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 think itis safe to say they have not posted real photos because of this tidbit in the GW legal section

Unreleased Material

While we know that it is always cool to see new material before it arrives on the shelves, we would ask you not to publish, or link to other sites that publish, any material that has not been officially reported or released by Games Workshop. This does not apply to small pieces of conjecture written in your "rumors" section (unless of course said "rumors" are akin to publishing unreleased material).

If they post actual pictures of unreleased models, it gives GW grounds to have their site shut down for IP infringement. So trash them all you like, but they are just playing it safe.


You can find the part I quoted at this link, about half way down the page.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=3&aId=3900002&multiPageMode=true&start=4

Exactly.

BoW are in the business to make money, not get shut down by pissed of gaming manufacturers. That's why they release sketches of unreleased stuff.

Panic wrote:yeah,
The point is no one wants these gak sketches.
If they dont have the photo they have nothing I want to see.

at the moment;
BOW=BOLs=BullGak

Panic...

I agree with this sentiment

So you would prefer nothing rather than a sketch?

That's odd.

And I like the sketches and rumours, actually. Assuming they're true, they give us a decent idea how they'll look, and what models are going to be released a month in advance, which is sooner and more precise than the other rumour sources currently. The rules preview is just a bonus to me.

It certainly beats those rumours that describe a new model in text... ('it was like totally awesome with jets and wings and assault cannons and stuff!')

Redemption wrote:[sketches] certainly beats those rumours that describe a new model in text... ('it was like totally awesome with jets and wings and assault cannons and stuff!')

I would have to agree (assuming they turn out to be legit).

Slinky wrote:So you would prefer nothing rather than a sketch?

That's odd.

No, I would rather they don't report things in a manner that makes it very clear that they are just in it for website hits and ad revenue.

They spent so much time building it up, saying that there would be a "look" at the upcoming releases, etc etc. They crashed their own website doing this--and for what? To show sketches?

It is ridiculous that rumor sites are not interested in actually reporting rumors. They're interested in generating revenue and being able to claim "FIRST!" on reporting things.

I actually quite like the SM sketch reminds me of a the ships from G-Police on the PS1.

Plan on doing a planet invasion force, 1 Thunder Hawk 2x Storm Hawks 4x Storm Talons.

Ahhh fighta bombas as well why does it have to be my Wifes birthday next month :(

Kanluwen wrote:

Slinky wrote:So you would prefer nothing rather than a sketch?

That's odd.

No, I would rather they don't report things in a manner that makes it very clear that they are just in it for website hits and ad revenue.

They spent so much time building it up, saying that there would be a "look" at the upcoming releases, etc etc. They crashed their own website doing this--and for what? To show sketches?

It is ridiculous that rumor sites are not interested in actually reporting rumors. They're interested in generating revenue and being able to claim "FIRST!" on reporting things.

Meh, it's their business, they can run it as they please, either it will succeed or die.

I don't like BoW either (but not for this), but I'd rather have sketches than nothing.
People get desperate for information whilst GW clamp everything down and IMHO sketches instead of photos are just a part of this.

Different strokes for different folks, ultimately...

Well I would prefer photos instead of sketches, but I am assuming that through some agreement/leak or whatever, they couldn't use the photos. As for the track record, I believe that whoever makes these sketches are making them while seeing actual photos of the real models. The necron stalker comparison a few pages back obviously shows this. Some of you might not think so, but it would have to be a major coincidence to get the positioning of the legs, cables, orbs, etc. spot on from just looking at the codex art. I don't know why some of you don't see it, but it is obvious that there are a lot of elements on the sketch that would have been near impossible to get spot on let alone 5 or 6 elements together.

I think you guys are looking at this incorrectly.
They aren't sketches, they are TRACINGS.
So, aside from the paint job and the details, this is exactly what the modle will look like.
Can't you infer?

Slinky wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Slinky wrote:So you would prefer nothing rather than a sketch?

That's odd.

No, I would rather they don't report things in a manner that makes it very clear that they are just in it for website hits and ad revenue.

They spent so much time building it up, saying that there would be a "look" at the upcoming releases, etc etc. They crashed their own website doing this--and for what? To show sketches?

