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.

 Mymearan wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Has anyone gotten the new Hellblaster kit? I'm curious about the assembly of the weapons, it seems to me that it is impossible to assemble the weapon to look like the Dark Imperium plasma incenerator.

I answered this on the last page. Rapid fire version (same as in DI): two cylinder mag. Assault version: add scope under barrel. Heavy version: add cable and backpack.

But the mag is different and there is not the shoulder bit. So now we have two different looking plasma incenerators, one of which looks much more like the assault plasma than it looks like the other incenerator variant...

 Crimson wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Has anyone gotten the new Hellblaster kit? I'm curious about the assembly of the weapons, it seems to me that it is impossible to assemble the weapon to look like the Dark Imperium plasma incenerator.

I answered this on the last page. Rapid fire version (same as in DI): two cylinder mag. Assault version: add scope under barrel. Heavy version: add cable and backpack.

But the mag is different and there is not the shoulder bit. So now we have two different looking plasma incenerators, one of which looks much more like the assault plasma than it looks like the other incenerator variant...

The mag is just rotated but yeah I don't know why they omitted the stock. Should've been s separate piece to differentiate the rapid fire gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Looking at it again, my theory is this: since the kit is two spruces duplicated twice each, it was probably intended to be a five man kit initially. There's a lot less room to play around with the sprue and add extra pieces if you have duplicate spruces as opposed to four different ones. This might mean that they couldn't fit an extra bit in as those spruces are really packed. They don't even have that many extra heads, which they usually do.

 Mymearan wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Has anyone gotten the new Hellblaster kit? I'm curious about the assembly of the weapons, it seems to me that it is impossible to assemble the weapon to look like the Dark Imperium plasma incenerator.

I answered this on the last page. Rapid fire version (same as in DI): two cylinder mag. Assault version: add scope under barrel. Heavy version: add cable and backpack.

That's incorrect, actually. Both the Rapid Fire and Assault use the undermount light(there's only two types of "tip", the undermount and the Heavy with extra reservoir). The Assault version adds a rail mounted sight up top.

There is no way to build them to look like the DI box versions without conversion.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Has anyone gotten the new Hellblaster kit? I'm curious about the assembly of the weapons, it seems to me that it is impossible to assemble the weapon to look like the Dark Imperium plasma incenerator.

I answered this on the last page. Rapid fire version (same as in DI): two cylinder mag. Assault version: add scope under barrel. Heavy version: add cable and backpack.

That's incorrect, actually. Both the Rapid Fire and Assault use the undermount light(there's only two types of "tip", the undermount and the Heavy with extra reservoir). The Assault version adds a rail mounted sight up top.

There is no way to build them to look like the DI box versions without conversion.

This is so stupid and will be super confusing. These almost identical looking guns are different while these two guns which look much more different than the previous two are the same...

Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

Because all the cool kids have sleek, modular tacticool guns in their vidyas, so GW gives the cool new Marine kids sleek, modular tacticool guns.

Won't help them when a piece of rusted metal severs their head, though.

Okay, Plague Marines still have monofilament knives from back in the day, so that rusted piece is still fancy, but not AS fancy.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

They're following Corvus Belli's example of having a core design for Faction weapons with the details signifying the difference.

 Platuan4th wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

They're following Corvus Belli's example of having a core design for Faction weapons with the details signifying the difference.

Except they're not consistent about it. Sometimes a minor visual difference indicates mechanical difference and sometimes a major visual difference doesn't!

 Crimson wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

They're following Corvus Belli's example of having a core design for Faction weapons with the details signifying the difference.

Except they're not consistent about it. Sometimes a minor visual difference indicates mechanical difference and sometimes a major visual difference doesn't!

I actually do wish the basic tip from the DI box was an option. I'm ordering more DI ones for the Rapid Fires and only building the box ones as Heavy or Assault Incenerators. They're on the desk at the moment, I'll try to get pictures to show the differences.

 Crimson wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

They're following Corvus Belli's example of having a core design for Faction weapons with the details signifying the difference.

Except they're not consistent about it. Sometimes a minor visual difference indicates mechanical difference and sometimes a major visual difference doesn't!

I imagine most people will kit out all their hell blasters with the same gun anyway one way or another..

if one wanted to indicate a differance you could also use differant colours of plasma glow. "rapid fire glow blue, assault glow red, heavy glow white"

 Platuan4th wrote:

Spoiler:

 Crimson wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:

 spiralingcadaver wrote:
Man, what ever happened to guns looking obviously different? I mean, no one's going to mistake scouts with bolters from pistol + CCW, sniper, or heavy weapon, and probably not with shotguns (other than being blocky and 2-handed, they're not very similar), but these things all look the same to me... IDK what GW's logic is behind making the weapons not immediately identifiable, but it's pretty bizarre.

