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'm working on a guard army with unique uniforms and equipment, and I'd like to give their vehicles a distinctive look as well. The first thing I thought of that could make the tanks stand out was replacement of the turrets. I've attached some pictures of my first rough test model, and I'd like to know what you think.

The turret style I'm working on replaces the small, angular turrets found on Guard tanks with large, cylindrical ones. These are based loosely on pictures of the turret on the (American) Civil War ironclad U.S.S. Monitor, although I thought it would be best to make the weapons protrude from their slots instead of being fully concealed (since hiding them would make it tough to figure out how the tank is equipped). The example shown below is a Chimera with a rough version of the new turret. I intend to sink the hatch fully into the roof (it's just stick-tacked on right now), add a good deal of detail to the sides (vision slits, vertical struts, protruding edges around the top and bottom), and add a lot of rivets. If I stick with this style, I'm planning to do something similar with my Leman Rus turrets and sponsons.

Here are my main questions. Feel free to suggest anything else that comes to mind as well:

What do you think of the cylindrical turret look in general?

What do you think of the size? Is the diameter too great (I aimed for the maximum reasonable size - it already hangs over the hull's roof on one side slightly)? Is it too tall, or too short (it's roughly twice the height of the original turret)?

Is the placement of the hatch appropriate (left of center)?

What do you think of the weapon mount? Should it be moved further inside the turret (so that only the tip of the barrel protrudes from its slot)? Is there an external mounting technique that might look better with this sort of turret?

Would a periscope look good on this? (It seems unnecessary with the cupola hatch, but it might be a neat way to mount pintle weapons.)

Will building the turret like this make it harder to magnetize? (I don't really expect to swap out the multilaser, but this will be significant for other types of tanks.)

Sorry, but I am not a fan. Too wide, too blocky, and totally low-tech. Turrets like that haven't been seen since the early 1930's and they were QUICKLY done away with when they realized how easy they were to blow off.

In fact, I think the ONLY time in all of history that a turret like that was ever successful was on the Monitor.

I just see some poor Adeptus Architectus grad student getting demoted to some restoration team in an underhive after turning that design in.
I don't know. Maybe after the treads and turret detail are finished...


Ghidorah

I'm sorry but I have to agree with ghidorah.

"Low-Tech" is perfect for an age where technology is found not created.

The adeptus follow plans, they do not write them. (nerdy but fluffy) =P

Looks to Orky, or like a Civil War Ironclad.

seems far too basic, if you smooth down the top edge to give it a sloped look then it might be better, but it just seems plain.

Interesting idea. I think it could potentially work well with a WWI-esque Guard army (ie:Greatcoat Guard.)

The idea is cool, but you should make the turret a little big bit smaller and more streamlined (= less box-ish)

Sloped armor was one of the quickly apparent and quickly adapted design considerations in early tank construction. Vertical armor plates are forced to absorb the total impact momentum of a projectile while sloped armor can deflect projectiles, only absorbing a fraction of the total energy.

I believe this is a concept that even the technologically regressed civilization of the Imperium would realize. The sloped armor concept is already very apparent on the Chimera chassis.

I love it, of course my Guard I'm working on are very klunky as well. I'd make the turret a bit smaller though.

It's a different look, I like, just make it a tad smaller. The whole concept would be great for a retro guard army, besides greatcoats, give the weapons wood stocks.

It's great for a Victorian feel.
I hope you continue in this vein.

If you are going for a Monitor look, you nailed it.

Personally, I would knock about 1/3 off the height, although you do have a real life example in the Soviet KV-1 for an insanely huge turret model. (True, that sucker was a tempting target though).

I think the biggest visual problem is the roundness of the turret and the angular nature of the chassis. They just don't mess.

"Real life" examples you could also look at for inspiration would be the British Churchills and possibly the Valentines. I think if you moved the turret back to a more center position, that might help. It would cause you to reduce the size of the hatch though.

Thanks for the replies. I knew someone would probably bring up sloped armor, but I didn't really expect quite so much input on effective tank design. I do realize that this would be a pretty bad design as modern tanks go. On the other hand, most Imperial vehicles include some throwbacks to very primitive tank designs (tall hulls and riveted armor, for instance).

