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'm browsing the land raiders, and I tried searching for it in indexes and on the internet but I cannot seem to find any difference in stats or rules...

Is the MkIIb and the GW Land Raider the same in the rule book?

They're the same. Mk.IIB Land Raiders are just a different model, same as how Tactical Marines in different marks of armour are identical on the table.

Basically it's the more common variant in the Horus Heresy the "current" version that along later during the Heresy thus being in more limited quantities during the HH. Looks wise it pays homage to the plastic land raiders that came along with epic 40,000 in mid-90's much like the Deimos rhino pays homage to the original rhino plastic kit.

Take it if you like the looks off. Just assembled mine for HH Blood Angels. Nice kit.

this is good info. I also noticed that for anyone really picky about disembarking at door points, the door points on the MkII are behind the sponson weapons... though I'm pretty sure you could move them forward on the GW land raider.
deeply considering having both since I dont think the MkII has the Crusader configuration allowing extra space in it.

Yeah no crusader mark on MKIIb.

Also note on the doors if you feel like using FW upgrade kits for this you need both land raider AND rhino kit if you want all. Front part requires the upgrade piece from land raider kit while side doors are actually rhino sized.

This went me go "aaargh!" and decide not to legion mark my land raider. 2 upgrade kits with left over pieces didn't sound that appealing.

Mjkramer8003 wrote:
this is good info. I also noticed that for anyone really picky about disembarking at door points, the door points on the MkII are behind the sponson weapons... though I'm pretty sure you could move them forward on the GW land raider.
deeply considering having both since I dont think the MkII has the Crusader configuration allowing extra space in it.

That's only relevant in HH by now - 40k no longer has doors, you disembark more like it was with Open-Topped vehicles in 7th.

The doors should be behind the weapons... nothing worse than getting incinerated by trying to get out at the wrong moment.

 Flinty wrote:
The doors should be behind the weapons... nothing worse than getting incinerated by trying to get out at the wrong moment.

Or having the weapons disabled by safety interlocks because someone didn't shut the door properly...

Plus the current LR looks better with front sponsons.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
The doors should be behind the weapons... nothing worse than getting incinerated by trying to get out at the wrong moment.

Or having the weapons disabled by safety interlocks because someone didn't shut the door properly...

Plus the current LR looks better with front sponsons.

You could interlock them but a) it's complicated and therefore prone to failure and b) it stops your gunners doing their jobs, probably at a critical moment, I.e. covering fire as the troops disembark. I agree, much better to get out behind the guns

Mjkramer8003 wrote:
this is good info. I also noticed that for anyone really picky about disembarking at door points, the door points on the MkII are behind the sponson weapons... though I'm pretty sure you could move them forward on the GW land raider.
deeply considering having both since I dont think the MkII has the Crusader configuration allowing extra space in it.

The land raider kit was specifically designed to allow people to choose whether to put the doors in front or behind the sponsons. (From the designer's notes published when the kit was revealed)

Common convention in GW's own builds over the years has been to have the doors in front on the regular land raider, and behind on the Crusader pattern.


Personally, I prefer the way it looks with the doors in front... and having them behind the sponsons really isn't any 'safer' when the sponsons are designed with a 180+ degree firearc...

Depends on preferences.

Its more the long barreled laser cannons, well kinda get in the way of the doors if you had doors in front.

On a crusaders smaller guns they can do behind.. Plus they are mainly meant for transport capacity than there guns let's be honest!

The MkIIb Land Raider appeared in Epic 40k just before the MkIII Land Raider finally replaced the MkI in regular 40k. And the MkIIb stayed an Epic scale only model for well over a decade before FW produced a regular scale kit.

In the fluff, MkII’s are Post-Spartan production Land Raiders, built to accommodate TDA without the extended hull. The current “MkIII” is technically just a Phobos-pattern MkII, but GW tends to forgot their own fluff from time to time, and then just make stupid stuff up to retcon the error. In this case, they forgot that they just released MkII’s literally a month before they released the MkIII’s.

SJ

Would it be better (in a thematic sense) to use MkIIb landraiders to represent Venerable Land Raider tanks for the Custodes with some embellishment added?

I modelled the doors in the front slots on mine.

But mine also have notices on the hatches.

"The Emperor commands: Thou shalt duck" and "DANGER: Do not stand in front of laser cannons".