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.

timetowaste85 wrote:When I saw this topic first hit yesterday and there were no posts I was thinking about typing "Um...what?" Because it was such a PITA to follow. Now seeing 6 pages of it continue, I'd like to add in my own little bit of troll-food that I should have put in yesterday, but had better things to do with my life: like anything

So without any further or do.... "Um, what? Do you have an actual point here?"

But first explain NATO style please, for I want to know if what we have as NATO style is correct

He has posted in his other thread, prepare yourselves!

I think we should vote on Swuk becoming a new meme for all the entertainment he has provided today.

To further reinforce armors that took their own spin






And I did that with only using 1 thing from IA

Nah. We should however, immortalize the Steampunk Landraider!

iproxtaco wrote:He has posted in his other thread, prepare yourselves!

Must find this new thread!

Kazerkinelite wrote:

iproxtaco wrote:He has posted in his other thread, prepare yourselves!

Must find this new thread!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/378694.page merry xmas, lets try not to troll the user though, even if he is a fail troll

Wardragoon wrote:

timetowaste85 wrote:When I saw this topic first hit yesterday and there were no posts I was thinking about typing "Um...what?" Because it was such a PITA to follow. Now seeing 6 pages of it continue, I'd like to add in my own little bit of troll-food that I should have put in yesterday, but had better things to do with my life: like anything

So without any further or do.... "Um, what? Do you have an actual point here?"

But first explain NATO style please, for I want to know if what we have as NATO style is correct

"What's your style?"

"NATO Style."

"NATO Style?", "Show me shum of it!"

Can't promise that I'm afraid.

CRASSUS ARMOURED ASSAULT TRANSPORT with free steampunk landraider!!!

Guys, this is funny, but please control yourselves.

And YES, 40k is supposed to be WW1 and WW2 in space. His argument is poorly worded, but semi correct. Only partly, however.

Steampunk is a design style that combines Victorian era with modern technology, such as using a typewriter as a keyboard. WW1 Tanks? Not steampunk.

Mr. Burning wrote:"What's your style?"

"NATO Style."

"NATO Style?", "Show me shum of it!"

*Is entertained*

The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

LoneLictor wrote:The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

I thought I already established he's William Shatner, and Shatner does fit both of those descriptions well

LoneLictor wrote:The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

Sometimes those two things walk side by side. Very closely.

gaovinni wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

Sometimes those two things walk side by side. Very closely.

But not for Khorne, he's just insane

LoneLictor wrote:The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

Not insanity
Simply inspired rhetoric
Just hilarious

Wardragoon wrote:

gaovinni wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

Sometimes those two things walk side by side. Very closely.

But not for Khorne, he's just insane

Oh no, no, no, no, no. Khorne is not insane. He just has a vision. A violent one. With skulls. A lot of skulls. And dead puppies.

LoneLictor wrote:The person who made this thread has a true poet's soul. He's also insane.

Unless he can channel Ted Hughes' soul he doesnt.

I read through about 3 pages of this, and get the general idea that is..

L-O-FFING-L

So you are just saying that you want to be artistically inspired by walking in to a war games store, and that GW has flaws.

Someone deserves a Nobel Prize!

DrownedRat117 wrote:I read through about 3 pages of this, and get the general idea that is..

L-O-FFING-L

So you are just saying that you want to be artistically inspired by walking in to a war games store, and that GW has flaws.

Someone deserves a Nobel Prize!

Then again they are just giving them out anymore, I would rather have the last place prize for a 1st grade spelling bee

Wardragoon wrote:

DrownedRat117 wrote:I read through about 3 pages of this, and get the general idea that is..

L-O-FFING-L

So you are just saying that you want to be artistically inspired by walking in to a war games store, and that GW has flaws.

Someone deserves a Nobel Prize!

Then again they are just giving them out anymore, I would rather have the last place prize for a 1st grade spelling bee

Nobel Prize, last place in Spelling Bee, you get the idea..

