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.

 Lynata wrote:
Boltguns fire in calibre .75 and heavy bolters fire in 1.00. There is a model 998 bolter, which might be where the calibre idea might originate?
Furthermore, bolt projectiles leave the weapon at low velocity (subsonic) before their rocket motor kicks in. We already have real world weapons firing larger shells with more speed.

Interestingly enough, .75 was the caliber of the Brown Bess, the musket the British empire used to conquer quite a bit of the world. Makes me wonder if GW was a French Company, if it would be in .69 Charleville?

TheCaptain wrote:Fair enough; SM game said .998.

Ohh. Yeah, somebody on their end must've misinterpreted the name then.
That said, the game isn't entirely accurate in its depiction of Astartes weaponry anyways if you compare it with GW fluff. From meltas working like shotguns to lascannons using tiny chargepacks rather than backpacks.
Granted, the latter is probably because the developer didn't want to bother modeling a cable connecting the weapon to a backpack...

TheCaptain wrote:Regardless, a bolt-pistol will still require a lot of force to expel the round from the gun accurately, even if it does have secondary ignition. No bullet "leaving the weapon at low velocity" will be reliably accurate.

I guess that would depend when on the rocket motor kicks in? I don't think that, say, half a meter on reduced velocity would change a projectile's trajectory much. We'd still be talking something like 200-300 m/sec for sure, and that's just for a few milliseconds.

The exact speed is just a theory of mine; according to the Chapter Approved DW Kill-team rules, Stalker-pattern bolts are subsonic (so below 340 m/sec) even on full speed, and thanks to the magics of sci-fi tech they still deliver the same penetration and damage. The latter is logical as velocity wouldn't change the effects of the explosion, the former ... well, perhaps it would be sufficient to just point at the abstract nature of the game's rules and the difference not being big enough to result in a stat change?
Anyways, the "low velocity" bit was mentioned in the Wargear book first, and the CA rules kind of backed it up (it wouldn't make sense if Stalker bolts would be fired on a faster velocity than they actually travel with active rocket motor).

Space Marines and humans have been using the same "line" of weapons since forever. I'd still expect Astartes weapons to be a bit bigger and heavier to conform to their slightly increased size, though - likely sporting stuff like extra armour (to deal with increased stress in combat) or additional internal gadgets - see this cross-section for an idea of how sophisticated these guns can actually be.

BaronIveagh wrote:Interestingly enough, .75 was the caliber of the Brown Bess, the musket the British empire used to conquer quite a bit of the world. Makes me wonder if GW was a French Company, if it would be in .69 Charleville?

Huh, that I did not know. Quite likely not a coincidence then.
Thanks for the fun fact!

This thread type always descends into two distinct camps:
1. Those that want to have female soldiers to have a greater diversity in their army
2. Those that just want tits and ass

Neither will convince the other camp to change minds, so OP, you can either go with the tight ass IG (as any soldier will tell, having your uniform right up you butt makes fighting so much easier) shown earlier or you could just do head swaps and do a slight bit of filing around the waist.

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:
Nope, but IG are the cloest thing to a real world military, and I personally can ignore the lack of vehicle scale, but having an army of stippers is too over the top for me. And again. Flak armor Kroot. We're talking about Flak armor, which would look like the pictures I posted.

So in other words, if someone is searching for female Guard, you are suggesting to just use male models, as females look basically the same? Okaaay.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:
Nope, but IG are the cloest thing to a real world military, and I personally can ignore the lack of vehicle scale, but having an army of stippers is too over the top for me. And again. Flak armor Kroot. We're talking about Flak armor, which would look like the pictures I posted.

So in other words, if someone is searching for female Guard, you are suggesting to just use male models, as females look basically the same? Okaaay.

Hah.

/thread

http://www.digitaltrends.com/lifestyle/us-military-developing-better-armor-for-female-troops-takes-a-nod-from-xena-the-warrior-princess/?src=Outbrain


Interestingly, while I doubt that it will be a breastplate, the US army is looking at armors that will better fit female soldiers.

Text removed.
Reds8n

 Kroothawk wrote:

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:
Nope, but IG are the cloest thing to a real world military, and I personally can ignore the lack of vehicle scale, but having an army of stippers is too over the top for me. And again. Flak armor Kroot. We're talking about Flak armor, which would look like the pictures I posted.

So in other words, if someone is searching for female Guard, you are suggesting to just use male models, as females look basically the same? Okaaay.

Replace the head with a feminine head. Have you read anything I posted? Here I'll quote myself to make it easier for you.

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:
My problem with the mini's is that they exaggerate the feminine characteristics. They go into battle with their boobs hangingout in stripper heals, clown make up and skin tight pants, and it ruins everything for me. I know its a fantasy game, but I hate a chain mail bikini or the like you know. I do like the http://statuesqueminiatures.shop033.com/ ones since their clearly female with out resorting to stripperness. The ones BaronIveagh posted would work if they didn't have the skin tight pants in the arse area.

Honestly if you seen a woman in fatigues about the only characteristic that would stand out at 28mm would be the face and maybe the hips. I'd stick with cadian bodies with the resistance heads. Just my personal preference.

Also the Female commissar is clearly a male in drag.

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:
Just gonna leave some pics here for you Kroot. Since we are talking about females in Flak armor. Not Marines. Put in spoiler tags to help slower PC's.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

The next pic is of custom ACU's designed to fit the female form better.

Spoiler:

The Face and Hips are really the only things distinctly female. Which will not be too noticeable at 28mm. So cadians with female heads would work great.

