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.

I like how the Warhound's size but prefer the leviathan's look.

Now that FW has updated the selection of Lords of War for Escalation to include their super heavies, I have a feeling this debate will only get more heated.

My personal opinion is, if the Leviathan is modeled up to match the overall footprint of a warhound, I'd have no problem with it. Heck, reverse the legs so the knees point backward, extend the upper carapace and push the head forward a bit, and you have a decent looking warhound (and its the same size as the armourcast version).

 ClassicCarraway wrote:
Now that FW has updated the selection of Lords of War for Escalation to include their super heavies, I have a feeling this debate will only get more heated.

My personal opinion is, if the Leviathan is modeled up to match the overall footprint of a warhound, I'd have no problem with it. Heck, reverse the legs so the knees point backward, extend the upper carapace and push the head forward a bit, and you have a decent looking warhound (and its the same size as the armourcast version).

The pictures don't quite tell the whole truth. The Leviathan is taller than the top of the Armorcast Warhound's carapace, but not quite as tall as the "spikes". Although its torso isn't quite as long it does seem bulkier. Overall, I'd say the Leviathan might have a little more bulk than an Armorcast Warhound.


As to the lack of deatail, there ISN'T any. This is a highly detailed model. Sure, there are some flat surfaces. However, I find this more realistic than the GW theme of "detail for detail's sake". Opinions tend to get skewed a bit when you are used to seeing everything covered head to toe in skulls.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yonan wrote:
Cheapskate! ; p

Scale pics always nice, thanks for posting them. I'm scared to ask for a titan collection shot. I *want* to, but I'm worried about what it will do to my hobby budget.

I've honestly never taken a picture of the entire lot all together. The most I have is 20 of them together (sadly missing two of the four Warlords and the Imperator). Dragging them out and posing them is actually quite a time consuming (and space consuming) process. I could possibly get on this after the New Year.

I still would not allow it as a Warhound. The size and look is way too different.
But have you considered this: http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Knight It fits the Leviathan perfectly. If you could make up some cool house rules as well, I would love to play against it.

edit: Ah, I just read the last page XD Still, I feel you should give the knight a try. If people than won't allow you Leviathan as a Warhound, you could ask them if they are okay with you using it as a knight.

Does anyone have rules for Knight titans? I am currently making a chaos version of one of these guys and was wondering what people think about the idea of it being a Knight class titan and how they feel about it being over sized?

Well the problem with using it as a Knight is that people are more likely to be iffy about using unofficial, custom rules than they are an official GW ruleset.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Well the problem with using it as a Knight is that people are more likely to be iffy about using unofficial, custom rules than they are an official GW ruleset.

That is understandable... I found these rules from another post and was wondering what you guys thought of them:

Knight Power Field:
Imperial Knight Titans are protected by powerful force fields, that reduce the strength of incoming enemy firepower. Unlike the mighty void shields of a true Titan, these fields provide a focused shield in a single direction. This powerful protection is needed for them to truely aid their larger brethren on the battlefield.

A unit equiped with Knight Power Fields ignores the effects of the destroyer special rule against attacks coming from its front arc. Treat these as S10 ranged attacks instead. All other attacks from the front arc have a maximum strength of 8. Ignore these restrictions if the attack comes from within 6" of the unit.

Knight Lancer:
300pts.
F:13 S:12 R:11 WS:2 BS:4 S:10 I:1 A: 1
Type: Super-heavy Walker
Structure Points: 2
Equipment:
Knight Close Combat Weapon
Vanquisher Battle Cannon
2 Heavy Bolters
Knight Power Field

Special rules:
Irresistable Charge: Instead of gaing the normal bonus attack on the charge the Knight Lancer may reroll missed to hits and automatically penetrates any armor value and/or wounds any toughness value. Against creatures with a toughness value it causes d3 wounds.
Fleet


Knight Errant :
300pts.
F:12 S:12 R:11 WS:2 BS:4 S:10 I:1 A: 1
Type: Super-heavy Walker
Structure Points: 2
Equipment:
Knight Meltacannon
2 Heavy Bolters
Knight Close Combat Weapon
Knight Power Field

Options:
May excahnge its Knight Meltacannon for a Knight Inferno Gun +25pts.

