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.

 Ghaz wrote:
Did they forget to tell the painter that it was a Necron model he was painting not a T'au model?

Necrons that look Tau.
Dawn Blade is a Necron artifact confirmed.

What's going on with that Escher's face? It is otherwise great model, but those eyes are crazy close together. I hope it is only the painting.

I think it's just the paint job.

Also, original 3D render:

 Crimson wrote:
What's going on with that Escher's face? It is otherwise great model, but those eyes are crazy close together. I hope it is only the painting.

It's a lot better than the female faces they used to do. Given that it's probably at least 5x as large on your monitor than it will be in in hand I wouldn't worry too much.

 Ghaz wrote:
Did they forget to tell the painter that it was a Necron model he was painting not a T'au model?

In fairness FW makes a lot more Tau than Necrons

Still great looking model - and I want one!!

From Facebook:

Giuseppe Chiafele wrote:
Kria the Huntress preview on warhammer community! From the Amazing designer Alexandre Dumillard this has been the hardest model that I've Painted until now!

If the construct is around or under £200, I may just treat meself.

anyone know how big the new 'cron construct is? I've a friend whose hoping he'll finally get a knight equivilant

I'm pretty excited about the Necron construct presuming it's very large; if it's similar in size to a Triarch Stalker then I would pass as the Triarch Stalker is a very similar aesthetic but has much cleaner lines.

BrianDavion wrote:
anyone know how big the new 'cron construct is? I've a friend whose hoping he'll finally get a knight equivilant

Gives some idea:

 ImAGeek wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
anyone know how big the new 'cron construct is? I've a friend whose hoping he'll finally get a knight equivilant

Gives some idea:

hm yeah about knight sizedish

I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I think that construct would look a lot better at some sort of tripod. I guess I will have to buy one now to find out

Most impressive model in a while from FW.
Definitely liking the design on this construct.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

It's certainly my preferred style of Necron vehicle.
Ouze did an excellent stalker conversion. It's not only what the model should have looked like in the first place, but also matches up quite well with this new big beastie.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I refuse to leave any crew on what should be autonomous vehicles. I convert where I can (Triarch Stalker) and proxy where I can't (tomb blades). I have some not-yet-photographed "drones" I cobbled up to replace them, they look kind of like small H/Ks from the Terminator movies.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

Ditto. Or at least a featureless, geometric shape, like the monolith.
I really don't like the necron vehicles. Aesthetically they are fine, the just don't fit in with the rest of the army, and they are a bitch to assemble. You could tell it was something that was drawn by some artist who didn't know anything about necrons and they pushed it for a buck.
If I could convert away the pilots I would, but my conversion skills aren't great so I had to leave the pilots in, as otherwise I might do something irreversible. I did manage to cover up the stupid hole in the scythe, which ruins an otherwise excellent model. My makeshift covering doesn't look great though.

Anyone else noticing a similarity with the new cron vehicle and imperial knights, the carapace is quite similar, I wonder if that’s a purposeful “void dragon” inspired result or just a coincidence.

 Formosa wrote:
Anyone else noticing a similarity with the new cron vehicle and imperial knights, the carapace is quite similar, I wonder if that’s a purposeful “void dragon” inspired result or just a coincidence.

I think FW is just taking shortcuts. Its a common thing artists and whatnot do to save time.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I quite like the crewed vehicles; it adds to the "Lovecraft meets Pinocchio" feel to the Necrons. Integrated constructs might be more efficient, but the Necronms are desperate to cling on to (or reclaim) their ... necrontyrity, so they use machinery like they did when they were alive. The constructs are either AIs that were never living beings, or they're controlled by those Necrons who are too far gone to be "recoverable". I think things like Destroyers are objects of pity (and not a little horror) to the more humanoid Necrons.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I quite like the crewed vehicles; it adds to the "Lovecraft meets Pinocchio" feel to the Necrons. Integrated constructs might be more efficient, but the Necronms are desperate to cling on to (or reclaim) their ... necrontyrity, so they use machinery like they did when they were alive. The constructs are either AIs that were never living beings, or they're controlled by those Necrons who are too far gone to be "recoverable". I think things like Destroyers are objects of pity (and not a little horror) to the more humanoid Necrons.

Until you realize that there's no reason why they would be exposed like that, as they are supposed to have been a race obsessed with self preservation when they were alive.
Designing a military vehicle in such a way that the pilot is exposed is counterproductive. I don't care if there's a quantum shield, its still a stupid idea to tempt fate into shooting you in the face with a lascannon because you're too stupid to put a nice, big sheet of metal in front of you.
It just doesn't make sense as a necron vehicle. It flies in face of their own lore and established aesthetic.

