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.

With all the talk about Superheavies in 40K and the crazy high price of titans how would you feel about allowing your opponent to sub in a DreamForge Leviathan for a Warhound?
The Leviathan is only about 1 inch shorter and the head is much smaller.

ForgeWord Titan body $416
ForgeWord Arms $62 each
$540

DreamForge Leviathan Mortis Body $92
DreamForge Arms $30 each
$152

Not sure about rest of you but I will (probably) Never be able to afford a real Titan but could easily afford the Leviathan.
Would you allow this in the Table?

I would allow that, provided you've explained what it is and what stats it has before the game.

Considering I bought a Leviathan Crusader for that purpose, yes, I would allow it.
Much of the Warhound's size comes from the bulk of its upper body. And, in that particular picture, it looks even bigger with the legs spread out like that.
Yes, the Leviathan is smaller than the FW version, but it's about the same size as the original Armorcast Warhound. On the tabletop, the Leviathan is quite large enough to play the part.

I prefer the warhound, frankly.

Vulcan Mega Bolter


TURBO LASER



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tannhauser42 wrote:Yes, the Leviathan is smaller than the FW version, but it's about the same size as the original Armorcast Warhound.

Yeah I forgot about the old Armorcast Titans.

kronk wrote:I prefer the warhound, frankly.

So do I! But I cant justify the price.

I wouldn't allow it as a warhound, there is a huge and marked difference in size between the two, much more than a simple set of measurements would imply.

chaos0xomega wrote:
I wouldn't allow it as a warhound, there is a huge and marked difference in size between the two, much more than a simple set of measurements would imply.

Would just not allow it in a 40k game if they are added or in APOC also?

Wouldn't allow it at all. It's too small to be a Warhound, the guns don't match, and unless it has some serious conversion work done it doesn't look like a Warhound (or a good model at all). Really the only argument in favor of allowing the Leviathan to be used in 40k is that it's cheap, and throwing a bunch of cheap proxies on the table to get the overpowered titan rules as easily as possible is TFG behavior.

I actually hate the look of that model. It looks like a model knight (literally, like, Templar knight from the late medieval) for children (hence the action-figure-esque changes) that is overscaled for 40k.

I much prefer the look of the leviathan to the 40k titans.

The differences are magnified by:
- The perspective of the shot on the side of the warhound
- The pose of the warhound compared to the leviathan
- The warhound being painted to the grey leviathan.

Mount the leviathan on a little rubble, something very easy to do due to the highly posable nature of the kit, and give it a dynamic pose and it will easily match a warhound in all bit ridiculous top heavy girth and price. As mentioned above it has weapon options that easily match the warhounds possible loadouts.

This is a much better comparison imo. Side on, painted to painted, both posed. Yes the leviathan is a little smaller, but not enough to impact gameplay.

On a related note, how about the Dreamforge Mortis instead of a Lord of Skulls?

I run a Tzeentch force, and don't want a Khorne wagon rumbling around

 Yonan wrote:
As mentioned above it has weapon options that easily match the warhounds possible loadouts.

Really? Because I have no idea what Warhound weapons those guns are supposed to match. The vulkan cannon is kind of vaguely like a mega bolter (the gun nobody ever uses) I guess, but the HEL cannon doesn't look like anything a Warhound can take, and the melee options are all obviously not something a Warhound can have. In your comparison picture the only way I'd have any idea that those were supposed to be Warhound weapons is if you told me it was a Warhound proxy.

This is a much better comparison imo. Side on, painted to painted, both posed.

And it still reveals the huge difference. The Leviathan is almost as tall, but has none of the massive bulk of the Warhound. They're two very different models, and the main reason anyone thinks the Leviathan is a good substitute for a Warhound is because it's cheap.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
On a related note, how about the Dreamforge Mortis instead of a Lord of Skulls?

No. That model doesn't look even remotely like its 40k "equivalent". You'd have to do significant conversion work to even consider making that substitution.

