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.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:

It at least copies ideas that were tried out and in the end found lacking, Some of our design ideas on the other hand would make every engineer cringe when just thinking about them (tanks on the rear more or less are just held by an armour plate and the space between tracks and this plate cries for a gammon bomb to really disable the whole tank)

Also, your calculations abot production cost seem a little bit wonky. I do have the numbers from some companies that can do such resin modells and they are nowhere near your numbers (for a reason)

I don`t want to curb your enthusiasm, but I am tackling it from a business perspective.

If you call it 4th Reich Tank, many Alternate WWII guys will rightly claim that there is no similarity to any german designs. The Mortian is much closer to WWII tanks and the StuG variant is even a very close variant of a real StuG IV or III.

Duncan, you didn't actually bother to look past the first page (or the last page is my guess), did you? The tanks on the rear are actually held in place via a strap in the latest design. I'm not really sure what spacing you're referring to (as again there isn't a plate in the latest design), so whatever. Although the way I see it, its fine. Whats that about Grenades in close combat hitting against rear armor...?

My cost calculations are pretty much spot on, actually. Thats what I was quoted by companies (in the US) who can do CAM mold tooling and plastic injection (not resin) for a model of this size and complexity.

As for 4th reich tank, that was a concept that I abandoned quite some time ago (which you would have realized if you read through the rest of the thread).

Either way, you seem to be in the minority in regards to the tank design, for that I am grateful.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:BTW, the P1000 and P1500 don't match spec illustrations.

Nobody can cast wheels that large.

I've not seen any evidence that either design actually dates back from WW2. They could well be products of the Internet.

You should read "My Tank Is Fight!" which besides sounding silly is a really informative book on the subject of these wartime projects.

I haven't played my IG in 6 years, but I'm going to have to buy a hand full of manticores and bring them out of retierment.

agnosto wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:BTW, the P1000 and P1500 don't match spec illustrations.

Nobody can cast wheels that large.

I beg to differ:

Those aren't wheels. Try again.

@omega
I have read the full thread, but some issues were not that clear. Maybe you dropped the name, but I found no post that explicitly stated it. Still, most of my critisizm is still reflected by many in the thread. The one about the plate, ok, didn´t registered the new picture, but still, there is still too much room between the barrel and the "fender", makes it a nice shot trap.

And if they really can offer you such low prices I wonder how they manage it. Look out for additional "extras" you will have to pay for.

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Those aren't wheels. Try again.

Seriously? You're that anal....I mean it's harder to cast a tube than cast a solid wheel.... Uh, ok.



Older than WWII:


Be a man and admit you're wrong.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

agnosto wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:BTW, the P1000 and P1500 don't match spec illustrations.

Nobody can cast wheels that large.

I beg to differ:

Those aren't wheels. Try again.

Someone say something about wheels?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Duncan_Idaho wrote:@omega
I have read the full thread, but some issues were not that clear. Maybe you dropped the name, but I found no post that explicitly stated it. Still, most of my critisizm is still reflected by many in the thread. The one about the plate, ok, didn´t registered the new picture, but still, there is still too much room between the barrel and the "fender", makes it a nice shot trap.

And if they really can offer you such low prices I wonder how they manage it. Look out for additional "extras" you will have to pay for.

I don't see the tank you guys are talking about.

BrookM wrote:You should read "My Tank Is Fight!" which besides sounding silly is a really informative book on the subject of these wartime projects.

From what little I've heard of the book, it sounded like a pretty sensationalist work that didn't really go much for the verification and referencing I'm mostly interested in about the thing. I've never been interested in it enough to order a copy from the US merely to stifle my curiosity. I've not heard of too many other sources for the supposed project, which makes it sound unlikely, given how many volumes have been written about German experimental weapons and hypothetical designs.

Given the obvious shortcomings of the vehicle as described, I find it unlikely that it would have come from the drawing board of any competent German vehicle designer (especially if we consider the materials costs of such a monstrous thing).

Ratte and Monster can be verified from the german military archieves, but like the H-class battleships the were just design studies.

chaos0xomega wrote:If you would like another alternative to the Leman Russ, please see here:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207928

It is very much still a WIP, and not yet in production. I'm hoping to be able to go to PLASTIC production with this one, and for a cheaper price than the Leman Russ (seriously, after doing my research, there is really no reason at all that the kits have to be that expensive. They could cost half of that and GW would still make a very nice profit per unit sold (not counting labor costs, etc.) Also, dont be scared off by the pics on the first page, the design has changed rather considerably.

