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.

Frazzled wrote:We'll just have to agree to disagree on that then redbeard. On the positive, i now have ideas on how to combine both with a model showing the soulgrinder "breaking out" of a defiler model. Very cool.

Do that and I'll have no problem You know you wanna make me happy

Redbeard wrote:
Well, that's certainly a matter of opinion. Mine is opposite - I believe that it does clash. Look at the rest of the daemon range. There's nothing boxy about any of it. I think the defiler most definitely does clash with the other daemons.

Blood Crushers are boxy. In fact, juggernaughts are boxy in much the same fashion as a defiler.... hrm...

As an amusing aside, Sourclams, didn't you and I have an argument previously about WYSIWYG regarding CSM and SM? Something along the lines of using C:SM rules for your CSM Legions not being ok? Does this new approach on your part signal a change in heart?

The old juggernauts perhaps. The new juggernauts are all curves; there are few, if any, right angles anywhere on the model.

Wehrkind wrote:
As an amusing aside, Sourclams, didn't you and I have an argument previously about WYSIWYG regarding CSM and SM? Something along the lines of using C:SM rules for your CSM Legions not being ok? Does this new approach on your part signal a change in heart?

As I recall, that debate was regarding using SM models as a counts-as Chaos models with no conversion whatsoever. Newly turned traitor, or somesuch. Someone was saying that it was not confusing for him to use SM Terms as Oblits, and his opponents shouldn't ever have problems with that. My point of view was that SM Terms similarity to Chaos Terms would cause confusion as to whether or not a model was a Terminator, or an Oblit.

In the case of whether or not a Soulgrinder/Defiler is a Soulgrinder/Defiler when played in a CSM or Caemons army, I don't see how there could ever be any confusion.

Ok, pretend I take the autocannon off a soulgrinder and put a reaper autocannon there.

The two models now share %50+ of the parts and the same paint scheme.

Now pretend a scratch-build a terminator chaos lord out of a chaos terminator, aspiring champion, and a WHFB warriors of chaos model.
The two models (GW terminator lord and this new one) have 0 parts in common.

They are both WYSIWYG.
But only 1 of them is acceptable?
Makes perfect sense.

Canonness Rory wrote:But only 1 of them is acceptable?
Makes perfect sense.

Yes, only one is acceptable because one has been a lazy attempt to save on work, while the other has had effort put into it.

Gwar! wrote:

Canonness Rory wrote:But only 1 of them is acceptable?
Makes perfect sense.

Yes, only one is acceptable because one has been a lazy attempt to save on work, while the other has had effort put into it.

1.) What if they just prefer how the soulgrinder looks? Like I said, if I ever plan to field a defiler im just going to buy a soulgrinder because I think it looks cooler. I'll probably put a reaper autocannon on it's arm, so it would take slightly more work than a defiler would.

2.)So if space marine player shows up with a poorly painted and poorly assembled, but 100% codex models, you will refuse to play them because they didn't put as much effort as you did into your army?
Hell, even GW says you shouldn't try to make every single infantryman look perfect if you're trying to field a decent sized army!
I pity anyone who tries to play IG against you.
"YOU DIDN'T PAINT THE EYES!"
"YOU DIDN'T DRILL YOUR LASGUNS OUT!"
"YOU DIDN'T PUT LASER-POINTERS IN YOUR HULL-MOUNTED-LASCANNON!"

Canonness Rory wrote:1.) What if they just prefer how the soulgrinder looks?

Sucks to be them. I prefer how the Carnifex Looks. That doesn't mean I can use it as a Drop Pod

Canonness Rory wrote:2.)So if space marine player shows up with a poorly painted and poorly assembled, but 100% codex models, you will refuse to play them because they didn't put as much effort as you did into your army?
Hell, even GW says you shouldn't try to make every single infantryman look perfect if you're trying to field a decent sized army!
I pity anyone who tries to play IG against you.
"YOU DIDN'T PAINT THE EYES!"
"YOU DIDN'T DRILL YOUR LASGUNS OUT!"
"YOU DIDN'T PUT LASER-POINTERS IN YOUR HULL-MOUNTED-LASCANNON!"

