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.

Nah the Blood Angels got that one...

Jack

whitedragon wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:The design, from what I can see, is however ridiculous in my opinion.
As it stands:
It looks like they took the idea from the Russian "Stalin's Organ" from WW2.
Y'know, the trucks that they mounted racks of missiles on the roof of. That's...kinda silly for an armored vehicle.

So silly a design that the Russians actually built it, that they didn't use a truck at all in the 60's when they designed it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K12_Kub

I believe he means this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyusha_rocket_launcher

Kanluwen wrote:If you're using the Russians as an example of good manufacturing ideas, I point you towards their flying tank.

I was merely pointing out that they did in fact create a vehicle that looks very similiar to the epic Manticore, hardly a silly design but apparently very functional and still in use by many countries today.

As for your comment about the Russian Engineering/Manufacturing skill, I think you may need to be reminded that the Russians made it into space before we did, and have just as many engineering marvels as we have done. Also, the United States has created some extremely silly designs as well, so your point about the "flying tank" is meaningless.

Like I said:
Personal tastes. I don't like it. You do.
We're at an impasse. So let's just agree to disagree, and start with saying that it'll be far too expensive and missing pieces?

Redemption wrote:Yeah, they're definitely not going with the codex art look, but with the old epic look instead.

And that's a good thing - more realistic, and easier to build.

Hell, I might even buy one, just to further increase my IG Tank arsenal.

I'm thinking Deathstrike ...


http://www.missionmodels.com/product.php?productid=16655

Umm, while the deathstrike does look cool I think this threads about the Eldar nightspinner. I think it's going to be a massive anti infantry like the punisher cannon with 10-20 shots or something.

I for one will have at least one.... (wether the rules are good or not) My WraithLords told me, if I dont find a new fire magnet, they quit. lol

FlammingGaunt wrote:Umm, while the deathstrike does look cool I think this threads about the Eldar nightspinner. I think it's going to be a massive anti infantry like the punisher cannon with 10-20 shots or something.

In epic a nightspinner is indirect artillery. It launches a cloud of filaments which wafts down and cuts you to ribbons-think giant warp spider generator.

Hibby:

Yes, we are looking at the same picture. However there is a picture of the Forgeworld style Manticore in the Codex and GW has been matching models to the artwork in Codices since before the start of 5th edition. Take the Battlewagon, for example. It matches the model exactly. And GW has been matching Forgeworld designs in plastic, re: Pirhana, Valkyrie, Trygon, etc.

So it's nice that the front cover of White Dwarf looks different, but the evidence for what actually happens says otherwise. I'm just saying that giving GW's past behaviour, we are less likely to see Manticores that resemble the Epic models and more likely to see Manticores that match the Forgeworld models and Codex pictures.

Frazzled wrote:

FlammingGaunt wrote:Umm, while the deathstrike does look cool I think this threads about the Eldar nightspinner. I think it's going to be a massive anti infantry like the punisher cannon with 10-20 shots or something.

In epic a nightspinner is indirect artillery. It launches a cloud of filaments which wafts down and cuts you to ribbons-think giant warp spider generator.

Wouldn't decent Eldar artillery redefine the army? That could be really interesting, imagine a skimmer basilisk (whatever the gun stats end up becoming) that could really break army build patterns for Eldar, I think that is exciting.

But it will have to be pretty good at something to outstrip the popularity of the prism cannon, with the incredible range, blast and S10 it is capable of. It's such a great utility vehicle for a low price. Hopefully the Nightpinner will be somehow, at least subtly better, or cheaper perhaps? Maybe less of a skimmer Basilisk and more of a skimmer Whirlwind?

Nurglitch wrote:I'm just saying that giving GW's past behaviour, we are less likely to see Manticores that resemble the Epic models and more likely to see Manticores that match the Forgeworld models and Codex pictures.

I think this is generally true. 6mm Epic models don't really scale well at 30mm, plus some of the Epic stuff was just ridiculous.

Though a goodly chunk of the larger FW stuff is also kinda ridiculous...
___

Augustus wrote: Wouldn't decent Eldar artillery redefine the army?

That could be really interesting, imagine a skimmer basilisk (whatever the gun stats end up becoming) that could really break army build patterns for Eldar, I think that is exciting.

Hopefully the Nightpinner will be somehow, at least subtly better, or cheaper perhaps? Maybe less of a skimmer Basilisk and more of a skimmer Whirlwind?

In Epic, Eldar are have decent artillery units, so there's no reason for them not to have similar capability in 40k, if that's the direction 40k is going. And given how the Valkyrie changed IG, Artillery won't redefine Eldar nearly as much as that.

IMO, Eldar are more fundamentally flawed by not having Assault Ramps on their expensive Transports to mesh with their heavy (and expensive) HtH focus. Particularly with BA now getting Fast (non-Skimmer) Transports along with a near Thunderhawk Fast Skimmer Assault Mega-Transport... Make the Wave Serpent Power Field count as Assault Ramps, and suddenly, Eldar Aspects in a 100-pt Serpent become viable.

