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.

SilverMK2 wrote:What about its design is stupid? I think it is a pretty cool design.

Here's my beef: it looks like someone at FW just took a 3-upped flamer and said, hey, let's put this on a Valdor chassis. Aside from the weapon needing to be recognizable as a flamer, what purpose does having the gun look like that have? Do the pilot lights for it need to be as big as a normal SM flamer? That seems pretty ridiculous to me. I mean, not to delve too deeply into the "realism" aspect, but real life flame tanks just have the flames come out the end of a barrel - they look pretty much like any other tank. This just looks like one of the FW designer was given the task of coming up with a medium heavy flame tank and he sat around checking FB and reading wikipedia entries until a week before the project was due. Then in the last week, he said, "AH HA! I'll take a 3-up flamer and mount it on a Valdor. Done!"

It is, I think, supposed to represent a re-purposed Titan chassis weapon, isn't it?

Alpharius wrote:It is, I think, supposed to represent a re-purposed Titan chassis weapon, isn't it?

Yea this is plausible. Have a ton of super flamers but no titans? Strap them on a tank!

What I'd like to know now is what this lumbering piece of ancient gak is going to do against the Eldar. Other than helping the Imperium lose hard again that is.

A flamer on a Tank isn't the problem. A flamer in a fixed position is.
Plus, looks like the fuel may last for 1 single blast.

So, no Valdor of any sort for me.

thats really cool

I wonder what makes it more powerful than a regular flamer? The fuel? I wouldve thought flame by another other source is still flame in the end.

And while it looks cool...it is totally impractical...the older chimera drawn fuel tanker would look more appropriate for this than that tiny tanker.

1hadhq wrote:A flamer on a Tank isn't the problem. A flamer in a fixed position is.
Plus, looks like the fuel may last for 1 single blast.

It's the Deathstrike of flame tanks.

Is this going to be in an IA book, or have online rules?

kendoka wrote:

spireland wrote:I like how the weapon isn't mounted on a turret. That is inspired design.

As the (oldish) Swedish Tank "Stridsvagn S":

Ah, the strv 103. Said to be the most effective tank ever built... so long as its used in Sweden or in terrain matching Sweden.

I think we'll get rules in IA11, and no test rules before then. It really doesn't matter though guys - the Malcador is a piece of junk, and every tank based on its profile is a piece of junk as well. This will not be a good tank, it will be like all the other FW superheavies - cool to look at, not worth a damn in-game. I mean really... just look at the Macharius. All those points for an extra Battlecannon? Two Russes will be better than it.

BrookM wrote:What I'd like to know now is what this lumbering piece of ancient gak is going to do against the Eldar. Other than helping the Imperium lose hard again that is.

Maybe the Guard know they're in an Imperial Armour book, and thus have resigned themselves to the fact that it is simply impossible for the Imperium to ever win in those books. Therefore, operating under this assumption, and the fact that they're in a bitter and cold wasteland, they decided to make a MASSIVE flame tank to make their final moments a bit warmer.

endtransmission - you need 2, trust me

H.B.M.C. wrote:I think we'll get rules in IA11, and no test rules before then. It really doesn't matter though guys - the Malcador is a piece of junk, and every tank based on its profile is a piece of junk as well. This will not be a good tank, it will be like all the other FW superheavies - cool to look at, not worth a damn in-game. I mean really... just look at the Macharius. All those points for an extra Battlecannon? Two Russes will be better than it.

BrookM wrote:What I'd like to know now is what this lumbering piece of ancient gak is going to do against the Eldar. Other than helping the Imperium lose hard again that is.

Maybe the Guard know they're in an Imperial Armour book, and thus have resigned themselves to the fact that it is simply impossible for the Imperium to ever win in those books. Therefore, operating under this assumption, and the fact that they're in a bitter and cold wasteland, they decided to make a MASSIVE flame tank to make their final moments a bit warmer.

Why would we get this in IA11?

Krieg aren't involved with IA11, and the Valdor/Malcador are Krieg "signature" vehicles.

IA11 is all about Elysia/Cadians and Space Wolves.

But you know, there was an inkling of another Imperial Armour: Apocalypse volume where this would fit right in.

My Sisters army called... hey will take two

Sounds about right, actually!

Although, even more: I wonder if there's going to be an update to the "Tyrant's Legion" list where this crops up?

Kanluwen wrote:Why would we get this in IA11?

Ice World + Huge Flame Tank = Logical Correlation.

Kanluwen wrote:Krieg aren't involved with IA11, and the Valdor/Malcador are Krieg "signature" vehicles.

