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.
2018/03/20 13:26:06
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
TwilightSparkles wrote: Not sure how much credence can be given to a story based on a sprue having a letter on it, given that GW instructions reference part by number and not spure then number. It could just be a way to distinguish the sprue from other sprues to try avoid mispacks.
Except the existing Knight Warden kit which references sprue A then number for the extra sprue added with the warden kit.
Which is because it was added afterwards. They numbered the parts the same an added the "A" to it so that it didn't end up being labeled like part 200+.
TwilightSparkles wrote: Not sure how much credence can be given to a story based on a sprue having a letter on it, given that GW instructions reference part by number and not spure then number. It could just be a way to distinguish the sprue from other sprues to try avoid mispacks.
As referenced in the article, there are numbered parts on the instruction sheet that do not appear on the sprues in the box. Similar situation happened when the Imperial Knight was released with a very clear attachment point for what was eventually released as the Carapace weapons. There will be a solo kit for the Armiger that will have at least 1/2 more sprue... and weapons are a likely thing to include.
The "very clear attachment point" was added by the sculptor originally. Purportedly the sculptor did the extra weapons and bits as extraneous stuff compared to the original project brief. We got the Errant/Paladin because the management at that point didn't want to invest too heavily into production.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/20 13:28:01
2018/03/20 13:28:48
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Which is because it was added afterwards. They numbered the parts the same an added the "A" to it so that it didn't end up being labeled like part 200+.
The "very clear attachment point" was added by the sculptor originally. Purportedly the sculptor did the extra weapons and bits as extraneous stuff compared to the original project brief. We got the Errant/Paladin because the management at that point didn't want to invest too heavily into production.
Sauce?
I'm not doubting you specifically, but your statement here has the sort of authority behind it that would usually either have a concrete source or be totally made up internet bs. I'd presume you to be more likely to be the former.
Didnt that knight thread have a rumour about a new heavier Knight? Could be its engine.
warboss wrote: Is there a permanent stickied thread for Chaos players to complain every time someone/anyone gets models or rules besides them? If not, there should be.
2018/03/21 12:16:34
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Which is because it was added afterwards. They numbered the parts the same an added the "A" to it so that it didn't end up being labeled like part 200+.
The "very clear attachment point" was added by the sculptor originally. Purportedly the sculptor did the extra weapons and bits as extraneous stuff compared to the original project brief. We got the Errant/Paladin because the management at that point didn't want to invest too heavily into production.
Sauce?
I'm not doubting you specifically, but your statement here has the sort of authority behind it that would usually either have a concrete source or be totally made up internet bs. I'd presume you to be more likely to be the former.
Adding room for expansion is what some folks do. I was surprised by how the eldar wave grav falcon/ serpent engines were built. They had this odd large unnecessary tab in them. Years later that was the attachment tab for the engine upgrades in the new kits. Built by design day one? I think so.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crazyterran wrote: Didnt that knight thread have a rumour about a new heavier Knight? Could be its engine.
One of the rumors had several new knight names floated out, or at least new kits. It would make sense if they were armiger variants. But could be another knight altogether.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/21 12:19:59
Voxed from Salamander 84-24020
2018/03/21 15:27:33
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Adding room for expansion is what some folks do. I was surprised by how the eldar wave grav falcon/ serpent engines were built. They had this odd large unnecessary tab in them. Years later that was the attachment tab for the engine upgrades in the new kits. Built by design day one? I think so.
I wouldn't expect that. There was a really long time difference between the two.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/21 15:31:37
2018/03/21 18:30:23
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Am I the only person that is hoping that the differences between Forgebane and the Necron codex might mean that the Knight Armiger has some differences in the codex. At least in terms of points.
Which is because it was added afterwards. They numbered the parts the same an added the "A" to it so that it didn't end up being labeled like part 200+.
The "very clear attachment point" was added by the sculptor originally. Purportedly the sculptor did the extra weapons and bits as extraneous stuff compared to the original project brief. We got the Errant/Paladin because the management at that point didn't want to invest too heavily into production.
Sauce?
