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.

tneva82 wrote:

 Glasdir wrote:
except the spartan and storm eagle are much larger than a land raider and storm raven respectively, proxying really isn't ok in any aspect of the hobby not just 30k, the plastic phobos land raiders are fine to use as land raiders in 30k as they are documented to have existed, 30k is all about narrative gaming and if you ignore the narrative then why bother playing? might as well play 40k. While I strongly dislike the outer circle 90% of the points given about the minis are right, if you aren't even going to put in the effort to make a decent looking, era appropriate army (ie. correct livery and loadouts, with no proxying and minimal to no mkvii/mkviii) then might as well not bother as it's not what 30k is about. It's not being elitist (I've built my armies on a reasonable budget and taken time to save cash for the more expensive things rather than half arsing them) its about being "historically" accurate as that is what 30k is at it's core, a historical version of 40k. historical gamers would be generally unimpressed if you turned up to a WW2 game with romans or an 19th century English army, the same applies to 30k.

Sorry but you can say this is not elitistic but that doesn't make elitistic stance any less elitistic.

And you are incorrect about what 30k is at it's core. 30k is at it's core about HAVING FUN. Period.

And just because historic gamers are elitistic doesn't mean it's good attitude to take in 30k.

While I don't agree with everything the poster said, I do think that plenty of 30K devotees tend to be more narrative-focused and interested in an immersive experience. That's HAVING FUN to them. And so seeing a bunch of MkVII marines and/or 40K color schemes and looks on the table runs counter to that.

This general discussion has existed long before 30K was a thing, and so I don't expect it to go anywhere other than to conclude that different people have different ideas of fun, and that you should seek out groups that more closely pair with your own interests.

tneva82 wrote:

Sorry but you can say this is not elitistic but that doesn't make elitistic stance any less elitistic.

And you are incorrect about what 30k is at it's core. 30k is at it's core about HAVING FUN. Period.

And just because historic gamers are elitistic doesn't mean it's good attitude to take in 30k.

and I suppose you consider saying that you can't play 40k with your warmahordes army is elitist as well.

 Glasdir wrote:

Kasper Hawser wrote:
There's an 18 year old at our club who wanted to play some HH with our group we helped him make a list using his 40k Salamanders as a 30k army e.g his Devastators as heavy support squad, Vulkan Hestan as a Praetor with Paragon blade, Storm Raven as a Storm Eagle or Fire Raptor.
As times gone on he's added some Fire Drakes, Vulkan, Calth and Prospero models. He still uses his LandRaider as a Spartan and Raven as Raptor or Eagle but there expensive models for someone without a full time job and expensive even when you have one.
If we had acted like that fool on the you tube vid we would have lost a 30k player for our campaigns you need to encourage with this hobby not ack like an elitist fool. We've got 2 more 17 year olds into it recently one using his Deathwatch as black shields for our current campaign in fact we're all running black shield lists so all our armies could be considered incorrect by some as we have WE, TS, IH, IW, and others painted in their legion colours.
I think when reading the Black books it's obvious how the spirit of the game should be and that's inclusion not exclusion.

except the spartan and storm eagle are much larger than a land raider and storm raven respectively, proxying really isn't ok in any aspect of the hobby not just 30k, the plastic phobos land raiders are fine to use as land raiders in 30k as they are documented to have existed, 30k is all about narrative gaming and if you ignore the narrative then why bother playing? might as well play 40k. While I strongly dislike the outer circle 90% of the points given about the minis are right, if you aren't even going to put in the effort to make a decent looking, era appropriate army (ie. correct livery and loadouts, with no proxying and minimal to no mkvii/mkviii) then might as well not bother as it's not what 30k is about. It's not being elitist (I've built my armies on a reasonable budget and taken time to save cash for the more expensive things rather than half arsing them) its about being "historically" accurate as that is what 30k is at it's core, a historical version of 40k. historical gamers would be generally unimpressed if you turned up to a WW2 game with romans or an 19th century English army, the same applies to 30k.

It’s nice to have all the correct models but the most important thing for narrative gaming is to have fun and enjoy the era that the narrative takes place in. I don’t think it’s worth getting hung up on exact models.
Don’t get me wrong I like having the right armour and models my World Eaters are made up of Mk 2,3,and 4 kits with FW pads helmets and torsos for the sergeants. I’ve got a Spartan, 3 Dreadclaws etc etc.
My personal example was just to show why it’s worth not getting elitist about the hobby we have all enjoyed watching his army change from 40k to 30k and he’s spent a fair bit Vulkan, Fire Drakes, betrayal at Calth, Prospero Burns allowing the proxies which are very similar in shape and size makes his lists more competitive and the games more fun when we use our fancy toys.