Knight Meltacannon:
Range: 48", S:10, AP:1, Heavy 1, Melta, Primary weapon
Knight Inferno Gun:
Range: Helstorm, S:6, AP:3, Heavy 1, Primary Weapon

Knight Paladin:
350pts.
F:13 S:12 R:11 WS:2 BS:4 S:10 I:1 A: 1
Type: Super-heavy Walker
Structure Points: 2
Equipment:
Knight Autocannon
Knight Close Combat Weapon
2 Heavy Bolters
Knight Power Field

Options:
May upgrade its Knight Autocannon to a:
Laser Destructor+100pts.
Knight Blastgun+50pts.

Knight Autocannon
Range: 60, S:8, AP:3, Heavy 5 Primary weapon
Laser Destructor
Range: 48", S, AP:2, Heavy 1, 5"Blast, Destroyer, Primary weapon
Knight Blastgun
Range: 60", S:8, AP:2, Heavy 1, 7" Blast, Primary weapon

Knight Warden
375pts.
F:13 S:12 R:11 WS:2 BS:4 S:10 I:1 A: 1
Type: Super-heavy Walker
Structure Points: 2
Equipment:
2 Autocannons
2 Knight Bolters
1 Knight Missile Launcher
Knight Power Field

Options:
My exchange its Knight Bolters with 4 Hydra Autocannons for +40pts
May exchange its Knight Missile Launcher for:
an Earthshaker Cannon- free.
A Ordnance 2 Medusa Siege Cannon- +50pts.
In either case it counts as a primary weapon due to the heavy shielding on a Knight Warden

Knight Missile Launcher:
Range: 24-120", S:7, AP:3, Apocalypse Barrage 3, Primary Weapon


Do they seem reasonable for a friendly game?

so iv seen this asked a few times but no one has touched on it yet.

how do people feel about these being bought up for use as D weapon platforms under the escalation rules. because lets be honest here, they wont be bought for the mega bolters etc etc.

now in ways i dont mind if someone grabbed one as a temp proxy as they saved up for the real thing.... but well... same as most other proxies in my book.

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
so iv seen this asked a few times but no one has touched on it yet.

how do people feel about these being bought up for use as D weapon platforms under the escalation rules. because lets be honest here, they wont be bought for the mega bolters etc etc.

now in ways i dont mind if someone grabbed one as a temp proxy as they saved up for the real thing.... but well... same as most other proxies in my book.

But why styfle variation? If everyone thought like you then nobody would have cool unique units. My friend made his chaos out of a mix of fantasy and 40k models and they look epic. My friend had all his ork vehicles made from scratch and it puts GW models to shame. Why is it so wrong to use the not standard model in a game set in a universe where anything is possible. Im glad the people i play with let me use other company models because it looks far better (up to personal opinion of course) and it means my army doesnt look like the next guys army which looks like the next guys army and so on. Who cares how much it is. It doesnt matter how much you spend, its how little you can spend for the same/better result.

I say just let people be free to customize their army. Youd have to be very mentally challenged to not know what this model is meant to represent. Especially after being told the first time.

Well Hell since we posting our Variants of the Titan - here is what me and My local Gaming Store have been using.

C&C are sure welcome here as we are constantly modifying it (however this one seems to be the most fair out of all)

 Swastakowey wrote:

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
so iv seen this asked a few times but no one has touched on it yet.

how do people feel about these being bought up for use as D weapon platforms under the escalation rules. because lets be honest here, they wont be bought for the mega bolters etc etc.

now in ways i dont mind if someone grabbed one as a temp proxy as they saved up for the real thing.... but well... same as most other proxies in my book.

But why styfle variation? If everyone thought like you then nobody would have cool unique units. My friend made his chaos out of a mix of fantasy and 40k models and they look epic. My friend had all his ork vehicles made from scratch and it puts GW models to shame. Why is it so wrong to use the not standard model in a game set in a universe where anything is possible. Im glad the people i play with let me use other company models because it looks far better (up to personal opinion of course) and it means my army doesnt look like the next guys army which looks like the next guys army and so on. Who cares how much it is. It doesnt matter how much you spend, its how little you can spend for the same/better result.

