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.

 Cap'n Facebeard wrote:
I feel like Lord Damocles should join this conversation. On Warseer he built a complete 2nd ed Tyranid army, complete with swearing.

I love almost all of the 2nd ed Tyranid range, aesthetically... especially the Hive Tyrant, which is cool and distinctive in ways that the later versions did not manage to live up to. The 2nd ed Warriors, though, are hands down my least favourite models in the entire 40K range. They were a massive downgrade from the look of the RT-era Advanced Space Crusade plastic warriors, and an absolute cow to build and keep assembled. Ugly models in every way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
The Predator Annihilator kept the curved turret, but somehow looked even worse.

Not sure if it’s just everything being….chunky, or the fact the Turret is mounted so far forward, giving a lopsided look.

The turret being forward was a large part of the problem with both of the hybrid models, along with the heavy riveting looking out of place against the plastic hull, but the annihilator makes it worse because the turret design also just doesn't match the sponsons. It looks like a vehicle cobbled together from spare parts.

I would be curious as to what the reasoning was with replacing the RT-era kit with the hybrid models. The similar vintage battlewagon and land raider kits were supposedly dropped from the range because the moulds were damaged. I don't recall ever hearing anything similar about the predator sprue, but it seems like the most likely scenario. I can't see any other way that replacing an already produced plastic sprue with metal add on parts makes any sort of financial or logistical sense.

It's possible that they just wore them out. they may have reached their shot limit lifespan and been retired.

I did like the RT Predator aesthetic, but my 2nd Ed metal/plastic Predator Annihilator and Pred Destructor tanks are two of my favourite models. I still play them today in all their glory.

 insaniak wrote:

The turret being forward was a large part of the problem with both of the hybrid models, along with the heavy riveting looking out of place against the plastic hull, but the annihilator makes it worse because the turret design also just doesn't match the sponsons. It looks like a vehicle cobbled together from spare parts.

I would be curious as to what the reasoning was with replacing the RT-era kit with the hybrid models. The similar vintage battlewagon and land raider kits were supposedly dropped from the range because the moulds were damaged. I don't recall ever hearing anything similar about the predator sprue, but it seems like the most likely scenario. I can't see any other way that replacing an already produced plastic sprue with metal add on parts makes any sort of financial or logistical sense.

Mould issues perhaps? The turret forward was actually a sensible design choice in the real world. But we loved the unrealistic rear design.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PenitentJake wrote:
2nd ed was great in its time. I didn't find any of its rules particularly problematic at the time, though in hindsight, I think some of the newer rules are better.

Assault was the biggest problem for us, big time sink and there are numerous solutions to improve it floating around. Vehicle targeting datafax (was that 1st or 2nd?) was great in theory, in practice a lot of ammunition explosions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

 Hellebore wrote:
I ended up going to my country's first GT in 1997 with an GW Grand Tournament pack that placed limits on wargear and psychic powers.

From memory limits on characters, no level 3 psychic powers and some other stuff? I will have the rules pack buried at home somewhere.

Targeting Datafax was both 1st and 2nd, just in different ways.

Tail end of 1st you had a universal clear plastic template, which you centred over drawn plans of a vehicle, and that determined if and where you hit (the smaller the vehicle, the great the chance of “hitting” an empty space).

2nd Ed tidied this up, with each vehicle having a Datafax, the rear of which listed it hit locations, armour ratings and damage tables.

If I can be bothered later, I’ll break the books out to provide a pictorial example.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Targeting Datafax was both 1st and 2nd, just in different ways.

Tail end of 1st you had a universal clear plastic template, which you centred over drawn plans of a vehicle, and that determined if and where you hit (the smaller the vehicle, the great the chance of “hitting” an empty space).

2nd Ed tidied this up, with each vehicle having a Datafax, the rear of which listed it hit locations, armour ratings and damage tables.

If I can be bothered later, I’ll break the books out to provide a pictorial example.

Similar to the original Space marine/epic titan hit locations.


It didn't entirely make sense though, because you should only be able to hit locations you can see, unless you're firing a parabolic round or blast.

Does anyone know if there's a site or resource where someone has made 2nd ed rules for modern units? Datafaxes for modern 40K vehicles, etc?

 Hellebore wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Targeting Datafax was both 1st and 2nd, just in different ways.