I really don't see 30k as being any more narrative driven than 40k. People make that claim, but if it were true, quad launcher sales would be 10% of what they are. Whilst I personally prefer FW's range for my 30k collection, as far as I am concerned, if it existed at the time then there is no argument against it, and if it is a citadel kit with no FW upgrade options (ie landspeeders, attack bikes etc) then the citadel box is fine (I'd kitbash myself, don't expect anyone else to.)

I've never heard anyone complain about 30k models used in 40k, despite the lack of numbers of "relic armour". I don't really see it as any different myself.

I'd just let people naturally transition into 30k models. If they're having a good time and enjoying the setting they'll likely do it of their own accord. I know I did. I used to use 40k models as a proxy myself. (with some terrible conversions that ruined at least $150 worth of models!)

 Glasdir wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Sorry but you can say this is not elitistic but that doesn't make elitistic stance any less elitistic.

And you are incorrect about what 30k is at it's core. 30k is at it's core about HAVING FUN. Period.

And just because historic gamers are elitistic doesn't mean it's good attitude to take in 30k.

and I suppose you consider saying that you can't play 40k with your warmahordes army is elitist as well.

It's more like using Lord of the Rings chess pieces when you've just brought a basic chessboard and a set of white chess pieces. There's nothing inherently wrong with mixing and matching different pieces fro different sets, and you might prefer certain chess piece styles over others, but one tends to seem like a jerk when one says, "well, I only play with one style of pieces, so don't talk to me unless you also have that style of pieces." (Ok, granted you don't bring Chess pieces to a chess match, but work with me here)

The main thing I was trying (and, apparently failing) to say was: there's different ways of saying things and trying to get people to do things. You can say " get out of my face if you don't have 30k" or you can say "bro, the 30k stuff is way cooler; take as much time as you need, get the 30k stuff and join the cool kids club."

The line for me is effort. You want to plop down an army with 40k plastic IIC Rhinos and Mk.VII armour in 30k colours and tell me all about your company's illustrious action at the Siege of Terra, go ahead, absolutely, happy to have you. You want to plop down your army of 40k plastic IIB Rhinos and Mk.VII armour casually sprayed black and then tell me you know your plastic Vanguards with Lightning Claws aren't actually Dark Furies but if I could just pretend because the rules are so awesome, I'm going to start looking at you sideways. (Addendum: Trying things in proxy before dumping the money is rather different from treating the proxy as an end goal, and it's very much a difference of attitude.)

People tell horror stories about anal-historical-wargamer-style "oooh the buttons on that tunic are the wrong shade of silver you illiterate peon" snobbery in 30k, but I have yet to run across anyone who would take issue with someone putting an honest effort on the table, even if it did involve 40k plastics.

My word Bearers use alot of csm models mixed with BaC. My Word Bearers chapter are themed around the assault on Ultramar/the Ruinstorm so looking pretty chaosy is ok.

All my Sons of Horus are MkIV armor, with the Eye of Horus pauldron being MkIII, I like it, some others don't like it because they are not full MkIV.

 conker249 wrote:
All my Sons of Horus are MkIV armor, with the Eye of Horus pauldron being MkIII, I like it, some others don't like it because they are not full MkIV.

When they express their dislikes simply point to the Legion Champion model.

 conker249 wrote:
All my Sons of Horus are MkIV armor, with the Eye of Horus pauldron being MkIII, I like it, some others don't like it because they are not full MkIV.

They seem to have a pretty warped understanding of especially the later parts of the Heresy.

AnomanderRake wrote:The line for me is effort. You want to plop down an army with 40k plastic IIC Rhinos and Mk.VII armour in 30k colours and tell me all about your company's illustrious action at the Siege of Terra, go ahead, absolutely, happy to have you. You want to plop down your army of 40k plastic IIB Rhinos and Mk.VII armour casually sprayed black and then tell me you know your plastic Vanguards with Lightning Claws aren't actually Dark Furies but if I could just pretend because the rules are so awesome, I'm going to start looking at you sideways. (Addendum: Trying things in proxy before dumping the money is rather different from treating the proxy as an end goal, and it's very much a difference of attitude.)