The Fire Prism is the Basilisk equivalent, with high S & long range MEQ-killing tank-busting capability.

The Night Spinner should be the Griffon / Whirlwind equivalent, but focus on true horde killing with multiple shots / blasts, rather than simply cutting the cost and S.

Nurglitch wrote:Hibby:

Yes, we are looking at the same picture. However there is a picture of the Forgeworld style Manticore in the Codex and GW has been matching models to the artwork in Codices since before the start of 5th edition. Take the Battlewagon, for example. It matches the model exactly. And GW has been matching Forgeworld designs in plastic, re: Pirhana, Valkyrie, Trygon, etc.

So it's nice that the front cover of White Dwarf looks different, but the evidence for what actually happens says otherwise. I'm just saying that giving GW's past behaviour, we are less likely to see Manticores that resemble the Epic models and more likely to see Manticores that match the Forgeworld models and Codex pictures.

Ah but the GW battlewagon doesn't resemble battlewagon that FW did! Frankly I don't care if it looks like the FW one or not as long as it looks good.

Ozymandias:

Good point, but consider the timelines involved. Something else that I hadn't considered was if the kit is made for the Hydra, Deathstrike, and Manticore, then the Hydra turret may allow the Manticore to be configured in the Forgeworld way, and the Deathstrike turret the Epic way.

Ozymandias wrote:...I don't care if it looks like the FW one or not as long as it looks good.

Yes I agree with that. Cool.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also there really are tanks that look like this: Heres an SA-6



an SA 4



It's not all russian either, Hawk Missile Battery:



This is all AAA, but they do look like epic manticores.

Nurglitch wrote:Ozymandias:

Good point, but consider the timelines involved. Something else that I hadn't considered was if the kit is made for the Hydra, Deathstrike, and Manticore, then the Hydra turret may allow the Manticore to be configured in the Forgeworld way, and the Deathstrike turret the Epic way.

So basically having different kits that allow for different versions of the same tank? That's kinda interesting and would please everyone really.

@Augustus: Sweet!

Nurglitch wrote:Hibby:

Yes, we are looking at the same picture. However there is a picture of the Forgeworld style Manticore in the Codex and GW has been matching models to the artwork in Codices since before the start of 5th edition. Take the Battlewagon, for example. It matches the model exactly. And GW has been matching Forgeworld designs in plastic, re: Pirhana, Valkyrie, Trygon, etc.

So it's nice that the front cover of White Dwarf looks different, but the evidence for what actually happens says otherwise. I'm just saying that giving GW's past behaviour, we are less likely to see Manticores that resemble the Epic models and more likely to see Manticores that match the Forgeworld models and Codex pictures.

That line of logic is sound, and, yes, I find it strange that they would make new art in the Guard Codex and then completely change the aesthetics for the actual model. However, given that it is a combined Manticore/Deathstrike kit (rather than Manticore/Hydra), and that we've heard reports that the Manticore is more 'old Epic' style and this new artwork fits with those rumours, I'm thinking they have done the ol' swicharoo on us and are giving us a vastly different looking vehicle.

And if they do come out with a plastic Hydra eventually - and one would hope they would, as given it's popularity it would be like printing money - that it would be compatible with the Manticore Missiles. That would make everyone happy and isn't a completely absurd idea, given how modular many of GW's kits are these days.

It would be interesting if GW made the deathstrike/manticore/hydra one kit, with a rack for deathstrike or manticore and a central turret for manticore or hydra. Would probably be too much sprue though.

Being an Eldar player with an armada of grav tanks I hope I'm wrong but the night spinner is the last thing I would have wanted for my army.

Does it look cool, you bet but we already have mono filament stuff in abundance and theres no way its going to be better than a Fire Prism so whats the point. If its what I think its going to be.... St6 ordnance/indirect/ap- I'm going to be laughing at the waste of plastic.

If its what it needs to be to be a viable option to the fire prism, St6 ordnance/indirect optional/rending/ignores cover saves then sign me up. I guess will see but its going to have to be very good to beat the old Fire prism in slot allocation. . . . . and there is no way it will be able to compete with IG arty, just no way, to do that we would need something akin to a 48" range large blast always scatters distort cannon and I just don't see that happening any time soon.
If you want to blast someone off the table IG is the answer.

For whatever reason, I'm assuming the new Eldar tank will be a HS choice. What if it isn't?

Heck, just imagine how different Eldar armies would have been if the War Walker was a FA choice rather than HS (IMO this is what should have happened).

Well GW can make 2 obvios moves if it wants to make some easy money with the next eldar book and keep them more inline with what imperials can bring.

1. Move War Walkers to Fast attack, This may not happen just because they have 2 heavy weapons but makes sense since sentinels are fast attack.

