patterns (which only rarely included the Sarum-pattern - Aquilla-style - helm) and just have lots of colchisian script on their armour.






* Reminds me of Douglas Adam's descriptions of the problems of trying to describe tenses when time travel's involved!

I just want to mention I'm OK with this example. The chaos armour is mostly a mix a mkv heresy armour of some kind of all intents and purposes. Well it may no longer be battle of calth, that would be more or less what a latter heresy Era word bearer force would look like.

If you made sure to avoid using the few mk7 parts in the kit, then bonus points.

I even sujested to a player mixing the part from the new plastic mk4 box with a csm box to make 20 man word bearer tac squads, to stretch their bac box further.

I also use the chaos back packs on my iron warriors mkiii.

Plastics have a place in 30k armies, it just needs to be era appoperiare. Nothing oviousely mk 7 or 8 except on a knight errant or something,

I use 40k CSM parts for one of my Dark Channelling Veteran squads to highlight that their greater favour in the eyes of the gods has twisted and tainted their armour into shapes that no longer truly resemble the originals.

Most of my army is 30k parts though. Mk4, MK3, I have both. No MK2 yet as they look a bit thin IMO.

If you're playing a pickup game all that matters is if both players will enjoy the game. I have no desire to play against 40k SM armies which is one of the atithesis reasons why I play 30k.

I've started typing the super long post. I'll make it a new thread later.

But a lot of the '40k in 30k' thing comes down to presentation. A little effort goes a long way and some legions lend themselves better to certain things than others.

Word Bearers lend themselves better to CSM bits.
Night Lords can get mileage out of the 40k upgrade pack.
Iron Warriors can get mileage out of their upgrade pack - heck, it's a fantastic source of MK II torsos tbh.
Space Wolves, Dark Angels and Blood Angels can make use of bits from their kits.

I will say...

It's a lot easier to take a 30k army into 40k than taking a 40k army into 30k. If anything it'd require some restructuring to use them, depending on which Codex you want to use in 40k.

My 30k Death Guard are used with my 40k Death Guard - I use them as generic CSM with MoN at most - the Plague Marines are still Plague Marines...

And I suspect when the book for the Siege is released the Plague Marines, Thousand Sons and Berserkers might have usage.

Great research guys, special kudos to gashrog i think.

I'm cool with someone using 40k marines if they already had the models and were curious how HH battles play out.
I would kinda expect a regular opponent to slowly change those 40k marines into 30k ones - i'm not fussy about whether it's replacement or conversion and i'm not too fussed over how long it takes to do either.

I absolutely relish battles with everything era-specific and wysiwyg on really nice terrain - it's what i'm in it for and it gives me a real kick to take part; this includes being really anal over armour marks sadly.
However, I recognise that the cost and effort of that can be a massive hurdle for a lot of people which is why i'm cool with weird armour mixes, illogical helmet swaps, kitbashing, paradox-inducing aquillas, unpainted models and good old-fashioned proxying. (plus i'm not a fast painter so a very slow 'arms race' suits me fine!)

 SirDonlad wrote:
paradox-inducing aquillas,

The 'Aquila' restriction for the legions (other than EC) has been soft retconned.
Seems anyone can have the aquila, anywhere at any time.
It was the 'palatine aquila' that was restricted to the EC.



This is made clear in Betrayer, where Kharn is fighting an Ultramarine with the Aquila on his chest. This only makes sense when you realise every MK II armour already has the aquila on there.

Likewise, winged skulls aren't some new invention that is introduced for the first time in the siege of Terra.
Its a common symbol throughout history whose meaning is clear- skull=death, wings =swiftness, flight.
It only takes on that particular meaning of loyalty to the throne when it becomes a campaign badge during the siege.

The GWFW complex has been pasting the true double-headed Aquila on multiple legions' gear for quite a long time, despite their stated (and awesome!) restriction that it should be reserved for Emperor's Children.