People tell horror stories about anal-historical-wargamer-style "oooh the buttons on that tunic are the wrong shade of silver you illiterate peon" snobbery in 30k, but I have yet to run across anyone who would take issue with someone putting an honest effort on the table, even if it did involve 40k plastics.

I agree with this sentiment exactly! Plus it’s not like Mk VII came out of no where; there’s a lot of basically Mk VII helmets in the black books, and I wouldn’t be surprised if proto mk VII was sent out how Mk VI was to the IW and RG for testing. 100 guys is a drop in the bucket, and it’s entirely plausible an entire company could have been issued test versions of Mk VII at some point. If people want to be asinine about rhinos I point them to page 217 in book 1. It’s tiny but it’s there XD. not to mention FW just released HH era doors and front plate for the normal rhino... I don’t want to come across as vindictive, but I’ll laugh if come the siege of Terra we have Mk VII IF/WS/BA players refusing to play early Heresy DG/WE/EC because their models don’t represent the corrupted version (ex plague marines) they would have been by then. It’s just not worth splitting hairs so much, especially when we don’t have any concrete facts or numbers on Mk VII.

conker249 wrote:All my Sons of Horus are MkIV armor, with the Eye of Horus pauldron being MkIII, I like it, some others don't like it because they are not full MkIV.

Have none of them read the black books? Even if they only have access to one there are mixed armor types in every book, and really when you think about it many of the books also cover how they looked before the heresy so it’s not like mixed armor was a result of the heresy or some odd occurrence.

For vehicles nobody really seems to have an issue, as the plastic rhinos etc are all mk's that were in production during the heresy. I personally don't mind about suits of mk vii power armour being mixed in either, by the seige of terra it's safe to assume that at least the imperial fists / white scars and blood angles all had a large supply of it. And given have of mars sided with horus I'm sure the traitor legions would have some as well. But I have meet several players that get really pissy about people using it.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
People tell horror stories about anal-historical-wargamer-style "oooh the buttons on that tunic are the wrong shade of silver you illiterate peon" snobbery in 30k, but I have yet to run across anyone who would take issue with someone putting an honest effort on the table, even if it did involve 40k plastics.

There will be people all over the spectrum on this, but I think the majority will be fine with the underlined bit. It's one of those things that's hard to define, but you know it when you see it.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
then tell me you know your plastic Vanguards with Lightning Claws aren't actually Dark Furies but if I could just pretend because the rules are so awesome, I'm going to start looking at you sideways.

Why? Hypothetical player could have put more Mk IV bits into the squad, Dark Furies are essentially just VGV with Lightning Claws. They dont need the mono-jet and wings. As the Heresy ran on they'd use what ever they could get their hands on.

R0bcrt wrote:

conker249 wrote:All my Sons of Horus are MkIV armor, with the Eye of Horus pauldron being MkIII, I like it, some others don't like it because they are not full MkIV.

Have none of them read the black books? Even if they only have access to one there are mixed armor types in every book, and really when you think about it many of the books also cover how they looked before the heresy so it’s not like mixed armor was a result of the heresy or some odd occurrence.

Grumpy old farts can be loathe to change. In the original fluff that still forms the basis of power armour evolution mark 5 was not 'not a mark' as it is in the Thorpe-fluff, but a specific design (albeit in the same way that a Sherman tank was a specific design) created and manufactured because of an apparent incompatibility between mark 4 and earlier technology. Many old timers feel "but it tastes so good" is insufficient justification for Thorpe's urinating over the established canon with Deliverance Lost. Even Forge World appear to be of two minds on the issue, there's far less mixing in the later books and in Book 6 there's a mixed MkIII/IV Iron Hand whose description states that that legion's techmarines are the only ones capable of doing such a feat because of the underlying incompatibility between the marks.

That said grumpy old fart or not anyone who complains about MkIV marines with MkIII pads is a tit of the highest order, the only practical difference is the *decorative* rim which any artificer could easily apply to a MkIV pad if a marine or his unit commander wished it.

 Gashrog wrote:
a mixed MkIII/IV Iron Hand whose description states that that legion's techmarines are the only ones capable of doing such a feat because of the underlying incompatibility between the marks.

Well considering the fact that that armor shown isn't something simple like Mk IV legs and arms on a Mk III Torso, but a Mk III and IV torso hybrid. I'm of the opinion that its the hybrid that has only been managed by their artificers, not something as simple as making legs work with the Torso.