I say just let people be free to customize their army. Youd have to be very mentally challenged to not know what this model is meant to represent. Especially after being told the first time.

because im styfling variation? how about those chimps that want to spend as little as possible to take advantage of game breaking rules... sure it could lead to a pay to win situation but i dont see how cheapening it expands the experiance, especially when you can now use a titan in normal games of 40k

 ausYenLoWang wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
so iv seen this asked a few times but no one has touched on it yet.

how do people feel about these being bought up for use as D weapon platforms under the escalation rules. because lets be honest here, they wont be bought for the mega bolters etc etc.

now in ways i dont mind if someone grabbed one as a temp proxy as they saved up for the real thing.... but well... same as most other proxies in my book.

But why styfle variation? If everyone thought like you then nobody would have cool unique units. My friend made his chaos out of a mix of fantasy and 40k models and they look epic. My friend had all his ork vehicles made from scratch and it puts GW models to shame. Why is it so wrong to use the not standard model in a game set in a universe where anything is possible. Im glad the people i play with let me use other company models because it looks far better (up to personal opinion of course) and it means my army doesnt look like the next guys army which looks like the next guys army and so on. Who cares how much it is. It doesnt matter how much you spend, its how little you can spend for the same/better result.

I say just let people be free to customize their army. Youd have to be very mentally challenged to not know what this model is meant to represent. Especially after being told the first time.

because im styfling variation? how about those chimps that want to spend as little as possible to take advantage of game breaking rules... sure it could lead to a pay to win situation but i dont see how cheapening it expands the experiance, especially when you can now use a titan in normal games of 40k

Thats fine, what about the people (who are the majority) who spend as little as possible on normal stuff? and YOU may be contempt with the standard warhound being seen and used all the time, everywhere buy anyone wanting it. Personally id rather see a mix of variants and not bother about the price. My guard squad is 10 dollars cheaper than GW squads because i use another company for them. Am i all of a sudden abusing the system because for every 6 boxes i buy i can get a whole new box fom the savings? No of course not. (well i should hope so). Its just a really narrow GW only view that really ruins the game in a lot of ways. I am fairly sure you would be annoyed if someone spammed official titans for D weapons just as much. So get over it. Let people save money, help out a smaller buisness and have an actual model on the field.

I wouldn't mind it but personally i see it more as a knight.
As the playgroup is ok with it why not. use a more scenic base to make look taller.

 Swastakowey wrote:
Personally id rather see a mix of variants and not bother about the price.

Except this isn't a Warhound variant. The size and shape are wrong, the guns are completely wrong, and there's a melee option that doesn't exist for the Warhound. The main reason to use it over a real Warhound is the cheaper price, and that's the argument that leads to Apocalypse games full of random toys as proxies for all of the big Apocalypse units.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Personally id rather see a mix of variants and not bother about the price.

Except this isn't a Warhound variant. The size and shape are wrong, the guns are completely wrong, and there's a melee option that doesn't exist for the Warhound. The main reason to use it over a real Warhound is the cheaper price, and that's the argument that leads to Apocalypse games full of random toys as proxies for all of the big Apocalypse units.

The main reason for most people I know is that it's a better looking kit, made from plastic not inferior quality hard to clean, fix and assemble resin. Yes price is definitely a factor - I don't think it's the main factor. I'd prefer to run it with legit knight rules, but they don't exist. The closest legit rules available are warhound rules. That is why we choose warhound in general.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Personally id rather see a mix of variants and not bother about the price.

Except this isn't a Warhound variant. The size and shape are wrong, the guns are completely wrong, and there's a melee option that doesn't exist for the Warhound. The main reason to use it over a real Warhound is the cheaper price, and that's the argument that leads to Apocalypse games full of random toys as proxies for all of the big Apocalypse units.

