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.

The Surveyor wrote:
Anyone know what the DImensions are? How tall and WIde? Is this more like the lord of skulls or is it bigger closer to a Stompa! wanna Loot one but needs to "as is" for either a Mega-Dread or Stompa.....

15 CM tall, that much is told to the stores.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Unsure if posted yet, but heres another size ref picture...

Several times now.

 insaniak wrote:

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Unsure if posted yet, but heres another size ref picture...

Several times now.

Alright, I've tried to keep up with the thread since day 1, but too many pages while I'm not around lol

Pardon my previous rage post....On a more positive note....There models will be awesome for conversions and I'm sure my jaw will be on the floor when people convert these. Especially if I could see an entire house of Knights in AD-MECH colours for 30k!

A teaser with an actual model picture at the end?

GW is improving...

 akkados wrote:
Video. again

Seriously, folks, the enthusiasm is awesome, but please at least read the thread before hitting Reply...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Therion wrote:

Broadsides are bigger models than Space Marine Dreadnoughts, but I never seen anyone wonder why they're not vehicles.

Really? I can recall quite a few complaints about that back when the Tau were new.

Well to be fair the original broadsided were just crisis suits with metal bits stuck on. They were the size of a crisis suits, just with guns bigger than them. .

Yes... and both the Crisis and Broadside should have been treated as Walkers.

 insaniak wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Therion wrote:

Broadsides are bigger models than Space Marine Dreadnoughts, but I never seen anyone wonder why they're not vehicles.

Really? I can recall quite a few complaints about that back when the Tau were new.

Well to be fair the original broadsided were just crisis suits with metal bits stuck on. They were the size of a crisis suits, just with guns bigger than them. .

Yes... and both the Crisis and Broadside should have been treated as Walkers.

Why? Statwise, they have always been jet infantry/infantry. They are powered suits, more like the tau version of terminator armor than a dreadnought.

Well bugger

thats next months pay gone lol

I want to know what their codex will look like. It could still be a lukewarm turd floating in a sea of khorne flakes.

 BunkerBob wrote:
I want to know what their codex will look like. It could still be a lukewarm turd floating in a sea of khorne flakes.

The rules have been posted here multiple times, unless they've since been edited out. I think that they're kind of cool, yet pretty mediocre. I'll take one because of the cool factor and because hey, large melta blasts are pretty cool.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Why? Statwise, they have always been jet infantry/infantry. They are powered suits, more like the tau version of terminator armor than a dreadnought.

Because they're not powered suits. They're a walking vehicle with a guy sitting in a little capsule in the middle. The only difference between a Crisis suit and a dreadnought is that the Crisis pilot can get out by himself.

 Brother SRM wrote:

 BunkerBob wrote:
I want to know what their codex will look like. It could still be a lukewarm turd floating in a sea of khorne flakes.

The rules have been posted here multiple times, unless they've since been edited out. I think that they're kind of cool, yet pretty mediocre. I'll take one because of the cool factor and because hey, large melta blasts are pretty cool.

BoLS was talking about a new codex coming, I was speaking of that lukewarm turd. The knight looks fun to build but it is not worth loosing a baneblade to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BrookM wrote:

The Surveyor wrote:
Anyone know what the DImensions are? How tall and WIde? Is this more like the lord of skulls or is it bigger closer to a Stompa! wanna Loot one but needs to "as is" for either a Mega-Dread or Stompa.....

15 CM tall, that much is told to the stores.

It is in the neighborhood of a megadread that is for sure it definitely towers over normal deff dreads.

Right so, 15cm, about 6". That makes the Mumak-sized base much more likely then, since if you size one of the full-body pictures such that the model is about 6" high, the base is approx 7" wide. Given it has a wide stance, it's actually quite close to being in-scale.

£85 is still bloody ludicrous though.

Killa kans are nearly that height. It has to be at least 10" tall.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The paladin is taller than an avatar of war.

 Yodhrin wrote:
£85 is still bloody ludicrous though.

A touch more expensive than the DFG Leviathan, but I think despite the more ornate kit, it will likely be less "well designed" in posability since the Leviathan is amazing in that regard. The Leviathan is also larger. Combine the two and yeah, GW seems to be charging more for less, as usual.

I thought we didn't know the price yet?

As I was recently reminded, we don't even know the release date yet...

I guess we kinda/sorta know that now though.

I think we've got a pretty good idea on a price range - the whole $120US to $140US, or "Baneblade" price, if that helps 'localize' it?

 BunkerBob wrote:
Killa kans are nearly that height. It has to be at least 10" tall.

