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.

ph34r wrote:$62? $75? Where are you people thinking up these absurd values? I would be shocked if this kit was more than $50.

Valk carries a price tag of $62 US, I'd be shocked if this wasn't priced exactly the same.

Really? Looks like it has as much plastic as a LandRaider at the very least to me? Surface area wise... The 'block' area alone looks to be a rhino width high and equally as wide, so double rhino volume. Then the wings, engines and tail...

If it was 35-40 i'd buy 3 lol, love it or not, that is a very good dollar value per game point right?

Teek wrote:

ph34r wrote:$62? $75? Where are you people thinking up these absurd values? I would be shocked if this kit was more than $50.

Valk carries a price tag of $62 US, I'd be shocked if this wasn't priced exactly the same.

Really? This kit looks to be much smaller than a valk. I'd say $45. Knowing GW though, it's a mystery.

BrassScorpion wrote:Apparently 1 leaked picture = 8 pages of jumping to conclusions and sophomoric bickering with a smattering occasionally of civil conversation that is also on topic.

At a bare minimum it's got to be $62 like the Valkyrie. Probably more, especially if the release date is after June 1 when prices often get "adjusted".

Ah good! I do so love the part of every rumour thread where BrassScorpion shows up to tell us both how many pages the thread is and also and then to insult everyone (and then posts something on topic as to make his post slightly more than a vague flame). Could alsmost set my watch to it if it wasn't already set to KDT (Kanluwen Defenence Time).

Ah, apropos...

Kanluwen wrote:So you've seen the sprues in person? Held the bare plastic in your hands and built it up?

He's basing his opinion of what he's seen Kan - that's all - and to him, the new vehicle does not fit the aesthetic of the Grey Knights. I'm certain that he's allowed to hold this view without being challenged (or without being told he cannot hold his view because he hasn't physically seen the sprues). I dislike it because it looks like the front of a larger vehicle with some wings and a vestigial tail slapped on, and because the turret is God-awful, and because MajorTom's version is simply amazing (so much so that I want it to be made that way). I'm fine with people liking it, but I think the overwhelmingly negative reaction to this isn't just me this time. I mean even Chuck hates it (and explained his reasons why), and I'll take his opinion on things here before I take most of anyone else's as he certainly has his head on straight.

Edited by Manchu.

H.B.M.C. wrote:He's basing his opinion of what he's seen Kan - that's all - and to him, the new vehicle does not fit the aesthetic of the Grey Knights. I'm certain that he's allowed to hold this view without being challenged (or without being told he cannot hold his view because he hasn't physically seen the sprues). I dislike it because it looks like the front of a larger vehicle with some wings and a vestigial tail slapped on, and because the turret is God-awful, and because MajorTom's version is simply amazing (so much so that I want it to be made that way). I'm fine with people liking it, but I think the overwhelmingly negative reaction to this isn't just me this time. I mean even Chuck hates it (and explained his reasons why), and I'll take his opinion on things here before I take most of anyone else's as he certainly has his head on straight.

My point was that his statement was that it doesn't fit the aesthetic of the Grey Knights(which I wholeheartedly agree with)...but that at the same time, the Stormraven is something that won't fit with the aesthetics of the Grey Knights, period.

It's a brand new vehicle design, in terms of where it fits in the fluff of 40k. Simply because of that:
It's going to conflict with the baroque artificer look of Grey Knights, no matter how many purity seals and inscriptions you slap on it.

just seeing this now but wow.. that model looks just plain dumb. it's a short stubby thunderhawk. The valkyrie conversions people have been doing blow this thing away...

Kanluwen wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:He's basing his opinion of what he's seen Kan - that's all - and to him, the new vehicle does not fit the aesthetic of the Grey Knights. I'm certain that he's allowed to hold this view without being challenged (or without being told he cannot hold his view because he hasn't physically seen the sprues). I dislike it because it looks like the front of a larger vehicle with some wings and a vestigial tail slapped on, and because the turret is God-awful, and because MajorTom's version is simply amazing (so much so that I want it to be made that way). I'm fine with people liking it, but I think the overwhelmingly negative reaction to this isn't just me this time. I mean even Chuck hates it (and explained his reasons why), and I'll take his opinion on things here before I take most of anyone else's as he certainly has his head on straight.

My point was that his statement was that it doesn't fit the aesthetic of the Grey Knights(which I wholeheartedly agree with)...but that at the same time, the Stormraven is something that won't fit with the aesthetics of the Grey Knights, period.

