| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/14 09:03:49
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
1) Lack of Helmeted Sisters.
2) Lack of female Guard heads.
3) Lack of female Sisters heads (and generally the oversized 'hero scale' heads that make it look like their armour is less than a half cm thick).
4) Dreadknights having Terminator pilots - should be a PAGK, since the DK provides Terminator-level protection anyway and even the GK don't have an infinite supply of Terminator suits.
5) PAGK. The wrist storm bolters look... silly on PA gauntlets. Sorry. They just do.
Also, Dshrike - in Rogue Trader, Hunter-Killers had lasguns  That's why Termagants carry their weapons.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/15 19:26:08
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/14 21:01:43
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
I love how many of peoples "aesthetic" dislikes are actually about game rules...
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/15 19:37:09
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
OgreChubbs wrote:
mmmmm you know heroic scale is smaller heads......right?
Uh, no. Heroic scale is why Space Marine and Sister of Battle heads are the same size as Space Marine and Sister of Battle helmets.
throwoff wrote:
Marine shotguns - not only hideous but why do they fire solid slugs.. I mean come on buckshot against nids would be more effective!!
Hurricaine bolters - the same ones on land raider crusaders are as powerful on those attached to centurion suits...
You're kidding, right? Buckshot would increase the 'nids armour save from 5+ to 4+. Buckshot does not penetrate well.
In fact, the only reason it's called Buckshot is because 'Duckshot' sounds less manly. Buckshot is only really used for hunting birds.
As for Hurricane Bolters, you do realise that the Hurricane Bolter is literally a battlefield jury-rig (originally) made by linking six regular Godwyn-pattern bolters to a single mount and trigger, right?
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/16 20:49:59
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
MWHistorian wrote:True, not quite aesthetic, but like others reminded me, I hate that there are so few female characters. The IG should be at least 1/3 female. (depending on planet I suppose.)
40k is too much a sausage fest even to the point of contradicting the fluff. There should also be more female Eldar and where are the female Tau?
Female Tau are only distinguishable against male Tau to humans by the Y-shaped incision on their face instead of the vertical slit, so... craft knife fixes that issue pretty neatly.
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Not to sound like a male chauvinist pig... but the Cadian models are AWEFUL proportions, I'd much rather GW fix the proportions of the male models so they actually look human before worrying about adding female models.
If they just added a female torso to the Cadians it'd look silly because the arms, legs and heads are too thick even for a man let alone a woman.
Though maybe the female models would also be fethed up in proportions enough to look like regular human males 
I don't think it makes you a male chauvinist pig to make that comment, but I disagree. Fixing the models' proportions would mean they don't fit in with the rest of the older models in the army, whereas with the emphasis on the heads on GW models, female heads on equally disproportionate bodies would look just as good (or bad) as the male models.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 10:24:08
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
All of a sudden I find myself gripped by terrified, morbid curiosity about your kinks if you think squirming, pulsing beetles covered in eyes and teeth look like sex toys.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 14:35:22
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
... my boobs hurt just from watching that transformation sequence. No.
Just... no.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 00:13:17
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
Veteran Sergeant wrote:What the hell did I just watch? I had to break the link just to ensure I'd have no part in redsitributing that nonsense.
You anime kiddos are weird.
 Don't lump me in with them...
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 10:18:59
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
The Valkyrie, I believe, is actually a vectored thrust aircraft like the Harrier. When entering hover mode, the entire output of those two massive engines on the top is redirected to the four wingtip fans. The narrow aperture on the wingtips increases the effective downthrust relative to the engine output.
It's still a stupid way to run a transport plane though. There's a reason the Osprey has props.
Seconding the disgust at the White Dwarf painting scheme, and I don't know where their photographer trained, but gods, man, I take better photos than you do and I was just the note-taker!
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/21 10:22:25
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 15:52:26
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
I suppose so, but there's also the fact that in terms of fuel efficiency, a straight-up VTOL is never going to be superior to a V/STOVL. The Valkyrie would be a much more reasonable aircraft (if you assume, as I do, that the wings on the 'real thing' have aerofoils), if it had wheels instead of skids.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 18:42:05
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
The Guardsmen models have long been criticised as being too large.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/23 01:33:49
Subject: Re:Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
Lynata and Frozen Ocean are men. My universe is shattered. Noooo. [/deadpan sarcasm]
Unyielding Hunger wrote:5. Certain terrible vehicle exit locations. As wonderful as the models are in general, I would love to see conversions that would remove those issues of friendly fire.
4. Lack of bodily protection. Gentlemen (and occasionally Ladies), you are among the finest tacticians your respective faction can produce, be it T'au, Adeptas Astartes, Eldar, or even Ork (Especially Ork.). Bring appropriate full body armor and helmet to prevent quick and immediate death upon the battlefield.
Oh, sir, honestly, I wish I could[i] rock up to my games in full power armour. Really, I do.
For the following 3 responses, I apologize to all the veteran SoB players, especially SisterSydney and Furyou Miku. I surrender myself to your flamers for summary execution for heresy.
3. Exorcists. I would perfer a far better pun than a couple ladies who can play some pretty explosive solos.
2. Sisters of Battle haircuts. I'm sorry ladies, but that style is not a mandate of the God Emperor of Mankind. Feel free to show some minor individuality as long as you punish yourself appropriately for it later.
1. Adepta Sororitas armor. Oh how I wish there was a more modern version without the boobplate and heels. I can understand the flair they were going for in the 80s, but that armor just does not look like it can be rated at 4+ save, let alone 3+. Heck, I picked up some Sisters just recently, and I think I see rivets on the cloak.
On point #2: white hair. Look, people. Ephrael Stern had white hair because she was the Daemonifuge. White dye jobs are [i]not standard issue amongst the Adepta Sororitas! Sadly, since the original codex, it seems that the studio painting team have decided to go with white hair as well, which just reinforces this silly idea. Sisters do NOT have to have white hair!
On the armour: I think part of the reason people think it would struggle to provide a 4+ save is because of the over-sized heads. Remember, the Sisters models are the same size as the Space Marine models of their time, even though the Sisters themselves are smaller. Sororitas Power Armour is not skin tight. It is thick, armoured plate with mechanical support. Godwyn De'az bolters are not miniature. They are actually longer than Astartes bolters in some cases. If you look at bolters contemporary to when the Sisters were released, the Marines' bolters look like SMGs in comparison.
It is due to these reasons that I reckon that a fully armoured Battle Sister is roughly the same size as a fully armoured Space Marine - because the armour itself is not skin tight to the wearer, but built around them... That's why you can have Sisters novices in power armour, even though their youth makes them smaller than full Battle Sisters - the difference in size is made up by a support frame inside the armour.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/23 07:14:42
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
The plastic Sisters heads off the Immolator sprue are the same size as each other AND the standard tactical marine helmet AND the standard bare space marine baldy head.
If you use the front half-torso out of the Immolator kit to build a model, you have to use Guardian legs and a fantasy Elf head or it it looks like they're a bobblehead in flare trousers.
As for the armour, half joking, half serious, because honestly, walking around in a badass suit of power armour (with internal cooling or heating system!) would be awesome. But also patently ridiculous.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/23 22:33:23
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
I love the original hive tyrant.
Those colours are no longer available, I believe.
|
|
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/24 21:15:31
Subject: Your top 5 most displeasing aesthetic aspectsof the 40k setting?
|
 |
Hallowed Canoness
|
403 Forbidden, Plum. Automatically Appended Next Post: 403 Forbidden, Plum.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/24 21:16:16
|
|
|
 |
|
|