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 did a thing. When the Repulsor Executioner came out I loved the idea of a 'proper' tank for the Astartes, but I hated the way GW had festooned weapons in the most illogical places all over the hull. So I decided to rectify it. This is my attempt at making the Repulsor Executioner a bit more logical. The conversion work was done about a year ago, but I never got around to weathering this. Fortunately, I took the dive to learn how to weather better on some 1:48 historical aircraft recently, and that gave me the impetus to finally finish this up. It's actually a number of 'firsts' really - it's also my first vehicle painted with an airbrush, which was another learning curve. Let me know what you think, C&C is welcome and appreciated .
@Mods - I am aware this doesn't have a base (I don't game, so for display purposes it's just on it's clear stand). Please feel free to move this thread into somewhere more appropriate if you feel it's breaking the rules too much.
I know people often poo poo on the new SM tanks for guns everywhere, making them too busy looking and I can understand that argument.
One thing that I've noticed, though, is that when reducing clutter, often the first thing people remove is all the stowage options on the tanks--even before removing or relocating the guns (as you have here).
Stowage is actually a very realistic thing to have on an armored vehicle, and honestly makes it more "realistic" looking in my opinion.
All that aside (really just a personal opinion), I really love what you've done with the turret here. I haven't yet assembled my Executioner, as I was trying to figure out what I'd do about the gun overload. Some great ideas here with the rocket pod placement and second hatch/cupola. Yours looks great with the flames and weathering!
@Quasistellar - Thanks for the compliment - appreciate it!
As for the stowage, I completely agree in most cases. Spoilered explanation:
Spoiler:
The problem I have with SM tanks, is that stowage is largely redundant here. If you trawl through pictures of tanks from the Second World War onwards, you'll note that stowage is typically of two varieties - small arms ammunition and personal kit (Usually sleeping kit, packs and combat armour). The problem then lies with SM as troops. They do not need to sleep on operations, they do not remove their armour (Except, arguably, the power pack for extra-vehiclar combat) and they do not require food or water supplies due to the stimms and recycling provisions inside the armour itself. So in terms of soft stowage, it's utterly redundant on an SM tank. Which leaves us with ammunition. This is slightly more subjective in terms of how you consider SM to operate. If you perceive them as a strike force, they do not take part in extended operations and (likely) their weapon systems are designed to hold a specific quantity appropriate for the operation. However, if you consider that they undertake extended ops (equally reasonable), then yes, extra ammunition stowage is appropriate.
And then there's the inbetween stance - they carry extra ammo as and when it's warranted on a situational basis. Or there's the get-out clause - the extra ammunition is loaded into the troop bay. Or Astartes are supremely efficient and require less ammunition.
Essentially, I didn't add the extra stowage because of a combination of thinking soft stowage doesn't apply to SMs and because the weapons systems it possesses would use such a volume of ammunition (and of such large caliber) that it would have to be dripping with storage racks for the extra ammunition to be anything other than a token gesture - unless, the ammunition is held inside the troop compartment. It's GW's perennial problem of not understanding that tanks can have big weapons because they don't carry troops, and IFVs have smaller weapons because there's no space for ammunition and troops.
As for my conversions - I basically just wanted them to make sense. It didn't make sense for the AA installation to be wedged into a 45 degree traverse behind the turret. It didn't make sense to have the anti-infantry bolters on either corner of the turret and their arc dictated by where the main gun is focused. The missile launchers are a little more reasonable if they're guided missiles, but I think it's better to have them in a 360 mount and acting more like a guided mortar system. The main gun was lengthened mainly because I like 'proper' tanks It's not a perfect conversion, but outside of something like a 30k Glaive, it's the best alternative to GWs janky tank design (IMHO).
I really like it mate. A lot of people tend to go massively overboard when weathering vehicles and make them look like they are literally just about to collapse into piles of rust covered junk. You have just the right level of it here. I also love the subtle flame effect on the vehicle too.
Zap Brannigan -
"In the game of chess you can never let your adversary see your pieces."
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate."
"Rock breaks scissors. But paper covers rock, and scissors cut paper! Kiff: we have a conundrum...... Search them for paper... and bring me a rock."
The flames aren't to my liking (too blurry) but, they are perfect because they look like they were airbrushed on by one of the space marines (i.e. van art). Great work on this vehicle.
I agree with Shadows that the flames could use some more definition on the edges, but overall a very good job. I've never liked the Repulsor either but I do like this one.
@Valkyrie and Shadows - Aye, I can see what you mean. The flames are a little sharper in person, but they are generally more 'glowy' than defined. I was avoiding hot rod flames, and this is my first time attemping 'true' flames. Definitely room for improvement!
I really like what you did with the turret and weapon placement. I generally like GW's designs and don't mind lots of dakka, but some of their recent vehicles have guns randomly tacked on in a way that doesn't work if you're not an Ork. Taking inspiration from modern armored vehicles to rein in these excesses is a good idea. Back when I did my Taurox Prime, I relocated the hull guns to the turret for similar reasons, although the result isn't quite as compelling due to a lack of turret space.
.
It's not a perfect conversion, but outside of something like a 30k Glaive, it's the best alternative to 
.
