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.

Why would I stop playing Imperial Guard just because their MBT sucks out of the box? Especially in a hobby that encourages you to modify and rebuild models?

BrookM wrote:Then don't play guard?

Their silly look looks cute to me , i dont mind them.
Though a "new" kit for same look does bother me. Supposedly the real improvement from the old one are the new less assembly required tracks?

LunaHound wrote:

BrookM wrote:Then don't play guard?

Their silly look looks cute to me , i dont mind them.
Though a "new" kit for same look does bother me. Supposedly the real improvement from the old one are the new less assembly required tracks?

They did the same with the Land Speeder.

Hmm heres me thinking the improvement was the three different turret variants or something.......

Nurglitch wrote:Why would I stop playing Imperial Guard just because their MBT sucks out of the box?

Because you won't stop bitching?

Nurglitch wrote:Especially in a hobby that encourages you to modify and rebuild models?

Now I really have no idea why you're complaining since you said yourself that you can just modify it to suit your needs anyway! Pointless.



If you hate the look of the MBT so much then why in the feth did you ever go with IG, a treadhead army, in the first place? I never would have picked Tau if I hated the look of the vehicles.

And I'm still not convinced by the argument, either, you're asking for a modern look that doesn't really fit with the Imperium's fluff and complaining about the same design flaws that plague every one of GW's fantasy tanks. The land raider that you guys like so much has no ground clearance, and then there's the rhinos track placement, the Tau devilfish engines with really huge, vulnerable intakes, etc. The designers aren't engineers, and none of their tank designs have ever made "sense", so I'm not sure why the Leman Russ deserves any better.

That, and a mini baneblade would just look fething ugly. I'm not a big fan of the plastic baneblade in the first place, and like it was said the LR design predates the BB in the first place, so...why?

Those were improved. At least the turret is bigger now. I'm just surprised that they aren't concurrently releasing a Leman Russ set with the options of a Battle Cannon, Exterminator Autocannon, and that other one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sidstyler:

Bitching is a noble tradition of wargaming. I, as an honourable grognard, reserve the right to hold two mutually incompatible thoughts at once, and grumble about both! I'm complaining that the regular Leman Russ sucks, not about my ability to convert it into something with less suck.

But now that you mention it, the Imperial Guard vehicles prevented me from starting an Imperial Guard army for quite a while until I became confident enough to hack and saw away at plastic kits and make something that didn't look like a 10 year old Ork player made it out of a dollar store truck. So then I started the army because they're the army-est army in 40k, and because I wanted a human army to go with my Dark Eldar, Orks, Tyranids, and Space Marines. As generic human sci-fi models go, they're not bad once you scrape all the fascist iconography off of them, and they're pretty fun in 5th edition to boot.

I wouldn't say that I like the Land Raider design. If anything it's even worse than the Leman Russ because it has high-tech styling without the high-tech design. It's like an I-Pod with toggle-switches. I hacked my Land Raiders up as well.

But it doesn't matter that the designers aren't engineers. They don't have to be (although it might help). They don't need to be engineers to avoid the obvious flaws that their designs have, which you've admirably listed, just a hobbyist's passing familiarity with modern armour. They don't have to make something that works, just something that looks like it works to the average hobbyist. I mean, one of my favourite shows on television is this thing on the history channel where they restore a tank, and you learn about all the interesting design pressures that went into making and fielding that particular configuration, where only the expert engineers would be able to point out why one configuration is better than another, for what purpose, and why.

So, no, the Leman Russ doesn't deserve better so much as the fans deserve better.

Bitching is a noble tradition of wargaming. I, as an honourable grognard, reserve the right to hold two mutually incompatible thoughts at once, and grumble about both!

Well yeah, I'm a whiner too.

Anyway, I guess that's just the thing, all the little flaws don't really bother me that much. I don't care if you could easily disable a Tau tank by tossing a piece of debris into the engine, it still looks cool enough. The land raider ground clearance wouldn't have bothered me if I didn't have it pointed out to me. Etc.