To be serious, can you point out specific examples of what could be done better? I read you scathing review of the tyranids on page one, and I'm wondering what, in your opinion, should GW have done instead?

swuk wrote:ref " Yeah, by looking at every tank ever made, the IG are a conglomerate of several designs, not a direct rip-off of any specific one "

and that in a nutshell is my general complaint , better to rip off one style eg NATO+ or build your own style. In the case of IG , it is meant to be the square side , they have spoil it by ripping form many areas diluting its raison d'etre . There was no need to do this. If you cant create NATA+ then just copy NATO & voilà , you now have a cohesive army with a distinct style that does what it says on the tin....no complaints....no confusion.

Sir, that is how people improve on tank designs. The designers of the Challenger-II did not sit down and say "well, the sloping armour of the T-34 is an excellent feature, but sadly it's a Russian feature and all of our tanks must be based on British style."
That is what you call plain common sense.
Now, here's your Earl Grey. Come and sit down, and you can drink it in peace.

Surely.. it's better taking ideas from various existing ideas than just ripping one off??

You, sir, need to take your 11 o'clock pills..

micahaphone wrote:To be serious, can you point out specific examples of what could be done better? I read you scathing review of the tyranids on page one, and I'm wondering what, in your opinion, should GW have done instead?

The Tyranids

A quick glance at the Battle Box leaves me thinking " They all look the same to me "

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440179a&prodId=prod370004a&rootCatGameStyle=

When deployed on the battlefield they dont that fair much better visually.



Pick one up and closely examine it and it still takes a while for your eyes to take in the plethora of arms and legs. Do that with every unit in the range and your mind becomes a blur.
As a fighting force , they are fine as an idea , a way to play.

Colours are odd , white underbelly , high contrasting blocks of colour. Its as if the designers had done all they could to confuse the eyes.
A shark has a light underbelly BECAUSE it swims in the sea and it helps to hide its shadow from prey swimming below.
The paint scheme reminds of some of the Germans Naval Camouflage designs , use of contrasting block colour to confuse enemies at a distance

http://www.smmlonline.com/articles/kriegsmarinecamo/kreigsmarine.html

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/sharks/anatomy/Skin.shtml

Now of course they can be painted different colors etc . My point is that GW used one of the worst colour schemes for the job, compounded by the fact that a flail of arms and legs in weird proportions is hard for the eye to make sense of....." they all look the same to me syndrome " If i decided to paint them up as trees and position them in a forest like manner you would walk past the table none the wiser.

So here we have an army of rushing monsters that dont do justice to the term.

What needs changing , well first and foremost as they are deployed mostly in large numbers it wouldn't hurt to simplify their form a little. After all most of the detail is lost in the rush.
In redesigning the army i would take great care to make sure that the different troops where strongly differentiated in form and color. Further more i would choose my colors very wisely in order to highlight the key features of each troops. Basically im after WYSIWYG at a glance. Im not after perfection but where i have choices this is the general direction that its sensible to head.

Now having toned down the colours and form of the worst offenders i could proceed to beef up the Elites and HQ's They are badass , i want your kid sister to walk into your room and run screaming at the sight of a stray Tyranid left on the floor....ok thats pushing it a little bit , lol



Tyrant Guard ? With a body like that i doubt it could cross the road with out falling over. Proportions are all wrong = Not scary or battle worthy

Tyrant Hive Guard ? another ridiculous B movie monster...my guns bigger than your gun...yeah but you looklike youve been stamped on and half squashed

Hormogaunt Brood ? I would streamline the model , less spikey , lets highlight those bloodstained murderous claws , beef up your legs a touch and equip you with feet that enable you to twist , turn and pursue your quarry. Sheep Hoof be gone

Gene stealer ? Lets slim down those arms and slightly differentiate them into primary and secondary fast slashing weapons. This will highlight the claw like nature of the beat you are. The eye is drawn to light colors not dark. Markings on the body need to be muted so you complex shape and form stands out.

Zoanthrope ? one word sea horse...yes its a struggle to find you a suitable form , pretty as you are your form & function stretches credibility

Carnifex ? passable , but you need to be unwound from your compact form & made 10 or 20% larger to do you justices


just a few ideas , the current sculpting and color scheme and differentiation just dont do the Tyranids justice on the table

swuk wrote:

micahaphone wrote:To be serious, can you point out specific examples of what could be done better? I read you scathing review of the tyranids on page one, and I'm wondering what, in your opinion, should GW have done instead?