Killer Kans are nowhere near 6" tall. Half that at most.

 insaniak wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
Why? Statwise, they have always been jet infantry/infantry. They are powered suits, more like the tau version of terminator armor than a dreadnought.

Because they're not powered suits. They're a walking vehicle with a guy sitting in a little capsule in the middle. The only difference between a Crisis suit and a dreadnought is that the Crisis pilot can get out by himself.

Crisis suits are also jet pack infantry, and I'm not sure how you would do that. They really don't make sense to be walkers at all. IIRC centurions are that size, should they be walkers? What about the dreadknight, or the wraith lord, or the wraith knight? Size should not determine type. They are a lot more like a large terminator then a dreadnought. They are not piloted in the conventional sense, they are worn. Rules-wise making them walkers would be bad and kind of clunky. They were never designed to be walkers and should not be walkers. And if you did make them walkers you would have broadsides with the ability to move and shoot as full BS. And you would have to create rules for jet pack walkers. I kind of agree that the riptide should have been a walkers but that's mostly because I think it should have never been created. It is a un-fluffy pile of.... well you get the idea. They could have just kept broadsides with railguns or given railguns a beam like ability. Also they ARE powered suits.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Crisis suits are also jet pack infantry, and I'm not sure how you would do that.

The Jet Pack rules were originally created for Crisis suits. It's not like they were made infantry instead of vehicles because they had to fit into existing rules... GW could as easily have made their jetpacks a vehicle upgrade that worked the same way.

What about the dreadknight, or the wraith lord, or the wraith knight?

Did you miss what started this whole tangent in the first place?

They were never designed to be walkers...

Yes, that was the point. When they were released, some players thought that they should have been designed as walkers.


I'm not one of them. Personally, I feel 40K would be better served by just removing the vehicle rules and counting them all as Monstrous Creatures instead. But this little tangent started because someone suggested that the Riptide 'couldn't be' a vehicle because Crisis suits aren't.

 BunkerBob wrote:
It has to be at least 10" tall.

Unfortunately, from the heap of previous photos already posted, nowhere near 10".

 insaniak wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Crisis suits are also jet pack infantry, and I'm not sure how you would do that.

The Jet Pack rules were originally created for Crisis suits. It's not like they were made infantry instead of vehicles because they had to fit into existing rules... GW could as easily have made their jetpacks a vehicle upgrade that worked the same way.

True

What about the dreadknight, or the wraith lord, or the wraith knight?

Did you miss what started this whole tangent in the first place?

It did start yesterday .

They were never designed to be walkers...

Yes, that was the point. When they were released, some players thought that they should have been designed as walkers.


I'm not one of them. Personally, I feel 40K would be better served by just removing the vehicle rules and counting them all as Monstrous Creatures instead. But this little tangent started because someone suggested that the Riptide 'couldn't be' a vehicle because Crisis suits aren't.

Really, silly me . I do think the riptide could completely be a walker. It would make it more manageable (although it might need a price tweak), but it really should not have been ever created. It is a fluff defying abomination.

Guys, maybe the whole "Walker VS Jetpacker VS MC VS Vehicle VS I-don't-know" tangent would be better off in a thread in a rules forum somewhere?

I think it's been done to death in this thread already, hasn't it?

(And, no, I'm not having a crack at anyone, it's just a suggestion.)

It started out sort of relevant... but yes, it's been explored about as far as it needs to be in this thread...

 insaniak wrote:

 akkados wrote:
Video. again

Seriously, folks, the enthusiasm is awesome, but please at least read the thread before hitting Reply...

To be fair, the video isn't in the OP. I did encounter it reading through the thread but some people might have missed it.

 Medium of Death wrote:
To be fair, the video isn't in the OP. .

Nor is most of the discussion from the ensuing thread.

That's kind of the point of reading the thread.

 insaniak wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
To be fair, the video isn't in the OP. .

Nor is most of the discussion from the ensuing thread.

That's kind of the point of reading the thread.

Because we all know that we have 30+ pages of pure gold. The important stuff like videos and pictures are usually posted in the OP. If they aren't there somebody might assume it hasn't been posted.

 Medium of Death wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Medium of Death wrote:
To be fair, the video isn't in the OP. .

Nor is most of the discussion from the ensuing thread.

That's kind of the point of reading the thread.

Because we all know that we have 30+ pages of pure gold. The important stuff like videos and pictures are usually posted in the OP. If they aren't there somebody might assume it hasn't been posted.

I haven't put the video in the OP because it is the usual pointless nonsense that adds no actual info to what we already had, but then I did also assume that people generally will scroll through pages they haven't read to catch up on new pics or info, even if they don't read every post.....

So uh... yeah, 30+ pages to parse. Is there a tl;dr?