It's a brand new vehicle design, in terms of where it fits in the fluff of 40k. Simply because of that:
It's going to conflict with the baroque artificer look of Grey Knights, no matter how many purity seals and inscriptions you slap on it.

That was my point. It doesn't fit. Hence why it will not grace my army list unless I can get either a modified version from a 3rd party or if there happens to be a FW kit able to redeem its appearance (like the door kits for the rhino, for the GK LR Redeemer which screams awesome).

And if it does end up costing as much as a land raider (over here in Australia a good $100AUS or more) then I don't know if there will be many sales down at the FLGS, being one of the few GK players there (there also being a limited number of BA players).

Don't even remotely assume for a second it'd be close to a Land Raider. The size is nowhere near justifying that cost, unless there really is a ton of Grey Knight bits that we're not seeing yet.

Whoever's spitballed those numbers is full of crap, or was confusing when myself and other posted a reply to someone who asked how much that conversion posted in the thread a few pages ago was(Not sure who said "$62", but that was because a Valkyrie at $58 USD was involved. I'm guessing $75 unless they bitz ordered stuff though, simply because it's an ENTIRE Valkyrie kit with a Star Wars Snowspeeder toy).

But yeah, I definitely agree with you on that it doesn't work too well with Grey Knights...or at least the version of it that we've seen so far doesn't.

I think the storm raven should have transport rules similar to the monolith, as I can all too easily envision a huge number of marines pouring constantly from its absurdly compact assault ramp. it looks like a flying space marine clown car.

The model is another turd spewed out by a company that lives by the motto, "If you paint a turd three colors, a bunch of idiots will buy it!" That is what GW thinks of their customer base.

Kan 2.3a wrote:Don't even remotely assume for a second it'd be close to a Land Raider.

Well why not? They can pretty much charge what ever the want for it? I see it being Valk priced, which is the same bracket as the new Demolisher/Russ, etc. (at least it is in Oz), but if they wanted to 'Goldsword' the price and give us the Goldraven, they certainly could. Well within their rights.

Necros wrote:just seeing this now but wow.. that model looks just plain dumb. it's a short stubby thunderhawk. The valkyrie conversions people have been doing blow this thing away...

Speaking of all the conversions, the last time we had a really popular 'Scratch Built' model was, I think, before the Defiler came out. Everyone and his dog was making their own Defiler. There were some awful ones, some great ones, and some inspired ones (I think someone on Taco Bell had one based around a Landspeeder with HUGE tall legs and eyes sticking out of it). Then, when we finally saw the Defiler just before the EOT Campaign, the general responce was "Wow. That's pretty cool", and people either kept theirs or bought one (or in my case two, as I got two in the one box thanks to a packaging mistake! ).

This model had the same build up. Same amount of excitment over it, same amount of people making fantastic and awful scratch builds (best I've seen was a GW staffer at the new North Sydney store here in Oz) but... now this model has been revealed (sorta, even if by mistake) and... people hate it? I wasn't expecting that. Were we spoilt by the Valkyrie kit? I've not seen such a universal reaction to a new GW kit since the Pumbagore, but even that was pretty low key.

taebeck wrote:The model is another turd spewed out by a company that lives by the motto, "If you paint a turd three colors, a bunch of idiots will buy it!" That is what GW thinks of their customer base.

Well that certainly added a lot to the discussion.

As bad as the reaction is, I think by leaving off the top bits and slapping on a razorback turret, it could be quite successful. It all depends on the cost.

taebeck wrote:The model is another turd spewed out by a company that lives by the motto, "If you paint a turd three colors, a bunch of idiots will buy it!" That is what GW thinks of their customer base.

Yep, that'll do it all right. I'm sure GW will see the error of their ways when they read balanced and well reasoned comments like that.

I think the major issue with this kit is its height compared to its width - the rest is just detail, and easily modified. In that respect, it's like the Battlewagon kit, which looks so much better once you've added about a centimetre or so of width. The other issue is the tail, which seems like an afterthought. Overall, it's ended up out of step with the rest of the Marine design ethos. Another issue is the weapon mounts, which seem to combine some of the less satisfactory features of Marine tanks (like the angled panels on the lascannon, which don't provide any frontal protection) with new features that would look more at home on an Imperial bomber (the glass panels in the top turret).

It looks to me as though the designer couldn't pull of what was probably the design brief - keep it relatively compact (as GW seems to have realised that WH40k battlefields are increasingly gridlocked), cram all of the weapons in, and try to suggest a 'gunship' while keeping it in line with the tracked Marine vehicles and the Thunderhawk.