They're following Corvus Belli's example of having a core design for Faction weapons with the details signifying the difference.

Except they're not consistent about it. Sometimes a minor visual difference indicates mechanical difference and sometimes a major visual difference doesn't!

I actually do wish the basic tip from the DI box was an option. I'm ordering more DI ones for the Rapid Fires and only building the box ones as Heavy or Assault Incenerators. They're on the desk at the moment, I'll try to get pictures to show the differences.

That would be really helpful to have all four side by side in one pic to compare.

I'm at lunch currently, but I'll have them up tonight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As promised, a comparison. Sorry for the blurriness, my camera batteries were dead and had to use my phone.



Left to right: DI Rapid Fire, box Rapid Fire, Assault(note the box on the tac-rail), Heavy(extra reservoir, cable, and backpack mounted generator). Also note that the box reservoirs are side to side rather than aft-fore like the DI version.

 Platuan4th wrote:
I'm at lunch currently, but I'll have them up tonight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As promised, a comparison. Sorry for the blurriness, my camera batteries were dead and had to use my phone.

Spoiler:

Left to right: DI Rapid Fire, box Rapid Fire, Assault(note the box on the tac-rail), Heavy(extra reservoir, cable, and backpack mounted generator). Also note that the box reservoirs are side to side rather than aft-fore like the DI version.

Thanks! Yeah, I think those would have been better off just like the intercessors as two visually different variants instead of trying to shoehorn in a third IMO (or in this case a third but actually fourth visual variant). They should have left it at heavy and either rapid fire or assault. I spoilered the pic as I replaced it with the full size one you uploaded which can mess with browser spacing frequently.

Yeah. That's why I'm gonna stick with the DI models for the Rapid Fire version, it's actually visually distinct enough from the box builds.

A bit of a bummer, they should have made the Assault variant shorter and slighter, like a plasma version of the Reivers' bolt carbine.

 Platuan4th wrote:
Yeah. That's why I'm gonna stick with the DI models for the Rapid Fire version, it's actually visually distinct enough from the box builds.

A bit of a bummer, they should have made the Assault variant shorter and slighter, like a plasma version of the Reivers' bolt carbine.

From what I've read, the autoboltrifle and carbine have the exact same stats (correct me if I'm wrong as I don't have the rules myself) yet look completely different. It would have been better if they had made the bolt rifle the SAR looking autoboltrifle but kept the 30" rapid fire sats and then left the scope for the heavy bolt rifle DMR style... and left the third stats for the carbine in the Reivers kit as the assault 2 weapon.. Making three "different" weapons out of one base with only one or two bits added is a visual stretch that IMO didn't work out.

 Platuan4th wrote:




Left to right: DI Rapid Fire, box Rapid Fire, Assault(note the box on the tac-rail), Heavy(extra reservoir, cable, and backpack mounted generator). Also note that the box reservoirs are side to side rather than aft-fore like the DI version.

Yeah, this is stupid. If you told a person who didn't already know the answer, that these represent tree different types of weapons and thus two of the pictured weapons are the same, they would invariably say that the two in the middle are the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 warboss wrote:

From what I've read, the autoboltrifle and carbine have the exact same stats (correct me if I'm wrong as I don't have the rules myself) yet look completely different.

Yeah, that is indeed the case. Again a minor difference changes the stats, while a huge difference doesn't...

 warboss wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Yeah. That's why I'm gonna stick with the DI models for the Rapid Fire version, it's actually visually distinct enough from the box builds.

A bit of a bummer, they should have made the Assault variant shorter and slighter, like a plasma version of the Reivers' bolt carbine.

From what I've read, the autoboltrifle and carbine have the exact same stats (correct me if I'm wrong as I don't have the rules myself) yet look completely different. It would have been better if they had made the bolt rifle the SAR looking autoboltrifle but kept the 30" rapid fire sats and then left the scope for the heavy bolt rifle DMR style... and left the third stats for the carbine in the Reivers kit as the assault 2 weapon.. Making three "different" weapons out of one base with only one or two bits added is a visual stretch that IMO didn't work out.

Yeah, the bolt carbines and the auto bolts are exactly the same weapon, stats wise. Which is why I've done this:

IDK
the Assault plasma and the Regular plasma looks the same from far away, whcih I like, my DI can use either and not be the wiser.

