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.

Since, in the fluff, drop pods doors blow off, would it be odd to model the pods without doors? I think they would look pretty cool. I know with the FAQ people want to keep them on for LOS blocking but ITC ignores them for all purposes.

Thoughts?

The doors blow open, not off IIRC.

Drop pod doors are one of the frequent visitors to the YMDC section of Dakka, for another round of arguments. And as the latest Draft FAQs that GW is putting out, even they are not done with the rules on pods yet.

You never know what the next rules edition will bring. I would not build something based on one interpretation currently in use. By building it as close to the instructions as possible, you can avoid MFA issues that might arise in the future.

In a hypothetical example, if the deployed doors are part of the hull, and that counts for landing, a door-less pod would have a much smaller footprint, letting you drop them in tighter spots and denser groups.

They are your models, and you can do what you want with them. But there might be some rules issues, maybe sooner, rather then later.

If your local gamers don't mind, by all means model the pods without doors. But you'd better keep those doors, just in case GW finally get around to writing some clear rules around how the doors work and you suddenly need to rebase to include the doors...