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 wondering what everyone thinks of how the centurion models look. I have heard mixed views.

Like most of the new GW kits, they look more like something from Zoids than the grimly dark grim dark darkness of the grim far dark future.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/543907.page

Enough views to sink a battleship in there.

Rather than bash them, its best to accept that centurions are not designed for the demographic of anyone 16+.

they.. look funny.. ok maybe not that funny...

I don't mind the Dev ones. They make no sense as assault troops though. Big, blocky and ungainly works fine for fire support, not close combat.

I'm not terribly impressed by the rumored rules, kinda "meh" on the minis, and don't see how they fit into the fluff, so I'm passing on them. Once the book comes out, and we get better looks at the minis and what non-GW people can do with them, I may change my mind.

 Nevelon wrote:
I don't mind the Dev ones. They make no sense as assault troops though. Big, blocky and ungainly works fine for fire support, not close combat.

I'm not terribly impressed by the rumored rules, kinda "meh" on the minis, and don't see how they fit into the fluff, so I'm passing on them. Once the book comes out, and we get better looks at the minis and what non-GW people can do with them, I may change my mind.

Agreed

 Nevelon wrote:
I don't mind the Dev ones. They make no sense as assault troops though. Big, blocky and ungainly works fine for fire support, not close combat.

I'm not terribly impressed by the rumored rules, kinda "meh" on the minis, and don't see how they fit into the fluff, so I'm passing on them. Once the book comes out, and we get better looks at the minis and what non-GW people can do with them, I may change my mind.

I also agree.

I like em. Devastators work better than Assault, but either way they are at least something new, which is a positive for me.

Funny how the innovation part, trying out new and daring things (which always comes at the risk of failing) of the 40K range is done by the GW studio these days and the bland milking of Space Marines with infinite un-inspired and minimal no-risk-involved variations is now the daily bread of Forge Word.

How times change.

Judging purely from a stylistic PoV, I like the designs, and the idea behind them is sound. However, they don't really fit in with the rest as soon as you insert them into 40k, especially once you put them next to a Terminator. They feel just a tad too "modern", almost breaking into Tau territory.

I'm also somewhat biased as I am averse to any significant change to the Astartes Chapter organisation as it has existed for about 20 years now. I just don't like changes to a static setting. I get that the company may feel a need to push out SHINY NEW STUFF every once in a while, but given that this approach invariably results in supposedly fairly basic armies having a gazillion different tools in a couple years? Not my cup of tea.

My question about them is: do they replace Dreadnaughts? Not in a literal way, but who's going to take a dred over these things when dreds die so easily and it seems they carry the same amount of firepower with better chances of survival?

 MWHistorian wrote:
My question about them is: do they replace Dreadnaughts? Not in a literal way, but who's going to take a dred over these things when dreds die so easily and it seems they carry the same amount of firepower with better chances of survival?

I know exactly what you are talking about!
My dreads (shooty and CC) are as expensive as two or three Centurions.
But Centurions are looking like they have more firepower and a harder melee-punch.
Their problem however is that VoF and plasma work against them, whereas my dreads have AV13.

 gossipmeng wrote:
Rather than bash them, its best to accept that centurions are not designed for the demographic of anyone 16+.

So instead of bashing the models, we turn to bashing the people who like them?
I am 25.
These models have grown on me, I actually like them.
I am even going to buy them, even though I play Blood Angels.

AV 12 vs T5? You need a minimum of a S:6 gun to even glance a Dreadnought, and 7 if you want to pen. Then you still need 6s. A S:6 will wound on 3s and S:7 on 2s against the Centurion. Even the humble bolter will wound on 5s, bolters that can't even touch a Dreadnought. Even with equivalent points, ie 2 Centurions it only gives you 1 wound more then the 3 HP of the Dreadnought. Dreadnoughts also still hit harder in CC at S10, and get 4 attacks with both DCCW. Even a gundread is still S6.

I'm an adult and I don't mind the figures. I think the cc versions are lame, but I like the heavy support ones. Don't insult people just because they have a different opinion about how something looks.

I like the idea of them, especially when supported by an ironclad. Fluffy... like siege teams, or something. As to the assaulty fat kids, well, might I remind people that they can curbstomp most walkers and go toe to toe with a wraithlord/knight with a decent chance to survive the encounter and put some hurtin' on the elfin magic robots.

Can't bring myself to like them; they are the least dynamic modells that GW has published in recent times and they just make me feel like any potential enemy could just walk up to them and tip them over (though the thought of a centurion lying on it's back and waddling with his arms is amusing).

And they just seem to continue the recent trend, that new modells don't really add anything new to an army (e.g. the Wraithknight is just a beefed up Wraithlord).

I don't mind the models themselves apart from the oversized weapons on the assault type and that strange arrangement of groin and thigh armour that makes me think they couldn't walk but would instead have to waddle. But that probably wouldn't be hard to convert.

As for the rules, I don't see that they really bring anything new to the army that I can't already do with the current book (and by the sound of it most of the good stuff from the book we've got now will remain unchanged, or only have some tiny differences), so I won't be buying them in any case.

Terrible, ugly models. I would have purchased them too if they had looked good, even with gak rules.

I'm now holding out for an awesome tyranids release

This discussion is already taking place in the N&R thread.