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.

 cuda1179 wrote:
However...... That isn't the only info we have. Hastings has chimed in and stated that something along these lines is coming.

Hastings, or at least the disqus account people assume is in fact hastings, also said this wasn't it.

75hastings69 wrote:I don't think this is genuine, doesn't seem to fit the description I got, looks like a (pretty good) conversion to me. Lower legs seem to be a different colour than rest of body and feet for some reason?

Vitor Correia wrote:Interesting. This one had a familiar silhouette, will the new marines be radically different?

75hastings69 wrote:not "radically" but certainly not as close to the original as this. I'm just going off a vague description of almost a year ago but this image doesn't fit it.

Link here.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
GW has twice boosted the size of.marines. From the RT era beakies to the Mk 7s then again from 2nd edition to 3rd without needing additional fluff, so they can upsize again without needing to create nu marines or super marines.

The scale of the models are simply wrong in either case. You're right, you don't need new fluff to justify it because space marines in the tabletop game are tiny compared to what they should be. Base height + power armor should make imperial guardsmen look like children scale-wise.

These new marines look to be the proper scale (yet it still doesn't explain why sisters of silence are massive as they should only come up to a marines chest)

 Kirasu wrote:
yet it still doesn't explain why sisters of silence are massive

Because clearly only Amazonian Women can be Null-Maidens, come on man!

 Kirasu wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
GW has twice boosted the size of.marines. From the RT era beakies to the Mk 7s then again from 2nd edition to 3rd without needing additional fluff, so they can upsize again without needing to create nu marines or super marines.

The scale of the models are simply wrong in either case. You're right, you don't need new fluff to justify it because space marines in the tabletop game are tiny compared to what they should be. Base height + power armor should make imperial guardsmen look like children scale-wise.

These new marines look to be the proper scale (yet it still doesn't explain why sisters of silence are massive as they should only come up to a marines chest)

Part of the problem is Catachans were big (Planet Rambo has heavier G so plastic Catachans were marine sized, also meant that parts were interchangable, a life saver in those early days of plastic kits). And then Cadians were made Catachan sized. When current marines are compared to Empire Plastics or older metals they look the right size.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
yet it still doesn't explain why sisters of silence are massive

Because clearly only Amazonian Women can be Null-Maidens, come on man!

They snu-snu the voodoo.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
GW has twice boosted the size of.marines. From the RT era beakies to the Mk 7s then again from 2nd edition to 3rd without needing additional fluff, so they can upsize again without needing to create nu marines or super marines.

The scale of the models are simply wrong in either case. You're right, you don't need new fluff to justify it because space marines in the tabletop game are tiny compared to what they should be. Base height + power armor should make imperial guardsmen look like children scale-wise.

These new marines look to be the proper scale (yet it still doesn't explain why sisters of silence are massive as they should only come up to a marines chest)

Part of the problem is Catachans were big (Planet Rambo has heavier G so plastic Catachans were marine sized, also meant that parts were interchangable, a life saver in those early days of plastic kits). And then Cadians were made Catachan sized. When current marines are compared to Empire Plastics or older metals they look the right size.

The cultist models from Deathwatch: Overkill are also significantly smaller than the DW Marines, as well as my standard Marines. I haven't seen the GSC kit cultists, but I would assume the same to be true. The thing people seem to miss about scale creep is that it isn't universal. If you ask me, the best way to make Truescale Marines would be to reduce the size of other models.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Kirasu wrote:
yet it still doesn't explain why sisters of silence are massive

Because clearly only Amazonian Women can be Null-Maidens, come on man!

Platform shoes.

Because GW doesn't know how to scale things, either in lore or in miniatures.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
GW has twice boosted the size of.marines. From the RT era beakies to the Mk 7s then again from 2nd edition to 3rd without needing additional fluff, so they can upsize again without needing to create nu marines or super marines.

Actually thrice, Deathwatch are another step up.

No deathwatch are just stood up

I'd also say DW aren't actually a size boost to the Marine range given they haven't actually replaced any models in the existing Marine range.

 CURNOW wrote:
No deathwatch are just stood up

No, their legs are actually bigger. Even their feet are a bit bigger.

 Crimson wrote:

 CURNOW wrote:
No deathwatch are just stood up

No, their legs are actually bigger. Even their feet are a bit bigger.

I'm not arguing that the Deathwatch legs aren't bigger than normal Marine legs, they are. There's a definite scale creep when you put the models side by side. And it's more than just stance. Though stance does play a part.

However the image you've show really isn't in anyway an accurate way of demonstrating it. The colourful lines, while pretty, demonstrate nothing. They don't *mean* anything, there's no frame of real reference there, where are we measuring to and from? there are two completely different joints, two completely different ankle points. The point at which the bottom of the purple line meets the ankle is in a completely different place to the place the point the red line meets the ankle on the Deathwatch ankle. It's a completely skewed analysis.

The only meaningful comparison would be measurement in mm from knee to the sole of the foot, and knee to the dome of the waist.

I know I'm being overly picky, but I've seen this photo posted numerous times and it always niggles me that its utter nonsense. Even if I agree with the point it's trying to prove.

 General Kroll wrote:

However the image you've show really isn't in anyway an accurate way of demonstrating it. The colourful lines, while pretty, demonstrate nothing. They don't *mean* anything, there's no frame of real reference there, where are we measuring to and from? there are two completely different joints, two completely different ankle points. The point at which the bottom of the purple line meets the ankle is in a completely different place to the place the point the red line meets the ankle on the Deathwatch ankle. It's a completely skewed analysis.