From what I recall, the Malcador was present in IA5, 6 and 7 because Vraks was a world where tons and tons of weapons of war were stored, and part of that store was legions of ancient proto-Leman Russes, also known as the Malcador. They're not more signature to the Kriegers than the Chimera. The Kriegers use tanks sparringly. The Malcador isn't 'their' tank. it is 'a' tank that they have used, but not 'signature'.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Why would we get this in IA11?

Ice World + Huge Flame Tank = Logical Correlation.

Yes, what with it falling through the ice and all

Kanluwen wrote:Krieg aren't involved with IA11, and the Valdor/Malcador are Krieg "signature" vehicles.

From what I recall, the Malcador was present in IA5, 6 and 7 because Vraks was a world where tons and tons of weapons of war were stored, and part of that store was legions of ancient proto-Leman Russes, also known as the Malcador. They're not more signature to the Kriegers than the Chimera. The Kriegers use tanks sparringly. The Malcador isn't 'their' tank. it is 'a' tank that they have used, but not 'signature'.

It was present, and originally deployed by the traitors. As the War on Vraks progressed, Krieg captured several depots where they were mothballed in storage and they started deploying them en masse, as "meat shields" for the more advanced Leman Russ.

1hadhq wrote:A flamer on a Tank isn't the problem. A flamer in a fixed position is.

Hey if it worked in WW2 it can work in the wacky world of 40k!

Needs a bigger Tank of fuel, thats my only niggle

Death By Monkeys wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:What about its design is stupid? I think it is a pretty cool design.

Here's my beef: it looks like someone at FW just took a 3-upped flamer and said, hey, let's put this on a Valdor chassis. Aside from the weapon needing to be recognizable as a flamer, what purpose does having the gun look like that have? Do the pilot lights for it need to be as big as a normal SM flamer? That seems pretty ridiculous to me. I mean, not to delve too deeply into the "realism" aspect, but real life flame tanks just have the flames come out the end of a barrel - they look pretty much like any other tank. This just looks like one of the FW designer was given the task of coming up with a medium heavy flame tank and he sat around checking FB and reading wikipedia entries until a week before the project was due. Then in the last week, he said, "AH HA! I'll take a 3-up flamer and mount it on a Valdor. Done!"

I have the same complaint. It looks a bit silly. Why waste space for a longer barrel? Extra rifling in the barrel won't a difference. The fuel looks wee in comparison.

"One shot... aaaaand we're done here. Have a great battle guys, we'll be back tomorrow to shoot again!"

Forge world usually seems much better at avoiding strapping big guns on a chassis purely because they can, but this time I think it's a fail.

Shouted "WOW" when I saw that gun. I thought it was just another leman russ to begin with. That was nice.

It looks suitably rediculous, as a flame based titan sized weapon on a normal tank chassis should.

Looks interesting.. I hope this tank has the warhound rules for the inferno gun, IE template + 18". Generally thats how they do titans, but its not a titan.. so we'll see

If thats the case it'll be pretty sweet!.. Otherwise it'll be 120$ tank that never fires its gun..ever

hm looks like i was right about it being the warhound's flame weapon

Please tell me I'm not alone in my immediate thought of Skorcha!"

I mean, come on. It looks pretty ork inspired you have to admit.

I think it's both ridiculous and awful in equal measure. The volume in it's barrels is almost the same as the volume in its storage tank, there are fluid cables exposed on the front of the tank that are also visible from the side, the stupid little fuel holder could never hold enough to meaningfully provide for a weapon that needlessly large and for some reason they decided to make the non functioning oversized tip of the gun scaled to match the non functioning oversized barrel which makes it looks like a 40x scale terminator flamer on one of the worst tank designs forge world has.

ShumaGorath wrote:I think it's both ridiculous and awful in equal measure. The volume in it's barrels is almost the same as the volume in its storage tank, there are fluid cables exposed on the front of the tank that are also visible from the side, the stupid little fuel holder could never hold enough to meaningfully provide for a weapon that needlessly large and for some reason they decided to make the non functioning oversized tip of the gun scaled to match the non functioning oversized barrel which makes it looks like a 40x scale terminator flamer on one of the worst tank designs forge world has.

how is it the worst? personally i like the marcharius and malacor

TyraelVladinhurst wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:I think it's both ridiculous and awful in equal measure. The volume in it's barrels is almost the same as the volume in its storage tank, there are fluid cables exposed on the front of the tank that are also visible from the side, the stupid little fuel holder could never hold enough to meaningfully provide for a weapon that needlessly large and for some reason they decided to make the non functioning oversized tip of the gun scaled to match the non functioning oversized barrel which makes it looks like a 40x scale terminator flamer on one of the worst tank designs forge world has.

how is it the worst? personally i like the marcharius and malacor

From a technical standpoint it does absolutely everything wrong that a tank should do. It's lifted directly from WW1 english tanks, but even those were better designed and they were terrible. The tracks alone make me want to cringe.

to each their own i guess