Ok well whats wrong with that argument? Its not a random toy. Its a model. It is pretty much the same size. Doesnt look butt ugly. Costs far less. And are you a little special? Because im 100% certain weapons can easily be converted... and a variant doesnt need to be the same size and shape exact. It has the same basic shape: legs, a body, a head, and arms. Its like saying a small dog isnt a variant of a large dog. If someone moves the turret of a chimera to the back, widens the tracks and puts armored skirting around it, is it not able to be a chimera in your books? Got all the parts that make it a tank but the basic shape has been changed...

 Swastakowey wrote:
It has the same basic shape: legs, a body, a head, and arms.

And so does every other generic "giant robot" toy. Do you think you should be able to put a random anime mech on the table and call it a Warhound "variant"? Or a $10 robot toy from the local walmart?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
It has the same basic shape: legs, a body, a head, and arms.

And so does every other generic "giant robot" toy. Do you think you should be able to put a random anime mech on the table and call it a Warhound "variant"? Or a $10 robot toy from the local walmart?

As long as it fits their theme, has had effort put into it and looks remotely like the part then yes, yes i would. Like i would with anything wargaming related. I am not gonna be a (insert nasty word here) to someone with brains because they spent less on a model that the expensive one does no differently.

 Swastakowey wrote:
As long as it fits their theme, has had effort put into it and looks remotely like the part then yes, yes i would.

I'm talking about an unconverted model, like the Leviathans people want to use as Warhounds.

I am not gonna be a (insert nasty word here) to someone with brains because they spent less on a model that the expensive one does no differently.

I guess you don't value the fluff of having appropriate models, or the appearance of the superior real models? TBH with that kind of attitude why play 40k? If the models are just game pieces and you value the rules/gameplay most then why not play a game with rules that don't suck?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
As long as it fits their theme, has had effort put into it and looks remotely like the part then yes, yes i would.

I'm talking about an unconverted model, like the Leviathans people want to use as Warhounds.

I am not gonna be a (insert nasty word here) to someone with brains because they spent less on a model that the expensive one does no differently.

I guess you don't value the fluff of having appropriate models, or the appearance of the superior real models? TBH with that kind of attitude why play 40k? If the models are just game pieces and you value the rules/gameplay most then why not play a game with rules that don't suck?

The fluff has plenty of room for other titans that can act in the same role as the warhound. Plenty.

I play multiple rule sets, but i cant have giant war machines in other game sets, i cant have lots of things 40k has to offer. There ARE NO LIMITS in 40k, one of the few rule sets that isnt limited by history or strict lore and whatnot. So i play it as it was intended. A rule set where whatever the players feel like goes. If i wanna buy a box of army men to use as guard, i can, why is it a bad thing? And when i look at the 2 titans i dont see one as superior to the other, they both look and do the same thing (which is nothing by the way...) what is the difference. In function they are both the same. And the rules mostly suck when (insert nasty word here) like you are involved. Honestly the most bland, elitist minded player i have ever come across. There is no reason for it. Well my guardsmen arent converted then as they have nothing GW on them, i have done nothing to make them look GW official, but no one seems to complain? Why is it different for the leviathan? your lack of empathy towards those using a blatant warhound type/look model at a fraction of the cost is disgusting.

 Swastakowey wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
As long as it fits their theme, has had effort put into it and looks remotely like the part then yes, yes i would.

I'm talking about an unconverted model, like the Leviathans people want to use as Warhounds.

I am not gonna be a (insert nasty word here) to someone with brains because they spent less on a model that the expensive one does no differently.

I guess you don't value the fluff of having appropriate models, or the appearance of the superior real models? TBH with that kind of attitude why play 40k? If the models are just game pieces and you value the rules/gameplay most then why not play a game with rules that don't suck?

The fluff has plenty of room for other titans that can act in the same role as the warhound. Plenty.