With the Leman Russ though it just seems like people are complaining about stuff that they really shouldn't be, like the fact that it looks like an outdated WW1 tank design. It'd be like complaining about Tau tanks being too "sci-fi". I assumed that was the whole point, that was exactly the look they were going for. I understand that each Guard regiment fights differently and that there are very few that fight with WW1 tactics, but still.

I'm not saying I don't like the improvements. I do. I'm just wishing they'd gone further in re-designing it - the Mars Alpha, for example, would have been better.

I must admit though, that my disappointment was quenched a while ago, when I realized that the art in the Codex series of books was a good indicator of what up-coming releases were going to be. So the fact that it was redesigned to be more compatible with the rest of the line (no more over-sized weapons, etc), and easier to build didn't come as a surprised. It's going to be tricky giving it some track clearance though, without the wheels.

Nurglitch wrote:Don't forget getting bogged down in anything but pavement due to the tracks being flush with the track-guard, the limited transverse of the sponsons, all the shell traps in the glacis plating, its height, and the side hatches.

And all these glaring flaws become even more apparent when you consider that every other vehicle in 40K is bang-on 100% realistic.

Oh wait...


Seriously - why the Russ? Why is this tank singled out as the one that "needs to be realistic" when nothing else is.

Because it's the new content of the day/ maybe he's just had a grudge for a long, long time.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Seriously - why the Russ? Why is this tank singled out as the one that "needs to be realistic" when nothing else is.

I don't think it needs to be realistic, but it's a particularly fugly vehicle unlike other IG models. It's unattractive enough that I've got 3,500 points of IG so far and no Leman Russ. It's so unattractive that I've got a $160 Forge World order on barrels and body kits to improve the look, while I can get the standard Leman Russ at cost through my store. It's the only way I can stomach the thing. They didn't need to revolutionize it, but they could have done something. It's not like they don't have a whole R&D division that makes parts to make it attractive. I mean, really, they know what people want to see based on Forge World sales, right?

blackdiamond wrote:I don't think it needs to be realistic, but it's a particularly fugly vehicle unlike other IG models.

Based on what qualifiers? What methods or measures do you use to make this comparison?

It's subjective, of course. I could talk about the stubby little barrels, the lopsided nature of the design, or the archaic sponsons, but the bottom line is I can't bring myself to build one without some serious add-ons. As a store owner, I've heard others voice their opinions as well, and few can appreciate the look of the Leman Russ. It's overall utility is why most people take them, I think. It's great in the game.

That said, I think the Leman Russ is quite attractive when you stretch it out a bit and give it a longer barrel (Ryza pattern, for example), and I'm willing to spend stupid amounts of money for that, apparently. If I were the king of all Games Workshop, I would consider Forge World the high performance, concept division of GW and allow some of that good design to flow into new models. Instead, we get more of the same, as if FW is a valuable asset that needs protection, rather than a creative resource to be mined.

HBMC:

I singled out the Leman Russ because this thread is about the newly remodeled Leman Russ Demolisher kit. Shocking, eh?

Nurglitch wrote:I singled out the Leman Russ because this thread is about the newly remodeled Leman Russ Demolisher kit.

Nice try, but this isn't the first time (and I'm sure it won't be the last time) that the same conversation has come up about the Russ. Some people here demand that it be more realistic, and I'm trying to figure out why.

The same people who won't bat an eyelid when their gun-line gets attacked by screaming women in armour armed with swords riding in hover tanks or when a star-god incased in living metal attacks them are the same people screaming "It's unrealistic" at the Russ.

I don't get it.

Why this tank? Why is it so important that its tracks be correct or that its profile be lower when we've got men on horses using explosive-tipped lances and green people wielding axes in a game that has heavy Machine Guns and genetically enhanced super-humans screamly baldly whilst waving giant glowing fists around?

Nurglitch wrote:Shocking, eh?

No need to get cute Nurgy.

Sure the old Leman Russ has some faults, and i have indeed harboured some heretical thoughts of change. Even Anger.
But the LR is almost the Epitome of the Imperial Guard.

"What i cannot crush with words i will crush with the tanks of the Imperial Guard!"