It is ridiculous that rumor sites are not interested in actually reporting rumors. They're interested in generating revenue and being able to claim "FIRST!" on reporting things.

Meh, it's their business, they can run it as they please, either it will succeed or die.

And you phrased it perfectly.

It's not "rumormongering". It's a business.

matphat wrote:I think you guys are looking at this incorrectly.
They aren't sketches, they are TRACINGS.
So, aside from the paint job and the details, this is exactly what the modle will look like.
Can't you infer?

Not quite. The proportions tend to be kind of spotty from some of the imagery, but they aren't too far off. Regardless, I'm happy to see these rough drawings even if it isn't the real deal yet.

I'm not sure BoW can be classified as a business, they're not in it for the money. They all have regular jobs and use sponsorships, ad revenue and their own money to cover the costs of running the site and hosting the events. Heck, it's what most wargaming sites do, including this one.

Redemption wrote:I'm not sure BoW can be classified as a business, they're not in it for the money. They all have regular jobs and use sponsorships, ad revenue and their own money to cover the costs of running the site and hosting the events. Heck, it's what most wargaming sites do, including this one.

I thought they owned a game store.

Also, some of their content is pay per view.

They don't own a game store, but they do have a sponsorship from Wayland Games. And yes, they have payed content, but again, so do a lot of wargaming sites.

yeah,
Probabily tracing a photo of packaging the angle of the photo throwing off the proportions...

but this is the ultra weak sauce, passing of a traced codex image as news of an upcoming product!


they may as well have poop on a stick...

Panic...

And here is the Chaos mech-dragon flyer thingie. This is the Tzeench version.

streamdragon wrote:Leaked painted shot of the Necron flier!

I love the ork flyer. The marine one is horrible just like the chibihawk. The necrons look like something from Stargate. Gonna wait till I see it before judging.

Just a thought about the marine flyer; what are the chances that it is destined only for use with the Ravenwing? This type of attack vehicle seems geared up solely for this army.

timd wrote:
And here is the Chaos mech-dragon flyer thingie. This is the Tzeench version.

That thing was so hard to transform. Mine kept breaking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Panic wrote:yeah,
Probabily tracing a photo of packaging the angle of the photo throwing off the proportions...

but this is the ultra weak sauce, passing of a traced codex image as news of an upcoming product!


they may as well have poop on a stick...

Panic...

Agreed, I wasn't a fan of how BoW handles its public face already, but this is just amateur hour.

Panic wrote:yeah,
Probabily tracing a photo of packaging the angle of the photo throwing off the proportions...

but this is the ultra weak sauce, passing of a traced codex image as news of an upcoming product!
http://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2012/5/4/362337_sm-BOW%20crap%20rumours.jpg

they may as well have poop on a stick...

Panic...

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "tracing". If it was traced, you should be able to place one over the other so that the major lines are in the same place on each.

Obviously the Scythe was the least newsworthy of the 3 kits, as we already have codex art for that one. That overlay matches incredibly poorly though, so I have a hard time imagining it's just a traced picture.

And there are still a few notable differences between the sketch and the codex art:



We will probably see leaked WD pictures in about 3-4 weeks, so time will tell soon enough.

Slipstream wrote:Just a thought about the marine flyer; what are the chances that it is destined only for use with the Ravenwing? This type of attack vehicle seems geared up solely for this army.

Maybe that's how it was originally imagined but all the rumors have been consistent about it being for all Space Marines.

People keep giving it a hard time because it doesn't look like it could fly, but it has the same heel-less shoe shape as the land sppeder and Thunderhawk and even though it's proportions are scrunched its still proportional, in the least more so than the Stormraven. From the sketch it certainly has 4 engines and land speeder anti-grav suspensor units which seem enough to justify its capability to fly. It looks like only about predator sized which doesn't make it in believably armed either.

Since the beginning of 40k people complained that GWs models werent realistic and looked like toys... So why do people suddenly expect any different? Some have suggested this should have looked like the FW Landspeeder Tempest... A model FW considered one of its biggest failures because for the first year it only sold 100 or so.

I like it a lot and until I hear a real explanation for why it doesn't work design wise I will continue thinking those who dislike it are unjustified. I really don't think it matters if it resembles vaguely an eastern European model or a 30 year old toy, those are reasons to criticize and argue originality... Something 40k has never really been known for... Not to dislike its aesthetics which stand as a separate facet of the model.

