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.

You mean like the GK codex was in 5th?

That was released April 1st IIRC


Personally i think it was an Ork vehicle they had mostly finished, and then someone decided IG needed a new vehicle..

So they pulled a perfectly good ork wagun, and IOM'd it up, like looting in reverse.

I see that thing as amazing ork conversion bait, but a bit shudderworthy for IG.

So my question is; what would (W)Imperial Guard players prefer? 6 wheeled trukk style, or a solid tank trakk?
There are accessories on the market IRLfor ATVs that replace each wheel with a similar trapezoid tank tread. It provides better weight distribution on marshes and snow.
For the record, I love the turret and it wouldn't crush the driver in a N.A. left handed drive vehicle.

timd wrote:
A mildly aggressive IP lawyer would say the similarities between stormtrooper and storm trooper would cause "confusion in the marketplace"...

Maybe, but any lawyer who did should be hung, drawn, quartered, boiled and fed to the pigs. Germany's use of "Sturmtruppen" predates either usage by decades, which should put its use for armoured infantry specialising in close assault firmly in the public domain.

 AlexHolker wrote:
Maybe, but any lawyer who did should be hung, drawn, quartered, boiled and fed to the pigs. Germany's use of "Sturmtruppen" predates either usage by decades, which should put its use for armoured infantry specialising in close assault firmly in the public domain.

Seriously, this. I don't see how this is even in question. The name "storm troopers" in a scifi context is nothing more than a reference to real-world infantry units with the same name and role. Trying to claim it as your own unique term would be like trying to trademark "tank" and suing anyone who dared to make their own tanks.

And of course the term "imperial guard" isn't much better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Guard. Though GW might be able to make a case for their "horde of conscripts" being different from the real-world "elite troops of the emperor's personal army" concept and a legitimate brand name.

 Peregrine wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:
Maybe, but any lawyer who did should be hung, drawn, quartered, boiled and fed to the pigs. Germany's use of "Sturmtruppen" predates either usage by decades, which should put its use for armoured infantry specialising in close assault firmly in the public domain.

Seriously, this. I don't see how this is even in question. The name "storm troopers" in a scifi context is nothing more than a reference to real-world infantry units with the same name and role. Trying to claim it as your own unique term would be like trying to trademark "tank" and suing anyone who dared to make their own tanks.

Indeed, its almost as stupid as anyone trying to trademark the term "Space Marine." Like anybody would be stupid enough-- oh wait...

I remember doing some reading about this a while back when the Spots The Space Marine fiasco was happening.

And I genuinely don't think that Star Wars has anything to do with the Imperial Guard rename.

However, if we see the Space Marine Land Speeder renamed...

I don't exactly know how 'expired' trademarks work legally speaking, but it's not particularly unlikely that GW have been sticking 'TM' on Land Speeder before the year 2000. (I think I even checked my 3rd edition marine codices released in 1999-2000 for it).

Big Gob wrote:
So my question is; what would (W)Imperial Guard players prefer? 6 wheeled trukk style, or a solid tank trakk?
There are accessories on the market IRLfor ATVs that replace each wheel with a similar trapezoid tank tread. It provides better weight distribution on marshes and snow.
For the record, I love the turret and it wouldn't crush the driver in a N.A. left handed drive vehicle.

I'd love it to be either 6 wheeled or a half-track, so that it looks like a gritty and functional military machine that fits in with the fluff rather than something out of an 80's cartoon.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Honestly Lonecat if the tracks were removed for regular tires (or even just a halftrack) and they took off most of the stupid looking symbols and icons, I'd be pretty happy. Those 2 changes alone would make a huge difference and make it look a lot more practical for the IG to field in mass.

So with neko motifs removed, without fleur de lys, without other pimps, with MASS PRODUCT looks, but with quad tracks instead of being all wheeled or halftrack, will it looks better?
Is 'Quad Track' too advanced for an army modelled after modern day armed forces? in ya opinion meow


Personally i prefer any IG vehicles with quad track and all bogies powered just like this light tank shown above meow

So, not a fan of these new releases, but I'm very curious about the codex.

The Taurox needs suspension - if it had that, it'd be a little less ridiculous.

