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.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:
This new Necron HQ guy looks just terrible. Gone is the killer machine vibe. Here comes the egyptian goof squad...

Why couldn´t they put normal legs on the Armiger? Epic fail!

The legs themselves are the exact same design as the existing GW Imperial Knights, it's just that the armour plates and posing is different.
The lack of kneepads, the half-sized shin plates and the chicken-walker thigh plates just completely hide that fact.

They still ruined with their decision the visual appeal of the model.

warl0rdb0b wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:
This new Necron HQ guy looks just terrible. Gone is the killer machine vibe. Here comes the egyptian goof squad...

Why couldn´t they put normal legs on the Armiger? Epic fail!

Because the Armiger is a scouting Knight built for speed, the leg design supports that better than the standard Knight legs. Also, not seeing the issue with the Cryptek, they've always been different look ever since the heavy metal pose model.

Along with that the leg design, while it's fun to call it "chicken leg" is also the same shape as a feline. Felines are noted for being pretty darn fast (one of them being the fastest land animal after all) so there's some merit to the idea that such a leg shape is better for the purpose than "normal" legs. The missed opportunity here is the story about the dogmatic "Humanity's form is perfection" belief coming up against the likely irrefutable evidence that the other design is just better for the purpose. Obviously the AdMech doesn't agree with that viewpoint on the human form and would go with the data, but entire systems of 40k have burned over the topic of what is the proper level of sweetener to put into recaf...

 BrookM wrote:
From Facebook, a more official size comparison, in lovely House Griffith colours:

I figured out what bugs me about the Armigers ... the head placement.

It's lower than the hunch-backed Knight's head location and is practically in the crotch now. Not digging the sensor-laden belly button.
Does the pilot have a "heads-down" display ?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Of course, that's a minor quibble and won't prevent me from adding a couple to my collection !!

 Krinsath wrote:

warl0rdb0b wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:
This new Necron HQ guy looks just terrible. Gone is the killer machine vibe. Here comes the egyptian goof squad...

Why couldn´t they put normal legs on the Armiger? Epic fail!

Because the Armiger is a scouting Knight built for speed, the leg design supports that better than the standard Knight legs. Also, not seeing the issue with the Cryptek, they've always been different look ever since the heavy metal pose model.

Along with that the leg design, while it's fun to call it "chicken leg" is also the same shape as a feline. Felines are noted for being pretty darn fast (one of them being the fastest land animal after all) so there's some merit to the idea that such a leg shape is better for the purpose than "normal" legs. The missed opportunity here is the story about the dogmatic "Humanity's form is perfection" belief coming up against the likely irrefutable evidence that the other design is just better for the purpose. Obviously the AdMech doesn't agree with that viewpoint on the human form and would go with the data, but entire systems of 40k have burned over the topic of what is the proper level of sweetener to put into recaf...

Not sure if it's because I spent my time with Battletech back in the days, but the armiger design is perfectly fine for me. The crypteck does look a little... hmm. I dunno. Very adventures of tin-tin maybe? I'm sure someone can grim-dark it up a little though, it looks fine for me looking less hostile and more 'goofy' as it fits in with my desire to create a nemesor zahndrekh style force.

As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:
This new Necron HQ guy looks just terrible. Gone is the killer machine vibe. Here comes the egyptian goof squad...

Why couldn´t they put normal legs on the Armiger? Epic fail!

The legs themselves are the exact same design as the existing GW Imperial Knights, it's just that the armour plates and posing is different.
The lack of kneepads, the half-sized shin plates and the chicken-walker thigh plates just completely hide that fact.

They're not exactly the same. That claim is unsubstantiated. Both have a middle section between the lower and upper leg, but this is barely existent on the Imperial Knight with the lower leg effectively attaching behind instead of below the knee. This results in a straight leg pose, even if the ower leg is set back a little. In contrast the Armiger's middle section is longer like classic chicken walkers, and looks accordingly.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:
This new Necron HQ guy looks just terrible. Gone is the killer machine vibe. Here comes the egyptian goof squad...

Why couldn´t they put normal legs on the Armiger? Epic fail!

The legs themselves are the exact same design as the existing GW Imperial Knights, it's just that the armour plates and posing is different.
The lack of kneepads, the half-sized shin plates and the chicken-walker thigh plates just completely hide that fact.

No they are not.