I'm not doubting you specifically, but your statement here has the sort of authority behind it that would usually either have a concrete source or be totally made up internet bs. I'd presume you to be more likely to be the former.
Hermanista started posting about these in January, and has been mostly correct (Forgefire might turn out to be another book or he remembered the name wrong) based on what GW revealed so far
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/03/21 19:12:17
2018/03/21 19:21:06
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
casvalremdeikun wrote: Am I the only person that is hoping that the differences between Forgebane and the Necron codex might mean that the Knight Armiger has some differences in the codex. At least in terms of points.
Seeing that the IK codex is probably at least a month out, and the Necron codex rules are different from those in Forgebane, I'd be more surprised to find out that the points were exactly the same.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
2018/03/22 08:37:24
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
BOLS (yes I know) are reporting that @ Adepticon the additional Armiger variants were confirmed. Anybody have a more reliable source confirming the extra variants?
2018/03/22 13:03:08
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2018/03/22 13:11:44
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Remember though, if the "new" Armiger kits are not launched immediately, they won't be in the codex and will instead have rules that ship with the box - GW is being incredibly fervent about the "no model, no rules" stuff.
So if additional Armigers are planned for 3-6 months from now they won't be in the codex...as ridiculously stupid as that sounds.
2018/03/22 13:46:37
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Elbows wrote: Remember though, if the "new" Armiger kits are not launched immediately, they won't be in the codex and will instead have rules that ship with the box - GW is being incredibly fervent about the "no model, no rules" stuff.
So if additional Armigers are planned for 3-6 months from now they won't be in the codex...as ridiculously stupid as that sounds.
That wasn’t the case regarding the Blighhauler in the Death Guard codex. The model was shown, and placed in the codex, a good deal of time before its actual release. So, evidence points to that not necessarily being the case
2018/03/22 14:23:11
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Which is because it was added afterwards. They numbered the parts the same an added the "A" to it so that it didn't end up being labeled like part 200+.
The "very clear attachment point" was added by the sculptor originally. Purportedly the sculptor did the extra weapons and bits as extraneous stuff compared to the original project brief. We got the Errant/Paladin because the management at that point didn't want to invest too heavily into production.
Sauce?
I'm not doubting you specifically, but your statement here has the sort of authority behind it that would usually either have a concrete source or be totally made up internet bs. I'd presume you to be more likely to be the former.
These, Azazelx
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751594.page Hermanista started posting about these in January, and has been mostly correct (Forgefire might turn out to be another book or he remembered the name wrong) based on what GW revealed so far
I don't have any idea what you're replying to. I was discussing the attachment point with Kan.
My Project Blog: Necrons, Orks, Sisters, Blood Angels, and X-Wing "
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How it got into my pajamas, I'll never know." Groucho Marx
~A grammatically correct sentence can have multiple, valid interpretations.
Arguing over the facts is the lowest form of debate.
2018/03/24 00:43:14
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
MajorWesJanson wrote: After building 3 and a half armigers so far, they are easy to build, a bit harder to magnetize, and overall rather cute.
how are they harder to magnetize? I pick mine up tomorrow so I'm trying to figure out how so.
The ball socket in the waist is relatively deep, so unlike the paladin you can't just shave down the pin on top, you have to cut off part of the top of the waist. Not super hard, just more of a pain than the paladin, where you can just shave the pin, drop a magnet in the torso and one in the ball before you glue that onto the hips.
You can magnetize the arms onto the sides, but there is no real reason to actually. Just leave the top carapace unglued and you can pop it off and the rotate the arms on or off.
2018/03/24 01:02:52
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
Really annoyed that my FLGS isn't getting its shipment, the GW rep forgot about it again.. sometimes I worry that the guy is still stuck in the mindset of the previous managerial era and believes actively sabotaging non-GW stockists is still part of his job.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/03/24 08:01:58
Fatum Iustum Stultorum
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
2018/03/24 10:29:05
Subject: Warhammer 40k: Forgebane (Necrons vs AdMech box)
5250 pts
3850 pts
2500 pts 
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