I play multiple rule sets, but i cant have giant war machines in other game sets, i cant have lots of things 40k has to offer. There ARE NO LIMITS in 40k, one of the few rule sets that isnt limited by history or strict lore and whatnot. So i play it as it was intended. A rule set where whatever the players feel like goes. If i wanna buy a box of army men to use as guard, i can, why is it a bad thing? And when i look at the 2 titans i dont see one as superior to the other, they both look and do the same thing (which is nothing by the way...) what is the difference. In function they are both the same. And the rules mostly suck when (insert nasty word here) like you are involved. Honestly the most bland, elitist minded player i have ever come across. There is no reason for it. Well my guardsmen arent converted then as they have nothing GW on them, i have done nothing to make them look GW official, but no one seems to complain? Why is it different for the leviathan? your lack of empathy towards those using a blatant warhound type/look model at a fraction of the cost is disgusting.

1) Where is this fluff that the Imperium fields small Titans that are otherwise identical to Warhounds but not Warhounds?

2) It's funny that you would go on and on about the rules and converting models and stuff, but you're uncomfortable with simply writing your own rules to make it a knight titan. It's smaller than a Warhound, has a completely different style from a Warhound, and doesn't have weapons that look anything like the weapons a Warhound can take. It DOES, however, look almost exactly like a knight titan would (in my imagination), has weapons systems that the old knights could get (and since the knight no longer has an official model, the weapons are less of a big deal because NO ONE knows what some of them look like) and it's almost exactly the right size to be a knight titan.

 Swastakowey wrote:
[The fluff has plenty of room for other titans that can act in the same role as the warhound. Plenty.

Yes, but where is the fluff that suggests that the specific model(s) in question exist? All I see is some justification for why a cheap proxy should be allowed, not a legitimate effort to put the fluff first and bring an appropriate model.

There ARE NO LIMITS in 40k, one of the few rule sets that isnt limited by history or strict lore and whatnot.

Err, what? How exactly are limits about lore/history in other games absolute rules that you can't ignore and play whatever you want, but the lore/history of 40k are irrelevant details that nobody has to pay attention to?

If i wanna buy a box of army men to use as guard, i can, why is it a bad thing?

Because some of us enjoy the visual part of the game, and a box of cheap army men doesn't have the same appeal as a squad of well-painted miniatures from the setting we're playing in.

And when i look at the 2 titans i dont see one as superior to the other, they both look and do the same thing (which is nothing by the way...) what is the difference.

The difference, as I've said, is that the Leviathan doesn't look any more like a Warhound than any other random generic scifi mech. The only reason people got the idea that it's a good Warhound proxy is that it's cheap. If the Leviathan cost $500 you'd see interest in the "different style of titan" disappear almost entirely.

And the rules mostly suck when (insert nasty word here) like you are involved.

No, the rules just plain suck. The core rules are a bloated mess of ambiguous nonsense, the fundamental mechanics are awkward relics of GW's refusal to move beyond 40k's origins as a 1980s fantasy game, and army balance is virtually nonexistent. None of this depends on who you're playing the game with.

Why is it different for the leviathan?

It isn't. I don't really want to play against an IG army that uses unconverted models from another game just because they're cheaper.

your lack of empathy towards those using a blatant warhound type/look model at a fraction of the cost is disgusting.

I'm sorry, when did having a Warhound in your army become a mandatory part of the game? If you aren't going to bring a Warhound model then bring a different unit instead. I am not obligated to accept inappropriate proxy models just because they're cheap.

 Swastakowey wrote:
your lack of empathy towards those using a blatant warhound type/look model at a fraction of the cost is disgusting.

Your problem is that you are interested in his standpoint but dont let him have it. If hes not going to play against such a proxy ... fine ... find someone else. If your group is allowing it but his is not ... fine ... who cares?

People in my group are using it as a warhound stand-in. I give a rats ass about what other groups or people might think about it or if they ban it. If your play group disallows it ... bad luck - find someone else to play with. If not - fine - let other have their opinion without insulting them.

 Mywik wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
your lack of empathy towards those using a blatant warhound type/look model at a fraction of the cost is disgusting.

Your problem is that you are interested in his standpoint but dont let him have it. If hes not going to play against such a proxy ... fine ... find someone else. If your group is allowing it but his is not ... fine ... who cares?

