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 agree with the "Class" assessment. I would guess that the size of these mobile fortress would generally follow the different unit sizes. From platoon upto to company, with sizes in between for different specialized formations. Base on function and support you could see them scaled for platoon sized, mechanized platoon sized, supply line support, vehicle recovery, mobile cathedral, and company command. It makes sense.

The Iron Hands would need one exceeding a company size to house and train each clan.

lovage, subscribed.

Hmmm that other one seems a bit TOO big, it sort of classifies as a capitol imperialis now.

vodo40k wrote:Hmmm that other one seems a bit TOO big, it sort of classifies as a capitol imperialis now.

I'm not begrudging you, everybody has posted before without reading the entire thread, the timing of this comment is just funny.

The class arguement makes the most sense. The only fluff problem I have with that is the STC factor. If they're all based off of the same template, they should all be very similar in terms of size, even if you account for different forges (I assume these are build by Mars), the titan varients are the same size, just different stylization.

Ah my bad, it can count as both.

jabbakahut wrote:The class arguement makes the most sense. The only fluff problem I have with that is the STC factor. If they're all based off of the same template, they should all be very similar in terms of size, even if you account for different forges (I assume these are build by Mars), the titan varients are the same size, just different stylization.

But Baneblade variants aren't. The Lucius and Mars patterns(the FW versions) are both slightly smaller than the Arkurion pattern(FW's name for the plastic model).

I'm not including the Armorcast version, as that's a different company.

jabbakahut wrote:The class arguement makes the most sense. The only fluff problem I have with that is the STC factor. If they're all based off of the same template, they should all be very similar in terms of size, even if you account for different forges (I assume these are build by Mars), the titan varients are the same size, just different stylization.

A fair point, the differences in models we're actually familiar are very minor in terms of size, Platuan4th suggestion regarding Baneblades is in that respect as much as it goes.

However that said I do remember very specificly a piece of background text describing a Space Hulk, it's annoying me that I can't think where exactly I read it, though I believe it may have been a WD issue, possibly relating to BFG which narrows it down a bit, but it could also be from a codex, I'll have to try an find the reference later. Anyway this piece of text includes note of the Adeptus Mechanicus getting very excited by the ships which make up the Hulk, as a number are of very similar design but of different sizes, part of the reason a boarding is attempted (against forces unknown) and that the Hulk which is one a collission course with I think "Helios Orbital" or something to that effect is not simply bombarded is too secure potential pre-Imperial STC data from these. It's a little vague, I'd interprit that as perhaps pointing that size is not consistant to an identifiable design with regards to STC based technology.

To put another take on it, take any modern car which also has a stretch limo version, or even a van, same basic vehicle, but bigger, and probably a number of different components.

Epic work KK, keep it up.

As to the scale of this beastie, I think that comparing old epic models to each other isn't gonna give us the best idea. Although I always thought that if its STC, it not gonna vary much, and that there are plenty of Imperial forces that have at least utilized non STC stand-ins. But hey, theres always room in the 40k universe for anyhting out of the ordinary.

Found the picture I remembered:



http://www.cold-moon.com/40k/Miniatures/Leviathan/praetorian_project.htm

This one is perfectly in scale but just not something I wanted to build. Maybe one day I'll build a Cold Moon pattern Leviathan but for me it's a Heiankyo Pattern Leviathan.

Hmm - I wonder why people Cold Moon armed his Leviathan with Heavy Bolters? Working from the Ork and Squat Warlords datasheet for it (as the book was to hand), it had a Doomsday Cannon (check), a turret-mounted battlecannon (check), 6 Lascannon (can't see 'em) and then 12 Bolters (definitely not Heavy Bolters).

Weird.

Also, regarding troop capacity, it is meant to be able to carry 30 stands of troops - or 150 men.....

As a Squat fan, I'd also like to point out that the vast majority of Leviathans are supplied to the Imperium as part of a trade program between the Imperium and the Squat Homeworlds, so there's no guarantee it is an STC construct.

Dysartes wrote:... and then 12 Bolters (definitely not Heavy Bolters).

The same thing could be said of all Super-Heavies of the time. They had 'bolters'.

Now thats not to say that w40ktank's is'nt a Leviathan, my take is simply that the Levaithan is simply a catch all name for a class of vehicle which is broadly similar in purpose but varies immensely depending on it's origin, some are larger more like a mobile fortress, some are smaller more of a mobile command bunker, ALL are Levaithan's - just differenet classes.

SIGN!

sone peopel wants it bigger and some wants it smaler.

my size are the same like this one (from final liberation pc-game) look at the rhinos in front of the leviathan. i think my leviathan isn´t to big or to small...
my levi ist leviathan command-tank. all leviathan´s are oversized land vehicle!

Dysartes wrote:Working from the Ork and Squat Warlords datasheet for it (as the book was to hand)

SNIP

Also, regarding troop capacity, it is meant to be able to carry 30 stands of troops - or 150 men.....

I can't comment on that, I dont have access to that book, my reference of 6 stands comes from the Epic 40,000 Armies Book, which just highlights the differences even more.

As a Squat fan, I'd also like to point out that the vast majority of Leviathans are supplied to the Imperium as part of a trade program between the Imperium and the Squat Homeworlds, so there's no guarantee it is an STC construct.

Fair point, though I'm not sure if thats been ret-conned or not given Squats have been pretty comprehensively expunged.

w40ktank wrote:
sone peopel wants it bigger and some wants it smaler.

my size are the same like this one (from final liberation pc-game) look at the rhinos in front of the leviathan. i think my leviathan isn´t to big or to small...
my levi ist leviathan command-tank. all leviathan´s are oversized land vehicle!