The reason why I haven't gone with a substitute for the LRBT is simply because I haven't found a kit that has the same dimensions. I don't need to use GW miniatures, but I would like my proxies to be accurate for fair gameplay.

If your kit is the same height, width, and length AND beats GW's prices, count me in. Bonus points if it is designed to be easily converted for weapon swaps.

So, anyway, on-topic for a change.

I'm really not liking the Deathstrike. The missile design they went with looks... well, odd. I wonder if they chose that design with the express purpose of making it impossible to get 4 spare Manticore missiles from one kit.

Agamemnon2 wrote:I wonder if they chose that design with the express purpose of making it impossible to get 4 spare Manticore missiles from one kit.

Nah... why would they do that?

Blah .. i don't care if stuff looks accurate or "realistic", as long as it just looks cool. I mean... it's a make believe sci fi game and we're all grown men still playing with toys. Use some imagination

BrookM wrote:You should read "My Tank Is Fight!" which besides sounding silly is a really informative book on the subject of these wartime projects.

while an interesting premise/subject matter, the book is pretty bad. the author's writing style reminded me of someone barely literate trying to formulate a REALLY long forum post and only partly succeeding. the cover was the best part of the book, lol.

This topic has officially gone south. How about starting a new one for the tank design? I don't ask to get it thrown out of here, I'd like to track the progress of the project without it getting lost in the clutter.

agnosto wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:
Those aren't wheels. Try again.

Seriously? You're that anal....I mean it's harder to cast a tube than cast a solid wheel.... Uh, ok.

Older than WWII:


Be a man and admit you're wrong.

As illustrated, those wheels would be solid steel and 16 feet in diameter. I figure a nominal weight of 20-25 tons per wheel, assuming the Photoshopped Russian T-xx chassis "worked". That's a lot of steel to cast.

Also, tube is carrying load very differently.

The crawler you show isn't self-propelled, and I can't tell how large the wheels are.

Those cannon wheels are only 8 feet high. They don't appear to be steel nor cast. Go ahead and find a cast wheel that's 15+ feet tall, and I'll be glad to admit that it's doable.

The Green Git wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:I wonder if they chose that design with the express purpose of making it impossible to get 4 spare Manticore missiles from one kit.

Nah... why would they do that?

Use magnets. For like, the whole thing. That's what I'll be doing and I won't have to buy twice as many kits.

Sidstyler wrote:The fire prism must be the first Jes Goodwin model I've seen that no one likes. And I'm not really sure I get why, it looks a lot better than before without the prissy-ass crystal just kinda stuck on. I like that there's an actual barrel now and that the crystal is integrated into it.

Other than that though, pretty underwhelming release. I like that the rules are free, I wish all the 40k expansions were free seeing as how they're all pretty crap anyway (and this one will probably be no different)...and I like the new Guard stuff...but that's it? Really?

Hey, I love the new fire prism. Like you, I think the old one looked like crap, while the new one looks a lot more "Eldar" to me. I actually see the relatively small scale of this release as a good thing, and was in fact dreading they would make a huge deal out of it. The more major the release, the longer we would have to wait for the next codex!

Duncan_Idaho wrote:Ratte and Monster can be verified from the german military archieves, but like the H-class battleships the were just design studies.

They built the turret for the Ratte. Researched it a bit for my science class. Nazi's had TONS of crazy ideas (ala. Sun Cannon), and most didn't make it it into production. The Ratte project was canceled, and they re fitted the turret for a Normandy bunker. Looked like a fething battleship cannon (description).

Anyway, I think I can make a manticore have both weapons options, but the Deathstrike would need plasticard to be an ICBM. Would look just as good though.

Wow does every topic involving IG have to devolve into WW2 talk somehow? The war is over guys, we've seen the 300000 documentaries and watched band of brothers 40 times

yes I love saving private ryan and the call of duty WW2 games too! This is as predictable as melissa showing up on BOLS and spamming her babble whenever the Sisters of battle are mentioned

The imperial guard are not the allies nor the axis... they use tanks from 1918, plasma guns from the future, have russian commissar commanders and then went to the shire and recruited FRODO BAGGINS to be a sniper..

