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.

 Yodhrin wrote:
And if you're honestly arguing that these;

...have less in common with these;

...than these;

...then I'm afraid you need to visit the optometrist, because your eyes need testing.

Your pics got me thinking that we'll more-or-less have a range of Daemon Engines, going from Juggernauts > Forgefiends/Maulerfiends/Hellbrutes/etc > the big FW daemon engines. Guess this wasn't much of a surprise given how Daemon Engines seemed to get more attention in the new rulebook fluff. And with this comes stronger visual ties between the CSMs and Daemons lines. Things like the more ornate, daemonic Chosen models help this too.

Whether or not the new models are appealing on their own is for each individual to decide. But IMO they're clearly trying to tie the lines together better and fill in some holes. Which makes sense given all the mixing and matching we'll see with ally rules.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 ergotoxin wrote:
I think I'll stick with Defilers, those at least look like real daemon engines

No they don't, Defilers looked terrible from day 1 and still do. Which part is the Daemon? The only sort of fleshy thing I can spot is one small hatch with an evil face on it. Apart from that it's a boxy centaur on orky piston-driven legs with a chest-mounted cannon (ow, recoil!) and a blender for an arm. By the time the model came out (quite a bit after the Codex) there were dozens of scratch-builds that looked better.

I agree the model is far from being perfect. Why should it be all fleshy though? As said it is a daemon engine, not a daemon - we have Chaos Daemons for that after all. Now you won't even be able to make a fluffy Iron Warriors army since all Dreadnoughts will be replaced by Fiends and Hellbrutes.

Also, the Defiler was always defined as a vehicle possessed by a daemon. I see no reasons why that should automatically mean mutations.

Finally, it looks much more iconic and original than a huge Pyrovore covered in metal bits.

So far my shopping list seems to be:

1x Helldrake (Thousand Sons)
1x Forgefiend (Death Guard)
2x Warp Talons (just for the heck of it)

None of the new models really fit my Flawless Host army, a Hellbrute will have to suffice there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:
That's a lot of Chaos armies, lord_blackfang!

Yeah. At some point I realized that doing a couple of 2000(ish) points lists in different colour schemes is more fun than one huge army. I have 3 loyalist Chapters, too (two from the same Codex).

I had high hopes for the new Raptors, but these look way too busy & crowded, and the legs are just full of fuglyness.

The War(p)smith looks cool, but if he is FC then "no thank you".

 lord_blackfang wrote:

Yeah. At some point I realized that doing a couple of 2000(ish) points lists in different colour schemes is more fun than one huge army. I have 3 loyalist Chapters, too (two from the same Codex).

Completely agree.. Will probably be doing something similar myself. I've been doing death guard the last couple of weeks and want to do some pre-heresy death guard too just because the painting would get really boring I think. Same happened when I was doing vanilla marines, I went from crimson fists to salamanders. Aside from that I'm doing two boxes worth of dark angels as fallen to use as csm or DA so that's gonna be a colourful army on the table...

I really hope the price on the dragon won't be too harsh, I'd really like one or two of them. And some warp talons for goodness

Maybe those little winglet things on the Warp Talons are for hit and run like blade attacks ala DE?

 Yodhrin wrote:
wrote stuff

OK congratulations you caught me on semantics by quoting an Oxford without applying it to art theory, my point still stands. The trouble with using an oxford definition when applying it to art theory is at times it fails. Original art will never hold true to that definition. Technique, medium and inspiration is all derived from some form of influence. So in your literal sense it can never be original which is why it is such a ludicrous claim. So in order to appease you I guess I'll just say, those new models are Extremely unoriginal as opposed to marginally unoriginal. There is a reason why you can google image a million similar zoids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tyr Grimtooth wrote:
Maybe those little winglet things on the Warp Talons are for hit and run like blade attacks ala DE?

Its to add more bling for their blind attack

All I get from the Warpsmith is

Are those three plasma cannons I see on the forge fiends?

I actully like the Mauler and Forge Fiends, heck I think they look alot cooler then the new flier. I don't see the zoid comparisons everyone is making.


They remind me of the Khorn Juggernauts more then anything, in all honesty,

 RecycledGenius wrote:
Are those three plasma cannons I see on the forge fiends?

I think the rumor was three S8 AP2 ecto plasma or something.

I've gotta admit, I'm a little underwhelmed by the daemon engines. I don't think they are necessarily bad, I'm just not crazy about them. They also just don't really fit my Death Guard army, so that's part of it. I think if you put a juggernaught head on them, they could make some really sweet Khorne daemon engines though.

I hope we see plastic Havocs and Obliterators soon, as those are the models I'm really looking forward too.

I'm pretty excited by these models actually, I like the direction they're going. The pics are all taken from bad angles, I'm anxious to see the 360 pics or better yet - hold them in my hands. The Daemon engines are probably fairly customizable, much like the Chronos/Talos kit is, so I bet you can make some really nice finished pieces from them.

I LOVE the Warp Talons - I actually want to take those models & use the Raptor jump packs (I think they look better IMO) and see how that pans out.