 Albertorius wrote:

 warboss wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Yeah. That's why I'm gonna stick with the DI models for the Rapid Fire version, it's actually visually distinct enough from the box builds.

A bit of a bummer, they should have made the Assault variant shorter and slighter, like a plasma version of the Reivers' bolt carbine.

From what I've read, the autoboltrifle and carbine have the exact same stats (correct me if I'm wrong as I don't have the rules myself) yet look completely different. It would have been better if they had made the bolt rifle the SAR looking autoboltrifle but kept the 30" rapid fire sats and then left the scope for the heavy bolt rifle DMR style... and left the third stats for the carbine in the Reivers kit as the assault 2 weapon.. Making three "different" weapons out of one base with only one or two bits added is a visual stretch that IMO didn't work out.

Yeah, the bolt carbines and the auto bolts are exactly the same weapon, stats wise. Which is why I've done this:

Spoiler:

The Google pic link isn't working for me.

 warboss wrote:
The Google pic link isn't working for me.

Hm. Uploaded to Dakka.

 Albertorius wrote:

 warboss wrote:
The Google pic link isn't working for me.

Hm. Uploaded to Dakka.

That definitely works, both technically and thematically. The carbines look like regular bolters with an added foregrip...it's too bad the seconds Marine bolter is inferior to it despite the similarities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why are the arms a different color btw? Did you prime them on sprue?

 warboss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 warboss wrote:
The Google pic link isn't working for me.

Hm. Uploaded to Dakka.

That definitely works, both technically and thematically. The carbines look like regular bolters with an added foregrip...it's too bad the seconds Marine bolter is inferior to it despite the similarities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why are the arms a different color btw? Did you prime them on sprue?

The arms and bodies are from different kits. The blue bodies are from the Know No Fear set.

 warboss wrote:

 Albertorius wrote:

 warboss wrote:
The Google pic link isn't working for me.

Hm. Uploaded to Dakka.

That definitely works, both technically and thematically. The carbines look like regular bolters with an added foregrip...it's too bad the seconds Marine bolter is inferior to it despite the similarities.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why are the arms a different color btw? Did you prime them on sprue?

Starter set bodies from the looks of it with multipart arms.

Maybe it's the lighting but that doesn't look like starter set colored plastic on my screen as it's not the typical grey I'm used too but rather tan/sand. Regardless I like the look and may borrow it if I expand my own primaris plans bet on a single squad' s worth.

 warboss wrote:
Maybe it's the lighting but that doesn't look like starter set colored plastic on my screen as it's not the typical grey I'm used too.

While Dark Imperium uses grey, the smaller starters use the Easy to Assemble colored plastic.

 warboss wrote:
Maybe it's the lighting but that doesn't look like starter set colored plastic on my screen as it's not the typical grey I'm used too.

It's actually Know no Fear Intercessors with Reiver arms and SM shoulder pads ^_^. I needed to excise the arms in some cases (and thin the reivers' left shoulders because the have molded a shoulder pad, albeit smaller), as the shoulder pads were molded with the bodies, but nothing very difficult.

 Platuan4th wrote:
I'm at lunch currently, but I'll have them up tonight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As promised, a comparison. Sorry for the blurriness, my camera batteries were dead and had to use my phone.



Left to right: DI Rapid Fire, box Rapid Fire, Assault(note the box on the tac-rail), Heavy(extra reservoir, cable, and backpack mounted generator). Also note that the box reservoirs are side to side rather than aft-fore like the DI version.

Yeah; that's clearly Rapid Fire, Assault, Assault, Heavy.

 AduroT wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
I'm at lunch currently, but I'll have them up tonight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As promised, a comparison. Sorry for the blurriness, my camera batteries were dead and had to use my phone.



Left to right: DI Rapid Fire, box Rapid Fire, Assault(note the box on the tac-rail), Heavy(extra reservoir, cable, and backpack mounted generator). Also note that the box reservoirs are side to side rather than aft-fore like the DI version.

Yeah; that's clearly Rapid Fire, Assault, Assault, Heavy.

Even worse is the one carrying his gun by the grip, there is no room to put the sight on. What I may do is actually put these sights on the DI ones, and not the assault guns.

It would be better if you used the Heavy gun tip instead of the Assault for them.

How the instructions tell to assemble the rapid fire variant? The scope doodah is really the only difference?

This is really weird, it seems like the kit was really designed to only allow two variants.