2. Move the Falcon to the designated Transport section like the Wave Serpent, kind of like marines have Rhinos, Razorbacks and Land raiders.

those moves free up spots for things like the night spinner (if it's good that is) and makes Eldar as good as Guard with their damn Vendettas and other ridiculous transports that have yet to come out (the rumored DE nasty with the 20 shot cannon...yuck)

IG88 wrote:Well GW can make 2 obvios moves if it wants to make some easy money with the next eldar book and keep them more inline with what imperials can bring.

1. Move War Walkers to Fast attack, This may not happen just because they have 2 heavy weapons but makes sense since sentinels are fast attack.

Agreed.

IG88 wrote:

2. Move the Falcon to the designated Transport section like the Wave Serpent, kind of like marines have Rhinos, Razorbacks and Land raiders.

This would be a welcome move, but I'd settle for a price reduction in the transports or, for the love, some sort of assault vehicle.

IG88 wrote:those moves free up spots for things like the night spinner (if it's good that is) and makes Eldar as good as Guard with their damn Vendettas and other ridiculous transports that have yet to come out (the rumored DE nasty with the 20 shot cannon...yuck)

The DE rumors were an April Fool's joke : /

they're gonna make the night spinner a str 6 twin linked shootable flamer template with a range of 36" and ap 3. That will ensure that everyone buys at least 12.

We all know GW's design philosphy by now!

step 1: Make an awesome looking new model
step 2: make the rules for it totally insanely good and game breaking so everyone will buy it
step 3: ???
step 4: profit!

IG88 wrote:Well GW can make 2 obvious moves if it wants to make some easy money with the next eldar book and keep them more inline with what imperials can bring.

1. Move War Walkers to Fast attack, This may not happen just because they have 2 heavy weapons but makes sense since sentinels are fast attack.

2. Move the Falcon to the designated Transport section like the Wave Serpent, kind of like marines have Rhinos, Razorbacks and Land raiders.

those moves free up spots for things like the night spinner (if it's good that is) and makes Eldar as good as Guard with their damn Vendettas and other ridiculous transports that have yet to come out (the rumored DE nasty with the 20 shot cannon...yuck)

Sorry, so you want a no-brainer choice with no actual other options for your slots?

Take the damn Vendettas then. I don't want the bloody things, I like having options and being able to alter up lists to change up the flow and theme of an army.
Valkyries should've been designated transports from the get-go for the Imperial Guard, for Hardened Veteran squads, Command Squads, and Stormtrooper Squads rather than being some bastardized version of the Vulture and Thunderbolt rolled into one.

And in case you missed it:
The Dark Eldar rumors that came out earlier this week were an April Fool's prank done by some Warseer members early. The people who came up with it thought it was hilarious--hardly anyone else did though.

I bet the Nightspinner wll be cheaper/weaker than a Prism, but you'll get to take them in squadrons so that GW will be able to sell you more of them.

puma713 wrote:

IG88 wrote:and other ridiculous transports that have yet to come out (the rumored DE nasty with the 20 shot cannon...yuck)

The DE rumors were an April Fool's joke : /

Actually it was a conspiracy by several Warseer veterans to spread false rumours in March, two days ahead of 1st April.
Just to call everyone having trust in the community's goodwill and Warseer moderation a fool and laugh at them. To add insult to injury, a moderator added that the 3 days thread starting 8pm 30th March all took place on 1st April
If it weren't several veterans and several days ahead of 1st April, I would have noticed and not started a thread.

I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that whilst a plastic Manticore will undercut FW sales, a plastic Nightspinner will do exactly the same...



I'm guessing the GW suits may have considered this.

Codex art is a really moot point, to use the Ork example, yes the Battlewagon resembles the art as do the Nobz but the new Stormboyz, kanz and deff dreds do not at all follow the art. The art is based on the models that were current at the time or in the case of the BW and nobz models that were in development. The Maticore art uses the Forgeworld model because it was the current design for 40k, GW can and apparently will change it if they so please.

With good reason too, if we keep going by codex art = what the model should look like then the Orks will never get a new buggy!

I don't think the real consideration is that forgeworld will be undercut. More that pressure will be taken off them. It's only a very small branch of the company that's always backlogged with orders (from what i understand anyway). Moving popular models into plastic is good for sales and helps Forgeworld shift other units (read: titans) quicker.

Thats just IMO, of course.

Curious to see how close the new rules for the 'spinner will be to the current apocalypse rules (Heavy 1 G72", S6, AP- 7" blast for 135 points)

I'd guess that the strength and AP will remain the same as this is the same as all eldar weapons of that type and the 72" range would also make sense given its role.

Possibly it might move to heavy 2 with 5" templates for a slight increase in points cost? Rending is also a possibilty but I can't see it getting ignore cover - that just doesn't 'mesh' (sorry ) with the inabilty of these weapon types to cut through armour.

Maybe something like a manticore with it dropping multiple templates.

I have seen a lot of eldar complaints about horde armies being an issue. Sure your aspect warriors are epic in combat but will lose to a 50 model ork mob.

Drop 3 S6 AP4 large blasts on any mob then let your warriors do the work.