Gashrog wrote:

R0bcrt wrote:

conker249 wrote:All my Sons of Horus are MkIV armor, with the Eye of Horus pauldron being MkIII, I like it, some others don't like it because they are not full MkIV.

Have none of them read the black books? Even if they only have access to one there are mixed armor types in every book, and really when you think about it many of the books also cover how they looked before the heresy so it’s not like mixed armor was a result of the heresy or some odd occurrence.

Grumpy old farts can be loathe to change. In the original fluff that still forms the basis of power armour evolution mark 5 was not 'not a mark' as it is in the Thorpe-fluff, but a specific design (albeit in the same way that a Sherman tank was a specific design) created and manufactured because of an apparent incompatibility between mark 4 and earlier technology. Many old timers feel "but it tastes so good" is insufficient justification for Thorpe's urinating over the established canon with Deliverance Lost. Even Forge World appear to be of two minds on the issue, there's far less mixing in the later books and in Book 6 there's a mixed MkIII/IV Iron Hand whose description states that that legion's techmarines are the only ones capable of doing such a feat because of the underlying incompatibility between the marks.

That said grumpy old fart or not anyone who complains about MkIV marines with MkIII pads is a tit of the highest order, the only practical difference is the *decorative* rim which any artificer could easily apply to a MkIV pad if a marine or his unit commander wished it.

Fair enough, I didn't start getting into 40k until middle school which was when the first Horus Heresy book came out (late 2000s? man how time flies XD), and then when I bought the collected visions book my idea of what Horus Heresy armor was like was very fluid due to the vast array of variety. I agree there is less armor mixing in the later books but it is still significant. For example book 7 I counted 7 power armor marines, and 2 had mixed armor (one was MK III with mk II shoulders and mk IV head for example). Book 5 had 2 mixed out of about 11ish (suzerains and ashen circles I didn't count as mixed but they are not standard so depends on your view point). Book 6 had 7 mixed armor out of about 20. While never the majority it is significant in number. Also I'm 98% sure the remark about the IH marine was about how one half of his chest plate was MkIII while the other half was Mk IV. There are a lot of other examples of marines having Mk IV heads on III bodies and vice versa, so I don't think FW is of two minds on the matter at all, if anything the IH marine proves you could do some crazy conversions if you wanted to and blame the tech-priests/marines XD. Keep in mind this doesn't even consider "local" patterns of Mk armor that would have been a similar degree of separation (for example IW mk II armor is very different looking in the torso when compared to normal mk II, and ofcourse Ultramarine Praetor armor) and technically would be considered distinct from the standard pattern in terms of supply and repair.

VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Gashrog wrote:
a mixed MkIII/IV Iron Hand whose description states that that legion's techmarines are the only ones capable of doing such a feat because of the underlying incompatibility between the marks.

Well considering the fact that that armor shown isn't something simple like Mk IV legs and arms on a Mk III Torso, but a Mk III and IV torso hybrid. I'm of the opinion that its the hybrid that has only been managed by their artificers, not something as simple as making legs work with the Torso.

Yeah I'm pretty sure that was what they were referring too, in book VI we also have the WE with mk II torso and head (albeit modified legion specific versions) with Mk IV arms, legs, and jump pack. If a WE can fuse Mk II and IV then it's safe to say it's referring to the two halves of the torso of the IH and not the idea in general of mixing armor.

What about fielding the Macharius super heavies in an Ordo Reductor army, as is apparently legal to do so by the statement on page 21 of the Taghmata red book?
There it gives the requirements of it being made to look amply fluffy, with the excuse being how the Mechanicum has a habit of losing old designs as time goes on.

Macharius is fine,it would just have a different name back then.

Book III page 127. Mars pattern Rhino shown with extra armor for the Iron Warriors along with description "one of the less common patterns of the ubiquiton Rhinos used by the Legiones Astartes of this period"

Seems like its officially canon that "40k" rhinos are used during the heresy

Kisada11 wrote:
Book III page 127. Mars pattern Rhino shown with extra armor for the Iron Warriors along with description "one of the less common patterns of the ubiquiton Rhinos used by the Legiones Astartes of this period"

Seems like its officially canon that "40k" rhinos are used during the heresy

It's the fething MARS pattern Rhino. Mars! As in Forgeworld Numero Uno.