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.

Just a quick consensus... Has anyone ever thought about doing a space marine army and just leaving the chest painted the same as the base color? I am wanting to go for a more utilitarian army look, but part of me is also tired of painting them on every army I paint... Will it look good? Or am I just being lazy? By the way, the overall army color will be airbrushed troll slayer orange (with a yellow highlight) with small vellejo black metal accents and maybe some boltgun metal as well (leadbelcher in new range). I think the orange will be pretty loud and I don't want to busy it up with too much extra stuff... Also, I will be oil washing the army so a lot of details will be picked out after clean up... I do, however, plan on trying out some OSL with the eyes of this army (ordering some Freak Flex tints this evening). Overall, it is meant to be a Salamander based army, but I have enough marines to play some other chapters as well.... The army will most likely double as a Chaos renegade chapter.

This may be a dumb question, but I figured I would ask the community what they thought of it... Thank you for your thoughts or inputs.

Todd

If you edge highlight it or at least make it look somewhat distinctive it wouldn't look too bad

You do whatever you want, they are your models afterall, I just think it would make them look unfinished.

Do a test mini and post it. It'll give us a better idea of what you mean.

tomcat31 wrote:
Do a test mini and post it. It'll give us a better idea of what you mean.

That's what I was thinking... I just can't find a picture for reference. It wouldn't hurt to do them up and paint the chest last. I also may try using the Space Marine XBox game (where you customize your armor) to take a look at it... It is just hard to find a picture of a SM with an unpainted chest...

A lot of chapters have a white or black aquila, so if you spray in white or black you can just leave them like that and maybe give them a wash in the case of white or a drybrush in the case of black.

Orange on orange would look very strange, though, even if you gave it a wash or highlight to spruce it up.

There have been a few pieces of art over the years that have had the aquila painted in the same colour as the chest armour. It can look ok.


I started an army of gold-coloured Marines some time ago that had the aquila in gold as well. Also worked ok, although I never got around to finishing them off, and scrapped the army completely when Codex Daemonhunters went away, as the army as planned was led by an Inquisitor.

Are you talking about leaving the aquila the same color as the rest of the armor, as opposed to making it a contrasting or metallic color? Makes sense to me. I'd only spend time painting them a different color for sergeants and officers or for some kind of valor decoration. If you're talking about just primer coating them or leaving them unprimed, I don't think they'd look very good.

I do like the idea of only doing the Aquila on important people... I will just have to give it a shot and see how it turns out.... It just seems a little too "main stream" to paint the Aquila... Also, when the army is used for Chaos, it would be nice to not have it as noticeable...

All of my Space Marines are in Mk6 armor so I don't have to worry about that as much. The only models that have eagles are my Librarians and one Captain.

Could I suggest that if you don't want to paint a full aquila but you want a little spot colour somewhere, if you can afford it and it's practical, then why do't you surf the bits sites/eBay for the front torso parts that have just a single skull on the plastron (breastplate)? That way you can have touch of spot colour, to grab the viewers attention, whilst simultaneously emphasising the orange and the utilitarian nature of the chapter. Really speaking you can cover your Tactical, Assault and Devastators in this manner due to the multi-part plastic. This would then just leave any elites/HQ options with slightly more decoration to mark them out. Another benefit would mean that for a larger army you cut right down on painting times for fiddly decor.

And of course, the lack of wings means you can double them as your renegades (Salamander renegades - Burn Heretic! )

Will find a pic of my first fully done terminator - its basically not got a painted Aquila, just highlighted lightly, same as the crux terminates.

Silver base colour so not sure how helpful it will be to you but it will show you how it will look.

I am pressing on with the project (since the army is already built)... I think I may give the chest area a little extra airbrush love when I am doing the high lights just to make it seem highlighted... I am planning on doing an oil wash so all highlights should be nicely maintained and all detail picked up... I am sure this will not be the last army I will paint so I think I will take a chance... Pics to come as soon as I get them done... I am just starting the priming tonite...

From a fluff perspective there is no reason for the aquillas to be a different colour, that is simply convention to do it that way.

I don't see why the plastron cannot be made in the forgeworld with the aquilla moulded into the surface of it.
We tend to think of the aquilla as decoration added later but it could be integral to the plastron.