 Peregrine wrote:

And it still reveals the huge difference. The Leviathan is almost as tall, but has none of the massive bulk of the Warhound. They're two very different models, and the main reason anyone thinks the Leviathan is a good substitute for a Warhound is because it's cheap.

It would also look rather badass in a GK army due to its design. It's like a bigger Dreadknight without the whole exposing the pilot thing. Even the 'head' kinda matches GK PA helmets.

1. It looks better (debateable ofc)
2. It's a great plastic kit making it infinitely more poseable, very important for a large segment of hobbyists.
3. It's *much* cheaper, to the tune of getting 4-5 leviathans for one warhound.

The lack of the massive bulk is a big selling point for it to me, the warhound just looks ridiculous (more so than most 40k). The difference in girth is no different to many other acceptable "counts as" that I've seen, and won't have any impact on gameplay.

Here are some more weapon options. Like with any other counts as, they don't need to look exactly like the original weapons, they need to be clearly distinguishable, which these certainly are. Double barreled turbo laser destructor, vulcan mega bolter, inferno gun and plasma blastgun are all easily mappable to the H.E.L gun, nova gun, vulkan cannon, and beowulf or grendel.

 Peregrine wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
On a related note, how about the Dreamforge Mortis instead of a Lord of Skulls?

No. That model doesn't look even remotely like its 40k "equivalent". You'd have to do significant conversion work to even consider making that substitution.

The reason to use the Mortis is because it looks *nothing* like that abomination.

 Yonan wrote:
3. It's *much* cheaper, to the tune of getting 4-5 leviathans for one warhound.

And this is why I hate the model. Everyone keeps praising how cheap it is, as if Apocalypse is nothing more than a race to get the most D-weapons on the table, no matter how ugly the proxies look. I'd rather see one Warhound on a table than 4-5 Leviathans that were bought simply because they were cheap.

Double barreled turbo laser destructor, vulcan mega bolter, inferno gun and plasma blastgun are all easily mappable to the H.E.L gun, nova gun, vulkan cannon, and beowulf or grendel.

No they aren't.

The HEL gun is not a double-barrel gun like the turbolaser, and it doesn't have even close to the same shape. And obviously it doesn't have the coil bits that identify a plasma weapon, or the flamer bits that identify a flame weapon.

The beowulf and grendel cannons don't look like anything a Warhound can take. The Warhound doesn't have any guns with a large single barrel like an artillery cannon.

The nova cannon looks like a melta weapon that only exists on the Reaver.

And of course the Warhound doesn't have access to any melee weapons.

End result: none of the guns are even close to matching, and using them as a proxy is about as reasonable as grabbing a cheap robot toy from walmart and declaring that its guns are turbolasers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yonan wrote:
The reason to use the Mortis is because it looks *nothing* like that abomination.

I agree that the model looks stupid, but that doesn't mean you can throw any random toy on the table and call it one. I would still expect to see at least the same general shape of a human-like upper body mounted on a large track section.

I would rather use the Mortis then the big walking knight.

 Peregrine wrote:
No. That model doesn't look even remotely like its 40k "equivalent". You'd have to do significant conversion work to even consider making that substitution.

I was more after size comparisons there, chief. I should have made that clear

 Peregrine wrote:

 Yonan wrote:
3. It's *much* cheaper, to the tune of getting 4-5 leviathans for one warhound.

And this is why I hate the model. Everyone keeps praising how cheap it is, as if Apocalypse is nothing more than a race to get the most D-weapons on the table, no matter how ugly the proxies look. I'd rather see one Warhound on a table than 4-5 Leviathans that were bought simply because they were cheap.

That's a pretty poor argument imo. Something making the hobby more affordable for the "peasants" is not a bad thing. You keep saying "cheap" implying you think they're lower quality. They're far from it, to me they look and feel superior to the resin titans which come off as "cheap" in comparison, despite costing much more.

I agree that the model looks stupid, but that doesn't mean you can throw any random toy on the table and call it one. I would still expect to see at least the same general shape of a human-like upper body mounted on a large track section.