The Scions? I'm glad they exist. Berets *are* cool, and I'm glad they're back - while the reference people have made earlier to Volpones also works for me. Creating a new concept of the codex, so that instead of being specifically Guard, it covers the majority of non-chaotic human warriors, including private armies of nobles, Schola Progenum troops, rebel armies? I'm OK with that actually. You're opening a door for more variation and personalisation, and if anyone's ever read eisenhorn/ravenor, you'd know there's a scary amount of private armies around the place. The IG is just those soldiers that are shipped off-world to work for the Emperor, PDF's are those that stay on-world to work for the Emperor, everything else might therefore get coverage from this new book.
Who doesn't like the idea of making a whole backstory for your noble-corporation's private army duking it out with the Orks because THOSE PROFITS MUST GET THROUGH?

Anyway, all that aside, I can actually see a fluff-explanation for the butt-ugly Taurox. Consider me the devil's advocate...


The answer is, ALL imperial vehicles are converted civilian STC's. Rhinos especially - using the STC, you can make them out of wood and power them with steam, and they'll still tow bales of hay and plow a field for you.

So why wouldn't the Imperium use a butt-ugly tactically stupid armoured bus? It's the basis of most of their tech.

If you can't achieve your goals with said armoured bus, you clearly didn't send enough of them. send 300!

 Captain Roderick wrote:
So, not a fan of these new releases, but I'm very curious about the codex.

The Taurox needs suspension - if it had that, it'd be a little less ridiculous.

The Scions? I'm glad they exist. Berets *are* cool, and I'm glad they're back - while the reference people have made earlier to Volpones also works for me. Creating a new concept of the codex, so that instead of being specifically Guard, it covers the majority of non-chaotic human warriors, including private armies of nobles, Schola Progenum troops, rebel armies? I'm OK with that actually. You're opening a door for more variation and personalisation, and if anyone's ever read eisenhorn/ravenor, you'd know there's a scary amount of private armies around the place. The IG is just those soldiers that are shipped off-world to work for the Emperor, PDF's are those that stay on-world to work for the Emperor, everything else might therefore get coverage from this new book.
Who doesn't like the idea of making a whole backstory for your noble-corporation's private army duking it out with the Orks because THOSE PROFITS MUST GET THROUGH?

Anyway, all that aside, I can actually see a fluff-explanation for the butt-ugly Taurox. Consider me the devil's advocate...


The answer is, ALL imperial vehicles are converted civilian STC's. Rhinos especially - using the STC, you can make them out of wood and power them with steam, and they'll still tow bales of hay and plow a field for you.

So why wouldn't the Imperium use a butt-ugly tactically stupid armoured bus? It's the basis of most of their tech.

If you can't achieve your goals with said armoured bus, you clearly didn't send enough of them. send 300!

1. I'm sure Taurox has suspension systems. it's gonna be active ones meow. housed inside track bogies meowmeow. or do you expect hard wound coilspring & Torsion bars used in Hummers?
2. Only if the codex says that Imperial ruling power over several worlds aren't absolute and colonial but rather some kinda confeds. but cuirasses are good.

 Captain Roderick wrote:


The answer is, ALL imperial vehicles are converted civilian STC's. Rhinos especially - using the STC, you can make them out of wood and power them with steam, and they'll still tow bales of hay and plow a field for you.

Actually, IIRC, it's not 'civilian tech' but 'colony tech' that had sort of a double duty to act not only as sturdy utility vehicles, but also as frames for weaponisable vehicles with some protection and offensive capability if it was a more hostile territory.

Anyhow, I don't think the GW designers ment it that way - judged from a bunch of latest vehicles, they could barely design their way out of a paper bag! As I've mentioned before, I have no idea how they manage to come up with this stuff, as any 1st year design student would come up with better ones.

There's something wrong with the whole design process at GW, no idea what, but it seems like they skip the vehicle concept/mock-up design phase completely. Usually you do some rough block renders and perhaps a 3-up rough styrofoam model first, to see that the shape is what you want and it looks nice from all angles. It's like the vehicles are a second thought, "yeah we need that on Monday..", and someone is just quickly throwing them together, skipping the initial design and spending that time on detail work.

 prowla wrote:

 tarnish wrote:
Looked around on the web and came across this one:



I think you will agree that they took a lot of inspiration from this armored car. It´s the german E-V/4 Panzerkraftwagen Ehrhardt from WW1.

