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.

So pretty....

 Verviedi wrote:
It's £275. Impressive price.

It's a little hard to tell, but I certainly hope not: That's an inane price. Low end Titan pricing.

changemod wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
It's £275. Impressive price.

It's a little hard to tell, but I certainly hope not: That's an inane price. Low end Titan pricing.

Maybe it does low end titan levels of things.

 Desubot wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
It's £275. Impressive price.

It's a little hard to tell, but I certainly hope not: That's an inane price. Low end Titan pricing.

Maybe it does low end titan levels of things.

Whatever the case, it's gonna look awesome alongside my raven guard. Curse you, forge world.

It certainly looks "low-end titan"-sized.

Whatever it does, I like it. It's going on my "things to use as terrain pieces on my lottery-winnings gaming table" list, along with an ejected Warlord titan head. Leave the guns off, and it'd do for all sorts of sci-fi games; it's not as "40k-ish" as most of the flyers.

Where are you seeing the pics of the dropship as i can't find them?

thanks

 Mr Morden wrote:
Where are you seeing the pics of the dropship as i can't find them?

thanks

 Desubot wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
It's £275. Impressive price.

It's a little hard to tell, but I certainly hope not: That's an inane price. Low end Titan pricing.

Maybe it does low end titan levels of things.

I'm curious if it's bigger or smaller than that Eagle dropship that's only £100 from the Antenociti KS running now.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

changemod wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
It's £275. Impressive price.

It's a little hard to tell, but I certainly hope not: That's an inane price. Low end Titan pricing.

Maybe it does low end titan levels of things.

I'm curious if it's bigger or smaller than that Eagle dropship that's only £100 from the Antenociti KS running now.

Going by the cockpit size the Roc is about the size of a valkery

going by the size of the heavy bolters on the side. i think the orion is a little bit bigger

But it appears to have far more mass than the valkery

eye balling though.

If only they would bring the Legio Custodes 30K models into 40K, that Dropship and the grav tanks would sell really well.

 SonicPara wrote:
If only they would bring the Legio Custodes 30K models into 40K, that Dropship and the grav tanks would sell really well.

For some reason Forgeworld doesn't want to sell their models. Personally I've been waiting for rules for their Mechanicus stuff for years.

Fires of Cyraxus has been delayed by a double whammy.

1. 8thEd coming out.

2. Alan Bligh's sadly terminal cancer :,(

changemod wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
It's £275. Impressive price.

It's a little hard to tell, but I certainly hope not: That's an inane price. Low end Titan pricing.

It's not hard to tell if you look at the original picture, not a crop of a low res version:

https://20889-presscdn-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/FW-Specialist-Games-Open-Day-Programme-1-2.png

Given the size of custodies; I would not be surprised if it is the width of 3-4 baneblades.

Looks like it is about tigershark sized, but bulkier.

frankr wrote:


Given the size of custodies; I would not be surprised if it is the width of 3-4 baneblades.

I highly doubt that considering we've seen pictures of it on its flying stand, and it looks like the standard stand. Plus you know weapons system sizes based on it having weapons we've already been able to see, or own.

The flyer looks nice, but I admit it does look quite Tau-esque. I wish there were more plastic kits for small shuttles for every race. Ditch the bombers/fighters and give us scenario-useful shuttles and transports.

 Elbows wrote:
The flyer looks nice, but I admit it does look quite Tau-esque. I wish there were more plastic kits for small shuttles for every race. Ditch the bombers/fighters and give us scenario-useful shuttles and transports.

I think it the bolter turret on the sides.

its the same shape as the burst cannon mount on most forge world tau flyers or the devilfish kit.

Also not digging the insane amount of Christmas lights on the front end.

but i still think it looks cool.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

frankr wrote:


Given the size of custodies; I would not be surprised if it is the width of 3-4 baneblades.

I highly doubt that considering we've seen pictures of it on its flying stand, and it looks like the standard stand. Plus you know weapons system sizes based on it having weapons we've already been able to see, or own.

I own every Custodes vehicle on sale to date. The Coronus Grav Carrier is the length of a baneblade chassis and 2/3 the width. This looks longer and is at least twice (if not more) the width. So maybe it is 2-3 wide instead of 3-4 wide; but I stand by my general assessment of the size of this.

Also note that those Bolt Canons (not heavy bolters) are stacked atop each other, not side by side. So it would be very easy to mis-judge the size of them.
https://17890-presscdn-0-51-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Legio-Custodes-Orion-Gunship.jpg (and that flying stand is pretty small on this model)

But not that arguing about this really matters; we'll fine out in a few weeks.