If you don't mind conversion work then you could also just remove the aquillas with a knife, files etc.

cadbren wrote:
From a fluff perspective there is no reason for the aquillas to be a different colour, that is simply convention to do it that way.

I don't see why the plastron cannot be made in the forgeworld with the aquilla moulded into the surface of it.
We tend to think of the aquilla as decoration added later but it could be integral to the plastron.

If you don't mind conversion work then you could also just remove the aquillas with a knife, files etc.

I agree! This is my exact thinking. I work in a metal fabrication career field and have seen first hand how parts come from an industrial source. The gold, silver, etc would maybe be a coating applied to the armor after it is made.

strengthofthedragon2 wrote:

cadbren wrote:
From a fluff perspective there is no reason for the aquillas to be a different colour, that is simply convention to do it that way.

I don't see why the plastron cannot be made in the forgeworld with the aquilla moulded into the surface of it.
We tend to think of the aquilla as decoration added later but it could be integral to the plastron.

If you don't mind conversion work then you could also just remove the aquillas with a knife, files etc.

I agree! This is my exact thinking. I work in a metal fabrication career field and have seen first hand how parts come from an industrial source. The gold, silver, etc would maybe be a coating applied to the armor after it is made.

You cannot apply real-world thinking to the 40K universe. You and I both know it would be easier to mass produce armor with as few embellishments as possible, both from a cost and ease of manufacturing prospective. However, space marine power armor is painstakingly handcrafted in a bizarre mix of science and hocus-pocus. Just remember this is the same universe populated with green skinned mushroom men that all have bad Cockney accents.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

strengthofthedragon2 wrote:

cadbren wrote:
From a fluff perspective there is no reason for the aquillas to be a different colour, that is simply convention to do it that way.

I don't see why the plastron cannot be made in the forgeworld with the aquilla moulded into the surface of it.
We tend to think of the aquilla as decoration added later but it could be integral to the plastron.

If you don't mind conversion work then you could also just remove the aquillas with a knife, files etc.

I agree! This is my exact thinking. I work in a metal fabrication career field and have seen first hand how parts come from an industrial source. The gold, silver, etc would maybe be a coating applied to the armor after it is made.

You cannot apply real-world thinking to the 40K universe. You and I both know it would be easier to mass produce armor with as few embellishments as possible, both from a cost and ease of manufacturing prospective. However, space marine power armor is painstakingly handcrafted in a bizarre mix of science and hocus-pocus. Just remember this is the same universe populated with green skinned mushroom men that all have bad Cockney accents.

If I were you, I'd have it as if the metal coating on the aquila had been scratched away by the marines themselves, in order to preserve camouflage or something, or if it's just a ritual for them, and have tiny slits of gold/silver left remaining.

@ScottyPuffJunior - Whilst I tend to agree that in a 40K context things are generally exaggerated/fethed-up, the case of hand-crafting war-material to give a superlative performance can very rationally be explained. The process of hand-crafting often ensures that the product's manufacturer/fabricator is paying more attention to detail and with precision instruments, of which there are many in power armour, this extra attention is well warranted considering the range of activities, environments and combat stresses the armour is expected to perform under.

Obviously there is none of the hocus-pocus involved (Which is purely GW's artistic license), but there are examples of this sort of hand-crafting of war-materials in real-life. For example, through-out the Second World War there were over 20,000 Supermarine Spitfires built, each of which had it's airframe and all other intricate components, such as engines, hand-crafted. However, the result of this painstaking manufacturing process was a fighter that was really second to none in terms of both combat and air performance. This, from a small island-nation alone against Germany (at least until the US finally decided it would be in their interests to support Great Britain following Pearl Harbour) , under siege by both the threat of invasion (Operation Sea-lion) and a sustained Luftwaffe air-campaign (The Battle of Britain) and having a restricted flow of raw-materials due to U-boat hunting (The Battle of the Atlantic), indicates that in if it's possible under these circumstances for Britain, then even 40K context, hand-crafting high-performance war-materials is not too far-fetched for the Imperium.

Yes, mass production would produce more armour, but I doubt the armour would be of the same quality as it would be using the current method of construction. All that said however, we have to give GW artistic license as Space Marines wouldn't be half as interesting if they were all swanning about in mass produced bare-bones armour.

Anyway, that's a bit OT so I'll leave it at that.