This turret style isn't supposed to give the impression of a more effective vehicle. The idea I'm trying to convey is that of a lower-quality vehicle produced by the army's homeworld, based on incomplete copies of STC vehicle schematics. I'm not aiming for any technological level in particular with this army, I'm just trying for equipment that looks like it's built from a mix of high and low tech (but standardized, not individually jury-rigged) parts.

Based on the comments here, and looking the tank over again this morning, I do think this turret is probably too big for the Chimera. It definitely stands out as starkly different from the vehicle's angular body (although I think the Chimera already has some of this going on - the round portholes on the back don't seem to fit well with the square windows and doors elsewhere). The comment about it looking "Orky" does bother me some - the final result isn't supposed to look that primitive, and I can see the resemblance to some of their vehicles.

I'll try a smaller version of this, and also bring this one to a more finished state for comparison.

Shotgun, thanks for pointing out the Churchill and Valentine. Those do bear a resemblance, having angular hulls and round turrets, and I might take some ideas from their turret designs. I think I prefer the forward turret placement to centering it, however (I did consider placing the turret over the back of the vehicle, where the troop compartment hatch is now, but the internal layout that suggested seemed a little too weird).

Om my Chimeras I made the rear gunports into firing slits instead.



Also, if you haven't already thought of it, the bottom part of the hatch (that sticks down into the hull usually) should be trimmed off.

eh not my taste but if you like it go with it, who cares what everyone else thinks, its your design roll with it, there will be plenty of people who just plain don't like it and will say it "sucks" but what ever, make it the way you like it, its your army, why change it to fit other peoples tastes and not your own(unless you plain to sell it lol then you may wish to consider making it more party friendly)

I say if you put an angle around the edges of the turret it would look a lot better.

As it is I must confess I dislike it

Here are two versions of the "Cheesebox" turret concept, now much closer to completion. As suggested, I made the smaller turret's diameter two-thirds that of the larger (I didn't apply the same suggestion to the height as this would leave insufficient space to mount the guns vertically). I haven't tried adding a curve to the roof as this seems like it would be far too much work (using green stuff is the only way I've thought of so far), and the domed-looking result I imagine doesn't strike me as very appealing.

I've added a lot more detail such as the bands around the top and bottom with vertical connectors, lots of rivets, and some of the standard equipment bits (antenna, smoke launchers, and searchlight). I'd like opinions on the updated version, and suggestions for improvements (I know some people will likely never care for the concept in general - I'm planning to stick with it, though).

1. What do you think of the equipment placement? (Note that the searchlight's housing shown here is far from final - I just wanted to give a sense of the general shape and placement it will have)

2. Where would the pintle weapon mount look best? The normal spot, mounted as coaxial secondary weapons for the main gun, or somewhere else entirely?

3. Which version of the turret do you like better, large or small? (I'm still undecided - I like aspects of both)

I vote small turret

The small one looks better.

redstripe wrote:Sloped armor was one of the quickly apparent and quickly adapted design considerations in early tank construction. Vertical armor plates are forced to absorb the total impact momentum of a projectile while sloped armor can deflect projectiles, only absorbing a fraction of the total energy.

I believe this is a concept that even the technologically regressed civilization of the Imperium would realize. The sloped armor concept is already very apparent on the Chimera chassis.

To alter the holy designs of the Standard Template Construct is to court disaster. Technology works because it has worked for thousands of years. If you want "innovation", try the Tau. This is the Imperium. If this were an STC design, even an incomplete one, it would not be altered in any way. To do so would be, quite frankly, heretical. Punishable, it might be added, by death. And likely dismemberment beforehand.

I like this concept, and if you like the way it looks, then go for it! (But if you want my opinion, the small turret looks better.)

And disregard the naysayers! This is 40k! All those little inconveniences like feasibility, realism, and those nasty laws of physics have no practical application here.

So roll with it!

I like the large turret.
It looks like the gun has ::actual:: space for internal components.