The regular Knight has very humanoid legs. A "knee" and a lower leg ending in a near-to-the-ground "ankle" above the stompy foot.

The Armiger has the backward facing ankle-joint very high on the leg, closer to the "knee" than the actual foot, akin to avian legs, which is clearly taking design-element from AdMech stuff like the Dragoon, Ruststalkers, etc..

For a biology student, they might arguably be (very roughly) the same, but aesthetic and association (humanoid vs. bird) changes dramatically with shifting the ankle that far up.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

It actually looks like it comes with two sets of legs on the sprue.


So while you don't get to 'pose' them as much as you might like, there is some room to do some posing of the model itself.

Oh yeah, and apparently they added the weapon sprue this weekend:

So with that sprue pic and that little color biology pic, it's clearly a bird leg.

For the Gent that was saying the IK and Armiger are the same, even though they are clearly not.

I really like bird legs. I like extrange looking robots.

I don't like megazords. And, looking at how the weapons are all in a sprue with more heads... I think its a given to receive more kits that use the basic Armiger body with a different weapon sprue and different head options.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I just looked at that myself. I scaled the image of the Armiger on my screen so it was life-sized. DF leviathan would be too big I think.

The 15mm (1/100) version of the Leviathan? Darnit. Yeah the regular sized one is the size of an Atrapos, easy. I thought with the 15mm version being around the size of a Dreadknight it would be a good stand in. Oh well.

Could always use Dreadknight legs to convert something else up to be an Armiger if you're not into the whole chicken leg deal.

This is all moot if the rules for them a meh though. Will be interesting to see what variants of them are made by GW or Forgeworld.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

It actually looks like it comes with two sets of legs on the sprue.

Spoiler:

So while you don't get to 'pose' them as much as you might like, there is some room to do some posing of the model itself.

Oh yeah, and apparently they added the weapon sprue this weekend:

Spoiler:

I don't think thats two sets of legs, friend. I think thats two halves of two legs.

BoLS points out that there is no sprue A (the weapon sprue is B) for the mini Knights

and there are 2 heads in the instructions not present in the sprues in the box set (they show the image if you want to see them)

so as people have speculated it looks like there will be a separate release with an alternate (or extra) weapon sprue

(sorry no link as it's crashing my browser at the moment, typical BoLS)

I am fine with the Armiger legs, they echo what we already have from the Skitarii with the Ironstrider/Sydonian Dragoon. I cannot wait to get my Forgebane set and start putting them together.

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I am fine with the Armiger legs, they echo what we already have from the Skitarii with the Ironstrider/Sydonian Dragoon. I cannot wait to get my Forgebane set and start putting them together.

I see small Knights advertised as more mobile, while having a 14" move, I desperately want to pose them dynamically.

As it stands, they, uh... stand.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I am fine with the Armiger legs, they echo what we already have from the Skitarii with the Ironstrider/Sydonian Dragoon. I cannot wait to get my Forgebane set and start putting them together.

I see small Knights advertised as more mobile, while having a 14" move, I desperately want to pose them dynamically.

As it stands, they, uh... stand.

I want one thing, you want another. Such is life.

To be fair the Ironstrider is meant to be dynamic and faster but getting dynamic poses out of them requires some work as well.

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

ListenToMeWarriors wrote:
I am fine with the Armiger legs, they echo what we already have from the Skitarii with the Ironstrider/Sydonian Dragoon. I cannot wait to get my Forgebane set and start putting them together.

I see small Knights advertised as more mobile, while having a 14" move, I desperately want to pose them dynamically.

As it stands, they, uh... stand.

I want one thing, you want another. Such is life.

To be fair the Ironstrider is meant to be dynamic and faster but getting dynamic poses out of them requires some work as well.

Would we not both win if my suggestion as the one enacted, though?

You could pose them standing, as is your desire, and I could pose mine dynamically. My whole point is that we both want different things, one options simply allows everyone to have that.

Edit: Not that it matters, they're gonna do whatever they're gonna do, and I don't see the sprues changing at this point.

Try building a sentinel sometime , they have very similar leg design but are fully posable.

It is hell. For every person praising it for it's flexibility you'd see 4 complaining about getting it built right and having really goofy looking static knights.

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

It actually looks like it comes with two sets of legs on the sprue.

Spoiler:

So while you don't get to 'pose' them as much as you might like, there is some room to do some posing of the model itself.