 Warpig1815 wrote:
@ScottyPuffJunior - Whilst I tend to agree that in a 40K context things are generally exaggerated/fethed-up, the case of hand-crafting war-material to give a superlative performance can very rationally be explained. The process of hand-crafting often ensures that the product's manufacturer/fabricator is paying more attention to detail and with precision instruments, of which there are many in power armour, this extra attention is well warranted considering the range of activities, environments and combat stresses the armour is expected to perform under.

Obviously there is none of the hocus-pocus involved (Which is purely GW's artistic license), but there are examples of this sort of hand-crafting of war-materials in real-life. For example, through-out the Second World War there were over 20,000 Supermarine Spitfires built, each of which had it's airframe and all other intricate components, such as engines, hand-crafted. However, the result of this painstaking manufacturing process was a fighter that was really second to none in terms of both combat and air performance. This, from a small island-nation alone against Germany (at least until the US finally decided it would be in their interests to support Great Britain following Pearl Harbour) , under siege by both the threat of invasion (Operation Sea-lion) and a sustained Luftwaffe air-campaign (The Battle of Britain) and having a restricted flow of raw-materials due to U-boat hunting (The Battle of the Atlantic), indicates that in if it's possible under these circumstances for Britain, then even 40K context, hand-crafting high-performance war-materials is not too far-fetched for the Imperium.

Yes, mass production would produce more armour, but I doubt the armour would be of the same quality as it would be using the current method of construction. All that said however, we have to give GW artistic license as Space Marines wouldn't be half as interesting if they were all swanning about in mass produced bare-bones armour.

Anyway, that's a bit OT so I'll leave it at that.

Again, the point is you cannot make rational, real-world comparisons to the grimdark world of 40K. War machines built by all sides in the Second World War were mass produced on assembly lines in numerous factories, not to mention that power armor is exponentially more advanced than Merlin engines. Sure, the Spitfire was advanced when it first debuted in the mid-1930s, but again you can't compare a mid-20th century fighter to 40K weaponry. And yes, 20,000 Spitfires were build, but that includes pre-war and post-war production numbers as the plane was in production from 1938 to 1948. While there was a constant air threat early in the war (followed by the use of V-1 and V-2 rockets towards the end of the war), the Battle of Britain lasted 3 months and ended with total British air superiority and since the Germans could never fully blockade Britain, the U-boat wolf-packs were never enough to stop the flow of men and materials to the British Isles; less than 1% of the the all the ships coming and going from Britain were lost.

Back to the topic: If you are dead-set against painting the Aquila on a marine, just use some of the torsos that don't have one, which is pretty much everything before Mk. VII.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
you cannot make rational, real-world comparisons to the grimdark world of 40K.

Not true at all, especially not as a huge blanket statement like that. To quote Ron Perlman, "War. War never changes". There are supply lines and fortifications. There are troops and deployments and command structures. Sure, 40k has its own elements - but war never changes. Are you arguing that all Space Marine power armour must be mass-produced? Guardsman flak armour is mass-produced. Power armour is treated with a high and religious revenance. Even if they have the resources and capability to mass-produce it, they still do not.

ScootPuffJunior wrote: Sure, the Spitfire was advanced when it first debuted in the mid-1930s, but again you can't compare a mid-20th century fighter to 40K weaponry. And yes, 20,000 Spitfires were build, but that includes pre-war and post-war production numbers as the plane was in production from 1938 to 1948.

Produced by hand in a small island nation, not on any one of innumerable forgeworlds by countless numbers of tech priests. It is not just technology that advances either; skills and tools advance as well. A Spitfire is not equivalent to power armour, no, but neither is the crafter of a Spitfire comparable to a skilled tech priest, nor their tools.

@strengthofthedragon2: Do one test Marine and post a photo. I think edge highlighting might work, as suggested by Color Sgt. Kell.

@ScootyPuffJunior - True, but it's still evidence of hand-crafted weaponry (regardless of how advanced or not it is) trumping mass-produced weaponry - hence justifying the increased time/labour/cost that goes into the process.