 Galas wrote:
30k stuff should have 40k rules, just like in Fantasy you had rules for special character that where dead centuries before of the date of the setting.

Afterall the Wargame is basically a sandbox to build up your own rules. Why a 40k battle can't be in the 33k? Or the 36k, etc...
Even if you wan't to fight units agains't units in a totally historically unacurate manner, you should be able to do it.

And yes, we need SoS and Custodes HQ's

The proper way to achieve that would be to pull a Battletech and set out the whole timeline divided into four or five broad "eras" with certain units allowed or disallowed for each based on the background, but "here's all the rules for all the things, sort it out yourselves" is certainly less effort for GW, sure.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Galas wrote:
30k stuff should have 40k rules, just like in Fantasy you had rules for special character that where dead centuries before of the date of the setting.

Afterall the Wargame is basically a sandbox to build up your own rules. Why a 40k battle can't be in the 33k? Or the 36k, etc...
Even if you wan't to fight units agains't units in a totally historically unacurate manner, you should be able to do it.

And yes, we need SoS and Custodes HQ's

The proper way to achieve that would be to pull a Battletech and set out the whole timeline divided into four or five broad "eras" with certain units allowed or disallowed for each based on the background, but "here's all the rules for all the things, sort it out yourselves" is certainly less effort for GW, sure.

I can see that "era restricted units" for a Narrative driven campaing or game mode. For competitive is very irrelevant. Everybody don't want the same of the game, and GW is pushing this 3-ways to play.
40K has always been sold as a sandbox wargame for people to ... yes, I'm gonna use it, "Forge their own narrative". They are selling you a "Minecraft". Is that lazy? Maybe. I like that freedom.

 Galas wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Galas wrote:
30k stuff should have 40k rules, just like in Fantasy you had rules for special character that where dead centuries before of the date of the setting.

Afterall the Wargame is basically a sandbox to build up your own rules. Why a 40k battle can't be in the 33k? Or the 36k, etc...
Even if you wan't to fight units agains't units in a totally historically unacurate manner, you should be able to do it.

And yes, we need SoS and Custodes HQ's

The proper way to achieve that would be to pull a Battletech and set out the whole timeline divided into four or five broad "eras" with certain units allowed or disallowed for each based on the background, but "here's all the rules for all the things, sort it out yourselves" is certainly less effort for GW, sure.

I can see that "era restricted units" for a Narrative driven campaing or game mode. For competitive is very irrelevant. Everybody don't want the same of the game, and GW is pushing this 3-ways to play.
40K has always been sold as a sandbox wargame for people to ... yes, I'm gonna use it, "Forge their own narrative". They are selling you a "Minecraft". Is that lazy? Maybe. I like that freedom.

That would work if Matched Play or whatever its equivalent in any given edition didn't immediately become the default for most players simply because it's the method that requires the least negotiation, therefore "Matched Play" IS 40K for all intents and purposes, and the core, basic version of the game should reflect the IP, IMO. Wanting games to reflect the background isn't the same as wanting to play United Nations Negotiation Session: 40K Edition or The Hippy-Dippy Anything Goes Wargame methods that GW are trying to shunt background fans off into with the silly Matched/Narrative/Open split.

Have you ever tried asking some random pickup opponent to rework their army list because you'd rather not play against X, Y, or Z? Yeah.

I like points. I like playing to win on the tabletop. I may not prefer but functionally must default to pickup games. I'm a bit bored of GW's inability to balance a game properly meaning that limits my ability to interact with the IP the game is ostensibly based on.

The ideal version of 40K is one where there's no need to split off background gamers because GW have done their job properly and you can just say "Fancy a game at [X Points] in [Y Era]" and have a fully featured experience rather than a background-wise nonsensical hodgepodge.

That flyer better be huge for costing over $500.

IFC_Casting wrote:
That flyer better be huge for costing over $500.

275£ is only about $360 today. It's a butt-load, but not a $500 butt-load.

Look at his flag, US$ is not the only $!

I miss the days when our dollar was worth more than the US. Honestly though I feel even 360 would be too much for it.

Dang didgeridoo dollars.

Yeah, it's all I can koala bare.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I bet that burger'd cost $30 in Australia.

I'm sure you could easily find a $30 burger here that was less ...filled than that one, though.

 Azazelx wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I bet that burger'd cost $30 in Australia.

I'm sure you could easily find a $30 burger here that was less ...filled than that one, though.

Probably at McDonald's.

The Oiron looks fantastic and is easily up there as one of my fav ships now. FW "gets" flyers so much better than GW for the most part barring the Valkyrie/Corvus.