I haven't been this excited for a release in quite some time.

~Vryce

I like all of the minis except for the forge feind, the neck's too long. However I hope there is some more actual marines as six isn't that much, roll on wave two.

Hai guyz found this new Daemon Engine pic:

Well.
I was not expecting that.

 Harriticus wrote:
Hai guyz found this new spam:

FTFY. At least the other 'it looks like a toy' posts had a bit more substance than that. Geeze.

I mean, c'mon, Red Corsair's been arguing art theory and you post some trite little unedited pic? 0/10 for effort.

 ergotoxin wrote:


I agree the model is far from being perfect. Why should it be all fleshy though? As said it is a daemon engine, not a daemon - we have Chaos Daemons for that after all. Now you won't even be able to make a fluffy Iron Warriors army since all Dreadnoughts will be replaced by Fiends and Hellbrutes.

Also, the Defiler was always defined as a vehicle possessed by a daemon. I see no reasons why that should automatically mean mutations.

Finally, it looks much more iconic and original than a huge Pyrovore covered in metal bits.

Spoiler:

I think you're over reacting and ignoring the aesthetic precedent for this:


The forgefiend is simply more daemon than daemon engine and more bloodcrusher than defiler:

While its never been explicitly stated a bloodcrusher/juggernaut, being mechanical and daemonic sure sounds like a daemon engine as well. I tend to believe GW made these more organic than the standard defiler simply so they'd be cross compatible between Codex Chaos Marines and Codex Chaos Daemons for their inevitable inclusion.

When you look at the Soul Grinder that brings plenty of organic elements to the basic defiler and its still regarded as a daemon engine, not purely a daemon, so I see no reason the Forgefiend and Helldrake can't. be.

 pretre wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
Hai guyz found this new spam:

FTFY. At least the other 'it looks like a toy' posts had a bit more substance than that. Geeze.

I mean, c'mon, Red Corsair's been arguing art theory and you post some trite little unedited pic? 0/10 for effort.

True, I blame the fact that I found it on Heresy online

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
wrote stuff

OK congratulations you caught me on semantics by quoting an Oxford without applying it to art theory, my point still stands. The trouble with using an oxford definition when applying it to art theory is at times it fails. Original art will never hold true to that definition. Technique, medium and inspiration is all derived from some form of influence. So in your literal sense it can never be original which is why it is such a ludicrous claim. So in order to appease you I guess I'll just say, those new models are Extremely unoriginal as opposed to marginally unoriginal. There is a reason why you can google image a million similar zoids.

Semantics implies that I was quibbling over an incredibly minor detail in order to avoid taking on your argument. This is not the case. Your argument was that a thing can be both derivative, and original, which is, as I showed, a contradiction in terms. "Art theory" doesn't get a pass on that, there is no special exception; if your definitions of those terms were recognised and in common use they would be in the dictionary. And it's not "my" literal sense, it's just "the" sense, the definition, the meaning of the word. So yes, that means that by "my(the)" definition, art can never be original; because it can't. You show me a work of art, and I will show you an artist who drew his ideas either from someone else's work, or nature. In neither case is the work original, merely different, and that's fine.

Only artists are so obsessed with this hipsterish ideal of "originality" that they consider iteration to be a dirty word - one design sharing similarities with another is not an indictment of the one which came second, nor does it necessitate the concept which you have really been trying to convey; that the designers were lazy.

EDIT: Tell you what, lets see how well you do: propose a design for a daemon engine which takes design elements from the Hellbrute, Soulgrinder, and Forgeworld models, with a hulking animalistic profile, such as a gorilla. This design cannot even vaguely resemble any other toy made prior to this date. Pull that off, and I'll accept that your argument has some merit.

Alpharius wrote:Getting a bit too heated in here.

Opinions on,.. everything... will vary.

Agree to disagree, and stay polite.

Avoid extremes, insults and using giant font sizes.

Thanks!

Alpharius wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Getting a bit too heated in here.

Opinions on,.. everything... will vary.

Agree to disagree, and stay polite.

Avoid extremes, insults and using giant font sizes.

Thanks!

Also avoid the temptation to reference "Dakka" as a whole and tarring any particular group with any particular brush.

Last warning.

Because 2 times weren't enough...

Warnings have already been handed out, off topic/spam posts have been deleted.

"Time off" will be the next reward for not paying attention in this thread...

Please don't lose this one guys, I am sure more leaks will be posted soon.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I tend to believe GW made these more organic than the standard defiler simply so they'd be cross compatible between Codex Chaos Marines and Codex Chaos Daemons for their inevitable inclusion.

It's interesting to consider how miniatures and rules have to be considered in a larger context now in the era of allies.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 RecycledGenius wrote:
Are those three plasma cannons I see on the forge fiends?

I think the rumor was three S8 AP2 ecto plasma or something.

Cool! I'm guessing they are heavy support. If the rumors are true and Defilers are 195 pts then I may switch to running the forge fiends if they are cheaper.