And I'd agree with that, I've got the game and that picture myself, personlly I went off the model meanwhile, at work so dont have a convient scale shot to hand, but this is pretty useful showing the Leviathan, Baneblade, Shadowsword and the very back of a Capitol Imperialis.



And heres another featureing a Rhino, Landraider, Capitol Imperialis, Knight, Warhound Titan and Mk1 Warlord Titan.

Well BoLS Lord of Battles v.II depicts the Capitol and Leviathan at about the same size.

Col.Gravis wrote:

Dysartes wrote:Working from the Ork and Squat Warlords datasheet for it (as the book was to hand)

SNIP

Also, regarding troop capacity, it is meant to be able to carry 30 stands of troops - or 150 men.....

I can't comment on that, I dont have access to that book, my reference of 6 stands comes from the Epic 40,000 Armies Book, which just highlights the differences even more.

Ah, from the edition that abstracted away most of Epic's flavour?

Also, the same edition which gave an Imperator transport capacity of 8 stands?

Having done a little digging, I see that the Leviathan was given a transport capacity of 14 stands in Epic: Armageddon (in the Collector's Imperial Guard section - annoyingly, no stats were given for the Capitol Imperialis ), which would be about 70 men. Based on that, I'd guess it'd need to be a bit bigger than Kid_Kyoto's version, though I'm not certain by how much.

H.B.M.C - The blessed bolter, unrivalled in keeping the PBI from assaulting your tanks.....

Main structure is done, lots of detailing left but for tomorrow's game it's good to go.


The beast in all its glory


And the rules...



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Still time to add or change stuff to feedback is welcomed. I'm a bit concerned about the under carriage being too plain, and ideas?

Sorry, I just don't care for it as it turned out. It looks too much like you simply took Bastions and set them on top of some tank tracks. You need to mesh them together more somehow.

I would probably take out one of the Bastions, to bring the tracks closer together and try to take off the front of one and back of the other and make them into one set of longer tracks. After that take off the "ground" levels of the Bastions so they're less Bastion-like, and most just walls. At the very least do something with that door so it's less of a hazard, walking out into thin air.

Here's a quick, horrible Paint job of what I would do to it...

The doors are getting balconies and ladders and the rear door is getting a staircase.

Moving the track units to the sides might work but then I'd really worry about them sheering off...

Still it is worth a thought.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
y'know I'm giving this more thought and side-mounted treads might work.

I could drive screws from the inside of the bastions into the sides of the treads. It would sit closer to the ground and look wider and less top-heavy.

The only problem is if it does not work I'll have ruined the model.

Wow looks nice finished. I'd suggest adding a walkway/parapet to connect the tracks and the upper structure. I deinitely see Aduro's point about the two looking stuck together, but I also believe that the fact that the bits are still very recognizable is responsible for that. What bugs me is the space between the track units, those definitely need to be filled up. Maybe add some suspension or some engine stuff over there? But still, that's mere nitpicking; great model, and let us know how it did!

I have to agree with Aduro. It still looks like the concept stages. There is a lot of filling you should do. Especially bulking out and making the bottom look structurally feasible. I don't see how you can ruin the model, just take your time and plan out what you want to do and how to make it sound. The great thing about models is they're easy to change (before paint at least). Shows promise, just don't give up too early.

14,14,13 armours?!?!?! Theres like freakin windows in it and you are giving it 14! no big tank like even has 14, i would say 13,12,11

(._.) wrote:14,14,13 armours?!?!?! Theres like freakin windows in it and you are giving it 14! no big tank like even has 14, i would say 13,12,11

Yes, but by saying that you also display your ignorance of all things Apocalypse

How about scavenging a big ass toy tank for treads instead?

person person wrote:How about scavenging a big ass toy tank for treads instead?

I know that's what a few Leviathan makers have done but I had no luck.

I checked Toys R Us and target before I started, the largest tanks I could find were 12" and this is close to 20". Thanks though.

I've followed advice and added a walkway where the doors are, replacing the tiny balcony I originally had. Pics tomorrow.

Man, that Starwars sandcrawler is like 200 bucks, but that would be a perfect frame to base something like this off of.

Some more work done on my snow day.

Mostly work on the doors.

For the side hatches I'd originally planned a tiny access platform.



But after comments here it became a longer walkway.



The back also got a platform and staircase.



Oh and I'm adding more Tallarn to my IG armies.



Almost 1 am, sleep or paint more Tallarn... tough call.

Looks good. You going to do something with that imperial door on the back?

I really like it. It is a mighty addition to any side in an apoc battle. How did it do in the game you played? I reckon another advantage of it is that its not a titan, meaning that people don't give it too much attention or credit, so you can get on with dropping doomsday shells on them while they try to glory hunt by taking out titans.

Do the baneblade track sections swivel underneath the leviathan? If they do you could add some cool cogs and open machinery to reflect that on the lip of the tracks that extends out.

Keep up the great work kyoto!

I have to say, in a way, it looks awesome, but in a other way, it looks so top-heavy that a single large blast from a baneblade cannon or even a battle cannon would topple this leviathan over.. I strongly recommend to move those baneblade tracks from underneath the hull to the sides..

I would recommend a frame or something similar around that door on the back if possible, something simple would do.

I would say keep the tracks as they are, a vehicle like that needs to have some height off the ground. I would suggest a "skirt" of some sort around the open gaps, nothing major, maybe 1" to 2" long hanging down.

After seeing some of your previous work, I dont really need to say but I like hearing my..er reading myself...forget it, just greenstuff the gaps...sigh.

Last bit, I think the overall dimensions are great and accurate, but for general use, I would knock it down a level...really a tough call.