The large track section is a substantial part of the problem. A walker is much more "khorney" if you'll excuse the pun. Even completely unmodified, this looks better than the blasphemy that is the khorne thing.


The rule of cool has to take precedence in this situation imo, so long as the gameplay is largely unaffected.

edit: Past discussions here on the topic:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/554589.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/549949.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/522845.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/495634.page

 Yonan wrote:
That's a pretty poor argument imo. Something making the hobby more affordable for the "peasants" is not a bad thing. You keep saying "cheap" implying you think they're lower quality. They're far from it, to me they look and feel superior to the resin titans which come off as "cheap" in comparison, despite costing much more.

It's not that I hate cheap models, it's that I hate the fact that the motivation for a lot of Apocalypse players seems to be "get the cheapest possible titan-shaped object and get more D-weapons" rather than "get the most awesome model I can find". So you get stuff like cardboard titans, cheap toys from walmart with a few 40k bits glued on, barely-painted models with half the pieces missing, etc. And the Leviathan is just more of that attitude: there was much more talk about how cheap it is and how it will be a great titan proxy than how cool the model is for its own sake, or whether it's an appropriate equivalent to a 40k titan.

A walker is much more "khorney" if you'll excuse the pun. Even completely unmodified, this looks better than the blasphemy that is the khorne thing.

I agree that it's a better model, but it's a different model. The shape is completely different, the body gun is missing, and it has dual melee weapons instead of axe + gun. If I saw it on the table I'd have no clue what it was supposed to be unless you explained that it's a proxy for the khorne abomination. It makes about as much sense as using a LRBT for a Rhino.

The rule of cool has to take precedence in this situation imo, so long as the gameplay is largely unaffected.

Except gameplay IS affected. Besides the massive TLOS issues models proxy just need to look like the standard model so that you can easily tell what it is. Apocalypse has enough to keep track of as it is, adding in proxies that don't look anything like the standard model only adds to that confusion.

I'm not sure how many large models you get in Apocalypse games, but it's never been an issue for me keeping track of what's what. Even in normal games conversions and counts-as to use third party bits are fine, when the scale you're talking about is "ok this is a converted Kharn, this guys pistol is a third party plasma gun" which is fine. "This giant model is a Khorne abomination" is much easier to keep track of, so I don't think that argument holds much weight. So long as it has a visibly apparent loadout, the scythe arm easily matches the axe, the Nova cannon easily matches the gun. You'd need to modify it so the torso gun was apparent though.

TLOS for large models is so rarely a problem, in this case you're trading less girth for more height which is if anything a penalty to the player using the leviathan.

The lower cost of a model is of course a selling point. If people didn't like the model it wouldn't be an issue, there are many options that are cheaper still that you don't see people using. This model has working plastic pistons and screws, lack of quality is definitely not an issue so imo it's disingenuous to compare it to cardboard DIY titans. The manufacturer being able to make it for so cheap, and selling it to us for so cheap when it rivals much more expensive models in quality is a definite plus.

In my instance the Mortis is actually more expensive than the Lord of Skulls

I think the Leviathan is a great looking model, and the actual build for the kit is pretty incredible; but it's kind of iffy as a Warhound proxy. The size really is off by quite a bit.

It would be utterly perfect for some kind of homebrew rules for Grey Knights, of course. There is no way to get vehicle design rules in 6th, right?

I had no idea players could be this picky about proxying extra large units, especially with such expensive models. In apoc reports I see people literally using cardboard constructs without any issue apparently, I'd personally have no problem at all with a Leviathan being put on the table. In fact I'd even marvel at seeing it.

I don't see it as "get the cheapest possible titan-shaped object and get more D-weapons" its still about $150 for a model that will get used once or twice a year. I see it more as making that was never affordable before now in reach. Do you think its fine that GW makes really cool rules to to sell a $500 model and we should not use a reasonable priced model in its place?

 PrehistoricUFO wrote:
I had no idea players could be this picky about proxying extra large units, especially with such expensive models. In apoc reports I see people literally using cardboard constructs without any issue apparently, I'd personally have no problem at all with a Leviathan being put on the table. In fact I'd even marvel at seeing it.

Is the cardboard proxy the right size and shape of what it is standing in for? A lot of the beef has nothing to do with the quality of the Leviathan, it's that it simply does not approximate a Warhound.

In a friendly game I'd obviously let me friends use it, but I am not really into winning.

Yeah I suppose they are roughly the same dimensions, but then again it's difficult to tell as the camera tends to pan by fairly quickly and I've never actually seen Titans in real life to judge very well compared to the other stuff around the home-made models.

Yeah, I'm in the same boat. I own both a Leviathan and a Warhound and haven't yet assembled either; so only have what I see here to go by. But the Warhound looks a lot bigger bulkwise.

 Ouze wrote:

 PrehistoricUFO wrote:
I had no idea players could be this picky about proxying extra large units, especially with such expensive models. In apoc reports I see people literally using cardboard constructs without any issue apparently, I'd personally have no problem at all with a Leviathan being put on the table. In fact I'd even marvel at seeing it.

Is the cardboard proxy the right size and shape of what it is standing in for? A lot of the beef has nothing to do with the quality of the Leviathan, it's that it simply does not approximate a Warhound.

In a friendly game I'd obviously let me friends use it, but I am not really into winning.

It is a little shorter and substantially less top heavy, but have you ever seen an instance where this would be a problem with models the size that we're talking about? Titans tower over terrain. All the instances I've seen, the largest terrain has been on the outside of the boards to give a more reasonable playing area, and any sufficiently large terrain has been enough to block both.

So if we don't have the money to buy Forgeworld's over priced and horribly modeled apoc units, we're not supposed to play? I bought a Leviathan for my grey knight army because I refuse to pay $600 for something that I have to spend weeks fixing because the resin mold work sucks. It took 2 1/2 weeks to fix the pieces of my thunderhawk that I saved my @$$ off to buy. I got it and wanted to cry. I had zero choice but to completely seal it up which is not what I wanted. I wanted a full blown masterpiece sitting on my shelf at the head of my Raven Guard army and had to half @$$ it because nothing and I mean nothing lined up. If they did it on the thunderhawk, it's safe to assume it'll be like that on a titan. I'm not going thru that again. For the prices they're asking for their stuff, it should be perfect.

Of course I'll ask my opponent if they'll accept the Leviathan as a suitable warhound proxy as long as the weapons are remotely close. And if they don't, then I'll find another opponent that will. The game is suppose to be fun but seems more and more as the months go on that they're catering to people with deep pockets. This is sapping the fun out of it fast. The Leviathan and Mortis are great alternatives for people on a budget that want to have an apoc model in their army. I truly like the Warhound titan more than the Dreamforge titans. In the completed pics, in my opinion, it's a better looking unit. And if the Warhound was $100-$150, it might be worth the insane headache that comes with repairing their massive mistakes.

I guess when the 4.5" Leviathan version comes out, it'll be a big deal all over again when people start trying to proxy out the dreadknight with it. Pro Leviathan people get ready for that one too. I personally think they'll be a much better dreadknight as it actually looks like a knight instead of a walker with a termie baby in a pouch.

 Yonan wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 PrehistoricUFO wrote:
I had no idea players could be this picky about proxying extra large units, especially with such expensive models. In apoc reports I see people literally using cardboard constructs without any issue apparently, I'd personally have no problem at all with a Leviathan being put on the table. In fact I'd even marvel at seeing it.

Is the cardboard proxy the right size and shape of what it is standing in for? A lot of the beef has nothing to do with the quality of the Leviathan, it's that it simply does not approximate a Warhound.

In a friendly game I'd obviously let me friends use it, but I am not really into winning.

It is a little shorter and substantially less top heavy, but have you ever seen an instance where this would be a problem with models the size that we're talking about? Titans tower over terrain.

That's pretty much what I mean when I mentioned size. However, in Apoc games, I imagine scenery is specifically designed to be large enough to cover Titans?