It is accurate enough for such tiny objects. The Deathwatch ankle has the orb, and the red line ends in the middle of the orb, which is about where the armour would end were it the same shape as on the Blood Angel. Of course, the lines are really not needed to make the point, but are merely there in an attempt to take account the slight differences in the stances.

so given that GW made new announcements today but never even commented on this leak, anyone else think we can put this to rest as "likely not true"?

Not in the least. They haven't said anything about plastic Mortarion either, and Hastings says that's definitely coming, and we have images of similar dubious provenance for that rumour.

Yeah if these are 4 months out there not going to say anything that causes there biggest selling range to tank for that length of time.

Either through people waiting off on purchases or the 2nd hand market being flooded with dirt cheap marines. As it is there has been a slight spike in marines on ebay, probably by people who used to play fantasy as well and saw there very expensive army reduced to worthlessness over night.

In fact an anouncement this far out would be evidence of there ineptitude at bussiness that most people all ready credit them with.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd also say DW aren't actually a size boost to the Marine range given they haven't actually replaced any models in the existing Marine range.

It seems to suggest, along with the Hastings rumor, that GW makes the more special marines are bigger than the regular ones. I guess marines follow the same "Bigga is betta!" principle as the Orkz.

SeanDrake wrote:
Yeah if these are 4 months out there not going to say anything that causes there biggest selling range to tank for that length of time.

Then would be funny with nu-marine rules being overpriced junk so old marines are better after all so all those dumped armies in anticpiation of uber marines was actually bad

 TheCustomLime wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd also say DW aren't actually a size boost to the Marine range given they haven't actually replaced any models in the existing Marine range.

It seems to suggest, along with the Hastings rumor, that GW makes the more special marines are bigger than the regular ones. I guess marines follow the same "Bigga is betta!" principle as the Orkz.

My guess is DW will be the new default Marine size (I think I saw someone say Thousand Sons are the same size?) and the super marines will be a bit bigger still.

Are GW going to quietly bin old Marines and their various chapters over time in favour of consolidating into just one Guilliman marine chapter/legion with the new models ?

Bartali wrote:
Are GW going to quietly bin old Marines and their various chapters over time in favour of consolidating into just one Guilliman marine chapter/legion with the new models ?

Yes. They're also going to require purchase of one codex book per unit type, enforce that all gaming tables are Citadel branded, and demand all your existing D6's be binned in favour of buying their exclusive 3-sided dice. JFC.

 Melissia wrote:
Because GW doesn't know how to scale things, either in lore or in miniatures.

That, and they just don't care. Warhammer isn't a historically accurate wargame simulation, but just a game to them.

 Crimson wrote:

 General Kroll wrote:

However the image you've show really isn't in anyway an accurate way of demonstrating it. The colourful lines, while pretty, demonstrate nothing. They don't *mean* anything, there's no frame of real reference there, where are we measuring to and from? there are two completely different joints, two completely different ankle points. The point at which the bottom of the purple line meets the ankle is in a completely different place to the place the point the red line meets the ankle on the Deathwatch ankle. It's a completely skewed analysis.

It is accurate enough for such tiny objects. The Deathwatch ankle has the orb, and the red line ends in the middle of the orb, which is about where the armour would end were it the same shape as on the Blood Angel. Of course, the lines are really not needed to make the point, but are merely there in an attempt to take account the slight differences in the stances.

It really is a terrible picture though, I wish people wouldn't use it. Not only are the lines going to different parts of the leg, but the legs are rotated a different amount, with the DW leg being more side on while the old SM leg is viewed more from the front.

It also doesn't demonstrate the most important thing, how much are the legs leaning away from the camera. The old SM legs are very splayed outwards in the typical "I'm riding a horse" stance, the DW legs are more straight down from the hips, so for the photograph to be valid both legs have to be perpendicular to the camera's line of sight, but we can't tell if they are or aren't. If the DW legs are the same length, but are being viewed closer to perpendicular to the camera, the imaginary lines drawn will come out longer even if the legs themselves aren't.

Do we need another "are Deathwatch taller" thread, guys? Pages and pages of back-and-forth have been done on that one already.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Do we need another "are Deathwatch taller" thread, guys? Pages and pages of back-and-forth have been done on that one already.

Really? Pages and pages? I haven't been involved in one before Geeze, guys, learn to measure properly and we won't need pages and pages of threads to discuss something that can be objectively measured

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Do we need another "are Deathwatch taller" thread, guys? Pages and pages of back-and-forth have been done on that one already.

Really? Pages and pages? I haven't been involved in one before Geeze, guys, learn to measure properly and we won't need pages and pages of threads to discuss something that can be objectively measured

They have been measured. They're bigger. The end.

Well hopefully by a picture better than that one

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Well hopefully by a picture better than that one

I took measurements but some people didn't believe me, so I took that picture, but apparently it was not enough. I probably should have made a video of them rotating side by side or something, but I doubt it would have helped. I swear there are people who could be holding two different sized objects in their own little hands and still insist that they're the same size!

Of course, to these people these new upscaled marines (should they exist) will not be a problem, as they will think they're the same size as their old marines even though they're a head taller!

The deathwatch mk8 marines are taller mainly because of the extended waist joint (the dome bit where the torso attaches to the legs) and the thicker belt area on their torso armour.

The leg stance adds to the effect.

They arent massively taller than regular marines though.