AlexHolker wrote:

Panic wrote:yeah,
Probabily tracing a photo of packaging the angle of the photo throwing off the proportions...

but this is the ultra weak sauce, passing of a traced codex image as news of an upcoming product!
http://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2012/5/4/362337_sm-BOW%20crap%20rumours.jpg

they may as well have poop on a stick...

Panic...

I don't think you quite understand the concept of "tracing". If it was traced, you should be able to place one over the other so that the major lines are in the same place on each.

They may have distorted the final image including the horizontal flip.
I was just showing how close it was.

Panic...

The tracing is still the same 'camera angle' as the Codex image. Essentially, yes, it is a unique piece of art that isn't the Codex illustration.

Regardless, it's just a rehash of the Codex art, and that's just shameful.

NuclearMessiah wrote:I think itis safe to say they have not posted real photos because of this tidbit in the GW legal section

Unreleased Material

While we know that it is always cool to see new material before it arrives on the shelves, we would ask you not to publish, or link to other sites that publish, any material that has not been officially reported or released by Games Workshop. This does not apply to small pieces of conjecture written in your "rumors" section (unless of course said "rumors" are akin to publishing unreleased material).

If they post actual pictures of unreleased models, it gives GW grounds to have their site shut down for IP infringement. So trash them all you like, but they are just playing it safe.


You can find the part I quoted at this link, about half way down the page.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=3&aId=3900002&multiPageMode=true&start=4

But, BoW released some rules for these new fliers, wouldn't they catch flak for that?

aka_mythos wrote:People keep giving it a hard time because it doesn't look like it could fly, but it has the same heel-less shoe shape as the land sppeder and Thunderhawk and even though it's proportions are scrunched its still proportional, in the least more so than the Stormraven. **snip*** Not to dislike its aesthetics which stand as a separate facet of the model.

I think the second part is the big reason most people don't like the sketchtalon. For some reason, people need to justify their dislike with some real world mechanical/aerodynamic logic which tends to fall flat. Personally, I suspect that warfare 38,000 years in the future will more likely involve robots shooting megaton nuclear lasers from their magneto-nipples rather than people fighting with WW1 sponson tanks and chainsaws so the idea of equating 40k design to real world function tends to fall flat. The problem, IMO, is not that the new designs aren't real-world functional but rather that they simply don't look good in addition. People are fine with a tank that looks cool but would have a real life flaw making it nonfunctional as a design. The Stormraven hopefully would have taught GW that accidental chib-hawk designs are not fondly recieved (as opposed to purposeful chibihawks); FW seems to have taken a lesson from the success of the Chapterhouse kit... it's strange that GW wouldn't. If the resultant sketchtalon actually looks like that, I suspect most of the same people that think the storm raven looks better shorter or longer (but not as is) will think the same thing about it.

I also find it obvious, that BOW just copied or even traced a photo of the box cover art. But we will see in a few weeks.

On the bright side, we will finally get official GW rules for this:


Another tidbit:

straightsilver wrote:From what I can gather the sketch of the Storm Talon is a bit deceptive, possibly because it's copied from a photo taken at a poor angle, or maybe because the perspective is a bit off.

Essentially the tail and engines are pretty much the same as the Storm Raven (the engines on the talon are gimble mounted in a new hull piece, rather than under the wing as they are on the Raven).

The cockpit is new, but similar to the Storm raven.

Essentially imagine removing the wings and transport capacity from a Storm Raven, and then glueing the tail and engines back on.

So it is a Storm Raven variant, so very similar in aesthetic, certainly bigger than a Land Speeder, but not as big as a Storm Raven, but certainly not as "curvy" as the sketch would suggest, but still a lot sleeker than the Storm Raven.

It also does sort of have wings which are attached to the engine pods, but they are small and stubby, although not as small and stubby as the pic suggests.

MooseOnTheLoose wrote:If you listened too the broadcast they made it clear it was neither a variant, and only roughly half as long as the Storm Raven, so your perspective is considerably off. The question becomes is it a one or two seater cockpit and really its size is far closer to a land speeder then a storm raven.