Hibby:

But I put the pink pinafore on, just like you like it!

When people use the term "realistic", they really mean a degree a verisimilitude that matches their own opinion of what's 'real'. Unfortunately it is not unusual for people to phrase expressions of preference, and expressions of degrees of preference at that, as absolute declarative statements of fact. Presumably because adding all the qualifiers about opinion, exact degree, and whatnot gets you tarred with the label of 'pedant' or whatever dismissive nastiness is popular at the time.

This tank is the defining tank of the Imperial Guard, the army-est army in Warhammer, the most realistic army in Warhammer. Having men on horses using explosive-tipped lances isn't unrealistic, as the use of anti-tank teppo-yaris in WWII, and the fact that men actually used to charge each other on horseback with spears, attests. The combination doesn't exceed the suspension of disbelief that people are willing to give to the Imperial Guard. Likewise Orks wielding axes doesn't exceed the suspension of disbelief that people give to Orks, since the Orks have a built-in force multiplier for the suspension of disbelief ever since GW decided to make Genetor Anzion's 3rd edition blithering the fact of the matter when it came to the facts about Orks in the Warhammer 40k ficton or universe. Likewise the "genetically enhanced" super-humans who like to fight with giant fists are pretty in line with the hogswash that counts as genetic enhancement in the GW background. Space Marines are already so stupidly ludicrous that fighting with giant glowy fists while angry and freshly bic'd actually kind of disappointing and ordinary compared to what the background builds them up as. I'm sure you've observed the stupidly over-the-top "Movie Marines" that people make rules for every so often, when ordinary Marines are neither bald nor screaming enough.

Basically what it seems to be is the closer to reasonably reaslistic we get, such as humans fighting in an organization that vaguely resembles a real army, the more realism is demanded.

I like to think of it like caricatures. The more realistic the caricature, the more it needs to look like the person it caricatures, while a stick figure only needs a catch-phrase or posture and people immediately marvel at the resemblance.

Hahaha

In this thread: HBMC defends the ugly model kits that he's spent $2000+ on.

It's an awful model. The new demolisher looks a little better, but the company's clearly not interested in doing a complete redesign. If you don't like the kit, convert it or pick a different army. I'm just going to suck it up and do some plasticarding or pay for mars alpha hulls if I ever do guard.

Yeah, I'm with H.B.M.C. I don't see the need to modernize the Russ chassis, it is the very Image of the Imperial guard. Why pick on the iconic Russ, if you want a more modern look, go play with the marines or Tau... I have always loved the Russ shape, it matches that whole world of 40K. The stagnate technology level of the universe. and of course I to own way to many of these Russ chassis myself, but such is the Fate of a true Imperial guard player. the tank is cool the way it is...

btw. i still hate that stowage lid on the new turret, still think it looks stupid...

Nurglitch wrote:Hibby:

There was a girl at my last work we called Hibby. She was a good golfer. Anyway...

Nurglitch wrote:When people use the term "realistic", they really mean a degree a verisimilitude that matches their own opinion of what's 'real'.

Which I find very hard to fathom given all the various un-real things in this game. How can one draw a distinction between what should be realistic, and what's fine to exist in the realm of fantasy?

Nurglitch wrote:Unfortunately it is not unusual for people to phrase expressions of preference, and expressions of degrees of preference at that, as absolute declarative statements of fact. Presumably because adding all the qualifiers about opinion, exact degree, and whatnot gets you tarred with the label of 'pedant' or whatever dismissive nastiness is popular at the time.

Pompous ass. This has nothing to do with the 'opinion as fact' thing, and puffing it up with flowery language doesn't make you sound smarter.

Nurglitch wrote:This tank is the defining tank of the Imperial Guard, the army-est army in Warhammer, the most realistic army in Warhammer.

Ok fair enough. I'm sure some people can see it that way, wanting their army-like army to have a more army-like vehicle. I've always seen Russes the rickety old WWI tanks as opposed to anything trying to be a WWII Panzer (or even a more modern design like an Abrams), but that doesn't make them wrong wither.