Oh yeah, and apparently they added the weapon sprue this weekend:

Spoiler:

I don't think thats two sets of legs, friend. I think thats two halves of two legs.

Then how do they attach to the waist/pelvis? Notice that both sets of legs have what appears to be the same rivets/indents on the outside.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

It actually looks like it comes with two sets of legs on the sprue.

Spoiler:

So while you don't get to 'pose' them as much as you might like, there is some room to do some posing of the model itself.

Oh yeah, and apparently they added the weapon sprue this weekend:

Spoiler:

I don't think thats two sets of legs, friend. I think thats two halves of two legs.

Then how do they attach to the waist/pelvis? Notice that both sets of legs have what appears to be the same rivets/indents on the outside.

The attachment points on the hips appear to be hollow. You stick one rivet and joint piece in there, leaving the other side exposed. If you look, the top of the things only has the eyelet for the piston on two of the leg pieces.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

It actually looks like it comes with two sets of legs on the sprue.

Spoiler:

So while you don't get to 'pose' them as much as you might like, there is some room to do some posing of the model itself.

Oh yeah, and apparently they added the weapon sprue this weekend:

Spoiler:

I don't think thats two sets of legs, friend. I think thats two halves of two legs.

Then how do they attach to the waist/pelvis? Notice that both sets of legs have what appears to be the same rivets/indents on the outside.

Watch an unboxing video, the legs come in two halves.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

It actually looks like it comes with two sets of legs on the sprue.

Spoiler:

So while you don't get to 'pose' them as much as you might like, there is some room to do some posing of the model itself.

Oh yeah, and apparently they added the weapon sprue this weekend:

Spoiler:

I don't think thats two sets of legs, friend. I think thats two halves of two legs.

Then how do they attach to the waist/pelvis? Notice that both sets of legs have what appears to be the same rivets/indents on the outside.

Watch an unboxing video, the legs come in two halves.

Okay then, it is what it is.

 OrlandotheTechnicoloured wrote:
BoLS points out that there is no sprue A (the weapon sprue is B) for the mini Knights

and there are 2 heads in the instructions not present in the sprues in the box set (they show the image if you want to see them)

so as people have speculated it looks like there will be a separate release with an alternate (or extra) weapon sprue

(sorry no link as it's crashing my browser at the moment, typical BoLS)

Fingers and toes crossed that this is true. A few more weapons in the full kit would make the Forgebane Armigers go further

Not sure how much credence can be given to a story based on a sprue having a letter on it, given that GW instructions reference part by number and not spure then number. It could just be a way to distinguish the sprue from other sprues to try avoid mispacks.

Looks like I'll have to convert and work some magic to fix the head placement in relation to the legs and carapace. The legs by no means bother me. I already converted my regular knights to having the same types of legs as the "chicken walkers". I just wish they more closely resembled the larger counterparts. Maybe I'll even make that cleaver into a spear so they could hit something on the ground..

I think I might try putting the extra faceplates from my two Big Boy Knights in the face of the Armiger just to see what it looks like.

This is what I think a simple change from having the head down low to higher would have done for the model.

 TwilightSparkles wrote:
Not sure how much credence can be given to a story based on a sprue having a letter on it, given that GW instructions reference part by number and not spure then number. It could just be a way to distinguish the sprue from other sprues to try avoid mispacks.

Except the existing Knight Warden kit which references sprue A then number for the extra sprue added with the warden kit.

 TwilightSparkles wrote:
Not sure how much credence can be given to a story based on a sprue having a letter on it, given that GW instructions reference part by number and not spure then number. It could just be a way to distinguish the sprue from other sprues to try avoid mispacks.

As referenced in the article, there are numbered parts on the instruction sheet that do not appear on the sprues in the box. Similar situation happened when the Imperial Knight was released with a very clear attachment point for what was eventually released as the Carapace weapons. There will be a solo kit for the Armiger that will have at least 1/2 more sprue... and weapons are a likely thing to include.

Pre-ordered mine. Will probably hold off building the Baby Knights until I see what other weapons GW releases whenever the new Knight Codex hits. Right now though I'm excited about all the Necrons I'm getting.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
As long as the eventual release of their full kit allows me to actually pose their legs, it's fine.

This is the full kit. Nothing on the current kit will change. They might add a different weapon sprue to do different configs, but the base chassis is done.