I'm liking the new direction GW is taking Chaos. The Maulerfiend reminds me of the Grendlr from the Sedition Wars kickstarter and that's one of the models I loved and made me buy into it.

 Brometheus wrote:
Please don't lose this one guys, I am sure more leaks will be posted soon.

Let us both, NAY, let us ALL pray together, that tomorrow, a new day will come, a brighter day, a day filled with more pictures, a day full of hope, to set aside todays anger and criticism.

So come on whos with me! FOR NARNIAAAAAAAAA....

gorgon wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
I tend to believe GW made these more organic than the standard defiler simply so they'd be cross compatible between Codex Chaos Marines and Codex Chaos Daemons for their inevitable inclusion.

It's interesting to consider how miniatures and rules have to be considered in a larger context now in the era of allies.

I don't even think its just a matter of allies. I think its a matter of the Codex Daemon slated to receive a not too distant update where it will either receive these or unique variants like they did with the soul grinder. Its no different than when GW designed the Rhino model kit to be easily adapted to use for variants and for codex specific variants ahead of when they ever made those other models.

Dragon - At first I was 'meh'. Upon close inspection, I've started to take a liking for it. I admit, I expected something more organic... dunno... less aircraft-like-mecha and more twisty and bendy magical chaos-tech. But has some really inspired details. Not genius, but a beautiful miniature indeed.

Forgefiend / Maulerfiend - Mr. Sephyr beat me to it: Warmachine Cryx stuff, which means fairly generic, uninspired steampunk mech horror. They still have familiar shines of Chaos to them (bearing strong similarities to the classic Juggernauts of Khorne), but sadly lack the eerie grandeur of, say, the Dark Eldar Talos. Not bad. But maybe a bit on the bland side of things.

Warpsmith - Hmmm I think the picture does not do justice to this miniature. Still, I'd have opted for a more dramatic pose. Again, the Dark Eldar range comes to mind.

Warp Talons - A HUGE improvement from the current set of Raptors, at least in terms of detail and poses. The fused armor, mutations, and general twisted baroqueness blends seamlessly with the Dark Vengeance Chaos models. Besides... Are those pre-heresy pattern jump packs? Sweet.

 Starfarer wrote:
I've gotta admit, I'm a little underwhelmed by the daemon engines. I don't think they are necessarily bad, I'm just not crazy about them. They also just don't really fit my Death Guard army.

Much the same. I was expecting something more along the lines of the old Daemon Engines but these are too organic. They also don't fit into the aesthetic of my Death Guard at all and I would be as well scratchbuilding one if I ever wanted to field them. Actually I wonder how well a Blight Drone would work as the dragon thingy? Or maybe a Zombie Dragon.

To be honest the only changes that my existing army is likely to see is that a couple of cultists squads will be replacing some CSM squads and I may try a Lord for a while to see how he rolls.

I personally like the looks of the models, a brief overview of my thoughts:

Warp Talons: They're going to be great to canibalize parts. The legs can be used for Raptors, the heads and shoulders make good Noise Marines bits, and the LC's will be useful for any power armored guys; especially since there are so few. Pending the stats of the Warptalons, this set will more than likely be a source of bits, similar to how the Possessed set has always been for me. The only thing I dislike is the backpacks, but that may just be because of the little winglets, which are easily clipped and filed to non-existence. Alternatively, lots of 3rd parties make cool backpacks I could use. Great looking set.

Forgefiend: Very interesting and in-line with the Daemon Engine look. I do think a bit of conversion will be needed to make the model look less static, and I think the paintjob really brings down the look of the model. I've never been a fan of "the head is the gun" type monsters, so I will probably convert mine to have a different head with a gun on the back or something. Overall, looks sweet!

Maulerfiend: Awesome. Just awesome. There's something about the look of it that makes it very menacing. Definitely looks like a cross between a Soulgrinder and a Bloodcrusher. My first one of these kits will definitely be one of these, though I may convert the head a bit. That's the thing with Chaos, the conversion opportunites are the best part!

Dragon: I wasn't sure about this one until I saw the second picture. At first, I felt like it looked like something the Dark Eldar would use. Then I saw the second, larger picture and saw a huge amount of potential. I'm not crazy about it's look in the picture, but I think the model is workable enough that with a little conversion it could look awesome. Not to mention the rumors of it having other looks to it. Overall, not disappointed, but it's going to need a good amount of conversion to fit with my vision for my army.

Warpsmith: This is the only model I'm not so sure about. The pictures obviously don't do it justice, but I think I'll need a 360 degree view before I can properly assess the model. From this picture, it looks very busy, but I suppose I'll wait and see!


Overall, I think a lot of people are overreacting to some crudely taken photos from White Dwarf. Additionally, if there's anything I've learned about the GW display models, the 'Eavy Metal team has a tendancy to either make the model look really good (Eldar Harlequins) or really bad (Beastmen Minotaurs). I want to see the plastics, but overall, I think these are great kits. News that we could be getting more? Awesome! I just hope we get plastic Plague Marines as detailed and awesome as those Warp Talons.