If they are all models that are representative of what they actually are (i.e. No "This Monolith is actually a Whirlwind") then I couldn't care less if it was painted poorly or not. He has done it to the best of his ability.

If the same person were to come and put a Monolith down and go "This is a Whirlwind", it could be the most spectacularly painted thing since Da Vinci but I will tell him to get a whirlwind if he wants to use a whirlwind.

Likewise if someone just puts down a defiler and says "It's a soul grinder hurrrrrrrrr!" I'll tell them if they want to use a Soul Grinder then put down a Soul Grinder.

Are you quite finished with your attack against my character?

Are you quite finished with your attack against my character?

Cry some more.

Gwar, I don't know what you're getting out of this. You have nothing to gain. Give up.

Guys, I think think it's safe to say that we've reached a point where nobody is going to change anybody's mind, and simply paying attention to somebody who clearly craves it is not doing any favors to the thread.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:Gwar, I don't know what you're getting out of this. You have nothing to gain. Give up.

Are my posts breaking any of Dakkas rules? I have in fact been extra careful to not lose my temper and be rude, unlike others in this thread.

What is your take on this? If I were to come to a game with you and place a Monolith Down on the table and say "This is a whirlwind", would you be annoyed? Yes or No, please.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:Guys, I think think it's safe to say that we've reached a point where nobody is going to change anybody's mind, and simply paying attention to somebody who clearly craves it is not doing any favors to the thread.

More indirect attacks against my character. I thought you were better than that.

Gwar! wrote:

Canonness Rory wrote:1.) What if they just prefer how the soulgrinder looks?

Sucks to be them. I prefer how the Carnifex Looks. That doesn't mean I can use it as a Drop Pod

Canonness Rory wrote:2.)So if space marine player shows up with a poorly painted and poorly assembled, but 100% codex models, you will refuse to play them because they didn't put as much effort as you did into your army?
Hell, even GW says you shouldn't try to make every single infantryman look perfect if you're trying to field a decent sized army!
I pity anyone who tries to play IG against you.
"YOU DIDN'T PAINT THE EYES!"
"YOU DIDN'T DRILL YOUR LASGUNS OUT!"
"YOU DIDN'T PUT LASER-POINTERS IN YOUR HULL-MOUNTED-LASCANNON!"

If they are all models that are representative of what they actually are (i.e. No "This Monolith is actually a Whirlwind") then I couldn't care less if it was painted poorly or not. He has done it to the best of his ability.

If the same person were to come and put a Monolith down and go "This is a Whirlwind", it could be the most spectacularly painted thing since Da Vinci but I will tell him to get a whirlwind if he wants to use a whirlwind.

Likewise if someone just puts down a defiler and says "It's a soul grinder hurrrrrrrrr!" I'll tell them if they want to use a Soul Grinder then put down a Soul Grinder.

Are you quite finished with your attack against my character?

and we are saying a soul grinder equals a defiler. like a space wolves dreadnaught can be used as a space marine dreadnaught. they are the same model with the same weapon loadout with the same profile. a black reach dreadnaught used as a chaos dreadnaught same sort of thing.

skkipper wrote:and we are saying a soul grinder equals a defiler. like a space wolves dreadnaught can be used as a space marine dreadnaught. they are the same model with the same weapon loadout with the same profile. a black reach dreadnaught used as a chaos dreadnaught same sort of thing.

No, it is like saying a Monolith is a Whirlwind.

Gwar! wrote:

skkipper wrote:and we are saying a soul grinder equals a defiler. like a space wolves dreadnaught can be used as a space marine dreadnaught. they are the same model with the same weapon loadout with the same profile. a black reach dreadnaught used as a chaos dreadnaught same sort of thing.