Even this exagerates the female characteristics alot and I thought it was the best of the lot you guys posted.

Spoiler:

However its way better then the drag queen Commissar GW put out.

Now you'll see that I said at 28mm the only thing that sticks out is the Face and Hips. So yes basically I said use the Cadian Bodies with a Female head since at 28mm its the only noticible characteristic. Even IRL the face and hips are the only difference between the sexes in combat gear.. So at 28mm it would work in a realistic way. If you rather have an army of strippers then it wont work that way.

The model you showed has a distinctly masculine face. So it wouldn't work. Also I'm thinking your a troll, but I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt for now.

ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:So at 28mm it would work in a realistic way. If you rather have an army of strippers then it wont work that way.

Surely there is some middle ground to be found here.
I'm not sure that headswaps alone will actually make the miniature visibly female in a way that the conversion actually paid off - unless you resort to awkward accents like lipstick. Likewise, I don't think anyone here is truly advocating "an army of strippers" (unless it's a Hiver regiment ).
I guess it depends on the quality/detail of the heads, too, though. Anyone try this, do we have pictures or something?

As for the female Commissar, let's not forget that this is the 41st millennium and this style of fashion is totally in with the Imperial citizenry. Sexist? I guess so, but as a species we seem to have a hard time getting away from it. On one hand we cry foul because it objectifies people, on the other we dismiss criticism because it is "empowering". Silly humans.

@Psienesis: lol

i want stripper guard army now..

How about Catachans?

 Kroothawk wrote:
How about Catachans?

HA KNEW YOU WHERE TROLLING! LOL good one Kroot. However isnt there a GW Catachan that looks like that?

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
How about Catachans?

HA KNEW YOU WHERE TROLLING! LOL good one Kroot.

What.

Quick somebody post a pic of the Lieutenant from Space Marine!

 BaronIveagh wrote:

They actually look pretty similar.

Kroothawk wrote:How about Catachans?

A female Catachan would be more muscular than most (non-Catachan) men, they grew up on Catachan after all

Drake: Hey Vasquez, you ever been mistaken for a man?
Vasquez: No, have you?

/aliens

wut

 BluntmanDC wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:How about Catachans?

A female Catachan would be more muscular than most (non-Catachan) men, they grew up on Catachan after all

... but also cuter, they grew up on Cata-chan after all

So... What would make the best model to use for a stripper squad? Thinking of modeling some civilians of the city life

Depends. Would you want to model a Hive World regiment where people are clothed as if they're living in the Bronx - or a Feral World regiment consisting of Conans and Red Sonjas?

Either way, Hasslefree is good...

... or Shadow Forge. Their female Catachans are even good for serious female Guard.

Not one of my better faces, the faces that dark soul sculpted were either too deep or too flat, but...

 cormadepanda wrote:
i want stripper guard army now..

Forget that. I want a RHPS guard army.
Fishnets and corsets everywhere! Especially the Ogryns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Not one of my better faces, the faces that dark soul sculpted were either too deep or too flat, but...

Is that meant to be a female? I really can't tell.

Ok I can see some of my points people seem to have taken offense to. Psi I wasn't telling you how you pursue your hobby or how to pursue your hobby. I was stating a fact people aim for realistic paint jobs on their models, please don't take that personally, but what ever your reason for painting a model it still looks like a realistic effect, that was the point I was trying to make. Yes 40k isn't real but that doesn't mean people shouldn't try to paint or make models that look real.

Sure enough the physics behind the weapons, armour etc. is ridiculous, but I never referred to the physics as realistic, I referred to the look. The style of the armour, the look of the weapons all these add (when painted in a realistic style) to the believability of the model. This is what I want to clarify.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Not one of my better faces, the faces that dark soul sculpted were either too deep or too flat, but...

That face is actually pretty good and looks female to me. Of course at first glance it might be hard to tell but thats a woman.

The think the question people need to ask themselves is, which is most important: that your enemies know they are facing women without a doubt or that you know with certainty yourself.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Not one of my better faces, the faces that dark soul sculpted were either too deep or too flat, but...

Spoiler:

Looks pretty decent to my eyes.

Next question for me is where to get a decent supply of appropriate 28mm female heads. I checked the Warstore, even did a search for just "heads" - I tried "female heads" first, but no results - and scanned through all 12 pages of results, but came up pretty much empty apart from a conversion kit that I think has been posted in this thread already. The Shadowforge one.

I know I haven't posted much in this thread, but I've been reading through it from time to time.

Edit: Actually, thinking more, about 15-20 heads would probably be good enough, since I play small games...

 Pouncey wrote:

Looks pretty decent to my eyes.

Next question for me is where to get a decent supply of appropriate 28mm female heads. I checked the Warstore, even did a search for just "heads" - I tried "female heads" first, but no results - and scanned through all 12 pages of results, but came up pretty much empty apart from a conversion kit that I think has been posted in this thread already. The Shadowforge one.

I know I haven't posted much in this thread, but I've been reading through it from time to time.

Edit: Actually, thinking more, about 15-20 heads would probably be good enough, since I play small games...

Decent female heads are always a tough one. Hasslefree makes some OK metal ones, but they're plain and bald, meaning you'd have to do some green stuff to make them look good. Unless you like em bald and hatless.

 ObliviousBlueCaboose wrote:
Honestly if you seen a woman in fatigues about the only characteristic that would stand out at 28mm would be the face and maybe the hips.

If you're making an effort to include female models in your force, surely you want them to be noticeably female?

If you do, then surely realism must take a back seat to emphasised features?

Otherwise, just use the regular models and if anyone asks just say they're female.