I have to admire the photoshopping skill of people like MajorTom11. I think his version makes more sense in some respects, but it still looks unfinished and doesn't have a well-defined shape. I think aka_mythos' version comes closer to what I would have ideally wanted. For all the criticism of its supposedly unworkable appearance, however, the new kit is clearly based on a helicopter design rather than an aircraft (so all this talk of airflow and aerodynamics is misplaced). There are some very unwieldy looking helicopters, which share this model's high, narrow front fuselage and spindly tail. The Mi-4 (a Soviet helicopter) is an example. I still don't think they got it right (i.e. turned a helicopter into a sci-fi transport) - in the way that, say, the Republic gunship from Star Wars does.

I also question the cries of 'looks worse than most of the scratchbuilds'. Few of the scratchbuilds on the net are any more convincing either as gunships or as Marine vehicles than this kit. MDizzle's, for instance, is a very nice model (and one of the best scratchbuilds I've seen), but looks too much like an aircraft to me. And for all the hate being directed at it now (and some of you are practically falling over each other in your eagerness to tell everyone how much you hate it), I bet it sells like hot cakes. It's also quite possible that when photos of it from other angles appear, there will be a degree of reconsideration. When it's released we'll start seeing some conversions along the lines of the photoshop modifications - after all, we're not stuck with the model as it is.

Necros wrote:just seeing this now but wow.. that model looks just plain dumb. it's a short stubby thunderhawk. The valkyrie conversions people have been doing blow this thing away...

I must agree...I am very disappointed with this, at first glance. Okay, it's not the best photo, but it's fairly underwhelming at this stage.

I was wondering if it would be possible to extend the base plate, and convert it to be more TH-like, but even that looks difficult...

Real shame...I was looking forward to this release.

Padre^.

Would a Razorback turret look better or worse though?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kan 2.3a wrote:Don't even remotely assume for a second it'd be close to a Land Raider.

Well why not? They can pretty much charge what ever the want for it? I see it being Valk priced, which is the same bracket as the new Demolisher/Russ, etc. (at least it is in Oz), but if they wanted to 'Goldsword' the price and give us the Goldraven, they certainly could. Well within their rights.

You're actually wrong about the price bracket there. Valkyrie is $62 USD, Demolisher/Russ is $49.50.

Rough guess from the size of the model in comparison to the Marines, and depending on how crammed up the sprues are...I'd guess $45-ish. Same price as a Predator/Whirlwind/Vindicator.

Knock the price down to $35 if Grey Knights actually have nothing on the sprues and their upgrades are a $10 "Grey Knight Upgrade Sprue" available from mail order only.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Would a Razorback turret look better or worse though?

Worse, in my view. It'd have an arbitrary armor plate over the twin-linked lascannons and some kind of sensor package over it too.

Regardless of how the model looks as a whole, it does look like a good kit for making conversions out of, it's got multi-meltas, wings, tail, even a turret which can be used for other things.

I'm starting to see some use for this model...for building better things, but I will hold out for the price.

Kanluwen wrote:You're actually wrong about the price bracket there. Valkyrie is $62 USD, Demolisher/Russ is $49.50.

Ah. It's gone up. Moved brackets to the Land Raider bracket. Hadn't realised that. Or could have been the initial price in Oz. I know that they change things, so it might've appeared AUD$83 when it came out, but then changed to AUD$96 (which is what the Land Raider was before the last price rise - now it's AUD$103).

Kanluwen wrote:Rough guess from the size of the model in comparison to the Marines, and depending on how crammed up the sprues are...I'd guess $45-ish. Same price as a Predator/Whirlwind/Vindicator.

Nah. You get more air than plastic in the Hellhound box and that's as much as a Russ. It's so tall as well. I can't see it being in a bracket below the Russ.

Kanluwen wrote:Worse, in my view. It'd have an arbitrary armor plate over the twin-linked lascannons and some kind of sensor package over it too.

You're right. The armour plate wouldn't make any sense.

Just wish they'd chosen an aesthetic that matched other Marine vehicles. The Stormraven turret looks like it belongs on a Guard plane, not a Marine vehicle. It's too... conventional.

Ehsteve wrote:Regardless of how the model looks as a whole, it does look like a good kit for making conversions out of, it's got multi-meltas, wings, tail, even a turret which can be used for other things.