I've been thinking about how much I hate crewed necron vehicles - like Tomb Blades. I had done these conversions but I never posted pictures because I never finished them/

Now that I have a 3D printer, I don't even know that I will finish them. In my mind I can redo them better in Rhino3D instead and print them with, ahem, straight lines instead of slightly warped greenstuff and uneven . So, here are my Necron Drones\ Tomb Blade replacement proxies made from little bits of this and that at various stages of development, maybe someone else will be inspired to build these, or something better.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I quite like the crewed vehicles; it adds to the "Lovecraft meets Pinocchio" feel to the Necrons. Integrated constructs might be more efficient, but the Necronms are desperate to cling on to (or reclaim) their ... necrontyrity, so they use machinery like they did when they were alive. The constructs are either AIs that were never living beings, or they're controlled by those Necrons who are too far gone to be "recoverable". I think things like Destroyers are objects of pity (and not a little horror) to the more humanoid Necrons.

Until you realize that there's no reason why they would be exposed like that, as they are supposed to have been a race obsessed with self preservation in life.
Designing a military vehicle in such a way that the pilot is exposed is counterproductive. I don't care if there's a quantum shield, its still a stupid idea to tempt fate into shooting you in the face with a lascannon because you're too stupid to put a nice, big sheet of metal in front of you.

That's a different argument. And not one that's exclusive to Necrons - Eldar, Tau and Imperial vehicles all have similar design flaws. Also, if the vehicle is protected by an energy shield, then it's not exposed, is it?

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I quite like the crewed vehicles; it adds to the "Lovecraft meets Pinocchio" feel to the Necrons. Integrated constructs might be more efficient, but the Necronms are desperate to cling on to (or reclaim) their ... necrontyrity, so they use machinery like they did when they were alive. The constructs are either AIs that were never living beings, or they're controlled by those Necrons who are too far gone to be "recoverable". I think things like Destroyers are objects of pity (and not a little horror) to the more humanoid Necrons.

Until you realize that there's no reason why they would be exposed like that, as they are supposed to have been a race obsessed with self preservation in life.
Designing a military vehicle in such a way that the pilot is exposed is counterproductive. I don't care if there's a quantum shield, its still a stupid idea to tempt fate into shooting you in the face with a lascannon because you're too stupid to put a nice, big sheet of metal in front of you.

That's a different argument. And not one that's exclusive to Necrons - Eldar, Tau and Imperial vehicles all have similar design flaws. Also, if the vehicle is protected by an energy shield, then it's not exposed, is it?

Perhaps not, but it does tell your enemy where to concentrate its fire. Its still painting a big target onto it. Tempting fate is never a good idea...unless you are an ork, or have crazy luck powers or something.
What gaping weakpoints do Tau vehicles have, save for the Stormsurge? Or imperial vehicles? Hell, even Eldar vehicles are more sensibly designed, as they tend to have a nice cockpit covering.

I should have said "some", sorry. I'm thinking of the Eldar War Walker and Vyper and the Tau Piranha and Tetra and the Stormsurge. Also Imperial Scout Sentinels, Land Speeders and the Tauros and Tauros Venator.

I suppose, once I've accepted (or invented) my theory above, the crew need to be visible on the model to continue that theme.

Most of those tend to be light vehicles with more an emphasis on speed and recon rather than being proper combat vehicles though, and they still do a better job in protecting their pilot.

Even the stormsurge's pilots are only exposed from the back, not the front.

The only way the necron vehicles make sense is if they are re-purposed civilian vehicles that were hastily outfitted for war before biotransference, and the necrons couldn't be bothered fully adapting them after becoming machines. The ghost ark fits this description, but not the Doomsday Ark, the barges or the flyers.

It does say that the DDA isn't meant to be a frontline combat vehicle, but that still doesn't justify the exposed pilot. The stormsurge and basilisks aren't supposed to be on the frontline either, iirc, and even they have more plating.
Annihilation barges are supposed to be defensive vehicles, so you'd think they'd be a bit more armored to go with that role. They aren't even long ranged.
Triarch Stalkers are also supposed to be assault walkers, and yet 50% of the pilot is exposed. Why wouldn't you concentrate fire at him? With sentinels only the head is exposed and there's plenty of cover for the pilot to duck behind, and with war walkers only the sides are exposed, and the walker is fast enough to get to a safer position.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I quite like the crewed vehicles; it adds to the "Lovecraft meets Pinocchio" feel to the Necrons. Integrated constructs might be more efficient, but the Necronms are desperate to cling on to (or reclaim) their ... necrontyrity, so they use machinery like they did when they were alive. The constructs are either AIs that were never living beings, or they're controlled by those Necrons who are too far gone to be "recoverable". I think things like Destroyers are objects of pity (and not a little horror) to the more humanoid Necrons.

Until you realize that there's no reason why they would be exposed like that, as they are supposed to have been a race obsessed with self preservation when they were alive.
Designing a military vehicle in such a way that the pilot is exposed is counterproductive. I don't care if there's a quantum shield, its still a stupid idea to tempt fate into shooting you in the face with a lascannon because you're too stupid to put a nice, big sheet of metal in front of you.
It just doesn't make sense as a necron vehicle. It flies in face of their own lore and established aesthetic.