I believe I have found a contender. A 1930's locally made Chinese armored car. Apparently when Japan invaded, a bunch of Chinese big wigs organized a bunch of home guard companies. They then had dozens of armoured cars whipped together in the local factories, improvised from whatever was available. I think they actually ended up designing better vehicles than GW in 2014..

1. This is the ancestor of Technicals we see today. just being heftier and gunnier meow. This is my favorite vehicle. In fact.. earliest armored cars were trucks with either steelplating or armored shroud meow
2. China of 1930s were not really united. the land is divided among military commanders who later break away from the central government. these are warlords. these sometimes were recognized nation states by arms dealer. and these warlords also serves foreign powers too! many Han chinese warlords worked for Japanese and Manchu bluebloods. others fought against them but under different factions, some were subjugated by the Guomindang. many has white russian mercs too! These 'technicals' are neccessity since the central government don't have real industry by then, too bad these technicals failed to defend Nanjing and Shanghai against Imperium Iaponnica. (since the latter has properly built armors, guns, shottes, and planes built domestically within the limits of the Empire territory) but yet it's better than nothing!

 Lone Cat wrote:
1. I'm sure Taurox has suspension systems. it's gonna be active ones meow. housed inside track bogies meowmeow. or do you expect hard wound coilspring & Torsion bars used in Hummers?

It does not. Suspension requires clearance, which means either the wheels have to rise relative to the pod (which they can't because of the side panels) or the pods have to rise relative to the hull (which they can't because they'd hit the mudguards).

All 4-track vehicles that are actually used (and not a just-for-fun conversion) have extremely broad tracks so to not sink in (swamp, snow). The taurox has none of that and would sink in pretty fast.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
As it happens, they don't share a name.

GW have gone to great lengths to refer to the Stormies as "Storm Troopers" in basically everything they've written, whereas in Star Wars they're "Stormtroopers". Yes, the space makes a difference. There's the odd slip-up on the online store, but for the most part GW has called them Storm Troopers (and not Stormtroopers) for a very long time.

In us law the space does NOT make a difference.

In fact anything confusingly similar like "Sturm Troops" would be a potential infringement.

I understand UK/commonwealth law is different though.

A different can of worms would be if a kind of common name for a type of shock soldier can be used as a trademark for toy shock soldiers... but that needs expensive lawyers and a judge and/or jury

On the other hand consider me a fan of the apocotruck. It's so horrible that I've been looking all kind of alternatives in case the rules are good. The bulltruck has done wonders for my alternate models library!

M.

Big Gob wrote:
So my question is; what would (W)Imperial Guard players prefer? 6 wheeled trukk style, or a solid tank trakk?
There are accessories on the market IRLfor ATVs that replace each wheel with a similar trapezoid tank tread. It provides better weight distribution on marshes and snow.
For the record, I love the turret and it wouldn't crush the driver in a N.A. left handed drive vehicle.

Not just ATVs...

 Ascalam wrote:
That was released April 1st IIRC

And is as much a joke today as it was then.

Could it be possible that the back compartment of the Taurus is open topped while the front driver/gunner area is enclosed leading it to being an assault vehicle for ogryns and possibly only counted as open topped when hit on the rear armor?
Also has anyone noticed that gun sat underneath the hammer on the side, what is that?

 Kroothawk wrote:

rabidguineapig wrote:Well no matter what GW decide to call them, I'm still going with "Imperial Guard" and "Stormtroopers" just so I don't have to speak Latin to let people know what army I'm playing.

I can assure you that this is NOT Latin. Wrong words, wrong grammar.

Google translate disagrees

http://translate.google.com/#la/en/militarum

It is just a jumble of random made up garbage though, and it wasn't meant to be literal when I said Latin haha.

 Kroothawk wrote:
All 4-track vehicles that are actually used (and not a just-for-fun conversion) have extremely broad tracks so to not sink in (swamp, snow). The taurox has none of that and would sink in pretty fast.

Yep. For example, armies in Nordic countries use 'bandvagens' to traverse snowy forests. It's a really light vehicle with no armor, with huge tracks. The 4-track design is to add maneuverability, the joint in the middle bends in all directions. However, as with the BV, when putting tracks on a vehicle, you maximize the track size for minimal surface pressure.