ScootyPuffJunior wrote:total British air superiority

As a result of the increased quality of British fighters (Granted Hawker Hurricanes were mass-produced and more numerous than Spitfires, but in general it was the Spitfire that tended to engage the Messerschmidt's rather than the Hurricanes - unless of course the Spitfires were unavailable) against the mass produced German Bf109's. IHowever, I would say that the Battle of Britain did not result in total British air superiority. Air superiority was achieved against daylight raids and German fighters, but bombing - 'The Blitz' - continued for another 7 months primarily against targets in Southern England. It was only after contiued efforts by the RAF throughout the next year or so did the Allies achieve total air superiority. In my above post, all I was trying to say was that if we (Great Britain) could do it under those circumstances, then so too could the Imperium afford to hand-craft weaponry for Space Marines under it's own circumstances.

In any case, I wasn't trying to compare the level of advancement regarding real and 40k weaponry, but I'm trying to point out that hand-crafting weaponry can and is used in a real world and most definitely relates to the 40K context of why armour is hand-crafted. More often than not hand-crafting produces superlative performance compared to mass-produced weaponry (Although I'm not saying that mass-produced weaponry is not effective - quite the opposite). It's like buying yourself an off the shelf Remington rifle and then comparing it's accuracy against a tuned, balanced, lightened and generally upgraded Anschutz target rifle - the accuracy of the Anschutz will be much improved as it has had attention lavished on it to iron out the 'wrinkles'and ensure it performs to the best of it's ability. Then go and ask a target shooter which rifle they would prefer - they'll probably plump for the one that performs better, which would be the hand-crafted one as it's been improved.

Back on topic, as Scooty says, you could use torso's from before the Mk. VII armour, however aside from the mixed variant's you get in the boxes I think the only other way you'll get non-aquila torsos is going to be from FW - which is going to be expensive. However, if you have the £££, then it's worth it, but you may want to be careful (if you go down that route) that you're force looks appropriately 40K-ish and not like a strangely coloured Heresy-Era Legion.

As my Alpha Legion Marines are supposed to look quite Loyalist, Anvil Industries' 'Steam Lords' chests are an utter blessing. If it's blank chestplates you're after rather than painted-over ones, look no further.

Well, this is how my terminators look;-



Should give you a rough idea - highlight on the Aquila is the same colour as the skull in the Crux Terminatus.

@Ross74H - As a personal preference I'm not keen on purple armour plates, unless it's the whole armour, however I do like the rather understated grey - Good work! .

To the OP, how do you propose to make the aquila stand out if your using orange? (By 'stand out' I really just mean show the sculpted detail - not necessarily show out as gaudy decoration)

It's not actually grey, it's leadbealcher with a bulb oil wash, came out a dirty dark silver colour.

Possibly the OP could highlight or drybrush the Aquila with a pale gold just to give it a slight highlight or black for a slightly more obvious highlight.

Well I know the OP stated a highlight earlier on, but I was thinking maybe the application a wash - inspired by your own model, could make the difference between picking out detail and having a rather flat area in the middle of the plastron. As to what wash I can't really comment as I only paint orange when it's in connection with fire (although as a Salamander painter I do that a great deal )

I don't want to push it too hard, but seriously!



It's beautiful. T_T

Where is that one from? Or is that a torso piece with the Aquila removed?

I am doing a mass painting session and can post pics when I get to the highlighting stage. I am using a yellow as my highlight for the orange and I may spray a little extra yellow on the chest area just to emphasize the Aquila and maybe do an edge highlight in subsequent steps. I just finished up priming the army and am waiting for my compressor to cool down before I move on... I am hoping to complete the preshading (brown) and base coat today...

I appreciate all the input helping me to work toward pulling off the desired look I am going for!

I also wish that the bitz sites were still up... Battlewagonbitz had sets of 10 torsos in whatever pattern you wanted in order to achieve a more homologous army look... I assembled this army from mainly DV marines and AoBR marines (In order to create a game ready army quicker).

Khorne Beserker chests and legs also work well with loyalists. Some of the bits have khorne marks on them but they're easy to remove.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
As my Alpha Legion Marines are supposed to look quite Loyalist, Anvil Industries' 'Steam Lords' chests are an utter blessing. If it's blank chestplates you're after rather than painted-over ones, look no further.

@strengthofthedragon2 From that!

Also, if you're looking for bitz, bitsandkits.co.uk is good (although it's a UK site). I don't know about any German ones, but I'm sure they're out there!