I'm starting to see some use for this model...for building better things, but I will hold out for the price.

I wouldn't be surprised if a decent amount of sales came from this kind of reasoning. Wouldn't have to spend $62 on a Valkyrie for conversions (depending on the final price point, of course.)

I would love for it to turn out that this is either an early stage pre-production model that's been test built, or someone's custom made one, but I rather doubt that. Even so, it still might be worth the money depending on what you plan to do with it - as a bitz kit it would be fantastic.

MajorTom and Tailgunner,

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. I guess I forgot that people would chastise me for giving my off the cuff reaction to what I think is a hastily designed model with no originality or effort. You are absolutely right to say that I should be ashamed for wanting a company that charges ultra premium prices to put some imagination into a item that they have the chance to build from the ground up, with no former models to try to "match styles" with. What was I thinking? The fact that they, IMHO, just slapped something together and threw it out there with a likely $60+ price tag is what makes this hobby great. The best thing to do now is go out and plunk down our cash along with the sheeple and fan boys, remembering to lick GWs boot.

Deadshane1 wrote:New Blood Angel players are reading the Dark Eldar Codex right now...and looking at the new models...and are pissed.

I can only hope that this is another one of those "all youve seen/read is a lie" deals. After looking at the kit for a while, it does have a certain kitbashed look to it. where the front landing skidds seem to be. that part looks like somewhat like a dread arm, and so on. one could only hope because if that is the real deal, i think GW wont make half the money they expected making with that thing. On the other hand, maybe GW doesnt care. People are already willing to pay half the price on top again to convert other kits

Well, THAT added something to the conversation!

Dude, that was something far more interesting to consider than 'poopypants makes smelly poops in his pants lol!'

Just a little clarification on what you are unsatisfied with helps a lot, and makes it easier to actually you know, respond and discuss and junk.

DiscoVader wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if a decent amount of sales came from this kind of reasoning. Wouldn't have to spend $62 on a Valkyrie for conversions (depending on the final price point, of course.)

Most of the sales will come from the fact that the majority of people will buy a bad official model before they make a good unofficial model themselves. Not to call people sheep in general, but most people aren't like us (which is good, otherwise the world'd be a boring place and we'd have no one to laugh at), so they'll just buy it because it's the Stormraven model, not because a good model.

MajorTom11 wrote:

taebeck wrote:The model is another turd spewed out by a company that lives by the motto, "If you paint a turd three colors, a bunch of idiots will buy it!" That is what GW thinks of their customer base.

Well that certainly added a lot to the discussion.

taebeck wrote:MajorTom and Tailgunner,

Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. I guess I forgot that people would chastise me for giving my off the cuff reaction to what I think is a hastily designed model with no originality or effort. You are absolutely right to say that I should be ashamed for wanting a company that charges ultra premium prices to put some imagination into a item that they have the chance to build from the ground up, with no former models to try to "match styles" with. What was I thinking? The fact that they, IMHO, just slapped something together and threw it out there with a likely $60+ price tag is what makes this hobby great. The best thing to do now is go out and plunk down our cash along with the sheeple and fan boys, remembering to lick GWs boot.

Well, THAT added something to the conversation!

Dude, that was something far more interesting to consider than 'poopypants makes smelly poops in his pants lol!'

Just a little clarification on what you are unsatisfied with helps a lot, and makes it easier to actually you know, respond and discuss and junk.

"And, GW said that it shall be blocky, ugly, and lame. . .it shall be done! And, then they said it shall be $95.00 US currency, to insult the BA players ever more!"

Flachzange wrote:I can only hope that this is another one of those "all youve seen/read is a lie" deals.

Another 'everything you've been told is a lie' deal? When was the last one?

Seems like an okay model to me. Lots of conversion potential at the very least. I've built 2 of my own stormravens and I'll still buy this new one

However, I also buy everything that is a blood angel

After looking at the thing for the last twelve and a half hours, I'm starting to like it a bit more.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

DiscoVader wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if a decent amount of sales came from this kind of reasoning. Wouldn't have to spend $62 on a Valkyrie for conversions (depending on the final price point, of course.)

Most of the sales will come from the fact that the majority of people will buy a bad official model before they make a good unofficial model themselves. Not to call people sheep in general, but most people aren't like us (which is good, otherwise the world'd be a boring place and we'd have no one to laugh at), so they'll just buy it because it's the Stormraven model, not because a good model.

I'll buy it because it's easier to modify into a Storm Raven that I like than anything else that's readily available.