There's a reason why those 'quad-tracks' are typically an aftermarket part - there's nothing to gain by designing the tracks shorter than the chassis allows. Factory-designed solutions are 8x8 wheeled vehicles, halftracks or fully tracked vehicles, depending on purpose.

The point is that, while quad tracks exist, said tracks are A) short and squaty vs tall and lean and B) when triangular/rhombus-y, the broad part is on the ground while the narrow point is not.

The Taurox fails these basic design features.

 prowla wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
All 4-track vehicles that are actually used (and not a just-for-fun conversion) have extremely broad tracks so to not sink in (swamp, snow). The taurox has none of that and would sink in pretty fast.

Yep. For example, armies in Nordic countries use 'bandvagens' to traverse snowy forests. It's a really light vehicle with no armor, with huge tracks. The 4-track design is to add maneuverability, the joint in the middle bends in all directions. However, as with the BV, when putting tracks on a vehicle, you maximize the track size for minimal surface pressure.

There's a reason why those 'quad-tracks' are typically an aftermarket part - there's nothing to gain by designing the tracks shorter than the chassis allows. Factory-designed solutions are 8x8 wheeled vehicles, halftracks or fully tracked vehicles, depending on purpose.



That thing can go anywhere!
It can even cross water!
I have spent many hours in bandvagnar

Absolutely love the new Storm Troopers.
The tracked thing has a cool hull but the tracks themselves are a total no no for me.

Any news on Rough Riders being kept or have they gone the way of the Squats?

In terms of making an IG truck, I was always impressed with Dave Taylor's conversions for trucks.



Not a huge fan of the Taurox, but it may get cooler with other pictures? Or not...

I hope rough riders aren't gone.

Hopefully they take a more ornate look like these Storm Troopers. Something foolhardy, based off of regimental pride combined with riding skill.

Bödeln wrote:

It can even cross water!
I have spent many hours in bandvagnar

I'll drink to that. We did a 2-week 'camping trip' in Lapland during winter.. 16 guys, two Bandies and -15 degrees outside.. Artillery firing to targets less than 1000m away from our tents.. good times

Bödeln wrote:

 prowla wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
All 4-track vehicles that are actually used (and not a just-for-fun conversion) have extremely broad tracks so to not sink in (swamp, snow). The taurox has none of that and would sink in pretty fast.

Yep. For example, armies in Nordic countries use 'bandvagens' to traverse snowy forests. It's a really light vehicle with no armor, with huge tracks. The 4-track design is to add maneuverability, the joint in the middle bends in all directions. However, as with the BV, when putting tracks on a vehicle, you maximize the track size for minimal surface pressure.

There's a reason why those 'quad-tracks' are typically an aftermarket part - there's nothing to gain by designing the tracks shorter than the chassis allows. Factory-designed solutions are 8x8 wheeled vehicles, halftracks or fully tracked vehicles, depending on purpose.

That thing can go anywhere!
It can even cross water!
I have spent many hours in bandvagnar

Lets not all jump on the bandvagen.

 prowla wrote:

Bödeln wrote:

It can even cross water!
I have spent many hours in bandvagnar

I'll drink to that. We did a 2-week 'camping trip' in Lapland during winter.. 16 guys, two Bandies and -15 degrees outside.. Artillery firing to targets less than 1000m away from our tents.. good times

Do you still have tents that can take woodburners with a hole in the lining for a chimney? That was a novelty to me when I was up there in '91 having an outing with the Finnish army.

 Stormonu wrote:

Spoiler:

 generalchaos34 wrote:

timd wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

Wouldn't happen, because nothing would come of it. The similarities between Star Wars Stormtroopers and 40K Stormtroopers start and end at the name.

Unless Star Wars has trademarked the word "Stormtrooper", In which case there would be issues....

See what i heard was Imperial Guard, which if you recall are the red guys who they have been making toys for since 1983

The red guys from Star Wars Return of the Jedi are Royal Guard, not Imperial Guard.

Still, while 40K's imperial guard have no relation to Star Wars imperial guard, the mark 7 helmet on the space marines was clearly inspired by Star War's stormtroopers (especially compared to the previous Corvus helmet).


Automatically Appended Next Post: