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 know that dakka discusses counts as and proxies frequently, sometimes very heatedly. I play a traitor guard army, started with the lost and the damned list from the eye of terror campaign back in third edition. Within the last year, I started to work on the army again, rebuilding and adding to the army trying to get it back into fighting form. Though I am using the imperial guard codex, I want a force that looks and feels like the old lost and the damned, not spiky guardsmen. Almost all of the models have been converted or scratchbuilt, and what I want to know is : would you fight this army in a friendly game, tournament, league or campaign? If not, why? Which units draw the line, or are they all acceptable?

here are a few pictures of the army for comparisons (not the whole army though) This isn't a showcase, merely posting for reactions and thoughts

My traitor company command squad with World Eater advisor (straken)


A squad of the dred legion with Apc, think disciples of Xaphan from siege of vraks (veterans with chimera)


A squad of mutants and barbarians with enforcer (infantry squad with commisar)


A stalk tank (Leman Russ)


In addition, my Valkyries/vendettas will be hell talon bombers

As you can see, the Leman Russ is heavily converted from a defiler, the infantry squads are armed with a variety of weapons, and the chimera is entirely scratchbuilt. What would you say if the army you faced looked like this?

It all looks fine, but it's pretty hard to tell who the enforcers/commissars are. You might want to give them more distinct models.

They look awesome

Um...yeah, that's a conversion army all the way. Not a proxy, not a 'counts as.' Far superior to proxy/counts as.

I've had to play against a lot stranger looking armies than this, so yup.

It would be fine if you told me what represents what before the game

I'd allow it, heck I would love to play against an army that well converted.

Now would any one mind if I used my HB immolator as a sub for an HB razorback? Or even a sisters rhino (complete with all the sisters iconography) in a BA army?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Besides, I'll be old and grey before traitor guard sees another codex.

I think your army looks great. I'd definitley play against it in any setting.

Two things though.
1) I think your APC could use just a bit more greebling. It's a bit unfinished looking right now, but some exhausts, handles, a bit of gear (bedrolls, packs, lasguns, etc) and more prominent doors would add alot to it. Still I'd play it as is.
2) I would hope that you'd be playing the units as they are armed. i.e. the Barrel you used for the stalk tank, matches the weapon you're playing it as. This might require a few weapon swaps for troops, but nothing major.

Great job
I would play against them any day. In fact I would like to know how you make your Chimera, I would like to have a few of those myself. I would appreciate you sharing your technique.

The models are all fine, but I'm not a fan of the APC... it doesn't really look like any 40k vehicle I'm familiar with.

Tighten up the vehicle weapons a bit and I think you're fine.

The only thing I'm seeing that is a bit iffy is your stalk tank. It looks very distinctively like a walker, and of course a Leman Russ is not a walker. Obviously you would play it like a regular Russ and inform your opponent of this, but this would be akin to having Space Marines armed with Jump Packs and using them as regular foot troops. In both cases the model is very clearly modelled to be something it is not, in this case as a walker.

That said, it is a very cool conversion!

Rule of cool- the better the model conversion is and the cooler it looks, the less flak your opponent can give you.

That said, I love these and would relish an opportunity to play against them with my orks! Just make sure that you specify who is who before the dice hit the table. Maybe give the commissars rubble to stand on or really big hats to differentiate them more.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:Rule of cool- the better the model conversion is and the cooler it looks, the less flak your opponent can give you.

Rule of cool only goes so far. If it isn't clear what is what, RoC falls apart and starts falling into 'Rule of PITA'.

Somke but not all I said.

Draigo as a Vanilla Chapter Master with Power Sword and SS is fine.

A converted, trakked Land Speeder looks fine to me as a Looted Buggie, or a Deff Copta with the fly-y bitz.

A Land Raider with the Black Reach Big Shoots boys as sponsons, and a RailGun as a turret cool.

WHFB Vampire counts, not even converted as they should be, as DE-no.

HE as Eldar, with a Big Dragon for the Avatra is acceptable count as, if they are just testing him out.

Dwarves with Lasguns are a nice Guard army ( SQUATS!!!)