The Tyranids

A quick glance at the Battle Box leaves me thinking " They all look the same to me "

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat440179a&prodId=prod370004a&rootCatGameStyle=

When deployed on the battlefield they dont that fair much better visually.



Pick one up and closely examine it and it still takes a while for your eyes to take in the plethora of arms and legs. Do that with every unit in the range and your mind becomes a blur.
As a fighting force , they are fine as an idea , a way to play.

Colours are odd , white underbelly , high contrasting blocks of colour. Its as if the designers had done all they could to confuse the eyes.
A shark has a light underbelly BECAUSE it swims in the sea and it helps to hide its shadow from prey swimming below.
The paint scheme reminds of some of the Germans Naval Camouflage designs , use of contrasting block colour to confuse enemies at a distance

http://www.smmlonline.com/articles/kriegsmarinecamo/kreigsmarine.html

http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/sharks/anatomy/Skin.shtml

Now of course they can be painted different colors etc . My point is that GW used one of the worst colour schemes for the job, compounded by the fact that a flail of arms and legs in weird proportions is hard for the eye to make sense of....." they all look the same to me syndrome " If i decided to paint them up as trees and position them in a forest like manner you would walk past the table none the wiser.

So here we have an army of rushing monsters that dont do justice to the term.

What needs changing , well first and foremost as they are deployed mostly in large numbers it wouldn't hurt to simplify their form a little. After all most of the detail is lost in the rush.
In redesigning the army i would take great care to make sure that the different troops where strongly differentiated in form and color. Further more i would choose my colors very wisely in order to highlight the key features of each troops. Basically im after WYSIWYG at a glance. Im not after perfection but where i have choices this is the general direction that its sensible to head.

Now having toned down the colours and form of the worst offenders i could proceed to beef up the Elites and HQ's They are badass , i want your kid sister to walk into your room and run screaming at the sight of a stray Tyranid left on the floor....ok thats pushing it a little bit , lol



Tyrant Guard ? With a body like that i doubt it could cross the road with out falling over. Proportions are all wrong = Not scary or battle worthy

Tyrant Hive Guard ? another ridiculous B movie monster...my guns bigger than your gun...yeah but you looklike youve been stamped on and half squashed

Hormogaunt Brood ? I would streamline the model , less spikey , lets highlight those bloodstained murderous claws , beef up your legs a touch and equip you with feet that enable you to twist , turn and pursue your quarry. Sheep Hoof be gone

Gene stealer ? Lets slim down those arms and slightly differentiate them into primary and secondary fast slashing weapons. This will highlight the claw like nature of the beat you are. The eye is drawn to light colors not dark. Markings on the body need to be muted so you complex shape and form stands out.





just a few ideas , the current sculpting and color scheme and differentiation just dont do the Tyranids justice on the table

Explain.NATO Style. NOW!!!!!!

Form and Function!

For example the drive system of a ship with largely dictate the rest of the ships design.

If you want your tanks to be able to fire defilade dictates that your tank will do so with a turret and gun system mounted up top and forward so as to be able to depress the gun and fire down at the valley and roads while your tank is more obscured to return fire by the angle of the hill your on.

Sloped armor provides more thickness to the face on angle = more protection.

Physics people, Physics.

Zakiriel wrote:Form and Function!

For example the drive system of a ship with largely dictate the rest of the ships design.

If you want your tanks to be able to fire defilade dictates that your tank will do so with a turret and gun system mounted up top and forward so as to be able to depress the gun and fire down at the valley and roads while your tank is more obscured to return fire by the angle of the hill your on.

Sloped armor provides more thickness to the face on angle = more protection.

Physics people, Physics.

Thats just the modern style, now he has been saying they need to be more nato, I seem to recall eastbloc since its formation always maintained sloped armor vehicles as well as even now post iron curtain.

I'm glad my parents didn't drop me on my head when I was a child, or else I'd be making posts like the OP's.