Tail end of 1st you had a universal clear plastic template, which you centred over drawn plans of a vehicle, and that determined if and where you hit (the smaller the vehicle, the great the chance of “hitting” an empty space).

2nd Ed tidied this up, with each vehicle having a Datafax, the rear of which listed it hit locations, armour ratings and damage tables.

If I can be bothered later, I’ll break the books out to provide a pictorial example.

Similar to the original Space marine/epic titan hit locations.


It didn't entirely make sense though, because you should only be able to hit locations you can see, unless you're firing a parabolic round or blast.

Oh Lawks, I need to a proper deep dive don’t I?

Not to prove you wrong, Good Sir. Instead I’m in my mid 40’s and so have forgotten whatever it was we did when I wasn’t all old and crusty and clapped out.

Now. I’m meeting a friend for Beer tomorrow evening. Maybe check back on this utter drivel on Saturday. If someone if feeling charitable, PM me a reminder?

 Cap'n Facebeard wrote:
Does anyone know if there's a site or resource where someone has made 2nd ed rules for modern units? Datafaxes for modern 40K vehicles, etc?

I've only seen these.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/654481.page


I know people have been doing it for fun ad hoc. No concerted effort afaik.

Remembering that the dark millennium rulebook has vehicle design rules in it, so you could probably build a simulacrum of anything with those. Although they are more 'weapon replacement' rules than anything else.

But given that virtually every vehicle in 40k is just a variant of one from 2nd ed, it shouldn't be too hard. Even tau vehicles are really just crappier eldar ones.

 Cap'n Facebeard wrote:
Does anyone know if there's a site or resource where someone has made 2nd ed rules for modern units? Datafaxes for modern 40K vehicles, etc?

Project Anvil has quite a few - https://projectanvil.blogspot.com/

I'm currently working on a 2.5 version of the Necron codex, retrofitting their modern model range into it. As part of that, I've redesigned the datafax a little, resized to work with current available print-on-demand card sizes, and consolidating the information you actually need during the game all onto the front. Weapon options which you only actually need during list building are rolled into the codex army list entry.

(click to embiggen)


Also working on some aircraft rules. The only existing rules I could find were the Thunderhawk rules in Citadel Journal, which weren't great, as they result in not having any need for an actual model unless you land. I wanted something that was distinct from skimmers, without just being an abstract strafing run with no model needed.
So... I wrote some. Here's a first draft.


..

Would it actually be good for the Monolith to have crew? 2nd ed crews are often attacked by Tyranid organisms, etc.

Depends what kind of necron you're working with.

Their portrayal in 2nd ed was very different to the modern image, and the destroyer was a vehicle with a necron pilot.

So in that vein I imagine a 2nd ed necron vehicle would have necron crew.

I initially considered not giving it a crew, but it creates potential issues with those occasional places were the rules interact with crew... so it was simpler to give it a crew than try to find and plug whatever edge cases might arise from not having them.

Ah OK makes sense. Its funny to imagine a Monolith being swarmed with snotlings too.

 Cap'n Facebeard wrote:
Ah OK makes sense. Its funny to imagine a Monolith being swarmed with snotlings too.

Oh I do love the original Shokk Attack Gun, my favorite weapon(and the greatest) in 40k that kept me playing orks off and on for many years and editions until I finally came to the conclusion GW was not going to put the original fun back into the Boyz and sold the army. Kind of glad I did it when I did since half or more of my vehicles(and my favorite ones at that)went to legends the next edition.

The damage chart for hitting dreadnoughts was absolutely amazing and I still laugh when I think about it today.

I love the Bonner artwork of the snotling with a flag....

I still miss the daft Orky field artillery.

Ever had your precious Landraider dragged out of cover, then lifted up, flipped over, and dropped on your Commander killing him stone dead?

I have.

Whether or not Monoliths have crew is something which GW has flip-flopped on over time.

The 3rd edition codex states that there are no crew, but the 5th edition (and subsequent copy-pastes) states that there are (and by the time we got to the conclusion of the Warhammer Adventures series, there are whole suites of rooms with occupants *sigh*). It doesn't really look like there is space inside the current model for crew.

Personally, I still prefer basically all Necron vehicles not having crew, and think that Monoliths are far more interesting as solid lumps of necrodermis/stone than spooky Rhinos.