No, it is like saying a Monolith is a Whirlwind.

is a monolith the same size as a whirlwind no
same weapons no

it is wsywig for the army and I am glad you don't live by me.

skkipper wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

skkipper wrote:and we are saying a soul grinder equals a defiler. like a space wolves dreadnaught can be used as a space marine dreadnaught. they are the same model with the same weapon loadout with the same profile. a black reach dreadnaught used as a chaos dreadnaught same sort of thing.

No, it is like saying a Monolith is a Whirlwind.

is a monolith the same size as a whirlwind no
same weapons no

Does the Defiler have the EXACT same weapons as a Soul Grinder? Is it the EXACT same size down to the last Planck length?

No to both.

skkipper wrote:it is wsywig for the army and I am glad you don't live by me.

I'm glad I don't live near me too.

If you actually have to explain what the model is, WYSIWYG is pretty much right out.

Note: The first "S" is for "See" not "Say".

shrug

Gwar! wrote:

skkipper wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

skkipper wrote:and we are saying a soul grinder equals a defiler. like a space wolves dreadnaught can be used as a space marine dreadnaught. they are the same model with the same weapon loadout with the same profile. a black reach dreadnaught used as a chaos dreadnaught same sort of thing.

No, it is like saying a Monolith is a Whirlwind.

is a monolith the same size as a whirlwind no
same weapons no

Does the Defiler have the EXACT same weapons as a Soul Grinder? Is it the EXACT same size down to the last Planck length?
No to both.

skkipper wrote:it is wsywig for the army and I am glad you don't live by me.

I'm glad I don't live near me too.

yep maul cannon( a cannon that comes out of a mouth yep) and multibarrel gun. both models have fully possible legs so you can make them almost any height.
you are wrong please move along

kirsanth wrote:If you actually have to explain what the model is, WYSIWYG is pretty much right out.

Note: The first "S" is for "See" not "Say".

shrug

I think you rolled a 18 for Intelligence

skkipper wrote:yep maul cannon( a cannon that comes out of a mouth yep) and multibarrel gun. both models have fully possible legs so you can make them almost any height.
you are wrong please move along

Hmm, that's weird, I was certain a Defiler had a Battle Cannon and a Reaper Autocannon, while the Defiler had a Harvester and a Mawcannon.

-Checks Codex-

Indeed, I remembered correctly.

As far as I am aware, they are not the same, in either function or Aesthetics.

Gwar! wrote:

Mars.Techpriest wrote:1) As proxy, sure, go ahead.

This, and only if I knew you well. If you pulled this at a random game I'd tell you to Go Buy a Soul grinder or not play. People wouldn't be happy me Proxying a Dreadnought as a Carnifex would they?

I don't get why people have such a problem Gwar's statement, it's perfectly reasonable. If the guy says to you up front "Hey, would you like to play a game? I'm playtesting a new list and I have some proxy models" and you say "sure" that's fine. But if someone asks you for a 1500 point game, you say "sure" and then during deployment they say "oh, by the way, 1/3 the points in my army are actually other things" I can see where the problem is.

That being said, I usually allow my opponents to proxy things because I don't have a perfectly WYSIWYG army (still haven't modeled a Gaze of Flame for my Necron Lord), but I do prefer it if the actual models can be on the field, even if they lack the appropriate options.

RobPro wrote:I don't get why people have such a problem Gwar's statement

My theory is jealousy, but that's obviously because I am an Arrogant donkey-cave.

how about this; since I too personally prefer the Soulgrinder model over the Defiler, what someone could do:

For a Soulgrinder -> Defiler
-Get a soulgrinder
-Get a battlecannon from any sprue that has one
-Get a reaper autocannon
-Place them in the proper location(s)

For a Defiler -> Soulgrinder:
-Don't play Gwar!
(it really is that simple)

Are you quite finished with your attack against my character?

I fail to see any attacks on your character, just a poster being, shall we say, "less than polite". Claiming to be a victim doesn't make you one.

Cry some more.

Rude and provocative. You have a history of insulting Gwar; keep the tone civil.

I really don't know why people are still arguing this. Point and counterpoint have been made, and really it comes down to opponent's or tournament organizer's permission. Why do you care what someone who you'll never play against thinks?