Nurglitch wrote:Having men on horses using explosive-tipped lances isn't unrealistic, as the use of anti-tank teppo-yaris in WWII, and the fact that men actually used to charge each other on horseback with spears, attests.

And now you're being intentionally obtuse. I never said that people didn't use horses, I said that it doesn't make much sense for horses to exist as a viable troop type in a world of Greater Daemons, Titans and Orbital Bombardments. Moreover, do you see any massive cavalry formations today? Of course you don't. We've moved on. They have become something of the past, rather than something we continue to use. However, 40,000 years... or 38,000 years I 'spose... into the future, there they are, ready to charge. This isn't 'realistic' this doesn't 'make sense', yet it is accepted. So why not the Russ?

See what I'm getting at here? Why are people fine with all the blatantly absurd and rediculous things in this game yet brought to the point of childishness when it comes to a tank (other than the explanation you offered above)? Are there any other reasons?

Nurglitch wrote:Basically what it seems to be is the closer to reasonably reaslistic we get, such as humans fighting in an organization that vaguely resembles a real army, the more realism is demanded.

Why do you suppose that is?

I wasn't the biggest fan of the tracked wheels, but now that those are gone I really see the conversion potential of the it severely restricted.

Nurglitch wrote:Why would I stop playing Imperial Guard just because their MBT sucks out of the box? Especially in a hobby that encourages you to modify and rebuild models?

Exactly. If you don't like it use it as an opportunity to convert it to something more appropriate to your personal vision. Most treadheads have a converter's eye and appreciate fine conversions, expecially if you field six of them and use them to smite MEQ with enthusiasm. Anecodtally but I'd proffer guard players have the 2nd highest levels of converters in thier midsts, just behind old school ork players.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Which I find very hard to fathom given all the various un-real things in this game. How can one draw a distinction between what should be realistic, and what's fine to exist in the realm of fantasy?

For me the issue is best exemplified the gross physical impossibility of the turret. Stylized weapons are one thing, but there's no way to fit a breech and any kind of crew into the stock Russ turret, given the insanely oversized barrel. To say nothing of ammo storage, loading mechanisms or motors for gun traverse. The new kit, at least, remedies this somewhat. Other issues include the poor parts breakdown of the kit and poorly sculpted hull and sponson weapons.

Of these the first is a "realism" issue, because it means the tank's basic functioning breaks basic laws of physics in the setting more than is reasonable. YMMV.

Why do people want things to look sooooooooooo realistic in a fantasy/sci-fi game?

You want realistic tanks? Then go buy an M4 model and call it a leman russ. Or whatever you're preferred Modern Battle Tank is.

And while you're at it why don't you get yourself those properly proportioned figures because GW doesn't have the right proportion. In fact if you're so obsessed about realistic stuff make your own game where all the crap you make in there are realistic. Or buy GW so you now own it and you can make all the super realistic stuff you want in the game.

But if you do that then there shouldn't be 40k at all, because all the stuff they do isn't realistic!!

Nobody is forcing you to buy GW stuff so quite complaining.

Nurglitch wrote:Hibby:

This tank is the defining tank of the Imperial Guard, the army-est army in Warhammer, the most realistic army in Warhammer.... Basically what it seems to be is the closer to reasonably reaslistic we get, such as humans fighting in an organization that vaguely resembles a real army, the more realism is demanded.

You've got something here. If you don't like science fiction, the Imperial Guard is the most realistic army available. I've learned to enjoy the 40K universe, but 40K turned me off for a long time because although I was a fantasy fan, sci-fi never grabbed me. I'm not saying I want realistic vehicles, but if you play IG, it's possible that you want more realism than other players, which is why you chose the army.

blackdiamond wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:Hibby:

This tank is the defining tank of the Imperial Guard, the army-est army in Warhammer, the most realistic army in Warhammer.... Basically what it seems to be is the closer to reasonably reaslistic we get, such as humans fighting in an organization that vaguely resembles a real army, the more realism is demanded.

You've got something here. If you don't like science fiction, the Imperial Guard is the most realistic army available. I've learned to enjoy the 40K universe, but 40K turned me off for a long time because although I was a fantasy fan, sci-fi never grabbed me. I'm not saying I want realistic vehicles, but if you play IG, it's possible that you want more realism than other players, which is why you chose the army.