I don't mind Necron things having crew. I think its a great way to highlight their cursed existence where they are crewing a vehicle because that's what they would have done when alive.

Their weapons and war machines were evolutions of their original organic selves because they thought once the war was over they'd get their bodies back. That they didn't want to abandon all that they were.

Until it didn't happen and now their army is a mix. Some parts clinging to the past; some given into madness in accepting their fate as machines; some parts Canoptek built to look after their masters.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
Whether or not Monoliths have crew is something which GW has flip-flopped on over time.

The 3rd edition codex states that there are no crew, but the 5th edition (and subsequent copy-pastes) states that there are (and by the time we got to the conclusion of the Warhammer Adventures series, there are whole suites of rooms with occupants *sigh*). It doesn't really look like there is space inside the current model for crew.

Personally, I still prefer basically all Necron vehicles not having crew, and think that Monoliths are far more interesting as solid lumps of necrodermis/stone than spooky Rhinos.

Totally agree that the Monolith shouldn't have a crew.

Disagree about the space for rooms inside that model though. It's a little hard to grasp how the model scales actually work, because the proportions of infantry models are weird, and their poses are often funny (waving arms and such) But the Monolith really is the size of small building.

Yeah scale is always a bit wobbly and the Monolith I've always thought scales like a wargame building in that its woefully undersized compared to what it should be in reality of the setting.

I would have thought they'd go with time Lord tech and make it bigger in the inside just casually to show the tech level. This palatial space inside

Well, with all portal tech and that? I can see it being kinda both.

As in the Monolith we see on the field itself doesn’t have a crew of its own anywhere near the battlefield. Instead, there’s a potentially substantial crew elsewhere managing it via sensors and that.

 Overread wrote:
Yeah scale is always a bit wobbly and the Monolith I've always thought scales like a wargame building in that its woefully undersized compared to what it should be in reality of the setting.

Oh I actually think the scale of the model is fine (clarification: old model with old infantry models, the new scales have shifted). The perception of the size of various models is bad.

Like, it's hard to appreciate how big that thing is even taking its literal size.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Yeah scale is always a bit wobbly and the Monolith I've always thought scales like a wargame building in that its woefully undersized compared to what it should be in reality of the setting.

Oh I actually think the scale of the model is fine (clarification: old model with old infantry models, the new scales have shifted). The perception of the size of various models is bad.

Like, it's hard to appreciate how big that thing is even taking its literal size.

I see this a lot with Titans..people complaining that the official sizes are too small without realising how big they would actually be.

 insaniak wrote:
The 2nd ed Warriors, though, are hands down my least favourite models in the entire 40K range. They were a massive downgrade from the look of the RT-era Advanced Space Crusade plastic warriors, and an absolute cow to build and keep assembled. Ugly models in every way.

I have a soft spot for the later 2nd Ed pewter Warriors, the ones that often get forgotten when talking Tyranids across the editions. The battle scenes in the 3rd Ed rulebook, showing late-2nd Ed Tyranids painted in the purple-and-black scheme that we now call Hydra, made a strong impression on me, and I think they do a lot to improve sculpts that can otherwise verge on goofy.

I'd have no trouble with Monoliths being bigger on the inside of the current model actually looked like it has an inside, and we didn't have examples of them being destroyed by krak grenades being thrown into the portal (unless the interiors are highly volatile (in which case why) they can't be building-sized).
There's also not really much of a need for them to have significant interior spaces if the portal can just connect to a tombworld/ship.

Depends how you look at it.

The thing physically present on the field is seemingly just an armed, mobile portal generator. The stuff handling the teleporting could be anywhere, connected solely by the portal.

Like the Mars Rover type thing.

Yeah I definitely prefer to think of them as just nodes in a network that can act autonomously or via remote command, with non-realspace "interiors" if anything at all.

I don't know the Krak grenade story, but it sounds dumb. Authors be writing for saturday morning cartoons.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Yeah I definitely prefer to think of them as just nodes in a network that can act autonomously or via remote command, with non-realspace "interiors" if anything at all.

I don't know the Krak grenade story, but it sounds dumb. Authors be writing for saturday morning cartoons.

Pretty much anything can be taken care of in 40k by force-feeding it a krack grenade or the business end of a plasma pistol.