Beastmen as Nids?

pretre wrote:

cgmckenzie wrote:Rule of cool- the better the model conversion is and the cooler it looks, the less flak your opponent can give you.

Rule of cool only goes so far. If it isn't clear what is what, RoC falls apart and starts falling into 'Rule of PITA'.

I agree that it only goes so far, but I think the stalk tank meets the rule in that not only does it look pretty cool, it's matches the fluff. The Blood Pact Traitor Guard use Stalk Tanks and they appear quite prominently (IIRC) in some Guant's Ghosts novels. The Defilo-stalk-tank seems like a good way to shoehorn an iconic Blood Pact unit into the existing IG codex.

Thanks for all the replies guys

It all looks fine, but it's pretty hard to tell who the enforcers/commissars are. You might want to give them more distinct models.

the enforcers have the gold skull helmets, but you're right, ill see about making them taller bases

Two things though.
1) I think your APC could use just a bit more greebling. It's a bit unfinished looking right now, but some exhausts, handles, a bit of gear (bedrolls, packs, lasguns, etc) and more prominent doors would add alot to it. Still I'd play it as is.
2) I would hope that you'd be playing the units as they are armed. i.e. the Barrel you used for the stalk tank, matches the weapon you're playing it as. This might require a few weapon swaps for troops, but nothing major.

The apc is just a test model (just made from cardstock), the next few would be be built properly, cleaner cuts, rivets, etc. and will have chaos spikes from the rhino kit
All of the heavy and special weapons are wysiwyg, but on the basic guys there are a variety of weapons. The old lost and the damned had "firearms" rather than a standard kit. I dont have the lasguns to replace the 80-90 grunts. Do you think it would be an issue for the basic grunts with standard kit to have a mix of weapons, or would it cause issues.

Um...yeah, that's a conversion army all the way. Not a proxy, not a 'counts as.' Far superior to proxy/counts as.

not sure if you are being sarcastic. If not, then thank you, if you are, could you elaborate please?

In fact I would like to know how you make your Chimera, I would like to have a few of those myself. I would appreciate you sharing your technique.

I'm not a fan of the APC... it doesn't really look like any 40k vehicle I'm familiar with.

The Apc profile is actually the rear of a leman russ for the front, and a rounded rear rather than the awkward angle.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/297819-Side%20Weathering.html
(not my russ, but it shows the profile)

add the support along the top of the tred, and the armored covers for the lower track wheels. add a central box in the shape that you like. When i get to a point where I can build by "real" Apcs, ill put up a tutorial.

edited for spelling and fixing the pic link

Eddtheman wrote:The Apc profile is actually the rear of a leman russ for the front, and a rounded rear rather than the awkward angle.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/297819-Side%20Weathering.html
(not my russ, but it shows the profile)

add the support along the top of the tred, and the armored covers for the lower track wheels. add a central box in the shape that you like. When i get to a point where I can build by "real" Apcs, ill put up a tutorial.

edited for spelling and fixing the pic link

thanks for the info

timetowaste85 wrote:Um...yeah, that's a conversion army all the way.

Plenty of conversions in there, but I definitely wouldn't say all the way. Head/weapon swaps on Cadians? Definitely conversion and what I would expect from a "conversion army." Slapping a gun on a Chaos Marauder? Also a conversion, but resulting in a less identifiable base model - we're entering counts-as territory, here. Using a Beastman with a gun as an IG model? Counts-as, with a touch of conversion to give it a detail that grounds it in the 41st millenium. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it goes well beyond flavoring the stock models - I'd wager that most folks won't know what every unit/model in that army represents without prior explanation.

Awesome idea i have no problem with someone use models like that.

Id play it. As long as your special wepons are modeled. like you said, i could care less what your guardsmen are armedwith, seeing as how standard gear doesnt have to be modeled.
Its pretty awesome.

Agreed. It's the specials and heavys and sgt's that should be right on. For the regular guardsmen, it's fair to assume they all have lasguns.

Yeah i mean heavy and special weapons, plus sgts, but only typed special. I really enjoy the army, id like to convert one myself someday.