Kirasu wrote:Wow does every topic involving IG have to devolve into WW2 talk somehow? The war is over guys, we've seen the 300000 documentaries and watched band of brothers 40 times

yes I love saving private ryan and the call of duty WW2 games too! This is as predictable as melissa showing up on BOLS and spamming her babble whenever the Sisters of battle are mentioned

The imperial guard are not the allies nor the axis... they use tanks from 1918, plasma guns from the future, have russian commissar commanders and then went to the shire and recruited FRODO BAGGINS to be a sniper..

And we will never get tired of complaining about the damn tractor tanks.

They built the turret for the Ratte.

Actually it was a battleship turret from the beginning on, modified for tests, it never really was built with the Ratte in mind.

@Crawler
It is self-propelled and has its own power station in its base (enough energy to support a small village) but the wheels are not that big. Come to northern Germany to see such a beast in action. Oh, and it is slow as hell.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:

They built the turret for the Ratte.

Actually it was a battleship turret from the beginning on, modified for tests, it never really was built with the Ratte in mind.

Whops, sorry bout that.

pombe wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:If you would like another alternative to the Leman Russ, please see here:

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207928

It is very much still a WIP, and not yet in production. I'm hoping to be able to go to PLASTIC production with this one, and for a cheaper price than the Leman Russ (seriously, after doing my research, there is really no reason at all that the kits have to be that expensive. They could cost half of that and GW would still make a very nice profit per unit sold (not counting labor costs, etc.) Also, dont be scared off by the pics on the first page, the design has changed rather considerably.

The reason why I haven't gone with a substitute for the LRBT is simply because I haven't found a kit that has the same dimensions. I don't need to use GW miniatures, but I would like my proxies to be accurate for fair gameplay.

If your kit is the same height, width, and length AND beats GW's prices, count me in. Bonus points if it is designed to be easily converted for weapon swaps.

No dice. I inted for all weapon options to be available, and magnetization to be easy, but size is something that I refuse to do. The Leman Russ is unrealistically tiny, which is actually one of my biggest complaints about it. Therefore, I want with a larger design (about the size of a wave serpent).

UltraPrime wrote:This topic has officially gone south. How about starting a new one for the tank design? I don't ask to get it thrown out of here, I'd like to track the progress of the project without it getting lost in the clutter.

Noted. i will soonish since it seems like there is some interest.

chaos0xomega wrote:which is actually one of my biggest complaints about it. Therefore, I want with a larger design (about the size of a wave serpent).

Well here is a good reason to stop waiting for your kit and not get it.

On topic though I HAVE to get at least 2 Manticores, but the deathstrike is just sily, it's TOO SMALL.

Okay, does anyone have anything to say about the Spearhead _rules_? All this treadhead weenie-waving is hilarious and all, but perhaps someone out there can dilute it with info about what will be in the WD (and thanks to whoever can- I've been drooling over this idea for some time).

From what I have heard, its standard FOC, but all minimum limits are removed (I.E. no min. hq and 2 troops)

Additionally, there are formations available ala apoc (focusing on vehicles/tanks, etc.)

deployment is done on short edges

thats about all I got

I'm not sure what GW was thinking with the release of the Eldar Support Weapon platform kit. Since 5th edition, those went back in everyone's carrying cases. Was it the possibility to make one more plastic kit and they flipped a coin as to what non Imperial army would get it? This just takes it one step closer to an all plastic range? Does GW really expect to recoup their costs with this kit?

That's the cynic in me talking. The very hopeful person in me wishes for an updated codex where the platforms could be useful again. Until that happens, I'll just continue to look at my metal versions collecting dust on my shelf.

Sarigar wrote:I'm not sure what GW was thinking with the release of the Eldar Support Weapon platform kit. Since 5th edition, those went back in everyone's carrying cases.

Do you think they know and/or care?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Sarigar wrote:I'm not sure what GW was thinking with the release of the Eldar Support Weapon platform kit. Since 5th edition, those went back in everyone's carrying cases.

Do you think they know and/or care?

But I thought only the good units got new plastic kits?