People in my group are using it as a warhound stand-in. I give a rats ass about what other groups or people might think about it or if they ban it. If your play group disallows it ... bad luck - find someone else to play with. If not - fine - let other have their opinion without insulting them.

True but the whole ït doesnt happen here so why care" attitude doesnt solve problems. I will however let him think as he does (not that i can change it ) but i will insult people who are jerks about a simple game.

To the guy who said make rules, why make rules when there is a suitable working one that can work for the leviathan just fine that everyone accepts as legal?

And as for the visual appeal, if someone who knew nothing about the game saw a leviathan painted up and based on a board he would probably not say it ruins the look for him, why? Because its just like the warhound. A titanic, walking war machine.

Anyways that is all.

 Swastakowey wrote:

To the guy who said make rules, why make rules when there is a suitable working one that can work for the leviathan just fine that everyone accepts as legal?

Because obviously not everyone accepts it working for the leviathan.

 Swastakowey wrote:

And as for the visual appeal, if someone who knew nothing about the game saw a leviathan painted up and based on a board he would probably not say it ruins the look for him, why? Because its just like the warhound. A titanic, walking war machine.

Anyways that is all.

1) And if someone who knows a lot about the game and the fluff saw a leviathan all painted up and based on a board he might say it ruins the look for him, why? Because it's smaller, wrongly-shaped, too sleek, and equipped with weapons that are completely unrecognizable.

2) The same argument could be used for Gundam models I bought at Walmart for $10 - "And as for the visual appeal, if someone who knew nothing about the game saw a leviathan Gundam painted up and based on a board he would probably not say it ruins the look for him, why? Because its just like the warhound. A titanic, walking war machine."

 Swastakowey wrote:
but i will insult people who are jerks about a simple game.

And then you will get some attention from the mods for violating the forum rules. Given your past rule-breaking discussion of illegal recasting I have to wonder how many warnings you already have.

To the guy who said make rules, why make rules when there is a suitable working one that can work for the leviathan just fine that everyone accepts as legal?

That's assuming it's suitable when it isn't. The Warhound rules aren't at all suitable for the Leviathan. The body doesn't look like a Warhound, the guns aren't anything like the Warhound's guns, and the Warhound doesn't have any rules for the Leviathan's melee options. Nobody would have any interest in using the Leviathan as a Warhound if it cost $500.

And as for the visual appeal, if someone who knew nothing about the game saw a leviathan painted up and based on a board he would probably not say it ruins the look for him, why? Because its just like the warhound. A titanic, walking war machine.

Why do we care about people who know nothing about the fluff of 40k? Obviously someone who doesn't know anything about the game isn't going to be able to tell the difference between a Leviathan and a 40k model, but that just means they don't care about the game at all. People who do care about the game enough to play it can tell that the Leviathan isn't a 40k model.

 Swastakowey wrote:
) but i will insult people who are jerks about a simple game.

Please don't.

Thanks.

 Peregrine wrote:


I guess you don't value the fluff of having appropriate models, or the appearance of the superior real models? TBH with that kind of attitude why play 40k? If the models are just game pieces and you value the rules/gameplay most then why not play a game with rules that don't suck?

I find a certain amount of irony in this given that in the Chaos BB thread you dismissed the fluff and denounced the idea purely for gameplay reasons.

What do you want people to prioritise, gameplay or fluff?

No, I wouldn't be fine with this. If I were to get my ass kicked by a super heavy, I would like the unit in question to actually look like that super heavy. It can be scratch built for all I care, as long as it is visually similar and has the same dimensions.

The leviathan looks nothing like a Warhound and doesn't have the same dimensions.

I'm just glad I play friendly games with the older rulesets. The Vehicle Design Rules were the perfect thing for building a Dreamforge 15mm Crusader to use as a Knight. It's really too bad material like that doesn't exist in 6th edition.

As any game I would play that involves Apocolypse level units would be purely for fun, I would much rather buy three of the $50 15mm Crusaders to use as homebrew knights than one of the big ones to use as a Warhound. They would look so much cooler operating on the table as a unit, even if the 4.5 inch height is a bit small for my tastes.