This has got to be the biggest load of bull that I've read... If you don't like science fiction, then why aren't you playing Flames Of War?

The IG aren't what I would call "realistic" by any means. Think about this... and let's go for realism here... The Commisariat, you know, those political officers that are bound to be in any armed forces for the sake of troop morale, are quite possibly the worst example of modern battlefield discipline I've ever seen. "You're all scared? *blam* SHUT UP AND GET BACK TO FIGHTING!" You're so worried about the fact that the LRBT is unrealistic, how about the fact that your troops carry laser guns, your anti-armor weaponry is basically an overpowered hairdryer, and you can bring field artillery and the 40k equivalent to a SCUD launcher (in TRIPLICATE, no less) to a run-in that's happening over a few square miles, at most.

The IG sort of resemble modern armed forces, but are, ultimately, a mish-mash of best-ofs dating back from the late 1700s all the way up to today.

Agamemnon2 wrote:For me the issue is best exemplified the gross physical impossibility of the turret. Stylized weapons are one thing, but there's no way to fit a breech and any kind of crew into the stock Russ turret, given the insanely oversized barrel. To say nothing of ammo storage, loading mechanisms or motors for gun traverse. The new kit, at least, remedies this somewhat. Other issues include the poor parts breakdown of the kit and poorly sculpted hull and sponson weapons.

Of these the first is a "realism" issue, because it means the tank's basic functioning breaks basic laws of physics in the setting more than is reasonable. YMMV.

I don't know how you can make these complaints on geometry. All things in 40k are caricatures and are not meant to be realistic. That is the ultimate failing of your arguement. You assume that GW is attempting to make something realistic. Even the basic IG have the wrong proportions to be realistic so why would their vehicle be any different? Marines suffer from being wider than they should be and eldar have barbie doll waists. There are plenty of things that are not realistic. Are the Leman Russ' battleship sized guns oversized? Probably so, but why does it really matter, when you are playing the wargame equivalent to a cartoon.

Anyone who thinks the Russ is 'unrealistic should take a looik at WW1 and inter-war tank designs. There are a lot of early designs similar to the Russ. for a start its a Mk1 with a turret, give or take.

Also the Mk1 is a solid design, the problems with it regard power transmission, as the Imperium has plenty of high energy systems the inefficient load transmission doesnt matter.

Furthermore with a lot of energy weapons which dont have recoil and are worthwhile mounting there is good reason to add sponsons. These tanks are not built like our tanks there are huge differences.

The bassic hull shape is in fact in several ways a good design rather than a bad. You might not know this but the Mk1 still holds the record for verticle traverse and horizontal traverse for any ground based AFV. That is to say it can cover a gap wider and climb a wall higher (as opposed to going through it) than any other AFV, this includes designs like Leopard, Challenger, Abrams etc. Given a sufficiently wide trench or high trench wall the Mk1 can cross but the modern tank cannot.
IIRC the verticle traverse of a Mk1 is over 3m. A modern tank would be lucky to traverse half that.

All the Leman Russ hull really tells us is that the tank is optimised for trench warfare. In fact a more 'realistic' modern loonking design would in fact proove inferior at the role the Imperium wants for it, allowing equal weaponry and engine.

The only real problem with the Russ, and for that matter most other Imperial turreted designs is that the main gun has no recoil space and preciouis little breach access. The commanders hatch is right behind the breach, anyone who knows anything about tanks knows this cannot work as a design. Which is why I consider the commanders hatch an entry/escape hatch and never miount a commander there except on the Chimera, which has an energy weapon and doesnt need a recoil track.

I think part of the issue though Orlanth are players like myself who would have preferred to see scaled down baneblade coolness.

I'm withholding judgement though. If the weapons have been scaled down and turrent enlarged that might be just the trick needed.

Turret is not enlarged per se, its instead very similar to the Ryza pattern turret. The front is entended slightly and there is a very pronounced slope to the turret front, which makes sense.