Er, no. It might have had armored cockpit once - you can clearly see two holes that might have been mounting points on each sides of the spine. Then, it might have been removed - maybe to increase parameters as the excess weight was now useless ballast, maybe because Warrior was too dumb to get out otherwise. We don't know. But I agree with Paul, this was Necron fighter that once had a living pilot, and the reason to put metal one in now (even if the actual flying is done by AI) is the fact Necrontyr had done so once and now inflexible and static Necrons won't rock the boat too much in hopes of regaining what they once lost. Really, anything strong enough to outright destroy Necron Warrior would probably punch straight through any metal sheet you'd put in there and you might argue it's the Warrior who is now the (extremely advanced, self-repairing) metal sheet for the computer behind him...

Oh good, you're here to start yet another post of yours with something along the lines of "No! You are wrong!".

 Ouze wrote:
I've been thinking about how much I hate crewed necron vehicles - like Tomb Blades. I had done these conversions but I never posted pictures because I never finished them

We're drifting a little off topic here, but I've always found Tomb Blades to be one of the goofier (and redundant) units in the Necron lineup.

I mean, they have Necrons who have converted to hover-bike-type-people - Destroyers - yet they also have guys who (hang droopily) on actual speeder bikes? Why?

 Irbis wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I've said this before, but I really do wish all Necron vehicles were like that - living (so to speak) constructs rather than crewed vehicles.

I quite like the crewed vehicles; it adds to the "Lovecraft meets Pinocchio" feel to the Necrons. Integrated constructs might be more efficient, but the Necronms are desperate to cling on to (or reclaim) their ... necrontyrity, so they use machinery like they did when they were alive. The constructs are either AIs that were never living beings, or they're controlled by those Necrons who are too far gone to be "recoverable". I think things like Destroyers are objects of pity (and not a little horror) to the more humanoid Necrons.

Until you realize that there's no reason why they would be exposed like that, as they are supposed to have been a race obsessed with self preservation when they were alive.
Designing a military vehicle in such a way that the pilot is exposed is counterproductive. I don't care if there's a quantum shield, its still a stupid idea to tempt fate into shooting you in the face with a lascannon because you're too stupid to put a nice, big sheet of metal in front of you.
It just doesn't make sense as a necron vehicle. It flies in face of their own lore and established aesthetic.

Er, no. It might have had armored cockpit once - you can clearly see two holes that might have been mounting points on each sides of the spine. Then, it might have been removed - maybe to increase parameters as the excess weight was now useless ballast, maybe because Warrior was too dumb to get out otherwise. We don't know. But I agree with Paul, this was Necron fighter that once had a living pilot, and the reason to put metal one in now (even if the actual flying is done by AI) is the fact Necrontyr had done so once and now inflexible and static Necrons won't rock the boat too much in hopes of regaining what they once lost. Really, anything strong enough to outright destroy Necron Warrior would probably punch straight through any metal sheet you'd put in there and you might argue it's the Warrior who is now the (extremely advanced, self-repairing) metal sheet for the computer behind him...

...or they could just leave the pilot out, replace it with machinery to make their flyer better or even just more armor and not waste warriors piloting craft that don't need pilots. Living metal, the material that necron vehicles is also self repairing, and it makes no sense to put a warrior there to act as a shield when they could use said warrior for more productive tasks. Like shooting the enemy. On the ground. And that still doesn't change the fact that its still an exposed cockpit. A warrior there would not stop an explosion from hitting the computer. You know what will? A nice thick layer of living metal.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Oh good, you're here to start yet another post of yours with something along the lines of "No! You are wrong!".

 Ouze wrote:
I've been thinking about how much I hate crewed necron vehicles - like Tomb Blades. I had done these conversions but I never posted pictures because I never finished them

We're drifting a little off topic here, but I've always found Tomb Blades to be one of the goofier (and redundant) units in the Necron lineup.

I mean, they have Necrons who have converted to hover-bike-type-people - Destroyers - yet they also have guys who (hand droopily) on actual speeder bikes? Why?

Apparently they were designed as fighter spacecraft during the end of the War in Heaven, so I guess the necrons were just slapping together crap at that point to make new weapons. Why a warrior and not a canoptek unit? Idk. I mean, the warrior isn't actually needed as the attack patterns are preprogrammed, so its not as if its actually piloting it.

The other angle that makes sense is that most of the "crew" on Necron vehicles are at best 'warriors' .. i.e. lower caste peons

I mean look at the Imperium, why haven't they moved from the Billions of servitors / human slaves that operate 99% of everything ? ... why would they ... they aren't exactly a rare commodity.

So who cares if a necron pilot gets blown out the sky.. the Canoptek cleanup crew will clean that right up later ..

Necron Overlord snaps his metallic fingers and two more scythes deploy to replace the downed one.

none of it has to do with logic, more to do with arrogance of the ruling Lords.

the majority of the ruling Necrons don't actually want the minions to get their souls back .. they want to get themselves back + immortality benefits and Spa and Country club access.

A few warriors get blowed up along the way, who cares?