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.

A while back, I was kicking around the idea of modeling a couple of Land Raiders or Leman Russes with legs (perhaps from a Defiler) to make an army with more of a steampunk flavor. I never got around to doing the conversions, but with the boost tanks have gotten, I thought I might revisit the idea. Back then, it seemed the effects of such modeling was rather minimal and wouldn't be a problem for most opponents, particularly if the conversions were nice. With 5th edition and TLOS, I'm a bit concerned. I haven't had much experience with 5th edition, so I come for opinions.

Regarding tactical disadvantages to the conversion, the legged tanks wouldn't be able to completely block LOS for your troops the way a standard tank would. Additionally, the added height would make hiding the tanks difficult. I'm sure an opponent wouldn't complain about these disadvantages, but what about advantages to the conversion, if any?

Is there anything that a tank with what is essentially an elevated chassis could exploit that would make a reasonable opponent cry foul? The added height of the guns would allow it to see over more terrain, but I would think that this would be balanced by the fact that it could be targeted easier. Keep in mind that I'd be using standard Land Raider or Russ rules for them and would not be counting them as actual walkers.

I'd like some input from the Dakka community on whether or not these changes could be perceived as taking advantage of the conversions.

A higher tanks main body does alot of things. Would you merely count it exactly the same as a tank with reguardes to rule - it would only have a higher point for TLOS than a standard tank.

Skimmers on arbitary stands (I assume they can hover within 6 inches of the ground & be quite happy - rather than 4 feet) suffer from this kinda thinking. Best bet would be to show & check & go through with the player before hand on all the effects.

I personally would, if you did a nice conversion, for the eye-candy.

With 5th ed rules some people have coverted up a stand in modile for their converted models. That way if there is an issue you can simply remove your convernt and replace it with the stand end for True LOS.

i would make the conversion but keep the rules and line of sight from whatever vehicle it represents.
in a hardcore gaming situation this might make waves but otherwise should be easy.
id love to see an at-at version of a land raider

One of my friends has a hilarious conversion of Calgar carrying a Land Raider.

sourclams wrote:One of my friends has a hilarious conversion of Calgar carrying a Land Raider.

Pictures, man!

As long as you aren't modeling in such a way that you get all the advantages and none of the disadvantages, i.e. a land raider half the height of a normal one, you should be fine.

Even in a friendly game I would ask my opponent to use the converted model, not a stand-in with the unconverted model's dimensions.

The only downside I see to using the model substitution is the time involved in swapping out models all the time. It probably wouldn't be too big of a deal as long as your whole army wasn't made up of walking tanks. Oooh, there's an idea...

I suppose the consensus is to announce that the walking tanks count as regular tanks, specifying that if used as is, the line of sight would be higher, but the tanks wouldn't be able to totally block line of sight to hiding troops, which is a pretty big disadvantage in many armies. If they seem to balk at the idea, offer to use a substitute model when determining *all* line of sight issues involving the tank.

And there's the key - ALL line of sight issues. If I have to use a substitute model when shooting my tanks guns, they have to use the same substitute when trying to target my troops behind the tank screen. Fair is fair. By offering the substitute, I would imagine that most opponents would realize that I'm not trying to take advantage of the modeling.

On further thought, I suppose the walking tanks would also be able to be used like a skimmer wall. Put a couple of tanks up front, shoot underneath it, and prevent stuff from assaulting. Tau do it, but it feels kind of dirty when using something with a 3+ armor save. I don't know. The opponent may agree to use the model as is, but if I pull this tactic out, it's kind of like a bait and switch. Use it? Never use it? Don't plan on using it, but use it if the opportunity arises? Thoughts?

I think that in general, you're going to get punished on this.

By making your tanks taller, you're going to make them harder to hide.

By creating a space underneath them, you're going to lose the ability to block LOS to models behind them.

No matter how evenhanded you try to be, people are going to find the whole "counts as" stuff tiresome, and a a few are always going to see the way it helps you (few though they may be) and whine.

I'd suggest two options:

1) Play it as TLOS, and deal with what you've got.
2) Model it as close to the size as the base tank as possible. Possibly a terrain base to fill under the model? Or banners hanging down?

Good modelling won't save you... I made a pair of Dakkatyrants from Tyranid Warriors, beefed them up so they're bigger and taller, but still smaller than normal Tyrants. Even though I did some serious green stuff work, and made some pretty nice models (IMO), people seemed to gloss over that, and complain about how small they are.

Well, I plan on using as tall a base as possible so my Fire Dragons can do a "Falcon of Fury."

ungulateman

hey, know what, its totaly cool, GW hasnt banned conversions or anything.

so some kid bitches that your tank can see him better. oh well, he can see it better too. not your fault he didnt bring any long-range AT to deal with it.

really, as long as you are not purposefully trying to bend the TLoS rule to your advantage, noone should be able to complain about a nice, WYSIWYG conversion. ever.

... rase a tank ... well lets think skimmers like fire prism and tau rail thingy have massive range ... now if i place them 20" air they can shoot you but you can't shoot them